Who is in and who is out?

[Eric The Viking]

... Manufactureres of electrical goods have a fundamental problem - it's perfectly possible to make things which will last for dozens of years (if not hundreds). We all have examples in our houses. Hence building in obsolescence. Industry wouldn't allow it but the domestic consumer is easily gulled. Engine size has absolutely nothing to do with it.

The Biblical term is, "straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel."

I'll lay it out very simply for you:

1. The vacuum cleaner motor power regulations are ridiculous (as you yourself conceded).
2. They help big manufacturers, pushing a false, "green" agenda.
3. They add cost to smaller manufacturers who use bigger motors.

And, oddly, you seem to agree with me that built-in obsolescence is a terrible thing for the environment.

So why are you clinging to the idea that this is an example of EU interference in OUR free market that is worth championing?

You are very confused, or so it seems to me.

E.

 

[RogerS]

.........
I'll give another daft EU Directive. One that affects each and everyone of us using the web. The EU cookie Directive. What an utterly pointless waste of time, money and energy. Not to mention you and I having to click that damn pointless 'This site uses cookies' tab.

:lol: Perfect case of trivial regulation tittle tattle! Thank you Roger.
Any more deeply serious and fundamentally disturbing examples?

Come on...tell me what the point is of that futile move between Brussels and Strasbourg. Still waiting. Third and last time of asking but as we all know, you won't or can't give any valid reason. Instead you will attempt to trivialise it as per your usual 'debating' (if it can be called that) style.

 

[Jacob]

... Manufactureres of electrical goods have a fundamental problem - it's perfectly possible to make things which will last for dozens of years (if not hundreds). We all have examples in our houses. Hence building in obsolescence. Industry wouldn't allow it but the domestic consumer is easily gulled. Engine size has absolutely nothing to do with it.

The Biblical term is, "straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel."

I'll lay it out very simply for you:

1. The vacuum cleaner motor power regulations are ridiculous (as you yourself conceded).
2. They help big manufacturers, pushing a false, "green" agenda.
3. They add cost to smaller manufacturers who use bigger motors.

And, oddly, you seem to agree with me that built-in obsolescence is a terrible thing for the environment.

So why are you clinging to the idea that this is an example of EU interference in OUR free market that is worth championing?

You are very confused, or so it seems to me.

E.

It's about reducing energy consumption. Tests show that efficiency isn't only about size. It's simpler than you think.

 

[Jacob]

.........
I'll give another daft EU Directive. One that affects each and everyone of us using the web. The EU cookie Directive. What an utterly pointless waste of time, money and energy. Not to mention you and I having to click that damn pointless 'This site uses cookies' tab.

:lol: Perfect case of trivial regulation tittle tattle! Thank you Roger.
Any more deeply serious and fundamentally disturbing examples?

Come on...tell me what the point is of that futile move between Brussels and Strasbourg. Still waiting. Third and last time of asking but as we all know, you won't or can't give any valid reason. Instead you will attempt to trivialise it as per your usual 'debating' (if it can be called that) style.

https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-Euro ... ce-a-month

Probably going to end anyway.

 

[Rhossydd]

For those that believe that the UK has no influence in the EU should read this:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... k-lobbying

Nothing to be proud of there.

 

[Eric The Viking]

1. The vacuum cleaner motor power regulations are ridiculous (as you yourself conceded).
2. They help big manufacturers, pushing a false, "green" agenda.
3. They add cost to smaller manufacturers who use bigger motors.
And, oddly, you seem to agree with me that built-in obsolescence is a terrible thing for the environment.

So why are you clinging to the idea that this is an example of EU interference in OUR free market that is worth championing?.

It's about reducing energy consumption. Tests show that efficiency isn't only about size. It's simpler than you think.

[chortle] =D> =D> =D> =D> [/]

 

[Jacob]

For those that believe that the UK has no influence in the EU should read this:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... k-lobbying

Nothing to be proud of there.

They'd be better off without us!

Interesting to see that raising the mad regulations issue has only brought up trivia.
I thought there might be more substance to it but it seems not - just the usual bureaucratic bumbling you get everywhere, but in the end we are better off for it.
Roger's cookies example would get the wooden spoon for utter triviality and unimportance. *
Are there EU regs about wooden spoons?

PS the "EU cookie Directive" means we can choose whether or not we want a web site to plant cookies on our computers, which previously they could do without us knowing. Seems reasonable to me.
Bring on the regs!

 

[RogerS]

Come on...tell me what the point is of that futile move between Brussels and Strasbourg. Still waiting. Third and last time of asking but as we all know, you won't or can't give any valid reason. Instead you will attempt to trivialise it as per your usual 'debating' (if it can be called that) style.

https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-Euro ... ce-a-month

Probably going to end anyway.

1) Those are not valid reasons. Just more examples of EU waste

2) Probably going to end? You do love your wishful thinking. There is more chance of you voting Conservative in the next general election or of ever admitting that you are wrong.

 

[Jacob]

https://www.cookielaw.org/the-cookie-law/

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Just to lighten the debate and prove that it is not just our friends across the channel who create bizarre laws. Some of the UK best - note that not all of them are pre-Victorian relics which should have been repealed. EU laws are inevitably more recent. This comes from the Law Commission website -but if you search there are many more:

It is illegal to enter the Houses of Parliament wearing a suit of armour.
The 1313 Statute Forbidding Bearing of Armour forbids members of Parliament from wearing armour in the House.
It is illegal to be drunk on licensed premises.
Under s 12 of the Licensing Act 1872,“every person found drunk… on any licensed premises, shall be liable to a penalty”. It is also an offence under the Metropolitan Police Act 1839 for the keeper of a public house to permit drunkenness or disorderly conduct on the premises. Furthermore, under the Licensing Act 2003, it is an offence to sell alcohol to a person who is drunk, or to obtain alcohol for consumption by a person who is drunk.
It is illegal to carry a plank along a pavement.
This is an offence under s 54 of the Metropolitan Police Act 1839. Other offences covered by s 54 include flying kites, playing annoying games, and sliding on ice or snow in the street.
It is illegal to fire cannon within 300 yards of a dwelling house.
This is an offence under s 55 of the Metropolitan Police Act 1839.
It is illegal to beat or shake any carpet or rug in any street. However, beating or shaking a doormat is allowed before 8am.
This is an offence under s 60 of the Metropolitan Police Act 1839. In other districts, it is an offence under s 28 of the Town Police Clauses Act 1847.
It is illegal to drive cows down the roadway without the permission of the Commissioner of Police.
The Metropolitan Streets Act 1867 made it an offence to drive cattle through the streets between 10am and 7pm, except with the permission of the Commissioner of Police.
It is illegal to be drunk in charge of a horse.
Under the Licensing Act 1872, it is an offence to be drunk in charge of a carriage, horse, cow or steam engine, or whilst in possession of a loaded firearm.
It is illegal to jump the queue in the Tube ticket hall.
Under the TfL Railway Byelaws, any person directed to queue by an authorised person or a sign must join the rear of the queue and obey the reasonable instructions of any authorised person regulating the queue.
It is illegal to destroy or deface money.
It is not illegal to deliberately destroy a banknote. However, under the Currency and Banknotes Act 1928, it is an offence to deface a banknote by printing, stamping or writing on it. The Coinage Act 1971 also makes it an offence to destroy a metal coin that has been current in the UK since 1969, unless a licence to do so has been granted by the Treasury.
It is illegal to handle salmon in suspicious circumstances.
This is an offence under the Salmon Act 1986

Terry

 

[Eric The Viking]

The salmon thing is brilliant.

What about letting coins rust deliberately - does that count?
Of course, pre-1969 you probably couldn't do that...

 

[finneyb]

Jacob, please explain how packing up pantechnicons and shifting everything and everybody from Brussels to Strasbourg each month and vice versa contributes to energy efficiency and being eco-friendly. Until you can do that then the rest of your arguments supporting the daft EU laws are without merit.

I'll give another daft EU Directive. One that affects each and everyone of us using the web. The EU cookie Directive. What an utterly pointless waste of time, money and energy. Not to mention you and I having to click that damn pointless 'This site uses cookies' tab.

Taking vacuum cleaners as the example. if we leave the EU and a UK manufacturer wants to sell his vacuum cleaners in the EU as he will - he will need to comply with the EU legislation. If he has to tool up to comply with the EU regs then his UK sales will also comply with the EU Regs regardless of whether we are in or out. Equally, an EU manufacture of vacuum cleaners will sell to the UK only vacuum cleaners to the EU specification.

I agree with the Brussels to Strasbourg issue. But nothing is perfect not even the UK system. As I understand it the French are blocking any change, at the moment.

Better in than out, by a long way - these are just minor irritations that you will get with any group of interested parties working together - its called compromise. If we are out we still get the results of the compromise without the benefit of being at the table forming the compromise

 

[Phil Pascoe]

"The Coinage Act 1971 also makes it an offence to destroy a metal coin that has been current in the UK since 1969, unless a licence to do so has been granted by the Treasury."
The machines you see in places like Alton towers that stretch and stamp pennies have a little plate on them that give the details of the law that renders it no longer illegal (about 1983,iirc). I think the manufacturers of expensive machines purpose made for the destruction of current coinage and sited in busy public places would have been informed if they were doing anything illegal.

 

[Eric The Viking]

I can't be the only person on here that has an elliptical American 'penny' from the Empire State Building. Ours must be much more work now for youngsters, as they're steel with a copper coating plated or laminated on.

 

[Rhyolith]

Too many pages to read through, sorry.

Just thought I would say that I am currently for voting to stay in, mainly out of the principle that we-re better off working together than apart... even if its somewhat inefficient.

Further no one has given me a solid reason why leaving the EU would benefit anyone, whereas there seems to be a myriad of small benefits to remaining; such as all the money that goes to Aberystwyth (and much of Wales I believe) from the EU.

 

[Jacob]

Too many pages to read through, sorry.

Just thought I would say that I am currently for voting to stay in, mainly out of the principle that we-re better off working together than apart... even if its somewhat inefficient.

Further no one has given me a solid reason why leaving the EU would benefit anyone, whereas there seems to be a myriad of small benefits to remaining; such as all the money that goes to Aberystwyth (and much of Wales I believe) from the EU.

Money going to Aberystwyth? I'm voting out!! :shock:
Are they coining it in Machynlleth?

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Too many pages to read through, sorry.

Just thought I would say that I am currently for voting to stay in, mainly out of the principle that we-re better off working together than apart... even if its somewhat inefficient.

Further no one has given me a solid reason why leaving the EU would benefit anyone, whereas there seems to be a myriad of small benefits to remaining; such as all the money that goes to Aberystwyth (and much of Wales I believe) from the EU.

1) Benefits to remaining - the ability to vote for the people who govern us, and hold them to account through the ballot box - you can't do that with the EU decision makers (the Commissioners, and 27 out of 28 on the Council of Ministers).

2) The generally freer approach the UK traditionally adopts (legislate or regulate when evidence shows it is necessary, otherwise leave well alone) contrasts with the traditional continental approach (legislate or regulate whether it's needed or not) means that the economy does better under UK approach. The Industrial Revolution happened in Britain because people were free to get on with things; it could never have happened on the continent because it would have taken too long to work through all the government committees.

3) Where do you think the EU gets it's money from?

Vote leave - the UK will be a freer, more democratic and more prosperous place.

 

[Rhossydd]

2) The generally freer approach the UK traditionally adopts (legislate or regulate when evidence shows it is necessary, otherwise leave well alone) contrasts with the traditional continental approach (legislate or regulate whether it's needed or not) means that the economy does better under UK approach.

There's absolutely no credible evidence to support this, but a lot more to suggest this is totally wrong.

The Industrial Revolution happened in Britain because people were free to get on with things

The industrial revolution happened two hundred years ago. That has no relevance in the twenty first century.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Too many pages to read through, sorry.

Just thought I would say that I am currently for voting to stay in, mainly out of the principle that we-re better off working together than apart... even if its somewhat inefficient.

Further no one has given me a solid reason why leaving the EU would benefit anyone, whereas there seems to be a myriad of small benefits to remaining; such as all the money that goes to Aberystwyth (and much of Wales I believe) from the EU.

England could pay for Wales - cut out the middle man.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

2) The generally freer approach the UK traditionally adopts (legislate or regulate when evidence shows it is necessary, otherwise leave well alone) contrasts with the traditional continental approach (legislate or regulate whether it's needed or not) means that the economy does better under UK approach.

There's absolutely no credible evidence to support this, but a lot more to suggest this is totally wrong.

The Industrial Revolution happened in Britain because people were free to get on with things

The industrial revolution happened two hundred years ago. That has no relevance in the twenty first century.

I disagree very strongly, and stand absolutely by every word I wrote - we've discussed this in some depth in this and other threads.