Shopkeepers' fury as EU prepares to ban selling eggs by the dozen

[-:Undertaker:-]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1289882/EU-ban-selling-eggs-dozen-Shopkeepers-fury-told-food-weighed-sold-kilo.html

EU to ban selling eggs by the dozen: Shopkeepers' fury as they are told all food must be weighed and sold by the kilo


British shoppers are to be banned from buying eggs by the dozen under new regulations approved by the European Parliament. For the first time, eggs and ­other products such as oranges and bread rolls will be sold by weight instead of by the number contained in a packet. Until now, Britain has been exempt from EU regulations that forbid the selling of goods by number. But last week MEPs voted to end Britain’s deal despite objections from UK members. The new rules will mean that instead of packaging telling shoppers a box contains six eggs, it will show the weight in grams of the eggs inside, for example 372g.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/26/article-1289882-006C8C2100000578-390_468x291.jpg



Or that a bag of white rolls has 322g inside instead of half a dozen. The rules will not allow both the weight and the quantity to be displayed. Last night, Britain’s Food Standards Agency said it was opposed to the move, putting the UK on a potential collision course with Brussels. It could be the first test of David Cameron’s pre-Election promise to stand up for Britain’s interests in the EU. Eggs have traditionally been sold by the dozen or half-dozen, because the old imperial measurements such as inches or pennies were calculated in groups of 12. Early in the 20th Century, eggs were sold from trays on shop counters and carried home in paper bags. But between the two world wars, it was discovered that eggs kept longer if they were left standing on their ends, so the cartons of 12 and six were developed. Last night, an FSA spokeswoman said: ‘This proposal would disallow selling by numbers. Retailers would not be allowed to put “Six eggs” on the front of the box. If it was a bag of rolls, it would say “500g” instead of six rolls.

‘It is important that information is provided in a way that is meaningful and beneficial to consumers. This issue is still being considered by EU member states and it will be some time before the regulation is finalised.’ The move could cost retailers millions of pounds because of changes they will have to make to packaging and labelling, as well as the extra burden of weighing each box of food before it is put on sale. The cost is likely to be passed on to shoppers through higher grocery bills. Experts say it will be next year before the EU is able to pass the controversial measure, which bureaucrats say is designed to help consumers make an informed choice when buying their food because it will require suppliers to provide more comprehensive information.

But last night, food industry experts said the EU plan was ‘bonkers’ and ‘absolute madness’. Federation of Bakers director Gordon Polson warned that it may be too late to change the rules, even though they will be debated further in the European Parliament. He revealed that lobbyists had already tried to rectify the regulations, discovered in the 174 pages of amendments to the initial 75-page proposal, but there was not enough time to convince MEPs before the crucial vote. The British Retail Consortium, which represents 90 per cent of UK shops, will ask Government Ministers to press for the decision to be reversed.This is what we pay for the sham EU parliament to spend its time doing, constantly overruling British laws and traditions and we are powerless to prevent it occuring. Why should German, French or Czech MEPs decide what weights and measurements the British people and its shops use? - a German, French or Czech MEP will be voting (you'd think anyway) for something thats best for their countries interests, not the interests of the United Kingdom so why are we part of this crazy and despotic project called the European Union?

The imperial measurements and weights system was designed through use and is practical whereas the metric system was desinged by Napoleons bureaucrats and has no familiarity in this country and is a stupid measurement system to say the least. To sell eggs by the weight rather than the number just proves this but of course common sense doesnt enter the heads of those within the EU and its fellow insitutions - we must all be harmonised, all made equal to continue and build their crazy notion of a common European identity of which no such thing exists or ever will exist.

Thoughts?

[dbgtz]

waste of time
waste of money
im actually LOLING at this

why change something which isn't broken?

[Special]

what's the point? they all weigh the same with about 2 grams between then anyway

[Catzsy]

I think you will find that the imperial measures were re-classified as legal in this country a couple of years ago much to the relief of market traders and other retailers so they can choose what system they used. I do not see this changing as it was never enforced in the first place,

[MrPinkPanther]

Catzsy's right. This isn't real.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I think you will find that the imperial measures were re-classified as legal in this country a couple of years ago much to the relief of market traders and other retailers so they can choose what system they used. I do not see this changing as it was never enforced in the first place,

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-508252/Meet-shopkeeper-latest-penalised-imperial-measures.html



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJgp3Tp5v7g
(from 3:05)


This appears to still be going on, and like usual with the European Union - it may back down sometimes, but like now in this example it is back again and will continue to come back with its laws. It did it with the EU Consitution/Lisbon Treaty, is apparently dropped the flag and anthem but then later slid it through the parliament meaning that we eventually got the EU Consitution anyway despite the fact the French, Dutch and Irish had all said no.

[MrPinkPanther]

No one is stopping anyone selling eggs by the dozen, they will continue to do so like they always have. What is ACTUALLY is is it's sensible legislation to ensure that all Eggs are roughly the weights that they say they are ensuring a fairer price for the end consumer. I mean we all see "large eggs" on the box but what actually constitutes large? This legislation is simply used to monitor that companies are putting in the box what they say they are preventing consumers from being "ripped off".

[Catzsy]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-508252/Meet-shopkeeper-latest-penalised-imperial-measures.html



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJgp3Tp5v7g
(from 3:05)


This appears to still be going on, and like usual with the European Union - it may back down sometimes, but like now in this example it is back again and will continue to come back with its laws. It did it with the EU Consitution/Lisbon Treaty, is apparently dropped the flag and anthem but then later slid it through the parliament meaning that we eventually got the EU Consitution anyway despite the fact the French, Dutch and Irish had all said no.




Well I cannot see it being implemented for my reasons above but I have voted 'refuse' above. :)

[-:Undertaker:-]

No one is stopping anyone selling eggs by the dozen, they will continue to do so like they always have. What is ACTUALLY is is it's sensible legislation to ensure that all Eggs are roughly the weights that they say they are ensuring a fairer price for the end consumer. I mean we all see "large eggs" on the box but what actually constitutes large? This legislation is simply used to monitor that companies are putting in the box what they say they are preventing consumers from being "ripped off".

I think we all know what a large egg is, infact I am pretty sure most people understand the words 'dozen large eggs' rather than '372g'. :rolleyes:

[Meanies]

thats just stupid, but even if it does happen, nothing was said about how they'd be packaged? so companies can still use the same packaging and people can recognise how many are in a box that way instead, which is what i do when mum asks me to go get eggs anyway :P

[FlyingJesus]

I can't see this happening at all simply because according to this report "The rules will not allow both the weight and the quantity to be displayed", which would never be made the case. If they have to display weight on items then that's fine, but unless they also plan on taking off GDA% from packaging because it's not universal to everyone, or removing the suggested recipes sections on some boxes in case you don't like the other ingredients, this looks like a fairly normal idea that the Mail have blown out of proportion.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I can't see this happening at all simply because according to this report "The rules will not allow both the weight and the quantity to be displayed", which would never be made the case. If they have to display weight on items then that's fine, but unless they also plan on taking off GDA% from packaging because it's not universal to everyone, or removing the suggested recipes sections on some boxes in case you don't like the other ingredients, this looks like a fairly normal idea that the Mail have blown out of proportion.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/bargains-and-rip-offs/article.html?in_article_id=507158&in_page_id=5&ito=1565

It states on both this article and the Mail article (both look exact same) that the European Union has decided to end Britains deal which allowed it to sidetrack the metrification to a degree. I very much doubt that is made up, especially when members of the FSA (Financial Services Authority) and the Federation of Bakers have both commented on this story along with food industry experts.

[Hecktix]

Nothing's gonna change so it won't affect us really, it'll just say 737g on a pack of 6 eggs rather than 6 eggs, although it'll still be the same packet. Doesn't make much difference to me, I don't need a label saying "6 eggs" to know that there are 6 eggs in the packet.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Nothing's gonna change so it won't affect us really, it'll just say 737g on a pack of 6 eggs rather than 6 eggs, although it'll still be the same packet. Doesn't make much difference to me, I don't need a label saying "6 eggs" to know that there are 6 eggs in the packet.

It;

a) confuses consumers (older people in general).
b) undermines the sovereignty of our country.
c) undermines and weakens our imperial measurements system.
d) linking in with c), it undermines our tradition and culture.
e) could potentially cost the industry millions.
f) potentially makes criminals out of people for using the British measurement system.

I think all of them are something worth fighting for, especially b) - don't you?

[hah]

It;

a) confuses consumers (older people in general).
b) undermines the sovereignty of our country.
c) undermines and weakens our imperial measurements system.
d) linking in with c), it undermines our tradition and culture.
e) could potentially cost the industry millions.
f) potentially makes criminals out of people for using the British measurement system.

I think all of them are something worth fighting for, especially b) - don't you?


Seriously get a grip, they are only putting the weight on the packet by the looks of it. You will find any small reason to discredit the EU and blow it out of proportion

[Inseriousity.]

Seriously get a grip, they are only putting the weight on the packet by the looks of it. You will find any small reason to discredit the EU and blow it out of proportion

Agreed. I really doubt culture will change just because the EU adds some numbers onto a packet of eggs. We'll still use these terms and I think you're underestimating the intelligence of consumers (including the older people).

[-:Undertaker:-]

Seriously get a grip, they are only putting the weight on the packet by the looks of it. You will find any small reason to discredit the EU and blow it out of proportion


Agreed. I really doubt culture will change just because the EU adds some numbers onto a packet of eggs. We'll still use these terms and I think you're underestimating the intelligence of consumers (including the older people).

You are both fine with having your country changed by unelected foreigners who do not have your countries best interests at heart?

Its not about picking at it for the sake of it; its about sovereignty, democracy, potential costs, tradition and culture. The imperial weights and measurements systems were designed for practical usage over many years, the same way every culture across Europe has evolved its own language, regional dialects and way of life - once its gone its gone forever and the EU wants to create something called a 'European identity' of which doesnt exist.

The whole European project was designed to be via the backdoor, hence why many people are oblivious to how much control it has over everything.

How many people need to be unemployed for the EU elite to build their superstate? (Greece, Spain and various other countries being the examples)
How many countries need to go under for the EU elite to build their superstate? (Greece so far, potentially Ireland/Italy/Portugal & Spain)
How many africans need to starve in order for the EU elite to build their superstate? (EU dumping trade on African markets)
How many people need to abtain criminal records for using a British measurement system?

If you are fine with all of this then I would ask what was the point in our ancestors fighting various wars across the world, only for the young to throw it away. If you can answer all of these, then come back to me and call them small reasons again when you've both thought them over.

[Caution]

Seriously get a grip, they are only putting the weight on the packet by the looks of it. You will find any small reason to discredit the EU and blow it out of proportion
He's completely right though. It's not so much the fact that it's unnecessary or that it's being changed from the number of eggs to a weight, it's more to do with the fact that no-one wants it and the whole idea has not came from the British government, it's came from the EU. It's a bloody sad situation when your country has no control over the changing and implementation of new, irrelevant laws.

[GommeInc]

No one is stopping anyone selling eggs by the dozen, they will continue to do so like they always have. What is ACTUALLY is is it's sensible legislation to ensure that all Eggs are roughly the weights that they say they are ensuring a fairer price for the end consumer. I mean we all see "large eggs" on the box but what actually constitutes large? This legislation is simply used to monitor that companies are putting in the box what they say they are preventing consumers from being "ripped off".
When did common sense die :S No-one cooks or consumes eggs through weight, they consume eggs by size. Cooking instructions for eggs go by size "1 medium egg/1 large egg" etc. Using weight is unnecessary when the size of an egg stands in line with other companies :/

It makes little sense adding weight to a packet of eggs, when no-one cares or uses eggs by their weight, seeing as what you see is what you get when it comes to eggs :/

[xxMATTGxx]

I think this is useless to be honest. I don't see the point why we need to start adding weight to things when we have used the current system for like years and years. :S

[Fehm]

That's way to end the recession! Spend 2 thirds of a billion pound on repainting road signs.

[alexxxxx]

ohmygosh it's getting blown a bit out of proportion here.

what will probably happen is that theyll put an average weight of the eggs on the box with words to the effect of average box: 400g and i doubt anyone will complain at all.

theyll put a range of weights on the front and theyll be sold by the range.

[Hecktix]

It;

a) confuses consumers (older people in general).
b) undermines the sovereignty of our country.
c) undermines and weakens our imperial measurements system.
d) linking in with c), it undermines our tradition and culture.
e) could potentially cost the industry millions.
f) potentially makes criminals out of people for using the British measurement system.

I think all of them are something worth fighting for, especially b) - don't you?

Lol, it's a number on some packets of food - it's not worth fighting over :S As someone else said you are insulting the intelligence of consumers suggesting they will get confused - a pack of 6 eggs is quite clear that there are 6 eggs in it, a pack of 6 bread rolls - again clear you have 6 bread rolls in it - people have eyes.

Undermines the sovereignty of our country? Oh please it's a number on a packet of bloody eggs. I can understand why you and many others are against the EU however I am not and I think that this is something so petty it's not worth being bothered about, as FlyingJesus said - it's unlikely it'll even happen and if it does it's not going to effect anybody in the slightest.

[Hitman]

Lol, it's a number on some packets of food - it's not worth fighting over :S As someone else said you are insulting the intelligence of consumers suggesting they will get confused - a pack of 6 eggs is quite clear that there are 6 eggs in it, a pack of 6 bread rolls - again clear you have 6 bread rolls in it - people have eyes.

Undermines the sovereignty of our country? Oh please it's a number on a packet of bloody eggs. I can understand why you and many others are against the EU however I am not and I think that this is something so petty it's not worth being bothered about, as FlyingJesus said - it's unlikely it'll even happen and if it does it's not going to effect anybody in the slightest.

Are they actually taking the number of eggs off the packet? :S I mean, I usually buy eggs in packets of 12 or 30... when you start dealing with bigger amounts you're not sure how many are in the packet by just looking unless you count, and I'm not gonna stand there counting 30 eggs.

[alexxxxx]

Are they actually taking the number of eggs off the packet? :S I mean, I usually buy eggs in packets of 12 or 30... when you start dealing with bigger amounts you're not sure how many are in the packet by just looking unless you count, and I'm not gonna stand there counting 30 eggs.

you'd put on the packet 30x(so many grammes).

[Moh]

As much as the EU has done for the UK, I think they should back off making petty laws in the UK.

There are a lot of benefits been part of the EU, but I think the UK would be a lot better country on it's own. I mean, we have the most powerful army and defence than any other country in the EU :)

you'd put on the packet 30x(so many grammes).
Every egg won't weigh the same.

[Hitman]

you'd put on the packet 30x(so many grammes).
That's alright then. Although why fix something that isn't broken? I buy 12 eggs from Iceland, and they are 'mixed weight' according to the box, so what would they put then? Would they have to scrap the eggs that don't meet certain weight requirements?

The only thing the EU is or would be good for is if another war like WWII broke out between two or more European countries. This is most likely not going to happen again as the big problems are elsewhere with Iran, North Korea, Russia, China, the USA, etc.

[Sameer!]

This is stupid, no real need to ban it.

[Hecktix]

Whilst you can say that no egg will weigh the same they will just take the average weight of a small egg, medium egg and a large egg, and as alex said put 30x XXg's on the packet, they aren't going to weigh every single egg.

[alexxxxx]

That's alright then. Although why fix something that isn't broken? I buy 12 eggs from Iceland, and they are 'mixed weight' according to the box, so what would they put then? Would they have to scrap the eggs that don't meet certain weight requirements?

The only thing the EU is or would be good for is if another war like WWII broke out between two or more European countries. This is most likely not going to happen again as the big problems are elsewhere with Iran, North Korea, Russia, China, the USA, etc.

the eggs that don't meet the requirements already dont find your way into the boxes. the egg producers have different weight requirements for what constitutes small, medium and large.

honestly i don't think this will even be enforced.

[kk.]

whats the big problem? It all has to be packaged anyway, and it will just be done how chicken is. It gets weighed, and priced. If youre moaning about not being able to look and actually see how many eggs are in a box, or how many oranges you have. Its not really any different in the manufacturing process either, because it has to get the price labels printed on.

I think the UK is just being completely stubborn. We've said no to pretty much all other EU legislation, and i think youll find that most other countries accept all of the laws, and will have had to have changed from numbers of items to weight

[Hitman]

the eggs that don't meet the requirements already dont find your way into the boxes. the egg producers have different weight requirements for what constitutes small, medium and large.

honestly i don't think this will even be enforced.
All of the eggs in the box will be different weights (hence mixed weight), and they can't put 12x40g or whatever because some will be more, others less.

[alexxxxx]

All of the eggs in the box will be different weights (hence mixed weight), and they can't put 12x40g or whatever because some will be more, others less.
they could probably get away with an average, or the lower boundary of what a small egg/medium egg/large egg. This is already done with most things. food manufacturers put a smaller value of the weight on the box so they cant be taken to court for not putting in enough, because you can't be prosecuted afaik for selling MORE that you need.

honestly.

it'll probably change the front from saying

6 eggs to 6X50g Eggs. or whatever.

[Hitman]

they could probably get away with an average, or the lower boundary of what a small egg/medium egg/large egg. This is already done with most things. food manufacturers put a smaller value of the weight on the box so they cant be taken to court for not putting in enough, because you can't be prosecuted afaik for selling MORE that you need.

honestly.

it'll probably change the front from saying

6 eggs to 6X50g Eggs. or whatever.

Was just interested in what they'd do and it doesn't bother me to be honest, although we've managed fine thus far without these changes.

[kk.]

tbh, i dont know why people are moaning.. its fairer on us.. lol.

[Camy]

who actually cares about the weight of an egg? just seems a completely unneeded change, the eu is good an all, but stupid things like this annoy me.

[Josh]

WOW. Pathetic. I love your government. Sorting out the real issues. (Y)

[Hitman]

WOW. Pathetic. I love your government. Sorting out the real issues. (Y)
Ah... well... it's worse than that. It's not our Government doing this, it's the European Union which seems to have control over our Government so we must bow down and accept what they say. You're quite right though, this is such a trivial thing, why spend time and money on it?

[alexxxxx]

Ah... well... it's worse than that. It's not our Government doing this, it's the European Union which seems to have control over our Government so we must bow down and accept what they say. You're quite right though, this is such a trivial thing, why spend time and money on it?

quite the opposite:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/10432128.stm

nor has this bill even been passed in the european parliament and there is a lot of weight behind not passing it from not just the UK.

it's not like selling eggs in 6s and dozens is a uniquely british thing:

http://courses.monoprix.fr/magasin-en-ligne/achat-acheter-Oeufs-frais-dates-du-jour-de-ponte-123288,true,1,.html#container

[Cheryl]

I don't see what this has to do with the sovereignty of our great nation.

If indeed it will mean the change from 6 eggs to 6x40g eggs, then in what way is this affecting the sovereignty?

[-:Undertaker:-]

whats the big problem? It all has to be packaged anyway, and it will just be done how chicken is. It gets weighed, and priced. If youre moaning about not being able to look and actually see how many eggs are in a box, or how many oranges you have. Its not really any different in the manufacturing process either, because it has to get the price labels printed on.

I think the UK is just being completely stubborn. We've said no to pretty much all other EU legislation, and i think youll find that most other countries accept all of the laws, and will have had to have changed from numbers of items to weight

The UK is being stubborn because it wants to decide its own laws?


I don't see what this has to do with the sovereignty of our great nation.

If indeed it will mean the change from 6 eggs to 6x40g eggs, then in what way is this affecting the sovereignty?

Because its being made by unelected foreigners who are not accountable to the electorate thus the opposite of the meaning of 'sovereignty'.

[kk.]

The UK is being stubborn because it wants to decide its own laws?

yes. we're part of the EU. Other countries would, im sure, like to decide their own laws, but because theyre in the EU, they adopt to the EU laws. If we want to manage ourselves, then we'll leave the EU.. but i dont think young people actually know what the EU does for us, they just see all these threads about how the EU are bad..

[-:Undertaker:-]

yes. we're part of the EU. Other countries would, im sure, like to decide their own laws, but because theyre in the EU, they adopt to the EU laws. If we want to manage ourselves, then we'll leave the EU.. but i dont think young people actually know what the EU does for us, they just see all these threads about how the EU are bad..

Then we should leave the European Union, or at least get the chance to have that say of which we have never been given. It has never been debated fully in the open, and when it is debated it is never truthfully debated from its supporters - Edward Heath took us into the EU knowing it is a federal project to create a European Superstate, most young, old, middle aged people I know would never vote for the aboliition of the United Kingdom in favour of a United States of Europe and I would hope that you are the same in that view.

It is very well blaming the papers, but people buy certain papers because they agree with them, hence why right wing papers (Telegraph, Mail, the Sun, Times) massively out sell left wing papers (Guardian & the Mirror) in this country.

[kk.]

Then we should leave the European Union, or at least get the chance to have that say of which we have never been given. It has never been debated, and when it is debated it is never truthfully from its supporters - Edward Heath took us into the EU knowing it is a federal project to create a European Superstate, most young, old, middle aged people I know would never vote for the aboliition of the United Kingdom in favour of a United States of Europe and I would hope that you are the same.

It is very well blaming the papers, but people buy certain papers because they agree with them, hence why right wing papers (Telegraph, Mail, the Sun, Times) massively out sell left wing papers (Guardian & the Mirror) in this country.

so we've never had that decision to leave the EU? ok.. cus there's no such party that offers this as an alternative. The people who want to, vote UKIP, or whoever, and those that dont, will vote other parties. I am the same, but I am all for the EU up until that point. It offers free trade, it offers freedom of immigration into and out of the country etc etc. Not many people will know the benefits of it, and just see the negatives as this is all thats reported..

Papers report on the bad things, and never the good things. The front page of yesterdays sunday telegraph was about this egg thing. I think youll find that ordinary people will be buying the sun, telegraph, mail, the star, and all the other bull crappers, who would probably support the withdraw from the EU. I bet not once have they wrote anything positive about why we should be in the EU.

[-:Undertaker:-]

so we've never had that decision to leave the EU? ok.. cus there's no such party that offers this as an alternative. The people who want to, vote UKIP, or whoever, and those that dont, will vote other parties. I am the same, but I am all for the EU up until that point. It offers free trade, it offers freedom of immigration into and out of the country etc etc. Not many people will know the benefits of it, and just see the negatives as this is all thats reported..

Papers report on the bad things, and never the good things. The front page of yesterdays sunday telegraph was about this egg thing. I think youll find that ordinary people will be buying the sun, telegraph, mail, the star, and all the other bull crappers, who would probably support the withdraw from the EU. I bet not once have they wrote anything positive about why we should be in the EU.

Hang on a second, you have just savaged the papers for not mentioning anything positive about the EU and at the start of your response you yourself put two what you think are 'positive points' about the European Union - so i'll explain why that are not positive lower down in the reply. The problem with parties such as UKIP is that we are locked in a FPTP voting system, in a PR voting system UKIP could easily abtain over 20% in a general election (they achieved 16.5% in the European Elections 2009 under a PR vote). You must ask yourself why the main parties will not change the voting system and why they will not allow a referendum on our EU membership - because it threatens them and their position of power.

You mention free trade, nobody is saying lets not trade with Europe. The EU is far from free trade anyway, we pay towards the EU regardless and the EU imposes tariffs on US goods in particular along with barring companies takeover bids for one another as it views it as 'unhealthy'. The EU also imposes thousands of new laws and regulations on business every year which costs business in the UK over £100 billion per year. The whole meaning of free trade is that you, as a country, can trade with whoever you wish and can trade for whatever price/whatever goods - free trade is not a trading bloc that attempts to rival the US in every shape and form.

Secondly you mention immigration, why is having no control over our immigration via the EU a good thing?

The public buy papers because they agree with them, I dont agree with the Guardian therefore I will not buy it. I am afraid the people have already made up their mind, and those who are in support for the fake reasons you have provided would soon change their mind if the truth was revealed to them that this is a federalist project. The papers have not commented on anything 'positive' the EU has done because there actually is nothing positive it has done, and anything you may agree with that it has done must always be followed by the following two questions which are; a) why should unelected foreigners be deciding UK law & b) why cant the democratic UK parliament pass this for a fraction of the price instead?

[alexxxxx]

You mention free trade, nobody is saying lets not trade with Europe. The EU is far from free trade anyway, we pay towards the EU regardless and the EU imposes tariffs on US goods in particular along with barring companies takeover bids for one another as it views it as 'unhealthy'. The EU also imposes thousands of new laws and regulations on business every year which costs business in the UK over £100 billion per year. The whole meaning of free trade is that you, as a country, can trade with whoever you wish and can trade for whatever price/whatever goods - free trade is not a trading bloc that attempts to rival the US in every shape and form.

you are - you are saying to say no to every regulation - which means that we wont get free trade with the eu we'll get tariff trade. the usa is one of the most protectionist countries in the world when it comes to trade. In an ideal world there would be no barriers but unfortunately there are. If you knew anything about economics you would learn that there are some really bad side-effects from having too many large companies running the market including price fixing and few reasons to cut costs and prices.

[kk.]

Hang on a second, you have just savaged the papers for not mentioning anything positive about the EU and at the start of your response you yourself put two what you think are 'positive points' about the European Union - so i'll explain why that are not positive lower down in the reply. The problem with parties such as UKIP is that we are locked in a FPTP voting system, in a PR voting system UKIP could easily abtain over 20% in a general election (they achieved 16.5% in the European Elections 2009 under a PR vote). You must ask yourself why the main parties will not change the voting system and why they will not allow a referendum on our EU membership - because it threatens them and their position of power.

Ive asked myself why the main parties will not change the voting system.. hmm, lets see, im pretty sure this was a huge deal. and that both labour and lib dems both agreed a change is necessary. yet its the conservatives in power. But youre saying that being a member of the EU threatens our position of power, so the argument cancels out..



You mention free trade, nobody is saying lets not trade with Europe. The EU is far from free trade anyway, we pay towards the EU regardless and the EU imposes tariffs on US goods in particular along with barring companies takeover bids for one another as it views it as 'unhealthy'. The EU also imposes thousands of new laws and regulations on business every year which costs business in the UK over £100 billion per year. The whole meaning of free trade is that you, as a country, can trade with whoever you wish and can trade for whatever price/whatever goods - free trade is not a trading bloc that attempts to rival the US in every shape and form.

Ok, so you still think that we'll be able to trade freely-ish, if we leave the EU? after we've basically said 'No.' to every law thats passed through the EU? im sorry but that is being quite naive. what do we give the EU? really? not much, but we get a lot back in terms of cheap products. Those laws affect every country in the EU and not just the UK. why dont you just campaign to get the EU shut down altogether? Free trade is the free movement of goods and services, without trade barriers. It means giving UK companies as well as overseas companies the chance of a bigger market, and a bigger demand.


Secondly you mention immigration, why is having no control over our immigration via the EU a good thing?

Because what most other people dont realise is that immigration doesnt just encompass people coming in, its people going out too. And if i remember rightly, a news article i read mentioned that the amount of people leaving our country to other countries in the EU was equal to the numbers coming in from the EU.


The public buy papers because they agree with them, I dont agree with the Guardian therefore I will not buy it. I am afraid the people have already made up their mind, and those who are in support for the fake reasons you have provided would soon change their mind if the truth was revealed to them that this is a federalist project. The papers have not commented on anything 'positive' the EU has done because there actually is nothing positive it has done, and anything you may agree with that it has done must always be followed by the following two questions which are; a) why should unelected foreigners be deciding UK law & b) why cant the democratic UK parliament pass this for a fraction of the price instead?

fake reasons? No, theyre not. Im sorry but the EU has done nothing for us? a quick google search of 'positive things the eu has done for us' brought up this first article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6455879.stm

[-:Undertaker:-]

you are - you are saying to say no to every regulation - which means that we wont get free trade with the eu we'll get tariff trade. the usa is one of the most protectionist countries in the world when it comes to trade. In an ideal world there would be no barriers but unfortunately there are. If you knew anything about economics you would learn that there are some really bad side-effects from having too many large companies running the market including price fixing and few reasons to cut costs and prices.

I am sorry but why should the European Union have any right to put harmful regulations on the United Kingdom? - well we know you agree with that completely, you'd have this country abolished tommorow if you had the chance without any of us having any say - you are an EU nationalist, you wish to impose your laws and your ways on the British people, the French people and people across Europe. In an ideal world we wouldnt have trade blocs competing against eachother, both trying to rival eachother in terms on world trade.

The EU has long wished to have the stranglehold over the United States, and its using trade as a weapon.


Ive asked myself why the main parties will not change the voting system.. hmm, lets see, im pretty sure this was a huge deal. and that both labour and lib dems both agreed a change is necessary. yet its the conservatives in power. But youre saying that being a member of the EU threatens our position of power, so the argument cancels out..

Whoever in is opposition out of these three will promise the world, once in power they will fold instantly on the subject. The Liberal Democrats folded on the PR issue following the election, Labour folded on both the EU issue and the PR system once gaining office in 1997. Infact its very likely Labour will campaign on all the things they [the Lib/Lab/Con] usually campaign on; tough on crime/lower taxes/proportional representation.. the list goes on and on and people still continue to fall for it.

I mean as though to prove me right even more so, the Conservatives the other day announced they are preparing to release thousands of criminals out of our prisons.. something they criticised Labour for when in office. No doubt Labour will now criticise the Conservatives for this in the coming months/years and thus the cycle goes on.


Ok, so you still think that we'll be able to trade freely-ish, if we leave the EU? after we've basically said 'No.' to every law thats passed through the EU? im sorry but that is being quite naive. what do we give the EU? really? not much, but we get a lot back in terms of cheap products. Those laws affect every country in the EU and not just the UK. why dont you just campaign to get the EU shut down altogether? Free trade is the free movement of goods and services, without trade barriers. It means giving UK companies as well as overseas companies the chance of a bigger market, and a bigger demand. Yes, I am. The United States, China, Switzerland, Iceland, Mexico, India, Austrialia, New Zealand and hundreds of other countries all trade freely with one another and they are not part of the European Union. The cheap products line is also another lie, the EU actually pushes prices up as it pays farmers and so forth not to farm the land (check out the CAP policy) whilst at the same time forces British fishermen to throw back millions of dead fish into the ocean, whilst Spanish and Portugese fleets can come and fish instead - thus creating a shorter supply and pushing up the price.

The EU also costs a heck of a lot, it costs from the £10 billion to £16 billion figure in direct payments and costs business in the United Kingdom over £100 billion every year. If the EU was so good for business as you claim, why then are small business, fishermen, farmers and people in the City so against the European Union? - Nigel Farage had personal experience of the regulations over a decade or so ago when he left the city because it became embroiled in regulations and legislation spewing out of the EU. I read the other day that there is a new EU law every 3 minutes.


Because what most other people dont realise is that immigration doesnt just encompass people coming in, its people going out too. And if i remember rightly, a news article i read mentioned that the amount of people leaving our country to other countries in the EU was equal to the numbers coming in from the EU.That is wrong. More people come into the United Kingdom than leave in terms fo emigration and immigration. To add to that note, thats not including the illegals who are here which now is around the one million mark (of course we dont know for sure, as they are here illegally). I am all for immigration myself and I dont believe in having a cap on immigration, but I do believe that the UK should be in control of its immigration policy and not the EU and that secondly we should have a tight system such as Austrialia which only allows those who we need into this country.


fake reasons? No, theyre not. Im sorry but the EU has done nothing for us? a quick google search of 'positive things the eu has done for us' brought up this first article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6455879.stmThat is absolute nonsense. Name just one of them and I can give the counter argument which shows the EU has actually done the opposite. Air travel for example, that article states it has become cheaper get doesnt reconisge the fact that the EU has put carbon regulation on airline industry which costs money and is passed to the consumer, not to mention the fact that to fund itself the EU has come out of your taxes so at the end of the day, you end up paying more rather than less.

The BBC is also funded by the European Union you'll be interested to hear.

[kk.]

Whoever in is opposition out of these three will promise the world, once in power they will fold instantly on the subject. The Liberal Democrats folded on the PR issue following the election, Labour folded on both the EU issue and the PR system once gaining office in 1997. Infact its very likely Labour will campaign on all the things they [the Lib/Lab/Con] usually campaign on; tough on crime/lower taxes/proportional representation.. the list goes on and on and people still continue to fall for it.

i do believe that come the next election, it will definitely be changed. whether its PR or not, but i do believe it will be a focal point both lab/lib policies


Yes, I am. The United States, China, Switzerland, Iceland, Mexico, India, Austrialia, New Zealand and hundreds of other countries all trade freely with one another and they are not part of the European Union. The cheap products line is also another lie, the EU actually pushes prices up as it pays farmers and so forth not to farm the land (check out the CAP policy) whilst at the same time forces British fishermen to throw back millions of dead fish into the ocean, whilst Spanish and Portugese fleets can come and fish instead - thus creating a shorter supply and pushing up the price.

Switzerland and the EU have no choice. Theyre in the middle, and its easier to go through them, than around them. as for other barriers:


If the goods originate from countries inside the European Union (EU), no duty is payable.

If the goods originate from countries outside the EU, but duty has already been paid on them in another EU country before they reach you, no duty is payable.

If the goods originate from outside the EU and no duty has been paid, you need to calculate the value of the goods. There are six calculation methods prescribed. If method one is not possible, you should move on to method two, and if that fails use method three, until you arrive at a value. Find out how to calculate import duty on the HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) website - Opens in a new window.

As for farmers, the british government also has this policy to pay farmers not to farm land, so dont bother going down that route.



The EU also costs a heck of a lot, it costs from the £10 billion to £16 billion figure in direct payments and costs business in the United Kingdom over £100 billion every year. If the EU was so good for business as you claim, why then are small business, fishermen, farmers and people in the City so against the European Union? - Nigel Farage had personal experience of the regulations over a decade or so ago when he left the city because it became embroiled in regulations and legislation spewing out of the EU. I read the other day that there is a new EU law every 3 minutes.

Its good for us, the consumers, and not the necessarily the businesses.. the ones that dont import, that is..


That is wrong. More people come into the United Kingdom than leave in terms fo emigration and immigration. To add to that note, thats not including the illegals who are here which now is around the one million mark (of course we dont know for sure, as they are here illegally). I am all for immigration myself and I dont believe in having a cap on immigration, but I do believe that the UK should be in control of its immigration policy and not the EU and that secondly we should have a tight system such as Austrialia which only allows those who we need into this country.

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/mig0510.pdf - page 7, long term migration. I agree with the last point, where we should have an australian type system. (tbh, i thought the UK do control international immigration, just not EU..)



That is absolute nonsense. Name just one of them and I can give the counter argument which shows the EU has actually done the opposite. Air travel for example, that article states it has become cheaper get doesnt reconisge the fact that the EU has put carbon regulation on airline industry which costs money and is passed to the consumer, not to mention the fact that to fund itself the EU has come out of your taxes so at the end of the day, you end up paying more rather than less.
'FOOD LABELLING'


The BBC is also funded by the European Union you'll be interested to hear.
not really, why is that a problem, anyway. Next youre gonna be saying that whichever government brought in the BBC (i think labour), BBC have a more favoured opinion of them. The BBC are neutral.

[-:Undertaker:-]

i do believe that come the next election, it will definitely be changed. whether its PR or not, but i do believe it will be a focal point both lab/lib policies

Why would you trust Labour again to change the voting system when they promised the exact same in 1997 and went back on it? - if i'm honest, if you and others are not prepared to think with your head and ignore the public relations stunts from the main parties then you all deserve everything these parties throw at you.


Switzerland and the EU have no choice. Theyre in the middle, and its easier to go through them, than around them. as for other barriers:

You havent responded properly to what I have said, this has nothing to do with the geographical positions of the European Union and Switzerland. Infact it only helps my points, Switzerland is not a member of the EU yet is landlocked dead bang in the centre of the EU yet it trades perfectly fine without being a member of the European Union. You'll also be interested to know that Switzerlands people have been asked to 'enjoy the benefits of the EU' - and they said no. Switzerland is gifted to have a referendum lock system which means the people decide, and like we would decide and most other Europeans (if given the chance) they said no.


As for farmers, the british government also has this policy to pay farmers not to farm land, so dont bother going down that route.

If you are perfectly fine with paying our own farmers (and those in Europe) not to farm.. only for us to end up paying more as their is not a surplus of goods.. then you are perfectly entitled to that view although most would class a system like that as total madness. So to finish with that point, no it doesnt make goods any cheaper - it makes them more expensive which is the opposite of what you claim.


Its good for us, the consumers, and not the necessarily the businesses.. the ones that dont import, that is..

It is not good at all for the consumer, what isnt good for the business isnt good for the consumer as the price is passed down to the consumer. It happens in big business, medium business and small business. A business exists to create profit and generate wealth, if it cannot generate the wealth it wishes then it is forced to pass on the price to the consumer so that you end up paying more, not less as you claim.


http://www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/mig0510.pdf - page 7, long term migration. I agree with the last point, where we should have an australian type system. (tbh, i thought the UK do control international immigration, just not EU..)

The statistics arent showing up, but heres a page I found which shows the levels of immigration are higher than the emigration levels (again doesnt include illegals or asylum seekers) - as you can see on the chart below, immigration is vastly higher to emigration levels which proves my point that the system is out of control.


http://www.statistics.gov.uk/images/charts/260.gif

The UK doesnt really control international immigration, hence why we have so many people being able to come here who are either a) criminals b) not needed c) extremists d) here for the benefits e) cannot speak English and so forth. This also does not target the issue that is EU immigration (of which the last government grossly underestimated) and the fact that once Turkey joins the European Union, the door to the likes of Iran, Iraq and so forth will be swung open to Europe.



'FOOD LABELLING'

Our parliament, being the oldest democracy in the world, is now unable to pass legislation regarding food labelling? are you seriously telling me that?


not really, why is that a problem, anyway. Next youre gonna be saying that whichever government brought in the BBC (i think labour), BBC have a more favoured opinion of them. The BBC are neutral.

That is exactly what I am telling you. Infact Lord Pearson even has a thinktank devoted to the topic itself I believe. I will give you an example myself that I notice rather often - the BBC always invites Guardian journalists onto the show despite the Guardian being a paper that sells poorly and is read by a small minority of the newspaper readership. I also noticed once just by sitting watching the television, that during a UKIP meeting in Buckinghamshire a few months back - the BBC felt the need to mention the word 'BNP' in the same line.

It is subtle hints such as that which make it biased, the article you quoted is just another example on the bias it places to its supporters and donors. Why is the BBC (supposedly neutral) running articles on how the European Union is good for me? - a newspaper is biased, a state owned broadcaster should be far from bias. Personally I would privatise and split the BBC up anyway, its nothing more than a bloated state 'asset' which relies on a stealth tax to fund its wasteful spending.

[alexxxxx]

I am sorry but why should the European Union have any right to put harmful regulations on the United Kingdom? - well we know you agree with that completely, you'd have this country abolished tommorow if you had the chance without any of us having any say - you are an EU nationalist, you wish to impose your laws and your ways on the British people, the French people and people across Europe. In an ideal world we wouldnt have trade blocs competing against eachother, both trying to rival eachother in terms on world trade.

The EU has long wished to have the stranglehold over the United States, and its using trade as a weapon.

Well unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world. do we. and i don't want this country to be demolished. what a stupid thing to say, i've never said that.



Yes, I am. The United States, China, Switzerland, Iceland, Mexico, India, Austrialia, New Zealand and hundreds of other countries all trade freely with one another and they are not part of the European Union. The cheap products line is also another lie, the EU actually pushes prices up as it pays farmers and so forth not to farm the land (check out the CAP policy) whilst at the same time forces British fishermen to throw back millions of dead fish into the ocean, whilst Spanish and Portugese fleets can come and fish instead - thus creating a shorter supply and pushing up the price.
What rubbish - USA and Canada and Mexico have free-ish trade via the NAFTA (another trading bloc) which does not carry nearly as much market integration as the EEA. Hundreds of other countries trade freely with each other? What a load of rubbish - you obviously don't know what you're on about. There are problems with the CAP, but it does drive down prices. There was a time where cars cost a lot more here than they did in france and belgium, so you know what people did? They went there to buy them and then drove them home, tax and tarrif free. That happens hardly anywhere else. The car dealerships realised they needed to cut their prices as they were losing customers (particularly along the south coast) and wham lower prices. 'Booze Cruises' are going out of fashion now too because of the lower prices of alcohol in UK supermarkets due to people (my parents included) stocking up huge amounts of wine when going to france (im talking in the hundreds of litres) and consuming it over the year for much cheaper. But now supermarket and specialists have cut costs and now loads of these places across the channel are closing down.


The BBC is also funded by the European Union you'll be interested to hear. and how on earth is the BBC funded by the EU.

and an EU law every 3 minutes would mean over 150 000 laws a year, what a load of rubbish.

[kk.]

Why would you trust Labour again to change the voting system when they promised the exact same in 1997 and went back on it? - if i'm honest, if you and others are not prepared to think with your head and ignore the public relations stunts from the main parties then you all deserve everything these parties throw at you.

isnt politics all about trust. how can you trust any party to do what they say..

You havent responded properly to what I have said, this has nothing to do with the geographical positions of the European Union and Switzerland. Infact it only helps my points, Switzerland is not a member of the EU yet is landlocked dead bang in the centre of the EU yet it trades perfectly fine without being a member of the European Union. You'll also be interested to know that Switzerlands people have been asked to 'enjoy the benefits of the EU' - and they said no. Switzerland is gifted to have a referendum lock system which means the people decide, and like we would decide and most other Europeans (if given the chance) they said no.

i think youve literally jsut proved what i was saying. i said DUE TO WHERE SWITZERLAND IS they can be part of the EU, but not. We have to go through them rather than around them so they receive the free trade without any of the laws.

If you are perfectly fine with paying our own farmers (and those in Europe) not to farm.. only for us to end up paying more as their is not a surplus of goods.. then you are perfectly entitled to that view although most would class a system like that as total madness. So to finish with that point, no it doesnt make goods any cheaper - it makes them more expensive which is the opposite of what you claim.

i dont remember saying anything about making goods cheaper, just that the UK government also have the same policy and so its nothing to do with the EU

It is not good at all for the consumer, what isnt good for the business isnt good for the consumer as the price is passed down to the consumer. It happens in big business, medium business and small business. A business exists to create profit and generate wealth, if it cannot generate the wealth it wishes then it is forced to pass on the price to the consumer so that you end up paying more, not less as you claim.

its not always passed down. in fact, if just one of those companies charge less, the rest will follow.

The statistics arent showing up, but heres a page I found which shows the levels of immigration are higher than the emigration levels (again doesnt include illegals or asylum seekers) - as you can see on the chart below, immigration is vastly higher to emigration levels which proves my point that the system is out of control.


http://www.statistics.gov.uk/images/charts/260.gif

The UK doesnt really control international immigration, hence why we have so many people being able to come here who are either a) criminals b) not needed c) extremists d) here for the benefits e) cannot speak English and so forth. This also does not target the issue that is EU immigration (of which the last government grossly underestimated) and the fact that once Turkey joins the European Union, the door to the likes of Iran, Iraq and so forth will be swung open to Europe.


i said recently, that data is 2008. the data that i linked to (try refreshing it when its opened) is from the last quarter of 2009, where the long term immigrants is under the line of migrants, and so a net loss of people.

Our parliament, being the oldest democracy in the world, is now unable to pass legislation regarding food labelling? are you seriously telling me that?
no, you told me that you could give the exact opposite argument as to why it was wrong by the EU to do this. Food labelling where manufacturers have to clearly label products which contain bad thigns for you.


That is exactly what I am telling you. Infact Lord Pearson even has a thinktank devoted to the topic itself I believe. I will give you an example myself that I notice rather often - the BBC always invites Guardian journalists onto the show despite the Guardian being a paper that sells poorly and is read by a small minority of the newspaper readership. I also noticed once just by sitting watching the television, that during a UKIP meeting in Buckinghamshire a few months back - the BBC felt the need to mention the word 'BNP' in the same line.

It is subtle hints such as that which make it biased, the article you quoted is just another example on the bias it places to its supporters and donors. Why is the BBC (supposedly neutral) running articles on how the European Union is good for me? - a newspaper is biased, a state owned broadcaster should be far from bias. Personally I would privatise and split the BBC up anyway, its nothing more than a bloated state 'asset' which relies on a stealth tax to fund its wasteful spending.

to the bnp part, thats hardly fair. its down to the reporter. i saw a newspaper article form the daily fail which included woman and black, which wasnt necessary. big ceebs with finding it but it really wasnt.




ive responded in bold. im too tired to debate this further lol..

[-:Undertaker:-]

Well unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world. do we. and i don't want this country to be demolished. what a stupid thing to say, i've never said that.

Oh yes you have, you have said you want a federal Europe. You are an EU nationalist, yourself and those in the EU intend and wish to persue your ideals and beliefs and place them of the peoples of Europe. The difference between myself and yourself is quite clear and highlighted by my signature in which George Orwell states the difference between a patriot and a nationalist.

I wish for my country to survive, you wish for it to be abolished and absorbed by a foreign power.


What rubbish - USA and Canada and Mexico have free-ish trade via the NAFTA (another trading bloc) which does not carry nearly as much market integration as the EEA. Hundreds of other countries trade freely with each other? What a load of rubbish - you obviously don't know what you're on about. There are problems with the CAP, but it does drive down prices. There was a time where cars cost a lot more here than they did in france and belgium, so you know what people did? They went there to buy them and then drove them home, tax and tarrif free. That happens hardly anywhere else. The car dealerships realised they needed to cut their prices as they were losing customers (particularly along the south coast) and wham lower prices. 'Booze Cruises' are going out of fashion now too because of the lower prices of alcohol in UK supermarkets due to people (my parents included) stocking up huge amounts of wine when going to france (im talking in the hundreds of litres) and consuming it over the year for much cheaper. But now supermarket and specialists have cut costs and now loads of these places across the channel are closing down.The difference between these trade organisations and the European Union can be seen quite cleartly in the names, although I will accept that many are attempting to emulate the European Unino by moving into social, political and economic policy to build world government, which afterall is what our unelected President wants for us all. Trade blocs create friction, they create problems and they trample on sovereignty once they reach a certain point - but of course we know that the EU was never really intended as a trade bloc, it was intended as a federal and nationalistic project which Edward Heath eventually admitted to in later years.

There are problems with CAP? - damn right there are problems, i'd class them as more than problems if i'm honest. It doesnt drive down prices, although it does result in mass unemployment and possibly starvation in Africa when surplus is dumped on African markets for cheap prices after being rejected by European consumers for the inflated prices. Why should British taxpayers (who are all consumers at the end of the day aswell) pay for French farmers to keep their fields empty?


and how on earth is the BBC funded by the EU.http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/tv_and_radio/article3257748.ece
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1544534/BBC-helps-to-sex-up-EU-election.html
http://www.globalbritain.org/BBC.asp(Lord Pearsons thinktank)
http://www.ashleymote.co.uk/?p=600


and an EU law every 3 minutes would mean over 150 000 laws a year, what a load of rubbish.It was every 3 hours, so my apologies for getting that figure wrong. Although still alarmingly, its every 3 hours according to UKIP on their website and published results which can be found on this page; http://www.ukip.org/content/latest-news/1705-uk-awash-in-eu-legislation


isnt politics all about trust. how can you trust any party to do what they say..

I suppose politics is about trust and you can never trust a party fully, however I certainly would trust any party with such bad records on trust as the Liberal Democrats, the Conservatives and the Labour Party - i'd advise you to do the same.


i think youve literally jsut proved what i was saying. i said DUE TO WHERE SWITZERLAND IS they can be part of the EU, but not. We have to go through them rather than around them so they receive the free trade without any of the laws.

Switzerland being in the middle of Europe has nothing to do with free trade, Switzerland is not obliged to allow anything to pass through its borders. More to the point, the UK economy is far greater in size and thus more of a pull for trade which demolishes the argument(?) you have been putting across.


i dont remember saying anything about making goods cheaper, just that the UK government also have the same policy and so its nothing to do with the EU

You said very clearly 'but we get a lot back in terms of cheap products.' which can be found here; http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=652381&p=6569805#post6569805 - so as I said, no the EU does not make things cheaper, it makes them more expensive.


its not always passed down. in fact, if just one of those companies charge less, the rest will follow.

It is always passed down, and if not directly passed down it is passed down via the fact the company has less money to expand and thus hire more people which contributes to unemployment issues.


i said recently, that data is 2008. the data that i linked to (try refreshing it when its opened) is from the last quarter of 2009, where the long term immigrants is under the line of migrants, and so a net loss of people.

Well if that is the case it is rather good news, although dont expect it to last - especially when Turkey recieve their EU membership (and our money of course!).


no, you told me that you could give the exact opposite argument as to why it was wrong by the EU to do this. Food labelling where manufacturers have to clearly label products which contain bad thigns for you.

Here are another three arguments then for that;

a) it undermines the sovereignty of this country.
b) it costs industry more in red tape.
c) it undermines our imperial system which is part of our culture.


to the bnp part, thats hardly fair. its down to the reporter. i saw a newspaper article form the daily fail which included woman and black, which wasnt necessary. big ceebs with finding it but it really wasnt.

The Daily Mail is bias though, the BBC should not be bias as it is state owned - that is my point. Therefore the BBC is biased.

[kk.]

It was every 3 hours, so my apologies for getting that figure wrong. Although still alarmingly, its every 3 hours according to UKIP on their website and published results which can be found on this page; http://www.ukip.org/content/latest-news/1705-uk-awash-in-eu-legislation

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-459698/The-Blair-years-new-law-passed-hours.html - that is all

[-:Undertaker:-]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-459698/The-Blair-years-new-law-passed-hours.html - that is all

Both are differing years, the Daily Mail article being from 2007 targeting the period of 06/07 and the UKIP one being from mid-2009 to now (2010) - both years are far too high i'm sure you'll agree with regardless on numbers. To prove my point more so; EU legislation has actually increased from 2,100 in 2006/2007 to 2,756 in 2009/2010.

[Geraint]

I can't be arsed to read the thread and it's probably been brought up already but what difference does it make. There'll still be 6 or 12 it'll just state the weight rather than 6 or 12. Nothing to stop them being sold in them quantities. Shops will continue to sell at the same price as there'll be no regulations to say that 400g will cost a quid or something.

[Tintinnabulate]

It;

a) confuses consumers (older people in general).


Hey everyone, undertaker thinks that the old people of this country are too thick to count to six. God help us all if that's true.


I am all for immigration myself and I dont believe in having a cap on immigration,

Just before the General Election, you were saying you wanted to stop all immigration and put a 5 year cap on it, and now you are saying that you "don't believe in having a cap on immigration". Caught you out there again. Guess you will just come up with some pathetic excuse "noo I meant something else" like you always do.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Hey everyone, undertaker thinks that the old people of this country are too thick to count to six. God help us all if that's true.

Just before the General Election, you were saying you wanted to stop all immigration and put a 5 year cap on it, and now you are saying that you "don't believe in having a cap on immigration". Caught you out there again. Guess you will just come up with some pathetic excuse "noo I meant something else" like you always do.

No, older people can add up. However, if you change 'a dozen eggs' into '378g' then yes it would confuse people, especially those such as older people who have not done metric in school and have used imperial all their life. The second point, thats not a cap - thats a blanket 5-year ban on immigration.

All immigration should be halted for a 5-year period (both EU and non-EU) whilst we sort out this ridiculous mess not to mention find the missing one million or so illegal immigrants who are in this country. Once that period has ended, you reopen the immigration system so that its based on merit and i'd be opposed to a number cap on immigration. To have a cap on the number is rather silly and would possibly mean a shortage in all sectors.

[Tintinnabulate]

No, older people can add up. However, if you change 'a dozen eggs' into '378g' then yes it would confuse people, especially those such as older people who have not done metric in school and have used imperial all their life. The second point, thats not a cap - thats a blanket 5-year ban on immigration.

All immigration should be halted for a 5-year period (both EU and non-EU) whilst we sort out this ridiculous mess not to mention find the missing one million or so illegal immigrants who are in this country. Once that period has ended, you reopen the immigration system so that its based on merit and i'd be opposed to a number cap on immigration. To have a cap on the number is rather silly and would possibly mean a shortage in all sectors.

Older people aren't as dumb as you think ... they are probably cleverer than you. They will see its 6 eggs and take it, not go "oh no it says 378g, what on earth does that mean :'( someone please help as I dont know what the hell 378g is!!!!!! is it still 6 eggs?!?!? I can see 6 eggs but omg 378g changes everything!!!"

Yeah, like I said, not as dumb as you think - if anything, you are dumber than them right now as a majority of them have more knowledge than you. I mean in the last debate regarding students, you were generalising all university students until I flamed you and you admitted being wrong - Catzsy or whoever it was backing my posts would back me up here again).

[-:Undertaker:-]

Older people aren't as dumb as you think ... they are probably cleverer than you. They will see its 6 eggs and take it, not go "oh no it says 378g, what on earth does that mean :'( someone please help as I dont know what the hell 378g is!!!!!! is it still 6 eggs?!?!? I can see 6 eggs but omg 378g changes everything!!!"

Yeah, like I said, not as dumb as you think - if anything, you are dumber than them right now as a majority of them have more knowledge than you. I mean in the last debate regarding students, you were generalising all university students until I flamed you and you admitted being wrong - Catzsy or whoever it was backing my posts would back me up here again).

Why do you totally ignore what i've written?

I have said I am not calling older people dumb, I am saying that due to them being older then they will not of have learnt metric in schools therefore are familiar with the imperial system rather than the metric system. Can you understand that clear difference? yeah? good. To add onto this, the issue isnt about the eggs in reality, its about the European Union dictating everything down to the smallest things to this country, and we cannot refuse to implement their crazy policies which aim to harm British culture and create a European identity which has never existed.

Yeah, and remember when I asked you to reply to my question 14 odd times and you kept saying you would?

[Tintinnabulate]

Why do you totally ignore what i've written?

I have said I am not calling older people dumb, I am saying that due to them being older then they will not of have learnt metric in schools therefore are familiar with the imperial system rather than the metric system. Can you understand that clear difference? yeah? good. To add onto this, the issue isnt about the eggs in reality, its about the European Union dictating everything down to the smallest things to this country, and we cannot refuse to implement their crazy policies which aim to harm British culture and create a European identity which has never existed.

Yeah, and remember when I asked you to reply to my question 14 odd times and you kept saying you would?

Blame Sammeth. He had some mental breakdown and banned me, thus I lost your PM. If you recall, I did PM you again on my new account.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Blame Sammeth. He had some mental breakdown and banned me, thus I lost your PM. If you recall, I did PM you again on my new account.

I remember you actually promised me fourteeen times to answer the question, or rather I asked the question 14 times and you never replied. But enough of that, so i'll ask for this thread an important question; do you think it right that the unelected and unaccountable EU can decide British laws which erode our culture and traditions? do you value this country and its sovereignty? do you value democracy? do you value the nation state?

That is the question everybody needs to ask themselves next time they vote, its the most important issue in politics today and facing this country.

[alexxxxx]

Oh yes you have, you have said you want a federal Europe. You are an EU nationalist, yourself and those in the EU intend and wish to persue your ideals and beliefs and place them of the peoples of Europe. The difference between myself and yourself is quite clear and highlighted by my signature in which George Orwell states the difference between a patriot and a nationalist.
I wish for my country to survive, you wish for it to be abolished and absorbed by a foreign power.

I have never said that. And Europe isn't foreign - we're already in it.


The difference between these trade organisations and the European Union can be seen quite cleartly in the names, although I will accept that many are attempting to emulate the European Unino by moving into social, political and economic policy to build world government, which afterall is what our unelected President wants for us all. Trade blocs create friction, they create problems and they tramplae on sovereignty once they reach a certain point - but of course we know that the EU was never really intended as a trade bloc, it was intended as a federal and nationalistic project which Edward Heath eventually admitted to in later years.

trade blocs do cause friction yes, but unfortunately we'd be damaged if we weren't in one. We aren't big enough to do so.



http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/tv_and_radio/article3257748.ece
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1544534/BBC-helps-to-sex-up-EU-election.html
http://www.globalbritain.org/BBC.asp(Lord Pearsons thinktank)
http://www.ashleymote.co.uk/?p=600

So the EU LOANED the BBC some money, which they are entitled to do so - a lot of this money was loaned to BBC Worldwide - a seperate entity of the BBC which is to make money for the BBC. This isn't funding. And the BBC in my opinion are impartial.


It was every 3 hours, so my apologies for getting that figure wrong. Although still alarmingly, its every 3 hours according to UKIP on their website and published results which can be found on this page; http://www.ukip.org/content/latest-news/1705-uk-awash-in-eu-legislation

yeah only 60 times less. and numbers don't tell the whole story do they?


The Daily Mail is bias though, the BBC should not be bias as it is state owned - that is my point. Therefore the BBC is biased.
The BBC is not state owned.

[Tintinnabulate]

I remember you actually promised me fourteeen times to answer the question, or rather I asked the question 14 times and you never replied. But enough of that, so i'll ask for this thread an important question; do you think it right that the unelected and unaccountable EU can decide British laws which erode our culture and traditions? do you value this country and its sovereignty? do you value democracy? do you value the nation state?

That is the question everybody needs to ask themselves next time they vote, its the most important issue in politics today and facing this country.

You have to look at the greater picture which you fail to do. You think older people are dumb but they aren't. Changing the number of items in a packet to grams is doing very little harm (if any) and when the country benefits greatly from the EU, these little things don't matter.

I can guarantee, if Daily Mail suddenly started saying how great the EU is, how great Labour are etc, you would be saying the same thing. What you are is a sheep. A sheep of the Daily Mail. You read what they write and THEY form your opinion. No, you don't form your own opinions, they do it for you.

[alexxxxx]

even the mail has put it wont be banned

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1290768/Eggs-dozen-NOT-banned-say-Brussels-backlash-Britain.html

euromyth

[Tintinnabulate]

even the mail has put it wont be banned

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1290768/Eggs-dozen-NOT-banned-say-Brussels-backlash-Britain.html

euromyth

I guess Undertaker, this won't happen and those dumb old people will not cry in the shops.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I have never said that. And Europe isn't foreign - we're already in it.

The European Union is foreign, its based in Brussels and is made up of 27 member states.


trade blocs do cause friction yes, but unfortunately we'd be damaged if we weren't in one. We aren't big enough to do so. We are big enough to be a sole trader, the United Kingdom is the 6th biggest trader in terms of GDP in the entire world - meaning well over 150 other countries are beneath us in terms of the size of their economies. You speak of euromyths, you have just pointed one out - the idea that we are some small petty island that needs the European Union is a euromyth.


So the EU LOANED the BBC some money, which they are entitled to do so - a lot of this money was loaned to BBC Worldwide - a seperate entity of the BBC which is to make money for the BBC. This isn't funding. And the BBC in my opinion are impartial.The BBC recieves direct funding aswell ontop of loans such as the one I linked you to; http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2004/06/that-wonderful-impartial-bbc.html - if somebody provides you with grants and loans, they are funding you with their money. The links from Global Britain are worth a read as the BBC is clearly biased in favour of the EU, I myself saw the example of the linking of the BNP and UKIP by a reporter a few months back despite the BNP having nothing to do with UKIP and their Buckingham meeting.

The BBC Worldwide service is a subsidiary of the BBC and therefore is not a seperate entity of the BBC, merely is a smaller part of the BBC in which its commercial activities take place. You are not pulling that one again anyway, much like with the EU and its insitutions - differing by name, same in aim and very closely linked. The BBC is funded by the European Union no matter how you attempt to word it.


yeah only 60 times less. and numbers don't tell the whole story do they?I think numbers do tell a good story, especially when you have legislation arising from the EU on things like the correct curvature of a fruit or the definition of a pig (you know, the pink animal with the twirly tail that we have been farming for thousands of years).


The BBC is not state owned.The BBC is state owned, all it takes is a quick look on wikipedia if you still doubt my words to see the ownership is 'publically owned' so please do not try and play games. The BBC is state owned/nationalised/publically owned/government owned - whatever way you prefer to word it, it falls under all of those.


You have to look at the greater picture which you fail to do. You think older people are dumb but they aren't. Changing the number of items in a packet to grams is doing very little harm (if any) and when the country benefits greatly from the EU, these little things don't matter.

Oh Saurav where have I said older people are dumb or stupid? I am getting the impression here that you cannot comprehend what i'm saying here which is pretty simple anyway, but it looks like i'll have to explain this really clearly for you now so here goes; older people didnt learn the metric system in school and many dont understand it because they were never taught it and have never used it before, therefore they are unfamiliar with the metric system as they have been using since before you were born.

The issue in itself isnt a little matter, the most important factor is that our sovereignty is being overruled. I shall ask again; do you or do you not value democracy and this countrys independence? should an unelected and foreign body have power over a 'sovereign' country?


I can guarantee, if Daily Mail suddenly started saying how great the EU is, how great Labour are etc, you would be saying the same thing. What you are is a sheep. A sheep of the Daily Mail. You read what they write and THEY form your opinion. No, you don't form your own opinions, they do it for you.I disagree with the Mail on abortion.
I disagree with the Mail on the Conservative Party.
I disagree with the Mail when it calls for a cap on immigration.
I disagree with the Mail and some of its columnists on civil liberties concerning terrorism.

Enough of this paper rubbish now, I read the Mail because I agree with the paper. If I picked up a Guardian newspaper, would it then mean I automatically switch to what the Guardian thinks? - no it doesnt. It is amusing though seeing you accusing people of being sheep when you have never actually defended the Labour Party properly without blowing your top/negative repping me/resorting to newspaper attacks. Infact you struggle to answer the simplest of questions, like the time I asked you a question 14 times and you still didnt reply.

You are the sheep, so to prove me wrong tell me something good about the EU which outweighs all of the negatives and we'll have a nice little debate about it, how about it then? or will you ignore me? or will I end up having to ask you a question over 10 times again?


I guess Undertaker, this won't happen and those dumb old people will not cry in the shops.

You are the only one accusing older people of being stupid, nobody else in this thread has implied or stated that older people are dumb or stupid. I said they dont understand metric, but not understanding a measurement system they were never taught and have never used doesnt mean they are dumb.

[alexxxxx]

We are big enough to be a sole trader, the United Kingdom is the 6th biggest trader in terms of GDP in the entire world - meaning well over 150 other countries are beneath us in terms of the size of their economies. You speak of euromyths, you have just pointed one out - the idea that we are some small petty island that needs the European Union is a euromyth.

...and slipping. The EU is the biggest trading area and the USA second.


The BBC recieves direct funding aswell ontop of loans such as the one I linked you to; http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2004/06/that-wonderful-impartial-bbc.html - if somebody provides you with grants and loans, they are funding you with their money. The links from Global Britain are worth a read as the BBC is clearly biased in favour of the EU, I myself saw the example of the linking of the BNP and UKIP by a reporter a few months back despite the BNP having nothing to do with UKIP and their Buckingham meeting.

Sounds OK to me. These grants have a purpose and the development boards will be very strict on their usage (my mum deals with EU funding in her job). The ITV could have done something similar and get the funding but they don't.

[Tintinnabulate]

The European Union is foreign, its based in Brussels and is made up of 27 member states.

We are big enough to be a sole trader, the United Kingdom is the 6th biggest trader in terms of GDP in the entire world - meaning well over 150 other countries are beneath us in terms of the size of their economies. You speak of euromyths, you have just pointed one out - the idea that we are some small petty island that needs the European Union is a euromyth.

The BBC recieves direct funding aswell ontop of loans such as the one I linked you to; http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2004/06/that-wonderful-impartial-bbc.html - if somebody provides you with grants and loans, they are funding you with their money. The links from Global Britain are worth a read as the BBC is clearly biased in favour of the EU, I myself saw the example of the linking of the BNP and UKIP by a reporter a few months back despite the BNP having nothing to do with UKIP and their Buckingham meeting.

The BBC Worldwide service is a subsidiary of the BBC and therefore is not a seperate entity of the BBC, merely is a smaller part of the BBC in which its commercial activities take place. You are not pulling that one again anyway, much like with the EU and its insitutions - differing by name, same in aim and very closely linked. The BBC is funded by the European Union no matter how you attempt to word it.

I think numbers do tell a good story, especially when you have legislation arising from the EU on things like the correct curvature of a fruit or the definition of a pig (you know, the pink animal with the twirly tail that we have been farming for thousands of years).

The BBC is state owned, all it takes is a quick look on wikipedia if you still doubt my words to see the ownership is 'publically owned' so please do not try and play games. The BBC is state owned/nationalised/publically owned/government owned - whatever way you prefer to word it, it falls under all of those.



Oh Saurav where have I said older people are dumb or stupid? I am getting the impression here that you cannot comprehend what i'm saying here which is pretty simple anyway, but it looks like i'll have to explain this really clearly for you now so here goes; older people didnt learn the metric system in school and many dont understand it because they were never taught it and have never used it before, therefore they are unfamiliar with the metric system as they have been using since before you were born.

The issue in itself isnt a little matter, the most important factor is that our sovereignty is being overruled. I shall ask again; do you or do you not value democracy and this countrys independence? should an unelected and foreign body have power over a 'sovereign' country?

I disagree with the Mail on abortion.
I disagree with the Mail on the Conservative Party.
I disagree with the Mail when it calls for a cap on immigration.
I disagree with the Mail and some of its columnists on civil liberties concerning terrorism.

Enough of this paper rubbish now, I read the Mail because I agree with the paper. If I picked up a Guardian newspaper, would it then mean I automatically switch to what the Guardian thinks? - no it doesnt. It is amusing though seeing you accusing people of being sheep when you have never actually defended the Labour Party properly without blowing your top/negative repping me/resorting to newspaper attacks. Infact you struggle to answer the simplest of questions, like the time I asked you a question 14 times and you still didnt reply.

You are the sheep, so to prove me wrong tell me something good about the EU which outweighs all of the negatives and we'll have a nice little debate about it, how about it then? or will you ignore me? or will I end up having to ask you a question over 10 times again?



You are the only one accusing older people of being stupid, nobody else in this thread has implied or stated that older people are dumb or stupid. I said they dont understand metric, but not understanding a measurement system they were never taught and have never used doesnt mean they are dumb.

You said the change will confuse older people thus suggesting that they are dumb and won't be able to count to 6. They probably wont care even if it said 60000000000000g as long as there was 6 eggs in the box. Tell me, when you go to buy eggs, do you really look at the box to make sure it says "6 eggs"? Most people probably wont even notice the difference.

No I don't agree with everything Labour did / wanted. I have rarely ever repped you in debates / this forum as we all have our opinions. If I have then I apologise and I will PM brandon requesting him to remove it if you can let me know when I repped you. Someone else posted exactly what EU gives us, so there really is no point in me repeating it. Like I said, little changes doesn't matter when you look at the greater picture.

I have explained 6 times that Sammeth banned me the day after you linked me.

[FlyingJesus]

Gonna be totally honest you should really open the eggbox and check that none are broken before you buy them anyway so it's kinda redundant having any sort of count or weight displayed on them anyway and this entire boring argument has been pointless. I like eggs.

[Browney]

I love the idea of a shopkeeper being off his ****, blood boilingly angry that he cant sell his eggs by the dozen. Like he's going through a difficult period with his wife, he cant sleep at night, he's turned to drink because he cant sell eggs by the dozen. :L

[-:Undertaker:-]

...and slipping. The EU is the biggest trading area and the USA second.

Sounds OK to me. These grants have a purpose and the development boards will be very strict on their usage (my mum deals with EU funding in her job). The ITV could have done something similar and get the funding but they don't.

I very much doubt it matters to most people whether we are first on the list or twentieth. We are not slipping, merely the developing countries are catching up and with bigger populations a few may overtake us. The United Kingdom has stayed at the top of that list for over 300 years I expect, and will remain at least in the top 20 for the next 100 years - thats no reason to sign away our liberties. I have said it before and I will say it again, the anglo-phobia of the EU project just shines through time after time in its desire to rival the United States in almost everything.


You said the change will confuse older people thus suggesting that they are dumb and won't be able to count to 6. They probably wont care even if it said 60000000000000g as long as there was 6 eggs in the box. Tell me, when you go to buy eggs, do you really look at the box to make sure it says "6 eggs"? Most people probably wont even notice the difference.

No I don't agree with everything Labour did / wanted. I have rarely ever repped you in debates / this forum as we all have our opinions. If I have then I apologise and I will PM brandon requesting him to remove it if you can let me know when I repped you. Someone else posted exactly what EU gives us, so there really is no point in me repeating it. Like I said, little changes doesn't matter when you look at the greater picture.

I have explained 6 times that Sammeth banned me the day after you linked me.

It will confuse older people because as I have explained time and time again, older people did not learn the metric system in school and are used to the imperial system which is the British system of measurement and weight. As for the European Union and its supposed benefits, i've read into it and read into it and I just cannot find one good thing about its existence which isnt overriden by its corruption/cost/loss of sovereignty.

I asked the question about 10 times in the thread and each time you ignored my question, this was before you were apparently banned so please dont play me around on that one. Its dead and buried anyway.