What's so bad about EU regulation anyway?

[Zod]

don4l said:

I've mentioned RoHS before. One of my suppliers closed down because they couldn't afford the changes.

80 people lost their jobs.

Did that supplier (or do you) sell into the US? Is the EDEE Act not a problem? What about the equivalent Japanese, Chinese or Korean legislation?

[herewego]

don4l said:

I've mentioned RoHS before. One of my suppliers closed down because they couldn't afford the changes.

80 people lost their jobs.

Are you suggesting that this legislation was not beneficial overall?

[s2art]

Derek Smith said:

s2art said:

Derek Smith said:

So whatever is bad about the EU regs will continue to be bad about them. In order for a, for instance, a vacuum cleaner manufacturer to trade with the EU, it will have to produce cleaners as efficient and low powered at the EU ones. Will they bother to make a different, higher-wattage range?

They will if the market for them is big enough.

You think there is a market for inefficient vacuum cleaners?

Why do you say inefficient?

[Dr Jekyll]

jjlynn27 said:

As with trade tariffs, you are struggling.

To recap.

I suggested in the context of trade agreements that we always had the option of not charging import tariffs.
You asked which industries could possibly survive zero import tariffs. I provided a list (not exhaustive).
You responded by giving a blood curdling scenario of a car manufacturer struggling to cope with being charged import tariffs by other countries as if this was somehow relevant.

[PositronicRay]

KrissKross said:

PositronicRay said:

The benefit of plenty of this EU stuff, it's not subject to political pressure. So it just happens, often for the best.

Thinking about environment and vacuum cleaners, investment in poorer areas.

I quite like that, if we had "free choice" it'd never happen.

Are you serious..

Yup, vacuum cleaners are and example. The lower power jobbies are better, a government looking for populist policies would never have progressed it (even Which dissed the principle it seems)

Ergo without EU they'd never exist.

Democracy can only go so far, 5yrs isn't a long time to be in power. Sometimes you need someone to just say "you know what, like it or not, this is what's going to happen"

I don't want a dictatorship (unless they have the wisdom of Solomon which is unlikely) but democracy is flawed (look at the last Labour leadership contest)

[s2art]

PositronicRay said:

Yup, vacuum cleaners are and example. The lower power jobbies are better, a government looking for populist policies would never have progressed it (even Which dissed the principle it seems)

Ergo without EU they'd never exist.

Thought Dyson had them way before the EU got involved.

[PositronicRay]

s2art said:

PositronicRay said:

Yup, vacuum cleaners are and example. The lower power jobbies are better, a government looking for populist policies would never have progressed it (even Which dissed the principle it seems)

Ergo without EU they'd never exist.

Thought Dyson had them way before the EU got involved.

Mr Dyson was the bloke who was up in arms about the regs. Anyway the point stands.

[Mr GrimNasty]

PositronicRay said:

Yup, vacuum cleaners are and example. The lower power jobbies are better, a government looking for populist policies would never have progressed it (even Which dissed the principle it seems)

Ergo without EU they'd never exist.

Democracy can only go so far, 5yrs isn't a long time to be in power. Sometimes you need someone to just say "you know what, like or not, this is what's going to happen"

I don't want a dictatorship (unless they have the wisdom of Solomon which is unlikely) but democracy is flawed (look at the last Labour leadership contest)

You must have strange criteria for better - they are less effective.

The lightbulb changes were also a financial/environmental disaster.

The biofuel % requirements added the equivalent of 12M extra cars to the roads in INCREASED CO2 that it was supposed to cut.

Then there's the industrialization of the beautiful German (and other) countryside despoiled with turbines killing thousands of birds and bats.

And the E.U.'s CO2 emissions rose again last year despite $1.2 trillion wasted on futile green energy subsidies, so far all they have succeeded in cutting is industry/manufacturing, and made energy unaffordable to many more households.

That's just off the top of my head.

[jjlynn27]

Dr Jekyll said:

To recap.

I suggested in the context of trade agreements that we always had the option of not charging import tariffs.
You asked which industries could possibly survive zero import tariffs. I provided a list (not exhaustive).
You responded by giving a blood curdling scenario of a car manufacturer struggling to cope with being charged import tariffs by other countries as if this was somehow relevant.

I don't even know where to start with this. You are making things up as you go.

You are not free to set tariffs as you like

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-wto-i...

Educate yourself please. It's from dir-gen of WTO.
When you digest that, come back, and we can continue.

[s2art]

PositronicRay said:

s2art said:

PositronicRay said:

Yup, vacuum cleaners are and example. The lower power jobbies are better, a government looking for populist policies would never have progressed it (even Which dissed the principle it seems)

Ergo without EU they'd never exist.

Thought Dyson had them way before the EU got involved.

Mr Dyson was the bloke who was up in arms about the regs. Anyway the point stands.

Not really. Dyson had hugely efficient cleaners well before the EU got involved. The added regulation is just a PITA to him.

[230TE]

jjlynn27 said:

I don't even know where to start with this. You are making things up as you go.

You are not free to set tariffs as you like

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-wto-i...

Educate yourself please. It's from dir-gen of WTO.
When you digest that, come back, and we can continue.

"Britain could opt to simply scrap all trade barriers and turn its economy into a duty-free state, but that was unlikely, Azevedo said."

Actually, let's just do it. If the theory behind wealth creation is correct we'll thrive. If it's wrong we're all screwed anyway.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Hong_Kong

[jjlynn27]

PositronicRay said:

Mr Dyson was the bloke who was up in arms about the regs. Anyway the point stands.

Indeed, he was harping how he needs more powerful motor. There is a Which! test of hoovers, different surfaces, Dyson came second to last, had the most powerful motor. And was most expensive. (Best looking too).

[s2art]

jjlynn27 said:

I don't even know where to start with this. You are making things up as you go.

You are not free to set tariffs as you like

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-wto-i...

Educate yourself please. It's from dir-gen of WTO. aWhen you digest that, come back, and we can continue.

Read that and I am not sure where he is coming from. Most, if not all of the trade agreements the EU arranged have the UK as a co-signatory and there is no reason they just wont get rubber stamped at the UN (although many countries might wish to improve then in a later negotiation) So where are these costs coming from? (other than the EU itself if it chooses to self-harm.)

[jjlynn27]

230TE said:

jjlynn27 said:

I don't even know where to start with this. You are making things up as you go.

You are not free to set tariffs as you like

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-wto-i...

Educate yourself please. It's from dir-gen of WTO.
When you digest that, come back, and we can continue.

"Britain could opt to simply scrap all trade barriers and turn its economy into a duty-free state, but that was unlikely, Azevedo said."

Actually, let's just do it. If the theory behind wealth creation is correct we'll thrive. If it's wrong we're all screwed anyway.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Hong_Kong

I know, parts of Hong Kong are just like parts of bad parts of Wisbech.
Meh, it's only WTO saying it'll cost us £9Bil, pfft, he's scaremongering.

[jjlynn27]

s2art said:

Read that and I am not sure where he is coming from. Most, if not all of the trade agreements the EU arranged have the UK as a co-signatory and there is no reason they just wont get rubber stamped at the UN (although many countries might wish to improve then in a later negotiation) So where are these costs coming from? (other than the EU itself if it chooses to self-harm.)

All explained, it's all on other thread. I know it'll come as a shock to you, but I'd say that dir gen of WTO, knows more about WTO than s2art of PH.

Back to regulations.

[s2art]

jjlynn27 said:

s2art said:

Read that and I am not sure where he is coming from. Most, if not all of the trade agreements the EU arranged have the UK as a co-signatory and there is no reason they just wont get rubber stamped at the UN (although many countries might wish to improve then in a later negotiation) So where are these costs coming from? (other than the EU itself if it chooses to self-harm.)

All explained, it's all on other thread. I know it'll come as a shock to you, but I'd say that dir gen of WTO, knows more about WTO than s2art of PH.

Back to regulations.

Which thread?
And I would say these guys know more about the actual situation with EU deals and the UK than the Dir Gen of the WTO.

http://www.lawyersforbritain.org/brexit-trade-trea...

Edited by s2art on Monday 4th July 19:38

[KrissKross]

PositronicRay said:

KrissKross said:

PositronicRay said:

The benefit of plenty of this EU stuff, it's not subject to political pressure. So it just happens, often for the best.

Thinking about environment and vacuum cleaners, investment in poorer areas.

I quite like that, if we had "free choice" it'd never happen.

Are you serious..

Yup, vacuum cleaners are and example. The lower power jobbies are better, a government looking for populist policies would never have progressed it (even Which dissed the principle it seems)

Ergo without EU they'd never exist.

Democracy can only go so far, 5yrs isn't a long time to be in power. Sometimes you need someone to just say "you know what, like it or not, this is what's going to happen"

I don't want a dictatorship (unless they have the wisdom of Solomon which is unlikely) but democracy is flawed (look at the last Labour leadership contest)

So much stupid..

[230TE]

Don't diss Wisbech. It's all right, by East Anglian standards. Anyway, equality of impoverishment is not something to aim for. (c.f. North Korea, the German Democratic Republic, Cuba etc etc).

[Derek Smith]

KrissKross said:

PositronicRay said:

KrissKross said:

PositronicRay said:

The benefit of plenty of this EU stuff, it's not subject to political pressure. So it just happens, often for the best.

Thinking about environment and vacuum cleaners, investment in poorer areas.

I quite like that, if we had "free choice" it'd never happen.

Are you serious..

Yup, vacuum cleaners are and example. The lower power jobbies are better, a government looking for populist policies would never have progressed it (even Which dissed the principle it seems)

Ergo without EU they'd never exist.

Democracy can only go so far, 5yrs isn't a long time to be in power. Sometimes you need someone to just say "you know what, like it or not, this is what's going to happen"

I don't want a dictatorship (unless they have the wisdom of Solomon which is unlikely) but democracy is flawed (look at the last Labour leadership contest)

So much stupid..

So much ignorance. The lower powered machines are much better. They are more reliable as well, but that's down to manufacturing standards and not the EU.

Cheap to run as well don't forget.

[Dr Jekyll]

jjlynn27 said:

I don't even know where to start with this. You are making things up as you go.

You are not free to set tariffs as you like

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-wto-i...

Educate yourself please. It's from dir-gen of WTO.
When you digest that, come back, and we can continue.

Yep, fully digested. Your move.