On 10/06/2016 17:26, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jun 2016 11:24:47 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

Whist you are probably right, it's not just about job creation is it?
I was thinking someone used to dealing with stuff on an
*international* scale (like Sr R.B.) *might* have a better view of the
bigger picture, especially than yer local plumber (for example)?

Indeed he will - but will tend to be influenced by how that affects him
and his businesses. If you have dreams that your businesses will "expand
into europe" etc or if your business already has strong ties into
Europe, then the EU will make lots of sense to you.

Again, whilst that could very well be the case, someone like RB who
came from 'a small business' *might* be able to both remember those
days and be able to distance himself from his personal / current
position and offer a real / unbiased overview?

They might be able to offer a view - not sure one can ever be unbiased
when dealing with complex and unknown factors - but since its all still
based on conjecture you are no nearer to getting the "right" answer.

Your local plumber probably does not care much - although will see less
new regulation and eco meddling in what he does, and so will prefer to
be less tightly bound to the EU.

But at the same time there will be say coarse fishermen who maybe
happy the EU have been looking out for them re the control of
poisonous chemicals as used by plumbers as the local waterways are now
filled with fish again?

I was not aware plumbers were particularly renowned for pollution of
water courses! ;-)

However I accept the point that not all legislation is necessarily bad
or unwelcome (although much of it is either unnecessary or counter
productive IME).

Take the other thread on Glyphosate herbicides, for a range of reasons
(none with much to do with science or real risk) it may well be banned.
In many cases forcing use of alternative options that are often more
environmentally costly in real terms.

He may also feel less threatened by the
possibility of priced out of work by people operating without his costs
or overheads.

Unfortunately that's the way it works these days (but still a valid
fear for him etc).

You are right, its not just about job creation - its about that, and
trade, and legislation, and red tape and loads of other things. However
its seems likely that if you just want to get on and run a local
business, you will have an easier time in a less heavily regulated
environment.

Possibly, but how do you (or I) judge those things that are
unnecessarily restrictive versus those things that are 'for our own
good'?

You can't always, however in many cases its fairly obvious when you are
jumping through administrative hoops to provide "data" to QUANGOs that
don't know what to do with it, and don't really want it.

How may people didn't wear a seatbelt all the time until they were
forced to?

Plenty... however even that, when analysed with some hindsight was not
the clear "win" that people thought it was. Factor out the effects of
the big anti drink drive campaign at the time, and then look at the
increase in injuries to pedestrians and other non car road users that
resulted in car drivers changing their driving style in response to
feeling "safer" (aka "risk homostasis"), and you end up with not much
actual real change in the total number of deaths and serious injuries on
the road.

I'm not saying all the restrictions are for the best for
everyone ... I liked real Creosote and Nitromoors for example but
maybe 'Jo public' could hurt themselves or the environment (which we
all have to then suffer).

Perhaps its that attitude to risk that has resulted in many of the
younger generation being almost unable to function as adults ;-)


If you don't speed then you won't be caught speeding so the cameras
won't be an issue to you. ;-)

Now, ultimately which is better for the UK as a whole? Doing things that
will benefit the SMEs providing the bulk of the employment and wealth
generation, or doing what will benefit the larger enterprise that has
more visibility, profile, and a much louder "voice"? We need both, but
probably can't keep all of them happy all of the time!

Quite, and once again demonstrating that the granularity of an In/Out
vote is too low.

In theory that could already be covered with yet another unknown and
that is any Exit deal we negotiate. Being as there is a good chance
these are already known and being discussed, they could form a part of
the 'Other' sub options on the ballot paper?

Except we don't have any other options, so need to go with what is
actually on offer, however imperfect.




--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/