On 11/06/2016 21:03, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2016 16:15:58 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

snip

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.

I'd like to think otherwise. Have you never been in a position where
you would answer completely honestly, even when you might have a
personal bias that might normally influence your answer?

While its obviously possible to have a personal "what's best for me"
viewpoint that is different from "what I believe to be the greater
good", I expect that the difficulty is that in many cases your
completely "honest" answer *is* the one including personal bias; a bias
you are probably not even aware of.

Like, I'm no *fan* of Apple products or OSX for all sorts of
real-world and practical (to me) reasons but there are times when I'll
recommend a Mac because I believe it would be the best thing for
*them*?


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! ;-)

Well, they have been know to use some pretty caustic chemicals when
cleaning out drains and central heating systems and they often end up
down the drain surface water drain and potentially in our rivers and
canals?

Can't say it figures high on my radar!

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).

I'm sure there are going to be things that aren't completely
cut_and_dried but I think most of it is well intended.

Like the paving on the road to hell!

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.

Do you have unequivocal evidence there is no risk? You know how many
things have been brought up as being a risk, cleared only to re-appear
when we better understand the 'bigger picture'?

Its not so much proving there is no risk (almost impossible), but it is
a well used and tested product. Note something that can be said for many
alternatives. Some of those currently used by the "organic" brigade are
already known to be more problematical.

In many cases forcing use of alternative options that are often more
environmentally costly in real terms.

Sure, that's bound to happen now and again but in general ... I
believe most people, when given the bigger picture will agree that
it's in the best interests of all of us.

Even when the "bigger picture" is that pesticide manufacturers are keen
to get the long out of patent "generic" out of production leaving only
their much higher revenue generating products as the only alternative?

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.

Sure, no system is perfect, even one that is supposed to be there to
look after *us* (like the Government, the Police and the NHS).

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.

Again, 'sure'. Fix one thing and there is a chance some of what was
resolved will re-appear somewhere else. It has always been said that
if there was a steel spike sticking out of the steering wheel, most
people would drive more carefully. However, 'in the main', the concept
is sound and we just then have to work harder at resolving the
knock-on things.

True. Not sure what that has to do with the EU though

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 ;-)

Yup, I agree with that but only to / at a certain level. I got our
daughter soldering and making her dolls house with me when she was 4
or 5. And much to her Mums concern, yes it was a real soldering iron
and vibro saw but with her wearing safety glasses when soldering after
being given a reasonably comprehensive lesson, I thought the remaining
risk acceptable, versus the benefit. Same was riding a motorcycle,
when you come off an off-road bike when you are 6 you tend to bounce
better than when you are 60 ... you also learn (very quickly) that you
don't really want to do that again. ;-)

[snip]

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.

Quite ... and even after we have take either option and the
re-negotiations complete, do we get a second vote?

Who knows... I would not be surprised if they interpret "out" as "lets
do some more show boating and ask the question again until we get the
"right" answer.

It's like phoning the cancellations dept for your cable supplier, you
can't actually decide if you still want to cancel till you hear what
they might offer to get you to stay.



--
Cheers,

John.

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