On 28/04/2018 11:45, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
On 28/04/2018 11:16, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a thermal
fuse inside the winding which would rupture long before the
transformer overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for one.
If not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back to
not having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.

Really? Most Brexiteers equate any EU regs to being nonsense and must
be revoked. And most of them are too thick to realise why they were
needed, or indeed care.

Typical of a Remoaner to think he speaks for Brexiters.

Most Brexiters think most of the EU derived laws are sensible.

If that is your view, you are rather rare among the Brexiteers on here.

Others
such as the illegal recycling of jam jars less so. Most Remoaners think
that is a stupid law too.

Ah - right. Yet another Brexiteer being happy with a leap into the dark
over something so inconsequential as jam jars. Perhaps it was the bent
bananas which swayed you?

Most Brexiters are aware that the classification of bananas is also
inconsequential. It doesn't make the selling of 'wonky' bananas illegal
either.

You are missing the point of why people voted for Brexit. Typical for a
Remoaner.

On Fri, 27 Apr 2018 21:43:23 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a thermal fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for one. If
not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back to not
having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.

Yes, the Brexiteers will not need transformers, just big resistors.
Probably made up from pound shop HB pencils.

Take back control!

But don't lose sight of the extinguisher.

AB

On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 09:59:30 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 28/04/2018 09:48, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 23:16, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 22:04, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 21:43, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a thermal
fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for
one. If not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back to
not having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.


Lievers are the ones that say we are going to make cheaper stuff, how
are we going to do that without ignoring safety?

I don't recall this? If so a very small minority might have made such
an assertion.

We won't be competing in the semi closed EU market but the world
markets with all the other cheap manufacturers like india and china.

We don't currently compete that well now, in buying more from the EU
than we sell.

Brexit was never about these things that sore loser Remoaners bang on
about.

No its all about some wishy washy excuse called sovereignty which as can
be seen from many of the posts here means "we hate foreigners".

That's right, the important things.

Housing shortages, stagnating wages and the lack of infrastructure to
match immigration. As a Remoaner you are free to interpret these
fundamental issues as "we hate foreigners", but it goes to show how in
denial the likes of you are to change in the UK.

Since you already own a house and don't work, I can see why you might be
Remoaning.

Not one liever here has been able to say what they actually mean by
sovereignty and what they actually think they are getting back.

Yes, they have repeatedly said what is meant, where Parliament can enact
laws they choose, and not those thrust upon them.


I wonder why Ireland are not paying third parties for their water
then, unlike the UK where it was sold of to the Tories friends because
the EU "made them do it".

Maybe if the thick pillocks that sent Farage over to Europe took a
small amount of time trying to figure out what the EU did, they would
realise what a waste of time their soundbites about sovereignty actual
were. They might also ponder on why the other EU countries sent MEP's
over to work for their national interests and not drink beer and
fiddle expenses.

The morons on the East coast are starting to understand that fish are
not great believers in sovereignty, there will always be the odd tory
supporting moron that supports the idea that the EU are keeping all
the fish in the Danube though.

AB

On 28/04/2018 11:28, Fredxx wrote:
On 28/04/2018 11:16, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â* Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a thermal fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for one. If
not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back to not
having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.

Really? Most Brexiteers equate any EU regs to being nonsense and must be
revoked. And most of them are too thick to realise why they were needed,
or indeed care.

Typical of a Remoaner to think he speaks for Brexiters.

Most Brexiters think most of the EU derived laws are sensible. Others
such as the illegal recycling of jam jars less so. Most Remoaners think
that is a stupid law too.


You mean re-using jam jars for homemade jams at fetes etc, reported in
the tabloids about 5 years back?

Myth.

--
Cheers, Rob

In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
Ah - right. Yet another Brexiteer being happy with a leap into the dark
over something so inconsequential as jam jars. Perhaps it was the bent
bananas which swayed you?

Most Brexiters are aware that the classification of bananas is also
inconsequential. It doesn't make the selling of 'wonky' bananas illegal
either.

You are missing the point of why people voted for Brexit. Typical for a
Remoaner.

If only. When I ask for some concrete reasons for leaving the EU all I get
is esoteric things like sovereignty, taking back control, and the wild
hopes we'll be able to do far better deals around the world.

To me, it's like leaving a decent job on a whim - on the hope you'll
easily find another.

But then you may have noticed from another thread I consider gambling a
fool's game.

--
*If you think nobody cares about you, try missing a couple of payments *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

After serious thinking dennis@home wrote :
Currently parliament can enact any law it likes and doesn't have to follow
any thrust upon it. So what are you gaining that you don't already have?
You do know that parliament has to accept any "laws" the EU passes before
they are valid in the UK. The fact that they do pass those laws is because
they have the sovereignty to do so.
Just like they have the sovereignty to stop more than 60% of immigration but
choose not to do so.
Like wise they have the sovereignty to not pay benefits but choose to do so.
I don't think you understand what you want is not the same as the government
wants. I don't even think you understand which one of you will get what they
want.

That is so very WRONG!

dennis@home wrote :
No its all about some wishy washy excuse called sovereignty which as can be
seen from many of the posts here means "we hate foreigners".
Not one liever here has been able to say what they actually mean by
sovereignty and what they actually think they are getting back.

Its about making our own decisions, rather than having them made for us
by a near neighbours dictating to us. Its rather like your next door
neighbours deciding what wallpaper you can have on your walls and what
curtains you can hang.

On 28/04/2018 11:24, Fredxx wrote:
On 28/04/2018 11:00, dennis@home wrote:
On 28/04/2018 09:59, Fredxx wrote:
On 28/04/2018 09:48, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 23:16, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 22:04, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 21:43, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a
thermal fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the
transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for
one. If not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back
to not having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.


Lievers are the ones that say we are going to make cheaper stuff,
how are we going to do that without ignoring safety?

I don't recall this? If so a very small minority might have made
such an assertion.

We won't be competing in the semi closed EU market but the world
markets with all the other cheap manufacturers like india and china.

We don't currently compete that well now, in buying more from the
EU than we sell.

Brexit was never about these things that sore loser Remoaners bang
on about.

No its all about some wishy washy excuse called sovereignty which as
can be seen from many of the posts here means "we hate foreigners".

That's right, the important things.

Housing shortages, stagnating wages and the lack of infrastructure to
match immigration. As a Remoaner you are free to interpret these
fundamental issues as "we hate foreigners", but it goes to show how
in denial the likes of you are to change in the UK.

Since you already own a house and don't work, I can see why you might
be Remoaning.

Not one liever here has been able to say what they actually mean by
sovereignty and what they actually think they are getting back.

Yes, they have repeatedly said what is meant, where Parliament can
enact laws they choose, and not those thrust upon them.



Currently parliament can enact any law it likes and doesn't have to
follow any thrust upon it.

Wrong.

Don't be stupid, the very fact we are leaving the EU is proof!

On 28/04/2018 13:48, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
After serious thinking dennis@home wrote :
Currently parliament can enact any law it likes and doesn't have to
follow any thrust upon it. So what are you gaining that you don't
already have?
You do know that parliament has to accept any "laws" the EU passes
before they are valid in the UK. The fact that they do pass those laws
is because they have the sovereignty to do so.
Just like they have the sovereignty to stop more than 60% of
immigration but choose not to do so.
Like wise they have the sovereignty to not pay benefits but choose to
do so.
I don't think you understand what you want is not the same as the
government wants. I don't even think you understand which one of you
will get what they want.

That is so very WRONG!

In what way?

On 28/04/2018 11:22, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Fredxx wrote:

Housing shortages, stagnating wages and the lack of infrastructure to
match immigration. As a Remoaner you are free to interpret these
fundamental issues as "we hate foreigners", but it goes to show how in
denial the likes of you are to change in the UK.

Assuming you are a good Tory, you actually want the wages of the lowest
paid to go up substantially? That will be a first...


I think the current policy of increasing the tax threshold to remove the
lower paid from income tax is a better idea than artificially increasing
wages.

On 28/04/2018 13:52, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
dennis@home wrote :
No its all about some wishy washy excuse called sovereignty which as
can be seen from many of the posts here means "we hate foreigners".
Not one liever here has been able to say what they actually mean by
sovereignty and what they actually think they are getting back.

Its about making our own decisions, rather than having them made for us
by a near neighbours dictating to us. Its rather like your next door
neighbours deciding what wallpaper you can have on your walls and what
curtains you can hang.

Its nothing like that.

On 28/04/2018 11:46, Fredxx wrote:
On 28/04/2018 11:33, Tim+ wrote:
Fredxx wrote:
On 28/04/2018 11:16, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a thermal
fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for
one. If
not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back
to not
having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.

Really? Most Brexiteers equate any EU regs to being nonsense and
must be
revoked. And most of them are too thick to realise why they were
needed,
or indeed care.

Typical of a Remoaner to think he speaks for Brexiters.

Most Brexiters think most of the EU derived laws are sensible. Others
such as the illegal recycling of jam jars less so. Most Remoaners think
that is a stupid law too.

But is it true? Making up bonkers €œlaws€� to support brexit isnt a
powerful
argument.

https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK...tent-eu-rules/

Interesting, the wording I recall said about jars for resale. No mention
of a business us was made, the exception was jars specifically made for
re-use like Kilner Jars.

Brexiteers appear to recall many things that have never happened.
I suspect that they get their information from dubious sources and just
repeat the lies without any thought or maybe they just lie because they
think it supports their cause.

In article ,
Harry Bloomfield wrote:
No its all about some wishy washy excuse called sovereignty which as can be
seen from many of the posts here means "we hate foreigners".
Not one liever here has been able to say what they actually mean by
sovereignty and what they actually think they are getting back.

Its about making our own decisions, rather than having them made for us
by a near neighbours dictating to us.

You'd have to define 'ours'

The Scots, Welsh and Irish have long complained about being dictated to by
Westminster. Parts of England have the same view too.

You are also falling into the common trap of saying the EU is united
against the interests of only England.

Its rather like your next door
neighbours deciding what wallpaper you can have on your walls and what
curtains you can hang.

Ah - right. That will be why we continue to speak English rather than
German, drive on the right, and have our own legal and parliamentary
systems. The important thing is the colour of the curtains.

Basically, it would seem you want just your own way about everything. So
would most - but unfortunately for that view is the common good is more
important.

--
*Never underestimate the power of very stupid people in large groups *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
On 28/04/2018 11:22, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Fredxx wrote:

Housing shortages, stagnating wages and the lack of infrastructure to
match immigration. As a Remoaner you are free to interpret these
fundamental issues as "we hate foreigners", but it goes to show how in
denial the likes of you are to change in the UK.

Assuming you are a good Tory, you actually want the wages of the lowest
paid to go up substantially? That will be a first...


I think the current policy of increasing the tax threshold to remove the
lower paid from income tax is a better idea than artificially increasing
wages.

Even when if paying zero income tax many are still poor?

--
*Xerox and Wurlitzer will merge to market reproductive organs.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

dennis@home wrote on 28/04/2018 :
Currently parliament can enact any law it likes and doesn't have to follow
any thrust upon it.

Wrong.

Don't be stupid, the very fact we are leaving the EU is proof!

I don't really see how that offers any proof at all.

On 28/04/2018 14:49, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
dennis@home wrote on 28/04/2018 :
Currently parliament can enact any law it likes and doesn't have to
follow any thrust upon it.

Wrong.

Don't be stupid, the very fact we are leaving the EU is proof!

I don't really see how that offers any proof at all.

Well if the EU made our laws we wouldn't be allowed to leave.
So our parliament makes the decisions not the EU. We either agree or not
the worst that can happen is we leave.

On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 11:06:00 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 27/04/2018 21:43, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a thermal fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for one. If
not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back to not
having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.

Lievers are the ones that say we are going to make cheaper stuff, how are
we going to do that without ignoring safety?

By only doing the stuff that matters safety wise
and not all the other bull**** the EU also requires.

Perhaps you would care to be specific?

Hint, pesticides might be a current target for the band of idiots
wanting to bring back sovereignty.


Of course prior to EU interference we could happily feed dead sheep to
cows couldn't we.

Basically if anyone wants to protect their product range, there have
to be rules.

British might mean red tractors and currently healthy produce, but all
the same corner cutting penny pinching farmers are busy stocking up on
the growth hormones and chlorine come Brexit.


AB

On 28/04/2018 14:28, dennis@home wrote:
On 28/04/2018 11:46, Fredxx wrote:
On 28/04/2018 11:33, Tim+ wrote:
Fredxx wrote:
On 28/04/2018 11:16, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a
thermal fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for
one. If
not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back
to not
having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.

Really? Most Brexiteers equate any EU regs to being nonsense and
must be
revoked. And most of them are too thick to realise why they were
needed,
or indeed care.

Typical of a Remoaner to think he speaks for Brexiters.

Most Brexiters think most of the EU derived laws are sensible. Others
such as the illegal recycling of jam jars less so. Most Remoaners think
that is a stupid law too.

But is it true? Making up bonkers €œlaws€� to support brexit isnt a
powerful
argument.

https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK...tent-eu-rules/


Interesting, the wording I recall said about jars for resale. No
mention of a business us was made, the exception was jars specifically
made for re-use like Kilner Jars.

Brexiteers appear to recall many things that have never happened.
I suspect that they get their information from dubious sources and just
repeat the lies without any thought or maybe they just lie because they
think it supports their cause.


On this NG at least, almost exclusively the Mail and the Express.

It makes you wonder what this country has come to :-)

--
Cheers, Rob

I'd trust a kite mark more

dennis@home used his keyboard to write :
Well if the EU made our laws we wouldn't be allowed to leave.
So our parliament makes the decisions not the EU. We either agree or not the
worst that can happen is we leave.

I don't really see how the EU could prevent us leaving, except by
force. We just stop paying the EU.

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 28/04/2018 09:59, Fredxx wrote:
On 28/04/2018 09:48, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 23:16, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 22:04, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 21:43, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a thermal
fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for one.
If not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back to
not having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.


Lievers are the ones that say we are going to make cheaper stuff, how
are we going to do that without ignoring safety?

I don't recall this? If so a very small minority might have made such
an assertion.

We won't be competing in the semi closed EU market but the world
markets with all the other cheap manufacturers like india and china.

We don't currently compete that well now, in buying more from the EU
than we sell.

Brexit was never about these things that sore loser Remoaners bang on
about.

No its all about some wishy washy excuse called sovereignty which as can
be seen from many of the posts here means "we hate foreigners".

That's right, the important things.

Housing shortages, stagnating wages and the lack of infrastructure to
match immigration. As a Remoaner you are free to interpret these
fundamental issues as "we hate foreigners", but it goes to show how in
denial the likes of you are to change in the UK.

Since you already own a house and don't work, I can see why you might be
Remoaning.

Not one liever here has been able to say what they actually mean by
sovereignty and what they actually think they are getting back.

Yes, they have repeatedly said what is meant, where Parliament can enact
laws they choose, and not those thrust upon them.

Currently parliament can enact any law it likes and doesn't have to follow
any thrust upon it.

But there are significant penaltys if the EU law is ignored.

So what are you gaining that you don't already have?

No penalty if the EU law is ignored.

You do know that parliament has to accept any "laws" the EU passes before
they are valid in the UK.

Thats a lie with one class of EU edict.

The fact that they do pass those laws is because they have the sovereignty
to do so.

Wrong again with the ones that dont require parliamentary rubber stamps.

Just like they have the sovereignty to stop more than 60% of immigration
but choose not to do so.

They have in fact chosen to stop great swathes of the
previous much freer immigration from the ex colonys.

But dont have the sovereignty to stop any of the other 40%

Like wise they have the sovereignty to not pay benefits but choose to do
so.

They have in fact chosen to not pay benefits for later children.

I don't think you understand what you want is not the same as the
government wants. I don't even think you understand which one of you will
get what they want.

We do understand that you are lying thru your teeth, as always, remoaner.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Tjoepstil wrote:
On 27/04/18 22:04, dennis@home wrote:
Lievers are the ones that say we are going to make cheaper stuff, how
are we going to do that without ignoring safety?

There, in a nutshell is the remoaner stupidity encapsulated.

single example: How can we make electricity cheaper without ignoring
safety?


repel the climate change act.


The staggering naivete that thinks that all EU legislation is good and
about safety shows how brainwashed the remoaners are.

EU legislation is about political virtue signalling and promoting and
protecting (chiefly German) industry against competition from the rest
of the world.

Thanks for confirming what seems to be a typical Brexiteer view. All EU
legislation is political. Just shows how little they know (or care).

BTW, don't you think it rather odd a country like France would
be happy with legislation designed to protect German industry?

Because they get the quid pro quo with legislation designed
to protect very inefficient French agriculture and with Airbus
and cars befit from the legislation designed to protect all
EU industry too. Germany just happens to have rather more
industry that France.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Fredxx wrote:

Housing shortages, stagnating wages and the lack of infrastructure to
match immigration. As a Remoaner you are free to interpret these
fundamental issues as "we hate foreigners", but it goes to show how in
denial the likes of you are to change in the UK.

Assuming you are a good Tory, you actually want the wages
of the lowest paid to go up substantially? That will be a first...

Nope, it happened with the minimum wage, by the Torys.

Harry Bloomfield wrote:
dennis@home used his keyboard to write :
Well if the EU made our laws we wouldn't be allowed to leave.
So our parliament makes the decisions not the EU. We either agree or not the
worst that can happen is we leave.

I don't really see how the EU could prevent us leaving, except by
force. We just stop paying the EU.


I doubt that the present incarnation of the EU could really be bothered to
attempt to stop the UK even if we had not gone down the negotiated path
that is happening,once all the posturing is over the German and French
equivalents of Harry will be celebrating at having got rid of a country
that was only halfhearted in its membership and wanting special treatment
most of the time.

If a more malevolent incarnation of the EU wanted to hurt Britain then not
much force would be needed.
Just close off the Ports in the Netherlands ,Belgium,France. Spain
,Portugal to shipping to and from the UK and like wise with European
airspace and that would include the Atlantic approaches under Irish Control
or if not actually close them just charge a lot.

That would upset those who got used to having cheap holidays in Spain etc.
At the moment those markets still want the Brits for economic reasons but
as the Eastern states improve economically Poles etc will take their place.

GH

"ARW" wrote in message
...
On 28/04/2018 11:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tjoepstil wrote:
On 27/04/18 22:04, dennis@home wrote:
Lievers are the ones that say we are going to make cheaper stuff, how
are we going to do that without ignoring safety?

There, in a nutshell is the remoaner stupidity encapsulated.

single example: How can we make electricity cheaper without ignoring
safety?


repel the climate change act.


The staggering naivete that thinks that all EU legislation is good and
about safety shows how brainwashed the remoaners are.

EU legislation is about political virtue signalling and promoting and
protecting (chiefly German) industry against competition from the rest
of the world.

Thanks for confirming what seems to be a typical Brexiteer view. All EU
legislation is political. Just shows how little they know (or care).

BTW, don't you think it rather odd a country like France would be happy
with legislation designed to protect German industry?


TBH the French are never happy are they?

They are pretty happy when you lot end up face down in the mud.

On 28/04/2018 13:46, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
Ah - right. Yet another Brexiteer being happy with a leap into the dark
over something so inconsequential as jam jars. Perhaps it was the bent
bananas which swayed you?

Most Brexiters are aware that the classification of bananas is also
inconsequential. It doesn't make the selling of 'wonky' bananas illegal
either.

You are missing the point of why people voted for Brexit. Typical for a
Remoaner.

If only. When I ask for some concrete reasons for leaving the EU all I get
is esoteric things like sovereignty, taking back control, and the wild
hopes we'll be able to do far better deals around the world.

You seem to forget the real reasons such as a shortage of housing,
stagnation of wages being propped up by the minimum wage and a lack of
infrastructure to match the level of immigration.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
Ah - right. Yet another Brexiteer being happy with a leap into the dark
over something so inconsequential as jam jars. Perhaps it was the bent
bananas which swayed you?

Most Brexiters are aware that the classification of bananas is also
inconsequential. It doesn't make the selling of 'wonky' bananas illegal
either.

You are missing the point of why people voted for Brexit. Typical for a
Remoaner.

If only. When I ask for some concrete reasons for leaving the EU all I get
is esoteric things like sovereignty, taking back control, and the wild
hopes we'll be able to do far better deals around the world.

To me, it's like leaving a decent job on a whim - on the hope you'll
easily find another.

Just as true of joining the EEC in the first place and more than half
of you lot have decided that it turned out to have been a bad choice.

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 28/04/2018 11:22, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Fredxx wrote:

Housing shortages, stagnating wages and the lack of infrastructure to
match immigration. As a Remoaner you are free to interpret these
fundamental issues as "we hate foreigners", but it goes to show how in
denial the likes of you are to change in the UK.

Assuming you are a good Tory, you actually want the wages of the lowest
paid to go up substantially? That will be a first...


I think the current policy of increasing the tax threshold to remove the
lower paid from income tax is a better idea than artificially increasing
wages.

The Torys have actually done both, most obviously with the increase
in the legal minimum wage.

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 28/04/2018 13:52, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
dennis@home wrote :
No its all about some wishy washy excuse called sovereignty which as can
be seen from many of the posts here means "we hate foreigners".
Not one liever here has been able to say what they actually mean by
sovereignty and what they actually think they are getting back.

Its about making our own decisions, rather than having them made for us
by a near neighbours dictating to us. Its rather like your next door
neighbours deciding what wallpaper you can have on your walls and what
curtains you can hang.

Its nothing like that.

It is in fact precisely like that.

"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 11:06:00 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 27/04/2018 21:43, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a thermal
fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for one.
If
not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back to
not
having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.

Lievers are the ones that say we are going to make cheaper stuff, how
are
we going to do that without ignoring safety?

By only doing the stuff that matters safety wise
and not all the other bull**** the EU also requires.

Perhaps you would care to be specific?

Most obviously with shutting down coal fired power
generation, the maximum power of vacuum cleaners etc.

Hint, pesticides might be a current target for the
band of idiots wanting to bring back sovereignty.

Much more likely being able to be selective about
which EUians are allowed to move to Britain.

Of course prior to EU interference we could
happily feed dead sheep to cows couldn't we.

And they still eat horses.

Basically if anyone wants to protect their
product range, there have to be rules.

That's not what the EU is about.

British might mean red tractors and currently healthy produce,
but all the same corner cutting penny pinching farmers are busy
stocking up on the growth hormones and chlorine come Brexit.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

On Sun, 29 Apr 2018 06:19:18 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 11:06:00 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 27/04/2018 21:43, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a thermal
fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for one.
If
not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back to
not
having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.

Lievers are the ones that say we are going to make cheaper stuff, how
are
we going to do that without ignoring safety?

By only doing the stuff that matters safety wise
and not all the other bull**** the EU also requires.

Perhaps you would care to be specific?

Most obviously with shutting down coal fired power
generation, the maximum power of vacuum cleaners etc.

I was at Longannet when they were putting the failed sulphur capture
systems in. The coal fired stations need phasing out, nothing wrong
there.

Apart from global warming sulphur dioxide plus rain = acid.

I too wasn't impressed by the EU poking it's nose into vacuum's. I
bought a miele 2kW in Ireland just before the ban. I would swear by
it, it's a fantastic cleaner and probably at the limits of useful
power as it sticks to the floor at full whack.

I bought a Karcher WD3 Wet and dry, lower power [1400W], that is just
as powerful. Had the WD3 been going when I bought the Miele, it would
have been the preferred purchase.

Hint, pesticides might be a current target for the
band of idiots wanting to bring back sovereignty.

Much more likely being able to be selective about
which EUians are allowed to move to Britain.

Of course prior to EU interference we could
happily feed dead sheep to cows couldn't we.

And they still eat horses.

No, horses cannot be fed to ruminants.

Basically if anyone wants to protect their
product range, there have to be rules.

That's not what the EU is about.

It's a common market, requiring common standards. Everything revolves
around that base. If you do not understand it you are not alone. May
and most of the Coservative party seem pretty clueless also.

British might mean red tractors and currently healthy produce,
but all the same corner cutting penny pinching farmers are busy
stocking up on the growth hormones and chlorine come Brexit.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

No, we are not "cutting red tape" to improve quality that's for
certain.


AB

On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 21:44:04 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 28/04/2018 12:50, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
On Fri, 27 Apr 2018 21:43:23 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a thermal fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for one. If
not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back to not
having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.

Yes, the Brexiteers will not need transformers, just big resistors.
Probably made up from pound shop HB pencils.

For someone who says they don't know much, you don't need to keep
telling us.

R= V/I

Very little else needs to be known in the brave new world of the
Brexiteer.

Mains droppers were the order of the day for TV sets before Britain
joined the EU.


A bit wasteful of energy, but not half cheap!

AB

On 28/04/2018 13:20, RJH wrote:
On 28/04/2018 11:28, Fredxx wrote:
On 28/04/2018 11:16, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â* Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a thermal
fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for
one. If
not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back to
not
having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.

Really? Most Brexiteers equate any EU regs to being nonsense and must be
revoked. And most of them are too thick to realise why they were needed,
or indeed care.

Typical of a Remoaner to think he speaks for Brexiters.

Most Brexiters think most of the EU derived laws are sensible. Others
such as the illegal recycling of jam jars less so. Most Remoaners
think that is a stupid law too.


You mean re-using jam jars for homemade jams at fetes etc, reported in
the tabloids about 5 years back?

It was never a myth.

http://www.churcheslegislation.org.u...d_jam-jars.pdf

An official document:
https://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/p...02guidance.pdf

"RJH" wrote in message
news
On 28/04/2018 14:28, dennis@home wrote:
On 28/04/2018 11:46, Fredxx wrote:
On 28/04/2018 11:33, Tim+ wrote:
Fredxx wrote:
On 28/04/2018 11:16, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a thermal
fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the
transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for
one. If
not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back to
not
having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.

Really? Most Brexiteers equate any EU regs to being nonsense and must
be
revoked. And most of them are too thick to realise why they were
needed,
or indeed care.

Typical of a Remoaner to think he speaks for Brexiters.

Most Brexiters think most of the EU derived laws are sensible. Others
such as the illegal recycling of jam jars less so. Most Remoaners
think
that is a stupid law too.

But is it true? Making up bonkers €œlaws€� to support brexit isnt a
powerful
argument.

https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK...tent-eu-rules/

Interesting, the wording I recall said about jars for resale. No mention
of a business us was made, the exception was jars specifically made for
re-use like Kilner Jars.

Brexiteers appear to recall many things that have never happened.
I suspect that they get their information from dubious sources and just
repeat the lies without any thought or maybe they just lie because they
think it supports their cause.

On this NG at least, almost exclusively the Mail and the Express.

Bet most of them dont bother with any newspaper at all anymore.

It makes you wonder what this country has come to :-)

On 28/04/2018 12:50, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
On Fri, 27 Apr 2018 21:43:23 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a thermal fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for one. If
not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back to not
having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.

Yes, the Brexiteers will not need transformers, just big resistors.
Probably made up from pound shop HB pencils.

For someone who says they don't know much, you don't need to keep
telling us.

Harry Bloomfield wrote
dennis@home wrote

Well if the EU made our laws we wouldn't be allowed to leave.
So our parliament makes the decisions not the EU. We either
agree or not the worst that can happen is we leave.

I don't really see how the EU could prevent us leaving, except by force.

Not possible by force either.

We just stop paying the EU.

"Marland" wrote in message
...
Harry Bloomfield wrote:
dennis@home used his keyboard to write :
Well if the EU made our laws we wouldn't be allowed to leave.
So our parliament makes the decisions not the EU. We either agree or not
the
worst that can happen is we leave.

I don't really see how the EU could prevent us leaving, except by
force. We just stop paying the EU.


I doubt that the present incarnation of the EU could really be bothered to
attempt to stop the UK even if we had not gone down the negotiated path
that is happening,once all the posturing is over the German and French
equivalents of Harry will be celebrating at having got rid of a country
that was only halfhearted in its membership and wanting special treatment
most of the time.

If a more malevolent incarnation of the EU wanted to hurt Britain then not
much force would be needed.
Just close off the Ports in the Netherlands ,Belgium,France. Spain
,Portugal to shipping to and from the UK and like wise with European
airspace and that would include the Atlantic approaches under Irish
Control
or if not actually close them just charge a lot.

That would upset those who got used to having cheap holidays in Spain etc.
At the moment those markets still want the Brits for economic reasons

And thats why that line of yours would never happen.

but as the Eastern states improve economically Poles etc will take their
place.

Not a chance.

On 28/04/2018 21:22, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
On Sun, 29 Apr 2018 06:19:18 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 11:06:00 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 27/04/2018 21:43, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a thermal
fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for one.
If
not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back to
not
having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.

Lievers are the ones that say we are going to make cheaper stuff, how
are
we going to do that without ignoring safety?

By only doing the stuff that matters safety wise
and not all the other bull**** the EU also requires.

Perhaps you would care to be specific?

Most obviously with shutting down coal fired power
generation, the maximum power of vacuum cleaners etc.

I was at Longannet when they were putting the failed sulphur capture
systems in. The coal fired stations need phasing out, nothing wrong
there.

Apart from global warming sulphur dioxide plus rain = acid.

I too wasn't impressed by the EU poking it's nose into vacuum's. I
bought a miele 2kW in Ireland just before the ban. I would swear by
it, it's a fantastic cleaner and probably at the limits of useful
power as it sticks to the floor at full whack.

Brexiteers fail to understand that advances require a push.
Vacuums were stagnating and just produced more noise and heat than they
do now.
The Sebo 1400W one I bought 6 years ago was just as powerful as the 2kW
ones. The difference was better design.

British designed vacs were cr@p by comparison.

At least they are now competing.



I bought a Karcher WD3 Wet and dry, lower power [1400W], that is just
as powerful. Had the WD3 been going when I bought the Miele, it would
have been the preferred purchase.

The last vac I bought was 1200w and it is by far the best from a suction
point of view, but it is a Bosh GAS25 so it should.

Its just proof that reducing the power requirements hasn't stopped vacs
from performing but it has driven a lot of cr@p one off the market.

Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote
Rod Speed wrote
dennis@home wrote
On 27/04/2018 21:43, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a thermal
fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for one.
If
not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back to
not
having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.

Lievers are the ones that say we are going to make cheaper stuff, how
are
we going to do that without ignoring safety?

By only doing the stuff that matters safety wise
and not all the other bull**** the EU also requires.

Perhaps you would care to be specific?

Most obviously with shutting down coal fired power
generation, the maximum power of vacuum cleaners etc.

I was at Longannet when they were putting
the failed sulphur capture systems in.

None of ours have failed.

The coal fired stations need phasing out

Bull****.

nothing wrong there.

Everything wrong with the EU mandating that,

And completely stupid to stop using coal and use natural gas
instead for power generation when natural gas is much more
useful for other stuff like powering cars and heating houses.

Even more stupid the EU not doing anything when
the stupid krauts chose to shut down their nukes and
start burning lignite for power generation again.

Apart from global warming sulphur dioxide plus rain = acid.

Our coal doesn't have enough sulphur in it to matter.
You lot are welcome to keep importing that.

I too wasn't impressed by the EU poking it's nose into vacuum's.
I bought a miele 2kW in Ireland just before the ban. I would
swear by it, it's a fantastic cleaner and probably at the limits
of useful power as it sticks to the floor at full whack.

So its pure bull**** for the EU to have any
say on what vacs can be sold in the EU.

I bought a Karcher WD3 Wet and dry, lower power [1400W],
that is just as powerful. Had the WD3 been going when I
bought the Miele, it would have been the preferred purchase.

I've got a 2KW wet and dry Ryobi and it works very well indeed.

Hint, pesticides might be a current target for the
band of idiots wanting to bring back sovereignty.

Much more likely being able to be selective about
which EUians are allowed to move to Britain.

Of course prior to EU interference we could
happily feed dead sheep to cows couldn't we.

And they still eat horses.

No, horses cannot be fed to ruminants.

But are fine to feed to humans or what pretend to be human.

Basically if anyone wants to protect their
product range, there have to be rules.

That's not what the EU is about.

It's a common market,

It is in fact just another protectionist scam.

requiring common standards.

Not with what can be done with vacuum cleaners it isnt REQUIRED.
It worked fine for decades without any common standards for those.

Ditto in spades with the political system of the member countrys. You can't
even join the EU now without some semblance of a democratic system.

Everything revolves around that base.

Not anymore. The EU has moved way past that starting point now.

If you do not understand it you are not alone.

Nothing to 'understand' in that regard, it is in fact
just another power grab by unelected bureaucrats.

May and most of the Coservative party seem pretty clueless also.

Even sillier than you usually manage, and that's saying something.

British might mean red tractors and currently healthy produce,
but all the same corner cutting penny pinching farmers are busy
stocking up on the growth hormones and chlorine come Brexit.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

No,

Yep.

we are not "cutting red tape" to improve quality that's for certain.

It isnt to shaft the consumers either,

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 28/04/2018 21:22, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
On Sun, 29 Apr 2018 06:19:18 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 11:06:00 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 27/04/2018 21:43, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 12:31, dennis@home wrote:
On 27/04/2018 01:47, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/04/2018 00:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

8

Good grief. I'd expect a transformer like that to have a thermal
fuse
inside the winding which would rupture long before the
transformer
overheated.

That was my thought, and I thought there was a requirement for
one.
If
not there ought to be.


The EU requires one but don't worry when we leave we can go back to
not
having them.

Only an idiot Remoaner would contemplate such.

Lievers are the ones that say we are going to make cheaper stuff, how
are
we going to do that without ignoring safety?

By only doing the stuff that matters safety wise
and not all the other bull**** the EU also requires.

Perhaps you would care to be specific?

Most obviously with shutting down coal fired power
generation, the maximum power of vacuum cleaners etc.

I was at Longannet when they were putting the failed sulphur capture
systems in. The coal fired stations need phasing out, nothing wrong
there.

Apart from global warming sulphur dioxide plus rain = acid.

I too wasn't impressed by the EU poking it's nose into vacuum's. I
bought a miele 2kW in Ireland just before the ban. I would swear by
it, it's a fantastic cleaner and probably at the limits of useful
power as it sticks to the floor at full whack.

Brexiteers fail to understand that advances require a push.

Not by unelected bureaucrats that dont have
a ****ing clue about anything at all, it doesnt.

Vacuums were stagnating and just produced more noise and heat than they do
now.

Bull****. My Ryobi 2KW wet and dry does a
hell of a lot better job than what it replaced.

The Sebo 1400W one I bought 6 years ago was just as powerful as the 2kW
ones.

Bull****.

The difference was better design.

The consumers should be free to buy what they decide
performs better. No unelected bureaucrat should be able
to tell them what they can't buy with vacuum cleaners.

British designed vacs were cr@p by comparison.

Consumers should be free to buy
what they like with vacuum cleaners.

At least they are now competing.

In fact you can still buy the best performing vacs as long as you
arent in the EU and Britain will be able to once it leaves too.

I bought a Karcher WD3 Wet and dry, lower power [1400W], that is just as
powerful. Had the WD3 been going when I bought the Miele, it would have
been the preferred purchase.

The last vac I bought was 1200w and it is by far the best from a suction
point of view, but it is a Bosh GAS25 so it should.

Its just proof that reducing the power requirements hasn't stopped vacs
from performing but it has driven a lot of cr@p one off the market.

Irrelevant to whether some unelected bureaucrat should have
any say what so ever on what vacuum cleaner you can buy.