StefanAVFC Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 13 minutes ago, colhint said: I can't offer any opinion on most of them but the one about sugar is complete bollocks. He doesn't know what he's talking about. He's reading a headline and then putting his spin on it. Explain it then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 1 hour ago, chrisp65 said: I find twitter to be far more balanced and measured. You've missed some pearlers of rabbit holes to fall down, then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 22, 2019 Moderator Share Posted January 22, 2019 Twitters balance depends on the people you choose to follow Faceache generally tends to be people you know, we all know some horrors I find Reddit offers a bit more balance as you follow sub-reddits not people (though in general on UK politics it leans very left) but you do get a taste of all opinions as long as you know how to use it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 Just now, snowychap said: You've missed some pearlers of rabbit holes to fall down, then. I was just pulling his whatsit. True about the cycling proficiency badge though. My mate had his taken off him by a policeman, but they never caught me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NurembergVillan Posted January 22, 2019 Moderator Share Posted January 22, 2019 3 hours ago, bickster said: A very long twitter thread on ‘them rules” Quote Brace for mega thread on "ALL THEM RULES INNIT" There is a type of of brexiter who is motivated not by xenophobia, or Empire nostalgia, or buccaneering trade fantasies, but instead by "all them EU rules". Sadly they can never name a single one. So I have done some research... The commons library looked at how many UK laws were influenced by EU laws. researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/RP10… 4,514 out of 34,105. And out of the EU laws that influenced the 4,514 ....Vote Leave discovered 72 that were forced on us against our will. 72! gallery.mailchimp.com/1026e6b00f7328… ... So... what inequities were forced upon us, what degradation, what humiliations for a proud island nation? Let's have a little look shall we? I have put a link to each law we voted "no" to... and my own TLDR, if you don't fancy wading through the legalese.... (1/72) 29/03/1996 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Food labels should say if Aspartine is present. UK: Nonsense. Bloody red tape! (Linked to cancer, headaches and seizures, even Pepsi USA stopped using it by2015) (2/72) 29/04/1996 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Ban on livestock growth-boosters with hormonal, thyrostatic or beta-agonist effects (carcinogenic residue in meat). UK: Aw come on - a little bit of cancer never hurt no-one. (3/72) 03/06/1996 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Safety advisers dealing with transport of dangerous goods on public roads etc must be properly trained and regulated. UK: Bleedin elf'n'safety gorn mad. Wassamatta wiv a bit a toxic spillage across a playground? (4/72) 27/06/1996 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: we need some conservation measures to preserve North Atlantic fish stocks. UK: Ah Phooey. There's plenty o' fish in the sea. We've even registered on the website. (5/72) 22/07/1996 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: additives to mineral water must be safe and labels must be honest (eg "spring water" has to come from an actual spring) UK: This will kill our sales of Dell-boy Trotter's "Peckham Spring Water". (6/72) 24/09/1996 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: posted workers must be given the same pay and conditions as local workers. UK: You're kidding! The whole POINT of posted workers is to undercut the locals and undermine their employment rights. (7/72) 09/12/1996 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: lets have a consistent approach to data collection on goods traded between member states? UK: Hmm. That buggers up our carousel fraud schemes, somewhat. (8/72) 17/03/1997 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Lets tighten up on livestock health checks, paperwork and traceability. UK: God, you're not still pissed about that mad cow thing? IT'S SORTED! Twust us - we's Bwitish. ( Soon after: 10M animals slaughtered during foot and mouth) (9 & 10/72) 22/04/1997 & 26/06/1997 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: We still need to protect those fish stocks. UK: Aww. Cant we just keep fishin'? There are so few left, we want to catch as many as we can before they are ALL gone. (11/72) 22/07/97 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: OK folks: lets have a single set of rules about drying, powdering and labelling hops - instead of everyone making it up as they go along. UK: We LIKE making it up as we go along. (Hopping mad now) (12/72) 20/10/1997 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Don't add tartaric acid to wine. And here's how tariffs on grapejuice from 3rd countries should be calculated. UK: We LIKE adding dodgy things to wine. And the French, Spanish and Italian winemakers should do what WE say! (13/72) 11/12/1997 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: firms from outside the EU may carry passengers between destinations in the EU (cabbotage) without needing a registered office in the EU. UK (1997): Not happy. UK (2021): Splendid idea. (14/72) 16/12/1997 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Lamb and sheep meat to be classified in a consistent way as soon as possible after slaughter. UK: That violates the English common law principle: "you may as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb" (15/72) 16/02/1998 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Trucks for livestock journeys over 8 hours must have bedding, feed, water, ventilation, partitions and access for inspectors. UK: Why spend all that money? Innit all just meat on the plate at the end of the day? (16/72) 18/05/1998 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: This is a Gas turbine/nomenclature/tariff/temporary partial thingy-me-wotsit. UK: If that's not worth dying in a ditch for, I don't know what is. (17/72) 19/06/2000 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: We are going to intervene in the sugar market to create price stability and protect farm incomes. UK: We don't like it. (Be really cool if you reformed this system in, ooh say, 2006...) (18/72) 04/12/2000 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: These are our proposed subsidies for fruit and veg growers. UK: We don't like fruit and veg… can you subsidise laxitives and Anusol instead? (19/72) 29/01/2001 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Let's increase the tonnage of bananas we take from ACP countries at the lower tariff rates? UK: NEVER! You may take our blue passports, but you will never get your hands on our BANANANANANANANAS! (20/72) 19/12/2001 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: After the mad cow thing and the dioxin thing... maybe we should tighten up on compound feed and how it is labelled? UK: Knee-jerk regulation is the wrong mooooohve. (21/72) 27/06/2002 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: South Korean State Aid for shipyards is undercutting our yards on LNG tankers; time for countermeasures. UK: We couldn't care less about Danish shipyards; Thatcher destroyed all of the UK's about twenty years ago. (22/72) 27/02/2003 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: we must ban the advertising of tobacco products in printed media, radio, TV, events sponsorship etc. UK: just hang on a mo' - there's good money in those deathsticks, you know. (23/72) 03/06/2003 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: we must set up an EU-wide computer system to combat evasion of excise duty on booze etc. UK: but we like evading taxes… (24 & 25 /72) 22/07/2003 assets.panda.org/downloads/gmos… EU: Proper labelling of food that uses genetically modified ingredients - so consumers can decide not to buy them if they are worried. UK: Bugger consumers! What they don't know won't harm 'em" (26/72) 26/01/20014 eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/Lex… EU: airlines should compensate passengers for delayed or cancelled flights. UK: we don't support this proposal because ...um...because...we are just utter, utter bastards. (27/72) 28/02/2005 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: In 2000 we dropped sugar tariffs for some Balkans countries and we want to row that back a bit now. UK: NO! (We're sweet enough...) (28/72) 07/05/2007 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_… EU: Greece Italy and Spain are bearing disproportionate costs housing asylum seekers - everyone should chip in to help them? UK: Sod the Greeks! They shouldnt have put their country so close to the Middle East. (29/72) 07/05/2007 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: OK can you chip in to funding a programme to help asylum seekers return home? UK: You 'avin a giraffe, mate? (30/72) 23/05/2007 Solidarity and management of migration flows EU: Another whip-round needed; to help member States in receiving, and in bearing the consequences of receiving, refugees and displaced persons. UK: Why should WE help? A friend in need… can sod off! (31/72) 30/05/2007 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Common standard for emissions testing and what maintenance information vehicle manufacturers should provide. UK: Aw - do we have to? I mean...air polution only kills 36,000 in the UK each year. kcl.ac.uk/lsm/schools/po… (32/72) 24/09/2009https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32009R1107 EU: no pesticides that are; carcinogenic, mutagenic, toxic to reproduction, sensitising chemicals, very toxic, explosive or corrosive. UK: EU spoil sports! (33/72) 14/12/2010 EU: we need rule changes to allow us to do development type stuff with middle-income countries (eg China, India & various states that don't meet the OECD criteria for "Official Development Assistance") UK "no" 1st reading & "Yes" 2nd (34/72) 17/05/2011 oeilm.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil-mobile/su… EU: There's a potential period of legal limbo between the expiry of current fisheries legal framework and start of the next one. We need a temp. extension to cover the gap. UK: ("Fish? FISH? - 'ad their chips, their chips, hawhawhaw!") (35/72) 12/09/2011 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Lets create a new agency, eu-LISA, to ensure 24/7 resilience in the IT systems that keep our borders safe (asylum database, visa database, security, fingerprints, criminals). UK: We LIKE being flooded with crim's and asylum seekers. (36/72) 27/10/2011 Apparently we voted against the EU budget for 2012. Except this data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/S… says we voted FOR. Whatevs. (37/72) 30/11/2011 assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl… EU: We need a 5% increase in budget. UK (and NL): No not a penny more! EU: OK. How about no real terms increase, just inflationary uplift? UK: Still not happy! EU: Soz. (38/72) 14/02/2012 europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.d… EU: We've funded food banks since 1987. 13M people rely on them. Then SOMEONE blocked our budget increase last year. Can't we keep the funding going for another 12 months? UK: NO! Let the plebs starve; the very sight of them affronts us. (39/72) 09/03/2012 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: The European Refugee Fund needs more dosh, to help those countries that are bearing the brunt. UK: Having taken moral and ethical advice from Voldemort, Sauron and Satan himself, our view is: TOUGH SHIT! (40/72) 26/07/2012 EU: We need more cash. blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/the-… EU: Our budget was 1.2% of members' total GDP 10 years ago - now it's 1%. Come on, members? (your national budgets have all INCREASED as a %ge of GDP). UK: Not a penny. & everything is your fault, & we hate you. (41/72) 08/10/2012 register.consilium.europa.eu/doc/srv?l=EN&f… EU: The Maritime Safety Agency needs re-organising & more muscle to punish oil spills from ships and oil rigs. UK: (Gulp! Probs OUR oil rigs.) WE OPPOSE! (42/72) 21/11/2012 EU: We need a bit more money - really. UK: We don't care. This is an opportunity to grandstand for our euroskeptic electorate over really tiny amounts of money. (43/72) 10/12/2012 EU: We need about £0.4Bn for 2012 (Or 4 DUP MP's, if you prefer) UK: We don't care. This is ANOTHER opportunity to grandstand for our euroskeptic electorate over really tiny amounts of money. (44/72) 12/12/2012 EU: OK we have trimmed it by about 10%. UK. Still don't care! (45/72) 26/02/2013 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Canary Islands, Azores, Madeira etc are struggling due to their remoteness. Lets help them? UK: Tough titty - their fault for being so remote. Can't they be tax havens like Cayman and BVI? (46 & 47/72 ) 24/06/2013 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: We need prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms so that stuff like Lehman's and the 2008 crash don't happen again. UK: Oh don't worry. If the bankers go bust again, taxpayers will bail em out. (48&49) UK budget grandstanding on tiny amounts. (50/72) 10/10/2013 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: we want to make some changes to the employment contract for EU staff. UK: they're your staff - do what you wan….Wait! We oppose! (Dunno why….) (51,52,53) More pointless budget grandstanding. (54/72) 12/02/2014 data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/S… EU: Fund our Hercule III programme to combat irregularities, fraud and corruption affecting the EU budget. UK: Er…anti-fraud you say…hmm... WE OPPOSE! (Soz.. just got to pop out and make a call…) (55/72) 11/03/2014 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Let's provide funds for the most deprived - these people are really suffering. UK: Hey! We have been deliberately CAUSING deprivation with our austerity programme - now you want to undo all that work! WTF? (56/72) 12/03/2014 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: we need to agree rules for funding stuff like development, democracy, human rights, European Neighbourhood. UK: every one of those things is anathema to us. (57/72) 12/03/2014 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: We want to establish an instrument to fund stability and peace in countries. UK: Stability and peace?! Wipe me arse with them. (58/72) 12/03/2014 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Lets establish a financing instrument for the promotion of democracy and human rights around the world. UK: Sod off! Lets establish an instrument to wipe out democracy and human rights in the UK. Call it "Brexit". (59/72) 12/03/2014 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Lets establish an instrument for co-operation with 3rd countries. UK: Co-operate on THIS, mofo! (60/72) 12/03/2014 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Lets establish an instrument for development cooperation. UK: Development. Cooperation. Aid. These words make our skin burn. (61/72) 12/03/2014 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Measures to reduce poverty, promote development, trade, education and science in countries that border the EU? UK: SOD DEVELOPMENT! SOD TRADE! SOD EDUCATION, SOD SCIENCE AND SOD ALLEVIATING SODDING POVERTY! (62/72) 12/03/2014 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Help for pre-accession countries to get ready for joining the EU. UK: SOD THE SODDING PRE-ACCESSION COUNTRIES! SOD 'EM TO HELL AND BACK!! (63/72) 16/04/2014 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Measures to give FOM workers protection from exploitation. UK: But we WANT to exploit FOM workers - it helps keep our UK-born workers under the thumb. (64/72) 16/04/2014 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Boring bit of housekeeping re staff pensions, let's hope no eejit takes this as an opportunity for pointless, immature, grandstanding. UK: Someone mention my name? (65/72) 16/04/2014 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Same again re staff pensions, let's hope that eejit feels he's made his point already. UK: Do you ever get that feeling of déjà vu? (66 & 67 /72) 30/09/2014 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Now (Cameron) no political donations from dodgy Russians, Criminals or organised bicycle-seat sniffers. Farage? stop spunking your expense account on "other stuff"! UK: Hey! political corruption is an UK tradition, immemorial. (68/72) 13/10/2014 eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2014/1… EU: Enhanced labelling for EU Agricultural products; not just nutritional info, but also food safety, traceability, authenticity, health, animal welfare, environment, sustainability. UK: Less information consumers get, happier we'll be. (69/72) More budget grandstanding for the Mail readers. (70/72) 05/03/2015 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: These measures will protect National Statistical Authorities from interference by their National Governments. UK: You think? Hahaha - one day we will put Rory Stewart in charge. (71/72) 05/03/2015 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: Some rules about type approval of e-Call systems (they automatically call 999 in a car crash) UK: More Euro-bollocks. Wouldn't have saved Diana, hawhawhaw. (72/72) 23/06/2015 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/… EU: The CJEU needs more judges to deal with a big backlog of cases. UK: But we LIKE cases to wait ages. It means only the wealthy - who can afford to wait - can get justice. FINISHED! 51 https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1087360379691380736.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 19 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: Explain it then Ok in a short version. The UK uses approx 1.2m tonnes of sugar annually. we were given a quota of 1.2m. If you couldn't meet your quota others jumped in, but it was very hard to get that quota back. So he says the EU wants to create price stability and protect farm incomes. They did that, but the did it by setting the price at £625 a ton. No one wanted to miss out on that so they always produced about 1.3 to 1.4 m each year. It's a crop so there is a risk on the yield.. So British Sugar Employed my wife and her job was to sell the surplus every year. She sold at world spot prices at about £200-£220 at tonne and still made a profit. The rest of the world were paying a third of what Eu citizens were. One of her biggest contracts was with an ice cream firm in the Middle East, I used to joke with her it was Walls of Jericho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seat68 Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 11 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1087360379691380736.html Foisting their laws on us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 18 minutes ago, colhint said: Ok in a short version. The UK uses approx 1.2m tonnes of sugar annually. we were given a quota of 1.2m. If you couldn't meet your quota others jumped in, but it was very hard to get that quota back. So he says the EU wants to create price stability and protect farm incomes. They did that, but the did it by setting the price at £625 a ton. No one wanted to miss out on that so they always produced about 1.3 to 1.4 m each year. It's a crop so there is a risk on the yield.. So British Sugar Employed my wife and her job was to sell the surplus every year. She sold at world spot prices at about £200-£220 at tonne and still made a profit. The rest of the world were paying a third of what Eu citizens were. One of her biggest contracts was with an ice cream firm in the Middle East, I used to joke with her it was Walls of Jericho. No, he says that they wanted to create price stability and protect farm incomes when they intervened in the market. Your post appears to support the idea that they protected farm incomes by setting a price that was higher than the then world spot price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 Sure you could say that. Fair point. But 3 times the price of whatever the rest of the world pays. If you think this is a good thing the EU ha done well that's your opinion. Of course these price stabilities also apply to most of the food we buy to a varying degree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 39 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said: Linked to cancer, headaches and seizures, even Pepsi USA stopped using it by2015 Without wishing to go through every line item , this one caught my eye as I’m kinda involved with that area of industry Pepsi withdrew it from some products but not all ( coke didn’t remove it at all ) , Pepsi have subsequently introduced it back into their products I suspect it may be because there is no evidence Of the claims agaisnt it indeed I thought the aspartame cancer links etc was proven to be a hoax ,known as the Markle hoax or something after one of those chain type emails there’s no consensus as to whether aspartame is “bad” for you , the euro food standard agency themselves have ruled it “safe “ ... a can of diet drink contains about 190 mg of aspartame you’d have to consume more than 19 cans of soda to reach the Approved level so in conclusion the first fact he lists proves the U.K. were right and it was bloody red tape / EU meddling ...thus I hearby rule his evidence flawed and means I don’t have to bother reading the rest of that long post ( fwiw , the U.K. did add then introduce the warning itself in 1997 ) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 7 minutes ago, colhint said: Sure you could say that. Fair point. But 3 times the price of whatever the rest of the world pays. If you think this is a good thing the EU ha done well that's your opinion. Of course these price stabilities also apply to most of the food we buy to a varying degree. I wasn't claiming that the protectionist policy (as that's what it obviously is) is a good thing or a bad thing (for the avoidance of doubt, I'm generally against protectionism but I can understand it to a limited degree with regard to basic supply security). Just that, if the aim was to protect farm incomes then by ensuring a price higher than would otherwise likely be the case this would do that. With regard to sugar production, it's complicated by the difference between beet and cane, isn't it? I'm not trying to defend the policy in itself (I think its effects have rather waned over time, too, haven't they?) just against the particular question you raised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) 17 minutes ago, colhint said: Of course these price stabilities also apply to most of the food we buy to a varying degree. Without getting in to particular products and the tariffs and ntbs that you're talking about then I'm not sure it's as necessarily universally the case as you seem to have extrapolated from this example. When drilled down in to a lot of the claims about EU tariff barriers against non EU produce seem not to hold up. Edited January 22, 2019 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 No it's not complicated at all There are two major suppliers of sugar, British Sugar , beet, and Tate and Lyle, Cane. Billingtons , cane, are well down in third place. Both the main two receive the same subsidies. I know you are or appear to be in your posts an intelligent person. What bothers me in this situation, and I do understand that to offer the farming community a level of income is generally good. But what annoys me in this situation is the fact the UK government was trying to block a subsidy to make sugar 3 times more expensive the most of the world, they would have voted yes to 1,5 or even 2 at a stretch, is portrayed in these tweets as the UK government being an arsehole, for what is not a very good policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 21 minutes ago, snowychap said: Without getting in to particular products and the tariffs and ntbs that you're talking about then I'm not sure it's as necessarily universally the case as you seem to have extrapolated from this example. When drilled down in to a lot of the claims about EU tariff barriers against non EU produce seem not to hold up. How much drilling down have you done in the 16 minutes between my post and yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 3 minutes ago, colhint said: No it's not complicated at all There are two major suppliers of sugar, British Sugar , beet, and Tate and Lyle, Cane. Billingtons , cane, are well down in third place. Both the main two receive the same subsidies. Are you maintaining that there is no difference in the EU policy for thos who import raw cane and process it in to white sugar and those who do the same with domestic beet? That would appear to run contrary to the claims of Tate & Lyle. My point about it being 'complicated' is not that it is complex but that it is complicated by the fact that there are two totally different sources/processes. One is dependent upon imported raw product to be processed, the other is a home grown product, i.e. one that deals with 'farm income'. 19 minutes ago, colhint said: What bothers me in this situation, and I do understand that to offer the farming community a level of income is generally good. But what annoys me in this situation is the fact the UK government was trying to block a subsidy to make sugar 3 times more expensive the most of the world, they would have voted yes to 1,5 or even 2 at a stretch, is portrayed in these tweets as the UK government being an arsehole, for what is not a very good policy. Again, that's a different discussion about protectionism. If you'd limited your criticism to 'protectionism is bad, mmkay' then I would have limited my questioning to that which I've posted above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 17 minutes ago, colhint said: How much drilling down have you done in the 16 minutes between my post and yours. None. I haven't done much drilling down myself as the various DBs are particularly tiresome to plough through (I did try it once or twice and it pissed me off). I think you have failed to grasp my point, though. It was a wider one about not generalizing from a specific policy that may well be the epitome of protectionism to all food (whether or not with a loose rider of 'to a varying degree'). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 I didn't generalise. I wrote on one point only. The bit he wrote about sugar was wrong. I said I offer no opinion about the rest. I can only talk about the sugar bits. This is getting a bit Heracletion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 2 hours ago, colhint said: I used to joke with her it was Walls of Jericho. Very good. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 31 minutes ago, colhint said: I didn't generalise. I wrote on one point only. The bit he wrote about sugar was wrong. I said I offer no opinion about the rest. I'm sorry but you don't appear to understand (or remember) what you've posted. I was quite interested in the apparent detail and expertise that you purported to add to the discussion. The subsequent posts you've made have steadily whittled away at that interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts