Posts by codejunky

Re: Brexit got done

@AC

"In 2016 the UK had the 3rd cheapest shopping basket in the world (relative to household income)"

Which doesnt argue against 'the UK was paying more for food'. And the important part to note is that if it gets cheaper then the population is getting a pay rise (reduced expenses).

Re: Brexit got done

@AC

To be fair the first one was my favourite (the Australian one). It showed how we were overpaying for food (as was established before the referendum) as farmers instantly complained about competition. Such a quick and available proof even if economically its not massive and the gov obviously puts quotas in place to protect farmers for now.

Re: Brexit got done

@AC

Five One years in, what's your favourite trade deal?

Re: The big problem is

@Lotaresco

"Before the referendum Brexiters were shouting at me that they wanted to go back to the 1970s"

Before the referendum remainers were shouting at me that we wanted to go back to the 1970's. I asked why then they wanted to remain in a protectionist trade block designed for the time of the soviets and protectionist blocks instead of the modern world.

"I warned them that in truth the 1970s were awful with rapidly declining "

Reading the description it could almost be the EU. Except Germany is burning more coal.

Re: Brexit got done

@NerryTutkins

"the UK will eventually sign a single market deal, and be bound by the rules. There is no other reasonable choice from an economic standpoint"

You are kidding? A case to remain couldnt be made when we had opt outs such as not joining the abysmal currency. The idea a case could be made to surrender to the EU in full is a joke. Lets put the economic in perspective, the EU keeps threatening to cut itself off from the #1 global financial centre of Europe which is #2 in the world but keeps putting it off because it will again plunge the Eurozone into another economic crisis.

A large chunk of the EU (the EZ) is economically dependent on a single city in England. The idea that the key to the UK's success is to be in a falling portion of the worlds wealth is an odd idea. When globalisation and trade has reduced global absolute poverty faster than any time in history it is odd to desire a protectionist block. And I have yet to hear how putting a crap government over our government can improve anything.

Re: Brexit got done

@Xalran

"The UK decided to keep the border porous to havoid having to put back Royal Marines in the streets all over Northern Ireland."

Ok thats fine and thats the UK's choice. The UK made clear it has no issues with a 'soft border' but the EU made clear it could not tolerate a porous border. Which is why I ask why the UK needs breaking up for EU incompetence at solving its own border dilemma?

"The UK can still go to a hard border at the Irland Republic/Northern Ireland actual border"

That is true. Article 6 which the EU nearly invoked over vaccine which gives the UK all the justification it needs should the UK wish to. Although it is likely the UK would just stop checking the UK sea border and not bother checking the Irish border.

"But OTOH, the UK will have to assume the political/religious consequences..."

This is a discussion I had a few times over the Irish border but never had a good answer to this question- why would the UK have any political/religious consequences if the UK didnt do anything but the EU threw up the hard border it demands? It would be the EU making an action which would have them assume the consequences.

Alternatively if it is acceptable to split the UK with the sea border then it is just as acceptable to split the EU with a sea border and they could demonstrate how it should be done.

Re: Brexit got done

@Dan 55

"The border would not ordinarily be porous were it not for the special circumstances on the island of Ireland."

Very true. The geography just doesnt allow for a hard border in any meaningful way.

"Ireland is obviously not going to follow the UK out of the EU as above 90% of the population want to stay in the EU"

Thats fine. Thats their choice and I am all in favour of them making their own choice. They are not in the UK and are free to do as they wish.

"Brexit should have taken into account how all of the UK territory was going to leave the EU"

Surely that would be to leave. The UK having the rights to only its own borders.

"while allowing the UK to uphold its side of the GFA"

That also allows for the UK to just leave. There is nothing in the GFA mandating the UK to be subservient to the EU. Also it does not describe the border. So the UK is well within its rights not to be in the EU, Ireland to remain in the EU and for both sides to agree to modifying or binning the GFA. Ireland being free to remain in the EU and leave the EU to dictate the terms if they wish, but if that leads to them binning the GFA so be it.

The current protocol doesnt work according to NI, UK and the EU so it was a bad effort to be scrapped. Which brings us back to there is a border that already exists in Ireland and work from there. The EU doesnt give a hoot about Ireland and promptly forgot about it when it accidentally nearly broke its agreement (art 6) for selfish stupidity due to its incompetent handling of a crisis. Ireland is only on their radar as a bargaining chip because the EU had so few.

Re: we're in a holding pattern, with our association not being granted

@AC

"EU goodwill is firmly locked in a box labelled "members only"."

Did you really have to conjure up images of the EU's members going into the locked goodwill box?

Re: Brexit got done

@Doctor Syntax

"The Protocol was the Brexiteers' fiction to try to pretend there wasn't a problem It would never stand up to reality."

Eh? In what universe was it the Brexiteers? The brexiteers wernt making the progress May wanted because the Brexiteers didnt agree to screwing the UK over. The protocol came after when May made progress (attempted BINO).

"And let's not beat about the bush - it was the direct and unavoidable consequence of Brexit"

Its entirely avoidable. The border isnt specified in the agreement, the Irish border already exists. Solved. It would cause huge problems for the EU but thats not the UK's concern.

"It's going to continue to be a problem unless the UK gets broken up and that would be an even bigger problem."

Why is the remain solution always to drop trow and grab ankles? Why must the UK be broken up for the EU incompetence to solve its porous border problem?

Re: EU Competition?

@Lars

"Population below poverty line

EU 9.8% (2013 est.) USA 15.1% (2010 est.)"

Curiosity here, does that account for the different methods of counting for welfare? For example the US counts cash welfare but not all the rest of it when counting poverty while the EU I believe counts welfare first (as it should be).

Re: With 27 countries involved (and 27 languages)

@Lars

"PS. English become important in Europe not because of the British but the Americans."

Being a common language spoken far and wide. Still amusing to remember Juncker joking to a crowd about the end of English in the EU, but having to switch to English to be understood.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/05/05/jean-claude-juncker-insists-english-is-losing-importance-in-europe-in-english-to-be-understood/?sh=3b55b4757f2d

Re: EU Competition?

@steamnut

"In 2023 we could have over-production and mothballing of unwanted capacity. We have been here before."

The good news is for all the other countries (UK here) who will get lots of cheap chips. But if the US and EU are willing to stump up the cash for home production then good for them, and us.

Re: Fingers crossed

@DJO

1)

"As stated many times, even by you, the UK could have gone alone on that while in the EU"

So you are a UK supremacist. Where other countries like Germany dropped their plans you think the UK government is so much better that we would have gone our own way. And thats before we look at EU actions after failing of trying to steal vaccines.

"We have since fallen behind many states so any gains have dissipated"

Some states, we are still ahead of the EU in vaccination (last I checked) which is due to the UK being as vaccinated as its willing to be and member countries placing their own vaccine orders because the EU screwed up (its like you cant read). That is not a dissipated advantage, its life saving and hasnt done reputational damage with countries and companies as the EU self inflicted through their actions. We are in an endemic not pandemic situation. Continued gains.

"Yes lives were saved but nowhere near as many that were lost by government incompetence"

Are you amusingly claiming this is an EU competence because if so then members with high death rates would be blamed on the EU (which is unfair). Each country acted on their own with varying degrees of success. Are you gonna claim the UK in the EU wouldnt have made the same domestic decisions? It wasnt an EU competence.

2)

"So without Brexit not only would women in the UK benefit but all over the EU."

So the slow moving effort to remove the tax through the EU (and done quickly upon leaving) is stalled and stopped because??? EU sucks? This is why I thought it funny and pointed out the crying from the article when the UK achieved the job when we could aka out of the EU.

You can now explain why the EU is so incompetent that they need the UK (UK supremacist again I see) to fix the EU? Can the EU not resolve this themselves as the UK did upon leaving?

3)

"Sovereignty shared is not sovereignty lost"

So you are arguing against the chief EU brexit negotiator and European of the year? You argue against the guy who represented the EU in the negotiations and tell him he is wrong? What is this sharing garbage, the EU makes the decisions so the sovereignty is given to them. I dont know if you truly dont understand or just cant admit this fact because its not really been in question for some time.

Re: Fingers crossed

@Strahd Ivarius

"Since I may be a little dimwitted, can you put a numbered list of all advantages from Brexit, with a link to the source?"

1. Covid vaccine procurement. Very extremely politely worded by the BBC- https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-52380823

The EU fell behind not only the UK but also the US and Israel. This is the vaccine expected to reopen economies but also save lives. The UK signed for delivery 3 months earlier (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/26/head-of-astrazeneca-confirms-uk-has-prior-claim-on-vaccine) and the UK had priority due to the contracts signed. The EU first tried to accuse companies of not meeting their EU contracts but that was rejected in court (https://www.penningtonslaw.com/news-publications/latest-news/2021/best-reasonable-efforts-eu-and-astrazeneca-in-dispute-over-interpretation) especially as the EU doesnt seem to understand their contract.

After forgetting the brexit deal made and how important Ireland was to the EU they dropped plans to implement the hard border when reminded by Ireland and the UK (https://www.ft.com/content/c678dc02-c5f5-4717-a7ca-43c0ba3f2b44). Various other incidents attacking companies, ill conceived raids and so on resulted in some manufacturers turning away from the EU and negotiating direct with member countries (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9498895/Covid-19-Valneva-scraps-talks-EU-bosses-wanting-buy-Covid-vaccine.html).

Unfortunately some people seem hung up on a minor technicality that the EU may have permitted countries to do it themselves but thats just the UK supremacist view that we are better run than other member countries- Italy, Germany and others had already started the process -but then stopped, at the EU's request.: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/one-year-after-brexit-britain-is-reaping-the-benefits-of-independence

2. Tampon tax. This is more amusement than effect but a protest went on in London to scrap a tax the EU law wont let them remove (this is a funny crying article about it- https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/31/tampon-tax-government-axes-vat-on-sanitary-products). Note that the victory has led to crying.

3. Sovereignty. For some reason this is both accepted and rejected and sometimes in the same conversation with a remainer, because its an uncomfortable truth. Leaving the EU frees the UK from the EU hence regains sovereignty. To argue against this is to argue against the hypocritical EU 'European of the year' (https://inews.co.uk/opinion/michel-barnier-u-turn-french-sovereignty-brexit-twist-1197242).

Those are fairly easy ones to establish since everyone knew that leaving the EU would require some adjustment of the economy as it was stuck in the protectionist block. Yet fairly instant tangible and not really debatable advantages have been shown to already exist only 1 year after leaving the project.

Re: Fingers crossed

@DJO

"What are the advantages, I have asked and asked and asked again for you to list them but you still cannot or will not, I wonder why?"

You asked. I answered. You said I cant count the advantages mentioned. And then cry you see no advantages (except the ones you ignore). Another amusing one is the removal of the tampon tax which fools marched on London when London couldnt remove it because of EU rules.

"The losses are far from intangible, £billions in regional development, common standards which are necessary if we want equal trade, economy of scale, freedom of movement and much more."

And if I was inclined to react as you have I would say 'I disagree, so apart from them what losses? See you cant list any'. Do you see why your perception is way off yet? Go back and read my comments, I have listed you benefits. Then we might be able to have a reasonable discussion.

Re: Fingers crossed

@Justthefacts

Thanks for the links, very interesting read. I wonder how the liabilities will be split between the EU and Eurozone. The bailout fund is sure to make it more difficult for other members to leave the project but if they are that close to the implosion anyway there may be no escape for them.

Re: Fingers crossed

@Loyal Commenter

"As everyone can see (except perhaps you), this was an unmitigated disaster, leading to such glories as nurses having to use bin-bags as makeshift equipment"

Probably didnt help that the PPE we did have was sent to the wrong places until the army was pulled in to send it to where it was needed. But I dunno why you assume I think it was ok? Again you seem to be arguing with your delusion and not with my comments.

"Besides allowing for safety trials to be fast-tracked (which was also done elsewhere), and chucking some cash at it, our government has absolutely nothing to do with this, despite Johnson's repeated claims that it was all enabled by the government"

So the question remains that if our gov did nothing (bar the things you note) and the US, UK and Israel managed to get vaccine ordered and rolled out why couldnt the EU? Because the fault was the EU's for their handling of the situation.

It seems the difference was that the EU didnt sign the orders, was slow to approve vaccine, turned down offers of more for political reasons, did not understand their contracts, stole vaccine, nearly put a border in Ireland because they forgot about the deal they just negotiated, raided suppliers only to find vaccine supplies for the EU and accused suppliers for EU failings.

"The someowhat inferior Oxford AstraZenica vaccine"

How do you conclude inferior? One of the suggested reasons the UK isnt suffering the wave on wave and crisis of continental Europe is that the AZ vaccine seems to provide longer lasting protection.

"I doubt there is one single member of the government who could give a decent explanation of vaccine science to the layman, which is why their claim to be intimately involved in the process is so laughable."

I doubt any politicians UK or EU would be able to give a laymen explanation of vaccine science. Their involvement being at the government level of giving them the resources and permissions to get the job done. The difference being clear in how the EU didnt fare as well as others.

"as for the Pfizer vaccine, well, we got that first because we overpaid for it. The price we are paying for it has since gone up even higher"

Overpaid or paid to get some? And its a good job the UK situation is now endemic instead of pandemic if the cost is going up.

"All of this is, of course moot, as there would have been nothing preventing our government from doing the exact same thing whilst still being an EU member"

That is the UK supremacist argument. I am discussing this with others on another topic so feel free to go join in if you have the answers they dont seem to have- https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2022/01/28/horizons_response/#c_4406093

"As it happens, several EU countries have since not only caught up with our vaccination rates, but overtaken them, largely because of the number of ill-educated absolutely idiotic anti-vaxxers in this country."

And that is again to point out the failure of the EU government but the success of the member state governments who belatedly placed their orders and managed to achieve what the EU didnt. The vaccination rate of the EU still below that of the UK but how much of that is personal choice (you say antivax) I dont know.

"People who wilfully ignore facts cannot be swayed by them."

I see we hold the same opinion there. The interesting issue with this is that the fragile belief in the EU is so weak that a few of you have to keep claiming there are no benefits of brexit, even when its possibly saved your life or those around you. You cannot seem to accept any benefits exist while maintaining your belief that the UK would be better in the EU than out. Otherwise you would be able to recognise a benefit while still holding the opinion remain would be better.

Conversely I do recognise there were some benefits of being in the EU. They just didnt outweigh the cost (in my opinion).

Re: Fingers crossed

@DJO

"This is getting ridiculous - what benefit already seen, there are none that I am aware of. Please enumerate them."

I agree this is ridiculous. Just read the thread where you have literally said not to mention the benefits but you are not aware of any benefits. That totals this discussion until your able to discuss.

"You go on about the (intangible) gains of Brexit but how about the losses"

This is a point that can be discussed but only once your willing to count both sides. That you seem to consider the benefits intangible yet I am sure you wont say that about the losses.

Re: Fingers crossed

@DJO

"So all the "advantages" are going to happen many years down the line, fat lot of fucking good that is, we were promised so much."

Wow thats desperate. So you want me to list the benefits, but not the benefits already seen because you dont like that. I can see why your not convinced there are benefits.

"So UK as a trading capital for Europe is obviously history as being out of the EU we are at a significant disadvantage and no EU companies will want the extra expense when cheaper to use EU alternatives are available."

And how well is that going so far? While in the EU they were desperate to move 'the city' out of London. We laughed at the EU when one of their idiots came over to 'take our banks away' which seriously disappointed them. The EU played hard ball for passporting rights and lost out (the UK said no). The EU keeps suggesting moving Euro clearing out of the UK and then banks in the EU have to explain how that would take the Eurozone to a whole new low.

It goes back to the idea of shooting themselves in the foot if the EU wants to cut itself off from the global financial centre of Europe, #2 in the world.

"If they are so blatant and available how come nobody can enumerate them, not a single fucking one!."

Not one! Just dont mention that one. Not a single one! But dont mention that one. Not fucking one! But dont mention that one. You are funny.

"It's a joke at your expense"

That you reject benefits but then tell me there aint any? Your so funny!

"so far the cost of Brexit is £800m per week"

What is that including? Does it include the transition period after we should have left? How does that compare with the covid bailout? About €750bn

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/20/macron-seeks-end-acrimony-eu-summit-enters-fourth-day

Re: Fingers crossed

@Loyal Commenter

"You do know that London is now not regarded as the financial centre of Europe, entirely because of brexit, right?"

Eh? Are you seriously claiming that or just spouting tripe?

"If you google the term "financial centre of Europe" you'll find a lot of results talking about London in the past tense."

Dont hurt your head too much-

https://www.google.com/search?q=largest+financial+centers+in+the+world&client=firefox-b-d&oq=largest+financial

"getting your posts deleted for making sexist slurs against Gina Miller."

Eh? When? Amused you now call me sexist.

"Now, please list some of these real "blatant and readily available" benefits"

Why? You obviously didnt read my post you replied to so your not gonna read/understand it if I repeat.

Re: Fingers crossed

@DJO

"So please list the myriad advantages unrelated to C-19 that Brexit has showered upon us ungrateful bastards."

The issue with that is you want to hear advantages but not the huge and immediate advantages that were so blatant and readily available. An advantage as touted by an EU president and ex president. This is knowing that the benefits of brexit were expected to materialise over years and decades.

By not related to C-19 does that still allow the UK escaping the covid bailout fund where the EU writes debt in EU members names for it to spend, which has been suggested to be not just for emergencies (as it was proposed) but a way to fund the EU?

Since London gave up on EU passporting rights the financial sector is working on removing EU regulations getting in the way of the #1 financial centre of Europe.

Off the top of my head thats a start.

Re: Fingers crossed

@DJO

"There were a LOT of responses needed to tackle Covid, this government got all but one completely wrong and the one they did get right was such a trivial advantage it dissipated in under a month."

Not sure the evidence supports your claim. Endemic vs pandemic. And the gov is bound to have got stuff wrong (as others did) but which way is the question. As for a dissipated trivial advantage in under a month thats funny and wrong. As was being discussed on another reg forum where there is a shocking lack of answers to serious questions.

Re: OK.

@Roland6

"did very effectively document what was involved in getting the sheer volume of fresh food to market and thus just how much modern 'farming' has industrialist a long production line principles."

It does bring the question of how to provide enough food if not by efficient means. The difference between the starving in the world and the developed world.

Re: Fingers crossed

@Loyal Commenter

"I probably actually won't bother to read your response"

Do you ever? I didnt realise there was any probability based on our past interactions.

But if your in the UK you are welcome. You were likely offered vaccination while the EU tried to figure out its arse from its elbow. And the EU cant create debt in the UK's name for the covid bailout fund they wish to extend to day to day funding.

Re: Chlorinated chicken

@Richard 12

"The production methods mean US chicken is not safe to eat unless it gets dunked in chlorine to remove surface bacteria. It's a food safety and animal welfare issue."

Yes. Just as salad is washed in chlorine too. And yes making food safe to eat is the reason. Surely thats a good reason.

Re: OK.

@Roland6

"I had always assumed that was the purpose of the chlorine wash."

To meet food safety standards yes. Which it does in the US and Europe.

"It is only when you ask why is a chlorine wash necessary do you start to get at the unsavoury truth of the matter."

Getting the food on our plates is a gruesome matter. There was concern that kids didnt know that their meat came from animals and were desensitised to the reality of putting food on their plates.

Re: OK.

@James 51

"My whole point is that the processes that the chicken are farmed in is not safe"

Ok. So you as an authority over the food standards agencies of Europe and the US? Your opinion above the very agencies responsible for this and previously you stated its blocked by the authorities, yet these agencies are the authorities on food safety.

Not only is it deemed safe by those food authorities but the US is a large exporter of these foods to 150 countries (according to a quick google) who obviously deem it safe. But you dont.

"These same conditions also lead to a miserable existance for these animals and we shouldn't turn a blind eye to that either."

Now that is a reasonable comment, except even UK farmers were impressed by the welfare of animals in the US after their initial distrust (think it was milking cows if I remember). The idea that animals live happy lives in Europe but not in the US is easy propaganda.

Re: OK.

@James 51

"You keep bringing up FUD about the wash."

Yes. That is because the comment you responded to by Jellied Eel who commented on the FUD: https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2022/01/31/brexit_freedom_bill/#c_4406785

And you went on to claim that isnt what it was really about even though that is the the FUD these people feared before the revised version that bothers you: https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2022/01/31/brexit_freedom_bill/#c_4407081

I am hammering this home because the FUD was real. It was a poor argument against brexit to feed the fear campaign and was shot down and debunked many times because the FUD was repeated so often. Its like trying to find a Euro (as UK currency) supporter, suddenly it didnt happen. But it did.

"pretending the wash was the sole problem and managed to construct the strawman you're so busy whacking."

Stop lying. I am not letting you get away with rewriting history, but I have engaged you on your issue with animal rights. So I am not only pulling you up for trying to brush off the reality of what happened but also willing to discuss your issue.

"I always understood when chlorine wash chicken was used in the media that meant"

That might be your take from it, kudo's if it really was. But that doesnt account for the FUD which was real-

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2014/09/30/351774240/european-activists-say-they-dont-want-any-u-s-chlorine-chicken?t=1643792737371

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/free-trade-with-us-europe-balks-at-chlorine-chicken-hormone-beef/2014/12/04/e9aa131c-6c3f-11e4-bafd-6598192a448d_story.html (I liked this bit- That move comes after actors in chicken outfits in one French protest troupe — dubbed the “chicken brigade” — tried to “chlorinate themselves” in a public pool.

Thats just a very quick search for what was years of FUD. And people believed the chlorine wash itself was the problem as I have already pointed out to you.

"You still haven't mentioned why we should lower our animal welfare standards to allow the sale of this chicken which if it was produced in the same way in the UK day, would be demeed unfit for human consumption."

I have early in our conversation- https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2022/01/31/brexit_freedom_bill/#c_4407098

I even quoted what I said because you missed it the first time- https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2022/01/31/brexit_freedom_bill/#c_4407203

And again- https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2022/01/31/brexit_freedom_bill/#c_4407345

If you cant read or understand then you need to ask the specific part your struggling with. But to say I havnt mentioned why is blatant ignorance of the comments I have written to you already in this exact conversation.

Re: Fingers crossed

@Loyal Commenter

"Can't find any benefits to brexit?"

Obviously been sleeping since we left.

Re: OK.

@James 51

"These chickens would probably end up in frozen dinners and and other places clear labeling won't be required so those who bleat about choice, we won't have the option to know."

I am all for labelling it, but to cry because people would have choice and you dont like that seems a selfish and daft argument. This stuff is considered safe to consume by the authorities deemed responsible for safety so the fear isnt about that. So accidents are unlikely to be noticed if you pick up one from the US unintentionally.

If you want to discuss that labels are a good thing then cool, I am all for that. But crying that people shouldnt be given choice because the difference may not be required to be labelled at the moment is just whining for nothing.

Re: OK.

@James 51

"I did make that post and I mentioned animal welfare twice and didn't mention wash once:"

Thank god you realise!!! Now put 2 and 2 together! You said that in response to my comment- https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2022/01/31/brexit_freedom_bill/#c_4407098

That comment states clearly there was plenty FUD about consuming chlorine washed chicken. So you clearly moved the goal posts by changing the discussion from the FUD to what you consider it to be 'really about'.

Now we established that the subsequent comments look a bit redundant dont they as you keep trying to redefine the discussion away from the FUD being discussed.

Re: OK.

@James 51

"And once again you're pretending it's all about the wash"

And once again you are pretending the FUD wasnt all about the wash. You are lying. You are beyond incorrect now you are actively pretending.

"I have never moved the goal posts, you're carrying over discussions you've had with other people into this one."

Erm... did you not post this one?- https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2022/01/31/brexit_freedom_bill/#c_4407143

Its your username. And in it you reorient the discussion from the FUD over the wash, which was real and about the wash, to animal welfare. I have tried to be accommodating and discuss that too with you while pointing out that you are wrong about the FUD because I had to explain this too people and link them to the European Food Standards webpage explaining it was safe because they didnt understand. The FUD was real. No matter how in denial you are.

"And for what is hopefully the final time, if the standards were acceptable in the EU then they would being produced and sold here already."

And I have been polite enough to entertain this line of discussion with you. Where its the politicians not the food safety authorities who made that decision. The protectionist block politicians.

"They are not and I hope they never will be."

I think it would be a good idea to. I would propose labelling them but freedom of choice and driving down the costs of living is a benefit to people. This is a debate about first world food from first world countries.

Re: OK.

@Loyal Commenter

"If competition as regulation worked, we wouldn't need regulations."

If the world (or even a country) could be just regulated by some politicians we would have socialist utopias run by those glorious authoritarians. Amazing how the alternative doesnt work at all.

"If you think we don't need regulations"

Dont recall saying that.

"Unregulated "free market" competition leads only to a race to the bottom with the most unscrupulous taking all."

Oddly enough the race to the bottom is what has brought us such wonders that we have, while the greed of the controlling few has kept many countries down and out.

Re: Meh

@Malcolm Weir

"First, only a complete idiot thinks the stock market has anything much to do with the economy"

Except to increase the wealth of the people. Be it through investment in companies (which may or may not reside in the country of the market) and through increasing peoples personal wealth such as their pension plans and investments.

"Amazon is listed on NASDAQ, yet here's their founder spending tons-o-cash in Holland. Perhaps you can get a friend to explain how that doesn't help the *US* economy."

Not sure I have that many dumb friends but I do have some acquaintances who might. The idea that money should not be spent beyond the nationalistic shore has been tried and failed over and over. Damaging the currency being 'protected'.

"only a total ignoramous and fool of the highest order would claim that Obama had THREE terms despite"

True. Good catch. My bad for hitting the key next to the one I intended.

"the worst GDP in Obama's terms started in Bush's (the financial crisis)"

Obama inherited Bush's financial crisis Trump inherited Obama's 'new normal'.

"Still, he did better than Trump even though he had to clean up Bush's mess, which is sadly for you the facts..."

Obama inherited a recovering economy from Bush. It was already heading back up from the crash.

"which makes it hard to blame Obama for the policies"

Obama's policies were to continue the policy of Bush in propping up the recovering economy.

"And did unemployment fall to it's lowest level under Trump? It's true, he failed to bugger up the trend that started in 2010"

And managed to plunge unemployment below what was considered the point of full employment. This resulted in serious wage growth.

"but it's also undeniably true that unemployment under Trump was the highest it's been since 1948!"

You dont mean the time of the pandemic caused by China which has buggered economies around the world?

"An honest person trying to allocate credit would also acknowledge the blame, so if Trump's policies were responsible (despite the trend line) for the lowest, then they also are responsible for the highest."

Was it his policy for China to allow the spread of a virus (lab or not) to become a global pandemic? Is that while colluding with Russia?

"As to the COVID deaths and policies that Trump *is* responsible for, have you noticed that it's his "deplorables" that are mostly dying now?"

Thats a pretty disgusting comment. What defines a 'deplorable'? Starting to sound like Hillary telling part of the electorate not to vote for her.

"although it would have been better if the silly sod hadn't spend as long denying the problem and personally exposing people to the virus when he had it...."

Trump acted before the WHO dared call it a pandemic (they held off so as not to offend the Chinese) and got vaccine ordered and delivered to states. Not panicking and overreacting is a fairly good trait.

Re: Meh

@Malcolm Weir

"as usual, wrong. This time he might be telling deliberate fibs, too."

How? Obama's new normal? He said it. Unemployment fell to the lowest in decades under Trump? True. The stock market reached record levels? True. Obama having 3 terms for you to compare against Trumps 1? Still beat expectations. Are you picking and choosing to claim fibs? I think you are...

You may wish to compare on differing metrics but to claim I am telling fibs is a bit strong.

"True, Trump did increase employment in my sister-in-law's line of business.

She runs mortuaries."

Trump who didnt start wars but ended them? Or do you mean from covid because more have died under Biden than Trump. Not that I credit that to the presidents but it is amusing how Biden claimed Trump shouldnt be president letting so many die.

Re: Meh

@phuzz

"Trickle down economics doesn't work."

So where did his money go for the boat and for work on the bridge? Does nobody get it? And the people paid by that money do they not spend it?

The link isnt quite correct. This is a curve created by Arthur Laffer, who showed the way that tax cuts create a powerful multiplication effect Arthur Laffer didnt create it although he did make it famous.

Trump’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is concerning since this trickle-down policy seems to exacerbate the income inequality spurred by Reaganomics Trump inherited Obama's 'new normal' sluggish economy propped up by government subsidy. Trumps tax cuts increased employment across the board and a white hot economy. The wet pants cry about income inequality is worthless, improved living standards matter and it delivers.

If you do want to live where inequality is small you should try socialist countries where most everyone is equally poor.

@thames

"I benchmarked the RPi3 and RPi4 in both 32 and 64 bit modes,"

You dont happen to have the results for how much faster the Pi3 is do you? I may be tempted to upgrade at the weekend