Screwfix rubbish

[dingbat]

The sooner we get out of Europe (which you are not mandated to be in!) the better.

You are wholly, completely, utterly, 100%, never-been-more-in-your-whole-life wrong.

Now I'm curious. If, after all these years, there are still 'absolute yes' and 'absolute no' camps regarding Europe, it suggests that the situation is nothing like as clear cut as either side implies. I just wonder what makes you so certain that david and julie are wrong?

 

[david and julie]

Ban.........I am wrong about what?

My opinion or the fact there was no mandate for this in the first place.

 

[Handyman]

This is excellent stuff!! And all because Screwfix have no idea about marketing.

As for what David & Julie said: "You don't get as big as Kingfisher if you don't know what you're doing", this is not necessarily a reflection of their success. Perhaps Kingfisher are only as big as they are because they don't know what they're doing. Kingfisher would be £300 better off if Screwfix hadn't lost my business over the last 3 weeks. If all their outlets are allowed to cock-up business in the same way, they could be losing millions every month.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Ban.........I am wrong about what?

My opinion or the fact there was no mandate for this in the first place.

Your opinion.

 

[kendor]

let's face it if there was no benefit for the country in being in the EEC then the government would have pulled out long ago!
Bit like some wars we could mention.

 

[david and julie]

Ban I don't understand your reasoning.

By defintion an opinion is an opinion, it is neither right nor wrong, ours may be different on this issue,but they are still ours.

I would like out of Europe because it is a proven corrupt set up. The fiddles and nepotism are widespread and well known.
We have vast ammounts of duplicity which is costing us dearly.They can't even agree where to be based and auditors have again thrown out the accounts for irregularities (7th year running I believe).We are not talking petty fiddles, hundreds of millions are missing. I see Europe as one big gravy train for the people involved. It is just a massive talking shop, providing jobs for the boys.

The main comment from pro-euro pundits centre around jobs. The UK spends more in Europe than they do here. It is a fallacy that these jobs would go if we left the club. All European countries deal with the rest of the world and would still do so with us. Europe needs our money.Indeed there is growing resentment about the club on mainland Europe too.

We never voted for any of this and are in Europe under false pretences.

I also don't understand the reasoning of this Gov either. On one hand they say bigger is better with enlargement in Europe. Then on the other we get devolution of Scotland and Wales. What is better, big or small?

Recent events in Iraq also show Europe is far from united and member states will go their own way if it suits anyway.

Don't you realise we are heading for a socialist superstate! People have lost their lives fighting against this in the past.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Ban I don't understand your reasoning.

By defintion an opinion is an opinion, it is neither right nor wrong, ours may be different on this issue,but they are still ours.

OK - suits me - in that case we'll have to settle on the dictionary definition of opinion:

Judgement or belief based on grounds short of proof.


As for the rest of your sub-Daily Mail claptrap, I won't bother debating as clearly your mind is made up, but this kind of gives away how rational you are being:

Don't you realise we are heading for a socialist superstate! People have lost their lives fighting against this in the past.

 

[david and julie]

Ban... I think we all know what an opinion is in this context.

I generally listen to the radio,telly, or use the internet for news.

I am not trying to change your viewpoint. I am only giving my opinion of how I see Europe.

It was you that vilified my comments without giving any reason or explanation.

Are you saying any of my comments about eurocons or otherwise are mistaken or untruthful?

It is notable that the only thing you have actually picked up on is an insignificant spelling mistake.( which is something most of us don't bother about). A rational discussion is when all parties do that, not take a stance with no facts whatsoever, as you have.

BTW. I have never even read the Mail, the only paper I occasionally read is our local evening paper which is not very political and is actually pro Europe.

Is there a Euro directive which prevents Mail readers having an opinion anyway,if that was the case?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Hang on a minute...

Ban... I think we all know what an opinion is in this context.

Which way do you want it to be? Is it possible, by your definition, for an opinion to be wrong? I thought so, which is why I said so, but you then came back with a claim that opinions cannot be right or wrong. Since, strictly speaking, an opinion is a belief, then you are correct, it cannot be wrong, in which case I find the dictionary definition of opinion rather apposite.

If you go back and pay attention, you'll see that you wrote:

"The sooner we get out of Europe (which you are not mandated to be in!) the better.".

You did not write "In my opinion the sooner we get out of Europe.... ", you presented it as a fact.

But this is all splitting hairs, whether or not I was correct to describe your opinion as wrong is irrelevant. YOU are wrong. Your belief is erroneous. However you want to phrase it - you know what I mean.

I am not trying to change your viewpoint. I am only giving my opinion of how I see Europe.

I'm not trying to change your viewpoint. I am only giving my opinion of it.

It was you that vilified my comments without giving any reason or explanation.

Where did I vilify your comments? Am I not allowed to say that I think you're wrong, without that being taken as vilification?

Are you saying any of my comments about eurocons or otherwise are mistaken or untruthful?

No I'm not. I don't know how accurate they are, or how significant the corruption is, but I do know that it is not a reason for leaving the EC.

It is notable that the only thing you have actually picked up on is an insignificant spelling mistake.( which is something most of us don't bother about).

The ONLY reason I wrote what I did (which was NOT "picking up" on it) was because you wrote "beureaucratic(?)". I can't think what else that question mark meant other than you weren't sure that was the correct spelling, so all I did was to point out what the Spell Check feature would have done for you.

Is there a Euro directive which prevents Mail readers having an opinion anyway,if that was the case?

No, there isn't, but then neither is there a Euro directive which prevents me from finding the Daily Mail a nasty and contemptible little rag.

 

[david and julie]

Ban.. were getting nowhere like this.

Quite clearly we disagree over Europe.

I would respect your opinion/viewpoint call it what you wish if you actually gave one. Even if I disagreed with any content, you are entitled to say it.

My main concerns are whether we actually need an ec at all. Opinions vary about the cost of our being a member. They are between £3B and £4B a year(after rebates and grants) depending on what you read. This budget is being managed by discredited politicians who do things like this.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/2293519.stm

We allready have local/county councils, Whitehall,MP's, MEP's The Lords, Brussels/Strasbourg, Euro commissioners etc. How much political control do we need?

We also have central gov's (tory and lab) who ignore the pincipals of Europe anyway when it suits them. EG working time opt out, fags and booze over the channel, car prices etc.

I was under the impression that all our neighbours are signatories to world trade agreements and can trade with each other anyway. We don't need to be in Europe to do this, it is a myth for anyone to say so.

IMHO some european politicians are more concerned with our(all members) becomming a superstate to rival the US. This as been openly talked about as I am sure you know.

In the UK we have a small population who often struggle to agree, it can only get worse with enlargement(imho)in the EC. I respect your view that we should argue from within, but we have historically disagreed with some of these people and I can't see that changing.

When you go for a pint at weekend have a discussion between 2 or 3 of you and you will reach a concensus. Now invite another 20 people and see how you go on. This is what we are talking about on a small scale.

I just think the whole thing is to big and unworkable.

That is some of my reasons against, what are yours for?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Ban.. were getting nowhere like this.

Indeed.

Quite clearly we disagree over Europe.

Indeed.

I would respect your opinion/viewpoint call it what you wish if you actually gave one. Even if I disagreed with any content, you are entitled to say it.

And you're entitled to yours, and to voice it. And I'm entitled to disagree with it as vehemently as I like, and to say so. The problem comes when I want to say the things that I'd say to someone I knew very well, and who said things that I thought were absolute rubbish - how to express what I feel very strongly without it coming across as a personal attack...

Yes there is much wrong with the EC, but then there is much wrong with our Government too - Westminster's "homes for votes", anyone? The Dome? Iraq? The incompetence over the Scottish Parliament building? Sellafield?

Is the answer to leave the UK?

I'm sure there was corruption and incompetence in the early days of the USA - should all the states have said "we're off"?

That is some of my reasons against, what are yours for?

Ironically, many of them are the same. I want a single currency. I want a common foreign policy, I want a common defence policy, I want increased integration. I want a Federal Europe, or a "United States of Europe".

 

[david and julie]

If you want those things that is for you. Many pro euro people would probably want the same.

The problem is we live in a democracy which is being hi-jacked and any opposing view is being ignored.

Before anything on this scale is contemplated our views should be sought.

What has actually happened is we have been put in a position where people are frightened of coming out, for fear of losing their job's.

The pro euro lobby uses similar tactics to you, it is called negative campaigning. That is, mention hardly any facts at all but try to demean an opposing viewpoint.

Incidently your subtle changing of my wording didn't go unnoticed.

 

[AdamW]

I want a Federal Europe, or a "United States of Europe".

If only Lloyd George had such revelations back in 1918, instead of listening to Woodrow W*nky Wilson... Then we would have a United Europe, all under the control of Downing Street. Although it is quite likely none of us would ever have been born without the Second World War.

The problem with experiments like the EU is that you have to be all or nothing. We either have to be a full on USE, as Ban wants, or we have to be separate sovereign states. Trade agreements are fine, treaties are great. But you can't have this wishy washy in-the-middle state.

Now, the reasons we don't have a USE are deeply rooted in the formation of the EC. A certain french general described as having "a head like a pineapple and hips like a woman’s" (hint: there's an ugly airport near Paris named after him) vetoed all British attempts to join the EC. His reasons included: the UK having ties to the Commonwealth, ties to the US, and a fear that English would become the official language of Europe. To put it bluntly, he was a xenophobe. Actually no, he was racist.

Maybe if he hadn't been so anti-English (you would think he would have liked us more, since after he fled/retreated/ran screaming like a girl from France we protected him in London) then we might have had more time for him. However there is a big problem: many Britons see the EU as France plus a bit more. And as a country France has traditionally had nothing but contempt for us. De Gaulle embodied this. If he had said "Ah, ma Breeteesh chums, come into the EC! 'Av some waaaaahn, 'av some cheeeese! Sank-you for saving ma aaaaarrse in zat last world war!" then we might all have warmed to French governments since then. And we wouldn't be so cynical.

There are so many reasons why some countries need to make massive changes to all sorts of things. For example, we have "Innocent until proven guilty". Can you imagine France changing from their "Guilty until proven innocent" standard? I can't.

Now, you may think I am just jibing at France but to be honest, this is the only EU country I have enough experience of living and working in to make sound judgement. So, let me draw your attention to an incompatibility between France and the UK:

Certain MPs have tried to encourage "continental drinking styles" in the UK. This hasn't worked. We are Nordic. When we drink, we drink. Now, before the EU, public urination was seen as a disgusting and despicable act in the UK. In France they have never understood our fuss about it. On Friday, take a stroll through your local town centre at 2am. Blair has failed to make us drink like Europeans, but we certainly p*ss like them now!

I support David's opinion, I also support Ban's opinion. They are both opinions. Neither is wrong. That isn't to say either is right, but where would we be if you couldn't sit and discuss politics in a calm and rational fashion?

 

[AdamW]

If you want those things that is for you. Many pro euro people would probably want the same.

Some might say "if you want to live in Europe, move there."

Despite my views on the benefits of Europe, I don't think it is at all fair that we are being driven into it. Last time there was a referendum on Europe was 1975. I wasn't even born. In fact, with an average life expectancy of 78 years, that means we each have 60 years voting on average. That means that 50% of those who were of an age to vote on that referendum are now dead. Now, that referendum was totally irrelevant to the changes we have had thrust upon us since then.

We need to have more say of what is done in our name, with our money and with our power and influence.

 

[Just_back_from_the_pub]

Certain MPs have tried to encourage "continental drinking styles" in the UK. This hasn't worked. We are Nordic. When we drink, we drink. Now, before the EU, public urination was seen as a disgusting and despicable act in the UK. In France they have never understood our fuss about it. On Friday, take a stroll through your local town centre at 2am. Blair has failed to make us drink like Europeans, but we certainly p*ss like them now!

Continental drinking styles as such will not be emulated for probably another ten or twenty years despite MP's encouragement. In France the ****oir has all but disappeared. Public urination is simply a symptom of chav disregard and desire to stir up anger in more obliging folk. Perhaps we will not be sufficiently Euro 'til traditional pub closing times are done away with...I can't wait!