Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
You claim the discussion isn’t moving on, yet when given the opportunity are unable to do so of your own accord. 
So extensive is the myriad of rules you cannot quantify the impact of a single one on the economy - to explain how the benefits could be retained through a UK law without the costs imposed by the EU.
The absence of any insight into the subject at hand renders your supreme confidence irrelevant. If proven to correct it will be through chance, much like a toss of a coin but with a lower level of probability.
You’re the expert here, OB. Enlighten us naysayers. |
Don’t be silly, jfman. I have given you examples of a small number of EU Directives that are restricting us, and I have also given you a clue against each one by way of a single example of how those Directives are impacting on us.
That, by itself, makes the point. I am not rising to the bait you so carefully set to derail that point. You can search the internet as well as I can, and as I have a life, I do not have the time nor the inclination to dot every i and cross every t just to satisfy you.
There are hundreds of such Directives and you want me to list them all, with a critique! You really are a case.
The actual argument, which is that the abolition or amendment of hundreds of Directives will free up industry from a considerable amount of bureaucracy was my point. If you want to challenge that with a considered argument to the contrary, be my guest. Otherwise, you are simply trying to disrupt the debate and I am not going to assist you with that.
This is not Monty Python’s Department for Arguments. It is a debating forum. So debate.