Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
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.
|
In the same sense you could tell me what a 70 mph speed limit is on the motorway is. What’s the alternative? Where’s the benefit? How many jobs?
Quote:
|
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.
|
Bait carefully set? That’s an interesting way to say you have no answer to the questions as posed.
Quote:
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.
|
“Considered argument”
Your argument is so hollow you cannot quantify a single one, make an alternative proposal and tell us how businesses would benefit? Wider impact on jobs? The economy?