Re: Going metric
>inferred old fart
Oh, do fuck off. I prefer metric. And I would also prefer it if the UK found a way to stay in the EU. I would totally get if the UK decided to dump the whole imperial mess, including in groceries.
But, I question the logic whereby the EU felt it had to intervene in what’s essentially internal UK affairs in this case. That’s subsidiarity was supposed to be about. Especially, in hindsight, targeting the one country who is doing imperial while it happens to have a strong Eurosceptic sentiment. Waving a red flag to a bull, essentially.
There’s always a tension between under and over-regulation. Or having the wrong kind of regulation. Pai’s FCC usually manages to get it wrong on both ends. Not vetting say nutrition supplements would qualify as under-regulation, because of health risks. The French policing bakery displays depending on where the bread is made is over-regulation: not much harm will come of a bad bread, the customers can vote with their feet ( a trade association logo would be different, it’s not a law).
Regulations against national industrial subsidies at the EU level have been hugely positive, by keeping national governments from propping up crony capitalism.
My point is that it achieved little from an EU perspective to regulate in _this_ particular instance and it was shooting itself in the foot PR-wise. Add up enough dumb regulation and you are enabling the build up of a toxic narrative of distrust in government. It was never about the defending the imperial system or English rather quixotic approaches to measures: Fahrenheit, alcohol proofs, gun sizes in pounds, etc...
Doesn’t excuse the naivety of Brexiteers, but hopefully lessons will be learned that regulation usually involves an expenditure of political capital and goodwill. Forcing fee and kickback disclosures by financial advisors benefits the majority so you get a payback in terms of sentiment and increased economic output - the regulator ends up more appreciated. Regulating hair dressers doesn’t and probably signals hidden taxes and limited competition.
I believe the main loss to the EU from the UK’s departure will be the loss of the occasional sanity check when some of the other big countries want to enforce EU-wide regulation, such as France’s long held dream of a EU-wide corporate tax rate (don’t put words in my mouth here: I find tax avoidance shenanigans abhorrent). Besides getting occasional opt-out the UK often asked the salutary question of why a particular regulation ought to be EU-wide.
And, just so as you seem slow on the uptake “PM Bojo FTW” was most definitely sarcastic. In reality I think it’s no coincidence him and the Orange Buffoon are best pals.
So, again with inferred old fart: je pete dans ta direction generale, pauvre con.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
