On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 17:34:25 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 03/11/2021 15:25, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> > On 3 Nov 2021 12:12:40 GMT
> > TimS <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On 03 Nov 2021 at 10:35:59 GMT, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Well when the question is whether the UK (a political entity) is
> >>> or is not inside Europe then the context is political
> >>
> >> Wrong as Europe is a geographical, not a political, entity.
> >
> > The UK is a political entity, as the first entity mentioned it
> > sets the context.
> >
> Europe however, is not.
>
>
> It's a bit like asking whether the United States has left North
> America.

It would be if there were a political entity that could reasonably
be taken to be what was meant by "North America" in a political context.
Rather more like asking "Has Wales left Britain" where the only plausible
interpretation is "Has Wales left the United Kingdom" since all other
interpretations are meaningless or extremely implausible.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On 03 Nov 2021 at 19:09:18 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:

> On 03/11/2021 14:26, TimS wrote:
>>
>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 14:07:04 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
>>>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
>>>>>
>>>>> But does represent the greater part of it.
>>>>
>>>> The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish
>>>> referendums about EU membership.
>>
>> This has been mooted by EU bigwigs.
>
> But where is your *EVIDENCE* for it?

That I recall it being mooted and reported in the media. If you want more than
that you'll have to look for it.

>>>> That would allow its unelected Commission
>>>> (the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected
>>>> president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in
>>>> the same way that Xi did in China.
>
> Nonsense the EU Commission is the EU equivalent of our civil service and
> cabinet combined, and is accountable to the European Parliament, just as
> our cabinet is accountable to the UK parliament.

It's only accountable in the crudest sense in that it can be sacked in toto by
the MEPs. Which has happened just the once in 30 years.

If it's the cabinet, which it is, then where is the shadow cabinet waiting to
take over after an election? Doesn't happen. So we have one-party government.
Where is the opposition party? There isn't one. No wonder the fuckers are
arrogant, which was my small experience of them.

>> You trying to tell me the Commission members and President *are* elected?
>> Funny, I must have missed those elections.
>
> Neither is our civil service, and neither sometimes are our cabinet, if
> they are a member of the House of Lords.
>
> https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2019/608873/IPOL_BRI(2019)608873_EN.pdf
>
> "The EU executive, the European Commission, is accountable to the
> European Parliament which has the power to dismiss it and may be also
> subject to judicial oversight. Its financial activities are bound by
> audit rules and political scrutiny by other institutions."

Which means that provided it stays within certain boundaries, its one-party
governemnt can continue unchecked ad infinitum - which is what happens.

>>>> The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh trough into
>>>> which to put a snout.
>
> What a conveniently short memory you have, I don't think anyone from the
> UK has much right to lecture the EU equivalent of the civil service how
> a civil service should be run!

Yes we have. We can certainly lecture them on their democratic deficit.

>>> Where is your *EVIDENCE* for all these crazed allegations? Until you
>>> can provide it, we'll assume it's just the usual Brexshit lies and crap.
>>
>> EU MEPs get expenses without having to account for them. That counts as an
>> example of a trough to get your snout into, in my book.
>
> What a conveniently short memory you have, I don't think anyone from the
> UK has much right to lecture the EU about members' of parliament expenses!

And we did something about it, as MPs are subject to public pressure (the only
sort that counts). The whole EU political structure, OTOH, can - and does -
laugh at the public. It certainly laughs at mugs like you.

--
Tim

On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 20:05:12 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:

> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 17:34:25 +0000 The Natural Philosopher
> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 03/11/2021 15:25, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> > On 3 Nov 2021 12:12:40 GMT TimS <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 03 Nov 2021 at 10:35:59 GMT, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
>> >> <steveo@eircom.net>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Well when the question is whether the UK (a political entity)
>> >>> is
>> >>> or is not inside Europe then the context is political
>> >>
>> >> Wrong as Europe is a geographical, not a political, entity.
>> >
>> > The UK is a political entity, as the first entity mentioned it
>> > sets the context.
>> >
>> Europe however, is not.
>>
>>
>> It's a bit like asking whether the United States has left North
>> America.
>
> It would be if there were a political entity that could reasonably
> be taken to be what was meant by "North America" in a political context.
> Rather more like asking "Has Wales left Britain" where the only
> plausible interpretation is "Has Wales left the United Kingdom" since
> all other interpretations are meaningless or extremely implausible.

Exactly so. The only equivalent North American question is about states
leaving the Union, for example:

Has Texas left the USA yet?

is very little different from asking:

Has the United Kingdom left the EU yet?

....the only difference is that Texas hasn't (yet) while the UK has.

--
--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

On 03/11/2021 21:33, TimS wrote:
> On 03 Nov 2021 at 19:09:18 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 03/11/2021 14:26, TimS wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 14:07:04 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
>>>>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But does represent the greater part of it.
>>>>>
>>>>> The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish
>>>>> referendums about EU membership.
>>>
>>> This has been mooted by EU bigwigs.
>>
>> But where is your *EVIDENCE* for it?
>
> That I recall it being mooted and reported in the media. If you want more than
> that you'll have to look for it.

I did, and ...
site:www.europarl.europa.eu referendum
.... found nothing that looked likely and ...
Abolish referenda about leaving EU
.... found even less.

So prove it.

>>>>> That would allow its unelected Commission
>>>>> (the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected
>>>>> president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in
>>>>> the same way that Xi did in China.
>>
>> Nonsense the EU Commission is the EU equivalent of our civil service and
>> cabinet combined, and is accountable to the European Parliament, just as
>> our cabinet is accountable to the UK parliament.
>
> It's only accountable in the crudest sense in that it can be sacked in toto by
> the MEPs. Which has happened just the once in 30 years.
>
> If it's the cabinet, which it is, then where is the shadow cabinet waiting to
> take over after an election?

You obviously have no idea how the EU functions democratically. It
works in a completely different way to UK government, many would say a
better way. The Commission is simply the executive branch of
government, it's more similar to the civil service than the cabinet.
Political direction is set by the European Council, *NOT* the
Commission, all but two of whom are heads of state or government of
member states. The Commission has to be approved by the European
Parliament. So how is the Commission so 'unaccountable'?

> Doesn't happen. So we have one-party government.
> Where is the opposition party? There isn't one.

Some would say that's a good thing, the swings and roundabouts of UK
confrontational politics have been damaging this country's interests for
decades, if not centuries. But the problem is really that you have nada
an idea of how it all works. See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Council
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission

> No wonder the fuckers are
> arrogant, which was my small experience of them.

I wonder what their experience of you was? You bitch about the EU
seemingly having zilch idea how it works, and then accuse them of being
arrogant? Jeez, there's nothing so toe-curlingly embarrassingly
arrogant and hypocritical as a bigoted Brit.

>>> You trying to tell me the Commission members and President *are* elected?
>>> Funny, I must have missed those elections.
>>
>> Neither is our civil service, and neither sometimes are our cabinet, if
>> they are a member of the House of Lords.
>>
>> https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2019/608873/IPOL_BRI(2019)608873_EN.pdf
>>
>> "The EU executive, the European Commission, is accountable to the
>> European Parliament which has the power to dismiss it and may be also
>> subject to judicial oversight. Its financial activities are bound by
>> audit rules and political scrutiny by other institutions."
>
> Which means that provided it stays within certain boundaries, its one-party
> governemnt can continue unchecked ad infinitum - which is what happens.

See above, it's not a party political institution, any more than is our
civil service. No-one accuses the civil-service of being a one-party
government, so why should they the European Commission?

>>>>> The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh trough into
>>>>> which to put a snout.
>>
>> What a conveniently short memory you have, I don't think anyone from the
>> UK has much right to lecture the EU equivalent of the civil service how
>> a civil service should be run!
>
> Yes we have. We can certainly lecture them on their democratic deficit.

Only if we are all as arrogantly hypocritical as you, thankfully not all
of us are. If you are saying that the European Commission should be
more democratically accountable, then beforehand you should also be
saying that about our own civil service, especially in the wake of
recent scandals within it.

>>>> Where is your *EVIDENCE* for all these crazed allegations? Until you
>>>> can provide it, we'll assume it's just the usual Brexshit lies and crap.
>>>
>>> EU MEPs get expenses without having to account for them. That counts as an
>>> example of a trough to get your snout into, in my book.
>>
>> What a conveniently short memory you have, I don't think anyone from the
>> UK has much right to lecture the EU about members' of parliament expenses!
>
> And we did something about it, as MPs are subject to public pressure (the only
> sort that counts). The whole EU political structure, OTOH, can - and does -
> laugh at the public. It certainly laughs at mugs like you.

The Commission is also subject to public pressure via the European
Parliament, which is voted in by public. In that sense they are more
accountable than our civil service.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 11/3/21 6:38 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 20:05:12 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 17:34:25 +0000 The Natural Philosopher
>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 03/11/2021 15:25, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> On 3 Nov 2021 12:12:40 GMT TimS <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 10:35:59 GMT, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
>>>>> <steveo@eircom.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Well when the question is whether the UK (a political entity)
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> or is not inside Europe then the context is political
>>>>>
>>>>> Wrong as Europe is a geographical, not a political, entity.
>>>>
>>>> The UK is a political entity, as the first entity mentioned it
>>>> sets the context.
>>>>
>>> Europe however, is not.
>>>
>>>
>>> It's a bit like asking whether the United States has left North
>>> America.
>>
>> It would be if there were a political entity that could reasonably
>> be taken to be what was meant by "North America" in a political context.
>> Rather more like asking "Has Wales left Britain" where the only
>> plausible interpretation is "Has Wales left the United Kingdom" since
>> all other interpretations are meaningless or extremely implausible.
>
> Exactly so. The only equivalent North American question is about states
> leaving the Union, for example:
>
> Has Texas left the USA yet?

Was never REALLY in it ... :-)

Which is to the Texans advantage.

In some ways it's still the Republic Of Texas,
more an ally than a subservient member.

It's worked out pretty well over the years.

> is very little different from asking:
>
> Has the United Kingdom left the EU yet?
>
> ...the only difference is that Texas hasn't (yet) while the UK has.

Which all has nothing to do with Raspberry Pi's ...
they are nominally made in UK anyhow .......

Hey ...... can the UK make the chips we need for
our automotive systems ??? Why screw around with
China if they can do it ?

On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 23:53:53 -0400
1p166 <z24ba6.net> wrote:

> Hey ...... can the UK make the chips we need for
> our automotive systems ??? Why screw around with
> China if they can do it ?

No the UK cannot there are very few 7nm fabs around, most of the
working ones belong to TSMC and none are in the UK.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On 3 Nov 2021 at 08:30:27, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000
>> Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The UK is no longer in Europe?
>>
>> Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so and
>> went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
>> process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of
>> this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
>> Eire/Northern Ireland border.
>>
>> Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter the
>> term Brexit ?
>>
> Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt bureaucracy founded by
> an Italian communist that gathers and redistributes taxes, and attempts
> to be a self appointed undemocratic lawmaker for 27 countries whose
> politicians were bribed or blackmailed into entering it - represents Europe?

After yesterday's shenanigans in the Commons how can you accuse others
of corruption with a straight face?

On 03 Nov 2021 at 23:03:14 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:

> On 03/11/2021 21:33, TimS wrote:
>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 19:09:18 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 03/11/2021 14:26, TimS wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 14:07:04 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
>>>>>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But does represent the greater part of it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish
>>>>>> referendums about EU membership.
>>>>
>>>> This has been mooted by EU bigwigs.
>>>
>>> But where is your *EVIDENCE* for it?
>>
>> That I recall it being mooted and reported in the media. If you want more than
>> that you'll have to look for it.
>
> I did, and ...
> site:www.europarl.europa.eu referendum
> ... found nothing that looked likely and ...
> Abolish referenda about leaving EU
> ... found even less.
>
> So prove it.

All you've discovered is that it's not *official* policy. That they want to do
it has been reported in the papers.

>>>>>> That would allow its unelected Commission
>>>>>> (the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected
>>>>>> president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in
>>>>>> the same way that Xi did in China.
>>>
>>> Nonsense the EU Commission is the EU equivalent of our civil service and
>>> cabinet combined, and is accountable to the European Parliament, just as
>>> our cabinet is accountable to the UK parliament.
>>
>> It's only accountable in the crudest sense in that it can be sacked in toto by
>> the MEPs. Which has happened just the once in 30 years.
>>
>> If it's the cabinet, which it is, then where is the shadow cabinet waiting to
>> take over after an election?
>
> You obviously have no idea how the EU functions democratically.

But it doesn't function democratically, that's the point.

> It works in a completely different way to UK government, many would say a
> better way.

And many would say a lot worse, because it lacks any democratic
accountability.

> Doesn't happen. So we have one-party government.
>> Where is the opposition party? There isn't one.
>
> Some would say that's a good thing, the swings and roundabouts of UK
> confrontational politics have been damaging this country's interests for
> decades, if not centuries.

So you're happy with one-party government.

>> No wonder the fuckers are
>> arrogant, which was my small experience of them.
>
> I wonder what their experience of you was? You bitch about the EU
> seemingly having zilch idea how it works, and then accuse them of being
> arrogant? Jeez, there's nothing so toe-curlingly embarrassingly
> arrogant and hypocritical as a bigoted Brit.
>
>>>> You trying to tell me the Commission members and President *are* elected?
>>>> Funny, I must have missed those elections.
>>>
>>> Neither is our civil service, and neither sometimes are our cabinet, if
>>> they are a member of the House of Lords.
>>>
>>> https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2019/608873/IPOL_BRI(2019)608873_EN.pdf
>>>
>>> "The EU executive, the European Commission, is accountable to the
>>> European Parliament which has the power to dismiss it and may be also
>>> subject to judicial oversight. Its financial activities are bound by
>>> audit rules and political scrutiny by other institutions."
>>
>> Which means that provided it stays within certain boundaries, its one-party
>> governemnt can continue unchecked ad infinitum - which is what happens.
>
> See above, it's not a party political institution, any more than is our
> civil service. No-one accuses the civil-service of being a one-party
> government, so why should they the European Commission?

Because the Commission is the body that decides and initiates the EU's
legislative programme. No one else does. That makes it the government; the
government decides the programme, the civil service drafts laws to implement
that. Governments need oppositions to make them function better. Clearly
lacking in the EU's case.

> The Commission is also subject to public pressure via the European
> Parliament, which is voted in by public.

No one pays any attention to the EU parliament, or their MEPs, because they
don't know who they are, or enything about them. What's worse, they are
elected using the egregious PR List System, the worst form of PR, which is
just used to reward party hacks.

Here, MPs and councillors in local government are elected on a constituency
basis, meaning that they have to be responsive to the public continuously, not
just at election time. Otheriwse they're likely to be removed by the
electorate. Generally, it gives you better public servants.

--
Tim

On 04/11/2021 09:04, TimS wrote:
>
> On 03 Nov 2021 at 23:03:14 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> On 03/11/2021 21:33, TimS wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 19:09:18 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 03/11/2021 14:26, TimS wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 14:07:04 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
>>>>>>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But does represent the greater part of it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish
>>>>>>> referendums about EU membership.
>>>>>
>>>>> This has been mooted by EU bigwigs.
>>>>
>>>> But where is your *EVIDENCE* for it?
>>>
>>> That I recall it being mooted and reported in the media. If you want more than
>>> that you'll have to look for it.
>>
>> I did, and ...
>> site:www.europarl.europa.eu referendum
>> ... found nothing that looked likely and ...
>> Abolish referenda about leaving EU
>> ... found even less.
>>
>> So prove it.
>
> All you've discovered is that it's not *official* policy. That they want to do
> it has been reported in the papers.

Then if it was a tabloid it can immediately be ignored, and anyway I
should have found it by the second search, but didn't, so prove it.

>>>>>>> That would allow its unelected Commission
>>>>>>> (the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected
>>>>>>> president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in
>>>>>>> the same way that Xi did in China.
>>>>
>>>> Nonsense the EU Commission is the EU equivalent of our civil service and
>>>> cabinet combined, and is accountable to the European Parliament, just as
>>>> our cabinet is accountable to the UK parliament.
>>>
>>> It's only accountable in the crudest sense in that it can be sacked in toto by
>>> the MEPs. Which has happened just the once in 30 years.
>>>
>>> If it's the cabinet, which it is, then where is the shadow cabinet waiting to
>>> take over after an election?
>>
>> You obviously have no idea how the EU functions democratically.
>
> But it doesn't function democratically, that's the point.

LOL! You're like a blind man saying the sun doesn't rise just because
he can't see it!

>> It works in a completely different way to UK government, many would say a
>> better way.
>
> And many would say a lot worse, because it lacks any democratic
> accountability.

It is *MORE*, not less, accountable than our own civil service - the
European Commission is accountable to both the European Council and the
European Parliament, while our civil service is only accountable to
ministers.

>> Doesn't happen. So we have one-party government.
>>> Where is the opposition party? There isn't one.
>>
>> Some would say that's a good thing, the swings and roundabouts of UK
>> confrontational politics have been damaging this country's interests for
>> decades, if not centuries.
>
> So you're happy with one-party government.

No, I'm happy with European democracy, which has many more diverse
political allegiances, as compared with the UK's with only two, perhaps
occasionally three.

>>> No wonder the fuckers are
>>> arrogant, which was my small experience of them.
>>
>> I wonder what their experience of you was? You bitch about the EU
>> seemingly having zilch idea how it works, and then accuse them of being
>> arrogant? Jeez, there's nothing so toe-curlingly embarrassingly
>> arrogant and hypocritical as a bigoted Brit.
>>
>>>>> You trying to tell me the Commission members and President *are* elected?
>>>>> Funny, I must have missed those elections.
>>>>
>>>> Neither is our civil service, and neither sometimes are our cabinet, if
>>>> they are a member of the House of Lords.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2019/608873/IPOL_BRI(2019)608873_EN.pdf
>>>>
>>>> "The EU executive, the European Commission, is accountable to the
>>>> European Parliament which has the power to dismiss it and may be also
>>>> subject to judicial oversight. Its financial activities are bound by
>>>> audit rules and political scrutiny by other institutions."
>>>
>>> Which means that provided it stays within certain boundaries, its one-party
>>> governemnt can continue unchecked ad infinitum - which is what happens.
>>
>> See above, it's not a party political institution, any more than is our
>> civil service. No-one accuses the civil-service of being a one-party
>> government, so why should they the European Commission?
>
> Because the Commission is the body that decides and initiates the EU's
> legislative programme. No one else does.

No, the political direction of the EU is decided by the European
Council, as you would have discovered if you'd bothered to educate
yourself by reading the links I gave, which, it is becoming obvious, you
didn't. The Commission does research for and drafts laws just as our
own civil service does, which then have to be approved by the European
Parliament, just as in the UK.

> That makes it the government;

No, they are merely the executive arm of government, the equivalent of
our civil service.

> the
> government decides the programme, the civil service drafts laws to implement
> that.

And that's exactly what happens in the EU, the Council and the
Parliament set the direction, the Commission does their bidding.

> Governments need oppositions to make them function better. Clearly
> lacking in the EU's case.

There's no real proof of the truth of that often quoted paradigm, but
anyway the EU has more political diversity than the UK, that is why
they're so good at compromise, and we're so fucking shite at it.

>> The Commission is also subject to public pressure via the European
>> Parliament, which is voted in by public.
>
> No one pays any attention to the EU parliament, or their MEPs, because they
> don't know who they are, or enything about them. What's worse, they are
> elected using the egregious PR List System, the worst form of PR, which is
> just used to reward party hacks.

The Scottish Parliament is elected partly on a list system, and as a
result it is more representative of the views of voters than the UK
Parliament:

https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/is-there-proportional-representation-in-scotland/

"How proportional is the system in Scotland?

A way of measuring the proportionality of electoral outcomes is via the
Deviation from Proportionality (DV) Index. The DV Index is calculated by
adding up the difference between each party’s vote share and their seat
share in each electoral area and dividing by two, giving a ‘total
deviation’ score. The higher the score, the more disproportionate the
result.

Westminster election results in recent years were in the 20s (2015: 24,
2010: 22.7, 2005: 20.7), the Scottish parliament has never had a result
worse than 12.1."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-57047907

Constituencies Seats
SNP 62 64
Con 5 31
LD 4 4
Lab 2 22
Green 0 8

Note that without the extra PR list seats, the SNP would have had an
overwhelming majority of 51, but with the PR list seats, they are one
short of a majority and consequently have to compromise with others to
get legislation through.

Nobody in Scotland seems to think that a bad thing.

> Here, MPs and councillors in local government are elected on a constituency
> basis, meaning that they have to be responsive to the public continuously, not
> just at election time. Otheriwse they're likely to be removed by the
> electorate. Generally, it gives you better public servants.

On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 23:53:53 -0400, 1p166 wrote:

>
> Hey ...... can the UK make the chips we need for our automotive
> systems ??? Why screw around with China if they can do it ?
>
Almost certainly not: IIRC back in the day when INMOS was going to be a
power in the land there was a chip foundry in Scotland. I don't know what
happened to it, but it isn't there now.

Of course, that was back in the days of Wedgie Benn's "White-Hot Heat of
Industrial Revolution" but a lot of Tory water has flowed through both
parties since then.

--
--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

On 4 Nov 2021 07:14:08 GMT, Bob Martin wrote:

>
> After yesterday's shenanigans in the Commons how can you accuse others
> of corruption with a straight face?

Well said!

Things have come to a pretty pass when an ex-cabinet member with his hand
out for 'commissions', behaviour that's explicitly forbidden for MPs,
gets defended by the PM. The first should be expelled from Parliament and
the second should resign.

--
--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

On 04/11/2021 07:14, Bob Martin wrote:
> On 3 Nov 2021 at 08:30:27, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000
>>> Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The UK is no longer in Europe?
>>>
>>> Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so and
>>> went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
>>> process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of
>>> this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
>>> Eire/Northern Ireland border.
>>>
>>> Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter the
>>> term Brexit ?
>>>
>> Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt bureaucracy founded by
>> an Italian communist that gathers and redistributes taxes, and attempts
>> to be a self appointed undemocratic lawmaker for 27 countries whose
>> politicians were bribed or blackmailed into entering it - represents Europe?
>
> After yesterday's shenanigans in the Commons how can you accuse others
> of corruption with a straight face?
>
Owen Patterson is a well known critic of the corrupt green energy
business pushed by the EU.

Naturally he had to be 'cancelled'.

--
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the
other is to refuse to believe what is true.”

—Soren Kierkegaard

On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
> FALSE!  It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.

How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?

--
“Ideas are inherently conservative. They yield not to the attack of
other ideas but to the massive onslaught of circumstance"

- John K Galbraith

On 04/11/2021 05:07, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 23:53:53 -0400
> 1p166 <z24ba6.net> wrote:
>
>> Hey ...... can the UK make the chips we need for
>> our automotive systems ??? Why screw around with
>> China if they can do it ?
>
> No the UK cannot there are very few 7nm fabs around, most of the
> working ones belong to TSMC and none are in the UK.
>

WE dont need 7nm fabs for a lot of stuff.

In fact larger dimensions would make for more reliable chips

--
“Ideas are inherently conservative. They yield not to the attack of
other ideas but to the massive onslaught of circumstance"

- John K Galbraith

On 04/11/2021 10:10, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 23:53:53 -0400, 1p166 wrote:
>
>>
>> Hey ...... can the UK make the chips we need for our automotive
>> systems ??? Why screw around with China if they can do it ?
>>
> Almost certainly not: IIRC back in the day when INMOS was going to be a
> power in the land there was a chip foundry in Scotland. I don't know what
> happened to it, but it isn't there now.
>
There are about 16 specialised foundries in the UK.

But none are low cost high volume

> Of course, that was back in the days of Wedgie Benn's "White-Hot Heat of
> Industrial Revolution" but a lot of Tory water has flowed through both
> parties since then.
>
>

--
“Ideas are inherently conservative. They yield not to the attack of
other ideas but to the massive onslaught of circumstance"

- John K Galbraith

On 04/11/2021 10:10, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> Of course, that was back in the days of Wedgie Benn's "White-Hot Heat of
> Industrial Revolution" but a lot of Tory water has flowed through both
> parties since then.

Oh dear. So you dont think the left's preoccupation with what gender you
identify with and 'rights for every minoriry under the sun, including my
per rat' rather then 'let's invest in a chip foundry and a few
technical colleges' has anything to do with it?

When the left captures the political agenda, you are only one step away
from the societal collapse thaty they venerate, as the natural precursor
to a better state.,

--
“Ideas are inherently conservative. They yield not to the attack of
other ideas but to the massive onslaught of circumstance"

- John K Galbraith

On Thu, 4 Nov 2021 10:57:09 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 04/11/2021 10:10, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> Of course, that was back in the days of Wedgie Benn's "White-Hot Heat
>> of Industrial Revolution" but a lot of Tory water has flowed through
>> both parties since then.
>
> Oh dear. So you dont think the left's preoccupation with what gender you
> identify with and 'rights for every minoriry under the sun, including my
> per rat' rather then 'let's invest in a chip foundry and a few
> technical colleges' has anything to do with it?
>
That's annoying dross but seems to be damaging universities more than
anything else. Which, of course, is going to be a serious problem AFTER
the present perps have retired.
> When the left captures the political agenda, you are only one step away
> from the societal collapse thaty they venerate, as the natural precursor
> to a better state.,
>
I think Tory shenanigans, such as using Cambridge Analytica to game Brexit
and the dubious COVID-related featherbedding of its cronies, partners
and benefactors is a more serious problem. Remember all the numerous
expensive PPE contracts that did little but enrich their recipients. Also
the eyewateringly expensive COVID Track&Trace system 'run' by the
Baroness of Chaos that only delivered, late, a near-useless, and soon
rewritten, system. But, at least some consultants got rather well paid,
so I suppose we (or they) should be grateful for that.

Currently, when we need a decent opposition in Parliament, if only to
force the Govt to clarify its thinking, pull its finger out and actually
implement some of the climate change stuff it trumpets about, Labour
appears dead in the water. The LibDems are too small to have much effect
(thank you, Mr Farceburk Clegg). I guess that leaves effective opposition
to the SNP.

--
--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

On Thu, 4 Nov 2021 10:52:43 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>WE dont need 7nm fabs for a lot of stuff.
>
>In fact larger dimensions would make for more reliable chips

Case in point being 74 logic series that seem to run forever, unless some
external event kills them.

Until I retired a couple of years ago, I was still seeing early 1970s PCBs
covered with them - a nightmare to service, but the only chips that showed
evidence of replacement were the I/O ones.

--
Basic

On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
> On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> FALSE!  It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
>
> How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?

Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 04/11/2021 10:57, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
> On 04/11/2021 10:10, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>>
>> Of course, that was back in the days of Wedgie Benn's "White-Hot Heat of
>> Industrial Revolution" but a lot of Tory water has flowed through both
>> parties since then.
>
> Oh dear. So you dont think the left's [...]

Oh dear, he's off on one of paranoid shitstreams again.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 04 Nov 2021 at 12:39:05 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:

> On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>> On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
>>>
>>> FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
>>
>> How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
>
> Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.

That's nothing more than the trappings of democracy; it's fool's gold and like
a mug, you think it's good.

With the List System, candidates are selected by the party. Those at the top
of the list are pretty much guaranteed to be elected. They need have no
contact with the public at all and cannot realistically be gotten rid of.

Once elected, MEPs can then *completely* ignore the public until next time.

--
Tim

On 04/11/2021 13:46, TimS wrote:
>
> On 04 Nov 2021 at 12:39:05 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
>>>>
>>>> FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
>>>
>>> How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
>>
>> Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.
>
> That's nothing more than the trappings of democracy; it's fool's gold and like
> a mug, you think it's good.

I could say the same, with rather more reason, about you every time you
vote for a UK election.

> With the List System, candidates are selected by the party. Those at the top
> of the list are pretty much guaranteed to be elected.

Blind man: I can't see the sun, therefore it doesn't exist! Again you
demonstrate complete ignorance of how the system actually works.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_of_the_European_Parliament

"Elections are held once every five years, on the basis of universal
suffrage. There is no uniform voting system for the election of MEPs;
rather, each member state is free to choose its own system, subject to
three restrictions:

The system must be a form of proportional representation, under
either the party list or Single Transferable Vote system.
The electoral area may be subdivided if this will not generally
affect the proportional nature of the voting system.
Any election threshold on the national level must not exceed five
per cent."

So the choice of PR is up to national governments, and if you didn't
want a list system to be used for the UK when we were still members, you
could have written to both your MP and MEP to apply pressure to get it
changed to STV, which I grant is a better system.

Though actually the system that was used at the last UK MEP elections is
described here, and again your description of it doesn't match the reality:

2019 European Elections: How does the voting system work?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27187434

> They need have no
> contact with the public at all and cannot realistically be gotten rid of.
>
> Once elected, MEPs can then *completely* ignore the public until next time.

Blind man: I can't see the sun, therefore it doesn't exist! Again you
demonstrate complete ignorance of how the system actually works.

From the same link above:

"Length of service

The European Parliament has a high turnover of members compared to some
national parliaments. For instance, after the 2004 elections, the
majority of elected members had not been members in the prior
parliamentary session, though that could largely be put down to the
recent enlargement. Hans-Gert Pöttering served the longest continuous
term from the first elections in 1979 until 2014."

I can only suggest that you spend some time learning about a subject
before shooting your mouth off about it. As someone whose name sadly
escapes me, American I think, once so aptly said: "It is better to keep
your mouth shut and let everyone think you're a fool, than to open it
and remove all shadow of doubt!"

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 04/11/2021 12:39, Java Jive wrote:
> On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>> On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
>>>
>>> FALSE!  It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
>>
>> How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
>
> Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.
>
Bless!

--
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit
atrocities.”

― Voltaire, Questions sur les Miracles à M. Claparede, Professeur de
Théologie à Genève, par un Proposant: Ou Extrait de Diverses Lettres de
M. de Voltaire

On 04/11/2021 18:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 04/11/2021 16:41, Java Jive wrote:
>> On 04/11/2021 16:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 04/11/2021 12:41, Java Jive wrote:
>>>> On 04/11/2021 10:57, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 04/11/2021 10:10, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course, that was back in the days of Wedgie Benn's "White-Hot
>>>>>> Heat of
>>>>>> Industrial Revolution" but a lot of Tory water has flowed through
>>>>>> both
>>>>>> parties since then.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh dear. So you dont think the left's [...]
>>>>
>>>> Oh dear, he's off on one of paranoid shitstreams again.
>>>
>>> Oh dear, he's off on one of paranoid shitstreams again.
>>
>> Parrotting doesn't win an argument.  I presume that you do it because
>> you know you can not substantiate your paranoid tirade.
>>
> Parrotting doesn't win an argument.  I presume that you do it because
> you know you can not substantiate your paranoid tirade.

So no real justification for your childishness then, bye.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

TimS wrote on 5/11/2021 12:46 am:
> On 04 Nov 2021 at 12:39:05 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>> On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
>>>>
>>>> FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
>>>
>>> How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
>>
>> Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.
>
> That's nothing more than the trappings of democracy; it's fool's gold
> and like a mug, you think it's good.
>
> With the List System, candidates are selected by the party. Those at
> the top of the list are pretty much guaranteed to be elected. They
> need have no contact with the public at all and cannot realistically
> be gotten rid of.
>
> Once elected, MEPs can then *completely* ignore the public until next
> time.
>
Gee, that sound just like any elected Parliament that I've heard of!!
--
Daniel