THE EU and ENGLISH SOVEREIGNTY, or Lack Thereof

 

If I’m wrong on this non-issue I’m sure you’ll tell me but, I think the idea of lights in daylight is pretty dumb.  And I wonder how much that’ll add to the cost of a new car. 
New law last year here says Pubs can be open 24/7 now.  Some folks complaining about the added problems that have surfaced.  So,,, will the EU step in here on this issue as well.  Bet not.  Too hard a target.

1. Dipped? I think this is another of those words that the British use that the Americans will not understand. I’m guessing it means “slightly on”, because one of the ways we use the word means “to become involved slightly”, as in “I took a dip into Niven, but went back to reading Heinlein.” Ok, I get it.

   We took a dip at daytime running lights (DTR) about a decade ago. It was never the law, but Saturn brand cars were built this way, along with a couple others. It really does help other drivers to be aware of your car, especially during light mist, or shortly before dusk or shortly after dawn.

   I don’t buy into the increase in fuel consumption though. Yes, running more electric devices is going to draw on the battery and alternator a bit more, which is going to suck a bit more power from the engine. However these days we have LED lamps which draw very little current, and the alternators could be built with those neodynium super magnets and the windings made with OCC single crystal copper which would increase their efficiency considerably. This would make a new car cost a tiny bit more, my guess is $50, but the lights and the super alternator should last forever, and the fuel increase should be just about nothing. Far less than the negligable 0.3% (which is .075mpg if you get 25mpg) estimate in the article. Actually, a super alternator could be smaller, and thus place less drag on the engine anyway, so you could get a tiny bit better mileage overall.

   Sometimes when you’re part of a union, you have to go along with what the union says. This is a slight instance of that, but it’s always good to keep a close eye on the buggers because they will get out of hand if you stop paying attention.

   Posted by Drew458       02/10/2008  at  12:31 PM  



2. What in the billy blue hell ever DID happen to national sovereignty? Once upon a time, a nation was proud of its history, and its sovereignty as a unit and a people. Now? Can anybody say “Illuminati/One World Government”? I knew you could.

   Posted by cmblake6       02/10/2008  at  07:00 PM  



3. Good question cmblacke.  When the EU movement started, I remember some talk of being more competitive on the world market.  Somehow, I don’t thinks that’s what has happened.  Unless, that is, the entire world winds up in the EU with their one-size-fits-all rules. 

   btw - Illuminati, Bilderbergs, Tri Lateral Commission, the names seem to go on and on.  They all seem to have arisen out of the ashes of WWII.  The founders (I’m told) were horrified by what they had just lived through and built these NGOs to break down borders and national pride and to limit economic competition.  With a lack of borders and no sharp divisions between economies in different parts of the world, their theory was that they could diminish or eliminate war.

   Since we are the richest nation, of course that made us the #1 target.  Some countries, such as Great Britain were actually imploding already and need no help from the one worlders.  It goes on and on. 

   I like being what I am and I’m proud of my country.  Other people should be proud of their countries.  It just doesn’t seem right to become another faceless cog, defined by a book of regulations.

   Posted by Dr. Jeff       02/11/2008  at  06:38 AM  



4. Peiper another way to explain it is this. If for example the US decided to remove passport controls in Mexico what would the result be? I appreciate that the border is very porous but just the same there are border controls. Now imagine if Mexico did the same and so did the rest of South America. I think the likely result would be that millions of South and Central Americans would flood into the US. Now imagine if Uncle Sam passed a law that allowed these people to claim welfare and forced the States to house these people! This is what is happening in Britain. Initially they allowed Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary etc. to pass without any border checks. Many of them came and took work. Meanwhile the socialists in power allowed millions of British people to carry on claiming unemployment or disability benefit. Now they have added Romania and Bulgaria to the mix. These are third world countries. Britain has been flooded with beggars and assorted riff raff and we cannot by (EU) law exclude these people.

   The issue of daylight running lights is just another example of the unelected EU and I stress that, these bastards are not elected. Telling us what we can and can’t do. As Peiper rightly says the French and Dutch voted against the “constitution” so these unelected bastards went away rewrote it and sold it as a treaty. The government of Britain was elected on a pledge that the British people would be allowed to vote on it. Now they have reneged on the promise. It is hard to find anything positive in this I feel that the scum in government have sold us out to the United Socialists of Europe. I know one thing it will end in bloodshed.

   Posted by LyndonB       02/11/2008  at  04:50 PM  



5. It gets better guys.  The imposition of EU standards on U.S. Industry began 20 years ago that I’m sure of.  The beginning was simply a desire by U.S. manufacturers to produce a product that they could sell in Europe and other foreign countries.  Beginning in 2000 was the ISO 2000 series of specifications to cover anything manufactured.  This was followed by the ISO 2001 series.  The International Standards Association gets a nice fee for approving each company’s registration and of course more fees at renewal time.  Most companies have to have a staff that does nothing except keep the paperwork up to date.
   
   Originally billed as being aids in establishing quality control, both of them are complete crocks.  The negative effects included the laying off of experienced workers when the MBAs thought that since process and other specifications are included, inexperienced workers could be hired instead and given a copy of the appropriate specs.  The only problem was that many were improperly recorded and that the new guys wouldn’t or couldn’t follow what they’d been given.

   Posted by Dr. Jeff       02/11/2008  at  05:17 PM  

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.