placeholder

Inflation must be worse than I thought in the UK... "Businesses had called on the government to extend the use of the CE mark, saying that forcing them to meet new UK rules, which would initially duplicate EU product standards, would add significant costs at a time when many have been trying to get over the disruption caused by the pandemic and stubbornly high inflation." ...if a rubber stamp can impose "significant costs".

Really. You think businesses think it's sensible to go to the time and expense of getting their products certified. You think those that have done it are happy that it turn out their effort was wasted? Funny how the same people who complained about the EU regulatory burden have no problem when the burden comes from the UK.

Thank you for your fact-filled rebuttal. Truly impressive! Or to put it another way: you've got nothing.

I don't think he even watched the video. For his sake, I kind of hope he didn't. Since there was nothing in it to support his claim.

Well, unlike you, apparently, I watched it and the commentator said there was nothing there that connected the payments to the President. Nor did she call it a bribe. You've got nothing.

Did Bloomberg characterize these payments as a bribe?

"The covid scam". You just continue to convict yourself. And I notice that you have no defense of your claim that Bloomberg reported on a bribe. You've got nothing.

When someone claims that they haven't got a dog on this fight you know that they are, in fact, extremely partisan. Keep in mind that you have a record here such as supporting demented right wing conspiracy theories. As for the "secret bribery payments." We've all heard reports about the FBI form for unconfirmed reports. That's been prominently in the news. What's new info about these alleged bribery payments have you got? You can't possibly be referring to the Bloomberg report. Did they report any payments to be bribes?

I would dispute that it's on both parties. Keep mind that the Republicans repeatedly passed big tax cut bills with the promise that they would stimulate the economy to such an extent that they would pay for themselves. You know, the Laffer curve. (The Laugher curve?) It never happened. If just the Bush & Trump tax cuts hadn't been passed, the National Debt would be 19 trillion less in today's dollars. (Throw in the Reagan tax cuts and it's about 29 trillion less. ) In fact the ratio of debt to GDP would have continued to decline. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/tax-cuts-are-primarily-responsible-for-the-increasing-debt-ratio/

Something strange is happening in the Pacific and we must find out why Unexpectedly, the eastern Pacific Ocean is cooling. If this “cold tongue” continues, it could reduce greenhouse gas warming by 30 per cent – but also bring megadrought to the US https://archive.ph/SosEe https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg25934500-100-something-strange-is-happening-in-the-pacific-and-we-must-find-out-why/?utm_source=onesignal&utm_medium=push&utm_campaign=2023-08-02-Mysterious-cool

Not after financial gain yet he didn't put his business in a blind trust. And after he got into office Mar a Lago raised it's membership fee from $100,000 to $300,000.

2 lawyers who thought that Aileen Cannon was correct in appointing a special master and who thought John Durham had brought 2 strong cases to trial. These 2 have been in the bag for Trump since forever. Although, to be fair, even they do both believe he's in serious legal jeopardy in the Mar-a-Lago documents case.

Really? No flies? You think all the owners and managers who wasted time and money to qualify for the mark agree with you?

Here's also what the government said: "Ministers said the move would give businesses certainty and would prevent a cliff-edge in December next year, when the UKCA mark was due to be introduced. You really think that the government is going to be shoving some industries off the cliff? Actually, given the quality of their governance, you may have a point.

Here's the update: " 1 August 2023 Updated the 'call to action' banner before the main body of text, to list the sectors the CE marking will continue to apply to. This is because the UK government intends to continue to recognise the CE marking across England, Wales and Scotland, indefinitely, beyond December 2024" What's your point?

In other words, there is no good reason to go for the UKCA mark, is there? Obviously the CE mark allows a business the option of getting into export. Why forego that?

Whereas the UK brilliantly outpaced Germany with growth in the 2nd quarter of 0.1%. In other words the UK grew 0.1% faster. And from a far lower base. And the thing is, Germany is a major manufacturing exporter. The UK really can't compare with Germany in that regard. And what ails Germany now are factors outside of its control. The UK's damage is self-inflicted. And do you really want to compare the strength of the Germany economy to the UK's? And the standard of living of most Germans compared to the UK's?

Which doesn't contradict my point.

Absolutely, it was a false statement. But the question that Kessler didn't address in his column was whether Biden knew it was false. A falsehood and a lie aren't necessarily the same thing.

Please identify the chap in the article who said Biden hired himself out. In fact, there isn't any such person in the article who said that.

The article doesn't say that the predicted increased production is dependent on the passage of that bill. The supporters of the bill claim that the bill would further expand production. Which is a dubious prediction. Basically the bill is about letting the fossil fuel industry pollute a lot more.

Is this a case of LiittleEnglanderitis? Do you believe that the UK encompasses the entire surface of Planet Earth?

What's particularly amusing is that the proof he submitted via a link shows that the extremely high heat levels of the distant past were associated with extremely high carbon dioxide levels.

They also supported Eileen Cannon's decision to appoint a special master in the Trump case. Among all prominent legal experts liberal and conservative they were virtually alone in their support. They also both fought that John Durham had brought strong cases. Again, most legal experts believed the prosecutions case in both instances were very weak.

Are you asking me why I did that? Not sure how that happened. But how is it relevant to the information?