I wonder what those who voted for Brexit, especially the less well off in the more depressed areas, make of the news in the past few days?
The government has publishedd a hundred page booklet on how to prepare for the non-delayed departure at the end of this year. If we travel to any EU countries in future, among other things we must:
- pay for fully comprehensive health insurance as the European Health Insurance Card, EHIC, is no longer valid for us;
- beware of roaming charges on our mobiles;
- make preparations months in advance (and probably pay a fortune in vet bills) if we wish to take our pets.
In spite of denials there is to be a customs barrier between the mainland and Northern Ireland.
The government is spending some £700m on a customs post-cum-lorry car park near Ashford in anticipation of delays.
And the "easiest trade talks in history" seem destined to hit the buffers and result in "no deal."
Meanwhile our government, released from the constraints of Brussels bureaucrats and free to do as it likes, after having carefully considered in January that it would be a good idea to employ the Chinese company Huawei to contribute to our 5G network, has noticed that President Trump has raised an eyebrow in disapproval so have changed their minds. So much for buccaneering independence.
And welcome to chlorinated chicken.
It's worth making clear that it's not the chlorine that's going to damage us, simply that US standards of food production and hygiene are not as stringent as ours, so the chlorine is used to compensate for this by killing off the bugs.
But it's not all that successful. Every year one in six Americans fall ill from food poisoning: the equivalent figure in the UK, observing EU regulations and excluding imports of inferior quality, is one in twenty-eight.
Before the Referendum speculations about the above were dubbed "project fear." The very same clique of charlatans now publish them as "project reality."
In this article:
https://www.apgef.com/21-09-2012-the-blenheim-palace-speech-radoslaw-sikorski/
the then foreign minister of Poland warns Mr Cameron against the folly of leaving the EU. Reading it now brings tears to my eyes.
Cheap food ,maybe. however as you say bugs cause illness.Stay in hospital puts costs onto NHS ,more expense for it. Even if stay at home can lead to a loss of earnings if not got sick pay,health insurance. 2 tier system. Cheap food versus dearer food (European imports as long as they do not rot in that car park) from UK farms that do not go bust. Feeding your family therefore costs more. Those with a little more income will have to pay that health insurance etc. People then have to think can they afford it. They will stay at home or borrow money,get into debt . Add other thoughts as they come to you.
ReplyDeleteBrexit will only favour those who have already got the money.
get into debt
Also remember that in December only 43% voted for Brexit (29% approx if total voters are counted). IT WAS NOT A UNANIMOUS DECISION. The mess we are in is cos our FPTP voting system is antiquated, not fit for a modern state and is only beneficial to the well off Elite.
ReplyDeleteEvery year one in six Americans fall ill from food poisoning: the equivalent figure in the UK, observing EU regulations and excluding imports of inferior quality, is one in twenty-eight.
ReplyDeleteOh dear me. Not that lie. Those figures are measuring different things.
https://fullfact.org/health/food-poisoning-US-UK/
Thanks for the reference. Indeed the methods of calculation used for making the comparisons seem a bit cavalier but I believe the comparisons are broadly true..
DeleteThe same site gives this information, which I find even more off-putting:
Home Health
“No wonder 1 in 6 in the US get food poisoning each year but only 1 in 66 in the UK.”
Jolyon Maugham QC, 6 October 2019
“A US Food and Drug Administration handbook shows that US food standards allow for:
Rat hairs in paprika
Rat droppings in ginger
Insect fragments in peanut butter
Maggots in orange juice”
Labour party press release, 7 October 2019
Indeed the methods of calculation used for making the comparisons seem a bit cavalier but I believe the comparisons are broadly true
DeleteYou believe? On the basis of any actual evidence, or just because it feels like the sort of thing you would like to think is true?
Wasn't that sort of 'I have no evidence but I believe this to be broadly true' exactly what those on the left mocked as the quality of 'truthiness' when George W. Bush said it?
The same site gives this information, which I find even more off-putting:
Did you read to the bottom of the page? If you did you'll find that those claims are lies. From the page:
'These levels represent the point at which the FDA has to take enforcement action against manufacturers. That doesn’t mean that the FDA “allows” contaminants below these levels—it can still choose to take enforcement action in these cases.[…]
When this piece was first published we referred to the enforceable limits of contaminants in food as “acceptable levels”, which was an inaccurate way to describe them.'
I read the original figures I quoted in an article by Will Hutton, normally a very reliable source, in the Observer on the 28th June. OK, the further and better particulars you provide show that the differences may have been exaggerated or portray a "worst case scenario" but I think they convey a pretty good picture of the differences in standards and their results. The animal rights and environmental campaigners probably argue that even the European standards leave a lot to be desired. I'm happy to believe that we need to raise them rather than lower them.
DeleteI read the original figures I quoted in an article by Will Hutton, normally a very reliable source, in the Observer on the 28th June. OK, the further and better particulars you provide show that the differences may have been exaggerated or portray a "worst case scenario" but I think they convey a pretty good picture of the differences in standards and their results.
DeleteHave you any reason for thinking that, beyond that it would fit in with your existing prejudices?
The animal rights and environmental campaigners probably argue that even the European standards leave a lot to be desired. I'm happy to believe that we need to raise them rather than lower them.
We already have a perfectly workable model for this. Free-range eggs are sold in shops alongside factory-farmed eggs, so that those who are willing to pay a bit extra so that their eggs come from happy chickens can do so, and those who don't give a fig about the chickens' welfare and just want cheap eggs can do that too. It turns out that enough people do care about the chickens' welfare to make free-range eggs a viable business.
That's how we should handle these sorts of issues: give people the choice and let them make up their own minds. If they care enough about animal welfare then the businesses that prioritise high standards of animal welfare will prosper, if not they will shut down. Find out what they really think by what they are prepared to sacrifice for. As an economist surely you know that revealled preferences are what really matter, not what people say they care about; talk, after all, is cheap.
I do not believe that the profit motive takes precedence over cruelty and the safeguarding of people's health.
DeleteI do not believe that the profit motive takes precedence over cruelty and the safeguarding of people's health.
DeleteWho said anything about the profit motive? The only motive is to supply people with stuff they want (or in the case of food, need) at the cheapest price. The people who benefit from having a choice are the consumers.
Remember the consumers are always the important people in the calculus. Farming isn't done for the benefit of the farmers (or the animals), it's for the benefit of the people who eat the food. Just like car factories aren't run for the benefit of the people who make the cars, but for the benefit of the people who drive the cars.
GET YOUR BLANK ATM CARD Get $5,500 USD every day, for six months! See how it works Do you know you can hack into any ATM machine with a hacked ATM card?? make up your mind before applying, straight deal... Order for a blank ATM card now and get millions within a week!: contact us via email address::alexanderhackers01@gmail.com We have specially programmed ATM cards that can be used to hack ATM machines, the ATM cards can be used to withdraw at the ATM or swipe, at any store or POS. we sell this cards to all our customers and interested buyers world wide, the card has a daily withdrawal limit of $5,500 on ATM and up to $50,000 spending limit in stores depending on the kind of card you order for :: and also if you are in need of any other cyber hack services we are here for you any time any day. Here is our price list for the ATM CARDS: Cards that withdraw $5,500 per day costs $380 USD Cards that withdraw $10,000 per day costs $665 USD Cards that withdraw $35,000 per day costs $3,550 USD Cards that withdraw $50,000 per day costs $5,500 USD Cards that withdraw $100,000 per day costs $8,000 USD Make up your mind before applying, straight deal!!! The price include shipping fees and charges, order now: contact us via email address::alexanderhackers01@gmail.com
ReplyDeleteIT WORKS EVERYWHERE IN THE WORLD!! JUST LOCATE AN ATM MACHINE!!!
ReplyDeleteI’ve been reluctant in purchasing this blank ATM card i heard about online because everything seems too good to be true, but i was convinced & shocked when my friend at my place of work got the card from [Mr Okhide] & we both confirmed it really works, without no delay i gave it a go. Ever since then I’ve been withdrawing $5000 daily from the card & the money .has been in my own account. So glad i gave it a try at last & this card has really changed my life financially without getting caught, its real & truly works though its illegal but made me rich!! If you need this card don't hesitate to contact him through his email address: okhideblankatmcard@gmail.com ..