Eurovision Song Contest
May 23rd 2005, 2:00 pm
#61
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Eurovision Song Contest
"tim \(moved to sweden\)" <[email protected]> wrote:
>"Padraig Breathnach" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> "tim \(moved to sweden\)" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>This is the inevitable result of tele-voting and short of completely
>>>anonymous singers (which would make the initial selection difficult)
>>>is completely impossible to stop.
>>>Back to the Jury voting, is what I say (that's how Sweden got
>>>their useless song)
>> I am overwhelmed by a "who cares?" sentiment.
>As in:
>"who cares about the Swedish entry"? (neither do I, it's just
>that I happened to see the voting for it and can use it as an
>example)
>Or
>"who cares about Eurovision"?
The latter. I can't really not care about the Swedish entry, as I
didn't watch the programme. I haven't watched it for the last few
years.
--
PB
The return address has been MUNGED
>"Padraig Breathnach" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> "tim \(moved to sweden\)" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>This is the inevitable result of tele-voting and short of completely
>>>anonymous singers (which would make the initial selection difficult)
>>>is completely impossible to stop.
>>>Back to the Jury voting, is what I say (that's how Sweden got
>>>their useless song)
>> I am overwhelmed by a "who cares?" sentiment.
>As in:
>"who cares about the Swedish entry"? (neither do I, it's just
>that I happened to see the voting for it and can use it as an
>example)
>Or
>"who cares about Eurovision"?
The latter. I can't really not care about the Swedish entry, as I
didn't watch the programme. I haven't watched it for the last few
years.
--
PB
The return address has been MUNGED
May 23rd 2005, 8:02 pm
#62
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Eurovision Song Contest
On Tue, 24 May 2005 00:25:28 +0100, [email protected]
(chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and prestwich tesco)
wrote:
>nitram <[email protected]> wrote:
>[]
>> I so hope the attempt to get UK to abandon the rebate will get UK out
>> of the EU and back into a customs union.
>>
>> This would leave Germany and NL paying for the other 22 impoverished
>> nations.
>Of course, some parts of Germany (pretty large parts too) are quite
>impoverished.
>I'm fast deciding that the EU as a political union is a load of
>bollocks.
Me too.
>Let's have a (relatively) free trade/immigration union- much
>like the relationship Norway has with the rest of Europe. I remind every
>reader _again_ that the "new" EU is bollocks anyway.
There's a good analysis of the French objections to the new
"Anglo-Saxon" EU constitution on the BBC website. It seems that the
things objected to are not new, but were in the original treaty of
Rome. Things that were never implemented in some EU countries like
fair competition.
>The UK has extended
>full working rights to the new countries- I don't believe any other
>country has.
A large number of Poles have been working black in NL for the last
decade. I was amused to find that the guy we employed many times had
learnt his stuff working black in UK for 3 years. We didn't employ him
because he was cheap, we employed him because he had the skills to do
the job well, unlike the locals.
>(Ireland? considering the open border...) Let's get rid of
>the notion that the EU has any sense of common purpose now!
I particularly dislike the divisive actions of France, Germany and
Poland.
(chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and prestwich tesco)
wrote:
>nitram <[email protected]> wrote:
>[]
>> I so hope the attempt to get UK to abandon the rebate will get UK out
>> of the EU and back into a customs union.
>>
>> This would leave Germany and NL paying for the other 22 impoverished
>> nations.
>Of course, some parts of Germany (pretty large parts too) are quite
>impoverished.
>I'm fast deciding that the EU as a political union is a load of
>bollocks.
Me too.
>Let's have a (relatively) free trade/immigration union- much
>like the relationship Norway has with the rest of Europe. I remind every
>reader _again_ that the "new" EU is bollocks anyway.
There's a good analysis of the French objections to the new
"Anglo-Saxon" EU constitution on the BBC website. It seems that the
things objected to are not new, but were in the original treaty of
Rome. Things that were never implemented in some EU countries like
fair competition.
>The UK has extended
>full working rights to the new countries- I don't believe any other
>country has.
A large number of Poles have been working black in NL for the last
decade. I was amused to find that the guy we employed many times had
learnt his stuff working black in UK for 3 years. We didn't employ him
because he was cheap, we employed him because he had the skills to do
the job well, unlike the locals.
>(Ireland? considering the open border...) Let's get rid of
>the notion that the EU has any sense of common purpose now!
I particularly dislike the divisive actions of France, Germany and
Poland.
May 23rd 2005, 8:11 pm
#63
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Eurovision Song Contest
On Mon, 23 May 2005 23:36:33 GMT, [email protected] (Jim Ley) wrote:
>On Tue, 24 May 2005 00:25:28 +0100, [email protected]
>(chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and prestwich tesco)
>wrote:
>>nitram <[email protected]> wrote:
>>[]
>>> I so hope the attempt to get UK to abandon the rebate will get UK out
>>> of the EU and back into a customs union.
>>>
>>> This would leave Germany and NL paying for the other 22 impoverished
>>> nations.
>>Of course, some parts of Germany (pretty large parts too) are quite
>>impoverished.
>>I'm fast deciding that the EU as a political union is a load of
>>bollocks. Let's have a (relatively) free trade/immigration union- much
>>like the relationship Norway has with the rest of Europe.
>I thought I showed last time this was discussed that Norway does not
>have a free trade relationship with the rest of the EU, see for
>example, live chickens:
><URL:
>http://europa.eu.int/comm/taxation_c...h=05&Year=2005
>(and yes I know about tinyurl, but no I see no reason to use it)
That's OK we don't click on your URLs either :-)
>Not that a free trade area wouldn't be a great idea, better if it also
>included an awful lot more countries - all maybe - and wasn't in
>itself protectionist.
http://secretariat.efta.int/Web/Publications/EFTABulletin/EFTABulletin/Bulletin(September2004).pdf
"The European Free Trade Association (EFTA) is an international
organisation comprising four states: Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway
and Switzerland which have eliminated barriers amongst themselves for
industrial products but do not apply a common external tariff. Apart
from Switzerland, the EFTA States base their relations with the
European Union on the European Economic Area Agreement allowing for
their participation in the Single Market. Switzerland’s relations with
the EU are based on bilateral agreements. The EFTA States have
developed an extensive network of free trade agreements with non-EU
countries and regional groupings in Europe and beyond. EFTA has
headquarters in Geneva and offices in Brussels and Luxembourg."
>On Tue, 24 May 2005 00:25:28 +0100, [email protected]
>(chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and prestwich tesco)
>wrote:
>>nitram <[email protected]> wrote:
>>[]
>>> I so hope the attempt to get UK to abandon the rebate will get UK out
>>> of the EU and back into a customs union.
>>>
>>> This would leave Germany and NL paying for the other 22 impoverished
>>> nations.
>>Of course, some parts of Germany (pretty large parts too) are quite
>>impoverished.
>>I'm fast deciding that the EU as a political union is a load of
>>bollocks. Let's have a (relatively) free trade/immigration union- much
>>like the relationship Norway has with the rest of Europe.
>I thought I showed last time this was discussed that Norway does not
>have a free trade relationship with the rest of the EU, see for
>example, live chickens:
><URL:
>http://europa.eu.int/comm/taxation_c...h=05&Year=2005
>(and yes I know about tinyurl, but no I see no reason to use it)
That's OK we don't click on your URLs either :-)
>Not that a free trade area wouldn't be a great idea, better if it also
>included an awful lot more countries - all maybe - and wasn't in
>itself protectionist.
http://secretariat.efta.int/Web/Publications/EFTABulletin/EFTABulletin/Bulletin(September2004).pdf
"The European Free Trade Association (EFTA) is an international
organisation comprising four states: Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway
and Switzerland which have eliminated barriers amongst themselves for
industrial products but do not apply a common external tariff. Apart
from Switzerland, the EFTA States base their relations with the
European Union on the European Economic Area Agreement allowing for
their participation in the Single Market. Switzerland’s relations with
the EU are based on bilateral agreements. The EFTA States have
developed an extensive network of free trade agreements with non-EU
countries and regional groupings in Europe and beyond. EFTA has
headquarters in Geneva and offices in Brussels and Luxembourg."
