Throttled

This is one of the most stupid headlines ever; "EU loophole could see 77 MILLION Turks head to Britain, warn Farage and Johnson" That anyone thinks Turkey would empty and its population would head here is just nonsense. It's already started mate......I went into our local kebab shop and the guys working in there tell me that they're Turkish! Not even in the EU yet and they're coming over here and setting up kebab shops. Maybe they're the advance guard......softening us up with tasty doner and kofte........ It is Germany where most Turks go in the EU. The kebabs in Germany are much nicer than the ones here, decent pitta, decent salad and identifiable cuts of meat.

Some of the government want in, some want out. It is the opposition who are pretty much united that they want to stay in, Labour, Lib Dems and the SNP. This is one where self serving is not really applicable.

This is one of the most stupid headlines ever; "EU loophole could see 77 MILLION Turks head to Britain, warn Farage and Johnson" That anyone thinks Turkey would empty and its population would head here is just nonsense.

Scrapping the rule on claiming asylum in the first country an asylum seeker arrives in is not a major issue for the UK. Asylum seekers can still live anywhere in the EU once they have started the process in the country they first claimed in, which were primarily Germany, Sweden, Bulgaria and Italy. It was easy for them to sneak across Europe before than it is now as border controls have gone back up between the EU countries. So the almost the entire burden has shifted onto Greece and Italy. Asylum seekers are people whose lives are in danger, often through no fault of their own as regimes change and countries descend into violence which in recent years has become more common and often happens after we got involved, when we should have. For better information than the Express; http://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/policy-primers/uk-common-european-asylum-system-and-eu-immigration-law" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Motorcycles have to vary speed with the weather far more than cars. Car drivers should learn from that.

Throttled Jnr and I at Dumbarton Castle

That was a busy week for tags, table and scores updated.

For me the biggest difference was how much the rider is more important than the bike, but the car is more important than the driver. The brake test involved Coulthard slamming on the brakes and skidding to a halt. Martin had to feather the brake and even then the back wheel was lifting off the ground. In the slalom I did not realise that Martin was using the brake, clutch and throttle to get through it.

Wow, if you had said you paid £1000 I would still have been impressed!

I will try to be there because I have never seen anyone throw up a tent before and it is on my bucket list of things to see.

I have managed to get a bolt like that out by using an old screwdriver and a mallet to bang little grooves into the head so that an extractor (a kit I got from Aldi) can bite in and unscrew.

Bumbags4bikers http://www.bumbags4bikers.co.uk/ For £25 plus delivery, last forever, cheaper but just as comfortable as the gelpads.

I said they were the arguments people use, I never said they were factually correct I know you know what you know, I did that for those who don't know what they don't know........

Democracy is the least worse political system to paraphrase Churchill I think. A reason why democracy does work is because of "the wisdom of the crowd" where it has been found that a large group decision is often better than one individual even if that individual is an expert. The ignorant in the crowd are more than cancelled out by those who do have knowledge of a certain subject. Collective knowledge is pooled. I think that a read of this thread is enough to make anyone better informed as to the issues and more importantly non issues being discussed. The big non issue is immigration. Leaving the EU will have hardly any affect on the present immigration issues. The UK opted out of Schengen (which has collapsed anyway) and never gave up its border controls. The present agreement between the UK and France to have the UK's border in France at Calais was a agreement between us that had nothing to do with the EU. The UK opted out of the refugee agreement which is why we only take a few Syrians directly from camps there and have not allowed any to walk into the country. Non EU immigration is not affected in any way by the EU, the UK always had full control over that. EU immigration is due to our membership of the EEA and if we stop the east Europeans from doing work here, we will just need to give their low paid jobs to.......? Plus we need to find jobs for UK citizens who will lose their right to work in the EU and may have to return. They do well paid work and will not be a replacement for the low paid work. Plus there is every indication we will negotiate to stay in the EEA along with various other non EU countries.

The UK never gave up border controls as it opted out of Schengen, which has all but ended anyway with the mass migration from the middle east. About £4-5 billion, which could easily be taken up by having to do many individual treaties/agreements with EU countries and their administration. The EU is the most democratic of all of the European institutions, it is the only one with elected members. Switzerland and Norway are members of a number of European institutions and have close links with the EU, but no say. They are not really going it alone. NATO, not the EU.

Nope mate. We have not fought Germany or Italy since WWII. France has not fought Germany or Italy since WWII. In fact apart from a few wars when the Soviet union imploded Europe has been fairly stable since WWII. So given that the EU has not been around since WWII and only started in 1957 as the EEC then you point is rather mute. So maybe we haven't had any wars in Europe because the Soviet Union isn't around any more. Or maybe its because of NATO, or maybe its because we are less willing to send people to die in pointless wars due to better access to information. so you see the problem is that we have not had any wars in Europe for many reasons. Where as seat belts and crash helmets have been proven to reduce deaths and injurys. So I say again you can't prove that the EU has stopped wars as there are other many reasons why we have not had any. I am not saying that there is a direct causal link between EU membership and war. I am not saying leaving will mean war. I am saying membership helps a lot in safeguarding peace.

So you know exactly where all our money we have paid in goes in that bloated mess that we call the EU? Yes. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8036096.stm Agriculture (remember the old EEC) gets the most as it sustains Europe's rather chaotic food production system. About 50% of UK farmers income is from the EU. So even if we leave that is £4.1 billion we will not save, unless you want to destroy the UK farming sector. Regional aid, which is often infrastructure for remoter, poorer areas. hence on my motorcycle tours of Scotland I often see EU signs to show a road or bridge has had EU funding. That is about £2.5 billion that we will not save of we leave the EU, unless you want to return the remote areas back to having no decent roads etc. Then there is foreign aid and the EU is the biggest donor organisation in the world. That makes me proud, we can afford it, we are stinking rich when it comes to countries of the world. There is also an EU disaster fund ready to act in times of disaster, anywhere in the world. Then there is administration, which at 6.8 billion euros is a lot. But the Mayor of London's budget is 4.2 billion euros Finally some that I think should get way more spending; research, technology and education. That is the future where Europe should lead the world. So even if we leave the EU we really should stay in the European research Council as joined up research benefits all.

Yet again you haven't proved that the EU has stopped wars. As there is no way you can prove that not having an EU would mean more wars. For it to be a fact the there must be a means to measure against. If we say Crash helmets and seat belts save lives then we can look back at the results and measure the facts one way or the other. But you have no valid figures to prove your statement. Unless you can go to a parrellel universe where the EU didn't exist and then see if we had more wars or not. People started to use crash helmets and wear seat belts and crash casualties were reduced from that point. Countries in the Europe joined together in the EU (and other organisations) and the instances of fighting were reduced from that point (to zero).

I find a self inflating mattress is nice and toasty.

I do not think it needs to be a precise level, hence there is a minimum and a maximum and anywhere in that range is fine.

The supposed EU superstate is actually the EU, Council of Europe, EEA, EFTA, Eurozone, ECU, Schengen, NATO and some others which are not all the same organisation and each can be joined or not joined. It is not falling apart, only the UK is having a referendum at the moment and no other member is even considering one. Sorry, but that is unevidenced propaganda. The EU pays 50% of UK farmers income and of the £13 billion paid we got back £4 billion. The £55million a day that is being bandied about is how much the UK gives to the EU and it does not take into account the money we get back in the rebate or EU spending here. The actual figure is £22 million a day, which sounds a lot, but it is tiny in the scale of things. https://fullfact.org/economy/our-eu-mem ... 5-million/ Very few, Labour who are very pro-EU where in power when we did not join the Eurozone. The debate is bordering on racist when it reveals that many do not know the difference between the different types of migrant and spout off more about one country than another. I so want this debate to be a way of improving knowledge of Europe and the EU.

That has nothing to do with the EU and more to do with our membership of the EEA. That attached list of countries with the most immigrants to the UK has as many from non EEA countries as EEA countries. http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.u ... k-overview Please stop blaming the EU for everything to do with immigration. Especially when as many UK citizens work elsewhere in the EU as they work here.

So because we have made our country "better" than other countries we should pay more to prop them up? We should bail out Countries like Greece and France where avoiding paying taxes is a national pastime? Why should we be penalised for getting our economy right and working? We are not bailing out Greece and France! We are not in the Eurozone (which only Greece needs bailing out, not France). If we leave the EU we are not also leaving the Eurozone, because we were never in the Eurozone. The UK contribution to the EU funding is not going to Eurozone bail outs. Why should the rich who have been successful and made themselves better than the poor pay taxes to the poor? Why should the rich be penalised for working and getting their personal finances right?

So no you can't prove it can you. As you can't prove that if we hadn't got an EU then we would be at each others throats. Yes the IRA struck in Europe but how many more attacks would there have been if we had an open border policy? I lock my house when I leave as it helps to deter theft. Yes thefts still happen but it makes it harder. Ditto a closed border. In the history of Europe, this is the only time crises has not resulted in at least mobilisation and a stand off between armies. I consider that proof of the effectiveness of the EU. We do not have open borders. The Schengen agreement is separate to our membership of the EU. So your claims about open borders are moot and nothing to do with membership of the EU. In the EU we have border control, out of the EU we have border control.

We are not, that is an issue for the Eurozone. We should make the biggest contribution because we are the wealthiest, or are you for taxing the poor to help the wealthy?