Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

What a lucky girl your beloved is.

3m,

Mother-in-law used to make brawn with pig's head and Trotters.

(Those were the days when mother-in-laws were really mother-in-laws.)

-------

I cheat and make in with Trotters and Belly pork, it is easier than picking the meat out of the head and the balance of jelly to meat is easier to balance.

Haven't done it for a long time.

(But have learned to cheat a little and more often now, for long low temperature cooking,, use a pressure cooker, it is getting the times approximate is the problem.)

---------
(I never seen and an inorganic chicken or the liver of one. Do they have feathers.)

------------------

After the tennis is over, going to make spring rolls out of yesterdays Pork and Sauerkraut.

And by the way I can give you 10 years.

So juniors behave.

Okay dad promise to behave.

Actually WW2 broke out after I was born and my father told me that my birth was responsible for it.

9-)

he'ld have commanded you to vote too!

==============

chickens - organic or otherwise

Though battery farming is now a thing of the past, or at least it is in europe, even the tag of "free range" can be something of a misnomer.

the colour of raw chicken livers is the giveaway ..... organic ones tend to be plumper, but more to the point are a rich maroon, whereas the bog standard chicken livers you see in most supermarkets are several shades paler, and certainly lack the flavour.

non-organic chickens certainly lack guts, and probably feathers too!

Actually, he had a similar opinion as you seem to have, and at the time he gave it, I was swayed by his "feelings" and didn't really questioned it. It is only later I realised it was just another cliché. Also, realise the statement was related to his past experiences.)

(Mind, also one of his nicknames was, War Department -------- and arguments could be very brief.)

Chickens, your taste buds are possibly more perceptive than mine.

(As a child we kept chickens and I had the job of collecting the eggs and catching one for the pot and )

.

can see you're older and that dementia has set in .... you've double-posted yet again!

confess i didn't used to vote, but was persuaded of the error of my ways by my late father-in-law ..... lovely chap

as for chickens and beef - and ditto potatoes and carrots - i bet even you with your depleted and dilapidated taste buds would readily taste the difference between standard supermarket fare and properly reared and well-hung(!!) beef and chicken .... i believe chicken is best left to "dry cure" for a few days

3m - do you know the answer to that one?

Cyn,

You are as charming as per usual.

One of the signs of dementia is becoming less inhibited and the onset can be seen in some at an earlier age than in others.

This leads to a state of over-valuation of self and insensitivity to others and the surrounding.

Sometimes, such individuals, if they recognise the symptoms are able to modify their responses.

Others are trapped in their patterns of behaviour and remain oblivious.

Just an observation or thought.

But, I do recognise the development my own slight imperfections.

Hope you chicken liver pate is the right colour.

pinkish of course ..... i dare say with mould it might go blue and woolly, which could then be fed to the favoured few

getting back to the eu debate, i re-post 20749 which, despite fred getting very hot hot under the collar re some of the phrasing (i make no apology), i think brings the issue back into focus, and it would be good to hear the views of others ....

"getting back to renegotiating the treaty with EU ......

i find it very interesting that even germany is supporting the idea of a robust debate on this very serious issue.

whereas the likes of germany, france and others are unable for both psychological and political reasons, to be critical of the treaty as it stands, the uk, because of its long history of vocal dissent, can easily take up that cudgel ...... this then gives the other countries an excuse to bow to at least some of the uk demands, using the excuse of "reluctant, but in the interests of continued unity"

when it comes to a referendum - let's hope the question is put sensibly for once! - i suspect that if there are no concessions at all, then i shall vote "out", though the arguments at the time may lead me to vote differently

the "great unwashed" will almost certainly vote "out" but without having really thought it all through ..... as my late father-in-law said back in 1973, "they're only interested in what will happen to the price of butter"

"while others will think of the depth of their pockets."
===============.

If, which I doubt, Cameron is doing the "negotiating", then he will "blink".
-------------------------

But the hype at the moment about "negotiations" is again PR for his own party's consumption.

Review of treaties, pacts, regulations, rules etc. are due for review, reconsider in 2015 as one would expect.

My personal feelings are the UK needs the EU more than the EU needs the UK.
Going into negotiations tub thumping, usually ends up with the participants leaving with empty hands.

My guess that the UK will be still be in the EU which will be more fiscally and politically integrated.

But name specifically which rules, or regulations you would like to change, or consider “unfair” to the “UK”.

Also, which groups are likely to benefit from the changes, or moderation.

It is strange, that many, who wish to “break away” from the “EU”, wish to keep Britain “united” in spite of it consisting of four different nationalities.

(Using the same and opposite arguments.)
-----------


PS.

You could always take a bath!

on the face of it, you may be right about UK needing EU more than the reverse ..... however, i think it is a bit more subtle than that ..... i think that most of the major players (countries) recognise that there are swathes of regulations and rules and allowances that are in need of radical overhaul, and with the uk battling on that front, they can accept at least some changes while masquerading that it is all in the cause of retaining unity ..... of course, the MEPs won't want to do anything that will upset their fat personal budgets and allowances, any more than local gov't will accept that cuts could and should mean removal of many of its plush offices and layers of over-manned bureaucracy

obvious and easy targets will be fishing quotas, restrictive work hours and with luck, restriction of some of the freedom of movement to work nonsense (aka immigration as of right) and some of the excessive interference by European courts

without actually doing anything, the major countries can very easily agree to hold talks about talks about all/any of the above issues and others .... that will create an illusion of some acceptance to reform and all country leaders can go home with something that is easily sold to their voters

if Cameron can come home with some actual meat on the bones, albeit that it may be a bit peripheral or even ephemeral, then he can pursue with reasonable justification his campaign to keep UK within EU

EU really cannot afford UK to pull out, for all sorts of good and psychological reasons .... you only have to look at the economic pandemonium that ensued when it was suggested that greece, let alone portugal, spain and ireland as well, would need to be expelled


i know the above is pretty simplistic, but it's good as i can do quickly and without breaking my self-imposed rules on brevity

I agree with much of what your post 20791.

I think that the efficiency of EU has to be improved.

The cost and "gravy train aspects" and expenses should be addressed.

I cannot see why the various “legislative bodies” have to be in institutions “scattered” around Europe. I can understand the “political” reasons for this being done initially, but think some of it is probably a waste of money and in that the EU is reasonably establish much of the "institutions" (blocks of concrete and dinning rooms) could be pruned back on an efficiency and cost savings basis.

The political needs could be justified against cost to the public in general.
Administration at a local level (country) should be borne directly by the individual countries concerned.

Doing the above may cut cost and improve efficiency, but wouldn’t think too many MEPS or their “colleagues” would like it to happen.

“obvious and easy targets will be fishing quotas, restrictive work hours and with luck, restriction of some of the freedom of movement to work nonsense (aka immigration as of right) and some of the excessive interference by European courts”

I will think about these areas which you have mentioned, but in a way think of them as minor or teething problems to be modified and the content is more emotional than actual (badly worded, but want to get back to next week’s targets).

-------

I like simplifying things, but this B World ain't simple.

Especially, if you have the responsibility without the authority.

8-)

if you want something much more contentious, try tackling the french on their hopelessly inefficient farming methods and the huge subsidies they require/demand

fishing really is not simple at all, not least because countries buy licences from each other, and certainly the likes of the spanish are appallingly profligate and rip out all the fish they can and devil take the hindmost .... time to revive the icelandic cod wars, or the updated version of same!

The latter is the need for "central European court".

The referendum has little to do with trade. The Conservatives have always liked the trade aspects of the EU. The areas that cause problems are the creeping centralist regulations and legislation, and the trend towards federalism.

Labour promised a referendum on the changes to the EU treaty but the treaty changes were scrapped. When the changes were reanimated Labour refused the referendum on the basis that the Lisbon treaty was different. Of course it wasn't and they knew it. Cameron was then unable to have a referendum as the Lisbon treaty had given away our veto on changes and legislation.

A lot of people are in favour of membership of a trading bloc but NOT a United States of Europe. The trend towards federalism is largely a goal of the various socialist parties.

I am a big fan of the EU as a trading bloc. It was called "The Common Market" for a good reason. Without a change in our relationship with the EU, I will vote to leave.

how big a change and in what specific aspects would make you change your vote?
do you think uk will be allowed to cherry pick?

i fear the federalist bogeyman will be glossed over - i.e. it will be ignored in the pretence it does not exist, when of course we all know it does

Both,

As can be seen I am in general in favour of greater integration into EU and will try to process my thoughts why.

But as long as negotiations in the EU is done with the interest of the EU as a whole and for the long term betterment of the whole, I would go along with minor "discomforts".

Also, having somebody blustering their way to the table and demanding the best cuts to be theirs, backed up by the threat that they will go home if they don't have all that they want does not seem the best way to enthuse the others at the party.

From the little I know, and the Europeans I have met, there appears to be a greater feeling for and enthusiasm of being "Europeans" and for the "European Cause and Greater Integration". Much of the politics of the UK seems to be based on blowing up of misinformation, narrow self-interest (I think some to do with the Financial Markets) and the prejudices of little Englanders.

I can understand why the French might be beastly to us.

I wonder in future what the European Contracts for Armaments, Engineering R&D will look like if we are outside the market.

Family and neighbours come first when negotiation are carried out. Same currency, laws and rules lubricate deals when they are made.

The USA works in generally very efficiently generally.

I get the impression that there are several countries that are unhappy with all the central control. We may trigger a general discussion about the long term future of the EU. The use of the Euro was not thought out adequately. It has become obvious that the Euro needs there to be more central control over the members' budgets. Interest rates are centrally controlled but countries are free to spend how they wish. To join the Euro there were strict convergence criteria such as inflation, deficit and interest rates. Of course once a country joined, the criteria could not be policed. Countries like Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Ireland spent like there no tomorrow. Within a short time from joining, these countries would not meet the joining criteria.

There are now only two solution to the Euro problem. One is to scrap the Euro and the other is federalism or at least central control of members' treasuries.