"EU to ban selling eggs by the dozen: Shopkeepers' fury as they are told all food must be weighed and sold by the kilo"June 27, 2010 (Mail Online)
British shoppers are to be banned from buying eggs by the dozen under new regulations approved by the European Parliament.
---------
Me: And you won't be able to buy them by the pound either. Metric system, you know.
God I love federalism. Especially your brand. By this time next year you will be singing a special European national anthem and using the Euro. Mark my words.
You are losing your country by degrees. Wake up. Get the hell out the EU now. And help us get out of NATO.
Why do you believe such junk? It is DRAFT legislation, and it's intended to stop selling things as "large". You need to take these reports with a pinch of salt. Unless of course that has been banned too.
ReplyDeleteWhat A. said. Don't trust what you read in the daily mail. I know the EU is very fond of regulation, but first of all, that is a draft. I am sure all countries see their share of insane drafts before (hopefully) somebody sane steps in.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, the proposed regulation doesn't ban selling the eggs by the dozen, it would ban pricing the eggs by the dozen. You'd still buy your carton of eggs, only somewhere in the process of packaging they would've been weighted, and the price calculated by their combined weight. Frankly, I don't see a problem with that.
Either way, what else would you expect from our government... other than doing the wrong thing.
ReplyDeleteThe Mail is extremely reliable and reputable. At least as much as our NY Times. Probably better than that. It didn't say anything about a draft - not that I saw - any more than the NY Times supplements its stories about Arizona laws with any morsels of truth.
ReplyDeleteWell, I guess we weigh them too, those pesky eggs, as well as count them and size them grade them and ordain temperature controls and what not. If egg dealers weren't so damn unscrupulous, our Federal Government could be a lot smaller. Heaven forbid. I feel all puffed up and proud to be an American, knowing that the trade in eggs is well-regulated. Like the well-regulated militias in colonial times, I'm thinking.
How reassuring for us in the U.S. to know that somewhere out there there are college-educated egg weighmasters working for the government, at great taxpayer expense, no doubt, doing their tireless calculations and issuing directives that a dozen large eggs must weigh no less than 24 ounces in order to be labeled as "large". My gratitude overflows. I am tearing up. Must stop.
Americans are not allowed to take things with a pinch of salt. We only take things with a grain of salt. We are not advanced enough, colloquially speaking, to deserve a full pinch.
ReplyDeleteI shouldn't trust what I read in the Daily Mail? Are you kidding me, Boris? That's like saying the New York Times is a filthy, lying, communist rag. Wait, they ARE a filthy, lying, communist rag. Bad example.
ReplyDeleteYou'll be chewing your fine Austrian pastry out of the other side of your mouth at this time next year when that egg draft is egg law.
I don't see a problem with weighing eggs, either. I mean, if weighing eggs puts the quoieetus on unscrupulous egg smugglers.
As long as the results are posted in ounces.
HI Jeff. Don't get me started on what I expect from the government. Heh.
ReplyDeleteCan't resist visiting and saying sorry your soccer team did not make it through to the next round. They did so well it was terrible to see them go even though I am happy for Africa that Ghana made it through! Stay well. Regards
ReplyDeleteFrostygirl
Frosty Girl! Is that really you??
ReplyDelete(So.... Ghana is in Africa?)
:)
For those of you across the pond, not every American takes all data without doublechecking, no matter the source. I routinely doublecheck the NYT, which is my "favorite" newspaper.
ReplyDeleteIf someone took all the draft and proposed legislature created in the US as representative of the US mindset, people from the rest of the world would be chasing after our citizenry with straight jackets and medication.
And I have no problem with being a part of NATO. Just sayin'.
Odd that a person who double-checks the articles in the NY Times would still read it after a week or so. Seems like another novel definition of insanity.
ReplyDeleteMilitary alliances only serve to get one into wars that they otherwise wouldn't be involved in. Not that France doesn't deserve to be in Afghanistan.
Do you not remember how WWI started?
Even the NY Times wouldn't support NATO.
Do you remember SEATO?
ReplyDeleteCan you say "Viet Nam?"
I love your comment about how the US government's raison d'être is egg-weighting. I suspect this applies to all governemnts, and explains much...
ReplyDeleteWhat the flying hell? You're still on the internet. Wait - that's great news - well, for you. CHEERS!
ReplyDeleteHi, Linc. I knew you would turn up on the beach all bloated and smelly from floating with the sharks. It's good to see you anyway. I had given up on you. Yes, I'm still here, more or less. :)
ReplyDelete