I’m not a huge advocate of pornography, but believe people should be free to see what they want online (so long as reasonable steps are taken to keep it away from minors)

Then again, letting minors use the Internet unsupervised is inherently risky.

Absolutely right.

It is the responsibility of parents to keep an eye on what their own kids are up to on the Internet.

Not 100% possible in this day and age of mobile broadband, admittedly, but that’s no excuse for not making the effort in the home.

Why should the rest of the adult population be restricted for the sake of those parents who do a half-assed job or will put up with anything for a quiet life?

That is my point in response to Snafu. The trade argument is endlessly arguable from either point of view. Until and if it happens we will not know.

Yes, indeed. Neither side of the argument knows for sure, despite protestations to the contrary from both camps.

That’s why I was speaking in terms of ‘might be’ rather than ‘will be’. 🙂

The assumptions about trade changing were we to leave may be falsely based. There is no reason why we should not continue to trade with EU members as we do now.

There is no reason to assume that the remaining members of the EU would grant the UK access to the Single Market on advantageous or favourable terms if the UK had just walked away from the EU and left them with a hole in their budget that Germany and France and others had to fill in addition to the existing demands on their hard-hit national economies.

Large non-EU companies currently invest in the UK because it is seen as being ‘pro-business’ AND provides a portal into the lucrative European Single Market.

Take the latter consideration away, and much of that investment may very well disappear along with it because the UK on its own isn’t a sufficiently attractive market on a global scale.

I invite you to consider the meaning of the phrase ‘Much of the ‘factual material’ you have presented’.

It’s in plain enough English, I should have thought.

Yes, it does seem more than a bit off now that you explain it.

Have you read the answer to the written question, by the way? It could teach Sir Humphrey a thing or two.

I think you’ll need to explain how the ‘EU giving money to Turkey’ is the reason behind a commercial decision by a large US private sector corporation.

Surely Ford makes decisions that are in the best interest of their shareholders? I strongly doubt they consult the EU before doing so.

Even if there was an overwhelming financial argument to stay in Europe, I would still want out.

You have the honesty, then, to admit that your desire to leave the EU is based on a personal distaste for the institution and I have to applaud that.

If more people showed the same moral fibre, the country could have an honest debate about where our future lies instead of the ceaseless repetition of entrenched positions bellowed at people who aren’t listening by people who aren’t listening either.

Why des everything have to be about money?

In the world that we live in, everything does come down to money in the end.

It shouldn’t be that way, but that’s the way it is.

I can’t make a call about the socialist bit, but GA mostly resorts to the ad hominem attacks and dissembling arguments when faced with factual material which runs counter to his position. I try to stick to the topic by introducing material with newer views, or which hopefully prompts considered discussion.

Much of the ‘factual material’ you have presented thus far has actually been political propaganda.

The rest of your diatribe does not merit a response of any kind.