Author Topic: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers  (Read 39932 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Cerebus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10576
  • Country: gb
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #250 on: January 03, 2021, 04:43:23 pm »
You're confusing opinion, for which one would need an independent arbiter if one was insistent on assigning a truth value to an opinion, with fact. Facts are verifiable, opinions are not. Whether someone has two X chromosomes and is therefore biologically female is a fact and is relatively easily proven one way or another, whether someone belongs to the gender set assigned the label "woman" is a social construct and therefore a matter of opinion or convention.
Some facts are easy to verify, like 2+2=4. This doesn't stop people now trying to argue that 2+2 can equal 5. Some facts are hard to verify. Few would argue that a ginger tom in someone's lounge, or a lion, is a cat. Around the periphery of what constitutes a cat the experts do argue. For example. do they have to be able to interbreed to all be cats? Maths, physics and chemistry largely have easy to verify truth claims. Most things have a socially constructed element to them, like "cat", and some concepts are 100% socially constructed. Even in physics we have socially constructed concepts, like colour, that cause endless disagreements. As soon as physics moves from a hard mathematical description to a looser textual one truth starts to get a little dodgy. People find truth claims quite difficult to agree on for most things.

That's just sophistry, and I think you know it.
Anybody got a syringe I can use to squeeze the magic smoke back into this?
 

Offline coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10031
  • Country: gb
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #251 on: January 03, 2021, 04:44:50 pm »
You're confusing opinion, for which one would need an independent arbiter if one was insistent on assigning a truth value to an opinion, with fact. Facts are verifiable, opinions are not. Whether someone has two X chromosomes and is therefore biologically female is a fact and is relatively easily proven one way or another, whether someone belongs to the gender set assigned the label "woman" is a social construct and therefore a matter of opinion or convention.
Some facts are easy to verify, like 2+2=4. This doesn't stop people now trying to argue that 2+2 can equal 5. Some facts are hard to verify. Few would argue that a ginger tom in someone's lounge, or a lion, is a cat. Around the periphery of what constitutes a cat the experts do argue. For example. do they have to be able to interbreed to all be cats? Maths, physics and chemistry largely have easy to verify truth claims. Most things have a socially constructed element to them, like "cat", and some concepts are 100% socially constructed. Even in physics we have socially constructed concepts, like colour, that cause endless disagreements. As soon as physics moves from a hard mathematical description to a looser textual one truth starts to get a little dodgy. People find truth claims quite difficult to agree on for most things.
That's just sophistry, and I think you know it.
That requires some explanation.
 

Offline SilverSolder

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6126
  • Country: 00
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #252 on: January 03, 2021, 04:46:23 pm »
You're confusing opinion, for which one would need an independent arbiter if one was insistent on assigning a truth value to an opinion, with fact. Facts are verifiable, opinions are not. Whether someone has two X chromosomes and is therefore biologically female is a fact and is relatively easily proven one way or another, whether someone belongs to the gender set assigned the label "woman" is a social construct and therefore a matter of opinion or convention.
Some facts are easy to verify, like 2+2=4. This doesn't stop people now trying to argue that 2+2 can equal 5. Some facts are hard to verify. Few would argue that a ginger tom in someone's lounge, or a lion, is a cat. Around the periphery of what constitutes a cat the experts do argue. For example. do they have to be able to interbreed to all be cats? Maths, physics and chemistry largely have easy to verify truth claims. Most things have a socially constructed element to them, like "cat", and some concepts are 100% socially constructed. Even in physics we have socially constructed concepts, like colour, that cause endless disagreements. As soon as physics moves from a hard mathematical description to a looser textual one truth starts to get a little dodgy. People find truth claims quite difficult to agree on for most things.

If we agree the assumptions, then we can also agree the logical truths.  Both steps are needed.
 

Offline DrG

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • !
  • Posts: 1199
  • Country: us
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #253 on: January 03, 2021, 04:54:01 pm »
The whole concept of democracy has some serious flaws, which are being exploited mercilessly these days.  (It is still probably just about the least bad of the possible political systems, but we probably need for there to be consequences for intentionally attempting to break the system for political advantage.  Also, I don't think politicians lying should fall in the category of "free speech").
The idea that you might be able to ban lies in public life is predicated, consciously or unconsciously, on there being some kind of benevolent proactive God who can look down and tell humanity what is right. The need for a truly independent arbiter, which doesn't exist in the real world, is the key reason so many ideas for running a society fail. Systems that work reasonably well are the ones that have some amount of self correction inherent in them. They can still go off the rails, but less often.

Some lies are so obvious and blatant, they should be incontrovertible. However, in tribal societies people can't even agree what "woman" means any more.

To start somewhere, we could say that a statement that is provably untrue is a "lie".  For example, claiming that there was cheating during an election without evidence to back it up.
That's an odd one to choose. There is lots of evidence, and sworn testimony. Maybe its all fake, but not investigating its veracity in a democracy is bizarre. Most of the court cases were thrown out due to a lack of standing, not because the evidence was successfully refuted.

Most of the court cases were thrown out due to a lack of standing, not because the evidence was successfully refuted.

That is simply a false statement and is easily proven to be false. Simply count the number of court cases and determine whether the number of court cases dismissed because of a lack of standing exceeds the total number of cases / 2. I do not believe that you have done that. I believe that it is more likely that you are simply expressing a biased perception because (in large part) of lies being repeated so often. Therein lies the bigger problem.

Maybe its all fake, but not investigating its veracity in a democracy is bizarre.

There is much that is simply wrong with that statement. First, it assumes that no investigations have taken place, which is, again, demonstrably false, Second, it suggests that the biased view that certain allegations, no matter how lacking of supportive evidence, should be investigated at whatever cost and for however long, if doing so is viewed as politically advantageous. Third is describing the practice of requiring evidence to support allegations as being bizarre. What is bizarre is that so many people, who know better, are acting like they really don't know better and have no problem wading into the unfounded conspiracy pool because they perceive some kind of personal gain in doing so.

The latter description distinguishes the "weasel" from the "loon". To be clear, I am not calling you either, I am referring to the talking heads and publicity hounds and wannabe "influencers", and, of course, the elected officials which condone and support such behaviors if not directly engaging in such behaviors, which some also do.

« Last Edit: January 03, 2021, 04:56:00 pm by DrG »
- Invest in science - it pays big dividends. -
 
The following users thanked this post: SilverSolder

Offline coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10031
  • Country: gb
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #254 on: January 03, 2021, 05:05:32 pm »
Most of the court cases were thrown out due to a lack of standing, not because the evidence was successfully refuted.

That is simply a false statement and is easily proven to be false. Simply count the number of court cases and determine whether the number of court cases dismissed because of a lack of standing exceeds the total number of cases / 2. I do not believe that you have done that. I believe that it is more likely that you are simply expressing a biased perception because (in large part) of lies being repeated so often. Therein lies the bigger problem.

Maybe its all fake, but not investigating its veracity in a democracy is bizarre.

There is much that is simply wrong with that statement. First, it assumes that no investigations have taken place, which is, again, demonstrably false, Second, it suggests that the biased view that certain allegations, no matter how lacking of supportive evidence, should be investigated at whatever cost and for however long, if doing so is viewed as politically advantageous. Third is describing the practice of requiring evidence to support allegations as being bizarre. What is bizarre is that so many people, who know better, are acting like they really don't know better and have no problem wading into the unfounded conspiracy pool because they perceive some kind of personal gain in doing so.

The latter description distinguishes the "weasel" from the "loon". To be clear, I am not calling you either, I am referring to the talking heads and publicity hounds and wannabe "influencers", and, of course, the elected officials which condone and support such behaviors if not directly engaging in such behaviors, which some also do.
As an observer from another country, I find a deep lack of skepticism in America about its elections. There are only two parties of any significant weight, and both are regularly seen to be using every possible means to skew results in their favour, like Gerrymandering. Its considered the preferred approach, over having policies the public can get behind, and ensuring they are carried out. Yet, when it comes to the actual election day there is a general assumption they won't play games. I would assume they are both getting up to every possible trick, and demand the most detailed monitoring by numerous representatives from all stakeholders. The US has used voting machines considered proprietary and not subject to independent audit. That's bizarre.
 

Offline DrG

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • !
  • Posts: 1199
  • Country: us
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #255 on: January 03, 2021, 05:12:25 pm »
Most of the court cases were thrown out due to a lack of standing, not because the evidence was successfully refuted.

That is simply a false statement and is easily proven to be false. Simply count the number of court cases and determine whether the number of court cases dismissed because of a lack of standing exceeds the total number of cases / 2. I do not believe that you have done that. I believe that it is more likely that you are simply expressing a biased perception because (in large part) of lies being repeated so often. Therein lies the bigger problem.

Maybe its all fake, but not investigating its veracity in a democracy is bizarre.

There is much that is simply wrong with that statement. First, it assumes that no investigations have taken place, which is, again, demonstrably false, Second, it suggests that the biased view that certain allegations, no matter how lacking of supportive evidence, should be investigated at whatever cost and for however long, if doing so is viewed as politically advantageous. Third is describing the practice of requiring evidence to support allegations as being bizarre. What is bizarre is that so many people, who know better, are acting like they really don't know better and have no problem wading into the unfounded conspiracy pool because they perceive some kind of personal gain in doing so.

The latter description distinguishes the "weasel" from the "loon". To be clear, I am not calling you either, I am referring to the talking heads and publicity hounds and wannabe "influencers", and, of course, the elected officials which condone and support such behaviors if not directly engaging in such behaviors, which some also do.
As an observer from another country, I find a deep lack of skepticism in America about its elections. There are only two parties of any significant weight, and both are regularly seen to be using every possible means to skew results in their favour, like Gerrymandering. Its considered the preferred approach, over having policies the public can get behind, and ensuring they are carried out. Yet, when it comes to the actual election day there is a general assumption they won't play games. I would assume they are both getting up to every possible trick, and demand the most detailed monitoring by numerous representatives from all stakeholders. The US has used voting machines considered proprietary and not subject to independent audit. That's bizarre.

I appreciate your opinion and respect your right to voice it. What you are saying above essentially ignores my responses and those responses were the most important points that I wanted to make and I am ok making them as I did.

I'm not going to go into your comments above in as much detail, except to say that we all find a lot of things bizarre.  :)
- Invest in science - it pays big dividends. -
 

Offline SilverSolder

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6126
  • Country: 00
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #256 on: January 03, 2021, 05:23:01 pm »
As an observer from another country, I find a deep lack of skepticism in America about its elections.

Can accusing the elections of being outright rigged without evidence be considered "skepticism"?  Or is it just sedition?


[...] I would assume they are both getting up to every possible trick, and demand the most detailed monitoring by numerous representatives from all stakeholders. [...]

It is almost as if you are saying nobody is monitoring the elections in the USA.  Is that really the case?


[...] The US has used voting machines considered proprietary and not subject to independent audit. [...]

Did that happen with the 2020 election?  I don't recall seeing any verified cases of that.
 

Online SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15797
  • Country: fr
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #257 on: January 03, 2021, 05:38:35 pm »
Most of the court cases were thrown out due to a lack of standing, not because the evidence was successfully refuted.

That is simply a false statement and is easily proven to be false. Simply count the number of court cases and determine whether the number of court cases dismissed because of a lack of standing exceeds the total number of cases / 2. I do not believe that you have done that. I believe that it is more likely that you are simply expressing a biased perception because (in large part) of lies being repeated so often. Therein lies the bigger problem.

Maybe its all fake, but not investigating its veracity in a democracy is bizarre.

There is much that is simply wrong with that statement. First, it assumes that no investigations have taken place, which is, again, demonstrably false, Second, it suggests that the biased view that certain allegations, no matter how lacking of supportive evidence, should be investigated at whatever cost and for however long, if doing so is viewed as politically advantageous. Third is describing the practice of requiring evidence to support allegations as being bizarre. What is bizarre is that so many people, who know better, are acting like they really don't know better and have no problem wading into the unfounded conspiracy pool because they perceive some kind of personal gain in doing so.

The latter description distinguishes the "weasel" from the "loon". To be clear, I am not calling you either, I am referring to the talking heads and publicity hounds and wannabe "influencers", and, of course, the elected officials which condone and support such behaviors if not directly engaging in such behaviors, which some also do.
As an observer from another country, I find a deep lack of skepticism in America about its elections. There are only two parties of any significant weight, and both are regularly seen to be using every possible means to skew results in their favour, like Gerrymandering. Its considered the preferred approach, over having policies the public can get behind, and ensuring they are carried out. Yet, when it comes to the actual election day there is a general assumption they won't play games. I would assume they are both getting up to every possible trick, and demand the most detailed monitoring by numerous representatives from all stakeholders. The US has used voting machines considered proprietary and not subject to independent audit. That's bizarre.

I agree with this, although I think you're downplaying the skepticism in the USA. There seems to be millions of americans being currently skeptic. Maybe you mean a lack of skeptisicm from the institutions themselves?

And regarding the voting machines, the concerns seem real and nothing new either:
https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/11/13/top-democrats-raised-concerns-about-dominion-voting-technology-in-2019/
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/26/politics/hackers-voting-machines/index.html
(a lot of other concerns were expressed in the past years, from independent sources, as well as both from democrats and republicans.)

Is there a valid reason not to be concerned anymore?

 

Offline coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10031
  • Country: gb
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #258 on: January 03, 2021, 06:04:46 pm »
And regarding the voting machines, the concerns seem real and nothing new either:
https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/11/13/top-democrats-raised-concerns-about-dominion-voting-technology-in-2019/
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/26/politics/hackers-voting-machines/index.html
(a lot of other concerns were expressed in the past years, from independent sources, as well as both from democrats and republicans.)

Is there a valid reason not to be concerned anymore?
There were a lot of articles about the lack of accountability in Dominion machines in early 2019. If you go back a decade there have been lots of articles in publications across the political spectrum about the lack of accountability in a number of makes of voting machines. Dominion seem to have supplied 28 US states. I'm not clear if they are the only supplier in those states, but they appear to have served 70M voters in the 2016 elections. Clearly they are an important player in this market.
 

Offline tszaboo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8217
  • Country: nl
  • Current job: ATEX product design
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #259 on: January 03, 2021, 06:13:29 pm »
As an observer from another country, I find a deep lack of skepticism in America about its elections.

Can accusing the elections of being outright rigged without evidence be considered "skepticism"?  Or is it just sedition?

No, it's not the elections that are rigged. It's the whole system.
It's very unreasonable to only have two choices for a given political view, and it polarizes your entire country. It's unhealthy. You should be able to choose between multiple political parties, have coalitions, and make healthy compromises that make sense.
There must be so many people that are forced to vote for one party or another, otherwise they will have worse taxation or they would (supposedly) loose a right that they cherish.

It is similarly wrong, like the elections were in the Soviet union. People are not free to choose what they actuallywant, due to the lack of reasonable candidates.
 

Offline bd139

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 23099
  • Country: gb
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #260 on: January 03, 2021, 07:22:48 pm »
Most of the court cases were thrown out due to a lack of standing, not because the evidence was successfully refuted.

That is simply a false statement and is easily proven to be false. Simply count the number of court cases and determine whether the number of court cases dismissed because of a lack of standing exceeds the total number of cases / 2. I do not believe that you have done that. I believe that it is more likely that you are simply expressing a biased perception because (in large part) of lies being repeated so often. Therein lies the bigger problem.

Maybe its all fake, but not investigating its veracity in a democracy is bizarre.

There is much that is simply wrong with that statement. First, it assumes that no investigations have taken place, which is, again, demonstrably false, Second, it suggests that the biased view that certain allegations, no matter how lacking of supportive evidence, should be investigated at whatever cost and for however long, if doing so is viewed as politically advantageous. Third is describing the practice of requiring evidence to support allegations as being bizarre. What is bizarre is that so many people, who know better, are acting like they really don't know better and have no problem wading into the unfounded conspiracy pool because they perceive some kind of personal gain in doing so.

The latter description distinguishes the "weasel" from the "loon". To be clear, I am not calling you either, I am referring to the talking heads and publicity hounds and wannabe "influencers", and, of course, the elected officials which condone and support such behaviors if not directly engaging in such behaviors, which some also do.
As an observer from another country, I find a deep lack of skepticism in America about its elections. There are only two parties of any significant weight, and both are regularly seen to be using every possible means to skew results in their favour, like Gerrymandering. Its considered the preferred approach, over having policies the public can get behind, and ensuring they are carried out. Yet, when it comes to the actual election day there is a general assumption they won't play games. I would assume they are both getting up to every possible trick, and demand the most detailed monitoring by numerous representatives from all stakeholders. The US has used voting machines considered proprietary and not subject to independent audit. That's bizarre.

I agree with this, although I think you're downplaying the skepticism in the USA. There seems to be millions of americans being currently skeptic. Maybe you mean a lack of skeptisicm from the institutions themselves?

And regarding the voting machines, the concerns seem real and nothing new either:
https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/11/13/top-democrats-raised-concerns-about-dominion-voting-technology-in-2019/
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/26/politics/hackers-voting-machines/index.html
(a lot of other concerns were expressed in the past years, from independent sources, as well as both from democrats and republicans.)

Is there a valid reason not to be concerned anymore?

Never quote Breitbart. Propaganda outfit.
 
The following users thanked this post: SilverSolder

Offline SilverSolder

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6126
  • Country: 00
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #261 on: January 03, 2021, 07:47:43 pm »
As an observer from another country, I find a deep lack of skepticism in America about its elections.

Can accusing the elections of being outright rigged without evidence be considered "skepticism"?  Or is it just sedition?

[...]
It's very unreasonable to only have two choices for a given political view, and it polarizes your entire country. It's unhealthy. You should be able to choose between multiple political parties, have coalitions, and make healthy compromises that make sense.
[...]

That is an entirely different discussion, and I agree with you - the two party, first past the post system has been leading to poor outcomes both in the UK and the USA in recent years.
 

Offline coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10031
  • Country: gb
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #262 on: January 03, 2021, 07:54:10 pm »
Never quote Breitbart. Propaganda outfit.
All news sources are now propaganda outfits.
 

Online SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15797
  • Country: fr
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #263 on: January 03, 2021, 08:38:05 pm »
Never quote Breitbart. Propaganda outfit.
All news sources are now propaganda outfits.

Pretty much so. Now what matters it whether the information conveyed is true or not. Was it not?
 

Offline bd139

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 23099
  • Country: gb
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #264 on: January 03, 2021, 11:38:51 pm »
Never quote Breitbart. Propaganda outfit.
All news sources are now propaganda outfits.

To a degree yes. But on the spectrum of batshit insane to vaguely ok, that one isn't even visible by Daily Mail readers with a telescope because it's that far closer towards batshit.
 

Offline Ed.Kloonk

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4000
  • Country: au
  • Cat video aficionado
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #265 on: January 04, 2021, 12:04:51 am »

I don't see the point in Scotland leaving the UK. A border between the two countries will only cause disruption and trouble.


It has less to do with the border and more to do with the taxation of the oil beneath the ocean up at the top.

iratus parum formica
 

Offline coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10031
  • Country: gb
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #266 on: January 04, 2021, 12:08:26 am »
Never quote Breitbart. Propaganda outfit.
All news sources are now propaganda outfits.

To a degree yes. But on the spectrum of batshit insane to vaguely ok, that one isn't even visible by Daily Mail readers with a telescope because it's that far closer towards batshit.
If you are going to call Breitbart batshit crazy, what words have you left in reserve for CNN?
 

Offline Ed.Kloonk

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4000
  • Country: au
  • Cat video aficionado
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #267 on: January 04, 2021, 12:10:34 am »

If you are going to call Breitbart batshit crazy, what words have you left in reserve for CNN?

Even the normies now are beginning to don the foil hat. I can't keep up with production.  :P
iratus parum formica
 

Offline coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10031
  • Country: gb
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #268 on: January 04, 2021, 12:18:21 am »
I don't see the point in Scotland leaving the UK. A border between the two countries will only cause disruption and trouble.
It has less to do with the border and more to do with the taxation of the oil beneath the ocean up at the top.
With the oil running out I think Scotland's interest in independence was waning. However, I've been reading rumours of new oil finds. Suddenly Scotland seems more interested in independence again. :)
 
The following users thanked this post: Ed.Kloonk

Offline bd139

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 23099
  • Country: gb
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #269 on: January 04, 2021, 09:12:31 am »
Never quote Breitbart. Propaganda outfit.
All news sources are now propaganda outfits.

To a degree yes. But on the spectrum of batshit insane to vaguely ok, that one isn't even visible by Daily Mail readers with a telescope because it's that far closer towards batshit.
If you are going to call Breitbart batshit crazy, what words have you left in reserve for CNN?

I never look at CNN so I can't classify it. I have no opinion.
 

Offline BravoV

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7549
  • Country: 00
  • +++ ATH1
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #270 on: January 04, 2021, 01:06:13 pm »
Yeah, not easy to get news nowadays, but still I keep trying, sometimes like viewing same subject at to opposing news sites, like BBC vs RT.COM for example.  :P

Or Israel's news vs Arab's ones and etc, or sometimes mixed cross referencing say like major news outlet vs different special type like financial news outlet, as sometimes it can yield something useful, at least for me.

Offline bd139

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 23099
  • Country: gb
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #271 on: January 04, 2021, 01:17:29 pm »
It's a good point. Never trust a single source and never trust a known bad one.
 

Offline BravoV

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7549
  • Country: 00
  • +++ ATH1
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #272 on: January 04, 2021, 01:23:04 pm »
It's a good point. Never trust a single source and never trust a known bad one.

Just try NOT to categorize bad or good, just read on and get the vibe, sometimes things looked differently from different perspectives , for example -> HERE vs HERE  >:D, now do you feel the vibes across two or even more than two POVs ?  :P

Offline bd139

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 23099
  • Country: gb
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #273 on: January 04, 2021, 01:42:54 pm »
Ah yeah of course. The lack of news is a sign as well. Although the BBC are well known for selectively ignoring stories.
 

Offline fcbTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2135
  • Country: gb
  • Test instrument designer/G1YWC
    • Electron Plus
Re: BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
« Reply #274 on: January 04, 2021, 01:50:53 pm »
"EU firms refuse UK deliveries over Brexit tax changes"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55530721
https://electron.plus Power Analysers, VI Signature Testers, Voltage References, Picoammeters, Curve Tracers.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf