Woah, easy there tiger... Submitter wanted to buy the daughter a phone. I was suggesting maybe it's better for her to get it herself when she is in the UK.

Well, you missed the point of my post then (and the submitter's also)! There are loads of 3G world phones. It's the whole topic of 4G world phones that we're discussing.

It's a lot different if you are a student and they usually let you take out a contract if show them paperwork for your university degree course. When I was a Canadian student in the UK, that's how it worked.

It's a world phone for normal GSM/WCDMA/HSPA, etc. But not for 4G/LTE.

If she is spending most of term time in Scotland, why not ask her to get a phone in the UK? It's a lot cheaper - most of the time top end phones are free on a 24-month contract. Assuming that she is going to Uni and not college - her course would be at least 3 years anyway. Unless, of course, it's just an exchange program.

The Nexus 4 isn't 4G (unless you hack it and live in Canada).

The Nexux 5 is, but there are 2 version to accommodate the different bands in North America and rest of the world.

... which was a great idea, but extremely poorly executed.

The Moto G and Moto E is really amazing for what it is - budget phones that have all the right things - IPS screen, snappy processor, good software, respectable brand, LTE (on E and Gv2), etc. It sells extremely well in the UK and many other markets in the EU.

If they opened up a factory in the UK or somewhere else in the EU, it may be 10-15 pounds more expensive to make than in China, but still there would be plenty of takers. In fact probably more so as it is manufactured locally and in an advanced economy - a sign of quality in its own right. The Raspberry Pi is made in the UK, and they were able to pretty much match cost with the batches produced in China.

Actually, those superior numbers are for the Twin Air models that I was talking about. You can't get them in the US (yet).

The Twin-Air is a special case as it's a two cylinder petrol engine tuned specifically for fuel efficiency (and related testing). The problem is that in real world driving, it's not quite as efficient as the Multi-jet diesel (basically you need to rev the twin-air to feel it). The other problem is ride quality - as it's a two cylinder engine, it has a distinctive noise and vibration that some people find harsh.

Diesel CO2 emissions on combustion is only ~12% more than petrol, not 30%.

The 76 mpg is the combined figure - the EUDC extra-urban figure is 85.6 (71.3 US) mpg. This will work around to at least 51 mpg (US) under EPA standards. So that is quite impressive giving that the energy density is only 12%. In fact, real world tests, especially at highway speeds, show much better fuel economy on diesel cars.

And add to that in the US you can't even get the super efficient 0.9L Twin-Air Petrol/Gasoline engine...

The Fiat 500 has also a very very efficient Diesel mult-jet version, which can do 76 MPG (in UK gallons or 63 MPG US gallons). Unfortunately you can't buy that in the US.

The whole reason for the existence of *these EU laws* is so that we can get rid of legislating lots of redundant secondary legislation and get on with implementing policies that matter.

Sorry, my mistake. FTFM.

Yes, but not equivalent in scale. The actual EU budget is tiny compared to the US federal government.

The interest rates were much lower in the Eurozone. So when the Greeks joined, not only were people able to afford more big-ticket items, even the government was allowed more room to run a big deficit. So there was a temporary credit-fueled boom, followed by a painful bust.

We live with regulations now because once a point in time, somebody recognized the existing system back then needed rules to optimize trade, improve safety, minimize waste, etc. Sometimes we make mistakes, and that we over regulate, or not regulate in the right way. Sometimes these are innocent mistakes, and sometimes it is due to lobbying efforts by vested interest. But in most case, they can be corrected.

The right way to deal with this is for engagement. Not using it as an excuse to throw the baby out of with the bathwater. In fact, if the UK did leave the EU, we would need to adhere to the same regulations in order to sell our stuff to Europe, while having no influence over the drafting of these rules. Do we really want to be such a situation?

Not that I don't agree with the mandate for EU reform. As it stands the way the EU, and especially the EC works it a mystery to most people. Although not an Eurosceptic myself, I do admit that it is useful to have a sceptical counterbalance in the European political landscape, in order to drive us to make the EU institutions that we already have, better.

Unfortunately, almost all of the Eurosceptic parties are increasingly moving towards xenophobic and populist arguments. You can see that from the type of political advertising that the UKIP has been doing here in Britain, and it is worse for the respective parties in the Netherlands and in France.