FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > How will Brexit be Funded?
How will Brexit be Funded?
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since the referendum we have had £70bn of monetary policy measures and £22bn of fiscal policy measures to keep the economy going as well as the government having to abandon its manifesto committments on getting rid of the deficit. Yesterday parliament heard from the former permanent representative to the EU that the bill for leaving will be £40-60bn. David Davis' own special advisor thinks the cost of leaving the EU and the customs union will be £25bn a year, due to reduced trade, and treasury figures out the cost a £66bn a year. How will Brexit be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? " Probably by selling our healthcare services to the US and screwing the lower income and disabled I guess. Cynical? Maybe. Anyone got a more realistic plan? -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since the referendum we have had £70bn of monetary policy measures and £22bn of fiscal policy measures to keep the economy going as well as the government having to abandon its manifesto committments on getting rid of the deficit. Yesterday parliament heard from the former permanent representative to the EU that the bill for leaving will be £40-60bn. David Davis' own special advisor thinks the cost of leaving the EU and the customs union will be £25bn a year, due to reduced trade, and treasury figures out the cost a £66bn a year. How will Brexit be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? " That will all be up for negotiation once article 50 has been triggered but as usual you are getting ahead of yourself. Any other comments of negativity you care to add? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By an increase in tax on continually whinging remoaners." Thanks for being so flippant but I think it's a genuine question For example... there are questions over covering pension liabilities, and also legally binding spending commitments post when we leave... the eu spending budgets are set up to 7 years in advance Just because we leave doesn't mean we won't still be paying...... Think of it like this... if you told a bank you didn't want to pay the mortgage on your house anymore because you didn't like it.... what sort of reaction do you think you would get | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since the referendum we have had £70bn of monetary policy measures and £22bn of fiscal policy measures to keep the economy going as well as the government having to abandon its manifesto committments on getting rid of the deficit. Yesterday parliament heard from the former permanent representative to the EU that the bill for leaving will be £40-60bn. David Davis' own special advisor thinks the cost of leaving the EU and the customs union will be £25bn a year, due to reduced trade, and treasury figures out the cost a £66bn a year. How will Brexit be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? That will all be up for negotiation once article 50 has been triggered but as usual you are getting ahead of yourself. Any other comments of negativity you care to add? " The loss of UK GDP (£25-66bn a year) won't be up for negotiation, neither will be the £92bn we have already spent. So how do you think we are going to pay for it. Genuine question. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since the referendum we have had £70bn of monetary policy measures and £22bn of fiscal policy measures to keep the economy going as well as the government having to abandon its manifesto committments on getting rid of the deficit. Yesterday parliament heard from the former permanent representative to the EU that the bill for leaving will be £40-60bn. David Davis' own special advisor thinks the cost of leaving the EU and the customs union will be £25bn a year, due to reduced trade, and treasury figures out the cost a £66bn a year. How will Brexit be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? That will all be up for negotiation once article 50 has been triggered but as usual you are getting ahead of yourself. Any other comments of negativity you care to add? The loss of UK GDP (£25-66bn a year) won't be up for negotiation, neither will be the £92bn we have already spent. So how do you think we are going to pay for it. Genuine question." Ah I see you are back to quoting George Osbourne's ridiculous figures of a loss of £66bn GDP each year once we leave based on a load of extremely dodgy statistics and mathematics. Leave the project fear crap out it has already been proved to be a load of nonsense. Pretty sure we will be due a rather large rebate once we leave which the EU has conveniently forgot to mention. So the rebate figure can come off any bill the EU wants to issue for a start. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since the referendum we have had £70bn of monetary policy measures and £22bn of fiscal policy measures to keep the economy going as well as the government having to abandon its manifesto committments on getting rid of the deficit. Yesterday parliament heard from the former permanent representative to the EU that the bill for leaving will be £40-60bn. David Davis' own special advisor thinks the cost of leaving the EU and the customs union will be £25bn a year, due to reduced trade, and treasury figures out the cost a £66bn a year. How will Brexit be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? That will all be up for negotiation once article 50 has been triggered but as usual you are getting ahead of yourself. Any other comments of negativity you care to add? The loss of UK GDP (£25-66bn a year) won't be up for negotiation, neither will be the £92bn we have already spent. So how do you think we are going to pay for it. Genuine question. Ah I see you are back to quoting George Osbourne's ridiculous figures of a loss of £66bn GDP each year once we leave based on a load of extremely dodgy statistics and mathematics. Leave the project fear crap out it has already been proved to be a load of nonsense. Pretty sure we will be due a rather large rebate once we leave which the EU has conveniently forgot to mention. So the rebate figure can come off any bill the EU wants to issue for a start. " rebate ? I thought we ran a trade deficit with the EU? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since the referendum we have had £70bn of monetary policy measures and £22bn of fiscal policy measures to keep the economy going as well as the government having to abandon its manifesto committments on getting rid of the deficit. Yesterday parliament heard from the former permanent representative to the EU that the bill for leaving will be £40-60bn. David Davis' own special advisor thinks the cost of leaving the EU and the customs union will be £25bn a year, due to reduced trade, and treasury figures out the cost a £66bn a year. How will Brexit be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? That will all be up for negotiation once article 50 has been triggered but as usual you are getting ahead of yourself. Any other comments of negativity you care to add? The loss of UK GDP (£25-66bn a year) won't be up for negotiation, neither will be the £92bn we have already spent. So how do you think we are going to pay for it. Genuine question. Ah I see you are back to quoting George Osbourne's ridiculous figures of a loss of £66bn GDP each year once we leave based on a load of extremely dodgy statistics and mathematics. Leave the project fear crap out it has already been proved to be a load of nonsense. Pretty sure we will be due a rather large rebate once we leave which the EU has conveniently forgot to mention. So the rebate figure can come off any bill the EU wants to issue for a start. rebate ? I thought we ran a trade deficit with the EU?" We are a net contributor to the EU budget. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since the referendum we have had £70bn of monetary policy measures and £22bn of fiscal policy measures to keep the economy going as well as the government having to abandon its manifesto committments on getting rid of the deficit. Yesterday parliament heard from the former permanent representative to the EU that the bill for leaving will be £40-60bn. David Davis' own special advisor thinks the cost of leaving the EU and the customs union will be £25bn a year, due to reduced trade, and treasury figures out the cost a £66bn a year. How will Brexit be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? That will all be up for negotiation once article 50 has been triggered but as usual you are getting ahead of yourself. Any other comments of negativity you care to add? The loss of UK GDP (£25-66bn a year) won't be up for negotiation, neither will be the £92bn we have already spent. So how do you think we are going to pay for it. Genuine question. Ah I see you are back to quoting George Osbourne's ridiculous figures of a loss of £66bn GDP each year once we leave based on a load of extremely dodgy statistics and mathematics. Leave the project fear crap out it has already been proved to be a load of nonsense. Pretty sure we will be due a rather large rebate once we leave which the EU has conveniently forgot to mention. So the rebate figure can come off any bill the EU wants to issue for a start. rebate ? I thought we ran a trade deficit with the EU? We are a net contributor to the EU budget. " you can put as much as you want in the bank ...however if you owe them you still have to pay | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since the referendum we have had £70bn of monetary policy measures and £22bn of fiscal policy measures to keep the economy going as well as the government having to abandon its manifesto committments on getting rid of the deficit. Yesterday parliament heard from the former permanent representative to the EU that the bill for leaving will be £40-60bn. David Davis' own special advisor thinks the cost of leaving the EU and the customs union will be £25bn a year, due to reduced trade, and treasury figures out the cost a £66bn a year. How will Brexit be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? That will all be up for negotiation once article 50 has been triggered but as usual you are getting ahead of yourself. Any other comments of negativity you care to add? The loss of UK GDP (£25-66bn a year) won't be up for negotiation, neither will be the £92bn we have already spent. So how do you think we are going to pay for it. Genuine question. Ah I see you are back to quoting George Osbourne's ridiculous figures of a loss of £66bn GDP each year once we leave based on a load of extremely dodgy statistics and mathematics. Leave the project fear crap out it has already been proved to be a load of nonsense. Pretty sure we will be due a rather large rebate once we leave which the EU has conveniently forgot to mention. So the rebate figure can come off any bill the EU wants to issue for a start. " The UK has to negotiate its way out of financial commitments it has signed up to for the next 7 years. It has to negotiate the repayment of advanced funding it has received for projects if they are not completed by the time UK leaves. It is, (is it not?) using the mythical £350m a week on the NHS, so that's ring fenced. 
It will need to relocate several EU establishments back to Europe ; and replace them with UK only ones.
It has to form a replacement for Euratom.
It will have to work out the implications of funding for power stations.
It will have to work out the changes in tariffs for its energy imports.
The government has pledged to replace " 100%" funding to agriculture that disappears with the CAP.
And all the funding for science and research, on which it depends for the EU.
Simply changing all the laws will cost a fortune.
It has to negotiate this fabulous trade deal with the US ( and whilst at at, increase trade with the US tenfold at least). One presumes that the tariffs agreed will of course be lesser than those enjoyed under the EU .
But if course, we all have complete confidence that the government budgets can cope with all that.
None of that takes account of how the actual economy will change as a result of BREXIT ( given that there is now the "Trump card" at loose in the world, turning everything inside out.) 
One hopes the economy will go stratospheric in order to fund all this.
I await with bated breath..... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since the referendum we have had £70bn of monetary policy measures and £22bn of fiscal policy measures to keep the economy going as well as the government having to abandon its manifesto committments on getting rid of the deficit. Yesterday parliament heard from the former permanent representative to the EU that the bill for leaving will be £40-60bn. David Davis' own special advisor thinks the cost of leaving the EU and the customs union will be £25bn a year, due to reduced trade, and treasury figures out the cost a £66bn a year. How will Brexit be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? That will all be up for negotiation once article 50 has been triggered but as usual you are getting ahead of yourself. Any other comments of negativity you care to add? The loss of UK GDP (£25-66bn a year) won't be up for negotiation, neither will be the £92bn we have already spent. So how do you think we are going to pay for it. Genuine question. Ah I see you are back to quoting George Osbourne's ridiculous figures of a loss of £66bn GDP each year once we leave based on a load of extremely dodgy statistics and mathematics. Leave the project fear crap out it has already been proved to be a load of nonsense. Pretty sure we will be due a rather large rebate once we leave which the EU has conveniently forgot to mention. So the rebate figure can come off any bill the EU wants to issue for a start. The UK has to negotiate its way out of financial commitments it has signed up to for the next 7 years. It has to negotiate the repayment of advanced funding it has received for projects if they are not completed by the time UK leaves. It is, (is it not?) using the mythical £350m a week on the NHS, so that's ring fenced.
It will need to relocate several EU establishments back to Europe ; and replace them with UK only ones.
It has to form a replacement for Euratom.
It will have to work out the implications of funding for power stations.
It will have to work out the changes in tariffs for its energy imports.
The government has pledged to replace " 100%" funding to agriculture that disappears with the CAP.
And all the funding for science and research, on which it depends for the EU.
Simply changing all the laws will cost a fortune.
It has to negotiate this fabulous trade deal with the US ( and whilst at at, increase trade with the US tenfold at least). One presumes that the tariffs agreed will of course be lesser than those enjoyed under the EU .
But if course, we all have complete confidence that the government budgets can cope with all that.
None of that takes account of how the actual economy will change as a result of BREXIT ( given that there is now the "Trump card" at loose in the world, turning everything inside out.)
One hopes the economy will go stratospheric in order to fund all this.
I await with bated breath....."The EU will have to take into account the cost of our rebate for the next 7 years. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Pretty sure we will be due a rather large rebate once we leave which the EU has conveniently forgot to mention. So the rebate figure can come off any bill the EU wants to issue for a start. " A rebate on what? And why? Let's assume that the UK could walk away without paying anything to the EU and assume that we would no longer be paying the fictitious £350,000,000 a week to the EU. Taking a simplistic view we would be £350,000,000 a week better off. However, we now know that we will depart both the single market and the customs union and even the most die hard Brexiters accept that there will be an economic cost to that. Companies have existing and long standing relationships that can't just be dropped whilst they find new customers on the other side of the world. Immigration controls of any description by default reduce the tax take and the necessary austerity because of that will mean people have less to spend because the population will have to pay more tax to make up the shortfall. None of this of course is an exact science and every Brexiter will have their own pain line where they will stop saying "it was worth it" to "WTF, I didn't think it would be like this." The very worst thing of all is that it is those at the bottom of the ladder who can least afford any more pain were the ones most taken in by the "immigrant problem" and the "evils of globalisation" - especially now that we are about to become a "globalised country." I have said before that to the best of my abilities I have Brexit proofed my family. This does not mean that I don't feel sorry for those who will suffer most at the hands of this ideologically driven Tory government as they pursue an agenda that will isolate the poorest from an economic Union that was portrayed as their enemy, but which in fact was their best friend. Time will of course tell,and I do hope as a proud English man that I am totally wrong and that the UK will thrive and prosper outside of the EU. The problem is that all of my instincts and all of my life experience leads me to think that the reason that no feasible economic argument has ever been made for Brexit, is because there isn't one. This will be a huge and unnecessarily costly exercise that only the very wealthy wil gain any benefit from. Not a single one of the perceived ills in our society can be fixed by Brexit and many will be made much worse and at great cost. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The EU will have to take into account the cost of our rebate for the next 7 years. " Not so fast oh dim centaur..... 1) rebate is already taken off any money we give to them 2) the eu budget is set up to 7 years ahead... but the money given to cover a financial year is given only the financial year before | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Sinc The EU will have to take into account the cost of our rebate for the next 7 years. " What on earth are you waffling about now? Unless you are seeing reality that it will take 7 years to leave.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"By an increase in tax on continually whinging remoaners." And that comment says it all... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The EU will have to take into account the cost of our rebate for the next 7 years. Not so fast oh dim centaur..... 1) rebate is already taken off any money we give to them 2) the eu budget is set up to 7 years ahead... but the money given to cover a financial year is given only the financial year before " Oh Fabio; don't spoil his game with facts, or reason. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Ah I see you are back to quoting George Osbourne's ridiculous figures of a loss of £66bn GDP each year once we leave based on a load of extremely dodgy statistics and mathematics. Leave the project fear crap out it has already been proved to be a load of nonsense. Pretty sure we will be due a rather large rebate once we leave which the EU has conveniently forgot to mention. So the rebate figure can come off any bill the EU wants to issue for a start. " Ok, so dont use that figure then, go for a figure in the middle of the range, let's say it will cost us £45bn a year, plus the 92bn already spent and (again taking the middle) a £50bn exit bill. How are we going to pay for that? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Pretty sure we will be due a rather large rebate once we leave which the EU has conveniently forgot to mention. So the rebate figure can come off any bill the EU wants to issue for a start. A rebate on what? And why? Let's assume that the UK could walk away without paying anything to the EU and assume that we would no longer be paying the fictitious £350,000,000 a week to the EU. Taking a simplistic view we would be £350,000,000 a week better off. However, we now know that we will depart both the single market and the customs union and even the most die hard Brexiters accept that there will be an economic cost to that. Companies have existing and long standing relationships that can't just be dropped whilst they find new customers on the other side of the world. Immigration controls of any description by default reduce the tax take and the necessary austerity because of that will mean people have less to spend because the population will have to pay more tax to make up the shortfall. None of this of course is an exact science and every Brexiter will have their own pain line where they will stop saying "it was worth it" to "WTF, I didn't think it would be like this." The very worst thing of all is that it is those at the bottom of the ladder who can least afford any more pain were the ones most taken in by the "immigrant problem" and the "evils of globalisation" - especially now that we are about to become a "globalised country." I have said before that to the best of my abilities I have Brexit proofed my family. This does not mean that I don't feel sorry for those who will suffer most at the hands of this ideologically driven Tory government as they pursue an agenda that will isolate the poorest from an economic Union that was portrayed as their enemy, but which in fact was their best friend. Time will of course tell,and I do hope as a proud English man that I am totally wrong and that the UK will thrive and prosper outside of the EU. The problem is that all of my instincts and all of my life experience leads me to think that the reason that no feasible economic argument has ever been made for Brexit, is because there isn't one. This will be a huge and unnecessarily costly exercise that only the very wealthy wil gain any benefit from. Not a single one of the perceived ills in our society can be fixed by Brexit and many will be made much worse and at great cost." Sorry but all of your life experience so far led you to believe Hillary Clinton would win the Presidency and turns out you were wrong on that. It's also ironic that you are now raging against the nasty Tories when you've previously admitted on here you are a life long Tory supporter/voter. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since the referendum we have had £70bn of monetary policy measures and £22bn of fiscal policy measures to keep the economy going as well as the government having to abandon its manifesto committments on getting rid of the deficit. Yesterday parliament heard from the former permanent representative to the EU that the bill for leaving will be £40-60bn. David Davis' own special advisor thinks the cost of leaving the EU and the customs union will be £25bn a year, due to reduced trade, and treasury figures out the cost a £66bn a year. How will Brexit be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? " The sky is falling, the sky is falling  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Ah I see you are back to quoting George Osbourne's ridiculous figures of a loss of £66bn GDP each year once we leave based on a load of extremely dodgy statistics and mathematics. Leave the project fear crap out it has already been proved to be a load of nonsense. Pretty sure we will be due a rather large rebate once we leave which the EU has conveniently forgot to mention. So the rebate figure can come off any bill the EU wants to issue for a start. Ok, so dont use that figure then, go for a figure in the middle of the range, let's say it will cost us £45bn a year, plus the 92bn already spent and (again taking the middle) a £50bn exit bill. How are we going to pay for that? " Border tax on Merc's BMW's VW's and Audi's.
Extra 10 pence on every bottle of French Italian or Spanish wine.
A fiver for an entrance visa.
That should cover it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Sorry but all of your life experience so far led you to believe Hillary Clinton would win the Presidency and turns out you were wrong on that. It's also ironic that you are now raging against the nasty Tories when you've previously admitted on here you are a life long Tory supporter/voter. " The only thing that led me to believe that Hilary would win was my personal experiences in the country as opposed to what I read in an English newspaper. You will recall that from September, I did say that I thought Trump would win because there was a noticeabble change - at least in the places where I stay. There is no relevance of me previously being a life long Tory supporter if I think the current incumbents are shallow minded imbeciles. What I have noticed however is that for the first time (to me anyway), you have not replied to a single issue raised in my post, but instead chose to attack me personally. Point taken. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? " Why? It's the Brexiters who have all the answers; they told everyone about the cash that was going to slosh around after BREXIT , so they know how it's all going to be funded. And they did, of course, already know all about the various commitment that theUK had. It's not a problem anyway, as the UK will be the global leader in trade, the world will be begging and pleading to give stuff to UK, the place will be awash with cash. So We are assured by that nice Mr Farange, and those lovely chaps Mr Gove and Mr Johnson . Anyway, Mrs May has a plan.Must be true, she keeps telling us she has.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? " The extra huge expense of Brexit has not been brought about by the people who voted to remain though has it. You'd expect that Leave voters would have some form of data / facts to support how leaving will benefit the country but there isn't any. Brexit will be so expensive even in the short term, knock on effects are already here with no sign of anything in return. All the deficit reduction policy that has been on the go the last few years, the tens of thousands of job losses, all the pain and suffering people have had to endure, the reduction of services in the communities in the name of reducing the countries deficit has all been pissed up the wall in the name of Brexit and no one can say how or when things will get better. I actually was all for leaving the EU at the right time, once the deficit reduction had been completed and running a surplus which would have happened, get our debt reduced then and only then maybe look at a brexit. I feel a bit like we had a good job with good security but we've decided to just throw our notice in with the notion "oh I might get a brain surgeon's job" but if that fails i can always get myself a 0 hours contract shelf stacking at Amazon. Bring on the Brexit, the harder the better to please the 52% | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since the referendum we have had £70bn of monetary policy measures and £22bn of fiscal policy measures to keep the economy going as well as the government having to abandon its manifesto committments on getting rid of the deficit. Yesterday parliament heard from the former permanent representative to the EU that the bill for leaving will be £40-60bn. David Davis' own special advisor thinks the cost of leaving the EU and the customs union will be £25bn a year, due to reduced trade, and treasury figures out the cost a £66bn a year. How will Brexit be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? That will all be up for negotiation once article 50 has been triggered but as usual you are getting ahead of yourself. Any other comments of negativity you care to add? "  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? Why? It's the Brexiters who have all the answers; they told everyone about the cash that was going to slosh around after BREXIT , so they know how it's all going to be funded. And they did, of course, already know all about the various commitment that theUK had. It's not a problem anyway, as the UK will be the global leader in trade, the world will be begging and pleading to give stuff to UK, the place will be awash with cash. So We are assured by that nice Mr Farange, and those lovely chaps Mr Gove and Mr Johnson . Anyway, Mrs May has a plan.Must be true, she keeps telling us she has. "Yes Teresa May does have a plan, in fact 77 pages of it in a white paper released today. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Yes Teresa May does have a plan, in fact 77 pages of it in a white paper released today. " Ringing Ocean Finance and mugging the RNIB doesn't constitute having a plan. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Poor Centaurs in the middle of the denial stage of grief. Facts are wrong, experts are wrong,logic is wrong and its all about attacking individuals. Someone needs a hug. And if Britain increases visa costs, taxes on wine or cars then we'll do the same to your exports and the net result will be that the British economy suffers even more." No denial at all here although some Remoaners still seem to be in denial and still think that we might actually stay in the EU, lol. Experts on the Remain side have been proved wrong, their facts have been proved wrong and their logic has been proved wrong, where on earth have you been for the last 7 months since the Brexit vote, where the IMF admitted they were wrong, Mark Carney admitted he was wrong, various other economists admitting they had their Michel Fish moment when all of their doomsday predictions turned out to be bullshit and fantasy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? Why? It's the Brexiters who have all the answers; they told everyone about the cash that was going to slosh around after BREXIT , so they know how it's all going to be funded. And they did, of course, already know all about the various commitment that theUK had. It's not a problem anyway, as the UK will be the global leader in trade, the world will be begging and pleading to give stuff to UK, the place will be awash with cash. So We are assured by that nice Mr Farange, and those lovely chaps Mr Gove and Mr Johnson . Anyway, Mrs May has a plan.Must be true, she keeps telling us she has.
Yes Teresa May does have a plan, in fact 77 pages of it in a white paper released today. "I have read the White paper, end to end twice. Struggling to find a plan. Struggling to find anything apart from "we are going to do very well" repeated about 50 times in different formats. Like May herself; it says precisely nothing. It's just a dressed up version of her Lancaster House non-speech. No wonder they didn't publish it before the debate; there might have been carnage. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Sorry but all of your life experience so far led you to believe Hillary Clinton would win the Presidency and turns out you were wrong on that. It's also ironic that you are now raging against the nasty Tories when you've previously admitted on here you are a life long Tory supporter/voter. The only thing that led me to believe that Hilary would win was my personal experiences in the country as opposed to what I read in an English newspaper. You will recall that from September, I did say that I thought Trump would win because there was a noticeabble change - at least in the places where I stay. There is no relevance of me previously being a life long Tory supporter if I think the current incumbents are shallow minded imbeciles. What I have noticed however is that for the first time (to me anyway), you have not replied to a single issue raised in my post, but instead chose to attack me personally. Point taken. " But it's ok for you to attack all Leave voters/Brexiteers and call them all thick, uneducated, dickheads (all 3 of these terms you have used on threads on here to direct abuse towards leave voters and I'm pretty sure you have used other insults besides). So maybe those in glass houses shouldn't be throwing stones in the first place. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Some of the comments in this thread sound like they come from people on drugs, total belief in the experts that yet again have today been shown to be mistaken in their guesses, the BoE has upgraded their forecast for growth yet again, yet still some are fooled into believing any forecast figures that are put out are going to be accurate, IMVHO its very sad when some uk citizens quite plainly want the uk to fail, so you lost the vote well big deal we all lose arguments sometimes but the decent people work together to make a success of a situation. TM laid out her plans last week and today we have the white paper yet still some say there is no plan, are you just trolling to get a reaction? If you werent serious then it would be funny, a few hours agoI looked up to see if the white paper had been put online which it hadnt at the time but there was tweats from some guy at the guardian who must have seen it saying that there was no guarantee for EU citizens here or ours there as though that was a disgrace, yet he put a quote up where it said" The governments priority is to secure the rights of both sets", talk about denying facts and making up headlines"
Wonder how long before the Guardian follows CNN's lead and goes full on fake news. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Some of the comments in this thread sound like they come from people on drugs, total belief in the experts that yet again have today been shown to be mistaken in their guesses, the BoE has upgraded their forecast for growth yet again, yet still some are fooled into believing any forecast figures that are put out are going to be accurate, IMVHO its very sad when some uk citizens quite plainly want the uk to fail, so you lost the vote well big deal we all lose arguments sometimes but the decent people work together to make a success of a situation. TM laid out her plans last week and today we have the white paper yet still some say there is no plan, are you just trolling to get a reaction? If you werent serious then it would be funny, a few hours agoI looked up to see if the white paper had been put online which it hadnt at the time but there was tweats from some guy at the guardian who must have seen it saying that there was no guarantee for EU citizens here or ours there as though that was a disgrace, yet he put a quote up where it said" The governments priority is to secure the rights of both sets", talk about denying facts and making up headlines
Wonder how long before the Guardian follows CNN's lead and goes full on fake news. "Bingo! Breitbart in the open! You have a direct line to Raheem Kassan? lets get those alternative facts rolling! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Some of the comments in this thread sound like they come from people on drugs, total belief in the experts that yet again have today been shown to be mistaken in their guesses, the BoE has upgraded their forecast for growth yet again, yet still some are fooled into believing any forecast figures that are put out are going to be accurate, IMVHO its very sad when some uk citizens quite plainly want the uk to fail, so you lost the vote well big deal we all lose arguments sometimes but the decent people work together to make a success of a situation. TM laid out her plans last week and today we have the white paper yet still some say there is no plan, are you just trolling to get a reaction? If you werent serious then it would be funny, a few hours agoI looked up to see if the white paper had been put online which it hadnt at the time but there was tweats from some guy at the guardian who must have seen it saying that there was no guarantee for EU citizens here or ours there as though that was a disgrace, yet he put a quote up where it said" The governments priority is to secure the rights of both sets", talk about denying facts and making up headlines
Wonder how long before the Guardian follows CNN's lead and goes full on fake news.
Bingo!
Breitbart in the open!
You have a direct line to Raheem Kassan?
lets get those alternative facts rolling!
"What like the Alternative facts in the OP's post where they said the UK will be £66bn of GDP worse off once we've left the EU. More precisely George Osborne's alternative facts. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Some of the comments in this thread sound like they come from people on drugs, total belief in the experts that yet again have today been shown to be mistaken in their guesses, the BoE has upgraded their forecast for growth yet again, yet still some are fooled into believing any forecast figures that are put out are going to be accurate, IMVHO its very sad when some uk citizens quite plainly want the uk to fail, so you lost the vote well big deal we all lose arguments sometimes but the decent people work together to make a success of a situation. TM laid out her plans last week and today we have the white paper yet still some say there is no plan, are you just trolling to get a reaction? If you werent serious then it would be funny, a few hours agoI looked up to see if the white paper had been put online which it hadnt at the time but there was tweats from some guy at the guardian who must have seen it saying that there was no guarantee for EU citizens here or ours there as though that was a disgrace, yet he put a quote up where it said" The governments priority is to secure the rights of both sets", talk about denying facts and making up headlines
Wonder how long before the Guardian follows CNN's lead and goes full on fake news.
Bingo!
Breitbart in the open!
You have a direct line to Raheem Kassan?
lets get those alternative facts rolling!
"The ministry of "Truth" strikes again. War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" But it's ok for you to attack all Leave voters/Brexiteers and call them all thick, uneducated, dickheads (all 3 of these terms you have used on threads on here to direct abuse towards leave voters and I'm pretty sure you have used other insults besides). So maybe those in glass houses shouldn't be throwing stones in the first place. " Not once - ever, have i directly replied to a post of yours with a personal attack. I wouldn't have done that on principle. However if in my open posts, if you took exception to my suggestions that "a number," "many," "some" Brexiters are thick, or stupid, or dickheads then you have chosen to wear that cap. I certainly dont take personal exception to what you and others have said in open posts about Remainers because I am comfortable with my own thoughts and feelings about my attitude to Brexit and all that surrounds it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Some of the comments in this thread sound like they come from people on drugs, total belief in the experts that yet again have today been shown to be mistaken in their guesses, the BoE has upgraded their forecast for growth yet again, yet still some are fooled into believing any forecast figures that are put out are going to be accurate, IMVHO its very sad when some uk citizens quite plainly want the uk to fail, so you lost the vote well big deal we all lose arguments sometimes but the decent people work together to make a success of a situation. TM laid out her plans last week and today we have the white paper yet still some say there is no plan, are you just trolling to get a reaction? If you werent serious then it would be funny, a few hours agoI looked up to see if the white paper had been put online which it hadnt at the time but there was tweats from some guy at the guardian who must have seen it saying that there was no guarantee for EU citizens here or ours there as though that was a disgrace, yet he put a quote up where it said" The governments priority is to secure the rights of both sets", talk about denying facts and making up headlines
Wonder how long before the Guardian follows CNN's lead and goes full on fake news.
Bingo!
Breitbart in the open!
You have a direct line to Raheem Kassan?
lets get those alternative facts rolling!
What like the Alternative facts in the OP's post where they said the UK will be £66bn of GDP worse off once we've left the EU. More precisely George Osborne's alternative facts. "As I have already said, if you don't accept that figure from the Treasury, then use a middle of the road figure of £45bn a year cost, or hell, let's go the whole hog and accept the figure from David Davis' own special advisor (a Leave expert, not a remain expert) of £25bn a year. How are we going to afford to pay £25bn a year? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Some of the comments in this thread sound like they come from people on drugs, total belief in the experts that yet again have today been shown to be mistaken in their guesses, the BoE has upgraded their forecast for growth yet again, yet still some are fooled into believing any forecast figures that are put out are going to be accurate, IMVHO its very sad when some uk citizens quite plainly want the uk to fail, so you lost the vote well big deal we all lose arguments sometimes but the decent people work together to make a success of a situation. TM laid out her plans last week and today we have the white paper yet still some say there is no plan, are you just trolling to get a reaction? If you werent serious then it would be funny, a few hours agoI looked up to see if the white paper had been put online which it hadnt at the time but there was tweats from some guy at the guardian who must have seen it saying that there was no guarantee for EU citizens here or ours there as though that was a disgrace, yet he put a quote up where it said" The governments priority is to secure the rights of both sets", talk about denying facts and making up headlines
Wonder how long before the Guardian follows CNN's lead and goes full on fake news.
Bingo!
Breitbart in the open!
You have a direct line to Raheem Kassan?
lets get those alternative facts rolling!
What like the Alternative facts in the OP's post where they said the UK will be £66bn of GDP worse off once we've left the EU. More precisely George Osborne's alternative facts.
As I have already said, if you don't accept that figure from the Treasury, then use a middle of the road figure of £45bn a year cost, or hell, let's go the whole hog and accept the figure from David Davis' own special advisor (a Leave expert, not a remain expert) of £25bn a year.
How are we going to afford to pay £25bn a year? "We could cut the useless and wasteful foreign aid budget for starters, that would be £12bn each year to fill in your imaginary hole. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Some of the comments in this thread sound like they come from people on drugs, total belief in the experts that yet again have today been shown to be mistaken in their guesses, the BoE has upgraded their forecast for growth yet again, yet still some are fooled into believing any forecast figures that are put out are going to be accurate, IMVHO its very sad when some uk citizens quite plainly want the uk to fail, so you lost the vote well big deal we all lose arguments sometimes but the decent people work together to make a success of a situation. TM laid out her plans last week and today we have the white paper yet still some say there is no plan, are you just trolling to get a reaction? If you werent serious then it would be funny, a few hours agoI looked up to see if the white paper had been put online which it hadnt at the time but there was tweats from some guy at the guardian who must have seen it saying that there was no guarantee for EU citizens here or ours there as though that was a disgrace, yet he put a quote up where it said" The governments priority is to secure the rights of both sets", talk about denying facts and making up headlines
Wonder how long before the Guardian follows CNN's lead and goes full on fake news.
Bingo!
Breitbart in the open!
You have a direct line to Raheem Kassan?
lets get those alternative facts rolling!
What like the Alternative facts in the OP's post where they said the UK will be £66bn of GDP worse off once we've left the EU. More precisely George Osborne's alternative facts.
As I have already said, if you don't accept that figure from the Treasury, then use a middle of the road figure of £45bn a year cost, or hell, let's go the whole hog and accept the figure from David Davis' own special advisor (a Leave expert, not a remain expert) of £25bn a year.
How are we going to afford to pay £25bn a year?
We could cut the useless and wasteful foreign aid budget for starters, that would be £12bn each year to fill in your imaginary hole. "Did the EU force us to do it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Some of the comments in this thread sound like they come from people on drugs, total belief in the experts that yet again have today been shown to be mistaken in their guesses, the BoE has upgraded their forecast for growth yet again, yet still some are fooled into believing any forecast figures that are put out are going to be accurate, IMVHO its very sad when some uk citizens quite plainly want the uk to fail, so you lost the vote well big deal we all lose arguments sometimes but the decent people work together to make a success of a situation. TM laid out her plans last week and today we have the white paper yet still some say there is no plan, are you just trolling to get a reaction? If you werent serious then it would be funny, a few hours agoI looked up to see if the white paper had been put online which it hadnt at the time but there was tweats from some guy at the guardian who must have seen it saying that there was no guarantee for EU citizens here or ours there as though that was a disgrace, yet he put a quote up where it said" The governments priority is to secure the rights of both sets", talk about denying facts and making up headlines
Wonder how long before the Guardian follows CNN's lead and goes full on fake news.
Bingo!
Breitbart in the open!
You have a direct line to Raheem Kassan?
lets get those alternative facts rolling!
What like the Alternative facts in the OP's post where they said the UK will be £66bn of GDP worse off once we've left the EU. More precisely George Osborne's alternative facts.
As I have already said, if you don't accept that figure from the Treasury, then use a middle of the road figure of £45bn a year cost, or hell, let's go the whole hog and accept the figure from David Davis' own special advisor (a Leave expert, not a remain expert) of £25bn a year.
How are we going to afford to pay £25bn a year?
We could cut the useless and wasteful foreign aid budget for starters, that would be £12bn each year to fill in your imaginary hole. "Well it's not an imaginary hole is it. A £25bn hole is what David Davis' own advisor is telling is we will have. The conservative government passed a law stating that 0.7% of GDP is spent on foreign aid. I and many others think that's not a waste of money. So unless they repealed the Act, we wouldn't be able to slash that budget. Even if we did, would you really want to send the message to the world that Brexit has made the UK so poor that we can no longer afford to help some of the poorest people in the world? But let's say for arguments same that we scrap the foreign aid budget, even you admit that that saving would be less than half of what's needed, so where would you find the other £13bn every year? Also how are you going to pay off the £92bn already spent, and the £40-60bn divorce settlement? Just to be generous to you let's take the lowest figure, that comes to £132bn. That equates to about 3.5 years of total defence spending or about 4.5 years of our education budget. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's fine, no need to worry. The Brexit fairy will pay for it. Sorted " There will be nothing to pay. It's the OP coming up with fairy stories, Project Fear mark II. The international trade secretary Liam Fox has said the idea of the UK paying an exit fee is "absurd". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's fine, no need to worry. The Brexit fairy will pay for it. Sorted There will be nothing to pay. It's the OP coming up with fairy stories, Project Fear mark II. The international trade secretary Liam Fox has said the idea of the UK paying an exit fee is "absurd". " but its not an exit fee... its what the UK has already signed up for in legally binding spending agreements..... that is why we are saying that the EU can plan some budgets for some deptartments up to 7 years in advance...... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? Why? It's the Brexiters who have all the answers; they told everyone about the cash that was going to slosh around after BREXIT , so they know how it's all going to be funded. And they did, of course, already know all about the various commitment that theUK had. It's not a problem anyway, as the UK will be the global leader in trade, the world will be begging and pleading to give stuff to UK, the place will be awash with cash. So We are assured by that nice Mr Farange, and those lovely chaps Mr Gove and Mr Johnson . Anyway, Mrs May has a plan.Must be true, she keeps telling us she has. "I was asking in order to get the viewpoint of the other side! But happy for you to respond in the way that you did. Not sure how sarcasm ever made a worthwhile contribution to intelligent debate but I'll roll with it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's fine, no need to worry. The Brexit fairy will pay for it. Sorted There will be nothing to pay. It's the OP coming up with fairy stories, Project Fear mark II. The international trade secretary Liam Fox has said the idea of the UK paying an exit fee is "absurd". " You might want to have a read of this then.... http://news.sky.com/story/eu-exit-bill-could-cost-up-to-836460bn-former-brussels-diplomat-warns-10751855 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? Why? It's the Brexiters who have all the answers; they told everyone about the cash that was going to slosh around after BREXIT , so they know how it's all going to be funded. And they did, of course, already know all about the various commitment that theUK had. It's not a problem anyway, as the UK will be the global leader in trade, the world will be begging and pleading to give stuff to UK, the place will be awash with cash. So We are assured by that nice Mr Farange, and those lovely chaps Mr Gove and Mr Johnson . Anyway, Mrs May has a plan.Must be true, she keeps telling us she has.
I was asking in order to get the viewpoint of the other side!
But happy for you to respond in the way that you did. Not sure how sarcasm ever made a worthwhile contribution to intelligent debate but I'll roll with it."Well it's hardly an intelligent debate, is it? The problems are clear to anyone who knows anything, and who can read; the only thing unsure is the level of payment required, which can only be estimated at present, though a quick scan of budgets gives a god clue. But any logical , reasoned arguments are just shouted down by the ignorant. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well it's hardly an intelligent debate, is it? The problems are clear to anyone who knows anything, and who can read; the only thing unsure is the level of payment required, which can only be estimated at present, though a quick scan of budgets gives a god clue. But any logical , reasoned arguments are just shouted down by the ignorant. "*wanders round with tray of canapés* Alternative truths, anyone? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well it's hardly an intelligent debate, is it? The problems are clear to anyone who knows anything, and who can read; the only thing unsure is the level of payment required, which can only be estimated at present, though a quick scan of budgets gives a god clue. But any logical , reasoned arguments are just shouted down by the ignorant.
*wanders round with tray of canapés*
Alternative truths, anyone?
"Are they crab vol au vents using 'crabstix'? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Brexit Department is already full of 200+ people being paid, along with the premises costs etc. " Be funny if the Ministry for Brexit ended up costing us £350m a week | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well it's hardly an intelligent debate, is it? The problems are clear to anyone who knows anything, and who can read; the only thing unsure is the level of payment required, which can only be estimated at present, though a quick scan of budgets gives a god clue. But any logical , reasoned arguments are just shouted down by the ignorant.
*wanders round with tray of canapés*
Alternative truths, anyone?
Are they crab vol au vents using 'crabstix'?
"I'm afraid not sir, the seahorse is actual horse but the crab is Andrex puppy sautéd in it's own tears. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well it's hardly an intelligent debate, is it? The problems are clear to anyone who knows anything, and who can read; the only thing unsure is the level of payment required, which can only be estimated at present, though a quick scan of budgets gives a god clue. But any logical , reasoned arguments are just shouted down by the ignorant.
*wanders round with tray of canapés*
Alternative truths, anyone?
Are they crab vol au vents using 'crabstix'?
I'm afraid not sir, the seahorse is actual horse but the crab is Andrex puppy sautéd in it's own tears. ""Sir?" Has Licketysplits had a sex change? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" How will Brexit be funded? " Maybe Brexit voters stand up and be accountable and all contribute their fair share of the costs, so whatever it works out at.... say £40 odd billion divided by however many leave voters 17.4 million ..... about £2500 each but that only sorts out now... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well it's hardly an intelligent debate, is it? The problems are clear to anyone who knows anything, and who can read; the only thing unsure is the level of payment required, which can only be estimated at present, though a quick scan of budgets gives a god clue. But any logical , reasoned arguments are just shouted down by the ignorant.
*wanders round with tray of canapés*
Alternative truths, anyone?
Are they crab vol au vents using 'crabstix'?
I'm afraid not sir, the seahorse is actual horse but the crab is Andrex puppy sautéd in it's own tears.
"Sir?" Has Licketysplits had a sex change? "It's these blinkers I'm forced to wear  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" How will Brexit be funded? Maybe Brexit voters stand up and be accountable and all contribute their fair share of the costs, so whatever it works out at.... say £40 odd billion divided by however many leave voters 17.4 million ..... about £2500 each but that only sorts out now..." By the same token then when Brexit is a great success it should be Leave voters who get the most benefit from the dividends. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" How will Brexit be funded? Maybe Brexit voters stand up and be accountable and all contribute their fair share of the costs, so whatever it works out at.... say £40 odd billion divided by however many leave voters 17.4 million ..... about £2500 each but that only sorts out now... By the same token then when Brexit is a great success it should be Leave voters who get the most benefit from the dividends. " If and when then turns out to be the case you're welcome to it. In the interim I'll also pay for the proposed associate EU citizenship to retain the rights I used to get for free. Thanks for that by the way. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? Why? It's the Brexiters who have all the answers; they told everyone about the cash that was going to slosh around after BREXIT , so they know how it's all going to be funded. And they did, of course, already know all about the various commitment that theUK had. It's not a problem anyway, as the UK will be the global leader in trade, the world will be begging and pleading to give stuff to UK, the place will be awash with cash. So We are assured by that nice Mr Farange, and those lovely chaps Mr Gove and Mr Johnson . Anyway, Mrs May has a plan.Must be true, she keeps telling us she has. "Id trust Baldrick's cunning plan more than May's tbh | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I can't see anything in the white paper by way of an analysis of costs and consequences compared to remaining in the EU. The white paper is propaganda. It doesn't even meet the standards of a back of a fag packet calculation. " I think you'd have great difficulty fitting 75 pages of A4 paper on the back of a fag packet. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I can't see anything in the white paper by way of an analysis of costs and consequences compared to remaining in the EU. The white paper is propaganda. It doesn't even meet the standards of a back of a fag packet calculation. " The white paper is the governments plan and intentions for leaving the EU not a comparison of staying or leaving, incase you missed it the country voted to leave and the commons voted by a huge majority to do as the voters told them to, you may not like it but thats what happening, and no amount of you calling people cunts, traitors and worse will change that fact instead of swearing at people raise your argument | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I can't see anything in the white paper by way of an analysis of costs and consequences compared to remaining in the EU. The white paper is propaganda. It doesn't even meet the standards of a back of a fag packet calculation. The white paper is the governments plan and intentions for leaving the EU not a comparison of staying or leaving, incase you missed it the country voted to leave and the commons voted by a huge majority to do as the voters told them to, you may not like it but thats what happening, and no amount of you calling people cunts, traitors and worse will change that fact instead of swearing at people raise your argument " They can't, it's becoming more apparent now on numerous threads that all the Remainers have left is to hurl insults and call people names. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I can't see anything in the white paper by way of an analysis of costs and consequences compared to remaining in the EU. The white paper is propaganda. It doesn't even meet the standards of a back of a fag packet calculation. The white paper is the governments plan and intentions for leaving the EU not a comparison of staying or leaving, incase you missed it the country voted to leave and the commons voted by a huge majority to do as the voters told them to, you may not like it but thats what happening, and no amount of you calling people cunts, traitors and worse will change that fact instead of swearing at people raise your argument They can't, it's becoming more apparent now on numerous threads that all the Remainers have left is to hurl insults and call people names. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I can't see anything in the white paper by way of an analysis of costs and consequences compared to remaining in the EU. The white paper is propaganda. It doesn't even meet the standards of a back of a fag packet calculation. The white paper is the governments plan and intentions for leaving the EU not a comparison of staying or leaving, incase you missed it the country voted to leave and the commons voted by a huge majority to do as the voters told them to, you may not like it but thats what happening, and no amount of you calling people cunts, traitors and worse will change that fact instead of swearing at people raise your argument They can't, it's becoming more apparent now on numerous threads that all the Remainers have left is to hurl insults and call people names. " On the contrary; when " remainers " ask valid questions , as to what is actually intended by BREXIT, or question motives, Then the BREXIT mob round on then with bile and hatred. Mainly because they can't explain what they actually want ( apart from leaving the hated EU; for no reason other than they hate it). And the comments on someone like Gina Miller are beyond any shred of decency. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? Why? It's the Brexiters who have all the answers; they told everyone about the cash that was going to slosh around after BREXIT , so they know how it's all going to be funded. And they did, of course, already know all about the various commitment that theUK had. It's not a problem anyway, as the UK will be the global leader in trade, the world will be begging and pleading to give stuff to UK, the place will be awash with cash. So We are assured by that nice Mr Farange, and those lovely chaps Mr Gove and Mr Johnson . Anyway, Mrs May has a plan.Must be true, she keeps telling us she has.
I was asking in order to get the viewpoint of the other side!
But happy for you to respond in the way that you did. Not sure how sarcasm ever made a worthwhile contribution to intelligent debate but I'll roll with it.
Well it's hardly an intelligent debate, is it?
The problems are clear to anyone who knows anything, and who can read; the only thing unsure is the level of payment required, which can only be estimated at present, though a quick scan of budgets gives a god clue.
But any logical , reasoned arguments are just shouted down by the ignorant.
"As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated. But this is a long term decision made in a democratic way. The future is owned by us all, not just a select few. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? Why? It's the Brexiters who have all the answers; they told everyone about the cash that was going to slosh around after BREXIT , so they know how it's all going to be funded. And they did, of course, already know all about the various commitment that theUK had. It's not a problem anyway, as the UK will be the global leader in trade, the world will be begging and pleading to give stuff to UK, the place will be awash with cash. So We are assured by that nice Mr Farange, and those lovely chaps Mr Gove and Mr Johnson . Anyway, Mrs May has a plan.Must be true, she keeps telling us she has.
I was asking in order to get the viewpoint of the other side!
But happy for you to respond in the way that you did. Not sure how sarcasm ever made a worthwhile contribution to intelligent debate but I'll roll with it.
Well it's hardly an intelligent debate, is it?
The problems are clear to anyone who knows anything, and who can read; the only thing unsure is the level of payment required, which can only be estimated at present, though a quick scan of budgets gives a god clue.
But any logical , reasoned arguments are just shouted down by the ignorant.
As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated.
But this is a long term decision made in a democratic way.
The future is owned by us all, not just a select few."How do you feel the process is going, honestly? If I were supporting the UK to leave the EU, I'd be pretty pissed off that my government is making such a shambles of it and still has no clear plan 6 months later. -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? Why? It's the Brexiters who have all the answers; they told everyone about the cash that was going to slosh around after BREXIT , so they know how it's all going to be funded. And they did, of course, already know all about the various commitment that theUK had. It's not a problem anyway, as the UK will be the global leader in trade, the world will be begging and pleading to give stuff to UK, the place will be awash with cash. So We are assured by that nice Mr Farange, and those lovely chaps Mr Gove and Mr Johnson . Anyway, Mrs May has a plan.Must be true, she keeps telling us she has.
I was asking in order to get the viewpoint of the other side!
But happy for you to respond in the way that you did. Not sure how sarcasm ever made a worthwhile contribution to intelligent debate but I'll roll with it.
Well it's hardly an intelligent debate, is it?
The problems are clear to anyone who knows anything, and who can read; the only thing unsure is the level of payment required, which can only be estimated at present, though a quick scan of budgets gives a god clue.
But any logical , reasoned arguments are just shouted down by the ignorant.
As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated.
But this is a long term decision made in a democratic way.
The future is owned by us all, not just a select few."Could you transmit this bit of common sense to your fellow evangelical BREXITers please? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated. But this is a long term decision made in a democratic way. The future is owned by us all, not just a select few." So can we get back to the OP? How are we going to pay for it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? Why? It's the Brexiters who have all the answers; they told everyone about the cash that was going to slosh around after BREXIT , so they know how it's all going to be funded. And they did, of course, already know all about the various commitment that theUK had. It's not a problem anyway, as the UK will be the global leader in trade, the world will be begging and pleading to give stuff to UK, the place will be awash with cash. So We are assured by that nice Mr Farange, and those lovely chaps Mr Gove and Mr Johnson . Anyway, Mrs May has a plan.Must be true, she keeps telling us she has.
I was asking in order to get the viewpoint of the other side!
But happy for you to respond in the way that you did. Not sure how sarcasm ever made a worthwhile contribution to intelligent debate but I'll roll with it.
Well it's hardly an intelligent debate, is it?
The problems are clear to anyone who knows anything, and who can read; the only thing unsure is the level of payment required, which can only be estimated at present, though a quick scan of budgets gives a god clue.
But any logical , reasoned arguments are just shouted down by the ignorant.
As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated.
But this is a long term decision made in a democratic way.
The future is owned by us all, not just a select few.
How do you feel the process is going, honestly? If I were supporting the UK to leave the EU, I'd be pretty pissed off that my government is making such a shambles of it and still has no clear plan 6 months later.
-Matt"I feel the process isn't going well at all on both sides. Firstly, I don't think that anyone in the world expected an OUT verdict, and that's put everyone on the back foot. This type of process hasn't been attempted before and there is no blueprint. Both sides are pumped up to get the best deal possible, and there is a lot of rhetoric around that is both unnecessary and divisive. As soon as Article 50 is triggered, then both sides have got to shut up, get in the real world and move forward. Everyone who voted did for their own personal reasons, and calling people " thick", "stupid" and "racist" in a tit for tat manner is just plain wrong. We all have our own agendas, our own hopes and our own plans and that's the beauty of living in a democratic society. How will the process go from now on in? We do have a plan, it may not be a very good one right now but it will evolve as the process gets going. Both sides have more intelligent people than me doing the talking and in them I put my trust. I doubt that the UK will get everything that we have on our wish list, but then, nor will the EU. A large chunk of Europe has their own political upheaval this year, and they will watch with interest the outcomes of our negotiations as we go along. The costs, as ever will be borne by Central Government. They will do their best to balance the books, and again, in Hammond I trust. If you were to ask me, then cancel HS2 and the third runway at Heathrow. Better and more cost-effective solutions are available and the money saved will help towards our Brexit bill. Costs will spiral, make no doubt about that. The timescale will lengthen, and by association, costs will increase. It's going to be a long and bumpy ride but then, this isn't the greatest challenge that the UK has had to face in the last hundred years. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? Why? It's the Brexiters who have all the answers; they told everyone about the cash that was going to slosh around after BREXIT , so they know how it's all going to be funded. And they did, of course, already know all about the various commitment that theUK had. It's not a problem anyway, as the UK will be the global leader in trade, the world will be begging and pleading to give stuff to UK, the place will be awash with cash. So We are assured by that nice Mr Farange, and those lovely chaps Mr Gove and Mr Johnson . Anyway, Mrs May has a plan.Must be true, she keeps telling us she has.
I was asking in order to get the viewpoint of the other side!
But happy for you to respond in the way that you did. Not sure how sarcasm ever made a worthwhile contribution to intelligent debate but I'll roll with it.
Well it's hardly an intelligent debate, is it?
The problems are clear to anyone who knows anything, and who can read; the only thing unsure is the level of payment required, which can only be estimated at present, though a quick scan of budgets gives a god clue.
But any logical , reasoned arguments are just shouted down by the ignorant.
As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated.
But this is a long term decision made in a democratic way.
The future is owned by us all, not just a select few.
How do you feel the process is going, honestly? If I were supporting the UK to leave the EU, I'd be pretty pissed off that my government is making such a shambles of it and still has no clear plan 6 months later.
-Matt"No plan that YOU know off do you honestly think there is no plan? . Do you honestly think the government should stand up and let slip the plan before article 50 is Triggered. . The biggest enemy of the UK are the Remainers who want to see the UK fail | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? Why? It's the Brexiters who have all the answers; they told everyone about the cash that was going to slosh around after BREXIT , so they know how it's all going to be funded. And they did, of course, already know all about the various commitment that theUK had. It's not a problem anyway, as the UK will be the global leader in trade, the world will be begging and pleading to give stuff to UK, the place will be awash with cash. So We are assured by that nice Mr Farange, and those lovely chaps Mr Gove and Mr Johnson . Anyway, Mrs May has a plan.Must be true, she keeps telling us she has.
I was asking in order to get the viewpoint of the other side!
But happy for you to respond in the way that you did. Not sure how sarcasm ever made a worthwhile contribution to intelligent debate but I'll roll with it.
Well it's hardly an intelligent debate, is it?
The problems are clear to anyone who knows anything, and who can read; the only thing unsure is the level of payment required, which can only be estimated at present, though a quick scan of budgets gives a god clue.
But any logical , reasoned arguments are just shouted down by the ignorant.
As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated.
But this is a long term decision made in a democratic way.
The future is owned by us all, not just a select few.
How do you feel the process is going, honestly? If I were supporting the UK to leave the EU, I'd be pretty pissed off that my government is making such a shambles of it and still has no clear plan 6 months later.
-Matt
No plan that YOU know off
do you honestly think there is no plan?
.
Do you honestly think the government should stand up and let slip the plan before article 50 is Triggered.
.
The biggest enemy of the UK are the Remainers who want to see the UK fail"There is no plan. Theresa May said that the plan was in the white paper. The white paper contains no plan. There is no plan. And please get over yourself about the 'remainers want the UK to fail'. Both sides want the UK to succeed, they just have different opinions on how to best achieve that success. The majority of leavers on here seem unable to come up with any coherent argument on why leaving will be better for us and hence can only resort to 'you want the UK to fail'. -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's fine - the Brexit fairy will sort it out. "Well let's hope the Brexit fairy has a bloody but chequebook! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? Why? It's the Brexiters who have all the answers; they told everyone about the cash that was going to slosh around after BREXIT , so they know how it's all going to be funded. And they did, of course, already know all about the various commitment that theUK had. It's not a problem anyway, as the UK will be the global leader in trade, the world will be begging and pleading to give stuff to UK, the place will be awash with cash. So We are assured by that nice Mr Farange, and those lovely chaps Mr Gove and Mr Johnson . Anyway, Mrs May has a plan.Must be true, she keeps telling us she has.
I was asking in order to get the viewpoint of the other side!
But happy for you to respond in the way that you did. Not sure how sarcasm ever made a worthwhile contribution to intelligent debate but I'll roll with it.
Well it's hardly an intelligent debate, is it?
The problems are clear to anyone who knows anything, and who can read; the only thing unsure is the level of payment required, which can only be estimated at present, though a quick scan of budgets gives a god clue.
But any logical , reasoned arguments are just shouted down by the ignorant.
As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated.
But this is a long term decision made in a democratic way.
The future is owned by us all, not just a select few.
How do you feel the process is going, honestly? If I were supporting the UK to leave the EU, I'd be pretty pissed off that my government is making such a shambles of it and still has no clear plan 6 months later.
-Matt
No plan that YOU know off
do you honestly think there is no plan?
.
Do you honestly think the government should stand up and let slip the plan before article 50 is Triggered.
.
The biggest enemy of the UK are the Remainers who want to see the UK fail
There is no plan. Theresa May said that the plan was in the white paper. The white paper contains no plan. There is no plan.
And please get over yourself about the 'remainers want the UK to fail'.
Both sides want the UK to succeed, they just have different opinions on how to best achieve that success.
The majority of leavers on here seem unable to come up with any coherent argument on why leaving will be better for us and hence can only resort to 'you want the UK to fail'.
-Matt"there are Pessimists and optimists, which do you consider yourself | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's fine - the Brexit fairy will sort it out.
Well let's hope the Brexit fairy has a bloody but chequebook! "I dunno, it's all borrowed noughts on a computer screen with a bunch of civil servants screaming that it's going to be difficult, expensive and long-winded. Hey ho! It's only money and our children's futures. I have total faith in the Brexit fairy - uh, I mean, our political masters - to dig us out of the hole they got us into. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's fine - the Brexit fairy will sort it out.
Well let's hope the Brexit fairy has a bloody but chequebook!
I dunno, it's all borrowed noughts on a computer screen with a bunch of civil servants screaming that it's going to be difficult, expensive and long-winded.
Hey ho!
It's only money and our children's futures.
I have total faith in the Brexit fairy - uh, I mean, our political masters - to dig us out of the hole they got us into.
"surely you will leave your children your estate & Capital; that on top of their employment success will leave them with a very comfortable future | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? Why? It's the Brexiters who have all the answers; they told everyone about the cash that was going to slosh around after BREXIT , so they know how it's all going to be funded. And they did, of course, already know all about the various commitment that theUK had. It's not a problem anyway, as the UK will be the global leader in trade, the world will be begging and pleading to give stuff to UK, the place will be awash with cash. So We are assured by that nice Mr Farange, and those lovely chaps Mr Gove and Mr Johnson . Anyway, Mrs May has a plan.Must be true, she keeps telling us she has.
I was asking in order to get the viewpoint of the other side!
But happy for you to respond in the way that you did. Not sure how sarcasm ever made a worthwhile contribution to intelligent debate but I'll roll with it.
Well it's hardly an intelligent debate, is it?
The problems are clear to anyone who knows anything, and who can read; the only thing unsure is the level of payment required, which can only be estimated at present, though a quick scan of budgets gives a god clue.
But any logical , reasoned arguments are just shouted down by the ignorant.
As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated.
But this is a long term decision made in a democratic way.
The future is owned by us all, not just a select few.
How do you feel the process is going, honestly? If I were supporting the UK to leave the EU, I'd be pretty pissed off that my government is making such a shambles of it and still has no clear plan 6 months later.
-Matt
No plan that YOU know off
do you honestly think there is no plan?
.
Do you honestly think the government should stand up and let slip the plan before article 50 is Triggered.
.
The biggest enemy of the UK are the Remainers who want to see the UK fail
There is no plan. Theresa May said that the plan was in the white paper. The white paper contains no plan. There is no plan.
And please get over yourself about the 'remainers want the UK to fail'.
Both sides want the UK to succeed, they just have different opinions on how to best achieve that success.
The majority of leavers on here seem unable to come up with any coherent argument on why leaving will be better for us and hence can only resort to 'you want the UK to fail'.
-Matt
there are Pessimists and optimists, which do you consider yourself"An optimist -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" there are Pessimists and optimists, which do you consider yourself
An optimist
-Matt"we really need a Pinocchio emoji on here | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's quite funny reading the same thing over and over again. There seem to be two distinct schools here and in the country. There are the 'brexiteers', they won, some would say thanks to some highly questionable claims and playing on the xenophobic nature of many. They are extremely upbeat and refuse to even consider any possibility that things may not work out fine and believe that the EU will give them what they want in the end regardless of who is telling them otherwise. Then there are the 'remoaners', they seem to be the ones who are listening to every negative and negatively nuanced statement made by EU, other foreign political leaders and business leaders. Their continual cry is 'why are you so happy? We have not even triggered article 50 yet and already the £ has lost a fifth of its value!' They ignore 'good' news because they believe it to be built on false hope. I most certainly fall into the latter camp. I believe that we are building a house of cards and that when reality catches up to us we are all in for a rude awakening. If I and others who share my view are proven wrong after we exit the EU and our fears prove false then we will have the most pleasant of surprises. My question to those on the other side of the fence is quite simple, if we on this side are right and it is you who are wrong how will you deal with knowing that you were conned by an Eaton posh boy, a city banker, and a multimillionaire cousin of the queen? " Is there a right or wrong in all this? It all comes down to the Remain camp not fighting a very good campaign. It's ok having all these arguments now but as in all votes, if the people have had enough and have the opportunity to change the status quo, then they will do. Consequences come later. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" there are Pessimists and optimists, which do you consider yourself
An optimist
-Matt
we really need a Pinocchio emoji on here"Why? I'm very much an optimist. We will get through this. Britain will no doubt eventually go on and grow and prosper. I just think that of the two paths we had open to use, choosing the most uncertain and expensive one wasn't a wise move. Just think what we could have achieved if we put this amount of money and political effort into remaining in the EU and improving our relationship with it rather than trashing it? e.g what if, instead, we had invested tens or hundreds of billions of pounds into the process and created the "Department for the Improvement of the EU" and staffed that up with thousands of civil servants? -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" there are Pessimists and optimists, which do you consider yourself
An optimist
-Matt
we really need a Pinocchio emoji on here
Why? I'm very much an optimist. We will get through this. Britain will no doubt eventually go on and grow and prosper. I just think that of the two paths we had open to use, choosing the most uncertain and expensive one wasn't a wise move.
Just think what we could have achieved if we put this amount of money and political effort into remaining in the EU and improving our relationship with it rather than trashing it?
e.g what if, instead, we had invested tens or hundreds of billions of pounds into the process and created the "Department for the Improvement of the EU" and staffed that up with thousands of civil servants?
-Matt"A noble idea Matt but would the EU have listened? Apparently they already see us as troublemakers and a nuisance to be got rid off. Saw an interview with some German financial bloke this morning and he stated that the EU will have to change in its financial direction due to the UK leaving. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" there are Pessimists and optimists, which do you consider yourself
An optimist
-Matt
we really need a Pinocchio emoji on here
Why? I'm very much an optimist. We will get through this. Britain will no doubt eventually go on and grow and prosper. I just think that of the two paths we had open to use, choosing the most uncertain and expensive one wasn't a wise move.
Just think what we could have achieved if we put this amount of money and political effort into remaining in the EU and improving our relationship with it rather than trashing it?
e.g what if, instead, we had invested tens or hundreds of billions of pounds into the process and created the "Department for the Improvement of the EU" and staffed that up with thousands of civil servants?
-Matt
A noble idea Matt but would the EU have listened? Apparently they already see us as troublemakers and a nuisance to be got rid off.
Saw an interview with some German financial bloke this morning and he stated that the EU will have to change in its financial direction due to the UK leaving."Yes, I'm not sure the practicalities, but just trying to put it out there as a thought. I mean, we pay £13B a year EU membership... we are predicted to be spending several times that leaving the EU. What would have happened if we (metaphorically) plonked that cash down on Junker's desk and said "Let's talk?". What if you took that money up an invested it all in UK businesses? -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" there are Pessimists and optimists, which do you consider yourself "I consider myself a realist..... You are not going to get everything you want and give up nothing So the question I asked all throughout the process and never got an answer for was a brutally simple question.... What is plan b? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" there are Pessimists and optimists, which do you consider yourself
I consider myself a realist.....
You are not going to get everything you want and give up nothing
So the question I asked all throughout the process and never got an answer for was a brutally simple question....
What is plan b?"now where have I heard that one before September 2014 perhaps | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated. " What was the estimate? The time frame we were told - piece of piss, triggered the next day, out in 18 months to two years, sorted! I can cut some slack for the resignation and new PM coming in, though UKIP and the three brexiteers should have had some proto costings ready to go as a starting point you'd have thought. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP you are using a mix of old figures dredged out by Osborne, since discredited, monetry and finacial measures that arent necessarily Brexit related and an exit fee dreamt up by the ex embassador. I think you are more than intelligent enough to know that you are trying to paint a very skewed picture. Why not use figures that reflect the fact we are experiencing higher than predicted growth, rather than a shrinking economy? Oh, because it doesn't suit your agenda." Great post. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP you are using a mix of old figures dredged out by Osborne, since discredited, monetry and finacial measures that arent necessarily Brexit related and an exit fee dreamt up by the ex embassador. I think you are more than intelligent enough to know that you are trying to paint a very skewed picture. Why not use figures that reflect the fact we are experiencing higher than predicted growth, rather than a shrinking economy? Oh, because it doesn't suit your agenda. Great post. "Great post? You two are in complete denial that there will be any financial cost, even when the department for exiting the EU is saying it will cost £25bn, the £70bn of monetary policy has indeed been linked to Brexit, as has the £22bn of fiscal policy. To try now to re-write history saying that it's nothing to do with Brexit is cowardly and shows have even you guys are beginning to regret the consequences of your votes. If you were proud of Brexit, you would be owning these consequences. To also think that there will be no divorce settlement and associated cost again shows your ignorance of how the EU works. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP you are using a mix of old figures dredged out by Osborne, since discredited, monetry and finacial measures that arent necessarily Brexit related and an exit fee dreamt up by the ex embassador. I think you are more than intelligent enough to know that you are trying to paint a very skewed picture. Why not use figures that reflect the fact we are experiencing higher than predicted growth, rather than a shrinking economy? Oh, because it doesn't suit your agenda. Great post.
Great post? You two are in complete denial that there will be any financial cost, even when the department for exiting the EU is saying it will cost £25bn, the £70bn of monetary policy has indeed been linked to Brexit, as has the £22bn of fiscal policy. To try now to re-write history saying that it's nothing to do with Brexit is cowardly and shows have even you guys are beginning to regret the consequences of your votes. If you were proud of Brexit, you would be owning these consequences. To also think that there will be no divorce settlement and associated cost again shows your ignorance of how the EU works."It's been scientifically shown that some people are allergic to facts. Damn those pesky science experts | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It's been scientifically shown that some people are allergic to facts. Damn those pesky science experts " Well, I have an engineering degree and have worked on and run numerous successful international engineering projects and now run a successful company exporting worldwide. So, personally, I can handle data and facts, thanks. Just for your own education the information being discussed isn't 'science'. By all means, disagree and debate, but please avoid the lazy incorrect notion that people who have different opinions are stupid. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP the £70Bn and £22Bn 'have been linked' by those who want to paint that picture. The two are not a proven cause and effect, it is speculation that you believe. That is the same as any political belief. It is not a 'fact' . The £40- £60Bn , you have now changed to £25Bn. It is a guestimate. Will the 2 year process cost money? Yes. Is it in the realms that you quote? No. Caring for the old and disabled cost money. Caring for refugees cost money. Do you base all your political beliefs on the cheapest option? I don't. I believe we will be politically freer and financially better off. The financial benefit may not be in year 1, it might be 2 or 5 .That doesn't stop me supporting the right decision for the country." So. Back to the actual question. How are we going to fund that cost? What area of the budget do you want to take money from to fund Brexit? Or what services would you cut? Or where would you borrow from etc? -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP the £70Bn and £22Bn 'have been linked' by those who want to paint that picture. The two are not a proven cause and effect, it is speculation that you believe. That is the same as any political belief. It is not a 'fact' . The £40- £60Bn , you have now changed to £25Bn. It is a guestimate. Will the 2 year process cost money? Yes. Is it in the realms that you quote? No. Caring for the old and disabled cost money. Caring for refugees cost money. Do you base all your political beliefs on the cheapest option? I don't. I believe we will be politically freer and financially better off. The financial benefit may not be in year 1, it might be 2 or 5 .That doesn't stop me supporting the right decision for the country." The MPC has to publish the reasons behind its decisions. In August 2016 the MPC announced £70bn of monetary policy measures and explained these in an open letter to the chancellor were it said "At its meeting ending on 3rd August 2016 the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) agreed to implement a package of monetary policy stimulus measures in order to strike an appropriate trade-off between supporting growth and returning inflation sustainably to the target over an appropriate horizon. This follows a material change in the MPC's assessment of the outlook for inflation, growth and employment in the light of the vote to leave the European Union" So are you sure that those measures have nothing to do with the decision to leave the EU? Really? Are you sure?
The £40-60bn is a one off cost of leaving the EU to cover the spending committments the UK has already agreed to.
The £25bn from the Department of Exiting the EU is the annual cost of leaving that will hit our GDP each and every year. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So. Back to the actual question. How are we going to fund that cost? What area of the budget do you want to take money from to fund Brexit? Or what services would you cut? Or where would you borrow from etc? -Matt" That assumes there is a nett cost. I don't believe there is. Growth is higher than predicted, employemnet also. Trade agreements will bolster growth further, Eu trade will remain as-is or tariffed (tariffs = nett gain to uk due to negative trade balance) and eu membership fee is gone. I , like most people are geting on with business and at the moment my exports are the highest in 5 years. The decision has been made. The outcome is what people wanted and it is, and will continue to be a financial and political success. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP you are using a mix of old figures dredged out by Osborne, since discredited, monetry and finacial measures that arent necessarily Brexit related and an exit fee dreamt up by the ex embassador. I think you are more than intelligent enough to know that you are trying to paint a very skewed picture. Why not use figures that reflect the fact we are experiencing higher than predicted growth, rather than a shrinking economy? Oh, because it doesn't suit your agenda. Great post.
Great post? You two are in complete denial that there will be any financial cost, even when the department for exiting the EU is saying it will cost £25bn, the £70bn of monetary policy has indeed been linked to Brexit, as has the £22bn of fiscal policy. To try now to re-write history saying that it's nothing to do with Brexit is cowardly and shows have even you guys are beginning to regret the consequences of your votes. If you were proud of Brexit, you would be owning these consequences. To also think that there will be no divorce settlement and associated cost again shows your ignorance of how the EU works.
It's been scientifically shown that some people are allergic to facts. Damn those pesky science experts "We're just allergic to yours and the OP's alternative facts, which are just re hashed alternative facts George Osborne spouted during the referendum campaign. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP you are using a mix of old figures dredged out by Osborne, since discredited, monetry and finacial measures that arent necessarily Brexit related and an exit fee dreamt up by the ex embassador. I think you are more than intelligent enough to know that you are trying to paint a very skewed picture. Why not use figures that reflect the fact we are experiencing higher than predicted growth, rather than a shrinking economy? Oh, because it doesn't suit your agenda. Great post.
Great post? You two are in complete denial that there will be any financial cost, even when the department for exiting the EU is saying it will cost £25bn, the £70bn of monetary policy has indeed been linked to Brexit, as has the £22bn of fiscal policy. To try now to re-write history saying that it's nothing to do with Brexit is cowardly and shows have even you guys are beginning to regret the consequences of your votes. If you were proud of Brexit, you would be owning these consequences. To also think that there will be no divorce settlement and associated cost again shows your ignorance of how the EU works.
It's been scientifically shown that some people are allergic to facts. Damn those pesky science experts
We're just allergic to yours and the OP's alternative facts, which are just re hashed alternative facts George Osborne spouted during the referendum campaign. ". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" We're just allergic to yours and the OP's alternative facts, which are just re hashed alternative facts George Osborne spouted during the referendum campaign. " You hate it when you are called thick, but it some times is appropriate when you can't understand simple facts. The £25bn per annum is NOT George Osbourne's number. That is David Davis's number, so a LEAVE campaigner says it will cost us £25bn each and every year. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Pretty sure we will be due a rather large rebate once we leave which the EU has conveniently forgot to mention. So the rebate figure can come off any bill the EU wants to issue for a start. A rebate on what? And why? Let's assume that the UK could walk away without paying anything to the EU and assume that we would no longer be paying the fictitious £350,000,000 a week to the EU. Taking a simplistic view we would be £350,000,000 a week better off. However, we now know that we will depart both the single market and the customs union and even the most die hard Brexiters accept that there will be an economic cost to that. Companies have existing and long standing relationships that can't just be dropped whilst they find new customers on the other side of the world. Immigration controls of any description by default reduce the tax take and the necessary austerity because of that will mean people have less to spend because the population will have to pay more tax to make up the shortfall. None of this of course is an exact science and every Brexiter will have their own pain line where they will stop saying "it was worth it" to "WTF, I didn't think it would be like this." The very worst thing of all is that it is those at the bottom of the ladder who can least afford any more pain were the ones most taken in by the "immigrant problem" and the "evils of globalisation" - especially now that we are about to become a "globalised country." I have said before that to the best of my abilities I have Brexit proofed my family. This does not mean that I don't feel sorry for those who will suffer most at the hands of this ideologically driven Tory government as they pursue an agenda that will isolate the poorest from an economic Union that was portrayed as their enemy, but which in fact was their best friend. Time will of course tell,and I do hope as a proud English man that I am totally wrong and that the UK will thrive and prosper outside of the EU. The problem is that all of my instincts and all of my life experience leads me to think that the reason that no feasible economic argument has ever been made for Brexit, is because there isn't one. This will be a huge and unnecessarily costly exercise that only the very wealthy wil gain any benefit from. Not a single one of the perceived ills in our society can be fixed by Brexit and many will be made much worse and at great cost." I couldn't have written it better myself. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So. Back to the actual question. How are we going to fund that cost? What area of the budget do you want to take money from to fund Brexit? Or what services would you cut? Or where would you borrow from etc? -Matt That assumes there is a nett cost. I don't believe there is. Growth is higher than predicted, employemnet also. Trade agreements will bolster growth further, Eu trade will remain as-is or tariffed (tariffs = nett gain to uk due to negative trade balance) and eu membership fee is gone. I , like most people are geting on with business and at the moment my exports are the highest in 5 years. The decision has been made. The outcome is what people wanted and it is, and will continue to be a financial and political success." Well, I wish you all the luck in your fantasy land then. When you are ignoring the costs even those in charge of Brexit are giving. I hope your blind optimisim wins. I really do. -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Pretty sure we will be due a rather large rebate once we leave which the EU has conveniently forgot to mention. So the rebate figure can come off any bill the EU wants to issue for a start. A rebate on what? And why? Let's assume that the UK could walk away without paying anything to the EU and assume that we would no longer be paying the fictitious £350,000,000 a week to the EU. Taking a simplistic view we would be £350,000,000 a week better off. However, we now know that we will depart both the single market and the customs union and even the most die hard Brexiters accept that there will be an economic cost to that. Companies have existing and long standing relationships that can't just be dropped whilst they find new customers on the other side of the world. Immigration controls of any description by default reduce the tax take and the necessary austerity because of that will mean people have less to spend because the population will have to pay more tax to make up the shortfall. None of this of course is an exact science and every Brexiter will have their own pain line where they will stop saying "it was worth it" to "WTF, I didn't think it would be like this." The very worst thing of all is that it is those at the bottom of the ladder who can least afford any more pain were the ones most taken in by the "immigrant problem" and the "evils of globalisation" - especially now that we are about to become a "globalised country." I have said before that to the best of my abilities I have Brexit proofed my family. This does not mean that I don't feel sorry for those who will suffer most at the hands of this ideologically driven Tory government as they pursue an agenda that will isolate the poorest from an economic Union that was portrayed as their enemy, but which in fact was their best friend. Time will of course tell,and I do hope as a proud English man that I am totally wrong and that the UK will thrive and prosper outside of the EU. The problem is that all of my instincts and all of my life experience leads me to think that the reason that no feasible economic argument has ever been made for Brexit, is because there isn't one. This will be a huge and unnecessarily costly exercise that only the very wealthy wil gain any benefit from. Not a single one of the perceived ills in our society can be fixed by Brexit and many will be made much worse and at great cost. Sorry but all of your life experience so far led you to believe Hillary Clinton would win the Presidency and turns out you were wrong on that. It's also ironic that you are now raging against the nasty Tories when you've previously admitted on here you are a life long Tory supporter/voter. " Maybe, like me, he's was in favour of the pragmatic approach usually taken by the Conservative party. However that is no longer the case with BREXIT. BREXIT is an ideologically driven experiment and is almost certainly going to fail this country and most of its people. There are millions of former Conservative voters who believe that and many won't be voting Conservative again until they change back. Unfortunately the alternatives of an indecisive Labour Party and ineffectual LibDem party is quite worrying. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Maybe, like me, he's was in favour of the pragmatic approach usually taken by the Conservative party. However that is no longer the case with BREXIT. BREXIT is an ideologically driven experiment and is almost certainly going to fail this country and most of its people. There are millions of former Conservative voters who believe that and many won't be voting Conservative again until they change back. Unfortunately the alternatives of an indecisive Labour Party and ineffectual LibDem party is quite worrying." Unlike the EU which of course is a hugely successful idealogical experiment | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Well, I wish you all the luck in your fantasy land then. When you are ignoring the costs even those in charge of Brexit are giving. I hope your blind optimisim wins. I really do. -Matt" I don't live in fantasy land. I run a real business, employ real people, export real goods and we generate real income for the country. Thanks for the well wishes. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Pretty sure we will be due a rather large rebate once we leave which the EU has conveniently forgot to mention. So the rebate figure can come off any bill the EU wants to issue for a start. A rebate on what? And why? Let's assume that the UK could walk away without paying anything to the EU and assume that we would no longer be paying the fictitious £350,000,000 a week to the EU. Taking a simplistic view we would be £350,000,000 a week better off. However, we now know that we will depart both the single market and the customs union and even the most die hard Brexiters accept that there will be an economic cost to that. Companies have existing and long standing relationships that can't just be dropped whilst they find new customers on the other side of the world. Immigration controls of any description by default reduce the tax take and the necessary austerity because of that will mean people have less to spend because the population will have to pay more tax to make up the shortfall. None of this of course is an exact science and every Brexiter will have their own pain line where they will stop saying "it was worth it" to "WTF, I didn't think it would be like this." The very worst thing of all is that it is those at the bottom of the ladder who can least afford any more pain were the ones most taken in by the "immigrant problem" and the "evils of globalisation" - especially now that we are about to become a "globalised country." I have said before that to the best of my abilities I have Brexit proofed my family. This does not mean that I don't feel sorry for those who will suffer most at the hands of this ideologically driven Tory government as they pursue an agenda that will isolate the poorest from an economic Union that was portrayed as their enemy, but which in fact was their best friend. Time will of course tell,and I do hope as a proud English man that I am totally wrong and that the UK will thrive and prosper outside of the EU. The problem is that all of my instincts and all of my life experience leads me to think that the reason that no feasible economic argument has ever been made for Brexit, is because there isn't one. This will be a huge and unnecessarily costly exercise that only the very wealthy wil gain any benefit from. Not a single one of the perceived ills in our society can be fixed by Brexit and many will be made much worse and at great cost. Sorry but all of your life experience so far led you to believe Hillary Clinton would win the Presidency and turns out you were wrong on that. It's also ironic that you are now raging against the nasty Tories when you've previously admitted on here you are a life long Tory supporter/voter. Maybe, like me, he's was in favour of the pragmatic approach usually taken by the Conservative party. However that is no longer the case with BREXIT. BREXIT is an ideologically driven experiment and is almost certainly going to fail this country and most of its people. There are millions of former Conservative voters who believe that and many won't be voting Conservative again until they change back. Unfortunately the alternatives of an indecisive Labour Party and ineffectual LibDem party is quite worrying." I was going to say... who would you support now then? Considering the general direction of ex-Tory's is towards the right and into UKIP. But if you don't believe in Brexit then what? Do you see there could be enough support for another party? Someone on here a while back asked if there would be support for a 'Remain' party. But I don't think single-policy parties really work. I mean, look at UKIP... what is the point of them now? They have achieved their single aim.. .without even any idea of what they would do when they get there. And with their main donor keep threatening to leave, they are pretty much dead in the water. -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Pretty sure we will be due a rather large rebate once we leave which the EU has conveniently forgot to mention. So the rebate figure can come off any bill the EU wants to issue for a start. A rebate on what? And why? Let's assume that the UK could walk away without paying anything to the EU and assume that we would no longer be paying the fictitious £350,000,000 a week to the EU. Taking a simplistic view we would be £350,000,000 a week better off. However, we now know that we will depart both the single market and the customs union and even the most die hard Brexiters accept that there will be an economic cost to that. Companies have existing and long standing relationships that can't just be dropped whilst they find new customers on the other side of the world. Immigration controls of any description by default reduce the tax take and the necessary austerity because of that will mean people have less to spend because the population will have to pay more tax to make up the shortfall. None of this of course is an exact science and every Brexiter will have their own pain line where they will stop saying "it was worth it" to "WTF, I didn't think it would be like this." The very worst thing of all is that it is those at the bottom of the ladder who can least afford any more pain were the ones most taken in by the "immigrant problem" and the "evils of globalisation" - especially now that we are about to become a "globalised country." I have said before that to the best of my abilities I have Brexit proofed my family. This does not mean that I don't feel sorry for those who will suffer most at the hands of this ideologically driven Tory government as they pursue an agenda that will isolate the poorest from an economic Union that was portrayed as their enemy, but which in fact was their best friend. Time will of course tell,and I do hope as a proud English man that I am totally wrong and that the UK will thrive and prosper outside of the EU. The problem is that all of my instincts and all of my life experience leads me to think that the reason that no feasible economic argument has ever been made for Brexit, is because there isn't one. This will be a huge and unnecessarily costly exercise that only the very wealthy wil gain any benefit from. Not a single one of the perceived ills in our society can be fixed by Brexit and many will be made much worse and at great cost. Sorry but all of your life experience so far led you to believe Hillary Clinton would win the Presidency and turns out you were wrong on that. It's also ironic that you are now raging against the nasty Tories when you've previously admitted on here you are a life long Tory supporter/voter. Maybe, like me, he's was in favour of the pragmatic approach usually taken by the Conservative party. However that is no longer the case with BREXIT. BREXIT is an ideologically driven experiment and is almost certainly going to fail this country and most of its people. There are millions of former Conservative voters who believe that and many won't be voting Conservative again until they change back. Unfortunately the alternatives of an indecisive Labour Party and ineffectual LibDem party is quite worrying." If we get a hard Brexit and Teresa May delivers on what she has set out in her speech at Lancaster house, then she could get millions of new votes from Ukip. As a Ukip voter myself I'm considering voting Conservative next time if Teresa May delivers. So while you and _oo hot can vote for someone else now, many Ukip voters (4 million of them at the last general election) may switch over to voting Conservative. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated. What was the estimate? The time frame we were told - piece of piss, triggered the next day, out in 18 months to two years, sorted! I can cut some slack for the resignation and new PM coming in, though UKIP and the three brexiteers should have had some proto costings ready to go as a starting point you'd have thought. " It took the EU and Canada over 7 years to reach a trade deal, and that still hasn't been implemented fully. The EU trade agreement with South Korea runs to over 20000 pages! I'm under no illusions that a deal will NOT be done in the prescribed timescale but then how many wars were "going to be over by Christmas"? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated. What was the estimate? The time frame we were told - piece of piss, triggered the next day, out in 18 months to two years, sorted! I can cut some slack for the resignation and new PM coming in, though UKIP and the three brexiteers should have had some proto costings ready to go as a starting point you'd have thought. It took the EU and Canada over 7 years to reach a trade deal, and that still hasn't been implemented fully. The EU trade agreement with South Korea runs to over 20000 pages! I'm under no illusions that a deal will NOT be done in the prescribed timescale but then how many wars were "going to be over by Christmas"?" Reports in the media, particularly the BBC said that the ex UK ambassador to the EU sir Ivan Rodgers said our exit from the EU would take upto 10 years. When Sir Ivan Rodgers appeared before a Commons select committee on Brexit this week he was asked by Conservative MP Bill Cash "Did you say our exit from the EU would take upto 10 years?" Sir Ivan replied, "No I've never ever said that either in public or in private". Bill Cash, "So where did the BBC get this from?" Ivan Rodgers "I've no idea where they got it from? " Are the BBC now guilty of fake news? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Sorry but all of your life experience so far led you to believe Hillary Clinton would win the Presidency and turns out you were wrong on that. " Jesus, might as well call everyone who calls a coin toss wrong a fucking idiot. Or perhaps a better analogy is to lambast the people who didn't lump on Leicester to win the Premier League last season. See also Brexit as well as Clinton. Not that I am suggesting for one minute Leicester lied and cheated, corrupted officials or had help from tax dodgers, foreign media magnates or Vladimir Putin. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated. What was the estimate? The time frame we were told - piece of piss, triggered the next day, out in 18 months to two years, sorted! I can cut some slack for the resignation and new PM coming in, though UKIP and the three brexiteers should have had some proto costings ready to go as a starting point you'd have thought. It took the EU and Canada over 7 years to reach a trade deal, and that still hasn't been implemented fully. The EU trade agreement with South Korea runs to over 20000 pages! I'm under no illusions that a deal will NOT be done in the prescribed timescale but then how many wars were "going to be over by Christmas"? Reports in the media, particularly the BBC said that the ex UK ambassador to the EU sir Ivan Rodgers said our exit from the EU would take upto 10 years. When Sir Ivan Rodgers appeared before a Commons select committee on Brexit this week he was asked by Conservative MP Bill Cash "Did you say our exit from the EU would take upto 10 years?" Sir Ivan replied, "No I've never ever said that either in public or in private". Bill Cash, "So where did the BBC get this from?" Ivan Rodgers "I've no idea where they got it from? " Are the BBC now guilty of fake news? " In as much as they passed on information that was passed to them by the Cabinet Office. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated. What was the estimate? The time frame we were told - piece of piss, triggered the next day, out in 18 months to two years, sorted! I can cut some slack for the resignation and new PM coming in, though UKIP and the three brexiteers should have had some proto costings ready to go as a starting point you'd have thought. It took the EU and Canada over 7 years to reach a trade deal, and that still hasn't been implemented fully. The EU trade agreement with South Korea runs to over 20000 pages! I'm under no illusions that a deal will NOT be done in the prescribed timescale but then how many wars were "going to be over by Christmas"? Reports in the media, particularly the BBC said that the ex UK ambassador to the EU sir Ivan Rodgers said our exit from the EU would take upto 10 years. When Sir Ivan Rodgers appeared before a Commons select committee on Brexit this week he was asked by Conservative MP Bill Cash "Did you say our exit from the EU would take upto 10 years?" Sir Ivan replied, "No I've never ever said that either in public or in private". Bill Cash, "So where did the BBC get this from?" Ivan Rodgers "I've no idea where they got it from? " Are the BBC now guilty of fake news? " No. Sir Ivan clarified that he had used such words but this was him passing on the views of his counterparts in the EU. So not fake news, but a reasonable misunderstanding. Tell me, did Sir Ivan think it will be a reasonably quick and straightforward negotiation? I'm sure you can find his quotes and put them up for us. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? Why? It's the Brexiters who have all the answers; they told everyone about the cash that was going to slosh around after BREXIT , so they know how it's all going to be funded. And they did, of course, already know all about the various commitment that theUK had. It's not a problem anyway, as the UK will be the global leader in trade, the world will be begging and pleading to give stuff to UK, the place will be awash with cash. So We are assured by that nice Mr Farange, and those lovely chaps Mr Gove and Mr Johnson . Anyway, Mrs May has a plan.Must be true, she keeps telling us she has.
I was asking in order to get the viewpoint of the other side!
But happy for you to respond in the way that you did. Not sure how sarcasm ever made a worthwhile contribution to intelligent debate but I'll roll with it.
Well it's hardly an intelligent debate, is it?
The problems are clear to anyone who knows anything, and who can read; the only thing unsure is the level of payment required, which can only be estimated at present, though a quick scan of budgets gives a god clue.
But any logical , reasoned arguments are just shouted down by the ignorant.
As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated.
But this is a long term decision made in a democratic way.
The future is owned by us all, not just a select few.
How do you feel the process is going, honestly? If I were supporting the UK to leave the EU, I'd be pretty pissed off that my government is making such a shambles of it and still has no clear plan 6 months later.
-Matt
No plan that YOU know off
do you honestly think there is no plan?
.
Do you honestly think the government should stand up and let slip the plan before article 50 is Triggered.
.
The biggest enemy of the UK are the Remainers who want to see the UK fail"If we wanted the UK to fail we'd have voted for BREXIT, like you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one of the ardent remainers on here might like to give a few answers on the mechanisms of how it's going to be funded? Why? It's the Brexiters who have all the answers; they told everyone about the cash that was going to slosh around after BREXIT , so they know how it's all going to be funded. And they did, of course, already know all about the various commitment that theUK had. It's not a problem anyway, as the UK will be the global leader in trade, the world will be begging and pleading to give stuff to UK, the place will be awash with cash. So We are assured by that nice Mr Farange, and those lovely chaps Mr Gove and Mr Johnson . Anyway, Mrs May has a plan.Must be true, she keeps telling us she has.
I was asking in order to get the viewpoint of the other side!
But happy for you to respond in the way that you did. Not sure how sarcasm ever made a worthwhile contribution to intelligent debate but I'll roll with it.
Well it's hardly an intelligent debate, is it?
The problems are clear to anyone who knows anything, and who can read; the only thing unsure is the level of payment required, which can only be estimated at present, though a quick scan of budgets gives a god clue.
But any logical , reasoned arguments are just shouted down by the ignorant.
As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated.
But this is a long term decision made in a democratic way.
The future is owned by us all, not just a select few.
How do you feel the process is going, honestly? If I were supporting the UK to leave the EU, I'd be pretty pissed off that my government is making such a shambles of it and still has no clear plan 6 months later.
-Matt
No plan that YOU know off
do you honestly think there is no plan?
.
Do you honestly think the government should stand up and let slip the plan before article 50 is Triggered.
.
The biggest enemy of the UK are the Remainers who want to see the UK fail
There is no plan. Theresa May said that the plan was in the white paper. The white paper contains no plan. There is no plan.
And please get over yourself about the 'remainers want the UK to fail'.
Both sides want the UK to succeed, they just have different opinions on how to best achieve that success.
The majority of leavers on here seem unable to come up with any coherent argument on why leaving will be better for us and hence can only resort to 'you want the UK to fail'.
-Matt
there are Pessimists and optimists, which do you consider yourself"I'm an optimist but also a realist. And the reality is is that if you make it harder to trade with your biggest, richest and closest partners you're unlikely to be better of as a result. But maybe you can take this opportunity to explain to me how it will be better because, so far, no BREXITer or BREXTREMIST has. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" As a so called Brexiter, I'll tell you this. It'll cost more than estimated and take longer than anticipated. But this is a long term decision made in a democratic way. The future is owned by us all, not just a select few." Thank you for being direct and honest. I don't agree that it is a good decision but as I have tried to say from day 1, the decision needs to work for the entire population which needs some compromise and leadership rather than management. The outcome isn't for 52% it's for 100% | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" There is one common factor in winners, they believe and have faith that they will suceed, losers dont and look for reasons that something cant be done." This is one factor amongst many. They understand what they are trying to achieve. Clarity of purpose. They have a plan that they follow through on. Leaving the EU is not a purpose for the UK. Making the lives of the people in this country better is a purpose. Uniting the country is a purpose. What Brexit related outcome does this? We currently have one action and a wish-list. Belief won't make up for that. Let me reframe this: How will Brexit make our lives better? Forget abstracts. Daily lives. Will there be a cost? Again, to our daily lives. Please try and address both points, particularly in deference to the OP | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's quite funny reading the same thing over and over again. There seem to be two distinct schools here and in the country. There are the 'brexiteers', they won, some would say thanks to some highly questionable claims and playing on the xenophobic nature of many. They are extremely upbeat and refuse to even consider any possibility that things may not work out fine and believe that the EU will give them what they want in the end regardless of who is telling them otherwise. Then there are the 'remoaners', they seem to be the ones who are listening to every negative and negatively nuanced statement made by EU, other foreign political leaders and business leaders. Their continual cry is 'why are you so happy? We have not even triggered article 50 yet and already the £ has lost a fifth of its value!' They ignore 'good' news because they believe it to be built on false hope. I most certainly fall into the latter camp. I believe that we are building a house of cards and that when reality catches up to us we are all in for a rude awakening. If I and others who share my view are proven wrong after we exit the EU and our fears prove false then we will have the most pleasant of surprises. My question to those on the other side of the fence is quite simple, if we on this side are right and it is you who are wrong how will you deal with knowing that you were conned by an Eaton posh boy, a city banker, and a multimillionaire cousin of the queen? Is there a right or wrong in all this? It all comes down to the Remain camp not fighting a very good campaign. It's ok having all these arguments now but as in all votes, if the people have had enough and have the opportunity to change the status quo, then they will do. Consequences come later." Shudduppa ya face!
That's the post of the week | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Pretty sure we will be due a rather large rebate once we leave which the EU has conveniently forgot to mention. So the rebate figure can come off any bill the EU wants to issue for a start. A rebate on what? And why? Let's assume that the UK could walk away without paying anything to the EU and assume that we would no longer be paying the fictitious £350,000,000 a week to the EU. Taking a simplistic view we would be £350,000,000 a week better off. However, we now know that we will depart both the single market and the customs union and even the most die hard Brexiters accept that there will be an economic cost to that. Companies have existing and long standing relationships that can't just be dropped whilst they find new customers on the other side of the world. Immigration controls of any description by default reduce the tax take and the necessary austerity because of that will mean people have less to spend because the population will have to pay more tax to make up the shortfall. None of this of course is an exact science and every Brexiter will have their own pain line where they will stop saying "it was worth it" to "WTF, I didn't think it would be like this." The very worst thing of all is that it is those at the bottom of the ladder who can least afford any more pain were the ones most taken in by the "immigrant problem" and the "evils of globalisation" - especially now that we are about to become a "globalised country." I have said before that to the best of my abilities I have Brexit proofed my family. This does not mean that I don't feel sorry for those who will suffer most at the hands of this ideologically driven Tory government as they pursue an agenda that will isolate the poorest from an economic Union that was portrayed as their enemy, but which in fact was their best friend. Time will of course tell,and I do hope as a proud English man that I am totally wrong and that the UK will thrive and prosper outside of the EU. The problem is that all of my instincts and all of my life experience leads me to think that the reason that no feasible economic argument has ever been made for Brexit, is because there isn't one. This will be a huge and unnecessarily costly exercise that only the very wealthy wil gain any benefit from. Not a single one of the perceived ills in our society can be fixed by Brexit and many will be made much worse and at great cost. Sorry but all of your life experience so far led you to believe Hillary Clinton would win the Presidency and turns out you were wrong on that. It's also ironic that you are now raging against the nasty Tories when you've previously admitted on here you are a life long Tory supporter/voter. Maybe, like me, he's was in favour of the pragmatic approach usually taken by the Conservative party. However that is no longer the case with BREXIT. BREXIT is an ideologically driven experiment and is almost certainly going to fail this country and most of its people. There are millions of former Conservative voters who believe that and many won't be voting Conservative again until they change back. Unfortunately the alternatives of an indecisive Labour Party and ineffectual LibDem party is quite worrying. If we get a hard Brexit and Teresa May delivers on what she has set out in her speech at Lancaster house, then she could get millions of new votes from Ukip. As a Ukip voter myself I'm considering voting Conservative next time if Teresa May delivers. So while you and _oo hot can vote for someone else now, many Ukip voters (4 million of them at the last general election) may switch over to voting Conservative. " They'd only be getting back what they already had in the past and, to be frank, the Conservatives were able to win a general election with out the UKIP votes last time and would probably have walked the 2020 election without UKIP and BREXIT. If BREXIT goes well, or even just about OK, with Labour in the total mess its currently in, the Conservatives will probably win in 2020 but if BREXIT goes badly or possibly is still not complete by 2020 then I wouldn't like to call it either way. One thing for sure is I will not be voting for them again until they turn back from this ideologically driven course they've set upon and become again the party of economics pragmatism. Putting ideology before pragmatism is why Labour lost in the 80's, 2015 and is doing badly now also. At the next election I will be voting for whatever Candidate, from whichever party, is putting forward the most pragmatic policy on Europe and the EU available at that time. And it will be on Europe and the EU that my decision will be mostly made. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since the referendum we have had £70bn of monetary policy measures and £22bn of fiscal policy measures to keep the economy going as well as the government having to abandon its manifesto committments on getting rid of the deficit. Yesterday parliament heard from the former permanent representative to the EU that the bill for leaving will be £40-60bn. David Davis' own special advisor thinks the cost of leaving the EU and the customs union will be £25bn a year, due to reduced trade, and treasury figures out the cost a £66bn a year. How will Brexit be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? " Over recent years the EU has had zillions of Euros of 'monetary policy measures' (not sure of the actual amount) and this year alone at €80 billion a month it will add another €trillion, or near enough. So how will the EU be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since the referendum we have had £70bn of monetary policy measures and £22bn of fiscal policy measures to keep the economy going as well as the government having to abandon its manifesto committments on getting rid of the deficit. Yesterday parliament heard from the former permanent representative to the EU that the bill for leaving will be £40-60bn. David Davis' own special advisor thinks the cost of leaving the EU and the customs union will be £25bn a year, due to reduced trade, and treasury figures out the cost a £66bn a year. How will Brexit be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? Over recent years the EU has had zillions of Euros of 'monetary policy measures' (not sure of the actual amount) and this year alone at €80 billion a month it will add another €trillion, or near enough. So how will the EU be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing?" We're leaving the EU. Not our problem. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since the referendum we have had £70bn of monetary policy measures and £22bn of fiscal policy measures to keep the economy going as well as the government having to abandon its manifesto committments on getting rid of the deficit. Yesterday parliament heard from the former permanent representative to the EU that the bill for leaving will be £40-60bn. David Davis' own special advisor thinks the cost of leaving the EU and the customs union will be £25bn a year, due to reduced trade, and treasury figures out the cost a £66bn a year. How will Brexit be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? Over recent years the EU has had zillions of Euros of 'monetary policy measures' (not sure of the actual amount) and this year alone at €80 billion a month it will add another €trillion, or near enough. So how will the EU be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? We're leaving the EU. Not our problem." just as well eh | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Over recent years the EU has had zillions of Euros of 'monetary policy measures' (not sure of the actual amount) and this year alone at €80 billion a month it will add another €trillion, or near enough. So how will the EU be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing?" Outside the Euro thAt was never our problem anyway. We've done exactly the same thing. We are living beyond our means and have been for some time. The same with the US. It's not a uniquely EU problem. What's anybody else's solution? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Over recent years the EU has had zillions of Euros of 'monetary policy measures' (not sure of the actual amount) and this year alone at €80 billion a month it will add another €trillion, or near enough. So how will the EU be funded? Increased taxation? Cutting services? More government borrowing? Outside the Euro thAt was never our problem anyway. We've done exactly the same thing. We are living beyond our means and have been for some time. The same with the US. It's not a uniquely EU problem. What's anybody else's solution? " dunno but the thread is about the problems the UK could face when in reality the EU's problems are far bigger. Maybe the OP will one day realise that and ask what the EU is costing everybody | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Outside the Euro thAt was never our problem anyway. We've done exactly the same thing. We are living beyond our means and have been for some time. The same with the US. It's not a uniquely EU problem. What's anybody else's solution? dunno but the thread is about the problems the UK could face when in reality the EU's problems are far bigger. Maybe the OP will one day realise that and ask what the EU is costing everybody" You do know that we are leaving the EU don't you? Why are you concerned about how they solve their problems? The OP was asking how we solve the ones that we've generated. Any thoughts on that?  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Outside the Euro thAt was never our problem anyway. We've done exactly the same thing. We are living beyond our means and have been for some time. The same with the US. It's not a uniquely EU problem. What's anybody else's solution? dunno but the thread is about the problems the UK could face when in reality the EU's problems are far bigger. Maybe the OP will one day realise that and ask what the EU is costing everybody You do know that we are leaving the EU don't you? Why are you concerned about how they solve their problems? The OP was asking how we solve the ones that we've generated. Any thoughts on that? "yes, we've made a start by leaving the EU, if there are a few problems along the way then so be it but it will be worth it in the end. And the EU and how they solve their problems concerns me because I have family in Italy and a home in Spain | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" yes, we've made a start by leaving the EU, if there are a few problems along the way then so be it but it will be worth it in the end. And the EU and how they solve their problems concerns me because I have family in Italy and a home in Spain" I would say what happens is that we have to either further extend austerity to reduce our expenditure or raise taxes or increase borrowing to fund our exit costs and cover our short term exit costs. This means fewer services in the UK and/or lower incomes, corporate profits and/or increased debt that eventually has to be paid back. This comes at a time when we already face significant spending challenges, particularly healthcare and elderly care with a progressively aging demographic. The currency has devalued so there is a short term increase in export demand. Unfortunately we cannot fully exploit this due to the shortage of skilled labour and the margin of profit is eroded by the devaluation of the currency increasing cost i.e. inflation You and I differ in our opinion as to if Brexit will in the medium to long term will be economically positive or negative so there's not much point arguing that out. The problems in the Eurozone are the same as ours with respect to bailing out bank's carp debt and poor government spending decisions. However, the situation is more varied there as some countries have booming exports and run a budget surplus whilst others are in huge difficulty. This was of their own making. There is money being transferred and the donors are demanding painful changes which could have happened less painfully in the good times. They didn't, but if you have you're hand out you aren't in a strong negotiating position. Much of this debt will eventually be written off for the real basket cases, but Ireland and Portugal have already done pretty well. The ultimate solution is from balancing the books and producing things that the world wants. I personally think that's better achieved as a collective with a large domestic market because the USA is sliding into protectionism and there is a global credit bubble looming. Any thoughts? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" yes, we've made a start by leaving the EU, if there are a few problems along the way then so be it but it will be worth it in the end. And the EU and how they solve their problems concerns me because I have family in Italy and a home in Spain I would say what happens is that we have to either further extend austerity to reduce our expenditure or raise taxes or increase borrowing to fund our exit costs and cover our short term exit costs. This means fewer services in the UK and/or lower incomes, corporate profits and/or increased debt that eventually has to be paid back. This comes at a time when we already face significant spending challenges, particularly healthcare and elderly care with a progressively aging demographic. The currency has devalued so there is a short term increase in export demand. Unfortunately we cannot fully exploit this due to the shortage of skilled labour and the margin of profit is eroded by the devaluation of the currency increasing cost i.e. inflation You and I differ in our opinion as to if Brexit will in the medium to long term will be economically positive or negative so there's not much point arguing that out. The problems in the Eurozone are the same as ours with respect to bailing out bank's carp debt and poor government spending decisions. However, the situation is more varied there as some countries have booming exports and run a budget surplus whilst others are in huge difficulty. This was of their own making. There is money being transferred and the donors are demanding painful changes which could have happened less painfully in the good times. They didn't, but if you have you're hand out you aren't in a strong negotiating position. Much of this debt will eventually be written off for the real basket cases, but Ireland and Portugal have already done pretty well. The ultimate solution is from balancing the books and producing things that the world wants. I personally think that's better achieved as a collective with a large domestic market because the USA is sliding into protectionism and there is a global credit bubble looming. Any thoughts?" Yes, the Eurozone is doomed to fail, which will probably mean the end of the EU project. The ECB are simply delaying the inevitable in some vain hope of a miracle. And trading blocks are a thing of the past. They are an old fashioned 1950s trick used to protect industries that suffer from inefficiences and lethargy and we are right to not be tied to a backward looking regime. We should, and now can, look forward and forge new trading links with the Americas and Asian continents | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Yes, the Eurozone is doomed to fail, which will probably mean the end of the EU project. The ECB are simply delaying the inevitable in some vain hope of a miracle. And trading blocks are a thing of the past. They are an old fashioned 1950s trick used to protect industries that suffer from inefficiences and lethargy and we are right to not be tied to a backward looking regime. We should, and now can, look forward and forge new trading links with the Americas and Asian continents " You read what you like, but I didn't say that the Euro was doomed. It's just as easy to say that the BoE is delaying the inevitable impoverishment of the UK. If trading blocks are done with then we have to accept trade on the terms of the bigger nation in bilateral agreements if you don't want to protect our own industries which cannot operate on the scale of larger countries or the low labour cost of poorer ones. How do you see that playing out? What do we do create that people want? Do we provide anything unique? Will that generate enough work for everyone? Will we reduce labour rights to become more competitive with deregulated low wage countries? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Yes, the Eurozone is doomed to fail, which will probably mean the end of the EU project. The ECB are simply delaying the inevitable in some vain hope of a miracle. And trading blocks are a thing of the past. They are an old fashioned 1950s trick used to protect industries that suffer from inefficiences and lethargy and we are right to not be tied to a backward looking regime. We should, and now can, look forward and forge new trading links with the Americas and Asian continents You read what you like, but I didn't say that the Euro was doomed. It's just as easy to say that the BoE is delaying the inevitable impoverishment of the UK. If trading blocks are done with then we have to accept trade on the terms of the bigger nation in bilateral agreements if you don't want to protect our own industries which cannot operate on the scale of larger countries or the low labour cost of poorer ones. How do you see that playing out? What do we do create that people want? Do we provide anything unique? Will that generate enough work for everyone? Will we reduce labour rights to become more competitive with deregulated low wage countries?" I know you didn't say the Euro was doomed. I did. If it was about competing on labour costs etc, why hasn't all production already moved to say Romania or Bulgaria? Or I'm sure there are a couple of million Greeks who would be happy to work for a lot less than the UK living wage. And how many countries are larger than the UK? Bi-lateral agreements can be made on better terms than we already have, lets face it, the EU can't make deals. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I know you didn't say the Euro was doomed. I did. If it was about competing on labour costs etc, why hasn't all production already moved to say Romania or Bulgaria? Or I'm sure there are a couple of million Greeks who would be happy to work for a lot less than the UK living wage. And how many countries are larger than the UK? Bi-lateral agreements can be made on better terms than we already have, lets face it, the EU can't make deals. " Really? Because the cheap labour moved here. All those nasty immigrants. With the UK outside the EU on the other side of a tariff barrier it would make sense to invest the capital in a site in one of the country's you named. China, America, Japan, India are all bigger than us. You know,the one's we're desperate to make deals with. Germany and France too with whom we already have a deal along with 25 other EU countries and 51 other nations because they're so crap at negotiating. Never mind | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I know you didn't say the Euro was doomed. I did. If it was about competing on labour costs etc, why hasn't all production already moved to say Romania or Bulgaria? Or I'm sure there are a couple of million Greeks who would be happy to work for a lot less than the UK living wage. And how many countries are larger than the UK? Bi-lateral agreements can be made on better terms than we already have, lets face it, the EU can't make deals. Really? Because the cheap labour moved here. All those nasty immigrants. With the UK outside the EU on the other side of a tariff barrier it would make sense to invest the capital in a site in one of the country's you named. China, America, Japan, India are all bigger than us. You know,the one's we're desperate to make deals with. Germany and France too with whom we already have a deal along with 25 other EU countries and 51 other nations because they're so crap at negotiating. Never mind "really, I was an immigrant to Spain and suffered 'racism' so that doesn't wash. why does it not make sense to invest in those countries already? who is the biggest of those 51 countries? and apparently the EU are trying to rush through deals with 12 countries, so why wouldn't they do a good deal with the UK? Out of spite? Who is on the nasty side mate | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Because the cheap labour moved here. All those nasty immigrants. With the UK outside the EU on the other side of a tariff barrier it would make sense to invest the capital in a site in one of the country's you named. China, America, Japan, India are all bigger than us. You know,the one's we're desperate to make deals with. Germany and France too with whom we already have a deal along with 25 other EU countries and 51 other nations because they're so crap at negotiating. Never mind
really, I was an immigrant to Spain and suffered 'racism' so that doesn't wash.
why does it not make sense to invest in those countries already?
who is the biggest of those 51 countries?
and apparently the EU are trying to rush through deals with 12 countries, so why wouldn't they do a good deal with the UK? Out of spite? Who is on the nasty side mate"Immigration is the single most cited reason for leaving the EU so there must be something wrong with it. I find it terrible that you suffered from racism. Why do you think that I wouldn't? I lived and worked in Italy for three years and everyone was lovely. Everyone's experience is personal to themselves so no point in generalising. If you have already made the capital investment then there's no benefit in spending to replicating what you already have in the same market. As I said, you move the labour. Here's the EU page on trade agreements: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/trade-agreements/ If you think trade agreements can be struck quickly then fine. We'll leave it at that. Here's an article from the FT: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/3c76e90a-270e-11e6-8ba3-cdd781d02d89 Why would they offer the UK a better deal than they offer themselves? I don't think that's not being nasty. Manufactured goods, particularly automotive and aerospace can probably be worked out as there is a clear mutual benefit with very integrated supply chains. For finance and services it's regulation and that's much harder. Unfortunately that's where we make our money as a country. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Because the cheap labour moved here. All those nasty immigrants. With the UK outside the EU on the other side of a tariff barrier it would make sense to invest the capital in a site in one of the country's you named. China, America, Japan, India are all bigger than us. You know,the one's we're desperate to make deals with. Germany and France too with whom we already have a deal along with 25 other EU countries and 51 other nations because they're so crap at negotiating. Never mind
really, I was an immigrant to Spain and suffered 'racism' so that doesn't wash.
why does it not make sense to invest in those countries already?
who is the biggest of those 51 countries?
and apparently the EU are trying to rush through deals with 12 countries, so why wouldn't they do a good deal with the UK? Out of spite? Who is on the nasty side mate
Immigration is the single most cited reason for leaving the EU so there must be something wrong with it.
I find it terrible that you suffered from racism. Why do you think that I wouldn't?
I lived and worked in Italy for three years and everyone was lovely. Everyone's experience is personal to themselves so no point in generalising.
If you have already made the capital investment then there's no benefit in spending to replicating what you already have in the same market. As I said, you move the labour.
Here's the EU page on trade agreements: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/trade-agreements/
If you think trade agreements can be struck quickly then fine. We'll leave it at that. Here's an article from the FT:
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/3c76e90a-270e-11e6-8ba3-cdd781d02d89
Why would they offer the UK a better deal than they offer themselves? I don't think that's not being nasty.
Manufactured goods, particularly automotive and aerospace can probably be worked out as there is a clear mutual benefit with very integrated supply chains.
For finance and services it's regulation and that's much harder. Unfortunately that's where we make our money as a country."maybe you should pass you're expert knowledge on to Merryl Lynch (sic) ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" What do we do create that people want? Do we provide anything unique? Will that generate enough work for everyone? Will we reduce labour rights to become more competitive with deregulated low wage countries? I know you didn't say the Euro was doomed. I did. If it was about competing on labour costs etc, why hasn't all production already moved to say Romania or Bulgaria? Or I'm sure there are a couple of million Greeks who would be happy to work for a lot less than the UK living wage. And how many countries are larger than the UK? Bi-lateral agreements can be made on better terms than we already have, lets face it, the EU can't make deals. " They're waiting until our money, has finished modernising their infrastructure. Then they'll move production to say, Romania or Bulgaria. You know,Similar to what's happened in the past with other countries, where we've paid for the modernisation of their infrastructure. Then Once complete,they move production there. . They say this process makes the world a safer,fairer,friendlier, wealthier place. A brave new world,detrimental to none, beneficial to all. Where nations Unite, And the whole world's your new friend. . Although I'm ashamed to say, Some days,my vision is blurred. Then all I can see, is my new friend, doing my old job, In a far of land, in a shiny new factory, that I financed. . Maybe the benefits,are just harder to perceive, When your signing on at the labour exchange, no new job, Anywhere in sight. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Because the cheap labour moved here. All those nasty immigrants. With the UK outside the EU on the other side of a tariff barrier it would make sense to invest the capital in a site in one of the country's you named. China, America, Japan, India are all bigger than us. You know,the one's we're desperate to make deals with. Germany and France too with whom we already have a deal along with 25 other EU countries and 51 other nations because they're so crap at negotiating. Never mind
really, I was an immigrant to Spain and suffered 'racism' so that doesn't wash.
why does it not make sense to invest in those countries already?
who is the biggest of those 51 countries?
and apparently the EU are trying to rush through deals with 12 countries, so why wouldn't they do a good deal with the UK? Out of spite? Who is on the nasty side mate
Immigration is the single most cited reason for leaving the EU so there must be something wrong with it.
I find it terrible that you suffered from racism. Why do you think that I wouldn't?
I lived and worked in Italy for three years and everyone was lovely. Everyone's experience is personal to themselves so no point in generalising.
If you have already made the capital investment then there's no benefit in spending to replicating what you already have in the same market. As I said, you move the labour.
Here's the EU page on trade agreements: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/trade-agreements/
If you think trade agreements can be struck quickly then fine. We'll leave it at that. Here's an article from the FT:
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/3c76e90a-270e-11e6-8ba3-cdd781d02d89
Why would they offer the UK a better deal than they offer themselves? I don't think that's not being nasty.
Manufactured goods, particularly automotive and aerospace can probably be worked out as there is a clear mutual benefit with very integrated supply chains.
For finance and services it's regulation and that's much harder. Unfortunately that's where we make our money as a country.
maybe you should pass you're expert knowledge on to Merryl Lynch (sic) ?"Game, Set, Match ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Are you saying that because Merrill Lynch have instructed Property Agents to look at other London Properties for when it's lease runs out on it's existing London office in 2020? " Yes. Just 500,000 square feet worth. Aren't they all supposed to be moving out? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Are you saying that because Merrill Lynch have instructed Property Agents to look at other London Properties for when it's lease runs out on it's existing London office in 2020? Yes. Just 500,000 square feet worth. Aren't they all supposed to be moving out?" I guess you can read what you want into any piece of information, but Merrill Lynch's lease is up in 2020 which is hopefully at a point when the passporting rights of financial institutions will be clearer. They have instructed their property search firm to look for premises UP TO 500,000 square ft. That means equal to OR LESS THAN their current area. So it doesn't really mean anything other than sensible planning. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" really, I was an immigrant to Spain and suffered 'racism' so that doesn't wash. why does it not make sense to invest in those countries already? who is the biggest of those 51 countries? and apparently the EU are trying to rush through deals with 12 countries, so why wouldn't they do a good deal with the UK? Out of spite? Who is on the nasty side mate Immigration is the single most cited reason for leaving the EU so there must be something wrong with it. I find it terrible that you suffered from racism. Why do you think that I wouldn't? I lived and worked in Italy for three years and everyone was lovely. Everyone's experience is personal to themselves so no point in generalising. If you have already made the capital investment then there's no benefit in spending to replicating what you already have in the same market. As I said, you move the labour. Here's the EU page on trade agreements: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/trade-agreements/ If you think trade agreements can be struck quickly then fine. We'll leave it at that. Here's an article from the FT: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/3c76e90a-270e-11e6-8ba3-cdd781d02d89 Why would they offer the UK a better deal than they offer themselves? I don't think that's not being nasty. Manufactured goods, particularly automotive and aerospace can probably be worked out as there is a clear mutual benefit with very integrated supply chains. For finance and services it's regulation and that's much harder. Unfortunately that's where we make our money as a country. maybe you should pass you're expert knowledge on to Merryl Lynch (sic) ?" I provided you with a reasoned answer to your questions with information to illustrate it. You could only manage this response? Anthing to refute what I actually wrote? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" They're waiting until our money, has finished modernising their infrastructure. Then they'll move production to say, Romania or Bulgaria. You know,Similar to what's happened in the past with other countries, where we've paid for the modernisation of their infrastructure. Then Once complete,they move production there. . They say this process makes the world a safer,fairer,friendlier, wealthier place. A brave new world,detrimental to none, beneficial to all. Where nations Unite, And the whole world's your new friend. . Although I'm ashamed to say, Some days,my vision is blurred. Then all I can see, is my new friend, doing my old job, In a far of land, in a shiny new factory, that I financed. . Maybe the benefits,are just harder to perceive, When your signing on at the labour exchange, no new job, Anywhere in sight. " Marshall Aid and its consequences for Europe. Was that a bad thing for Europe the USA? Your entire post says it was a bad thing. What should have happened instead and what would the likely outcome have been? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Personally I don't really understand why so many Brexiters like Marine Le Pen and Trump, when their economics are so diametrically opposed to each other. Both Trump and Le Pen talk about the failure of globalisation, how it has left behind the working class, how trade with developing economies is jobs flowing out, and cheap goods flowing in. Although I don't agree with most of their policies or methodologies, on this issue I think they have a point. Brexit on the other hand is about moving our trade away from 27 developed economies, and instead trying to increase trade with places like India and China, the same places Trump and Le Pen are trying to avoid." wake up. We are not moving trade away from anywhere | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Are you saying that because Merrill Lynch have instructed Property Agents to look at other London Properties for when it's lease runs out on it's existing London office in 2020? Yes. Just 500,000 square feet worth. Aren't they all supposed to be moving out? I guess you can read what you want into any piece of information, but Merrill Lynch's lease is up in 2020 which is hopefully at a point when the passporting rights of financial institutions will be clearer. They have instructed their property search firm to look for premises UP TO 500,000 square ft. That means equal to OR LESS THAN their current area. So it doesn't really mean anything other than sensible planning. " Well according to you, sensible planning would be to just move to the EU wouldn't it? Wiy do you think they are not? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" wake up. We are not moving trade away from anywhere" Just to clarify, do you think that because out net cash contribution to the EU is larger than our direct cash allocation from the EU there is no other benefit from membership? Do you also think that we will have exactly the same terms of trade as we do now whilst limiting EU immigration and making no financial contribution to the EU? Do you think that we will retain all our EU trade agreements with external countries or negotiate new deals faster than any country has ever done before? Will we also spend no money setting up and running new regulatory bodies replicating those in the EU? You can just answer yes/no because I know you don't like explaining how these things might be achieved. If you could explain the route to achieving these things it would be very informative though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I guess you can read what you want into any piece of information, but Merrill Lynch's lease is up in 2020 which is hopefully at a point when the passporting rights of financial institutions will be clearer. They have instructed their property search firm to look for premises UP TO 500,000 square ft. That means equal to OR LESS THAN their current area. So it doesn't really mean anything other than sensible planning. Well according to you, sensible planning would be to just move to the EU wouldn't it? Wiy do you think they are not?" So does that mean that ML are definitely definitely maintaining their office space or definitely reducing it or do you not actually know? Have some banks definitely said that they are moving staff out of the UK? Is this because the work that they do does not need to be done here so they'd prefer regulatory and business certainty or are they just cowardly betraying the UK? Do different organisations make different decisions based on their own individual circumstances and management styles? What point are you actually trying to make? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I guess you can read what you want into any piece of information, but Merrill Lynch's lease is up in 2020 which is hopefully at a point when the passporting rights of financial institutions will be clearer. They have instructed their property search firm to look for premises UP TO 500,000 square ft. That means equal to OR LESS THAN their current area. So it doesn't really mean anything other than sensible planning. Well according to you, sensible planning would be to just move to the EU wouldn't it? Wiy do you think they are not? So does that mean that ML are definitely definitely maintaining their office space or definitely reducing it or do you not actually know? Have some banks definitely said that they are moving staff out of the UK? Is this because the work that they do does not need to be done here so they'd prefer regulatory and business certainty or are they just cowardly betraying the UK? Do different organisations make different decisions based on their own individual circumstances and management styles? What point are you actually trying to make?" Move some staff? Why aren't they moving all or most if the UK will be in such a bad position? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" wake up. We are not moving trade away from anywhere Just to clarify, do you think that because out net cash contribution to the EU is larger than our direct cash allocation from the EU there is no other benefit from membership? Do you also think that we will have exactly the same terms of trade as we do now whilst limiting EU immigration and making no financial contribution to the EU? Do you think that we will retain all our EU trade agreements with external countries or negotiate new deals faster than any country has ever done before? Will we also spend no money setting up and running new regulatory bodies replicating those in the EU? You can just answer yes/no because I know you don't like explaining how these things might be achieved. If you could explain the route to achieving these things it would be very informative though." Maybe educate yourself and you wouldn't have to keep asking people here | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Move some staff? Why aren't they moving all or most if the UK will be in such a bad position?" I can answer this again if you like. Some banks are moving the jobs that are directly effected by European regulation to guarantee continuity and stability of service. They may or may not move other staff once negotiations are complete. Other banks are waiting until the situation is clearer because they have a different or because it's financially more appropriate to do so due to their property lease terms or any other factors that may be relevant. I know you are reluctant to explain your opinions, but why do you think that some banks are moving jobs and some aren't? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Move some staff? Why aren't they moving all or most if the UK will be in such a bad position? I can answer this again if you like. Some banks are moving the jobs that are directly effected by European regulation to guarantee continuity and stability of service. They may or may not move other staff once negotiations are complete. Other banks are waiting until the situation is clearer because they have a different or because it's financially more appropriate to do so due to their property lease terms or any other factors that may be relevant. I know you are reluctant to explain your opinions, but why do you think that some banks are moving jobs and some aren't? " for the reasons you've given but overall Brexit won't have much impact on them | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Just to clarify, do you think that because out net cash contribution to the EU is larger than our direct cash allocation from the EU there is no other benefit from membership? Do you also think that we will have exactly the same terms of trade as we do now whilst limiting EU immigration and making no financial contribution to the EU? Do you think that we will retain all our EU trade agreements with external countries or negotiate new deals faster than any country has ever done before? Will we also spend no money setting up and running new regulatory bodies replicating those in the EU? You can just answer yes/no because I know you don't like explaining how these things might be achieved. If you could explain the route to achieving these things it would be very informative though. Maybe educate yourself and you wouldn't have to keep asking people here"
Should I take it that your position is that I should answer your questions as fully and politely as possible but if I request that you validate your assertions I should go and find the answers for myself?
I will assume that you are unable to validate your assertions then.
However, just for my amusement if nothing else, having answered all of your questions I'll answer my own too.
In addition to cash movements we benefit exceptionally in coordinating and hosting European research and development activity in defence, science, technology and engineering. This includes infrastructure, staff and the associated tax and spending within the UK from the private companies that EU funding seeds.
Having unfettered access to the EU we have benefited from high levels of foreign direct investment and host the EUROPEAN headquarters and manufacturing facilities of many international companies.
We have benefited from economies of scale in EU regulating bodies and the commonality has facilitated free trade.
Free trade in goods and services has provided the UK with a truly huge domestic market which helps particularly in Times of international financial and political turbulence.
Working together within a common organisation has eliminated open conflict within continental Europe.
Europe has been able to assert substantial international influence in a manner not possible as individual nation states. The UK specifically as one of its most influential members has been diplomatically far more important than it would be in isolation.
It is highly unlikely that we will have exactly the same terms of trade as we do now whilst limiting EU immigration and making no financial contribution to the EU. There is no logic to the remaining stated offering us the same benefits as themselves without any of the responsibilities.
No, I don't think that we will retain existing trade agreements nor do I believe that we have the resource and experience to conclude trade deals on equivalent terms quickly. If we accept whatever we are offered without negotiating, that's a different matter.
We will spend a lot of money replicating existing EU bureaucracy.
Any thoughts? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How has this free trade helped the southern states in times of financial turbulence?" That's nothing to do at all with the UK and the fallout effects on the UK over Brexit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How has this free trade helped the southern states in times of financial turbulence?" They chose not to invest sensibly in industries and infrastructure. This is down to sovereign government decisions at the behest of their own populations and running huge budget deficits even in the good times. They have nothing to trade. Their choice. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How has this free trade helped the southern states in times of financial turbulence? They chose not to invest sensibly in industries and infrastructure. This is down to sovereign government decisions at the behest of their own populations and running huge budget deficits even in the good times. They have nothing to trade. Their choice." so they would be better off out of it then | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How has this free trade helped the southern states in times of financial turbulence? They chose not to invest sensibly in industries and infrastructure. This is down to sovereign government decisions at the behest of their own populations and running huge budget deficits even in the good times. They have nothing to trade. Their choice. so they would be better off out of it then" They probably would yes, us no. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How has this free trade helped the southern states in times of financial turbulence? They chose not to invest sensibly in industries and infrastructure. This is down to sovereign government decisions at the behest of their own populations and running huge budget deficits even in the good times. They have nothing to trade. Their choice. so they would be better off out of it then" No, I don't think that automatically follows. The companies that they do have benefit from being able to operate within a much larger domestic market than would otherwise be the case. Also they can move freely to find work in the more successful economies that are suffering from labour shortages. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How has this free trade helped the southern states in times of financial turbulence? They chose not to invest sensibly in industries and infrastructure. This is down to sovereign government decisions at the behest of their own populations and running huge budget deficits even in the good times. They have nothing to trade. Their choice. so they would be better off out of it then No, I don't think that automatically follows. The companies that they do have benefit from being able to operate within a much larger domestic market than would otherwise be the case. Also they can move freely to find work in the more successful economies that are suffering from labour shortages." which just increases the problems in their own countries | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" so they would be better off out of it then No, I don't think that automatically follows. The companies that they do have benefit from being able to operate within a much larger domestic market than would otherwise be the case. Also they can move freely to find work in the more successful economies that are suffering from labour shortages. which just increases the problems in their own countries" With reduced unemployment spending and repatriation of funds for spending at home? I suppose so. Their economic strategy has to be resolved either way though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Right. For a start the EU will continue tariff free trade with the UK because simply moving the tariffs in the first place was a complex process to protect vested interests. It would be a complete waste of time. But lets say that they don't. Our exports would face average tariffs of 2.4% which is neither here nor there when compared to currency fluctuations. Or put another way, our EU contribution is the equivalent of having a 7% tariff put on our goods. Would the UK have to renegotiate from scratch the EU's existing trade deals? Under the "principle of continuity" in international law we can adapt existing EU treaties to the UK. I could go on but basically, leaving the EU is a win win situation" For a start, no youre not getting tarriff free trade. We dont want tarriff free trade with the UK just like we dont want it with America or China who are both bigger economies than the UK. Average tarriffs of 2.4% is very optimistic. 10% is the WTO limit and that will be the EUs starting position. And its not a complex process to increase tarriffs on the UK. Its just as easy as raising them for any other country. And thats what you'll be after brexit, any other country. The main difference being youve stuck 2 fingers up at the EU and others havent. And no you cant just adapt our trade agreements for yourselves. Thats pure nonsense. You think all the concessions countries made to get access to 28 markets are going to be made for 1? Every country is going to pull back on their concessions because that will benefit them. They'll make more money so of course they will. Your fantasies about everyone just giving Britain whatever they want in trade negotiations is delusional. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Right. For a start the EU will continue tariff free trade with the UK because simply moving the tariffs in the first place was a complex process to protect vested interests. It would be a complete waste of time. But lets say that they don't. Our exports would face average tariffs of 2.4% which is neither here nor there when compared to currency fluctuations. Or put another way, our EU contribution is the equivalent of having a 7% tariff put on our goods. Would the UK have to renegotiate from scratch the EU's existing trade deals? Under the "principle of continuity" in international law we can adapt existing EU treaties to the UK. I could go on but basically, leaving the EU is a win win situation" That is an average figure so you can't actually indicate if more financially important industries will be more severely effected. I have no idea how the 7% equivalent tariff was calculated. The EU contribution is 0.6% of government spending of which there are both financial and non-financial benefits. However, this cost is not imposed on exporting companies so I don't see the purpose of the equivalence. The principle of continuity requires the agreement of both parties, so no guarantees either way. Yes, you could go on... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" For a start, no youre not getting tarriff free trade. We dont want tarriff free trade with the UK just like we dont want it with America or China who are both bigger economies than the UK. Average tarriffs of 2.4% is very optimistic. 10% is the WTO limit and that will be the EUs starting position. And its not a complex process to increase tarriffs on the UK. Its just as easy as raising them for any other country. And thats what you'll be after brexit, any other country. The main difference being youve stuck 2 fingers up at the EU and others havent. And no you cant just adapt our trade agreements for yourselves. Thats pure nonsense. You think all the concessions countries made to get access to 28 markets are going to be made for 1? Every country is going to pull back on their concessions because that will benefit them. They'll make more money so of course they will. Your fantasies about everyone just giving Britain whatever they want in trade negotiations is delusional." I am sooooo much more polite than you are
I don't disagree though | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Right. For a start the EU will continue tariff free trade with the UK because simply moving the tariffs in the first place was a complex process to protect vested interests. It would be a complete waste of time. But lets say that they don't. Our exports would face average tariffs of 2.4% which is neither here nor there when compared to currency fluctuations. Or put another way, our EU contribution is the equivalent of having a 7% tariff put on our goods. Would the UK have to renegotiate from scratch the EU's existing trade deals? Under the "principle of continuity" in international law we can adapt existing EU treaties to the UK. I could go on but basically, leaving the EU is a win win situation That is an average figure so you can't actually indicate if more financially important industries will be more severely effected. I have no idea how the 7% equivalent tariff was calculated. The EU contribution is 0.6% of government spending of which there are both financial and non-financial benefits. However, this cost is not imposed on exporting companies so I don't see the purpose of the equivalence. The principle of continuity requires the agreement of both parties, so no guarantees either way. Yes, you could go on..." but I can't be arsed. You just dismiss everything out of hand. Best thing that you can do is just hope I'm right | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
