FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > 40 billion and ecj to have a say
40 billion and ecj to have a say
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"40 billion and ecj having a say in britain. Thoughts please."
It is getting beyond a joke.
Little Brexiters seem to want a UK that is as isolated as N Korea. Not respecting any other jurisdictions, not accepting anyone else's conformity standards.
Why, it is almost as if we are back in colonial days and the rest of the world simply has to do what we want because... "By God we are British and just by the virtue of that fact, you cannot even be regarded as equal to us." |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"40 billion and ecj having a say in britain. Thoughts please.
2352.94 from every one that voted for to leave , 
Lol double checked and yep true lol"
Hands in pockets we ain't all in it together. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"40 billion and ecj having a say in britain. Thoughts please.
It is getting beyond a joke.
Little Brexiters seem to want a UK that is as isolated as N Korea. Not respecting any other jurisdictions, not accepting anyone else's conformity standards.
Why, it is almost as if we are back in colonial days and the rest of the world simply has to do what we want because... "By God we are British and just by the virtue of that fact, you cannot even be regarded as equal to us.""
Maybe many people have taken a more objective approach and concluded that our net contribution to the EU is not value for money . A significant number of countries are net beneficiaries of EU funding and as such do not pay their way.
It would be far simpler to track what is happening if the EU charged each country an admin fee based on a countries annual imports and exports. Any development funds should be via way of long term development loans.
A government has a responsibility to spend tax payers money in the most cost effective manner possible .
I do not see anyone suggesting that we will be isolated. We will simply be trading on slightly different terms with a few minor tweaks to duties. The EU needs our business as much as we need theirs .
In any event duties simply cancel out at world level. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Maybe many people have taken a more objective approach and concluded that our net contribution to the EU is not value for money ."
Any honest assessment says the benefits outweigh the cost.
"A significant number of countries are net beneficiaries of EU funding and as such do not pay their way. "
This is true of anywhere and everywhere. Northern Ireland amd Sunderland both take more than they get. Should all the money stay in London or is Britain stronger when all areas do well?
"
It would be far simpler to track what is happening if the EU charged each country an admin fee based on a countries annual imports and exports. Any development funds should be via way of long term development loans. "
Nonsensical and ill thought out. Back to the drawing board.
" We will simply be trading on slightly different terms with a few minor tweaks to duties. "
Wrong. Tariffs of up to 50%. Quotas limiting the amount allowed to be exported to the EU. Additional costs for conformance. No passporting rights. All these are potentially major if they happen.
"The EU needs our business as much as we need theirs ."
Wrong.
"
In any event duties simply cancel out at world level. "
Simplistic inaccurate nonsense. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
I think the country will do well in the long term ie 5 to 10 years from leaving. Have remainers no confidence in the UK.
Politics is known to have short memories and in 10 years eu will be bessy trading mates and we will have the privilege of trading with other countries too and will have escaped been sucked into a federal eu with in future it's own army which if we would still have been part of the eu could have imposed rule on our streets.
Am I going too far lol
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Maybe many people have taken a more objective approach and concluded that our net contribution to the EU is not value for money .
Any honest assessment says the benefits outweigh the cost.
A significant number of countries are net beneficiaries of EU funding and as such do not pay their way.
This is true of anywhere and everywhere. Northern Ireland amd Sunderland both take more than they get. Should all the money stay in London or is Britain stronger when all areas do well?
It would be far simpler to track what is happening if the EU charged each country an admin fee based on a countries annual imports and exports. Any development funds should be via way of long term development loans.
Nonsensical and ill thought out. Back to the drawing board.
We will simply be trading on slightly different terms with a few minor tweaks to duties.
Wrong. Tariffs of up to 50%. Quotas limiting the amount allowed to be exported to the EU. Additional costs for conformance. No passporting rights. All these are potentially major if they happen.
The EU needs our business as much as we need theirs .
Wrong.
In any event duties simply cancel out at world level.
Simplistic inaccurate nonsense."
But you have to love the La La Land simplisticicity of the inner working of his mind  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think the country will do well in the long term ie 5 to 10 years from leaving. Have remainers no confidence in the UK.
Politics is known to have short memories and in 10 years eu will be bessy trading mates and we will have the privilege of trading with other countries too and will have escaped been sucked into a federal eu with in future it's own army which if we would still have been part of the eu could have imposed rule on our streets.
Am I going too far lol
"
ya in 5 year the first trade deals will be just about completed , |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I think the country will do well in the long term ie 5 to 10 years from leaving. Have remainers no confidence in the UK.
Politics is known to have short memories and in 10 years eu will be bessy trading mates and we will have the privilege of trading with other countries too and will have escaped been sucked into a federal eu with in future it's own army which if we would still have been part of the eu could have imposed rule on our streets.
Am I going too far lol
ya in 5 year the first trade deals will be just about completed , "
My point exactly. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"I think the country will do well in the long term ie 5 to 10 years from leaving. Have remainers no confidence in the UK.
Politics is known to have short memories and in 10 years eu will be bessy trading mates and we will have the privilege of trading with other countries too and will have escaped been sucked into a federal eu with in future it's own army which if we would still have been part of the eu could have imposed rule on our streets.
Am I going too far lol
"
David Cameron negotiated a permanent opt for out frombever closer union, Euro and Shenghen. The U.K. had a good deal but seemingly he grass was greener because obviously it makes much more sense trading on past glories, rather than the realities of today, |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think the country will do well in the long term ie 5 to 10 years from leaving. Have remainers no confidence in the UK.
Politics is known to have short memories and in 10 years eu will be bessy trading mates and we will have the privilege of trading with other countries too and will have escaped been sucked into a federal eu with in future it's own army which if we would still have been part of the eu could have imposed rule on our streets.
Am I going too far lol
ya in 5 year the first trade deals will be just about completed ,
My point exactly."
which will be an approval of the application by the then labour government to join efta |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
See a report from European central bank today saying in advent of heard brexit there is potential for 75,000 jobs and 40 to 50 % of uk banking and insurance to leave for Europe , ECB is currently in talks with 50 groups setting up hubs outside uk in preparation , |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"40 billion and ecj having a say in britain. Thoughts please.
It is getting beyond a joke.
Little Brexiters seem to want a UK that is as isolated as N Korea. Not respecting any other jurisdictions, not accepting anyone else's conformity standards.
Why, it is almost as if we are back in colonial days and the rest of the world simply has to do what we want because... "By God we are British and just by the virtue of that fact, you cannot even be regarded as equal to us."Maybe many people have taken a more objective approach and concluded that our net contribution to the EU is not value for money . A significant number of countries are net beneficiaries of EU funding and as such do not pay their way.
It would be far simpler to track what is happening if the EU charged each country an admin fee based on a countries annual imports and exports. Any development funds should be via way of long term development loans.
A government has a responsibility to spend tax payers money in the most cost effective manner possible .
I do not see anyone suggesting that we will be isolated. We will simply be trading on slightly different terms with a few minor tweaks to duties. The EU needs our business as much as we need theirs .
In any event duties simply cancel out at world level. "
I have read your posts through many aliases over the years and I am as amazed today as I was with your first? Tenth and Hundredth profile incarnation that you still peddle the same nonsense knowing that you also try so hard to meet people as well.
What you have written above is sheer, patent, nonsense and I do recall that you ran away from this forum in one of your previous incarnations having been well spanked for writing similar nonsense.
The EU absolutely and categorically does not need us more than we need them. You either have a very short memory, are incredibly thick skinned or you are a troll who changes your user name every few months for nefarious reasons
- what is it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A 1000 jobs just relocated to the EU today...try telling them that things are fine 
It's just a minor tweek "
As far as the European banking agency moving from London to Paris yes it is pretty meaningless and only accounts for around 200 jobs. Just watched the coverage about it on BBC Newsnight. In fact one financial industry expert from London said this would benefit the UK in the long run as the financial services industry in the UK is already highly regulated anyway to international standards and getting rid of the EU aspect of this would benefit the UK in the long term by allowing the UK and London to do things more its own way in future. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A 1000 jobs just relocated to the EU today...try telling them that things are fine
1000 wow big deal, what happened to the 3 million jobs scaremongers like Nick Clegg said would be lost? "
The worst effects of leaving the EU won't kick in till...guess what? We actually leave the EU!
It's very silly that Brexiteers are acting like anything has been proven when a lot of business (and the EU itself) are still hoping we can come to some kind of sanity and stop this process... or at least stay in the single market. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A 1000 jobs just relocated to the EU today...try telling them that things are fine
1000 wow big deal, what happened to the 3 million jobs scaremongers like Nick Clegg said would be lost?
The worst effects of leaving the EU won't kick in till...guess what? We actually leave the EU!
It's very silly that Brexiteers are acting like anything has been proven when a lot of business (and the EU itself) are still hoping we can come to some kind of sanity and stop this process... or at least stay in the single market."
So any bad news it's automatically because of Brexit. Any good news and it's "but we haven't actually left yet". Which one is it then you can't have it both ways??? This is the kind of twisted logic we continually get from remainers, you really don't know if you're coming or going do you.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A 1000 jobs just relocated to the EU today...try telling them that things are fine
It's just a minor tweek
As far as the European banking agency moving from London to Paris yes it is pretty meaningless and only accounts for around 200 jobs. Just watched the coverage about it on BBC Newsnight. In fact one financial industry expert from London said this would benefit the UK in the long run as the financial services industry in the UK is already highly regulated anyway to international standards and getting rid of the EU aspect of this would benefit the UK in the long term by allowing the UK and London to do things more its own way in future. "
More selective bollocks |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A 1000 jobs just relocated to the EU today...try telling them that things are fine
1000 wow big deal, what happened to the 3 million jobs scaremongers like Nick Clegg said would be lost?
The worst effects of leaving the EU won't kick in till...guess what? We actually leave the EU!
It's very silly that Brexiteers are acting like anything has been proven when a lot of business (and the EU itself) are still hoping we can come to some kind of sanity and stop this process... or at least stay in the single market.
So any bad news it's automatically because of Brexit. Any good news and it's "but we haven't actually left yet". Which one is it then you can't have it both ways??? This is the kind of twisted logic we continually get from remainers, you really don't know if you're coming or going do you. "
Losing the Medicines and Banking authorities today is because of Brexit. Are you trying to deny that?
And you saying that its not the 3 million is meaningless since Brexit hasnt happened.
Its not that hard to understand. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A 1000 jobs just relocated to the EU today...try telling them that things are fine
1000 wow big deal, what happened to the 3 million jobs scaremongers like Nick Clegg said would be lost?
The worst effects of leaving the EU won't kick in till...guess what? We actually leave the EU!
It's very silly that Brexiteers are acting like anything has been proven when a lot of business (and the EU itself) are still hoping we can come to some kind of sanity and stop this process... or at least stay in the single market.
So any bad news it's automatically because of Brexit. Any good news and it's "but we haven't actually left yet". Which one is it then you can't have it both ways??? This is the kind of twisted logic we continually get from remainers, you really don't know if you're coming or going do you. "
No.
Bad news directly attributable to Brexit = because of Brexit.
There is no good news directly attributable to Brexit, is there?
Only 'it's not as bad as you said it'd be!' when we haven't actually left yet. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
i think it's safe to say that job losses are due to brexit when the organisation or business concerned makes a statement that says the job losses are due to brexit ... it's a bit of a no brainer that one to be fair |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. Winston Churchill
Turkey's voting for Christmas comes to my mind ,
By the time time the uk leaves you won't have to worry about trade deals , cause there definitely won't be any manufacturing left in the UK ,
the banking and services are packing up now ,
by the time D-day comes around all will be left , will be a few tourist taking pictures in Trafalgar square ,
And if money dose start leaving the uk how long till there will be total economic meltdown , finance not available , leads to prices rising , it will be Armageddon
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Looks like that divorce bill is creeping closer and closer to the 50 billion its gonna take to secure a deal.  "
You said on multiple occasions on here the UK would pay a MINIMUM of 50 billion divorce bill. Its being reported (but not confirmed) that the UK is only willing to offer 40 billion which is still a massive 10 billion off the 50 billion figure you were so cock sure about. This will be a final offer from the UK, you won't be getting your 50 billion. It's a 40 billion take it or leave it offer, which is still only conditional upon reaching a free trade deal). The EU refuse this offer then the UK will walk away from the negotiations and in that event you won't get a single penny. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. Winston Churchill
Turkey's voting for Christmas comes to my mind ,
By the time time the uk leaves you won't have to worry about trade deals , cause there definitely won't be any manufacturing left in the UK ,
the banking and services are packing up now ,
by the time D-day comes around all will be left , will be a few tourist taking pictures in Trafalgar square ,
And if money dose start leaving the uk how long till there will be total economic meltdown , finance not available , leads to prices rising , it will be Armageddon
"
Project fear nonsense all over again. Europhiles like Nick Clegg and Alistair Campbell tried to peddle this sort of garbage when the UK refused to join the Euro back in the early 00's. The UK would be 'left behind as an economic basket case' they said. In fact the complete opposite happened and the pound sterling consistently outperformed the Euro. Again in the referendum campaign we were told that the UK would suffer an immediate and deep recession in the event the country voted Leave, which turned out to be nonsensical scaremongering garbage from the Europhiles yet again because there has been no recession and the UK economy has Continued to grow since the Leave vote and also since article 50 was triggered. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Looks like that divorce bill is creeping closer and closer to the 50 billion its gonna take to secure a deal.
You said on multiple occasions on here the UK would pay a MINIMUM of 50 billion divorce bill. Its being reported (but not confirmed) that the UK is only willing to offer 40 billion which is still a massive 10 billion off the 50 billion figure you were so cock sure about. This will be a final offer from the UK, you won't be getting your 50 billion. It's a 40 billion take it or leave it offer, which is still only conditional upon reaching a free trade deal). The EU refuse this offer then the UK will walk away from the negotiations and in that event you won't get a single penny. "
I said ~50bn would be the number and Im standing by that. And I said the Tories would bury and disguise the number as best they could too and Im sure they will.
You on the otherhand said that it wouldnt be anything even close to that figure such was the might of the Tory negotiating team and the strength of the UKs position. Hows that working out for ya?
And no one in Downing Street is saying its a final offer. This is just the latest in the long line of concessions as reality slaps Brexiters across the face.
Speaking of which, it seems the ECJ is still going to be around after Brexit. Didnt one of us predict that and one of us say that under no circumstances would that happen?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Looks like that divorce bill is creeping closer and closer to the 50 billion its gonna take to secure a deal.
You said on multiple occasions on here the UK would pay a MINIMUM of 50 billion divorce bill. Its being reported (but not confirmed) that the UK is only willing to offer 40 billion which is still a massive 10 billion off the 50 billion figure you were so cock sure about. This will be a final offer from the UK, you won't be getting your 50 billion. It's a 40 billion take it or leave it offer, which is still only conditional upon reaching a free trade deal). The EU refuse this offer then the UK will walk away from the negotiations and in that event you won't get a single penny.
I said ~50bn would be the number and Im standing by that. And I said the Tories would bury and disguise the number as best they could too and Im sure they will.
You on the otherhand said that it wouldnt be anything even close to that figure such was the might of the Tory negotiating team and the strength of the UKs position. Hows that working out for ya?
And no one in Downing Street is saying its a final offer. This is just the latest in the long line of concessions as reality slaps Brexiters across the face.
Speaking of which, it seems the ECJ is still going to be around after Brexit. Didnt one of us predict that and one of us say that under no circumstances would that happen??"
People like Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Liam Fox in the cabinet will not have agreed to this 40 billion offer lightly. I'm pretty sure they will have sought assurances from the Prime Minister this 40 billion must be a final offer amount otherwise they would never have agreed to it. So we will see who is correct in the fullness of time. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Looks like that divorce bill is creeping closer and closer to the 50 billion its gonna take to secure a deal.
You said on multiple occasions on here the UK would pay a MINIMUM of 50 billion divorce bill. Its being reported (but not confirmed) that the UK is only willing to offer 40 billion which is still a massive 10 billion off the 50 billion figure you were so cock sure about. This will be a final offer from the UK, you won't be getting your 50 billion. It's a 40 billion take it or leave it offer, which is still only conditional upon reaching a free trade deal). The EU refuse this offer then the UK will walk away from the negotiations and in that event you won't get a single penny.
I said ~50bn would be the number and Im standing by that. And I said the Tories would bury and disguise the number as best they could too and Im sure they will.
You on the otherhand said that it wouldnt be anything even close to that figure such was the might of the Tory negotiating team and the strength of the UKs position. Hows that working out for ya?
And no one in Downing Street is saying its a final offer. This is just the latest in the long line of concessions as reality slaps Brexiters across the face.
Speaking of which, it seems the ECJ is still going to be around after Brexit. Didnt one of us predict that and one of us say that under no circumstances would that happen??"
Hehe chickens are coming home to roost right...but no matter what its good for the UK...or so he will say....a bit like the sketch in the Monty Python movie where the brave knight gets his arms and legs chopped off |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Looks like that divorce bill is creeping closer and closer to the 50 billion its gonna take to secure a deal.
You said on multiple occasions on here the UK would pay a MINIMUM of 50 billion divorce bill. Its being reported (but not confirmed) that the UK is only willing to offer 40 billion which is still a massive 10 billion off the 50 billion figure you were so cock sure about. This will be a final offer from the UK, you won't be getting your 50 billion. It's a 40 billion take it or leave it offer, which is still only conditional upon reaching a free trade deal). The EU refuse this offer then the UK will walk away from the negotiations and in that event you won't get a single penny.
I said ~50bn would be the number and Im standing by that. And I said the Tories would bury and disguise the number as best they could too and Im sure they will.
You on the otherhand said that it wouldnt be anything even close to that figure such was the might of the Tory negotiating team and the strength of the UKs position. Hows that working out for ya?
And no one in Downing Street is saying its a final offer. This is just the latest in the long line of concessions as reality slaps Brexiters across the face.
Speaking of which, it seems the ECJ is still going to be around after Brexit. Didnt one of us predict that and one of us say that under no circumstances would that happen??
People like Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Liam Fox in the cabinet will not have agreed to this 40 billion offer lightly. I'm pretty sure they will have sought assurances from the Prime Minister this 40 billion must be a final offer amount otherwise they would never have agreed to it. So we will see who is correct in the fullness of time. "
How the fuck do you know...Boris said the can swivel...its a bit different to agreeing at the very least 40mil lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A 1000 jobs just relocated to the EU today...try telling them that things are fine
1000 wow big deal, what happened to the 3 million jobs scaremongers like Nick Clegg said would be lost? "
Though such a flippant attitude doesn't surprise me the problem with the EMA and EBA moving - we'll have to reinvent those and employ almost as many people ourselves in the process, now with your hotline to the cabinet the amount of work done on creating a UK medicines agency is... please tell me the answer is "some". Please. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"People like Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Liam Fox in the cabinet will not have agreed to this 40 billion offer lightly."
You seriously think the opinions of LolBoris Gove and Fox carries an weight in cabinet? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
People like Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Liam Fox in the cabinet will not have agreed to this 40 billion offer lightly. I'm pretty sure they will have sought assurances from the Prime Minister this 40 billion must be a final offer amount otherwise they would never have agreed to it. So we will see who is correct in the fullness of time. "
 Im confused, why do we have to wait and see who is correct when we already know you were completely wrong? You said the ECJ would have absolutely no involvement in the UK judicial system. You categorically ruled it out because May had said it was a red line issue. I remember you in post after post saying it was a red line issue and that May would not be moved on it. And I also remember you saying that it would not be anywhere bear 50bn, that the EU was dreaming if they thought anything like that would happen.
So surely we already know that you were completely off in your assessment and theres no chance of you being correct. Not that I blame you of course, I mean if you read the Sun you have abaolutely no chance of being well informed on the issues. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"People like Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Liam Fox in the cabinet will not have agreed to this 40 billion offer lightly.
You seriously think the opinions of LolBoris Gove and Fox carries an weight in cabinet? "
Guys, we’ve all got to agree to disagree, no matter what the outcome, somebody will be unhappy. We should be happy that we live in a country where we can express our views, right or wrong we can say what we think . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We were told between &83 billion and 103 billion, so well done Theresa!
Ok but we need to remember Theresa May is only doing what the country voted for .. "
I don't think there was ever an option on the ballot for "make a catastrofuck out of the whole thing". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We were told between &83 billion and 103 billion, so well done Theresa!
Ok but we need to remember Theresa May is only doing what the country voted for ..
I don't think there was ever an option on the ballot for "make a catastrofuck out of the whole thing"."
Lucky for us, she hasn't!!! Go girl |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We were told between &83 billion and 103 billion, so well done Theresa!
Ok but we need to remember Theresa May is only doing what the country voted for ..
I don't think there was ever an option on the ballot for "make a catastrofuck out of the whole thing".
Lucky for us, she hasn't!!! Go girl"
I envy the assuredness your unique outlook on events gives you. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We were told between &83 billion and 103 billion, so well done Theresa!
Ok but we need to remember Theresa May is only doing what the country voted for ..
I don't think there was ever an option on the ballot for "make a catastrofuck out of the whole thing"."
There was a joke flying around at the time” England exited Europe twice in the space of 4 days- once was because of the Iceland football team and the second was because of the people who shopped in it “. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
So we have gone from nothing to £20 billion and no more! And if they won't take that they can have FA! To £40 billion (with no that's it...) Next stop will be £80 billions in January/Febuary and then £100 billion in May... The figure the EU said they wanted 18 months ago. Of course by the time that the tories accept that the UK will have to pay whatever the EU demand it will be too late to get any sort of access to the single market in time for April 2019 so all the jobs will be gone.
But don't worry the tories will have got an extra 7 years in power and that makes our pain totally worth it.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So we have gone from nothing to £20 billion and no more! And if they won't take that they can have FA! To £40 billion (with no that's it...) Next stop will be £80 billions in January/Febuary and then £100 billion in May... The figure the EU said they wanted 18 months ago. Of course by the time that the tories accept that the UK will have to pay whatever the EU demand it will be too late to get any sort of access to the single market in time for April 2019 so all the jobs will be gone.
But don't worry the tories will have got an extra 7 years in power and that makes our pain totally worth it.
"
Why blame the tories? They’re just doing what the country voted for, would you prefer Diane Abbott to represent us ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"40 billion and ecj having a say in britain. Thoughts please.
2352.94 from every one that voted for to leave , "
The government has announced it will accept payment in Wurthers wrappers and old copies of the Daily Fail |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why blame the tories? "
Because they were the ones who offered a referendum in order to stay in power for another term...
Because they are the ones who have constantly lied and blamed the EU for the results of their policies for the last 30 years.
Because they are the ones who have refused to properly regulate the press for the last 40 years because the press have in general supported them and as a result have allowed a few billionaires to indoctrinate the population of the UK into believing that the EU is their enemy when the opposite is actually the truth. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why blame the tories? Because they were the ones who offered a referendum in order to stay in power for another term...
Because they are the ones who have constantly lied and blamed the EU for the results of their policies for the last 30 years.
Because they are the ones who have refused to properly regulate the press for the last 40 years because the press have in general supported them and as a result have allowed a few billionaires to indoctrinate the population of the UK into believing that the EU is their enemy when the opposite is actually the truth. "
“Because they were the ones who offered a referendum in order to stay in power for another term”
How dare they give the people of the country what they asked for |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A 1000 jobs just relocated to the EU today...try telling them that things are fine
1000 wow big deal, what happened to the 3 million jobs scaremongers like Nick Clegg said would be lost?
The worst effects of leaving the EU won't kick in till...guess what? We actually leave the EU!
It's very silly that Brexiteers are acting like anything has been proven when a lot of business (and the EU itself) are still hoping we can come to some kind of sanity and stop this process... or at least stay in the single market.
So any bad news it's automatically because of Brexit. Any good news and it's "but we haven't actually left yet". Which one is it then you can't have it both ways??? This is the kind of twisted logic we continually get from remainers, you really don't know if you're coming or going do you. "
More tripe from this strange brexiteer
Facts and figures mean nothing |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
To quote a simple fact which everyone can agree - "We have not left yet". All we are experiencing is the world's reaction to our currency. The world obviously don't rate our currency and it's value hence the fall. Anyone who has been through a divorce, or signed a contract and subsequently break it - there are penalties to pay! As Nigel Evans admitted on TV this morning leave didn't tell anyone it was up to remain - another project fear story. Brexit is an unknown quantity and no one knows what will happen. Perhaps leave & the British press would have been better not to have insulted the EU before the talks. If as often quoted "just walk away" then and only then we will know if it's GOOD or BAD. Facts only arise after the event. There is a reason for saying "hindsight is a wonderful thing"! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
UK will be fine in the long term.
People are afraid of change and still a bit sore if they were on the remain side.
Their will be some pain to go through yes we all know that but in the long term once the UK re adjusts from leaving it will have trade with eu prob not as much but we will open up to growing economies around the world and do very well and be in a better position than been dragged into a federal eu parasiting off the uk and taking more control.
Speaking as a lay man and not for either remainers or Brexiters this is just my thoughts on present situation and not bias one to one particular side.
On stopping leave now and reversing the decision we would be savaged by the eu because they would say ok you can stop it's all fine and return to previous status quo. Are you kidding me . We would lose the rebate instantly for one thing.
I'm afraid as much as remainers might to turn it back I'm afraid the horse has bolted the eu would rip us to bits and our say in the eu would be seriously diminished.
We have no choice to see leave through and make it work.
Pain for pleasure. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Looks like that divorce bill is creeping closer and closer to the 50 billion its gonna take to secure a deal.
You said on multiple occasions on here the UK would pay a MINIMUM of 50 billion divorce bill. Its being reported (but not confirmed) that the UK is only willing to offer 40 billion which is still a massive 10 billion off the 50 billion figure you were so cock sure about. This will be a final offer from the UK, you won't be getting your 50 billion. It's a 40 billion take it or leave it offer, which is still only conditional upon reaching a free trade deal). The EU refuse this offer then the UK will walk away from the negotiations and in that event you won't get a single penny. "
before it was 20 billion now its 40 i think its clear to see now who needs who more its not the eu buckling under pressure its the uk thats doing all yhe yeilding that final bill will around 60 billion |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"UK will be fine in the long term.
People are afraid of change and still a bit sore if they were on the remain side.
Their will be some pain to go through yes we all know that but in the long term once the UK re adjusts from leaving it will have trade with eu prob not as much but we will open up to growing economies around the world and do very well and be in a better position than been dragged into a federal eu parasiting off the uk and taking more control.
Speaking as a lay man and not for either remainers or Brexiters this is just my thoughts on present situation and not bias one to one particular side.
On stopping leave now and reversing the decision we would be savaged by the eu because they would say ok you can stop it's all fine and return to previous status quo. Are you kidding me . We would lose the rebate instantly for one thing.
I'm afraid as much as remainers might to turn it back I'm afraid the horse has bolted the eu would rip us to bits and our say in the eu would be seriously diminished.
We have no choice to see leave through and make it work.
Pain for pleasure."
None of what you have said is factual. what will we be “opening up to growing economies” - not vague suggestions - exactly what? Will Indonesia be buying the Airbus wings? What about the ready of the plane? Will we be importing tomatoes from S Africa instead of Spain? Who will pay the additional transport cost and at what cost to the environment.
Also who said the U.K. would lose its rebate? You just made that up to suit your agenda - it is called confirmation bias. You may as well add that we would also be forced to join the Euro, all 18 year olds would be conscripted to join the EU army and English is going to banned. All the more reason to leave eh Mr Layman? You who has no agenda Leave or Remain..... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Looks like that divorce bill is creeping closer and closer to the 50 billion its gonna take to secure a deal.
You said on multiple occasions on here the UK would pay a MINIMUM of 50 billion divorce bill. Its being reported (but not confirmed) that the UK is only willing to offer 40 billion which is still a massive 10 billion off the 50 billion figure you were so cock sure about. This will be a final offer from the UK, you won't be getting your 50 billion. It's a 40 billion take it or leave it offer, which is still only conditional upon reaching a free trade deal). The EU refuse this offer then the UK will walk away from the negotiations and in that event you won't get a single penny. before it was 20 billion now its 40 i think its clear to see now who needs who more its not the eu buckling under pressure its the uk thats doing all yhe yeilding that final bill will around 60 billion "
Your right that was the figure quoted from day one |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"UK will be fine in the long term.
People are afraid of change and still a bit sore if they were on the remain side.
Their will be some pain to go through yes we all know that but in the long term once the UK re adjusts from leaving it will have trade with eu prob not as much but we will open up to growing economies around the world and do very well and be in a better position than been dragged into a federal eu parasiting off the uk and taking more control.
Speaking as a lay man and not for either remainers or Brexiters this is just my thoughts on present situation and not bias one to one particular side.
On stopping leave now and reversing the decision we would be savaged by the eu because they would say ok you can stop it's all fine and return to previous status quo. Are you kidding me . We would lose the rebate instantly for one thing.
I'm afraid as much as remainers might to turn it back I'm afraid the horse has bolted the eu would rip us to bits and our say in the eu would be seriously diminished.
We have no choice to see leave through and make it work.
Pain for pleasure.
None of what you have said is factual. what will we be “opening up to growing economies” - not vague suggestions - exactly what? Will Indonesia be buying the Airbus wings? What about the ready of the plane? Will we be importing tomatoes from S Africa instead of Spain? Who will pay the additional transport cost and at what cost to the environment.
Also who said the U.K. would lose its rebate? You just made that up to suit your agenda - it is called confirmation bias. You may as well add that we would also be forced to join the Euro, all 18 year olds would be conscripted to join the EU army and English is going to banned. All the more reason to leave eh Mr Layman? You who has no agenda Leave or Remain....."
Thanks for putting me right in your own way.
I was gutted when the result to leave came to be honest i like to get on with people and felt we had just insulted our eu friends and neighbours but I think theirs no turning back so may aswell get on with and be positive and although it's going to be hard it will be ok in the long term regardless of your facts and figures as we have to get on that's the fact.
The eu wouldn't allow us to stay on in the previous status quo I'm sure and no it's not fact just my presumption but I'm sure theirs something in my thinking.
Politics is selfish so why wouldnt the eu be if we said oh can we stay now. C'mon seriously they would have a right laugh. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Why blame the tories? Because they were the ones who offered a referendum in order to stay in power for another term...
Because they are the ones who have constantly lied and blamed the EU for the results of their policies for the last 30 years.
Because they are the ones who have refused to properly regulate the press for the last 40 years because the press have in general supported them and as a result have allowed a few billionaires to indoctrinate the population of the UK into believing that the EU is their enemy when the opposite is actually the truth. "
In what country were the tories in power for “the last 30 years”? I seem to remember a certain Mr Bliar and Mr Brown having some control for a large chunk of it..... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A 1000 jobs just relocated to the EU today...try telling them that things are fine
1000 wow big deal, what happened to the 3 million jobs scaremongers like Nick Clegg said would be lost?
The worst effects of leaving the EU won't kick in till...guess what? We actually leave the EU!
It's very silly that Brexiteers are acting like anything has been proven when a lot of business (and the EU itself) are still hoping we can come to some kind of sanity and stop this process... or at least stay in the single market."
And then what ..... Demonstrations and riots because the government went back on a democratic nationwide vote ?? Just saying  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
You can generally tell someone who doesn’t really have an argument worth listening to if, on matters of public controversy, where opinions differ and are sincerely held, he or she can only ascribe an alternative view from their own to stupidity or ignorance.
There are rational, as well as emotional, arguments both for remaining in and for leaving the EU. I have felt the pull of both.
Quite separately from the EU issue itself I do not myself think that referendums in almost any circumstances are likely to be the best way of determining policy. And I do not think that membership of the EU is an exception, although I can see why others take a different view. However, having called one I do think Parliament is obligated to implement the outcome, while respecting the position of those like Ken Clarke who voted against the referendum originally . (I don’t believe there is much weight in the argument that it was “ advisory”: for that to be used with much credibility it would have to have been made explicit during the campaign- which it was not.)
It is in that context that I now, while being a somewhat lukewarm remainer originally, do wish that we could be rather more united in seeking a positive future beyond our membership and a little more restrained in the Sibylline prophecies of doom! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"You can generally tell someone who doesn’t really have an argument worth listening to if, on matters of public controversy, where opinions differ and are sincerely held, he or she can only ascribe an alternative view from their own to stupidity or ignorance.
There are rational, as well as emotional, arguments both for remaining in and for leaving the EU. I have felt the pull of both.
Quite separately from the EU issue itself I do not myself think that referendums in almost any circumstances are likely to be the best way of determining policy. And I do not think that membership of the EU is an exception, although I can see why others take a different view. However, having called one I do think Parliament is obligated to implement the outcome, while respecting the position of those like Ken Clarke who voted against the referendum originally . (I don’t believe there is much weight in the argument that it was “ advisory”: for that to be used with much credibility it would have to have been made explicit during the campaign- which it was not.)
It is in that context that I now, while being a somewhat lukewarm remainer originally, do wish that we could be rather more united in seeking a positive future beyond our membership and a little more restrained in the Sibylline prophecies of doom! "
a very good post. However the referendum was flawed on several points:
1. It was badly organized and no matter who won the vote there were no checks and balances which would have prevented the bitter divide we have now.
2. Voting should have been compulsory - even if an invalid vote was cast.
3. A winning majority should have been set e.g. 60%-40% on whatever side won - 20% is a clear result which the other side cannot argue.
4. Any false statements or half truths e.g. £350m should have been painted out immediately. Project fear projections should have had a "health warning" these are guesstimate as brexit has never happened before nobody knew what would happen. Oh and we still don't.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I agree with most of that, although it is impossible in any kind of election to police the claims and counterclaims of those seeking your vote: it is for the protagonists to challenge each other’s statements and the electors to decide which they believe.
The problem in my opinion in a representative democracy like ours is that when Parliament ducks ( again in my opinion) its responsibility and passes the buck to the people to decide an issue, it cannot then honourably decide it doesn’t like the outcome and either reject it or appear to want to frustrate it. Or if it does it risks further devaluing its own authority and respect. And that I think is dangerous.
To be fair, I think many MPs accept this, but we have the uncomfortable situation now of a Parliament composed overwhelmingly of people who themselves voted to remain having to pass legislation to leave. Coupled with the fact that our legislative process is essentially an adversarial model, where the government proposes and the opposition ( both official and dissidents on the government benches) criticises and, if it can, defeats and embarrasses the government, it doesn’t conduce to uniting the country behind a common objective.
Compromise, usually the sensible solution in difficult circumstances, is not easy here. Indeed there is a danger that those most passionately opposed to our leaving at all achieve, through their continuing advocacy, not a reversal of the basic decision to leave, but a poorer outlook for the country after leaving.
This can sound rather, as I heard Gisela Stuart reproach Alastair Campbell yesterday as though he and those he represents would prefer a bad deal as it would prove he had been right!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I agree with most of that, although it is impossible in any kind of election to police the claims and counterclaims of those seeking your vote: it is for the protagonists to challenge each other’s statements and the electors to decide which they believe.
The problem in my opinion in a representative democracy like ours is that when Parliament ducks ( again in my opinion) its responsibility and passes the buck to the people to decide an issue, it cannot then honourably decide it doesn’t like the outcome and either reject it or appear to want to frustrate it. Or if it does it risks further devaluing its own authority and respect. And that I think is dangerous.
To be fair, I think many MPs accept this, but we have the uncomfortable situation now of a Parliament composed overwhelmingly of people who themselves voted to remain having to pass legislation to leave. Coupled with the fact that our legislative process is essentially an adversarial model, where the government proposes and the opposition ( both official and dissidents on the government benches) criticises and, if it can, defeats and embarrasses the government, it doesn’t conduce to uniting the country behind a common objective.
Compromise, usually the sensible solution in difficult circumstances, is not easy here. Indeed there is a danger that those most passionately opposed to our leaving at all achieve, through their continuing advocacy, not a reversal of the basic decision to leave, but a poorer outlook for the country after leaving.
This can sound rather, as I heard Gisela Stuart reproach Alastair Campbell yesterday as though he and those he represents would prefer a bad deal as it would prove he had been right!
"
A sensible post  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In what country were the tories in power for “the last 30 years”? I seem to remember a certain Mr Bliar and Mr Brown having some control for a large chunk of it....."
I know this is hard for some to understand but Blair and Brown were and are tories. They just joined and took over the Labour Party.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
So to clarify, we've gotta give billions to a bunch of counties which sell us more stuff than we sell them or they'll stop selling us stuff and we'll be forced to make the stuff they sell us ourselves!.... coz it's all about future commitments?.. Yeah it's about what I expected |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If it's all about future commitments... Can we have 20% of EU infrastructure back that we've paid for on the premises that there'd buy stuff off us  "
Seeing as the UK is the one running away, no. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If it's all about future commitments... Can we have 20% of EU infrastructure back that we've paid for on the premises that there'd buy stuff off us
Seeing as the UK is the one running away, no."
.
One rule for one, one rule for another hey |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
And just to confirm the UK is.. give or take a few feet exactly where it was 50 years ago.
If anybody could tow us further from France though that would be greatly appreciated |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"And just to confirm the UK is.. give or take a few feet exactly where it was 50 years ago.
If anybody could tow us further from France though that would be greatly appreciated "
Why France ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"And just to confirm the UK is.. give or take a few feet exactly where it was 50 years ago.
If anybody could tow us further from France though that would be greatly appreciated
Why France ?"
.
It's full of French people |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I agree with most of that, although it is impossible in any kind of election to police the claims and counterclaims of those seeking your vote: it is for the protagonists to challenge each other’s statements and the electors to decide which they believe.
The problem in my opinion in a representative democracy like ours is that when Parliament ducks ( again in my opinion) its responsibility and passes the buck to the people to decide an issue, it cannot then honourably decide it doesn’t like the outcome and either reject it or appear to want to frustrate it. Or if it does it risks further devaluing its own authority and respect. And that I think is dangerous.
To be fair, I think many MPs accept this, but we have the uncomfortable situation now of a Parliament composed overwhelmingly of people who themselves voted to remain having to pass legislation to leave. Coupled with the fact that our legislative process is essentially an adversarial model, where the government proposes and the opposition ( both official and dissidents on the government benches) criticises and, if it can, defeats and embarrasses the government, it doesn’t conduce to uniting the country behind a common objective.
Compromise, usually the sensible solution in difficult circumstances, is not easy here. Indeed there is a danger that those most passionately opposed to our leaving at all achieve, through their continuing advocacy, not a reversal of the basic decision to leave, but a poorer outlook for the country after leaving.
This can sound rather, as I heard Gisela Stuart reproach Alastair Campbell yesterday as though he and those he represents would prefer a bad deal as it would prove he had been right!
"
Alasdair Campbell say no more. I saw that clip. Back stabbing traitor or what encouraging ireland government to veto any deal if border agreement wasn't agreed in writing.
I can't stand that bloke arrogant has been nob.
It was enraging to watch him stab the UK and twisting the knife just so he can say told you so.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If it's all about future commitments... Can we have 20% of EU infrastructure back that we've paid for on the premises that there'd buy stuff off us
Seeing as the UK is the one running away, no..
One rule for one, one rule for another hey "
Not even slightly. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So to clarify, we've gotta give billions to a bunch of counties which sell us more stuff than we sell them or they'll stop selling us stuff and we'll be forced to make the stuff they sell us ourselves!.... coz it's all about future commitments?.. Yeah it's about what I expected "
Sounds about right when you say it like that...
But...
When you say the people who supply nearly 40% of our food, 54% of our total imports and 44% of our total exports while we only account for 12% of the Eu's total exports.
So when considered in these terms the issue and your statement needs to change to:
So to clarify, we've gotta to give billions to a bunch of countries which feed us and keep our economy running or we will be forced to starve while watching our economy crumble because we can neither feed ourselves or make the stuff we buy from them ourselves! Coz its all about future commitments to keep food in the shops and businesses open...
Now that now sounds more accurate to me. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
My own view is that we should indeed offer a fairly substantial payment in order to have access to the single market. This is in a way galling in that such freedom of trade is clearly in the interests of the EU ( of varying significance to its different members), as well as ourselves.
But it is also understandable that, whatever the economic logic, it is a political necessity within the EU for the UK not to appear to have shed the aspects of membership it disliked while retaining those it regarded as beneficial both to itself and others. That would in effect create an alternative model of European economic cooperation without the political imperative towards “ ever closer union” . Should the UK get its way on this , it is highly likely that several other members would also find that an attractive model.
But while I think we should be prepared to pay, because that is probably in our own interests should it eventuate in a settlement, I suspect that it will not lead to the positive talks , let alone agreement on trade that we seek. Because, for the reasons outlined above, key members on the EU side will not want an outcome which could be a potential alternative.
In which case we will have strengthened our moral position, and when things do start to get really tricky those countries within the EU which will lose out most if and when we withdraw with no financial or trade agreements in place are likely to start exerting real pressure. It probably will not be until then that we will see any compromises from the EU side begin to emerge. And if they do not- well the world won’t end, and neither will the development of trade or other factors which will affect all of us , in the EU or not, rather more than our membership of it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Run leave the UK now we are all going to starve lmfao wtf comedy gold "
Yep it's all very funny, we have nothing to worry about the USA will sell us as many 'whole chicken in a can' (google/youtube it) and all the hormone and antibiotic packed beef, tinned vegetables and flower we can take (at a significant markup because you have to take full advantage of the market).
Of course those at the bottom of the pile on benefits and fixed incomes (pensions) don't count. Because it will be them that will starve not wealthy. I wonder if you will still be laughing if (as is looking ever more likely) we end up with the hardest of brexits and our food prices start spiralling as shortages hit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Run leave the UK now we are all going to starve lmfao wtf comedy gold
Yep it's all very funny, we have nothing to worry about the USA will sell us as many 'whole chicken in a can' (google/youtube it) and all the hormone and antibiotic packed beef, tinned vegetables and flower we can take (at a significant markup because you have to take full advantage of the market).
Of course those at the bottom of the pile on benefits and fixed incomes (pensions) don't count. Because it will be them that will starve not wealthy. I wonder if you will still be laughing if (as is looking ever more likely) we end up with the hardest of brexits and our food prices start spiralling as shortages hit."
fingers crossed the price of Gold will rise, that's my investment in todays world |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So to clarify, we've gotta give billions to a bunch of counties which sell us more stuff than we sell them or they'll stop selling us stuff and we'll be forced to make the stuff they sell us ourselves!.... coz it's all about future commitments?.. Yeah it's about what I expected
Sounds about right when you say it like that...
But...
When you say the people who supply nearly 40% of our food, 54% of our total imports and 44% of our total exports while we only account for 12% of the Eu's total exports.
So when considered in these terms the issue and your statement needs to change to:
So to clarify, we've gotta to give billions to a bunch of countries which feed us and keep our economy running or we will be forced to starve while watching our economy crumble because we can neither feed ourselves or make the stuff we buy from them ourselves! Coz its all about future commitments to keep food in the shops and businesses open...
Now that now sounds more accurate to me. "
.
Whys that then, why are British people incapable of feeding themselves or making the things they need themselves, why are we a nation of dependants totally reliant on others?... And if this is so what happens when the time comes that those people we depend on decide they now want to keep the food they grow for themselves or they get a better price in China?.... Do we just lay down and stave
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
If we're really that fucking useless I suggest we forget trying to save this country, it's some sort of crazy exercise in lowering productivity having productive foreigners toiling extra hard to just keep us bunch of fuckwits who can't even wipe our own arse alive |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Why would food prices rise as a consequence of having access to cheap food outside the high EU protective tariffs? There are no significant foods which are not more cheaply available from outside the EU than from within.
A more likely concern, if we are determined to look on the gloomy side, is that an influx of cheap food from the wider world will undermine our own farming industry. The extent to which we protect that will be the political as well as economic decision to be made.
As someone who is relatively comfortable the price of food is not a great concern and indeed I would be happy to pay more , both for better quality and to support our farmers and our countryside. But those claiming to speak for the poor are in some logical difficulty in citing food prices as part of an argument in favour of EU membership. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"
Whys that then, why are British people incapable of feeding themselves or making the things they need themselves, why are we a nation of dependants totally reliant on others?... And if this is so what happens when the time comes that those people we depend on decide they now want to keep the food they grow for themselves or they get a better price in China?.... Do we just lay down and stave
"
If we were capable, then we would be feeding ourselves and we would be a net exporter of manufactured goods.
the fact that those two things are not happening indicates that we can't do those things without a significant investment in those areas - and who is going to do that if the stuff that you want to make and feed us with can be produced cheaper elsewhere? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Whys that then, why are British people incapable of feeding themselves or making the things they need themselves, why are we a nation of dependants totally reliant on others?... And if this is so what happens when the time comes that those people we depend on decide they now want to keep the food they grow for themselves or they get a better price in China?.... Do we just lay down and stave
"
Let me remind you that Britain has been incapable of feeding itself since some point in the early 1800's, that's nearly 200 years! The closest we have come to self sufficiency was in the late 1960's with the use of intensive farming and was not sustainable, in fact intensive farming came close to causing a nutrition collapse in farmland! And an ecosystem collapse! The fact is there are too many people living on this island for the land to support and if we through our own petulance reduce our available food supply then the suppliers that are left will raise their prices. This is already happening just on the prospect of a hard brexit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Whys that then, why are British people incapable of feeding themselves or making the things they need themselves, why are we a nation of dependants totally reliant on others?... And if this is so what happens when the time comes that those people we depend on decide they now want to keep the food they grow for themselves or they get a better price in China?.... Do we just lay down and stave
If we were capable, then we would be feeding ourselves and we would be a net exporter of manufactured goods.
the fact that those two things are not happening indicates that we can't do those things without a significant investment in those areas - and who is going to do that if the stuff that you want to make and feed us with can be produced cheaper elsewhere?"
It’s not really practicable or desirable to feed ourselves. Our population has long outgrown that as a sensible objective , save in the extreme of wartime, and we have prospered as a result. Manufacturing, as we normally define it, while it has actually grown in terms of value , has diminished steadily as a proportion off overall economic activity. As it has in all developed countries, though not in as pronounced degree as here, in most cases. That’s what happens as we become more affluent and demand more and more services. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"If it's all about future commitments... Can we have 20% of EU infrastructure back that we've paid for on the premises that there'd buy stuff off us "
So we want to leave and in the process demand that instead of honouring our pre-agreed future commitments we demand that our prior payments are used instead? I have heard that argument before but the issue is that the EU is not dissolving, we have elected to leave and we have cold, hard financial commitments that we can’t really drop on anyone else’s toes and then be taken serious in the future.
By the way, this £40 billion is about half way there in my opinion. The EU have not agreed to the U.K. request that the first £20 billion is tied to a transition period. There is going to be a separation payment to cover future obligations and then there is going to be a payment to cover the transition period. Bearing in mind how this easy process has made zero progress so far, the idea that a subsequent trade deal will be completed in anything less than 5 years seems implausible. The reason I say five years is because the Conservatives will not allow any kind of disasterous Brexit to occur before the next election. Expect spin and bullshit excuses to extend the transition period beyond Election Day.
This is of course assuming that May lasts that long lik |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So we want to leave and in the process demand that instead of honouring our pre-agreed future commitments we demand that our prior payments are used instead? I have heard that argument before but the issue is that the EU is not dissolving, we have elected to leave and we have cold, hard financial commitments that we can’t really drop on anyone else’s toes and then be taken serious in the future.
By the way, this £40 billion is about half way there in my opinion. The EU have not agreed to the U.K. request that the first £20 billion is tied to a transition period. There is going to be a separation payment to cover future obligations and then there is going to be a payment to cover the transition period. Bearing in mind how this easy process has made zero progress so far, the idea that a subsequent trade deal will be completed in anything less than 5 years seems implausible. The reason I say five years is because the Conservatives will not allow any kind of disasterous Brexit to occur before the next election. Expect spin and bullshit excuses to extend the transition period beyond Election Day.
This is of course assuming that May lasts that long lik"
I agree with most of what you say, but I would point out that as manufacturing has declined in the developed world and been transferred to Asia it is those economies are growing and our service economies that stagnating, and this trend will continue and accelerate. The reason for this is that we have allowed US multinationals to dominate the global economy and it is a legal requirement in US Federal law that all US Corporations maximise profits for their shareholders to the exclusion of all other concerns. And US Corporations are very good at doing this without giving a seconds thought to the consequences. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It’s not really practicable or desirable to feed ourselves. Our population has long outgrown that as a sensible objective , save in the extreme of wartime, and we have prospered as a result. Manufacturing, as we normally define it, while it has actually grown in terms of value , has diminished steadily as a proportion off overall economic activity. As it has in all developed countries, though not in as pronounced degree as here, in most cases. That’s what happens as we become more affluent and demand more and more services. "
Sorry Too Hot, I just agree with you. I meant to quote this post not you when I said:
I agree with most of what you say, but I would point out that as manufacturing has declined in the developed world and been transferred to Asia it is those economies are growing and our service economies that stagnating, and this trend will continue and accelerate. The reason for this is that we have allowed US multinationals to dominate the global economy and it is a legal requirement in US Federal law that all US Corporations maximise profits for their shareholders to the exclusion of all other concerns. And US Corporations are very good at doing this without giving a seconds thought to the consequences.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"40 billion and ecj having a say in britain. Thoughts please.
It is getting beyond a joke.
Little Brexiters seem to want a UK that is as isolated as N Korea. Not respecting any other jurisdictions, not accepting anyone else's conformity standards.
Why, it is almost as if we are back in colonial days and the rest of the world simply has to do what we want because... "By God we are British and just by the virtue of that fact, you cannot even be regarded as equal to us.""
I have read some crap on here but this statement wins hands down lol best crap of the year |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ex4unowCouple
over a year ago
near you |
Sorry but at the moment there’s no obligation to pay that is why Europe wants a financial settlement before talks
We should have already left but as i said when the vote was made this was staged to devalue the pound and too many in power would lose their dodgey deals to allow this to happen so they will use the situation to keep us poorer than them only my personal thoughts on the situation |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *j48Man
over a year ago
Wigan |
We're leaving
We need to start planning and preparing to grow food, make stuff and look after ourselves..
We don't need carrying we need to be proactive to move forwards.
The sooner everybody realises talking about the bill and what deal is diverting us all away from what we should be doing
Sorting stuff out for ourselves - survival of the fittest
End of |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sorry but at the moment there’s no obligation to pay that is why Europe wants a financial settlement before talks
We should have already left but as i said when the vote was made this was staged to devalue the pound and too many in power would lose their dodgey deals to allow this to happen so they will use the situation to keep us poorer than them only my personal thoughts on the situation "
The UK shouldnt have agreed to pay for these things in advance if they wanted to walk away. Its no one elses fault.
And no one staged anything to devalue the pound, it was an inevitable consequence of leaving. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Whys that then, why are British people incapable of feeding themselves or making the things they need themselves, why are we a nation of dependants totally reliant on others?... And if this is so what happens when the time comes that those people we depend on decide they now want to keep the food they grow for themselves or they get a better price in China?.... Do we just lay down and stave
If we were capable, then we would be feeding ourselves and we would be a net exporter of manufactured goods.
the fact that those two things are not happening indicates that we can't do those things without a significant investment in those areas - and who is going to do that if the stuff that you want to make and feed us with can be produced cheaper elsewhere?
It’s not really practicable or desirable to feed ourselves. Our population has long outgrown that as a sensible objective , save in the extreme of wartime, and we have prospered as a result. Manufacturing, as we normally define it, while it has actually grown in terms of value , has diminished steadily as a proportion off overall economic activity. As it has in all developed countries, though not in as pronounced degree as here, in most cases. That’s what happens as we become more affluent and demand more and more services. "
.
So your saying the EU isnt a developed country?...
It's going to be very sad watching all these utterly dependant useless at everything arsewipes starve to death due to the undeveloped EU refusing to sell us food but that seems like the bed we've made ourselves by becoming a nation incapable of doing anything productive |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If it's all about future commitments... Can we have 20% of EU infrastructure back that we've paid for on the premises that there'd buy stuff off us
So we want to leave and in the process demand that instead of honouring our pre-agreed future commitments we demand that our prior payments are used instead? I have heard that argument before but the issue is that the EU is not dissolving, we have elected to leave and we have cold, hard financial commitments that we can’t really drop on anyone else’s toes and then be taken serious in the future.
By the way, this £40 billion is about half way there in my opinion. The EU have not agreed to the U.K. request that the first £20 billion is tied to a transition period. There is going to be a separation payment to cover future obligations and then there is going to be a payment to cover the transition period. Bearing in mind how this easy process has made zero progress so far, the idea that a subsequent trade deal will be completed in anything less than 5 years seems implausible. The reason I say five years is because the Conservatives will not allow any kind of disasterous Brexit to occur before the next election. Expect spin and bullshit excuses to extend the transition period beyond Election Day.
This is of course assuming that May lasts that long lik"
In any normal commercial situation as soon as any party becomes aware of a change in their circumstances they either rein in their spending or review it . Only a fool would carry on spending regardless. Should the expenditure be of a revenue nature it can be put on hold immediately and if it is a capital project the investment can be deferred . The EU have already had 18 months to prepare for this . Projects in the UK are regularly deferred or cancelled depending on the state of the economy .
Another way of looking at the issue is that if the investments in various EU projects are as successfull as some people claim we are entitled to a share of the long term revenues generated and as such the EU owes us money ( and not vice versa).
In any event the EU is more dependent on the UK than we are on the EU.
It is interesting to note that this weekend influential German Businness leaders launched a campaign called New Deal for Britain to keep Britain in the EU , lobbying for concessions especially on immigration .
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I think the pound had become overvalued and merely found its more supportable market level. It’s been broadly stable since with the kinds of fluctuations one might expect.
The question of our obligations has I think to be considered in tranches. Firstly our legal ones. Genuine legal ones not ones arising from budget planning processes and expectations of future commitments but ones where, should the question come to court, it would be expected that such a court would find such obligations to be legally sound.
To my knowledge the only detailed legal analysis of what these comprise has been carried out by UK lawyers and was presented to the EU side a few weeks ago, and was relatively small. The EU side has not apparently responded with a counter opinion but expressed distaste at the presentation of the analysis, preferring to continue to wrap up these “concrete” legal claims with much wider and vaguer ones including what they feel to be moral obligations on the part of the UK.
In my view some of these moral claims have a lot of force- I don’t use the term to minimise their importance. There is indeed a reasonable expectation that a country leaving in the middle of a budget cycle should do so in a way which doesn’t throw its partners plans into disarray. So this second tranche of obligations should be accepted , and indeed that I think is where we are currently at.
The next tranche is, frankly, however it is dressed up, a bill which the EU thinks we might be induced to pay in order to get a deal. Whether we should or not is a judgement to be made. On balance Imthink it’s worth going a bit further.
We are used to thinking of these difficult judgements from our point of view but the following is also true- whether the figure we are currently offering over and above those rather minimal strictly legal obligations is £20b or £40b or whatever it’s a lot. And it is all at risk if things break down completely- for there are moral obligations both ways, and there is no way, I would imagine, that the UK will pay a penny beyond what it considers to be its legal obligations to an organisation it perceives as trying to punish its people for excercising their democratic choice
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Our trade deficit was running at 100 billon a year, that money comes back via foreign investment which then buys our infrastructure and hoovers up every penny of profit...
We were always fucked in the long run anyhow, I have no fucking idea what the pessimistic nonsense written for economic bullshit on here is meant to pass as!... Suddenly we used to be south Korea before the brexit vote
Get fucked, we've been sold a pup alright but it wasn't no fucking brexit vote, we were sold down the river in 1979 and taken it up the arse for so long we now have rent boy mentality |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
A little calm may be useful! And some reality. Firstly, our economy is not stagnating- it is growing. We might prefer it to grow faster and we may be uneasy that some economies in Asia have been growing faster, though I don’t share either of those views. More importantly in my opinion we may well be concerned that we share in the phenomenon observed in most developed economies in the last couple of decades that the link between economic growth as a whole and improved living standards is no longer as reliable as it was historically.
But we are, here in western Europe including those nations in and those without the EU, and will in all likelihood remain through our lifetimes among the most prosperous peoples on earth. That others, hopefully, are becoming less poor in comparison does not mean we will get poorer in some kind of economic see-saw. Conversely it is more likely to mean, as it always has, the reverse: that trade will increase and everyone has an opportunity to benefit. Unless we bugger things up our of a myopic and deluded self interest as we did temporarily during the Great Depression. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A little calm may be useful! And some reality. Firstly, our economy is not stagnating- it is growing. We might prefer it to grow faster and we may be uneasy that some economies in Asia have been growing faster, though I don’t share either of those views. More importantly in my opinion we may well be concerned that we share in the phenomenon observed in most developed economies in the last couple of decades that the link between economic growth as a whole and improved living standards is no longer as reliable as it was historically.
But we are, here in western Europe including those nations in and those without the EU, and will in all likelihood remain through our lifetimes among the most prosperous peoples on earth. That others, hopefully, are becoming less poor in comparison does not mean we will get poorer in some kind of economic see-saw. Conversely it is more likely to mean, as it always has, the reverse: that trade will increase and everyone has an opportunity to benefit. Unless we bugger things up our of a myopic and deluded self interest as we did temporarily during the Great Depression. "
I guess you never saw the news today about the economy being downgraded yet again |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I listened to the budget speech and , with rather less interest, to the reporting of it, which a careless listener might have interpreted as rather gloomier news that is justified. A downward revision of forecasts for growth is not the same as forecasting contraction, not to mention the fact that the difference between today’s forecasts and the previous ones are well within the margin of error.
The eventuality might of course be worse! But the fairly consistent pattern since its establishment has been that the forecasts of the Office for Budget Responsibility have been over pessimistic when compared with the outturn. Who knows? Well the Treasury probably has an inkling.
The more important forecast for me concerns debt. People have probably become bored with the deficit, but it remains in my opinion, critical to long term prosperity that it be reduced (and eliminated) and the overall ratio of debt to GDP lowered. Of course if growth is slower it doesn’t help, but despite the relaxation of some Austerity measures, we would still appear to be on the correct trajectory. So I remain unperturbed by the broad economic position. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
The more important forecast for me concerns debt. People have probably become bored with the deficit, but it remains in my opinion, critical to long term prosperity that it be reduced (and eliminated) and the overall ratio of debt to GDP lowered. Of course if growth is slower it doesn’t help, but despite the relaxation of some Austerity measures, we would still appear to be on the correct trajectory. So I remain unperturbed by the broad economic position."
Eliminating the deficit is never going to happen because there are smart enough people around who understand that debt is always necessary and some debt is always beneficial. You know who else has debt? Apple, Microsoft and Google, who between them have almost half a trillion in cash reserves. Why dont they pay off their debt? Because it doesnt make financial sense.
For a government if you have a project costing £X and the benefits to the exchequer outweigh the cost of borrowing then you would of course borrow the money if you didnt have it to hand. To do otherwise is stupid. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I listened to the budget speech and , with rather less interest, to the reporting of it, which a careless listener might have interpreted as rather gloomier news that is justified. A downward revision of forecasts for growth is not the same as forecasting contraction, not to mention the fact that the difference between today’s forecasts and the previous ones are well within the margin of error.
The eventuality might of course be worse! But the fairly consistent pattern since its establishment has been that the forecasts of the Office for Budget Responsibility have been over pessimistic when compared with the outturn. Who knows? Well the Treasury probably has an inkling.
The more important forecast for me concerns debt. People have probably become bored with the deficit, but it remains in my opinion, critical to long term prosperity that it be reduced (and eliminated) and the overall ratio of debt to GDP lowered. Of course if growth is slower it doesn’t help, but despite the relaxation of some Austerity measures, we would still appear to be on the correct trajectory. So I remain unperturbed by the broad economic position."
Lol  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
On the contrary there have frequently been periods when there has been a current account surplus and debt reduced. Some countries operate surpluses as the norm. Of course there are times when it can make sense for a deficit to be increased as the best available option.
National Debt, obviously is extremely unlikely to ever be eliminated, and there would be little point in doing so. What matters is the ratio between debt and GDP. As that is improved there is more scope for public spending or tax cuts or whatever you believe will best improve the stock of human happiness. It is also important to distinguish between what is genuine investment and what masquerades under the name but really isn’t. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
So post referendum we had about £70bn of fiscal policy measures, about £22bn of monetary policy measures, plus this additional £40bn. For the moment, lets just ignore that lost tax revenue from slower growth.
So when are we going to give £350m a week to the NHS? How many years of EU contributions does all that £132bn equate to? About 18yrs or so? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So post referendum we had about £70bn of fiscal policy measures, about £22bn of monetary policy measures, plus this additional £40bn. For the moment, lets just ignore that lost tax revenue from slower growth.
So when are we going to give £350m a week to the NHS? How many years of EU contributions does all that £132bn equate to? About 18yrs or so? "
.
Or about two years of trade deficit |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A 1000 jobs just relocated to the EU today...try telling them that things are fine
1000 wow big deal, what happened to the 3 million jobs scaremongers like Nick Clegg said would be lost?
Though such a flippant attitude doesn't surprise me the problem with the EMA and EBA moving - we'll have to reinvent those and employ almost as many people ourselves in the process, now with your hotline to the cabinet the amount of work done on creating a UK medicines agency is... please tell me the answer is "some". Please."
It's 1000 jobs, considering the UK has created an additional 300,000 new jobs in the private sector since the referendum result in June 2016, 1000 poxy jobs at the EMA and the EBA is like losing a single tear drop in the ocean. A sense of perspective might help. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"40 billion and ecj having a say in britain. Thoughts please."
Bit of a misleading opening post in this thread (possibly reported from the Guardian, the FT or the London evening standard so no wonder it would be wrong if you got it from there OP). The UK has not agreed to pay £40 billion, the exact figure is £38 billion. Also for clarification Prime Minister Theresa May has not agreed to let the ECJ have a say in Britain after Brexit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"40 billion and ecj having a say in britain. Thoughts please.
Bit of a misleading opening post in this thread (possibly reported from the Guardian, the FT or the London evening standard so no wonder it would be wrong if you got it from there OP). The UK has not agreed to pay £40 billion, the exact figure is £38 billion. Also for clarification Prime Minister Theresa May has not agreed to let the ECJ have a say in Britain after Brexit. "
And thats misleading as well....no offer has been accepted....Mays that desperate and Davis each time the EU says jump they say how high...completely fucked it up and now the DUP are trying to pull the strings haha....talk about a piss up and a brewery |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *anesjhCouple
over a year ago
LONDON. |
"40 billion and ecj having a say in britain. Thoughts please.
It is getting beyond a joke.
Little Brexiters seem to want a UK that is as isolated as N Korea. Not respecting any other jurisdictions, not accepting anyone else's conformity standards.
Why, it is almost as if we are back in colonial days and the rest of the world simply has to do what we want because... "By God we are British and just by the virtue of that fact, you cannot even be regarded as equal to us."Maybe many people have taken a more objective approach and concluded that our net contribution to the EU is not value for money . A significant number of countries are net beneficiaries of EU funding and as such do not pay their way.
It would be far simpler to track what is happening if the EU charged each country an admin fee based on a countries annual imports and exports. Any development funds should be via way of long term development loans.
A government has a responsibility to spend tax payers money in the most cost effective manner possible .
I do not see anyone suggesting that we will be isolated. We will simply be trading on slightly different terms with a few minor tweaks to duties. The EU needs our business as much as we need theirs .
In any event duties simply cancel out at world level. "
..Well said. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A 1000 jobs just relocated to the EU today...try telling them that things are fine
1000 wow big deal, what happened to the 3 million jobs scaremongers like Nick Clegg said would be lost?
Though such a flippant attitude doesn't surprise me the problem with the EMA and EBA moving - we'll have to reinvent those and employ almost as many people ourselves in the process, now with your hotline to the cabinet the amount of work done on creating a UK medicines agency is... please tell me the answer is "some". Please.
It's 1000 jobs, considering the UK has created an additional 300,000 new jobs in the private sector since the referendum result in June 2016, 1000 poxy jobs at the EMA and the EBA is like losing a single tear drop in the ocean. A sense of perspective might help. "
Your mind is very deluded if you believe everything these tory fuckers say |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"40 billion and ecj having a say in britain. Thoughts please.
It is getting beyond a joke.
Little Brexiters seem to want a UK that is as isolated as N Korea. Not respecting any other jurisdictions, not accepting anyone else's conformity standards.
Why, it is almost as if we are back in colonial days and the rest of the world simply has to do what we want because... "By God we are British and just by the virtue of that fact, you cannot even be regarded as equal to us."Maybe many people have taken a more objective approach and concluded that our net contribution to the EU is not value for money . A significant number of countries are net beneficiaries of EU funding and as such do not pay their way.
It would be far simpler to track what is happening if the EU charged each country an admin fee based on a countries annual imports and exports. Any development funds should be via way of long term development loans.
A government has a responsibility to spend tax payers money in the most cost effective manner possible .
I do not see anyone suggesting that we will be isolated. We will simply be trading on slightly different terms with a few minor tweaks to duties. The EU needs our business as much as we need theirs .
In any event duties simply cancel out at world level. ..Well said."
If duties cancel each other out, why all the push for FTA? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"40 billion and ecj having a say in britain. Thoughts please.
Bit of a misleading opening post in this thread (possibly reported from the Guardian, the FT or the London evening standard so no wonder it would be wrong if you got it from there OP). The UK has not agreed to pay £40 billion, the exact figure is £38 billion. Also for clarification Prime Minister Theresa May has not agreed to let the ECJ have a say in Britain after Brexit. "
Well the Torys have asked that the full amount theyve agreed to pay not be put in writing in December and instead kept secret from the public and that the full figure not be announced even in 2019.
Now tell me Centy, did one of us predict the Tories would do exactly that for the last 8 months? Im pretty sure one of us did. But, I hear you ask, it was already widely reported what the figure was, whats the point in keeping it a secret. The only logical reason is that those reports undersold the figure May agreed to.
So €45bn+ divorce bill, trying to hide the figure and the ECJ still having a say in the British Legal system. Thats 3 for 3,isnt it? Its almost as if anyone could look at the situation honestly and see what the logical conclusions are likely to be. Its just the honest part that some people struggle with I guess. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"40 billion and ecj having a say in britain. Thoughts please.
Bit of a misleading opening post in this thread (possibly reported from the Guardian, the FT or the London evening standard so no wonder it would be wrong if you got it from there OP). The UK has not agreed to pay £40 billion, the exact figure is £38 billion. Also for clarification Prime Minister Theresa May has not agreed to let the ECJ have a say in Britain after Brexit.
Well the Torys have asked that the full amount theyve agreed to pay not be put in writing in December and instead kept secret from the public and that the full figure not be announced even in 2019.
Now tell me Centy, did one of us predict the Tories would do exactly that for the last 8 months? Im pretty sure one of us did. But, I hear you ask, it was already widely reported what the figure was, whats the point in keeping it a secret. The only logical reason is that those reports undersold the figure May agreed to.
So €45bn+ divorce bill, trying to hide the figure and the ECJ still having a say in the British Legal system. Thats 3 for 3,isnt it? Its almost as if anyone could look at the situation honestly and see what the logical conclusions are likely to be. Its just the honest part that some people struggle with I guess."
The UK initially offered £18 billion and has now offered an additional £20 billion (conditional on the EU agreeing to move on to phase 2 trade talks), that's £38 billion total and not the £40 billion you've been falsely slinging about on various threads here. Secondly the initial reports of the ECJ having a say in Britain after Brexit appear to have been wrong as the Prime minister has since clarified that has not been agreed to (I suppose you got it from the Guardian, The FT or The London evening standard, so no surprise it turned out to be wrong). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"40 billion and ecj having a say in britain. Thoughts please.
Bit of a misleading opening post in this thread (possibly reported from the Guardian, the FT or the London evening standard so no wonder it would be wrong if you got it from there OP). The UK has not agreed to pay £40 billion, the exact figure is £38 billion. Also for clarification Prime Minister Theresa May has not agreed to let the ECJ have a say in Britain after Brexit.
Well the Torys have asked that the full amount theyve agreed to pay not be put in writing in December and instead kept secret from the public and that the full figure not be announced even in 2019.
Now tell me Centy, did one of us predict the Tories would do exactly that for the last 8 months? Im pretty sure one of us did. But, I hear you ask, it was already widely reported what the figure was, whats the point in keeping it a secret. The only logical reason is that those reports undersold the figure May agreed to.
So €45bn+ divorce bill, trying to hide the figure and the ECJ still having a say in the British Legal system. Thats 3 for 3,isnt it? Its almost as if anyone could look at the situation honestly and see what the logical conclusions are likely to be. Its just the honest part that some people struggle with I guess.
The UK initially offered £18 billion and has now offered an additional £20 billion (conditional on the EU agreeing to move on to phase 2 trade talks), that's £38 billion total and not the £40 billion you've been falsely slinging about on various threads here. Secondly the initial reports of the ECJ having a say in Britain after Brexit appear to have been wrong as the Prime minister has since clarified that has not been agreed to (I suppose you got it from the Guardian, The FT or The London evening standard, so no surprise it turned out to be wrong). "
Well the bill would be in euros not pounds because its an EU fund. And as everyone is currently reporting €45bn I still have to wonder what would be the point of that unless its actually more than being reported...but I know thats not an issue you want to deal with so maybe we'll leave that alone for the moment.
The Mail, Express and Sun all reported concessions on the issue of the ECJ. The Express even branded it a betrayal...sorry BETRAYAL!!, as they like to stylise these things.
I guess you just have to hope that the EU considers this offer good enough so that May doesnt have to concede any more ground. It is near the christmas season so I guess the EU might be more generous to the Tories who have had such a rough year. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Falsely is a bit harsh when all the papers are calling it this. Or at least “in excess of 38”. Given it’s probably in Euros and the FC won’t have been set, it’s solitting hairs.
And while it’s true the ECJ hasn’t been agreed (nor has the bill tbh) the direction of travel is this, given it seems to have gone from rules out to back in the table.
Source for both: DM. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"40 billion is on the table then.... soon to be increased by the idiots in charge of this shit fest"
Not bad going on this will be easy and they can swivel on it to over 45 billion...something one poster was rejoicing at the time it was said...like i've said before id never believe anything these tory fuckers say there only after saving there own skins |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"40 billion and ecj having a say in britain. Thoughts please.
Bit of a misleading opening post in this thread (possibly reported from the Guardian, the FT or the London evening standard so no wonder it would be wrong if you got it from there OP). The UK has not agreed to pay £40 billion, the exact figure is £38 billion. Also for clarification Prime Minister Theresa May has not agreed to let the ECJ have a say in Britain after Brexit.
Well the Torys have asked that the full amount theyve agreed to pay not be put in writing in December and instead kept secret from the public and that the full figure not be announced even in 2019.
Now tell me Centy, did one of us predict the Tories would do exactly that for the last 8 months? Im pretty sure one of us did. But, I hear you ask, it was already widely reported what the figure was, whats the point in keeping it a secret. The only logical reason is that those reports undersold the figure May agreed to.
So €45bn+ divorce bill, trying to hide the figure and the ECJ still having a say in the British Legal system. Thats 3 for 3,isnt it? Its almost as if anyone could look at the situation honestly and see what the logical conclusions are likely to be. Its just the honest part that some people struggle with I guess.
The UK initially offered £18 billion and has now offered an additional £20 billion (conditional on the EU agreeing to move on to phase 2 trade talks), that's £38 billion total and not the £40 billion you've been falsely slinging about on various threads here. Secondly the initial reports of the ECJ having a say in Britain after Brexit appear to have been wrong as the Prime minister has since clarified that has not been agreed to (I suppose you got it from the Guardian, The FT or The London evening standard, so no surprise it turned out to be wrong). "
cool... argueing over £2 billion... where have i heard that before (ahem, northern ireland!)......
we seem to be good at shaking this money tree we were told didn't exist!!!!
well.... since the whole point of the deal was that it would cover the 2 yr transistion period and that in that time nothing would change, then why would the ECJ not be arbitor for that period.....
seems a strange fight for brexiters to pick.... if nothing means nothing would change, then would that not apply to everything????? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
