|
Post by vokeswagen on Jul 20, 2019 11:09:34 GMT
How will the average Joe feel once we’ve left a block of countries to gain sovereignty, only to the benefit of the few who will be monetarily disposed to gain from the $#!t storm to follow:- When we have felt the sting of more economic recession/depression, then we will be rip for a bit of Yank bailout, with all of the legal restrictions their lawyers will place on us. Do you remember how long it took us to pay them off for their involvement in WWII. We will exchange the position of an early member of the EU with voting rights & influence, to that of a vassal of the Yanks with no say in our future. Just gathering any scraps that fall off our masters table. The Yanks aren’t all that. The American dream turned into a nightmare. They’re not our friends. And worst of all, Joe did this to us with the help of the ineffectual Cameron. His head should be on a spike outside the Tower. If we had everything we have now but we changed the words 'European Union' to 'United States of America' you'd fight tooth & nail to be free & regain our sovereignty. Terrified of the Yanks shitting on us, but perfectly happy to let the EU shit on us, bizarre logic. This is a truism. Obviously some people would be opposed to the USA and not AS opposed to the EU. They're ideologically different entities. There's nothing particularly bizarre about being more in favour of one than the other. This is Paul Joseph Watson levels of debate.
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Jul 20, 2019 11:50:04 GMT
How will the average Joe feel once we’ve left a block of countries to gain sovereignty, only to the benefit of the few who will be monetarily disposed to gain from the $#!t storm to follow:- When we have felt the sting of more economic recession/depression, then we will be rip for a bit of Yank bailout, with all of the legal restrictions their lawyers will place on us. Do you remember how long it took us to pay them off for their involvement in WWII. We will exchange the position of an early member of the EU with voting rights & influence, to that of a vassal of the Yanks with no say in our future. Just gathering any scraps that fall off our masters table. The Yanks aren’t all that. The American dream turned into a nightmare. They’re not our friends. And worst of all, Joe did this to us with the help of the ineffectual Cameron. His head should be on a spike outside the Tower. If we had everything we have now but we changed the words 'European Union' to 'United States of America' you'd fight tooth & nail to be free & regain our sovereignty. Terrified of the Yanks shitting on us, but perfectly happy to let the EU shit on us, bizarre logic. So you’re saying that the way that America does business is going to better for us than Europe. The Americans will be the friendly face of commerce in comparison to the EU.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Jul 20, 2019 13:05:58 GMT
The fact that so many of the Establishment are so pro EU makes me feel reassured that the majority of the country aren't That's the funniest thing about all this. For year upon year we've had people telling us how our politicians can't be trusted, how the banks are the scum of the Earth, how giant corporations are only in it for themselves, and it's about time that the normal, average Joe on the street got a chance to have his say. The Brexit referendum rolls around & the normal, average Joe on the street gets the chance to have a say, and he votes to leave the EU. Those same people from above now suddenly say "OMG the normal, average Joe off the street is such a thick, uneducated, racist, bigot who had no idea what he was voting for! Our politicians, the banks & giant corporations all want us to remain, and they know what's best for us, they have our best interests at heart!" Nailed it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2019 17:05:10 GMT
If we had everything we have now but we changed the words 'European Union' to 'United States of America' you'd fight tooth & nail to be free & regain our sovereignty. Terrified of the Yanks shitting on us, but perfectly happy to let the EU shit on us, bizarre logic. So you’re saying that the way that America does business is going to better for us than Europe. The Americans will be the friendly face of commerce in comparison to the EU. hes not said that though
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2019 18:11:55 GMT
They're even suggesting possibly getting HRH involved now ! The Queen is being dragged into Britain's Brexit crisis link
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Jul 20, 2019 18:14:31 GMT
I don't think for a minute we will leave with No Deal. I think it's all kiddums.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2019 18:15:21 GMT
Grauniad are reporting a possible Brussels offer to Boris (if he becomes P.M.) Brussels to offer Boris Johnson extension on no-deal Brexit link
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Jul 20, 2019 21:28:36 GMT
Grauniad are reporting a possible Brussels offer to Boris (if he becomes P.M.) Brussels to offer Boris Johnson extension on no-deal Brexit linkThey want a rigged vote.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jul 20, 2019 23:00:13 GMT
How much do we pay vs what we gain? You tell me, someone on here earlier was saying we owe £39bn because that was what the UK government agreed with the EU for outstanding commitments. Seems a bit steep to me The payment is for financial commitments made by the EU while the UK has been a member, such as pensions of EU employees, buildings and equipment in those buildings in Brussels and Strasbourg. What do you think it cost to build the 2 parliaments/offices etc? It will take 50 years to pay for them as they will have all been built and equipped by borrowing money. The £39 billion was agreed assuming we left on 31st march, it will be inflating at a furious rate since then, and my guess is would have inflated anyway during the 2 years trade negotiations period, which the EU will expect the UK to pay for because it is the UK that wants to leave. The inflation of this charge will make the inflation of Concorde and Crossrail look like chicken feed.
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Jul 21, 2019 6:24:40 GMT
How much do we pay vs what we gain? You tell me, someone on here earlier was saying we owe £39bn because that was what the UK government agreed with the EU for outstanding commitments. Seems a bit steep to me It confuses me numpty. The £39b is supposed to pay for commitments we agreed during the current 6 year fiscal period 2014-2020. Now our annual net contribution to the EU is £9b per year as of 2018. So, assuming this figure has been similar during the current fiscal period, we have already more than covered our liabilities by paying around £50b. I don’t get it or am I being too simplistic.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Jul 21, 2019 7:54:33 GMT
You tell me, someone on here earlier was saying we owe £39bn because that was what the UK government agreed with the EU for outstanding commitments. Seems a bit steep to me The payment is for financial commitments made by the EU while the UK has been a member, such as pensions of EU employees, buildings and equipment in those buildings in Brussels and Strasbourg. What do you think it cost to build the 2 parliaments/offices etc? It will take 50 years to pay for them as they will have all been built and equipped by borrowing money. The £39 billion was agreed assuming we left on 31st march, it will be inflating at a furious rate since then, and my guess is would have inflated anyway during the 2 years trade negotiations period, which the EU will expect the UK to pay for because it is the UK that wants to leave. The inflation of this charge will make the inflation of Concorde and Crossrail look like chicken feed. Thats wrong the EU cant borrow to spend on its own budget only to lend to other countries. Although now you mention the buildings why is is we only ever hear about our share of liabilities but never our assets ? It is true that the EU has to be pay the pensions of staff and initially my thoughts had been it right and proper we pay these for uk staff but you know what for 40 odd year the EU has presumably been deducting pension contributions from these staff so what have they done with this ? The £39 billion already includes the two year transition period so again I believe its wrong to say we will owe more.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jul 21, 2019 13:43:40 GMT
The payment is for financial commitments made by the EU while the UK has been a member, such as pensions of EU employees, buildings and equipment in those buildings in Brussels and Strasbourg. What do you think it cost to build the 2 parliaments/offices etc? It will take 50 years to pay for them as they will have all been built and equipped by borrowing money. The £39 billion was agreed assuming we left on 31st march, it will be inflating at a furious rate since then, and my guess is would have inflated anyway during the 2 years trade negotiations period, which the EU will expect the UK to pay for because it is the UK that wants to leave. The inflation of this charge will make the inflation of Concorde and Crossrail look like chicken feed. Thats wrong the EU cant borrow to spend on its own budget only to lend to other countries. Although now you mention the buildings why is is we only ever hear about our share of liabilities but never our assets ? It is true that the EU has to be pay the pensions of staff and initially my thoughts had been it right and proper we pay these for uk staff but you know what for 40 odd year the EU has presumably been deducting pension contributions from these staff so what have they done with this ? The £39 billion already includes the two year transition period so again I believe its wrong to say we will owe more. Time will tell which of us is correct. However I am quite confident that EU employees pensions will be funded by more than just their own contributions, a lot lot more! The least cost way of getting out of the EU is to walk away and let them sue us, and let the courts decide or agree an ooc settlement.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jul 21, 2019 14:15:31 GMT
Thats wrong the EU cant borrow to spend on its own budget only to lend to other countries. Although now you mention the buildings why is is we only ever hear about our share of liabilities but never our assets ? It is true that the EU has to be pay the pensions of staff and initially my thoughts had been it right and proper we pay these for uk staff but you know what for 40 odd year the EU has presumably been deducting pension contributions from these staff so what have they done with this ? The £39 billion already includes the two year transition period so again I believe its wrong to say we will owe more. Time will tell which of us is correct. However I am quite confident that EU employees pensions will be funded by more than just their own contributions, a lot lot more! The least cost way of getting out of the EU is to walk away and let them sue us, and let the courts decide or agree an ooc settlement. Mr Coke, I agree to an extent. I don't think that we should just pay £39 b. I agree that we should walk away. I do think that we should contribute to our MEPs pensions....once the " pension pot " has been scrutinised and other countries are committed to contributing to their MEPs pensions... including those who are already drawing pensions. Then I think that we should look at getting recompense for those things that we have contributed to and from which we wilk now not benefit. I am pretty sure that they cannot sue us because firstly they would have to be very specific and precise about which contract we have breached or our liability in respect of the £39b and secondly there is no court that has jurisdiction. The EU is at fault in that they should have been more detailed and specific in the procedures and liabilities in Article 50.... they should have thought through and specified the leaving process in more detail.... except Article 50 was first introduced by Lord Kerr as a mechanism to expel non conforming countries and it was Gisela Stuart who introduced the Idea of a country voluntarily leaving.....a concept not entertained by the EU. .......... Gisela Stuart, who has decided to step down as MP for Birmingham Edgbaston, was sent to Brussels by Tony Blair at the turn of the century to hammer out a European Constitution which ultimately failed but eventually became the Lisbon Treaty. Mrs Stuart told The Telegraph that she demanded the constitution include an “exit clause” which would subsequently become Article 50 which sets out the way in which a member state can leave the EU. Mrs Stuart also revealed that it was her experience of trying to negotiate the constitution with the rest of Europe that turned her into a Eurosceptic, having broadly been in favour of the European project until then. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/02/revealed-former-labour-mp-inadvertently-laid-groundwork-brexit/amp/
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Jul 21, 2019 18:09:46 GMT
Thats wrong the EU cant borrow to spend on its own budget only to lend to other countries. Although now you mention the buildings why is is we only ever hear about our share of liabilities but never our assets ? It is true that the EU has to be pay the pensions of staff and initially my thoughts had been it right and proper we pay these for uk staff but you know what for 40 odd year the EU has presumably been deducting pension contributions from these staff so what have they done with this ? The £39 billion already includes the two year transition period so again I believe its wrong to say we will owe more. Time will tell which of us is correct. However I am quite confident that EU employees pensions will be funded by more than just their own contributions, a lot lot more! The least cost way of getting out of the EU is to walk away and let them sue us, and let the courts decide or agree an ooc settlement. That is the problem like with local authorities the pensions are probably being paid out of current deductions, nothing has been put aside or invested to pay for these long term hence trying to get the UK to pay for these however these staff worked for the EU and are paid by the EU so there is not a court in the world they can sue the UK in to change this.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2019 6:39:04 GMT
Hes is far more optimistic than me, but he’ll have my vote, if only because all the other options want to ignore and even reverse a democratic vote result and As the powers throw more shit at them I’ll make sure brexit party get my vote at every opportunity
fuck off May, Hunt, Hammond, Corbyn, Blair, Brown, Cable and Johnson for that matter.....in fact fuck off to all the outdated cronies of Westminster
|
|
1972
Spectator
Posts: 9
|
Post by 1972 on Jul 22, 2019 6:46:55 GMT
Populism.
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Jul 22, 2019 7:34:09 GMT
Hes is far more optimistic than me, but he’ll have my vote, if only because all the other options want to ignore and even reverse a democratic vote result and As the powers throw more shit at them I’ll make sure brexit party get my vote at every opportunity fuck off May, Hunt, Hammond, Corbyn, Blair, Brown, Cable and Johnson for that matter.....in fact fuck off to all the outdated cronies of Westminster £@#&!n’e!! Mary, That’s not so much putting all your eggs into one basket, it’s just one bad egg...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2019 8:43:03 GMT
Hes is far more optimistic than me, but he’ll have my vote, if only because all the other options want to ignore and even reverse a democratic vote result and As the powers throw more shit at them I’ll make sure brexit party get my vote at every opportunity fuck off May, Hunt, Hammond, Corbyn, Blair, Brown, Cable and Johnson for that matter.....in fact fuck off to all the outdated cronies of Westminster £@#&!n’e!! Mary, That’s not so much putting all your eggs into one basket, it’s just one bad egg... Depends if you like genetically modified and cleansed eggs or natural the way mother nature intended eggs I dont want to take the risk Wise words could have come from cantana himself 😁
|
|
|
Post by sorethumbs on Jul 22, 2019 9:42:43 GMT
Anything appealing to a significant amount of people is 'popular' Populism isn't a dirty word, just because you don't agree with something you could call anything 'populism' but it means jack-shit to the people who do agree with the issues being put forward. Everything carrying on as it has within the EU should have a dirty buzzword.
|
|
|
Post by mattyd on Jul 22, 2019 9:55:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by maxplonk on Jul 22, 2019 10:00:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by 4372 on Jul 22, 2019 11:35:25 GMT
Anything appealing to a significant amount of people is 'popular' Populism isn't a dirty word, just because you don't agree with something you could call anything 'populism' but it means jack-shit to the people who do agree with the issues being put forward. Everything carrying on as it has within the EU should have a dirty buzzword. Its a bit like when people on here refer to those who don't agree with their take on Brexit as "Traitors" then?
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jul 22, 2019 12:18:15 GMT
Anything appealing to a significant amount of people is 'popular' Populism isn't a dirty word, just because you don't agree with something you could call anything 'populism' but it means jack-shit to the people who do agree with the issues being put forward. Everything carrying on as it has within the EU should have a dirty buzzword. Its a bit like when people on here refer to those who don't agree with their take on Brexit as "Traitors" then? Traitors to democracy what would you call those who triggered A50 knowing full well it meant leaving but then did everything they could to stop it !!!! If you believe in democracy but deliberately undermine it or even try to stop it is that not a traitor🤔
|
|
|
Post by 4372 on Jul 22, 2019 12:27:59 GMT
No. The current Plt did not pass Article 50. Absolute horse manure to suggest it is treacherous behaviour.
|
|
|
Post by Eggybread on Jul 22, 2019 12:33:40 GMT
"There is plenty of legal opinion saying the £39 billion is not payable in the event of no deal=Can you find one please. "Why did the EU feel the need to make this part of the withdrawal agreement"=Not 100% sure who started the conversation off about this but we have agreed to have it attached to the withdrawal agreement.Either way we have to pay the money we owe whilst we are still in .The bill is for the last couple of years not after we leave.We agreed this years ago. Google house of lords it was some sort of advice produced by them and has been regularly mentioned. And you are wrong the largest part of the £39 billion is for the transition period after we leave, if there is no deal there is no transition period and there is therefore no payment for the transition period. You seem to be getting confused, we dont pay in arrears to the EU you know.... You claimed legally we have to pay this regardless if that is the case there would be no need to include this again in the withdrawal agreement, the fact the EU wanted this in there should tell you all you need to know about this been legally enforceable already, it isn't or they wouldn't put it in the WA Here we go again. The money IS NOT for the transition period.It is for our commitments what we made back in 2013 up to 2020 which we cannot get out of. The EU budget every 7 years and 2020 is the end of our and everyone else financial commitments .If we left in 2020 we would owe nothing as we would have paid it up in full. The 39 billion pounds is being paid off now so when/if we leave we will pay the outstanding amount which will be a lot less than 39 billion.We would have had to pay 39 billion if we left on March or whenever it was . Simple.
|
|
|
Post by maxplonk on Jul 22, 2019 12:41:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Jul 22, 2019 12:54:37 GMT
Google house of lords it was some sort of advice produced by them and has been regularly mentioned. And you are wrong the largest part of the £39 billion is for the transition period after we leave, if there is no deal there is no transition period and there is therefore no payment for the transition period. You seem to be getting confused, we dont pay in arrears to the EU you know.... You claimed legally we have to pay this regardless if that is the case there would be no need to include this again in the withdrawal agreement, the fact the EU wanted this in there should tell you all you need to know about this been legally enforceable already, it isn't or they wouldn't put it in the WA Here we go again. The money IS NOT for the transition period.It is for our commitments what we made back in 2013 up to 2020 which we cannot get out of. The EU budget every 7 years and 2020 is the end of our and everyone else financial commitments .If we left in 2020 we would owe nothing as we would have paid it up in full. The 39 billion pounds is being paid off now so when/if we leave we will pay the outstanding amount which will be a lot less than 39 billion.We would have had to pay 39 billion if we left on March or whenever it was . Simple. publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201617/ldselect/ldeucom/125/12503.htm#_idTextAnchor003Eggybread or the house of lords subcommittee its a difficult one but I will go for the Lords who basically say above your financial commitment argument is well bollocks once you leave you don't have to pay There must be some very generous pensions too as I have seen in a few places our contribution is £9 billion yet your (discredited) argument claims we have to pay up to 2020 (1 or 2 more years) even allowing for growth of budget and pensions which run for many years after but are not being paid up in full, this £39 billion seems very fishy.
|
|
|
Post by Eggybread on Jul 22, 2019 14:08:47 GMT
Here we go again. The money IS NOT for the transition period.It is for our commitments what we made back in 2013 up to 2020 which we cannot get out of. The EU budget every 7 years and 2020 is the end of our and everyone else financial commitments .If we left in 2020 we would owe nothing as we would have paid it up in full. The 39 billion pounds is being paid off now so when/if we leave we will pay the outstanding amount which will be a lot less than 39 billion.We would have had to pay 39 billion if we left on March or whenever it was . Simple. publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201617/ldselect/ldeucom/125/12503.htm#_idTextAnchor003Eggybread or the house of lords subcommittee its a difficult one but I will go for the Lords who basically say above your financial commitment argument is well bollocks once you leave you don't have to pay There must be some very generous pensions too as I have seen in a few places our contribution is £9 billion yet your (discredited) argument claims we have to pay up to 2020 (1 or 2 more years) even allowing for growth of budget and pensions which run for many years after but are not being paid up in full, this £39 billion seems very fishy. O yes that old contentious chestnut.We will pay up and as I have said before we are actually paying it off now.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Jul 22, 2019 14:25:24 GMT
No. The current Plt did not pass Article 50. Absolute horse manure to suggest it is treacherous behaviour. Even if it did, that's not really the point. Article 50 is the process of leaving the EU. Parliament voted for that because the referendum result dictated it. The wording of Article 50 states that in the following two year period, the EU and the UK negotiate their future relationship, which is the Withdrawal Agreement. Parliament rejected that. Either way, as things currently stand, the legal position is that the UK is due to leave the EU on October 31st.
|
|
|
Post by Eggybread on Jul 22, 2019 14:30:39 GMT
No. The current Plt did not pass Article 50. Absolute horse manure to suggest it is treacherous behaviour. Even if it did, that's not really the point. Article 50 is the process of leaving the EU. Parliament voted for that because the referendum result dictated it. The wording of Article 50 states that in the following two year period, the EU and the UK negotiate their future relationship, which is the Withdrawal Agreement. Parliament rejected that. Either way, as things currently stand, the legal position is that the UK is due to leave the EU on October 31st. Not a cat in hells chance.
|
|