Brexit...

[Formby]

easy maths ignoring the jobs created, projects approved that would otherwise never happen (Liverpool being a great example of that), opportunities created for business....

 

I think easy maths is all we have to go on at the moment. There's nothing certain. Can you be sure opportunities aren't going to be created for business outside the EU, or that projects won't be approved?

Edited July 3, 2016 by formby

[Matt]

 

I think easy maths is all we have to go on at the moment. There's nothing certain. Can you be sure opportunities aren't going to be created for business outside the EU, or that projects won't be approved?

thats the whole point! The country was forced to vote on a massive point based on nothing other than some fuckwits that were more interested in their own careers! How this can be something to be celebrated, whatever your side, is beyond me. Everyone who voted went on lies and misinformation.

[MikeO]

thats the whole point! The country was forced to vote on a massive point based on nothing other than some fuckwits that were more interested in their own careers! How this can be something to be celebrated, whatever your side, is beyond me. Everyone who voted went on lies and misinformation.

 

Not the case Matt, not going to go back over my own position again but I listened to nobody.

[Matt]

 

Not the case Matt, not going to go back over my own position again but I listened to nobody.

all the reading in the world can't prepare anyone for this - it's not been done

[Matt]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/03/eu-swiss-single-market-access-no-free-movement-citizens?CMP=share_btn_tw

 

The European Union is to show its determination to make no concessions to the UK on Brexit terms by telling Switzerland it will lose access to the single market if it goes ahead with plans to impose controls on the free movement of EU citizens.

 

Edited July 4, 2016 by Matt

[Chach]

 

Net contribution 8.5 billion (hard cash)

 

No such thing as hard cash mate, been off the gold standard for many a year.

UK gov is running budget deficits, so any money given to the EU was spent into existence

[Peter H]

Well we will see the real cost when the deals are hammered out in regards to the singles market.

 

These are hard facts tho.

 

1 - UK only have 2 years to make these deals

2 - Canada spent 7 years on theirs

3 - While EU need the UK, they also need all their member countries to stay put. So they will drive a hard bargain to set an example

4 - Most voted out based on the UK getting control over their own laws and borders. With all deals concerning the singles market you have to follow the EU laws on both borders and laws thus rendering the exit useless

 

the UK will not get what the voters wanted. Farage and Johnson have been lying through their teeths. Johnson is now gracefully bowing out.Farage has admitted his lies. The brexit voters will feel cheated.

 

I just hope Scotland get their independence. They need the EU.

[Peter H]

 

Not the case Matt, not going to go back over my own position again but I listened to nobody.

 

On some level the PR machines had an effect on your opinion. Thats just how it works.

[Peter H]

Just checked.

 

UK contribution to the EU 18 billion

 

Less rebate 5 billion

 

Less EU spending in UK 4.5 billion

 

Net contribution 8.5 billion (hard cash)

 

So would you be ok with the UK paying 8.5 billion (hard cash) just to access the singles market? (and thats without having any say at all in all things related to the EU.)

 

 

 

"To see why this is so, start with Norway’s gross contribution. In 2016, Norway’s payments in relation to its membership of the European single market and other EU programmes it takes part in will come to about £623 million* or £119 a head, according to an analysis by InFacts of data provided by the country’s embassy in the UK.

Unfortunately, there are no public figures for the money Norway gets back from these programmes, making it impossible to be certain what its net contribution is. However, a generous assumption would be that Norway receives an amount per capita similar to what the UK receives from those parts of Europe’s arrangements in which Norway participates—mainly the EU’s science funding programme. (The UK has been notably successful in winning EU science grants.)

Britain’s receipts from EU programmes that Norway also benefits from (again, using generous assumptions) come to £23 per person**. Subtracting that amount from Norway’s gross contribution, we get an estimated net contribution of £96 per head.

What is the equivalent figure for Britain? As InFacts has previously shown, the UK sent £12.9 billion to the EU last year. After subtracting the money the EU spends in the UK and money that the UK would spend anyway because of its commitment to global development targets, the UK’s net contribution to the EU comes to £96 per capita—by coincidence, exactly the same as our estimate for Norway.

This is not to say that Britain would have to pay the same per head as Norway if we quit the EU and adopted the Norwegian model. After all, the UK’s GDP per person is lower than Norway’s. Perhaps the UK could plead poverty and negotiate a lower contribution to the EU in a post-Brexit arrangement. On the other hand, if the split were acrimonious, things could turn out worse."

 

 

 

According to the above, the estimated cost of accessing the single market is going to be around 96 pounds per britt. Or 12.9 billion. Im generous enough to say that you might get the same discount as you mentioned above (the 5 billion) leaving a cost of 8 billion per year. Same as you pay now.

 

(Unless you plead povety which is a terrible idea to all PROUD BRITS)

Edited July 4, 2016 by Peter H

[johnh]

 

A lot of it comes back in rebate though in addition to money that is spent in and on the UK, but you already know that; just don't feel the need to mention it .

 

Anyway, messier and messier....

 

https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2016/06/27/nick-barber-tom-hickman-and-jeff-king-pulling-the-article-50-trigger-parliaments-indispensable-role/

 

Er, my post on the breakdown of the UK payments to the EU was a response to the post above from MikeO which appeared to indicate that after the rebate and money spent in the UK our net payment wasn't significant. You will see that he also said that I don't feel the need to mention it. So I did.

[Peter H]

And now Farage has quit

[Matt]

So... Lets summarize this. The party responsible for privatizing most of Britain's assets in the last 50 years, and actively trying to privatize what little we have left, led the public on a propaganda ridden, fact void, popularity process to promote their own careers, none of whom actually thought Leave would win. Now, being the cowardly little scum-sucking molluscs they are, they running away from a decision which has split Great Britain in half and will take no responsibility themselves. That about right?

[Peter H]

Yup, sums it up perfectly. Theres a few of them left tho. Expecting more resignations within a week or two

[johnh]

So... Lets summarize this. The party responsible for privatizing most of Britain's assets in the last 50 years, and actively trying to privatize what little we have left, led the public on a propaganda ridden, fact void, popularity process to promote their own careers, none of whom actually thought Leave would win. Now, being the cowardly little scum-sucking molluscs they are, they running away from a decision which has split Great Britain in half and will take no responsibility themselves. That about right?

 

The man most conspicuous by their absence is Cameron, who is still, nominally, PM. Over the week-end I read several articles about Brexit and the post Brexit implications, not one mentioned Cameron, yet he is still PM and supposed to be making the immediate decisions regarding our new situation. Talk about dereliction of duty, and he's going to be hanging on until October. He called the referendum, it was his responsibility and he should have had detailed contingency plans in place in the event of a 'leave' vote. The fact that there does not appear to be any such plans in place shows that he expected a 'remain' win. He should be sacked.

[Peter H]

Cameron did the only smart thing he could and stepped down.

 

Its all his fault to begin with. There should never have been a referendum. And he should have been alot more active in the campaigning.

 

Him leaving is the only smart thing that he has done for a long time.

[Matt]

 

The man most conspicuous by their absence is Cameron, who is still, nominally, PM. Over the week-end I read several articles about Brexit and the post Brexit implications, not one mentioned Cameron, yet he is still PM and supposed to be making the immediate decisions regarding our new situation. Talk about dereliction of duty, and he's going to be hanging on until October. He called the referendum, it was his responsibility and he should have had detailed contingency plans in place in the event of a 'leave' vote. The fact that there does not appear to be any such plans in place shows that he expected a 'remain' win. He should be sacked.

Completely agree, but there needs to be someone to step into the position and not a single one of the candidates would have the spine or guille to lead and, most importantly, stabilize the country

[Matt]

Cameron did the only smart thing he could and stepped down.

 

Its all his fault to begin with. There should never have been a referendum. And he should have been alot more active in the campaigning.

 

Him leaving is the only smart thing that he has done for a long time.

It was a cowardly, yet very clever, tactic designed to save his own ass whilst taking out many of his political competitors.

[Peter H]

It was a cowardly, yet very clever, tactic designed to save his own ass whilst taking out many of his political competitors.

Again I repeat, it was the only smart thing to do. Ppl "Bowing out" left right and center.

 

Im sure that you all read the comment in the Guardian? That guy wasnt far off was he?

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/RobPulseNews/status/746844332855001088/photo/1

[Peter H]

Dunno about cowardly tho. Staying on as a PM, triggering article 50 would have been cowardly IMO

[Matt]

Again I repeat, it was the only smart thing to do. Ppl "Bowing out" left right and center.

 

Im sure that you all read the comment in the Guardian? That guy wasnt far off was he?

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/RobPulseNews/status/746844332855001088/photo/1

I know, I'm just reinforcing the point

 

 

Dunno about cowardly tho. Staying on as a PM, triggering article 50 would have been cowardly IMO

Really? Cowardly doesn't come close to it in my opinion - he's running away from a shitstorm he created. If he had stayed and done his job, no matter how much I despise the man, I couldn't have called him a coward.

[Peter H]

He gave up his job, and gave the UK a chance to not leave the EU.

 

Had he stayed and triggered article 50 there would have been no turning back.

[Matt]

He gave up his job, and gave the UK a chance to not leave the EU.

 

Had he stayed and triggered article 50 there would have been no turning back.

Don't see how that would be cowardly, but I don't want to defend that bloated bag of infected puss so I'll agree with you

[Peter H]

Lol

[johnh]

Cameron did the only smart thing he could and stepped down.

 

Its all his fault to begin with. There should never have been a referendum. And he should have been alot more active in the campaigning.

 

Him leaving is the only smart thing that he has done for a long time.

 

I don't think he could have been more active in the campaigning than he was. In my opinion, he should have adopted the opposite tactics and stayed out of (and above) the campaigning, leaving it all to Osborne. He then could have continued as PM. Poor political nous, he deserves the sack.

[Peter H]

 

I don't think he could have been more active in the campaigning than he was. In my opinion, he should have adopted the opposite tactics and stayed out of (and above) the campaigning, leaving it all to Osborne. He then could have continued as PM. Poor political nous, he deserves the sack.

 

I agree that he deserves the sack. Just for agreeing to the referendum in the first place. oh and for sticking his todger into the mouth of a pig

Edited July 4, 2016 by Peter H

[MikeO]

 

On some level the PR machines had an effect on your opinion. Thats just how it works.

 

No they haven't. My view is, was and always will be an ideological one; I couldn't give a shit if "we're" better off economically. I've had the same World view (which I came to all by myself) for more than twenty years now and no PR machine on the planet's going to change it.

[johnh]

Doesn't matter anyway. The Referendum was not legally binding, it was "advisory".

 

The government asked the opinion of the public, got an answer they didn't like and so will now see about the best method to consign the result to the dustbin.

 

It was a nice exercise in democracy for the proles but ultimately we will see that democracy doesn't really exist anymore in the way that we imagine it does.

 

'democracy' does still exist except that it's 'democracy' EU style.

[Matt]

 

'democracy' does still exist except that it's 'democracy' EU style.

if our government vote against it, is that the EUs fault?

[MikeO]

It's our fault for electing these morons in the first place. Every single one of them is bought and paid for. So long as we all have our football, booze and bets hey!

 

Bingo.

[Cornish Steve]

Just checked.

 

UK contribution to the EU 18 billion

 

Less rebate 5 billion

 

Less EU spending in UK 4.5 billion

 

Net contribution 8.5 billion (hard cash)

 

Over the course of the last parliament, the government's austerity programme saved the country 36 billion. That was more than wiped out by Britain's net contribution to the EU.

Edited July 4, 2016 by Cornish Steve