OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[swaledale]

Sorry, but they do play it down. http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/01/i...d-is-shameful/
You'd never catch the Guardian reporting on it or the BBC? Well, let's say no more.
The main stream press suppress most of this, but the internet is a game changer.
That is why you have a Brexit. Before it was what the tv wanted to tell you, or newspapers with their own agenda. No more.

Wow here comes the one who does not know why NATO was formed and seems to want to please Putin by encouraging right wing uprisings across europe!

The internet is as full of ****e as any other media, actually probably more because there is so much false news and of course you will only believe sources that suit your agenda, you believe what you want to, the rest of us will sift through the facts.

Tricky your clearly an old fart reactionary who wants the world to return to those "golden years" of the 50's when we did the invading and raping..not gonna happen and I just love how you think the Trump's and Farage's of this world are interested in the "ordinary" person..just like a certain Adolf promised an economic miracle to the german people, shame they didn't read the runes.......mmm there is one born every minute it seems.

[Ram59]

£350 million is what we would pay to the EU budget, without the rebate.

But the UK actually pays just under £250 million a week so we dont send or pay £350 million per week.

Now, £88m a week is paid back to the UK in the form of payments to support things like agriculture and regional development, leaving a net contribution of £188m a week.

Out of that, £26m a week goes directly to private sector organisations in the UK such as universities to fund research, leaving £161m a week going to run EU institutions, pan-European projects and projects in other countries.

And of course being in the EU has economic benefits, though these are harder to put figures on, but given our economy is as I've said the 5th largest and we have an unemployment rate of less than 4.8% then we clearly haven't suffered economically from being in the EU.

That bus lane and road you mention, maybe part funded from EU development funds - used to promote growth but it wasn't built at the behest of the EU, there is a difference.

Yes farm payments are a major EU regulation, they are a mess (though thats why our food is relatively cheap) and favour big farms over small farms - France incidentally has more small inefficient farms than the UK whose big farmers do very well from EU subsidies - one may question why tax payers should fund a business that is not economic,.

Over 50% of regulations from the EU concern farming and climate issues, these are highly unlikely to be dumped by the UK government when we leave - other regulations will remain, the UK government is famous for gold plating regulations in a way other Eu countries dont.

As for remain being a bigger gamble than leave - all I can do is use an analogy - say your in the 4th storey of a house and there is something that is unpleasant or irritates you in the house, which would affect you if you left by the stairs - now if this something was fleas, rats, a flood even a nasty virus, you would still probabely use the stairs as being safer and more under your control, whereas if it was a fire or a deadly gas then the gamble of jumping from the 4th floor maybe a choice, but surely not one you would take unless there was no othe roption?

Remaining, we had a veto and influence, and despite all the issues benefitted from, leaving is a jump into the unknown, it might be an improvement, but the evidence suggests it wont be.

So now you agree that £161m per week goes to the eu to be spent elsewhere and that all we receive is debatably a better economy, which will only be proven one way or another after we leave. So, the average taxpayer subsidises the eu to the tune of £5 per week, which would be enough to build 2 new schools per week or a new super hospital, like the one in Birmingham every 3 weeks, or 1500 new homes every week. I know where I want my money spent.

Subject to negotiation, we may still have most of the benefits of membership, being access to the single market like many other countries in the world. Even if our companies were charged a 5% levy on their goods, with the lowering in value of the pound, their goods will still be cheaper than the beginning of June.

So you're saying that while we stick to the eu rules, no one else bothers and gets away with it. You want to be a member of a group like that?

Yes, there are many good regulations and laws to come out of the eu, but there are also many bad ones which are not suitable for a country like ours. It would be nice to pick and choose which ones we like, I mean they don't have a copyright on any laws do they?

Britain joined 8 other countries in the eec, a common market, in 1973. Would we have joined if we had known that it would turn into a 28 country superstate where many of our laws and regulations would be taken out of our hands? Tony Benn was ridiculed when he said that this would happen.

So we move on to the power and influence that we have now. Lets compare with Malta, we have 300 times their economy, do we have any more power, no because they use the euro, they probably have more than us. I don't think they contribute £161m per week to the coffers either. Also, how can the eu work when now not only do individual countries have the veto, even regions in a country can hold up trade negotiations, ie. Wallonia region in Belgium regarding the Canada trade deal.

The eu is too large and inefficient to be fit for purpose and I agree with you that in an ideal world, it would be best to change from within, but sadly this wont happen. They had the chance when Cameron tried to get a few small changes and was rejected.

Btw, I asked Anag, but had no reply, were you in favour of joining the euro? Many of the same arguments were put forward then.

[Andy_Faber]

So now you agree that £161m per week goes to the eu to be spent elsewhere and that all we receive is debatably a better economy, which will only be proven one way or another after we leave. So, the average taxpayer subsidises the eu to the tune of £5 per week, which would be enough to build 2 new schools per week or a new super hospital, like the one in Birmingham every 3 weeks, or 1500 new homes every week. I know where I want my money spent, blah blah The eu is too large and inefficient to be fit for purpose

I was writing a response to Swale but Ram 59 wrote this most of which was in my response so I'll just say, broadly speaking, agreeing with Ram59. Remoaners have bleated on about the £350m lie, and yes it was, but the true figure whatever it is is still a BLOODY BIG number, and I'd rather my £5 went to Colne or Workington than Rumania or Hungary, and equally importantly that if the Govt choose not to do that I can be part of the mass movement that votes them out.

[ramAnag]

So now you agree that £161m per week goes to the eu to be spent elsewhere and that all we receive is debatably a better economy, which will only be proven one way or another after we leave. So, the average taxpayer subsidises the eu to the tune of £5 per week, which would be enough to build 2 new schools per week or a new super hospital, like the one in Birmingham every 3 weeks, or 1500 new homes every week. I know where I want my money spent.

Subject to negotiation, we may still have most of the benefits of membership, being access to the single market like many other countries in the world. Even if our companies were charged a 5% levy on their goods, with the lowering in value of the pound, their goods will still be cheaper than the beginning of June.

So you're saying that while we stick to the eu rules, no one else bothers and gets away with it. You want to be a member of a group like that?

Yes, there are many good regulations and laws to come out of the eu, but there are also many bad ones which are not suitable for a country like ours. It would be nice to pick and choose which ones we like, I mean they don't have a copyright on any laws do they?

Britain joined 8 other countries in the eec, a common market, in 1973. Would we have joined if we had known that it would turn into a 28 country superstate where many of our laws and regulations would be taken out of our hands? Tony Benn was ridiculed when he said that this would happen.

So we move on to the power and influence that we have now. Lets compare with Malta, we have 300 times their economy, do we have any more power, no because they use the euro, they probably have more than us. I don't think they contribute £161m per week to the coffers either. Also, how can the eu work when now not only do individual countries have the veto, even regions in a country can hold up trade negotiations, ie. Wallonia region in Belgium regarding the Canada trade deal.

The eu is too large and inefficient to be fit for purpose and I agree with you that in an ideal world, it would be best to change from within, but sadly this wont happen. They had the chance when Cameron tried to get a few small changes and was rejected.

Btw, I asked Anag, but had no reply, were you in favour of joining the euro? Many of the same arguments were put forward then.

Sorry, missed that question. Tbh I didn't consider myself sufficiently expert to have a strong opinion on joining the euro. I don't think any Remainers think that all is perfect in the EU garden either but we don't appear to have done too badly out of it and we're more likely to bring about the required change from within than by leaving and rendering ourselves powerless.

[Ram59]

Sorry, missed that question. Tbh I didn't consider myself sufficiently expert to have a strong opinion on joining the euro. I don't think any Remainers think that all is perfect in the EU garden either but we don't appear to have done too badly out of it and we're more likely to bring about the required change from within than by leaving and rendering ourselves powerless.

We are really powerful now, being dictated to by the Wallonia region of Belgium! If we were not in the eu, we would have negotiated our own deal with Canada.

If you believe we can change the eu from within, you probably believe in father Christmas as well. In fact, brexit may be the wake up call the eu needs, maybe it will bring change. I wouldn't rule out significant changes and a second referendum.

[ramAnag]

We are really powerful now, being dictated to by the Wallonia region of Belgium! If we were not in the eu, we would have negotiated our own deal with Canada.

If you believe we can change the eu from within, you probably believe in father Christmas as well. In fact, brexit may be the wake up call the eu needs, maybe it will bring change. I wouldn't rule out significant changes and a second referendum.

But as has been pointed out elsewhere...during our time within the EEC/EU we have emerged as one of the five or six wealthiest nations on the planet...can't have done us so much harm although it's seriously difficult to believe that at times when you consider the NHS crisis and the way many of the population are treated.

Give me an example of how leaving an organisation increases any individual or individual country's ability to exert influence or bring about change.

[Andy_Faber]

But as has been pointed out elsewhere...during our time within the EEC/EU we have emerged as one of the five or six wealthiest nations on the planet...can't have done us so much harm although it's seriously difficult to believe that at times when you consider the NHS crisis and the way many of the population are treated.

Give me an example of how leaving an organisation increases any individual or individual country's ability to exert influence or bring about change.

You fell in a big trap there....

USA. The how's obvious. Independance.

[ramAnag]

You fell in a big trap there....

USA. The how's obvious. Independance.

Oops...take your point, but not entirely comparable and they haven't exactly been queuing up to leave have they? Well not before Trump and California fell out anyway.

[Andy_Faber]

Oops...take your point, but not entirely comparable and they haven't exactly been queuing up to leave have they? Well not before Trump and California fell out anyway.

At least you took it in good spirit, Swale would still be constructing his response.

Amongst all this macro gobbledigook we keep spouting, on a personal level the referendum, and especially the response to the result, has soured my opinion of family, friends and public figures more than anything ever apart from the rise of facebook. There sure are some sore losers and ungratious winners out there

[Ram59]

But as has been pointed out elsewhere...during our time within the EEC/EU we have emerged as one of the five or six wealthiest nations on the planet...can't have done us so much harm although it's seriously difficult to believe that at times when you consider the NHS crisis and the way many of the population are treated.

Give me an example of how leaving an organisation increases any individual or individual country's ability to exert influence or bring about change.

I'm not interested in exerting pressure or influencing change in the eu, which I think is impossible anyway.

As a member of the G7, we have a significant say in World Trade and our role in NATO gives us a voice in world affairs. Are you saying because they're a member of the eu, Malta will have a greater influence worldwide?

[ramAnag]

I'm not interested in exerting pressure or influencing change in the eu, which I think is impossible anyway.

As a member of the G7, we have a significant say in World Trade and our role in NATO gives us a voice in world affairs. Are you saying because they're a member of the eu, Malta will have a greater influence worldwide?

You're right of course about the G7 and NATO. I just don't understand your hostility to our continental neighbours and why you and the Brexiteers in general seem so hell bent on going it alone especially when our membership of the EU has so obviously coincided with a period of relative prosperity. I guess we're never going to agree...as for Malta...it's not a place I know anything about but I imagine the Maltese clearly gain some sense of security from their membership.

[Ram59]

I'm sure Malta get a great sense of security, that's the problem with the over bloated eu.

With so many little countries and even regions (Wallonia) having an equal and disproportionate power of veto, the eu will cost us more and more.

Next time we want a trade deal sorted with another major nation, what will happen? I'll tell you, we'll have another Wallonia, it might be even be a whole country this time like Malta, which is 300 times smaller in GDP than us. So it comes down to us net contributing countries effectively paying the small countries sweeteners so we can go about our business. This won't stop at trade deals either, they can effectively blackmail us on all decisions. IE. 'we would like to agree with that decision, but we would really like the eu to pay for a new parliament building for us '

Surely you can't be be happy with this state of affairs.

[roger_ramjet]

Or these affairs of state....

[Andy_Faber]

For those wanting some stats to reinforce our waffle, this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/eur...6097.stm#start is a useful starter for ten. It shows AFTER REBATE what UK contributes and compares it to all other countries in EU. It also explains the rationale for the rebate, which wasn't 'negotiated by Margaret thatcher' is was a result of a lot of detailed negotiation before she stole the limelight. the simple maths of UK leaving and then negotiating a free trade deal with EU means there's a £3bn hole in the EU budget, so the remaining wealthy nations will have to contribute more or the poorer countries getting less. My admittedly flaky assessment is that UK leaving will be a big but manageable bump in the road for EU, but if another biggie follows suit (especially The Netherlands) it won't be so easy.

[swaledale]

So now you agree that £161m per week goes to the eu to be spent elsewhere and that all we receive is debatably a better economy, which will only be proven one way or another after we leave. So, the average taxpayer subsidises the eu to the tune of £5 per week, which would be enough to build 2 new schools per week or a new super hospital, like the one in Birmingham every 3 weeks, or 1500 new homes every week. I know where I want my money spent.

Subject to negotiation, we may still have most of the benefits of membership, being access to the single market like many other countries in the world. Even if our companies were charged a 5% levy on their goods, with the lowering in value of the pound, their goods will still be cheaper than the beginning of June.

So you're saying that while we stick to the eu rules, no one else bothers and gets away with it. You want to be a member of a group like that?

Yes, there are many good regulations and laws to come out of the eu, but there are also many bad ones which are not suitable for a country like ours. It would be nice to pick and choose which ones we like, I mean they don't have a copyright on any laws do they?

Britain joined 8 other countries in the eec, a common market, in 1973. Would we have joined if we had known that it would turn into a 28 country superstate where many of our laws and regulations would be taken out of our hands? Tony Benn was ridiculed when he said that this would happen.

So we move on to the power and influence that we have now. Lets compare with Malta, we have 300 times their economy, do we have any more power, no because they use the euro, they probably have more than us. I don't think they contribute £161m per week to the coffers either. Also, how can the eu work when now not only do individual countries have the veto, even regions in a country can hold up trade negotiations, ie. Wallonia region in Belgium regarding the Canada trade deal.

The eu is too large and inefficient to be fit for purpose and I agree with you that in an ideal world, it would be best to change from within, but sadly this wont happen. They had the chance when Cameron tried to get a few small changes and was rejected.

Btw, I asked Anag, but had no reply, were you in favour of joining the euro? Many of the same arguments were put forward then.

The economic benefits arent debateable its the economic benefit of Bexit that highly debateable!

A CBI review puts the net benefit of EU membership to the UK in the region of 4-5% of GDP or £62bn-£78bn a year – roughly the economies of the North East and Northern Ireland taken together.

Its a complete simplistic fallacy to say that the money that goes in contributions to the EU would be available for the things you mention - most would go on subsidies to farmers, the millions it will cost over the enxt decade to extricate ourselves from the EU and the cost of employing all those officials who will be administering the paperwork which Brexit will mean such as visas, work permits, checking and enforcing regulations etc etc.

UK firms’ access to the Single Market goes beyond a standard free-trade agreement - the EU has eliminated tariff barriers and customs procedures within its borders, and has taken strides towards removing non-tariff barriers - such as different product regulations - by enforcing EU-wide competition law and coordinating product regulations.

Investment flows across borders inside the EU have roughly doubled following the introduction of the Single Market. As the EU’s leading investment destination, the UK was a key beneficiary: the EU accounted for 47% of the UK’s stock of inward FDI at the end of 2011, with investments worth over $1.2 trillion.

he UK’s net contribution to the EU budget is around €7.3bn, or 0.4% of GDP. As a comparison that’s around a quarter of what the UK spends on the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, and less than an eighth of the UK’s defence spend. The £116 per person net contribution is less than that from Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Germany and the Netherlands.

Exactly what laws from the Eu are bad for the UK?

And to answer your euro question, IF it had been properly handled and strict entry criteria applied, the Euro made sense, unfortunately of course this did not happen and we wisely remained outside of it. As we didnt give up control over border checks.