[Politics] Brexit

[GT49er]

Read it again. It's about the level of trade and, of course, on what basis. We will continue to trade but it is highly unlikely to be on the same terms we have now.

Trade. Someone has something to sell. Someone wants to buy it. They haggle. Then it happens. Governments and Eurocrats don't come into it.

 

[Wrong-Direction]

Will leaving actually stop the thousands of people trying to board lorries though? I don't think so

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

 

[drew]

Trade. Someone has something to sell. Someone wants to buy it. They haggle. Then it happens. Governments and Eurocrats don't come into it.

Who imposes tariffs then, the buyer, the seller or the respective governments.

 

[heathgate]

Thing is only about 10% - 14% of acts of parliament are directly related to EU legislation with the lower figure directly enacting EU requirements and the remaining 4% being influence by the EU therefore it seems like we do have control of our lawmaking process. So Brexit claims we don't are a complete fallacy and really don't stand up to scrutiny! Secondly Brexiteers do seem, to me any way, to be mixing up the courts. Firstly the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ensures EU law is interpreted and applied the same in every EU country; ensuring countries and EU institutions abide by EU law. Then there is the European Court of Human Rights that is not part of the EU. It hears applications alleging that a contracting state has breached one or more of the human rights provisions concerning civil and political rights set out in the European Convention on Human Rights and its protocols. The convention currently has something like 47 states as part of the Council Of Europe and its more than likely that the missed informed Brexiteers (the numpties) are getting hot under the collar about this but this has nothing to do with the EU.

Dear oh dear.... actually.. if you include both actual parliamentary laws with BINDING eu regulation.... the figure is widely recognised to be in the region of 53%.....

Have a read of this when you get a chance -

https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-law-what-proportion-influenced-eu/

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[cunning fergus]

QE was as a result of the world wide financial crash and would have happened if we were in the EU or not. The austerity policy was put forward to address the massive over spending of the previous Labour administration I don't recall that was the EU's fault- remember Labour left a note saying " there is no money left". Although, we are a rich country the 5th largest economy in the world, as we are repeatedly told by the leavers, should we not redistribute some of that wealth? So you think the money we save from the not being in the EU will be redistributed to the poor then you really are deluded! I bet your one of these people who think the International Aid Budget should be cut to! I think I see where you are coming from and its not very nice and quite repellent!

Hold on, you are the one saying we are rich country, I am not.

There is vast wealth here of course, however so is there grinding poverty. The U.K. has some of the worst areas of poverty in the EU, which is why places like Cornwall and South Wales are recognised by the EU as requiring assistance.

That does not alter the fact though that MORE UK taxpayers money is given to the EU than we get back. This is unjust and worse still inefficient.

Why on earth would any Government perpetuate an arrangement where we have to borrow money by issuing debt so that UK taxpayers are required service the debt to give the money raised to other countries.

You come across as very comfortable with this policy which serves to impoverish the U.K. poor for the benefit of God knows who in other countries.

It's not justifiable politically, socially or economically.

 

[heathgate]

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...m-find-out-how-much-you-really-know?CMP=fb_gu

You are smarter than the average reader!
You were only 3 percentage points away from the right answer. The average reader was 11 points away from the right answer.

I was 13% away... but interesting the way the questions were framed... some tailoring to ensure a Remain slant is achieved.... ie % inward benefit claimants, vs actual number of outward benefit claimants ( c. 90000 vs 30000 )

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[drew]

Not a lot, austerity cuts are due to the country being in dept. but on your analysis we should have no dept at all when considering that immigration is at a all time high.

About £20b a year so that's about £400m a week.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/nov/05/eu-migrants-uk-gains-20bn-ucl-study

We spend £116.4b on NHS which is about £2,25b a week.

http://www.nhsconfed.org/resources/key-statistics-on-the-nhs


Austerity cuts are more of a political ideology than anything to do with debt. How on earth do you jump to the conclusion that the analysis says we should have no debt because of the current levels of immigration. You are aware that pretty much at every stage of our history, at least since 1694, we have had a national debt and certainly most of the time since the 1815?

 

[heathgate]

My out poster sits proudly in my window.
Roll on 7th june... Farage v pig f*cker Cameron. it's a no contest Farage will piss all over him.

Oddly.. and I am not a Ukip supporter at all, but Neil Hamilton did a decent job alongside Labour's Frank Field in support of Brexit last night on question time.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Come off it had the likes of you been around 200 year ago you'd be hung for treason. traitor.

'Traitor'

 

[drew]

Hold on, you are the one saying we are rich country, I am not.

There is vast wealth here of course, however so is there grinding poverty. The U.K. has some of the worst areas of poverty in the EU, which is why places like Cornwall and South Wales are recognised by the EU as requiring assistance.

That does not alter the fact though that MORE UK taxpayers money is given to the EU than we get back. This is unjust and worse still inefficient.

Why on earth would any Government perpetuate an arrangement where we have to borrow money by issuing debt so that UK taxpayers are required service the debt to give the money raised to other countries.

You come across as very comfortable with this policy which serves to impoverish the U.K. poor for the benefit of God knows who in other countries.

It's not justifiable politically, socially or economically.

Like it or not, we are rich country. What you are alluding to is the poor distribution of that wealth. Do you think that the distribution of wealth will improve with the likes of BJ, Gove and IDS running the show?

With regard to payments to the EU, we pay about £8b a year net, however it has been estimated by some that the benefit to the economy is ten times this amount, so about £80b. I'm not suggesting that with a Brexit that £80b will disappear but it will probably be substantially affected.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Oddly.. and I am not a Ukip supporter at all, but Neil Hamilton did a decent job alongside Labour's Frank Field in support of Brexit last night on question time.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

He did do alright. What I don't like is when someone like Owen Jones needs to harp back to something Hamilton said years ago, just to try and get the audience onside, it just shows the argument is lost.

Can't stand when the left start bringing xenophobia in to things to try and rubbish common sense.

 

[drew]

Come off it had the likes of you been around 200 year ago you'd be hung for treason. traitor.

Had we had and EU 200 years ago we might not have had two world wars!

 

[drew]

He did do alright. What I don't like is when someone like Owen Jones needs to harp back to something Hamilton said years ago, just to try and get the audience onside, it just shows the argument is lost.

Can't stand when the left start bringing xenophobia in to things to try and rubbish common sense.

Is that the same idealistic Neil Hamilton who apparently took cash for questions?

 

[Albumen]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...the-rise-of-far-right-politicians-everywhere/

Good article. The rise of the far-right in the UK in times of depression.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Is that the same idealistic Neil Hamilton who apparently took cash for questions?

Old news. That was years ago. Hamilton spoke sense along with the labour guy.

 

[heathgate]

He did do alright. What I don't like is when someone like Owen Jones needs to harp back to something Hamilton said years ago, just to try and get the audience onside, it just shows the argument is lost.

Can't stand when the left start bringing xenophobia in to things to try and rubbish common sense.

Yes... Jones several times threw in the old historic anti Tory rhetoric expecting the usual cheering and applause, only to be met with stony silence for the most part, I read him as the youngest old labour dinosaur in town.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[drew]

Old news. That was years ago. Hamilton spoke sense along with the labour guy.

Nicely dismissive of something very relevant to someone who was claiming to be in politics for his ideals rather than his pocket.

 

[heathgate]

Nicely dismissive of something very relevant to someone who was claiming to be in politics for his ideals rather than his pocket.

Hilarious one eyed view..... name me a politician that usnt in it for what they can get out of it. Original comment on here was about the contribution last night on QT... and as usual it was drearily digressed to some 20 year old anecdotal rhetoric...instead of keeping to context.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[Chief Wiggum]

 

[brighton fella]

Had we had and EU 200 years ago we might not have had two world wars!

Yugoslavia is a good enough example of what happens when nations merge. enough said..