[Politics] Brexit

[GT49er]

I suppose if there's one positive to take from Coronavirus, it's that it's likely to result in a higher number of fatalities among the old than the young, so it brings our inevitable rejoining of the EU a little closer.

.............. so I guess you'll be dancing in the street if your parents/grandparents and any of their friends snuff it through Coronavirus then? It'll be worth it if it gets us nearer to re-joining the EU, eh?

 

[melias shoes]

.............. so I guess you'll be dancing in the street if your parents/grandparents and any of their friends snuff it through Coronavirus then? It'll be worth it if it gets us nearer to re-joining the EU, eh?

Incredible post and it go a thumbsup as well.

 

[Hampster Gull]

It makes me smile whenever Leave Voters come onto this thread and comment/complain that there is still a dialogue going on; they classify ongoing concerns as 'doom-mongering' (a typically facile label) and seem genuinely irritated and/or amused that Remain Voters are still thinking and writing about Brexit fallout.
Perhaps they need reminding that this is what democracy looks like!

Maybe they are snowflakes

 

[Bodian]

Brexit will be spun even more now. Any bad economic outcomes will be entirely the fault of Coronavirus, whilst there could be an upswing in the economy following the Tories Damascene conversion to borrowing and spending - which the Brexiteers will claim is all to do with Brexit.

 

[beorhthelm]

We were told the UK had to charge VAT on sanitary products for women as a luxury because the EU ordered it, but Germany has abolished it there. More untruths.

is that actually abolished, or change from luxury 19% rate to household goods 7% rate? it would be disappointing to leave just as the EU change the very clear rules on VAT.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

Brexit will be spun even more now. Any bad economic outcomes will be entirely the fault of Coronavirus, whilst there could be an upswing in the economy following the Tories Damascene conversion to borrowing and spending - which the Brexiteers will claim is all to do with Brexit.

Of course. And the usual media suspects will be complicit, just as they were in blaming the Labour government for the difficulties caused by the global financial crisis in 2008.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

is that actually abolished, or change from luxury 19% rate to household goods 7% rate? it would be disappointing to leave just as the EU change the very clear rules on VAT.

Abolished the luxury rating.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

We were told the UK had to charge VAT on sanitary products for women as a luxury because the EU ordered it, but Germany has abolished it there. More untruths.

Abolished the luxury rating.

So if you're going to accuse leavers of saying 'untruths' it's best you don't also do so.

Firstly, Germany hasn't 'Abolished the luxury rating' - it still exists - what you mean is that sanitary products have been moved to another rating - 7% - as was pointed out to you ( awaits the 'you're splitting hairs' type post, yet that is what you have posted in an attempt of one upmanship ). They can't abolish VAT on sanitary products because, as it currently stands, EU rules prevent it. You might not like it but that is a fact. The fact is that members states have restrictions on what they can do around VAT - restrictions placed on them by the EU. I'll accept that the EU is looking at removing VAT from these products but THAT is EXACTLY the point many leavers ( me included ) make - we as a supposed sovereign nation should have complete control over our tax policy. We don't ..... well not until early next year. So stop trying to sell it as an untruth ..... it isn't .... Germany still has VAT on sanitary products .... as well you know ..... and they can't yet remove it because they are members of the EU.

 

[knocky1]

.... Germany still has VAT on sanitary products .... as well you know ..... and they can't yet remove it because they are members of the EU.

It’s going to be bloody messy when they do.

 

[sparkie]

Brexit will be spun even more now. Any bad economic outcomes will be entirely the fault of Coronavirus, whilst there could be an upswing in the economy following the Tories Damascene conversion to borrowing and spending - which the Brexiteers will claim is all to do with Brexit.

This.

The saving grace is that the Government no longer have to blame the EU, so we won't come across as being so obnoxious all the time any more.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

So if you're going to accuse leavers of saying 'untruths' it's best you don't also do so.

Firstly, Germany hasn't 'Abolished the luxury rating' - it still exists - what you mean is that sanitary products have been moved to another rating - 7% - as was pointed out to you ( awaits the 'you're splitting hairs' type post, yet that is what you have posted in an attempt of one upmanship ). They can't abolish VAT on sanitary products because, as it currently stands, EU rules prevent it. You might not like it but that is a fact. The fact is that members states have restrictions on what they can do around VAT - restrictions placed on them by the EU. I'll accept that the EU is looking at removing VAT from these products but THAT is EXACTLY the point many leavers ( me included ) make - we as a supposed sovereign nation should have complete control over our tax policy. We don't ..... well not until early next year. So stop trying to sell it as an untruth ..... it isn't .... Germany still has VAT on sanitary products .... as well you know ..... and they can't yet remove it because they are members of the EU.

Isn't it the case that the government donates the relatively small amount raised from this VAT to relevant good causes? Targeting money in this way rather than giving every woman in the country, however rich, a £2 pa tax refund sounds quite sensible, however much puce-faced backbench tories want to have a row about it. I know that you will claim that your argument is based on principle but even after Brexit there will be some tax moves the government will find it difficult to make if it wishes to sign the best trade agreements possible with other countries. There is something 19th century about the ERG vision of stand-alone sovereignty.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Isn't it the case that the government donates the relatively small amount raised from this VAT to relevant good causes? Targeting money in this way rather than giving every woman in the country, however rich, a £2 pa tax refund sounds quite sensible, however much puce-faced backbench tories want to have a row about it. I know that you will claim that your argument is based on principle but even after Brexit there will be some tax moves the government will find it difficult to make if it wishes to sign the best trade agreements possible with other countries. There is something 19th century about the ERG vision of stand-alone sovereignty.

That is indeed the case about the donation. You are correct that my argument is more about a sovereign nation being able to control it's entire tax policy and not have some proposed policies curtailed by a political union's rules. Equally it is to point out that some remainers claims about 'lies' are actually lies in themselves - just look at TB's posts on this VAT matter. It's a statement of fact that Germany have NOT removed VAT from sanitary products ( and couldn't ), they've just lowered them. Equally, we can't until the end of the year remove VAT for essential service such as gas and electric. I'd also suggest we should remove VAT from internet access - but guess what - we can't while 'members' of the EU.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

That is indeed the case about the donation. You are correct that my argument is more about a sovereign nation being able to control it's entire tax policy and not have some proposed policies curtailed by a political union's rules. Equally it is to point out that some remainers claims about 'lies' are actually lies in themselves - just look at TB's posts on this VAT matter. It's a statement of fact that Germany have NOT removed VAT from sanitary products ( and couldn't ), they've just lowered them. Equally, we can't until the end of the year remove VAT for essential service such as gas and electric. I'd also suggest we should remove VAT from internet access - but guess what - we can't while 'members' of the EU.

In the quest for a little bit of proportionality, here are a couple of figures.:

1. Projected saving for the average woman (over a lifetime) on sanitary products following our sovereign government's decision to adjust VAT = £40

2. Projected loss per individual per year of the Johnson deal (if he gets it) by 2034 = £2250

Now, I'm not great with figures but I reckon that this doesn't represent the best argument for leaving the EU. In fact I'd say that it would be laughable were it not so sad.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

In the quest for a little bit of proportionality, here are a couple of figures.:

1. Projected saving for the average woman (over a lifetime) on sanitary products following our sovereign government's decision to adjust VAT = £40

2. Projected loss per individual per year of the Johnson deal (if he gets it) by 2034 = £2250

Now, I'm not great with figures but I reckon that this doesn't represent the best argument for leaving the EU. In fact I'd say that it would be laughable were it not so sad.

Somewhat depends on your opinion of why we leave. For me, it's less about the money ( i.e. if we as a country or individuals gain or lose financially ) and more having the power over our own rules and destiny. Having power devolved to the people as close as possible ( as the UK is doing ) or centralising the power ( as per the EU ). I don't, nor won't, put a financial 'price' on that - I'm not money or wealth driven - aka greedy.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

In the quest for a little bit of proportionality, here are a couple of figures.:

1. Projected saving for the average woman (over a lifetime) on sanitary products following our sovereign government's decision to adjust VAT = £40

2. Projected loss per individual per year of the Johnson deal (if he gets it) by 2034 = £2250

Now, I'm not great with figures but I reckon that this doesn't represent the best argument for leaving the EU. In fact I'd say that it would be laughable were it not so sad.

I would guess that WS would argue that it's the principle what matters, whatever the cost. It is a legitimate position but I am not sure that a single mother living on the breadline in Grimsby would agree with him. The point I was trying to make though was that the principle itself is a bit of an illusion: in practical terms no country wanting to crack trade deals around the world is completely free to develop its own rules, particularly on matters such as subsidies and taxation. The ERG, like its ex-leader, has a 19th century view of these matters and seems to have persuaded many that they still apply.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Somewhat depends on your opinion of why we leave. For me, it's less about the money ( i.e. if we as a country or individuals gain or lose financially ) and more having the power over our own rules and destiny. Having power devolved to the people as close as possible ( as the UK is doing ) or centralising the power ( as per the EU ). I don't, nor won't, put a financial 'price' on that - I'm not money or wealth driven - aka greedy.

I understand completely why you wanted to leave and think that the principle of having power as close to the people as possible is a very good one. I'm not a great fan of centralising power myself. However, I do recognise the importance of a stable growing economy to the UK and recognise the compromises that have to be made to achieve that.

However, ignoring all that and trying to do what you want in an inter-connected, inter-dependant 21st century society, regardless of cost is, I believe, extremely naive and harmful, particularly to the poorest parts of society.

So that's where we genuinely disagree, you think taking into account the cost of your principles on society is greedy, I think not taking the cost to society into account is naive.

 

[BeHereNow]

https://youtu.be/SS6dWcziij8

 

[Grombleton]

https://youtu.be/SS6dWcziij8

Really? Carl Benjamin? Really?

 

[spence]

Really? Carl Benjamin? Really?

A youtuber with around a quarter of a million subscribers or a heavily sedated man talking bollox on a football forum.
Difficult choice.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

Somewhat depends on your opinion of why we leave. For me, it's less about the money ( i.e. if we as a country or individuals gain or lose financially ) and more having the power over our own rules and destiny. Having power devolved to the people as close as possible ( as the UK is doing ) or centralising the power ( as per the EU ). I don't, nor won't, put a financial 'price' on that - I'm not money or wealth driven - aka greedy.

I am sure my single mum on the breadline in Grimsby would be concerned with money but I am surprised that you would equate this with greed.

The mum is of course my hypothesis. Perhaps I could offer an actual relative living near Grimsby, a father grieving the fact that the higher education and early career dreams of two of his children are being compromised by the loss of their status as citizens of a wider Europe. More greed?