This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Post EU World
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 Spiderman  Horsham 18 Feb 23 7.44am |
  |
|---|---|
|
Not sure if this is the correct thread. Apologies if not. Can some of our Irish based posters throw some more light on this?
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 18 Feb 23 9.50am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by HKOwen
You talk about savings then go on to say there has been no measurement of such and would be difficult to do. Do you not see the self contradiction ? No, because there isn’t one. That they haven’t been measured doesn’t mean they don’t exist, and can therefore just be ignored. Intuitively they must be huge so I hope someone does find a way of quantifying them as it would enable the debate to take place more rationally and enable people to realise the fallacy of the economic arguments in favour of us leaving.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
cryrst  The garden of England 18 Feb 23 9.58am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
No, because there isn’t one. That they haven’t been measured doesn’t mean they don’t exist, and can therefore just be ignored. Intuitively they must be huge so I hope someone does find a way of quantifying them as it would enable the debate to take place more rationally and enable people to realise the fallacy of the economic arguments in favour of us leaving. Each individual change in policy would need comparing. The first is a saving of around £10 billion. So there’s a starter. Next is trade but each different type of goods needs isolating and comparing. If our general GDP goes up or at least doesn’t drop then brexit isn’t the problem some seem to want it to be. Would that be a fair summary of where we are at?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| silvertop Portishead 18 Feb 23 10.03am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by SW19 CPFC
Based on what specifically though As in – amount we paid out under obligation vs the amount we got back in grants etc.? Or the amount we paid out under obligation, cost of taking on excess immigrants etc. against the amount we got back in grants, trade, economic benefits generally and from said immigrant etc. etc. What I'm after is two numbers, both based on all measurable and identifiable negative (outgoings, eg. 'mandatory' annual payments) vs. all measurable and identifiable positives (incomings) One number for pre-exit, say 2016 One number for 2022 One projected number for 2032 As before, the whole 'but it cost us this' vs. 'we benefitted from that' argument seems pointless otherwise. Sure you can point to stats showing savings made since leaving but it's selective and doesn't tell the whole story (unless that chart takes into account all possible measurable data, but I'm not sure it does?) Not an easy task but surely someone must have done it. My guess is net positive 2016, net negative 2022. As for 2032, obviously projections are pretty rubbish anyway but would be an interesting exercise nonetheless. Edited by SW19 CPFC (17 Feb 2023 8.40pm) Yes I'd love to see such figures as well. And whatever is produced must factor in covid and Ukraine as anomalies. A fiendishly difficult task if not impossible. And then as sure as night follows day there will be a highly politicisized battle of interpretation. Brexiteers will blame any negatives on execution and them pesky foreigners. Remainers will doubtless do the same but based on different criteria. The statos who worked so hard on producing the figures will wonder why they bothered.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 18 Feb 23 10.03am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
Dear me, just rejoin then. It would be like shooting ourselves in the head. Why? Our lives would be enhanced , not ended, by rejoining! We will rejoin. In what way and when are open questions but not if. The young understand why. They want it. They already outnumber those who don’t. They aren’t wedded to outdated visions of Britain’s place in the world.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Teddy Eagle  18 Feb 23 10.10am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Why? Our lives would be enhanced , not ended, by rejoining! We will rejoin. In what way and when are open questions but not if. The young understand why. They want it. They already outnumber those who don’t. They aren’t wedded to outdated visions of Britain’s place in the world. These are the young who need Roald Dahl stories to be rewritten to stop them being offended? We should certainly follow their wise counsel.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 18 Feb 23 10.14am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
Each individual change in policy would need comparing. The first is a saving of around £10 billion. So there’s a starter. Next is trade but each different type of goods needs isolating and comparing. If our general GDP goes up or at least doesn’t drop then brexit isn’t the problem some seem to want it to be. Would that be a fair summary of where we are at? No, because you miss the biggest costs of all. These wil be the need to develop and regulate every aspect of life ourselves, rather than simply transferring those developed centrally into UK law. Such costs are enormous. Not only in their preparation but in the subsequent oversight. That extends to businesses whenever there is a variance with other regulatory regimes, as would inevitability hapen with the EU. These are hidden costs at the moment but they need to be brought into the light so informed judgements can be made. They could though be avoided if we maintain regulatory alignment with the EU but that would cost.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 18 Feb 23 10.19am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
These are the young who need Roald Dahl stories to be rewritten to stop them being offended? We should certainly follow their wise counsel. All our young people “need” this? Really? Our youth are as mixed as every generation but in general they are more aware of the benefits of EU membership than our generation.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Teddy Eagle 18 Feb 23 10.26am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
All our young people “need” this? Really? Our youth are as mixed as every generation but in general they are more aware of the benefits of EU membership than our generation. Well, it's happening so it appears so.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 18 Feb 23 10.44am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Well, it's happening so it appears so. And they are good reasons but it does seem we are getting more in their 20s and 30s. People I regard as part of the younger generation. It’s always easy to poke fun at the ridiculous, whatever it’s source but there is huge merit in being awake to needed change, rather than asleep and unaware of it.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Teddy Eagle 18 Feb 23 10.47am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
And they are good reasons but it does seem we are getting more in their 20s and 30s. People I regard as part of the younger generation. It’s always easy to poke fun at the ridiculous, whatever it’s source but there is huge merit in being awake to needed change, rather than asleep and unaware of it. Depends on the change and who decides on how needed it is.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
PalazioVecchio  south pole 18 Feb 23 10.57am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
to follow your logic...........why waste time buying your missus flowers for Valentines day ? when Chad at the end of your street is doing the identical work in buying flowers for all the women. the EU is for Cuckolds who want to pay for the upkeep of another man's kids. Literally. The wholesale importation of military aged men and an overly generous Welfare State for single mothers.....its end-game. Joe , the minimum-wage worker, will never own a house, never have 3 or 4 kids, never be a head of household. Daddy taxman is now the uber-head of household. The Gengis Khan of our destiny. Edited by PalazioVecchio (18 Feb 2023 11.28am)
Kayla did Anfield & Old Trafford |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.