This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 Stirlingsays  21 Nov 17 9.37am |
   |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Kermit8
And faux patriots loyalties lie with anyone/anything that can get rid of what p1sses them off personally about the UK rather than with the UK itself. Time will tell who the 'faux patriots' are.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| Hansy 21 Nov 17 9.41am |
|
|---|---|
|
It's not about patriots. EU is not a country, as much as they try to be. What gets me is people are 'ashamed' to be British. There was a time where the UK was in two world wars, losing at certain points. The UK/IRA aggression in NI (Whichever way you look at it), the Falklands, the illegal war in Iraq. No where near as many people were ashamed to be British during those times. Yet people are now because the UK decided not to be dictated by the EU? These same remoaners are the same ones that supporter Corbyn and his hike of the deficit and debt. This would be during the perio where we are losing jobs and businesses to the EU. Come on.... Edited by Hansy (21 Nov 2017 9.41am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| CambridgeEagle Sydenham 21 Nov 17 9.41am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hansy
I think it is stupid of the EU to request €100bn without including the UK's assets in the EU.I think that is stupid to go into negotiations with don't you think? Did I say that the UK should pay nothing? UK should pay it's dues up until the end of the EU budget. And by that we should also have access and remain a EU member up until that point. But if the EU want the sum agreed, then we should be requesting the value of our assets by the end of the budget also. What are you scared of?
They never requested €100bn. Ever. The EU have no objection to us remaining a member or at least operating under a Norway style deal until the end of the current budget. This wasn't their idea! You claimed we were somehow saving €38bn. This is total fantasy. This issue has set us back 9 months, needlessly other than for political point scoring. The RaL which the government has only just agreed to today represents commitments already made but not yet paid, to which the UK has been a party (i.e. they have signed up to paying these amounts). Some beneficiaries of RaL will be in the UK. What assets are you talking about? I agree that if there are any assets which are committed to be liquidated then we should receive our share, but it strikes me that most of the assets we have are intangible and we will lose their benefit when we leave.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| CambridgeEagle Sydenham 21 Nov 17 9.43am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hansy
It's not about patriots. EU is not a country, as much as they try to be. What gets me is people are 'ashamed' to be British. There was a time where the UK was in two world wars, losing at certain points. The UK/IRA aggression in NI (Whichever way you look at it), the Falklands, the illegal war in Iraq. No where near as many people were ashamed to be British during those times. Yet people are now because the UK decided not to be dictated by the EU? These same remoaners are the same ones that supporter Corbyn and his hike of the deficit and debt. This would be during the perio where we are losing jobs and businesses to the EU. Come on.... Edited by Hansy (21 Nov 2017 9.41am)
1/3 of Labour voters in 2017 voted Leave.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hansy 21 Nov 17 9.46am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle
They never requested €100bn. Ever. The EU have no objection to us remaining a member or at least operating under a Norway style deal until the end of the current budget. This wasn't their idea! You claimed we were somehow saving €38bn. This is total fantasy. This issue has set us back 9 months, needlessly other than for political point scoring. The RaL which the government has only just agreed to today represents commitments already made but not yet paid, to which the UK has been a party (i.e. they have signed up to paying these amounts). Some beneficiaries of RaL will be in the UK. What assets are you talking about? I agree that if there are any assets which are committed to be liquidated then we should receive our share, but it strikes me that most of the assets we have are intangible and we will lose their benefit when we leave. It was reported 100bn, but Juncker mentioned a 60bn charge. Still nearly double what we are potentially willing to pay. I have no issue paying our share of the EU budget until 2020. But we should also remain a member up until that point. If they want a transition after this period, then the UK should rightly include themselves in the budget until the transition ends. If you haven't looked into our assets in the UK, and what our obligations has been paying for over the past years. Why are you questioning this? It includes tangible and hard assets.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hansy 21 Nov 17 9.47am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle
1/3 of Labour voters in 2017 voted Leave. And why was there Austerity? Because of the previous government under Blair/Brown and GFC Austerity shouldn't continue. Those that voted Brexit are not all right-wingers. Some people like me have issues other than Immigration. Currently no party represents my ideas, however I will vote for Tory again (As long as it's not BoJo or Fox leading) because I believe a leader that wanted to remain a member like May did will get the best possible deal if she has people of similar ideas around her. She doesn't currently which won't help us. If I was leader, I'd agree to the EU pillars and look to become a EU partner. And focus more on building better relations with the commonwealth nations and right the wrongs we have done in the past. We get the best of both worlds in my fantasy world. Edited by Hansy (21 Nov 2017 9.52am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Kermit8  Hevon 21 Nov 17 9.52am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hansy
It was reported 100bn, but Juncker mentioned a 60bn charge. Still nearly double what we are potentially willing to pay. I have no issue paying our share of the EU budget until 2020. But we should also remain a member up until that point. If they want a transition after this period, then the UK should rightly include themselves in the budget until the transition ends. If you haven't looked into our assets in the UK, and what our obligations has been paying for over the past years. Why are you questioning this? It includes tangible and hard assets. More like 51.8% than double. The most popular figure being bandied around was anything between '40bill-60bill'. This will be our second offer. Expect the final one to be £50bill and handshakes all round. Though we must remember fervent Brexiteers keep saying 'we don't have to pay a penny' so maybe it will be in the form of an iou note or £5 a week. You gotta laugh - Osborne was ripped to pieces when he dared suggest the cost of Brexit would cost an an average family £4,000 per annum. Now we are talking about the cost to the UK as a whole as being a likely £50,000,000,000 Edited by Kermit8 (21 Nov 2017 9.54am)
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hansy 21 Nov 17 9.54am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Kermit8
More like 51.8% than double. The most popular figure being bandied around was anything between '40bill-60bill'. This will be our second offer. Expect the final one to be £50bill and handshakes all round. Though we must remember fervent Brexiteers keep saying 'we don't have to pay a penny' so maybe it will be in the form of an iou note or £5 a week. Thing is, we probably don't need to. Outside of any treaties current obligations. But that will mean we are isolated by the EU. I can't see that happening; not with a pro-remain leader. Bojo and co on the other hand....
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Kermit8 Hevon 21 Nov 17 9.56am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hansy
Thing is, we probably don't need to. Outside of any treaties current obligations. But that will mean we are isolated by the EU. I can't see that happening; not with a pro-remain leader. Bojo and co on the other hand.... I believe it was the obligations that made up the £40-60bill estimate. Also, it we didn't pay our credit rating would dive and we would be seen as pariahs and welchers so not a good way to start life outside of the EU. Edited by Kermit8 (21 Nov 2017 9.57am)
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| CambridgeEagle Sydenham 21 Nov 17 9.59am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hansy
It was reported 100bn, but Juncker mentioned a 60bn charge. Still nearly double what we are potentially willing to pay. I have no issue paying our share of the EU budget until 2020. But we should also remain a member up until that point. If they want a transition after this period, then the UK should rightly include themselves in the budget until the transition ends. If you haven't looked into our assets in the UK, and what our obligations has been paying for over the past years. Why are you questioning this? It includes tangible and hard assets. I know the government have been busy selling off most of our UK based assets, but I am aware we have some left. No sure what our assets in the UK have to do with the Brexit Bill. As I understand it the EU had about €41bn of "tangible" assets at the end of 2015, mostly cash. There were also €56bn of loans, which are matched by liabilities so net out to zero, less any contingent liabilities. So €41bn divided by 28... Even if you weight it according to size it's not huge. And part of this is property. How do we get a share of that? Consider to that we decided to leave so are hardly in a strong position to make the EU "buy our share". I agree that our share of cash and available for sale assets should be included. Shouldn't be particularly contentious.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| CambridgeEagle Sydenham 21 Nov 17 10.02am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hansy
And why was there Austerity? Because of the previous government under Blair/Brown and GFC Austerity shouldn't continue. Those that voted Brexit are not all right-wingers. Some people like me have issues other than Immigration. Currently no party represents my ideas, however I will vote for Tory again (As long as it's not BoJo or Fox leading) because I believe a leader that wanted to remain a member like May did will get the best possible deal if she has people of similar ideas around her. She doesn't currently which won't help us. If I was leader, I'd agree to the EU pillars and look to become a EU partner. And focus more on building better relations with the commonwealth nations and right the wrongs we have done in the past. We get the best of both worlds in my fantasy world. Edited by Hansy (21 Nov 2017 9.52am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hansy 21 Nov 17 10.06am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle
So it wasn't because our debt and deficit were out of control?
|
|
| 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.