Presumable about the same as the EU has invested in this country? what makes you think we have paid more than our share?
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
It's time we started calling Brexit what it really is.
Changing from belonging to what will become a European Federal Superstate
To being owned by an American Federal Superstate.
George Monbiot warned about this back in the year 2000
https://www.monbiot.com/2000/09/07/vote-conservative-for-a-federal-superstate/
We will end up like Mexico and Trump won't need to build a wall.
Changing from belonging to what will become a European Federal Superstate
To being owned by an American Federal Superstate.
George Monbiot warned about this back in the year 2000
https://www.monbiot.com/2000/09/07/vote-conservative-for-a-federal-superstate/
We will end up like Mexico and Trump won't need to build a wall.
Last edited:
You laughed, but have you any evidence?
There are plenty of charts that on the face of it show that to be the case, but the net result over the years has been a benefit , remember the amount we paid in was based on the size of our economy.
And most of our payments did not go on infrastructure, but into policies agreed among the member nations to support
The biggest area of EU spending is on agriculture. That accounts for 40% of the EU's budget, and more than half of the money that comes back to the UK, although this figure has fallen over time.
The other major area of spending, worth a third of the budget, is on funding for what the EU calls "economic, social and territorial cohesion". That means spending in poorer regions of EU member states, often on infrastructure projects like new roads.
Smaller amounts of money go on other economic projects, such as grants for technology research, and the EU's foreign affairs work. A total of 6% of the EU budget is absorbed by administrative costs.
So the notion we paid more into EU infrastructure than they did into ours may well be true, but it would be very difficult to prove one way or the other.
And the sting in the tail is that these expenditures were done with our MEPs involved in the process
(With the notable exception of Nigel Farage)
Last edited:
Trump did score a victory by linking trade to border security.
In a way, he made Mexico pay for the wall.
BTW, Danish election result last week saw the Social Democrats won 91 of the 179 seats in parliament.
Their leader, Mette Frederiksen, age 41, found popularity on immigration.
Her view includes confiscating assets of immigrants to pay for their support and welfare.
Their leader, Mette Frederiksen, age 41, found popularity on immigration.
Her view includes confiscating assets of immigrants to pay for their support and welfare.
Boris will get in and call a 'snap' election and win massively.
Now that would be interesting.
There is so much **** to come out on the twat.
He has at least 2 bastards running about. Scores of scorned woman with an axe to grind. It’s one of the reasons he pulled out last time.
It’s the Portillo effect.
He will never win.
The biggest sting in the tail,as you describe,is that they were agreed in London by UK Cabinets ,and agreed by the direction of the senior UK representives and of course with MEP agreement. However the EP was less important then than now,post Lisbon,so more authority resided with the home country..in this case the UK.
It may be very interesting, but does not affect the wider picture. Nero fiddling while Rome burns etc...
The UK was granted ,at its request a third extension until November 1.,in order to get its house in order. Nothing has been done.
They don't owe us anything, our routine payments into the EU budget were not subject to hypothecation.
Payments for specific purposes were by legal agreement and we are letting them down by withdrawing unexpectedly. Hence a large part of that £39 billion we are being charged. £11 billion of it is an unavoidable legal liability, and default on that would have very serious international consequences for us.
.
Last edited:
They don't generally have much in the way of assets, but perhaps she's thinking of kidneys and blood?
Good dollar earners.
.
wait a week then check the poll again.
BJ's brexit plan is nigh impossible.
He's already backpedalled on increasing the 40% tax threshold.
Although I agree that the threshold is too low for people who live and work in London, but increasing the threshold to £80 is rubbish. Better to introduce a 30% band between £50k and £80k.
Lol at ‘letting them down’
We will stay in and continue to fund your project that we will never be part of because we don’t want to let you down.
This is real life snow flecc not a birthday party you want to leave but are too embarrassed to exit early.
This is where we are under the Tories
www.theguardian.com
Schools begging children in need for money to fund staff and thousands of others crowdfunding to get stuff like paper and glue.
Yet all we get is stuffed shirts talking about doing cocaine and heroin.
If only we had an opposition these idiots would be destroyed.
School asks BBC Children in Need to cover funding gap
East London primary seeks charity’s help with pastoral care after budget cuts
www.theguardian.com
Schools begging children in need for money to fund staff and thousands of others crowdfunding to get stuff like paper and glue.
Yet all we get is stuffed shirts talking about doing cocaine and heroin.
If only we had an opposition these idiots would be destroyed.
This is the trouble with Johnson, he's prone to come up with crackpot schemes as his time as London Mayor showed.
The danger is his cussed refusal to change his mind, as he showed by forging ahead with his daft new routemaster buses idea against all expert advice. They've proved hopelessly expensive and very unreliable, so we after receiving one hundred we tried cancelling them. Only to find the contract he signed guaranteed we bought 1000, so we are forced to buy 900 more which we neither want nor need.
The UK can't afford him, there's no shortage of clowns far cheaper to hire.
.