Forum menu
Jambas - its a fair question. You are claiming that "the rules will have stunted growth and seen us fall further behind", so
1. What rules are you referring to?
2. How have they stunted growth in the past and how will they do so in the future
3. Who are we falling behind and why?
(4. £350m)
(5. The UK's role in the ESF)
As an aside, compare the valuations of the banks that have adopted your chosen model (0.5-0.8x PBV) and those who have re-focused on core Europe, rationalised their businesses, cut costs and produced steady dividends (1.5-2.0x PBV). Not suggesting that we do that, but there is a lot of hype about making money in Asia that has proved unsustained.
Also, the Obama shift has never been a singular act. Yes there was a shift in emphasis and a more global focus from his administration [b]but it was a matter of degree not absolutes. [/b]Furthermore, it has rebalanced back towards Europe in the past few years.
but there is a lot of hype about making money in Asia that has proved unsustained.
Very, very true THM. Emerging markets have not delivered on their hype/promise/potential.
Fact or jambafact?.....
To be honest whenever I see this I generally ignore it and the poster's content.
EU regulations, affects 100% of our business of which only 13% is with the EU. The regulations are a mishmash of various vested interests within the eu most of which are irrelevant to us, excessive irrelevant regulation = restrictive to growth. We are falling behind where we could be. £350 gross this year, £500 next - who knows the contribution is calculated on relative performance and as Inhave said we'll be required to fund the ESF when Greece goes tits up and contagion looms.
The 100/5 or 100/13 is another deliberately misleading statistic that the likes of Hannan use to hoodwink those who cant be bothered to check - not least because it completely ignores size and scope of businesses.
Companies only have to "obey the rules' if they relate to them, so again a misleading stat.
Outside the 5 or 13% (you chose) UK companies supply companies that then export to EU, so we would have to play by the rules anyway
If we then chose Brexit we would have to have different sets of standards (like trade with Korea) which adds not subtracts from costs and red tape
Suppliers from EU may not satisfy our new rules - so this "might' stop them supplying the UK market leading to a reduction in supply and competition. That is not in our interests.
Those are starters for 10. Be careful what you Brexiteers wish for as the results are likely to be very different from those you guys promote
We both know who guarantees the ESF don't we? Rhetoric aside, we also know what the UK's position is, however desperate Junker might be, don't we?
To be honest whenever I see this I generally ignore it and the poster's content.
Oh, is that because you've been caught out (AGAIN) posting opinions as facts & half-truths as bona fide....??
It's no wonder you're a fan of Boris et al. You're cut from the same cloth!
Asking you to quantify/back up your posts is becoming tiresome. Why not save me the bother & start off with some facts & see how you go from there?
Ps if you can patronise, then so can I.
Good to see Carney putting Jacob back in his box today
Now I know Brexiteers dont like our foreign Governor talking about risks to his mandate - RESIGN - but interesting that the last BoE Financial Stability Report had a whole chapter on the risks from Asia for the UK's financial stability - hmm....
More hysterics??? 😉
[i] molgrips - Member
They will cherry pick interpretations to back up their predetermined point of view based on that sentiment.[/i]
I think you're just as guilty of that, as most here.
Try listening to Steve Hilton, on this morning's R4 Today program. He makes some very good points.
I hope UK votes to leave. There's as much uncertainty in remaining as to leave. Who here knows what Brussels will do in 5 or 10 yrs time? See, just as much of the unknown as if we were to leave. Furthermore, how much does UK Joe public know about what is currently happening. Has anyone mentioned current EU negotiations with the South American trade block, which will see low cost Brazilian and Argentine Beef undercut UK and Irish producers?
I want UK to leave, so as to kick start phase 2 of the EU project. Phase one is spent, out dated and broken. Time not to leave, as such, but bringing about real change any member state can't achieve with a vote in Brussels.
FYI Jamba...
I'm undecided with a leaning towards Remain..
But, I could be swayed.
Though I think it's unlikely.
Why?
Whenever Brexit start talking facts & figures they get shot down pretty damned quickly.
Remain, however, seem to be trading a little too much on FUD.
So, talk some FACTS & you might be pleasantly surprised at the outcome.
Though, I have to say I don't think Brexit have it in them to talk straight - they know they'd lose the fight...
The out campaign are truly rattled now - the anti-Bojo lot are coming out of the woodwork (not unsurprisingly as his narcissism is turning people off) and seeking a new strategy
[b]Obviously lost the economic argument so watch the deliberate switch to an IMMIGRATION focus.[/b] All of our woes will be laid on Johnny Foreigner - the scapegoat designed to obscure the truth
We will have the delicious irony of Bojo - a man of some Turkish descent and who has been pro Turkey in the past - bashing the Turks now!!!
Obviously lost the economic argument so watch the deliberate switch to an IMMIGRATION focus. All of our woes will be laid on Johnny Foreigner - the scapegoat designed to obscure the truth
Of which said argument, I suspect, will quickly come to resemble this:
[img] 
?w=625[/img]
Everyone knows that we do not send £350m a week.
That's exactly what we spend.
Yes, we do get a fraction of it back, to be spent on whatever the EU tells us to, to then get fined for not spending it correctly, but it's what we spend none the less. 💡
Obviously lost the economic argument so watch the deliberate switch to an IMMIGRATION
I think that was always gonna happen, the same way a desperate Zac Goldsmith tried to bring race into the mayoral election when he knew he was beat.
How many other Vote Leave stands are manned by Nazis and racists
At least London showed that it wasn't easily whipped by fear of evil muslin nonsense that they tried to peddle, I'd hope the rest of the UK is similar
we do get a fraction of it back
Actually, it's closer to £250m per/wk excluding EU grant & including rebate.
Including EU grant it's closer to £150m that we pay in.
"The UK gets money back
The government then gets some of that money back, mainly through payments to farmers and for poorer areas of the country such as Wales and Cornwall.
In 2015, the UK's ‘public sector receipts’ amounted to £4.5 billion
So overall we paid in £8.5 billion more than we got back, or £23 million a day."
[url= https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/ ]Source[/url]
(It's so easy to back up with facts, one can't but help wonder why more don't try it....)
I so hope I've got my figures right....... 😳
What boils my p155 is the blatant lies that Brexit peddle..
We will have the delicious irony of Bojo - a man of some Turkish descent and who has been pro Turkey in the past - bashing the Turks now!!!
Instead of your man Cameron, who is quick to point out that we can veto Turkey's attempt to join the union, without actually saying that he would, in spite of him signing up for accelerating Turkey's accession.
The in camp are quick to point out the Leave's bedfellows, but you've got Cameron, Osborne and Erdogan.
Sleep tight.
FWIW, I'm leaning towards in.
I believe the EU will collapse, and the UK will either be on the shore watching a sinking ship, or be on one of the only lifeboats. Either way we'll be alright.
That's exactly what we spend.
No it isn't - neither from an accounting nor a cash flow perspective. Its a blatant Brexit LIE
Thanks for bring Erdogan into it - point proven already. 😯
The in camp are quick to point out the Leave's bedfellows, but you've got Cameron, Osborne and Erdogan.
Sleep tight.
Ful ofte in game a sooth, I have herd say...
No it isn't
I thought my description of how our money is slung about was quite accurate.
Care to elaborate?
I thought my description of how our money is slung about was quite accurate.
Care to elaborate?
Well....
For a start your numbers are wrong..
[url= https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/ ]Some facts..[/url].
67 pages in has anyone changed their mind?
Well....For a start your numbers are wrong.
Sorry, 250,000,000 not 350,000,000.
anagallis_arvensis - Member67 pages in has anyone changed their mind?
Yes, I'm now in.
Thanks for bring Erdogan into it - point proven already.
You brought in BoJo, I countered with Erdogan.
What exactly was your point?
Sorry, 250,000,000 not 350,000,000
Still getting it wrong...
It's actually closer to 150,000,000.
"£23 million a day."
[url= https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/ ]For the 3rd time..[/url]
As for whether it's VFM? That's far harder to quantify - I'll let others pick up the baton on that, if they so chose.
(Please read the link - I don't want to have to post it a 4th time!)
anagallis_arvensis - Member
67 pages in has anyone changed their mind?
[b]Yes. I am now further OUT.[/b]
I am now absolutely sure, many times over, my decision to Vote OUT is absolutely right based on the sample response from STW.
Still getting it wrong...
Not at all.
I was pointing out not only how much money it costs us to be a member of the EU (gross figure) but how the money we receive back is controlled and spent.
Understand now?
67 pages in has anyone changed their mind?
I have.
I was out, but I can't stomach the blatant lies & outright self serving political motivations of the leading lights of Brexit.
IDS, Galloway, Gove, Boris & Farage - an unholy alliance if ever there was one..
Understand now?
Your numbers of £350m are still wrong.
Understand now?
Ps if you think that was a clever little argument you constructed - please think again. Yes, it's a lot of money but do we get VFM back? The argument would appear to suggest so.
Pps one more thought for you, if we left we'd still have to pay the subsidies to our folk that we pay now...which could be argued is what the EU grants do..
Elaborate?
a. its the wrong figure by a large margin - hence the accounting comment
b. we don't spend it - that figure is never "spent", hence my comment about cash flow
c. Blatant lie - its untrue, this is known by the Brexiteers, but it suits their needs ie to lie about economic issues
Hence:
No it isn't - neither from an accounting nor a cash flow perspective. Its a blatant Brexit LIE
Anything else not clear?
Dont worry about bringing he Turks in - this is exactly where the final acts of this pantomime will be played out. Blame Johnny Foreigner, the final card of a desperate hand.
Your numbers of £350m are still wrong.
I adjusted the figure to 250,000,000 due to your link.
Did you miss it?
I adjusted the figure to 250,000,000 due to your link.
Did you miss it?
Nope, but the figure of £250m is still wrong..
This could have been such a good argument but there's too many lies & half truths on this thread for me.
For the last time: outgoings to the EU after adjustment equate to £23m a day = £150m a week.
Here's a tip: if you start with a blatant lie & then correct yourself so easily & so quickly your POV will be treated with suspicion & given weight accordingly.
Start your argument again.
(Is it really so hard to stick to the facts & speak the truth??)
Anything else not clear?
It was a gross figure, of course we don't spend it.
Is my somethingion of funding incorrect?
Point out how, rather than just saying "it's wrong".
Not sure what your feelings towards Turkey's accession are, other than using them as a race card because they have a slightly darker tan than me.
You haven't commented on the facts of the situation so it's hard to comment.
nope, but the figure of £250m is still wrong
I used [i]your[/i] reference FFS!!!
If you disagree, either use another reference or, hold your breath this could be mindblowing, SAY WHAT YOU ACTUALLY THINK!!!
Name a number!
We'll go with it! 😀
Do you not think that would make life easier?
I used your reference FFS!
Try this very simple sentence:
"So overall we paid in £8.5 billion more than we got back, or £23 million a day."
You do the rest of the maths.
Tip: Its about 3/4 of the way down.
I can't give your POV any value as you started off with a fallacy which you then quickly changed lending the image that you were willingly talking porkies.
FYI: I'd just like some facts & not ones I can shoot holes in with a catapult over my shoulder with my eyes shut.
Was out, likely in now. The out campaign/ campaigners make me want to vote in.
Well sbob, I am glad that you have changed your mind, but lest you forget
sbob - Member
Everyone knows that we do not send £350m a week. [my point]
That's exactly what we spend. [your response]
so your somethingion was wrong - as I said from both an accounting and cash flow perspective - but at least you have now changed to
of course we don't spend it
Excuse me for my confusion 😉
Not sure what your feelings towards Turkey's accession are, other than using them as a race card because they have a slightly darker tan than me.
You haven't commented on the facts of the situation so it's hard to comment.
Also untrue - I am pro Turkey joining the EU under normal accession conditions ie, I am very much in the minority. But I am pro the four freedoms that underlie or should underlie how we engage with each other. I dislike the xenophobic undertones and have made that point clearly too.
Here's a tip: if you start with a blatant lie
I started with (well, actually someone else did) a figure that is being used as the gross payment.
If this is wrong, and you know the right answer, then why not share it?
I'm happy to be corrected you know, I'm not sure why you'd want to keep the information to yourself, it doesn't help to further the debate.
Excuse me for my confusion
I can explain the difference between net and gross if you like, but I don't think it's necessary. 🙂
gross payment
Which is only one side of the argument....
Ergo.....
Quelle surpise.....
ONE SIDED.
Read the link, it explains how much goes in & how much goes out. That figure is the one you want to be referring to. It's not hard.
In a Junkyardesque manoeuvre THM, you have missed out on the pertinence and concentrated on point scoring.
sbob - you were very clear and categorical on what we spent.
Not only did you fail to grasp the difference between gross and net*, you also missed the cash flow bit
But tbf, Bojo has the same lie blazoned across the bus, so we should cut you some slack
* thanks for the offer, but not necessary
I'm happy to be corrected you know,
evidence suggest otherwise
In a Junkyardesque manoeuvre THM, you have missed out on the pertinence and concentrated on point scoring.
Wow, you fight dirty - that is really below the belt 😉 such rudeness ought to be reported!!
67 pages in has anyone changed their mind?
I was slightly swayed by out a few months ago but thanks to this thread as well other hatred and lies very much in.
mrlebowski,
I was pointing out how our money is spent.
I do not believe that giving some money away to be given a fraction back to spend on what we are told is beneficial to us.
This is the pertinent part of the discussion.
Using the gross figure makes sense in this example, and I'm happy to be corrected on that figure.
I did not expect my position to change TBH.
But the lack of truth & the xenophobia that's come out of the Brexit camp have pushed me away from them.
I wonder how many others have felt the same way?
On the other hand, I find the Remain camp's use of FUD quite unnecessary, see-through & weak.
They have, however, built a much stronger argument when they have chosen to stick with the facts.
Again it doesn't - it has no impact on any other spending decision (how can it, we dont spent it?), we do not get a fraction back (you can work out the rebate %age and then there are the other direct and indirect benefts); ergo it has no relevance to the discussion - its just a Brexit lie - even the ONS who use this figure for a specific accounting purpose are very clear that this is the incorrect figure to use as a cost of membership. So you final point is also not true - there is a trend developing here.... 😉