The Politics Thread

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

If the Brexit bill ends up at £60B then that'll be roughly £1K for every man, woman and child in Britain. Well done, you wankers who were reclaiming all that lovely cash for the NHS as per the Battle Bus

The cabal (Fox,Redwood,Rees-Mogg et al) that has seized the tiller of the Tory party are set upon on a very low tax Singapore-style economy. There will be no NHS with them in charge. But at least we'll have our country back.

They know they wont get away with doing away with the NHS, so they'll keep the free at point of use and instead pay 100s of billions of taxpayer money to Richard Branson and Co to provide the service. It wont be better but it'll cost twice as much as it does now...bit like the trains...

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Did none of you read what I wrote?
If the Brexit bill ends up at £60bn (which it won't anyway), that'll still be £20bn less than we would have given away scot-free to the fxckin EU anyway.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

... or to put it another way, we have already given away scot-free, as a big present to French, Romanian and Polish farmers, a staggering £10,000 for every man, woman, and child in this country. And you want this to continue, with fxck all representation and an ever growing unionist clique at the heart of it, with discriminatory rules favouring a monetary union with no fiscal union, led by a Franco-German alliance that has as little regard for British interests as it does for the average poor bastard Greek pensioner!

[BWFC_Insane]

This idea that somehow discussing a "EU divorce bill" is somehow a fault in the logic of Brexit is boiling my pee.

A few comments off the Beebs website illustrate the naivety of argument: "Brexit: now officially confirmed as the most expensive childish, spite fuelled tantrum in the history of the human race/ This amount is way too much. How can be moving to WTO rules be more expensive than this/ Time to scrap Brexit altogether. Even Boris says it's on the rocks. Save the money for hospitals, schools, social housing..."

Well actually no, just like the Big Bang Theory and the Expansion of the Universe there is a lot of mythologising and misunderstanding surrounding EU-UK Budgetary Facts.

Let's start with the basic net payment that the UK has given to the EU since we joined in 1973. As of this year that stands at £368.5bn - that's pounds not Euro's. If you translate it into Euros at the rates the pound equalled the Euro at each year the money was handed over this comes to €645bn. And that's net not gross. And let's tackle the misunderstanding about the rebate too: the net price is the price after the rebate, because the rebate actually isn't a rebate - the money simply isn't handed over to be subsequently handed back, it is an accountancy exercise deducted from a theoretical 'membership fee' (for example the membership fee for the UK in 2016 was £17.7bn - the amount that was actually handed over to the EU was £13.7bn (i.e. minus the theoretical rebate), and the amount that the EU spent on the UK was £4.3bn - thus the UK's net contribution was £9.4bn [net=gross-'rebate'-EU spend on UK).
And like the expansion of the universe, the gross fee that Britain pays to the EU is increasing over time, and not at a steady rate either. The UKs gross fee for 2017 is 19bn and for 2018 20.5bn. (plus the 2016 figures which Remoaners use all the time, was significantly lower than the contributions for each of the years between 2012-2015). If we had not voted to leave the EU, UK contributions to the EU from 2019 to 2023 (estimated over the EU's own 5yr planning period) would have equalled more than £120bn with a guestimate (based on previous actual year's proportions) to cost the UK a net figure of £80bn.
So to put it bluntly, if we hadn't joined the EU in 1973 we would have saved this country a truly staggering €734bn by the time we actually do leave the EU and including the period we will be paying for into the future.
Thus the accusation from Remoaners that by settling the divorce bill at €50bn we are somehow being done over by the Brexiteers is bollox. The €50bn 'divorce bill' covers the period when, if we hadn't left, we would have handed over €89bn net anyway. Remember there is no benefit from this net contribution, it is simply a wedge of moolah we hand over to the Europeans, most of which goes to French, Polish and Romanian farmers (the CAP swallows most of the EU budget - yeh, I know some of our farmers are net beneficiaries of CAP, but the UK isn't, that small net benefit is calculated in the deductions from the UKs gross contribution before we calculate what our net contribution is). Duh!

Given you yourself have discussed the "economic pain" we will experience could you conservatively forecast how long this will last, what impact this will have on GDP and thus the true economic cost of Brexit....

No I didn't. I refer you to page 822 of this thread. I quite clearly stated financial pain, not economic; I also expressed at the time these are two separate concepts.
Plus in my above post, I point out there is no overall fiscal cost, in fact we gain by hundreds of billions of Euros.
Any economic pain, which is quite theoretical, is a matter of argument and belief with no grounding in fact possible. We can explore it post factum if you like, but whether we have pain or gain it will be businesses, not the UK government or taxpayers, that suffer or thrive.

Ah, nice dodge. Very "Trumpesque". The fact that the true cost will equate to hundreds and hundreds of years of contributions is irrelevant, because nobody can definitively calculate it.

But don't worry folks, its only British business that suffers.

Also the UK government and the UK economy is in the main, entirely dependent upon the success of British businesses. I'm not sure you have much of a grasp on economics, to be suggesting that any drop in GDP is ok, because it doesn't affect the taxpayer or government. Mind you did vote Brexit, so I can hardly be surprised.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

...and also, what really singes my shit over this Brexit bill is the fact that if it was up to true Exiters we wouldn't be paying fxck all. The reason the bill keeps escalating is because individual MPs (once again unrepresentative of the electorate) are overwhelmingly Remoaners. They're trying to bribe and blackmail the EU, the House of Lords, Parliament, Government and the cabinet, into us remaining in the Single Market, the ECJ, and the EU by the back door.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

This idea that somehow discussing a "EU divorce bill" is somehow a fault in the logic of Brexit is boiling my pee.

A few comments off the Beebs website illustrate the naivety of argument: "Brexit: now officially confirmed as the most expensive childish, spite fuelled tantrum in the history of the human race/ This amount is way too much. How can be moving to WTO rules be more expensive than this/ Time to scrap Brexit altogether. Even Boris says it's on the rocks. Save the money for hospitals, schools, social housing..."

Well actually no, just like the Big Bang Theory and the Expansion of the Universe there is a lot of mythologising and misunderstanding surrounding EU-UK Budgetary Facts.

Let's start with the basic net payment that the UK has given to the EU since we joined in 1973. As of this year that stands at £368.5bn - that's pounds not Euro's. If you translate it into Euros at the rates the pound equalled the Euro at each year the money was handed over this comes to €645bn. And that's net not gross. And let's tackle the misunderstanding about the rebate too: the net price is the price after the rebate, because the rebate actually isn't a rebate - the money simply isn't handed over to be subsequently handed back, it is an accountancy exercise deducted from a theoretical 'membership fee' (for example the membership fee for the UK in 2016 was £17.7bn - the amount that was actually handed over to the EU was £13.7bn (i.e. minus the theoretical rebate), and the amount that the EU spent on the UK was £4.3bn - thus the UK's net contribution was £9.4bn [net=gross-'rebate'-EU spend on UK).
And like the expansion of the universe, the gross fee that Britain pays to the EU is increasing over time, and not at a steady rate either. The UKs gross fee for 2017 is 19bn and for 2018 20.5bn. (plus the 2016 figures which Remoaners use all the time, was significantly lower than the contributions for each of the years between 2012-2015). If we had not voted to leave the EU, UK contributions to the EU from 2019 to 2023 (estimated over the EU's own 5yr planning period) would have equalled more than £120bn with a guestimate (based on previous actual year's proportions) to cost the UK a net figure of £80bn.
So to put it bluntly, if we hadn't joined the EU in 1973 we would have saved this country a truly staggering €734bn by the time we actually do leave the EU and including the period we will be paying for into the future.
Thus the accusation from Remoaners that by settling the divorce bill at €50bn we are somehow being done over by the Brexiteers is bollox. The €50bn 'divorce bill' covers the period when, if we hadn't left, we would have handed over €89bn net anyway. Remember there is no benefit from this net contribution, it is simply a wedge of moolah we hand over to the Europeans, most of which goes to French, Polish and Romanian farmers (the CAP swallows most of the EU budget - yeh, I know some of our farmers are net beneficiaries of CAP, but the UK isn't, that small net benefit is calculated in the deductions from the UKs gross contribution before we calculate what our net contribution is). Duh!

Given you yourself have discussed the "economic pain" we will experience could you conservatively forecast how long this will last, what impact this will have on GDP and thus the true economic cost of Brexit....

No I didn't. I refer you to page 822 of this thread. I quite clearly stated financial pain, not economic; I also expressed at the time these are two separate concepts.
Plus in my above post, I point out there is no overall fiscal cost, in fact we gain by hundreds of billions of Euros.
Any economic pain, which is quite theoretical, is a matter of argument and belief with no grounding in fact possible. We can explore it post factum if you like, but whether we have pain or gain it will be businesses, not the UK government or taxpayers, that suffer or thrive.

Ah, nice dodge. Very "Trumpesque". The fact that the true cost will equate to hundreds and hundreds of years of contributions is irrelevant, because nobody can definitively calculate it.

But don't worry folks, its only British business that suffers.

Also the UK government and the UK economy is in the main, entirely dependent upon the success of British businesses. I'm not sure you have much of a grasp on economics, to be suggesting that any drop in GDP is ok, because it doesn't affect the taxpayer or government. Mind you did vote Brexit, so I can hardly be surprised.

You see, it's you and those who lost the referendum who are suggesting a drop in GDP. The facts are the economy is doing fine thank you. It will in all likelihood continue to do fine. I'd argue that once the fifth/sixth largest economy in the world, second largest in Europe, has left the EU, and the next tranche of Euro currency countries (tied by monetary union rules, but free to fxck up big style with fiscal rules) are admitted, the only economy going downhill will be the EUs. The fact you are actually willing the UK economy to plummet just goes to show how committed to the European ideological cause you are. Well done, I'm not.

[Bruce Rioja]

Did none of you read what I wrote?
If the Brexit bill ends up at £60bn (which it won't anyway), that'll still be £20bn less than we would have given away scot-free to the fxckin EU anyway.

Not a one-way street though is it, Spotty?! And I speak as the son of a dairy farmer!

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Did none of you read what I wrote?
If the Brexit bill ends up at £60bn (which it won't anyway), that'll still be £20bn less than we would have given away scot-free to the fxckin EU anyway.

Not a one-way street though is it, Spotty?! And I speak as the son of a dairy farmer!

Yes Bruce, it is. I addressed that in the figures above. I took out the income the UK receives from the EU (and that includes the tiny, in comparison, income we get from CAP) from the gross before we calculate what we pay to the EU.
Let me make it plain, we are giving away for free, to be members of the Franco-German membership club £9.4bn this year alone. That's £156 for every single man, woman and child in the UK this year alone.
And includes your dairy farming dad. In fact if we didn't participate in the common agricultural policy your father would have been richer by thousands of pounds. CAP discriminates against UK dairy farmers despite paying a small levy to them.

[BWFC_Insane]

This idea that somehow discussing a "EU divorce bill" is somehow a fault in the logic of Brexit is boiling my pee.

A few comments off the Beebs website illustrate the naivety of argument: "Brexit: now officially confirmed as the most expensive childish, spite fuelled tantrum in the history of the human race/ This amount is way too much. How can be moving to WTO rules be more expensive than this/ Time to scrap Brexit altogether. Even Boris says it's on the rocks. Save the money for hospitals, schools, social housing..."

Well actually no, just like the Big Bang Theory and the Expansion of the Universe there is a lot of mythologising and misunderstanding surrounding EU-UK Budgetary Facts.

Let's start with the basic net payment that the UK has given to the EU since we joined in 1973. As of this year that stands at £368.5bn - that's pounds not Euro's. If you translate it into Euros at the rates the pound equalled the Euro at each year the money was handed over this comes to €645bn. And that's net not gross. And let's tackle the misunderstanding about the rebate too: the net price is the price after the rebate, because the rebate actually isn't a rebate - the money simply isn't handed over to be subsequently handed back, it is an accountancy exercise deducted from a theoretical 'membership fee' (for example the membership fee for the UK in 2016 was £17.7bn - the amount that was actually handed over to the EU was £13.7bn (i.e. minus the theoretical rebate), and the amount that the EU spent on the UK was £4.3bn - thus the UK's net contribution was £9.4bn [net=gross-'rebate'-EU spend on UK).
And like the expansion of the universe, the gross fee that Britain pays to the EU is increasing over time, and not at a steady rate either. The UKs gross fee for 2017 is 19bn and for 2018 20.5bn. (plus the 2016 figures which Remoaners use all the time, was significantly lower than the contributions for each of the years between 2012-2015). If we had not voted to leave the EU, UK contributions to the EU from 2019 to 2023 (estimated over the EU's own 5yr planning period) would have equalled more than £120bn with a guestimate (based on previous actual year's proportions) to cost the UK a net figure of £80bn.
So to put it bluntly, if we hadn't joined the EU in 1973 we would have saved this country a truly staggering €734bn by the time we actually do leave the EU and including the period we will be paying for into the future.
Thus the accusation from Remoaners that by settling the divorce bill at €50bn we are somehow being done over by the Brexiteers is bollox. The €50bn 'divorce bill' covers the period when, if we hadn't left, we would have handed over €89bn net anyway. Remember there is no benefit from this net contribution, it is simply a wedge of moolah we hand over to the Europeans, most of which goes to French, Polish and Romanian farmers (the CAP swallows most of the EU budget - yeh, I know some of our farmers are net beneficiaries of CAP, but the UK isn't, that small net benefit is calculated in the deductions from the UKs gross contribution before we calculate what our net contribution is). Duh!

Given you yourself have discussed the "economic pain" we will experience could you conservatively forecast how long this will last, what impact this will have on GDP and thus the true economic cost of Brexit....

No I didn't. I refer you to page 822 of this thread. I quite clearly stated financial pain, not economic; I also expressed at the time these are two separate concepts.
Plus in my above post, I point out there is no overall fiscal cost, in fact we gain by hundreds of billions of Euros.
Any economic pain, which is quite theoretical, is a matter of argument and belief with no grounding in fact possible. We can explore it post factum if you like, but whether we have pain or gain it will be businesses, not the UK government or taxpayers, that suffer or thrive.

Ah, nice dodge. Very "Trumpesque". The fact that the true cost will equate to hundreds and hundreds of years of contributions is irrelevant, because nobody can definitively calculate it.

But don't worry folks, its only British business that suffers.

Also the UK government and the UK economy is in the main, entirely dependent upon the success of British businesses. I'm not sure you have much of a grasp on economics, to be suggesting that any drop in GDP is ok, because it doesn't affect the taxpayer or government. Mind you did vote Brexit, so I can hardly be surprised.

You see, it's you and those who lost the referendum who are suggesting a drop in GDP. The facts are the economy is doing fine thank you. It will in all likelihood continue to do fine. I'd argue that once the fifth/sixth largest economy in the world, second largest in Europe, has left the EU, and the next tranche of Euro currency countries (tied by monetary union rules, but free to fxck up big style with fiscal rules) are admitted, the only economy going downhill will be the EUs. The fact you are actually willing the UK economy to plummet just goes to show how committed to the European ideological cause you are. Well done, I'm not.

Indeed. The fact our growth lags behind the majority if not all EU countries in 2017 is nothing to worry about. We're only talking a few hundred billion after all and rising....

We're all going to suffer. Hugely. And yet not one Brexiteer, not even the most ardent at any point pre and post vote has put one real, tangible actual benefit forward of being out. Control our own borders is probably the closest, except it seems even that is going to be in reality very different to the picture painted.

But its ok, we've got "our country back".

[Lost Leopard Spot]

This idea that somehow discussing a "EU divorce bill" is somehow a fault in the logic of Brexit is boiling my pee.

A few comments off the Beebs website illustrate the naivety of argument: "Brexit: now officially confirmed as the most expensive childish, spite fuelled tantrum in the history of the human race/ This amount is way too much. How can be moving to WTO rules be more expensive than this/ Time to scrap Brexit altogether. Even Boris says it's on the rocks. Save the money for hospitals, schools, social housing..."

Well actually no, just like the Big Bang Theory and the Expansion of the Universe there is a lot of mythologising and misunderstanding surrounding EU-UK Budgetary Facts.

Let's start with the basic net payment that the UK has given to the EU since we joined in 1973. As of this year that stands at £368.5bn - that's pounds not Euro's. If you translate it into Euros at the rates the pound equalled the Euro at each year the money was handed over this comes to €645bn. And that's net not gross. And let's tackle the misunderstanding about the rebate too: the net price is the price after the rebate, because the rebate actually isn't a rebate - the money simply isn't handed over to be subsequently handed back, it is an accountancy exercise deducted from a theoretical 'membership fee' (for example the membership fee for the UK in 2016 was £17.7bn - the amount that was actually handed over to the EU was £13.7bn (i.e. minus the theoretical rebate), and the amount that the EU spent on the UK was £4.3bn - thus the UK's net contribution was £9.4bn [net=gross-'rebate'-EU spend on UK).
And like the expansion of the universe, the gross fee that Britain pays to the EU is increasing over time, and not at a steady rate either. The UKs gross fee for 2017 is 19bn and for 2018 20.5bn. (plus the 2016 figures which Remoaners use all the time, was significantly lower than the contributions for each of the years between 2012-2015). If we had not voted to leave the EU, UK contributions to the EU from 2019 to 2023 (estimated over the EU's own 5yr planning period) would have equalled more than £120bn with a guestimate (based on previous actual year's proportions) to cost the UK a net figure of £80bn.
So to put it bluntly, if we hadn't joined the EU in 1973 we would have saved this country a truly staggering €734bn by the time we actually do leave the EU and including the period we will be paying for into the future.
Thus the accusation from Remoaners that by settling the divorce bill at €50bn we are somehow being done over by the Brexiteers is bollox. The €50bn 'divorce bill' covers the period when, if we hadn't left, we would have handed over €89bn net anyway. Remember there is no benefit from this net contribution, it is simply a wedge of moolah we hand over to the Europeans, most of which goes to French, Polish and Romanian farmers (the CAP swallows most of the EU budget - yeh, I know some of our farmers are net beneficiaries of CAP, but the UK isn't, that small net benefit is calculated in the deductions from the UKs gross contribution before we calculate what our net contribution is). Duh!

Given you yourself have discussed the "economic pain" we will experience could you conservatively forecast how long this will last, what impact this will have on GDP and thus the true economic cost of Brexit....

No I didn't. I refer you to page 822 of this thread. I quite clearly stated financial pain, not economic; I also expressed at the time these are two separate concepts.
Plus in my above post, I point out there is no overall fiscal cost, in fact we gain by hundreds of billions of Euros.
Any economic pain, which is quite theoretical, is a matter of argument and belief with no grounding in fact possible. We can explore it post factum if you like, but whether we have pain or gain it will be businesses, not the UK government or taxpayers, that suffer or thrive.

Ah, nice dodge. Very "Trumpesque". The fact that the true cost will equate to hundreds and hundreds of years of contributions is irrelevant, because nobody can definitively calculate it.

But don't worry folks, its only British business that suffers.

Also the UK government and the UK economy is in the main, entirely dependent upon the success of British businesses. I'm not sure you have much of a grasp on economics, to be suggesting that any drop in GDP is ok, because it doesn't affect the taxpayer or government. Mind you did vote Brexit, so I can hardly be surprised.

You see, it's you and those who lost the referendum who are suggesting a drop in GDP. The facts are the economy is doing fine thank you. It will in all likelihood continue to do fine. I'd argue that once the fifth/sixth largest economy in the world, second largest in Europe, has left the EU, and the next tranche of Euro currency countries (tied by monetary union rules, but free to fxck up big style with fiscal rules) are admitted, the only economy going downhill will be the EUs. The fact you are actually willing the UK economy to plummet just goes to show how committed to the European ideological cause you are. Well done, I'm not.

Indeed. The fact our growth lags behind the majority if not all EU countries in 2017 is nothing to worry about. We're only talking a few hundred billion after all and rising....

We're all going to suffer. Hugely. And yet not one Brexiteer, not even the most ardent at any point pre and post vote has put one real, tangible actual benefit forward of being out. Control our own borders is probably the closest, except it seems even that is going to be in reality very different to the picture painted.

But its ok, we've got "our country back".

You're talking pure shit. Whenever benefits are put forward you just dismiss them.
I know grief has five stages but you really need to get past the denial phase pal.

[boltonboris]

Remain: "The UK should pay it's dues and settle the Bill with the EU"

UK: "The UK will pay it's dues and settle the Bill with the EU"

Remain: "HAHAHA So weak. Pathetic"

[boltonboris]

Indeed. The fact our growth lags behind the majority if not all EU countries in 2017 is nothing to worry about.

Wait, have you seen the individual economies of most EU member states?

It's like saying France's growth is lagging compared to that of Laos.

The largest single economies, will usually always have slower growth than smaller countries in modern times

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Indeed. The fact our growth lags behind the majority if not all EU countries in 2017 is nothing to worry about.

Wait, have you seen the individual economies of most EU member states?

It's like saying France's growth is lagging compared to that of Laos.

The largest single economies, will usually always have slower growth than smaller countries in modern times

How refreshing, an unbiased appraisal.

[Prufrock]

Did none of you read what I wrote?
If the Brexit bill ends up at £60bn (which it won't anyway), that'll still be £20bn less than we would have given away scot-free to the fxckin EU anyway.

I'm pretty sure we got something in return for it, like.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Did none of you read what I wrote?
If the Brexit bill ends up at £60bn (which it won't anyway), that'll still be £20bn less than we would have given away scot-free to the fxckin EU anyway.

I'm pretty sure we got something in return for it, like.

I'm absolutely positive that you think that, like. So name something that we got for that enormous bribe that Canada, or the US, or South Korea, didn't, like.

[BWFC_Insane]

Indeed. The fact our growth lags behind the majority if not all EU countries in 2017 is nothing to worry about.

Wait, have you seen the individual economies of most EU member states?

It's like saying France's growth is lagging compared to that of Laos.

The largest single economies, will usually always have slower growth than smaller countries in modern times

Our growth lags behind the eurozone as a whole. And it hasn't previously.

So no, that doesn't explain it.

Brexit has stunted our growth. That's hundreds of billions gone.

And because the national economy isn't like a fecking personal household bank account, inspire of what the right like to pretend, the lost growth if it continues anything like forecasts means we won't 'break even' on Brexit for centuries.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Indeed. The fact our growth lags behind the majority if not all EU countries in 2017 is nothing to worry about.

Wait, have you seen the individual economies of most EU member states?

It's like saying France's growth is lagging compared to that of Laos.

The largest single economies, will usually always have slower growth than smaller countries in modern times

Our growth lags behind the eurozone as a whole. And it hasn't previously.

So no, that doesn't explain it.

Brexit has stunted our growth. That's hundreds of billions gone.

And because the national economy isn't like a fecking personal household bank account, inspire of what the right like to pretend, the lost growth if it continues anything like forecasts means we won't 'break even' on Brexit for centuries.

You are talking hysterical bollox. Non-truths. False news. Bullshit.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

^ quote me a reliable source that backs up your bullshit. I bet you 0.000000001% of the amount we chuck at the EU year on year that you can't. (that's ~£20 by the way).

[Lost Leopard Spot]

...come on, I'm waiting.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Did none of you read what I wrote?
If the Brexit bill ends up at £60bn (which it won't anyway), that'll still be £20bn less than we would have given away scot-free to the fxckin EU anyway.

I'm pretty sure we got something in return for it, like.

I'm absolutely positive that you think that, like. So name something that we got for that enormous bribe that Canada, or the US, or South Korea, didn't, like.

...and as usual, drumming my fingers waiting for an answer to this too.
Remoaners, good at coming up with questions, shit at answering questions.