I love the EU because...

[Jockman]

crankedup said:

I'm fairly certain that the EU has yet to audit and sign off a few transactions going back a number of years. That and the EU grandiose, hefty staffing, constant jollies for MEP's, Looking at the Buildings recently paid for by the EU, a very fancy library ffs, a library!!! even the recipients in Wales are bemused.Trip through Spain and enjoy mile after mile of new dual carriageway roads, all empty of traffic, Airports built and unused. Absolute joke if it were not so serious, how to squander money on. industrial scale.

Surely you can't mean Cordoba ??

http://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR14_2...

[KrissKross]

battered said:

The EU doesn't work like a market stall. The economics is a bit more complicated than that. That's why there won't be £330M a week (or whatever) to spend on the NHS.

Put it another way, would you prefer 10% of £1M, or 5% of £3M?

Are you really asking what percentage of our own money we would like back, well 100% please so I can choose how to spend it!

You do understand we are net contributors to the EU, that means we spend more than we receive (of our own money), please explain how that is a good thing?

The £350m thing is distorted and is not relevant, the point is that if we gain control we "have a choice" where to spend it. Lets say it was possible to add another £50m a week to the NHS that would be a good thing, or not?

Economics and such like is really not complicated in this situation, when you add 10,000 people (on £100k+) on the payroll whose job it is to make things complicated, the average person on the street understandably gets baffled.

[crankedup]

Jockman said:

crankedup said:

I'm fairly certain that the EU has yet to audit and sign off a few transactions going back a number of years. That and the EU grandiose, hefty staffing, constant jollies for MEP's, Looking at the Buildings recently paid for by the EU, a very fancy library ffs, a library!!! even the recipients in Wales are bemused.Trip through Spain and enjoy mile after mile of new dual carriageway roads, all empty of traffic, Airports built and unused. Absolute joke if it were not so serious, how to squander money on. industrial scale.

Surely you can't mean Cordoba ??

http://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR14_2...

Looking at the passenger traffic downward spiral and the fact of two major airports within a two hour drive. Why would any business think it a great idea to build a third airport. Of course when the eu throw money into the equation it tends to tilt decision making.
Pity the UK haven't been given a vast sum to help us build another airport which is required and would be used. Makes too much common sense I suppose.

[battered]

KrissKross said:

Are you really asking what percentage of our own money we would like back, well 100% please so I can choose how to spend it!

You do understand we are net contributors to the EU, that means we spend more than we receive (of our own money), please explain how that is a good thing?

Because we are part of a greater whole, and 10% of a large pot is better than 100% of FA. Because investing in the region as a whole improves the ability of the whole region to trade.

KrissKross said:

Economics and such like is really not complicated in this situation.

LOL, that really is a good one. We are about to leave the EU and it's "really not complicated". You should be on stage. Seriously, not complicated? When are you going to take on chairmanship of the IMF so that you can tell them how to carry on? It's not complicated, I'm sure that you can knock that off in a spare weekend.

[crankedup]

battered said:

KrissKross said:

Are you really asking what percentage of our own money we would like back, well 100% please so I can choose how to spend it!

You do understand we are net contributors to the EU, that means we spend more than we receive (of our own money), please explain how that is a good thing?

Because we are part of a greater whole, and 10% of a large pot is better than 100% of FA. Because investing in the region as a whole improves the ability of the whole region to trade.

KrissKross said:

Economics and such like is really not complicated in this situation.

LOL, that really is a good one. We are about to leave the EU and it's "really not complicated". You should be on stage. Seriously, not complicated? When are you going to take on chairmanship of the IMF so that you can tell them how to carry on? It's not complicated, I'm sure that you can knock that off in a spare weekend.

It can only help a region trade if that region has an industrial or service base established. The e ample I used earlier suggests that to build a library in a region that is suffering from high unemployment is not particularly relevant to assist that area. Like the road building program in spain, complete and utter waste of money. By the time this particular Spanish region is able to offer some form of manufacturing, farming or services the weeds growing through the roads will be well established.

[battered]

We can all cherry pick the duds. It's part of being wise after the event. My stockbroker backs duds from time to time, but instead of beating him up for it I look at the overall portfolio return and provided he gets more right than wrong then I let it go.

Or do you believe that all EU funding is wasted on dud projects?

[Hosenbugler]

KrissKross said:

The £350m thing is distorted and is not relevant, the point is that if we gain control we "have a choice" where to spend it. Lets say it was possible to add another £50m a week to the NHS that would be a good thing, or not?.

Actaully, the 350 m thing is not distorted, it represents our Gross weekly liability to the EU. However, owing to our rebate, we do not actually have to literally pay that figure , we get a "discount" , not only that , we also get some back, disguised as "EU money" when in fact, its actually our own, and the cheeky bd EU tell us what we can spend it on.

From memory, I think our actual net weekly payment to the EU is in the region of £170m, and awful lot of money to disapear into an autocratic, corrupt machine which cannot even arrange and administer its own accounts.Not only that, the "hidden" costs of being in the EU concerns the "regulations" they are so keen on, "regulations" which its estimated , costs the \UK economy £120 billion per year. Staggering stuff.

Its well known, that an EU target is to strip us of our rebate, so that £350m is only going to get closer to being our net contribution, with QMV , here, or on the cusp of being so, and further stripping of sovreignty from its nation states, getting out of the authoritarian EU, is the greatest and wisest move as a nation we will have made in decades.

Edited by Hosenbugler on Tuesday 4th April 18:25

[crankedup]

battered said:

We can all cherry pick the duds. It's part of being wise after the event. My stockbroker backs duds from time to time, but instead of beating him up for it I look at the overall portfolio return and provided he gets more right than wrong then I let it go.

Or do you believe that all EU funding is wasted on dud projects?

I'm sure that some EU projects are hugely successful, my issue is that I prefer to see our money spent as we wish, not how beaurocrates in Brussels dictates.

Also my mention of duds is not some loose change found down the back of the sofa. It's millions upon millions of euro. May I also mention that in your analogy of your stockbroker, you do have the option of immediate dismissal, we were stuck with the eu.

[SKP555]

battered said:

We can all cherry pick the duds. It's part of being wise after the event. My stockbroker backs duds from time to time, but instead of beating him up for it I look at the overall portfolio return and provided he gets more right than wrong then I let it go.

Or do you believe that all EU funding is wasted on dud projects?

I think it's consistently underperformed for 44 ywars and isn't showing signs of improving.

[KrissKross]

battered said:

KrissKross said:

Are you really asking what percentage of our own money we would like back, well 100% please so I can choose how to spend it!

You do understand we are net contributors to the EU, that means we spend more than we receive (of our own money), please explain how that is a good thing?

Because we are part of a greater whole, and 10% of a large pot is better than 100% of FA. Because investing in the region as a whole improves the ability of the whole region to trade.

KrissKross said:

Economics and such like is really not complicated in this situation.

LOL, that really is a good one. We are about to leave the EU and it's "really not complicated". You should be on stage. Seriously, not complicated? When are you going to take on chairmanship of the IMF so that you can tell them how to carry on? It's not complicated, I'm sure that you can knock that off in a spare weekend.

1, The greater whole of what, I am part the whole world thanks, not sure what you mean, Greece, Spain, Poland, Turkey... Cannot really see how they are helping my family this week.

2, "LOL" - A common response from people who don't understand things is to laugh. Either that or to quote others who are equally inept. Care to share an example of what is difficult?

[KrissKross]

Hosenbugler said:

Actaully, the 350 m thing is not distorted, it represents our Gross weekly liability to the EU. However, owing to our rebate, we do not actually have to literally pay that figure , we get a "discount" , not only that , we also get some back, disguised as "EU money" when in fact, its actually our own, and the cheeky bd EU tell us what we can spend it on.

From memory, I think our actual net weekly payment to the EU is in the region of £170m, and awful lot of money to disapear into an autocratic, corrupt machine which cannot even arrange and administer its own accounts.Not only that, the "hidden" costs of being in the EU concerns the "regulations" they are so keen on, "regulations" which its estimated , costs the \UK economy £120 billion per year. Staggering stuff.

Its well known, that an EU target is to strip us of our rebate, so that £350m is only going to get closer to being our net contribution, with QMV , here, or on the cusp of being so, and further stripping of sovreignty from its nation states, getting out of the authoritarian EU, is the greatest and wisest move as a nation we will have made in decades.

Edited by Hosenbugler on Tuesday 4th April 18:25

Agreed, £50 net or £50 Billion, this was never agreed through any democratic process. They are stealing our money.

[markcoznottz]

crankedup said:

battered said:

crankedup said:

battered said:

Balmoral said:

battered said:

What has been proven by the ONS is that the EU migrants to UK have on the whole contributed more money in taxes etc than they have cost.

I don't understand the distinction being made, surely it would be the same for non EU migrants too? Even more so, as they don't enjoy the same rights, privileges or entitlements.

Edited by Balmoral on Thursday 30th March 16:15

Possibly so. However the question was "...the EU" so I'm talking about EU migrants making a positive contribution, which is more than can be said for certain sectors of the indigenous population. This may also be true about non-EU migrants, it doesn't detract from the positive contribution of the EU set.

The question is just how long can the UK sustain the number of immigrants entering the UK.
If, for example, Romainia, Bulgaria, Poland offered reciprocal benifit s in terms of employment and Social care perhaps UK residents may have been tempted to cross over to those Countries. As it is it seems that the UK is the number one distination for way too many eu and other immigrants. Be good to have some control over our borders

You can say the same about the north of England and the south east. Why is all the work in London, why do we allow people like me to travel from the north (Leeds) every week? How long can London sustain this? (Erm...indefinitely, it seems). I work in a factory in outer SE London, inside the M25, near the Dartford Xing. They pay for me to be in an hotel. Also there - a bloke from Selby. Another from Wakefield. Leicester. Milton K. Birmingham. All of us on the M11/A1/M1/M6 tonight. Why? Because it pays. Because there are not enough skilled people wanting to do this work in SE London. When are we going to stop these Yorkshiremen coming down here and taking our jobs?

Your not alone asking questions such as those ^^^^
I live in East Anglia, terrible infrastructure, low wage economy. I had the choice to stick or go, I chose to stick.

The UK has a shortage of some skilled workers as well as some unskilled sector jobs. IMO!
these shortages have in the main been brought about by bad Government policies of both colours over the past 4 decades.
The worst policy was the cessation of apprenticeships. The focus upon university education has been another disaster and the import of cheap labour.

Our daughter left East Anglia to work in London, she earns a large salary and enjoys city social life as well. It's suits her and her husband very well, we wouldn't even consider the option.

The de-skilling of the indigenous population and the dumbing down of uni can't have been by accident, it dovetails with open borders and a cheaper compliant workforce, which is what globalisation is all about. The move to a service based economy helps this as well. Unfortunately the part of the displaced and 'forgotten' population were still there, and crucially could still vote, so here we are.

[jonnyb]

markcoznottz said:

crankedup said:

battered said:

crankedup said:

battered said:

Balmoral said:

battered said:

What has been proven by the ONS is that the EU migrants to UK have on the whole contributed more money in taxes etc than they have cost.

I don't understand the distinction being made, surely it would be the same for non EU migrants too? Even more so, as they don't enjoy the same rights, privileges or entitlements.

Edited by Balmoral on Thursday 30th March 16:15

Possibly so. However the question was "...the EU" so I'm talking about EU migrants making a positive contribution, which is more than can be said for certain sectors of the indigenous population. This may also be true about non-EU migrants, it doesn't detract from the positive contribution of the EU set.

The question is just how long can the UK sustain the number of immigrants entering the UK.
If, for example, Romainia, Bulgaria, Poland offered reciprocal benifit s in terms of employment and Social care perhaps UK residents may have been tempted to cross over to those Countries. As it is it seems that the UK is the number one distination for way too many eu and other immigrants. Be good to have some control over our borders

You can say the same about the north of England and the south east. Why is all the work in London, why do we allow people like me to travel from the north (Leeds) every week? How long can London sustain this? (Erm...indefinitely, it seems). I work in a factory in outer SE London, inside the M25, near the Dartford Xing. They pay for me to be in an hotel. Also there - a bloke from Selby. Another from Wakefield. Leicester. Milton K. Birmingham. All of us on the M11/A1/M1/M6 tonight. Why? Because it pays. Because there are not enough skilled people wanting to do this work in SE London. When are we going to stop these Yorkshiremen coming down here and taking our jobs?

Your not alone asking questions such as those ^^^^
I live in East Anglia, terrible infrastructure, low wage economy. I had the choice to stick or go, I chose to stick.

The UK has a shortage of some skilled workers as well as some unskilled sector jobs. IMO!
these shortages have in the main been brought about by bad Government policies of both colours over the past 4 decades.
The worst policy was the cessation of apprenticeships. The focus upon university education has been another disaster and the import of cheap labour.

Our daughter left East Anglia to work in London, she earns a large salary and enjoys city social life as well. It's suits her and her husband very well, we wouldn't even consider the option.

The de-skilling of the indigenous population and the dumbing down of uni can't have been by accident, it dovetails with open borders and a cheaper compliant workforce, which is what globalisation is all about. The move to a service based economy helps this as well. Unfortunately the part of the displaced and 'forgotten' population were still there, and crucially could still vote, so here we are.

I really do hate this "victim" culture. No one has "de-skilled" any one. No-one is "forgotten" and in this context no one is "displaced" either, Its not the depression era.
What you don't have is a right to a good job and decent wage, you have to work hard to get them, and work hard to keep them. You earn respect, its not a right.
May be people should have tried harder at school.

[battered]

KrissKross said:

2, "LOL" - A common response from people who don't understand things is to laugh. Either that or to quote others who are equally inept. Care to share an example of what is difficult?

Yes, I will. I'm laughing at your remark that "European economics isn't complicated" because it's such an incredibly naive or stupid statement that it's funny. Macroeconomics is hugely complicated; to consider otherwise is ridiculous.

[mike9009]

crankedup said:

I'm sure that some EU projects are hugely successful, my issue is that I prefer to see our money spent as we wish, not how beaurocrates in Brussels dictates.

Also my mention of duds is not some loose change found down the back of the sofa. It's millions upon millions of euro. .

I agree, although now we are going to autocrats in Westminster dictating where we waste money on pet projects around the UK. I would prefer my money to go direct to the local council and have them decide.

Second thoughts the autocrats in our council aren't any better. I would like sovereignty and taxing decisions to be made by our local town council so real local decisions can be made in the interests of my local neighbourhood. Why should we continue to have Westminster dictating where all my taxes are spent....

[KrissKross]

battered said:

KrissKross said:

2, "LOL" - A common response from people who don't understand things is to laugh. Either that or to quote others who are equally inept. Care to share an example of what is difficult?

Yes, I will. I'm laughing at your remark that "European economics isn't complicated" because it's such an incredibly naive or stupid statement that it's funny. Macroeconomics is hugely complicated; to consider otherwise is ridiculous.

Please give an example.

[wc98]

jonnyb said:

May be people should have tried harder at school.

what school did you go to ? the most important job of the state in my eyes is to provide the best standard of education we can afford at any given time for all. that means the same standard everywhere. unfortunately that does not happen.

the push by the last labour government to get as many people into uni whether we needed people with lentil knitting degrees or not left those not academically inclined out in the cold. if the majority of people think zero hour contracts and people living three to a room is progress then so be it.

it never fails to amaze me that all the high flyers never seem to grasp you need low flyers to be a standout in the crowd. the low flyers still need the basics and a bit on top to lead a reasonably happy life .that's just the way it is in the uk today.

[davepoth]

jonnyb said:

I really do hate this "victim" culture. No one has "de-skilled" any one. No-one is "forgotten" and in this context no one is "displaced" either, Its not the depression era.
What you don't have is a right to a good job and decent wage, you have to work hard to get them, and work hard to keep them. You earn respect, its not a right.
May be people should have tried harder at school.

bks, frankly. I know some very wealthy stupid people.

People don't have the right to a good job, but what they have the right to is to not be exploited by their employers, exploited by their landlords, and left behind by their government.

We have a huge shortage of tradespeople, and a million people looking for work. Why?

[anonymous-user]

battered said:

KrissKross said:

2, "LOL" - A common response from people who don't understand things is to laugh. Either that or to quote others who are equally inept. Care to share an example of what is difficult?

Yes, I will. I'm laughing at your remark that "European economics isn't complicated" because it's such an incredibly naive or stupid statement that it's funny. Macroeconomics is hugely complicated; to consider otherwise is ridiculous.

I think you're right. That's probably why the EU has made such a balls up of it.

[KrissKross]

wc98 said:

it never fails to amaze me that all the high flyers never seem to grasp you need low flyers to be a standout in the crowd. the low flyers still need the basics and a bit on top to lead a reasonably happy life .that's just the way it is in the uk today.

By high flyers, do you mean politicians?