Boris. £350m for the NHS if we leave EU. Again.
Discussion
IroningMan said:
KrissKross said:
We have two options in business, a good deal, and a bad deal.
The remainers have been presented with a good deal but want to turn it into a bad deal, it's rather crazy if you ask me?
I haven't seen any deal at all, much less a good one. Where is the deal that's been presented?The remainers have been presented with a good deal but want to turn it into a bad deal, it's rather crazy if you ask me?
TooMany2cvs said:
IroningMan said:
KrissKross said:
We have two options in business, a good deal, and a bad deal.
The remainers have been presented with a good deal but want to turn it into a bad deal, it's rather crazy if you ask me?
I haven't seen any deal at all, much less a good one. Where is the deal that's been presented?The remainers have been presented with a good deal but want to turn it into a bad deal, it's rather crazy if you ask me?
Of course it's somebody else's fault that it doesn't really exist
rscott said:
Not really. If I tweak your analogy a bit..
I send £1000 a week to someone and they give me £300 back each time. I then stop sending them that money. How much better off am I each week? If you're Boris, then you're £1000 a week better off. Most others would say £700.
Let's avoid analogies and opt for what we were doing and what we are going to do. The maths is quite simple.I send £1000 a week to someone and they give me £300 back each time. I then stop sending them that money. How much better off am I each week? If you're Boris, then you're £1000 a week better off. Most others would say £700.
We paid considerably less than £350m pw for supposed advantages of membership. Whether these advantages were worth the sum is open to argument.
For a period after we leave there will be a transition period where we will pay more each week than we paid for membership. For this sum we get fewer benefits of membership which dry up as the years go by.
I don't know if we were getting value for money before brexit. What I can say is that if the price goes up and the benefits drop, the vfm is considerably less.
Fair enough, it is short term, a few years, but no one knows what happens after that.
Derek Smith said:
rscott said:
Not really. If I tweak your analogy a bit..
I send £1000 a week to someone and they give me £300 back each time. I then stop sending them that money. How much better off am I each week? If you're Boris, then you're £1000 a week better off. Most others would say £700.
Let's avoid analogies and opt for what we were doing and what we are going to do. The maths is quite simple.I send £1000 a week to someone and they give me £300 back each time. I then stop sending them that money. How much better off am I each week? If you're Boris, then you're £1000 a week better off. Most others would say £700.
We paid considerably less than £350m pw for supposed advantages of membership. Whether these advantages were worth the sum is open to argument.
For a period after we leave there will be a transition period where we will pay more each week than we paid for membership. For this sum we get fewer benefits of membership which dry up as the years go by.
I don't know if we were getting value for money before brexit. What I can say is that if the price goes up and the benefits drop, the vfm is considerably less.
Fair enough, it is short term, a few years, but no one knows what happens after that.
trade deals throughout the rest of World, especially those emerging markets. The question is will the new markets provide us with good strong trading partners over the next half century+
and will the EU onto he it’s downward trajectory harnest to debt of some of its partners.
mx5nut said:
KrissKross said:
mx5nut said:
If the alternative costs you more, that doesn't leave any to spend on something else.
The alternative is that you are better off, not worse of. It's a fact that we are a net contributor to the EU, no one is denying that, are you?
2/ why didn't you answer the question?
alfie2244 said:
mx5nut said:
And once we've left, we'll have to pay for many of the things our membership provided - without the economies of scale.
Big isn't always beautiful...as Carillion demonstrates .How long can you keep hiding your accounts and incompetencies for, any small business owners would have been in jail long ago!
Derek Smith said:
Let's avoid analogies and opt for what we were doing and what we are going to do. The maths is quite simple.
We paid considerably less than £350m pw for supposed advantages of membership. Whether these advantages were worth the sum is open to argument.
For a period after we leave there will be a transition period where we will pay more each week than we paid for membership. For this sum we get fewer benefits of membership which dry up as the years go by.
I don't know if we were getting value for money before brexit. What I can say is that if the price goes up and the benefits drop, the vfm is considerably less.
Fair enough, it is short term, a few years, but no one knows what happens after that.
Aren’t the increases in our contribution already planned and not Brexit related?We paid considerably less than £350m pw for supposed advantages of membership. Whether these advantages were worth the sum is open to argument.
For a period after we leave there will be a transition period where we will pay more each week than we paid for membership. For this sum we get fewer benefits of membership which dry up as the years go by.
I don't know if we were getting value for money before brexit. What I can say is that if the price goes up and the benefits drop, the vfm is considerably less.
Fair enough, it is short term, a few years, but no one knows what happens after that.
crankedup said:
The question is will the new markets provide us with good strong trading partners over the next half century+
an
I have an answer,an
Yes, if what you produce or offer someone else wants to buy. Location is irrelevant.
No, if what you produce or offer is poor quality or not required.
It really is that simple. I should know.
mx5nut said:
TooMany2cvs said:
IroningMan said:
KrissKross said:
We have two options in business, a good deal, and a bad deal.
The remainers have been presented with a good deal but want to turn it into a bad deal, it's rather crazy if you ask me?
I haven't seen any deal at all, much less a good one. Where is the deal that's been presented?The remainers have been presented with a good deal but want to turn it into a bad deal, it's rather crazy if you ask me?
Of course it's somebody else's fault that it doesn't really exist
TooMany2cvs said:
If you're waving the £1,000 figure about, and saying you can spend it on <emotive X>, then damn right it does.
B'sides, of the £700 you've ACTUALLY saved, you may actually need to spend £250 of it on the things that it was already being spent on by the other end... So we're down to £450 actually saved. But shout about a grand if you like...
So... you are saying we are better off but the amount is questionable. That's fair.B'sides, of the £700 you've ACTUALLY saved, you may actually need to spend £250 of it on the things that it was already being spent on by the other end... So we're down to £450 actually saved. But shout about a grand if you like...
But we are better off.
mx5nut said:
the EU isn't as scary as they make it sound 
I was never scared, although your choice of emotion is interesting. I will simply say that I did not want to follow the EU along it's (oft stated) direction of travel, nor did I want us to get to it's (long held) desired conclusion, no matter how far in the future you may imagine that to be. I also didn't want the UK to keep being the gooseberry on the sofa, always getting in the way of what our friends on the mainland wanted.
Better to be good friends than warring spouses, in my view.
But scary? No. Perhaps for you? Do you scare easily?
KrissKross said:
TooMany2cvs said:
If you're waving the £1,000 figure about, and saying you can spend it on <emotive X>, then damn right it does.
B'sides, of the £700 you've ACTUALLY saved, you may actually need to spend £250 of it on the things that it was already being spent on by the other end... So we're down to £450 actually saved. But shout about a grand if you like...
So... you are saying we are better off but the amount is questionable. That's fair.B'sides, of the £700 you've ACTUALLY saved, you may actually need to spend £250 of it on the things that it was already being spent on by the other end... So we're down to £450 actually saved. But shout about a grand if you like...
But we are better off.
Whether we're "better off" is a MUCH more complex question, because you need to balance that contribution against the benefits of membership. There's a very strong argument that membership benefits the economy by far more than the contribution - but it's almost impossible to quantify.
Have a read of this: (2014, so before the referendum was even a question)
http://www.res.org.uk/details/mediabrief/6052141/E...
I suspect it will be a lot easier to quantify in retrospect. But, by then, it'll be too late.
TooMany2cvs said:
No. Whether our EU membership "costs" is a definite - the UK is a net contributor, as one of the richest countries - but the £350m/wk figure is a lie.
Whether we're "better off" is a MUCH more complex question, because you need to balance that contribution against the benefits of membership. There's a very strong argument that membership benefits the economy by far more than the contribution - but it's almost impossible to quantify.
Have a read of this: (2014, so before the referendum was even a question)
http://www.res.org.uk/details/mediabrief/6052141/E...
I suspect it will be a lot easier to quantify in retrospect. But, by then, it'll be too late.
I would imagine those at the top of Carillion were boasting the same for as long as they could.Whether we're "better off" is a MUCH more complex question, because you need to balance that contribution against the benefits of membership. There's a very strong argument that membership benefits the economy by far more than the contribution - but it's almost impossible to quantify.
Have a read of this: (2014, so before the referendum was even a question)
http://www.res.org.uk/details/mediabrief/6052141/E...
I suspect it will be a lot easier to quantify in retrospect. But, by then, it'll be too late.
I also scanned your link, switched off at the bit that said "estimates" and the fact that none of the editors or contributors appear to be from this country, can you link one of them to any real-world business or are they all just academics?
sidicks said:
Derek Smith said:
Let's avoid analogies and opt for what we were doing and what we are going to do. The maths is quite simple.
We paid considerably less than £350m pw for supposed advantages of membership. Whether these advantages were worth the sum is open to argument.
For a period after we leave there will be a transition period where we will pay more each week than we paid for membership. For this sum we get fewer benefits of membership which dry up as the years go by.
I don't know if we were getting value for money before brexit. What I can say is that if the price goes up and the benefits drop, the vfm is considerably less.
Fair enough, it is short term, a few years, but no one knows what happens after that.
Aren’t the increases in our contribution already planned and not Brexit related?We paid considerably less than £350m pw for supposed advantages of membership. Whether these advantages were worth the sum is open to argument.
For a period after we leave there will be a transition period where we will pay more each week than we paid for membership. For this sum we get fewer benefits of membership which dry up as the years go by.
I don't know if we were getting value for money before brexit. What I can say is that if the price goes up and the benefits drop, the vfm is considerably less.
Fair enough, it is short term, a few years, but no one knows what happens after that.
2017 - Gross - £19,200 - Rebate - £5,900 - Net - £13,300
2018 - Gross - £18,600 - Rebate - £3,600 - Net - £15,100
2019 - Gross - £19,200 - Rebate - £3,900 - Net - £15,400
2020 - Gross - £19,600 - Rebate - £4,200 - Net - £15,400
2021 - Gross - £19,800 - Rebate - £4,200 - Net - £15,500
TooMany2cvs said:
No. Whether our EU membership "costs" is a definite - the UK is a net contributor, as one of the richest countries - but the £350m/wk figure is a lie.
Whether we're "better off" is a MUCH more complex question, because you need to balance that contribution against the benefits of membership. There's a very strong argument that membership benefits the economy by far more than the contribution - but it's almost impossible to quantify.
Have a read of this: (2014, so before the referendum was even a question)
http://www.res.org.uk/details/mediabrief/6052141/E...
I suspect it will be a lot easier to quantify in retrospect. But, by then, it'll be too late.
Indeed. That is what makes the Johnson/Gove invented figure nonsensical regardless of its inaccuracy. Whether we're "better off" is a MUCH more complex question, because you need to balance that contribution against the benefits of membership. There's a very strong argument that membership benefits the economy by far more than the contribution - but it's almost impossible to quantify.
Have a read of this: (2014, so before the referendum was even a question)
http://www.res.org.uk/details/mediabrief/6052141/E...
I suspect it will be a lot easier to quantify in retrospect. But, by then, it'll be too late.
The only relevant question is whether membership was worth the cost. Everything else is spin.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff