** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

[pete75]

I wonder if Boris can get his place in history by beating George Canning to be the shortest serving prime minister?

... the Prime Minister with the total shortest period in office was George Canning, whose sole term lasted 119 days from 12 April 1827 until his death on 8 August 1827.

Although I expect even he would struggle to beat Lord Bath.

The shortest ever period was only three days, a record held by Lord Bath, from 10 February to 12 February 1746, who was asked to form a government but was unable to find more than one person who would agree to serve in his cabinet.

(Both quotes from here.)

I'd prefer him to have a Spencer Percival premiership.

[Mick F]

And Farage et al can send back all the cash they received. And the farmers. And communities all around the UK.

Not taking sides here, and not making a point.

Question:

There's only so much money about.
If we pay the EU our dues, and we get money back for fishing and farming and Objective One etc, what's the balance?
If the balance is zero or thereabouts, why pay out and then receive?
Are we financially in profit or loss?

Not counting other benefits with respect to free movement, free trade, free anything etc etc etc.
Just payments versus receipts.
Are we in profit are are we in debt or are we balanced?

Does anyone know?

[661-Pete]

I'd prefer him to have a Spencer Percival premiership.

Now now! Let's not get too carried away! Although I agree that Bozo's tenure should be curtailed as quickly as possible, this isn't the way...

[stu1102]

And Farage et al can send back all the cash they received. And the farmers. And communities all around the UK.

Not taking sides here, and not making a point.

Question:

There's only so much money about.
If we pay the EU our dues, and we get money back for fishing and farming and Objective One etc, what's the balance?
If the balance is zero or thereabouts, why pay out and then receive?
Are we financially in profit or loss?

Not counting other benefits with respect to free movement, free trade, free anything etc etc etc.
Just payments versus receipts.
Are we in profit are are we in debt or are we balanced?

Does anyone know?

The current analysis is that to quote;

'National Income and living standards are a good 2% or £40 billion a year lower than they would have been'....source Paul Johnson Director of the Institute of Fiscal Studies as Paul indicates in his article The Times July 22nd 'the impact of the Brexit vote has played out almost as predicted'
source https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/14260

https://www.ifs.org.uk/


Before anyone shouts Project Fear please show contrary empirical analysis to refute the above

[PDQ Mobile]

And Farage et al can send back all the cash they received. And the farmers. And communities all around the UK.

Not taking sides here, and not making a point.

Question:

There's only so much money about.
If we pay the EU our dues, and we get money back for fishing and farming and Objective One etc, what's the balance?
If the balance is zero or thereabouts, why pay out and then receive?
Are we financially in profit or loss?

Not counting other benefits with respect to free movement, free trade, free anything etc etc etc.
Just payments versus receipts.
Are we in profit are are we in debt or are we balanced?

Does anyone know?

This was asked several times particularly in the run up to the referendum.
Have you forgotten?
"About balanced", seemed to have some consensus but one should not overlook benefits to being a member of course.
Like subs when you were in the scouts.

Tarif free food imports being an important one.
But there are plenty of others.
Cornwall (and parts of Wales), of course, had a bit more than their "fair" share of funding for various projects/schemes on account of them being relatively poor.

[Mick F]

How much do we pay per annum and how much do we get in receipts?
This is over decades .................... not just since the referendum.

Receipts over Expenditure.
I used to be a treasurer for a fund. I was audited annually and had to do a Receipts over Expenditure statement each time.

Not taking sides here. Just a question.
Give some figures.

Not asking about stuff that's good or bad or how good or bad it is to be a member of the EU .................. just numbers of quids.
How much do we pay, and how much do we get back.

[andrec]

And Farage et al can send back all the cash they received. And the farmers. And communities all around the UK.

Not taking sides here, and not making a point.

Question:

There's only so much money about.
If we pay the EU our dues, and we get money back for fishing and farming and Objective One etc, what's the balance?
If the balance is zero or thereabouts, why pay out and then receive?
Are we financially in profit or loss?

Not counting other benefits with respect to free movement, free trade, free anything etc etc etc.
Just payments versus receipts.
Are we in profit are are we in debt or are we balanced?

Does anyone know?

The UK is the second biggest net contributor to the EU, lagging far behind Germany but well ahead of third placed France. This goes a long way to explaining why the bloc is so reluctant to see us leave. Brexit will leave a large hole in the EU's finances, one which will have to be filled by the taxpayers of the other net contributors of which there are only a few. They'll have to pay more from their paypackets so that Brussels can send the same money to the majority of members who get more from the EU than they pay in. Meanwhile, we in the UK will gain billions from Brexit when we stop sending money to Poland, Bulgaria, Belgium etc via the middlemen in Brussels. As far as I know people are not starving the death in those countries, so I expect they'll manage without our money. It is strange how Remainers never seem to mention just how much cash we send to Brussels compared to how little we get back, while they are forever going on about how much money the EU gives to us, as if it is some sort benevolent organisation which is helping us out, doing things we couldn't otherwise afford, and which we'll miss when we leave.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48256318

[PDQ Mobile]

How much do we pay per annum and how much do we get in receipts?
This is over decades .................... not just since the referendum.

Receipts over Expenditure.
I used to be a treasurer for a fund. I was audited annually and had to do a Receipts over Expenditure statement each time.

Not taking sides here. Just a question.
Give some figures.

Not asking about stuff that's good or bad or how good or bad it is to be a member of the EU .................. just numbers of quids.
How much do we pay, and how much do we get back.

If your interested (suddenly) I suggest you google it.
Definitive answers were given in the up to the referendum debate by some knowledgable contributors on here.
My memory says it was about equal as I just stated.
But ignores the advantages/perks of being axmember.

[andrec]

And Farage et al can send back all the cash they received. And the farmers. And communities all around the UK.

Not taking sides here, and not making a point.

Question:

There's only so much money about.
If we pay the EU our dues, and we get money back for fishing and farming and Objective One etc, what's the balance?
If the balance is zero or thereabouts, why pay out and then receive?
Are we financially in profit or loss?

Not counting other benefits with respect to free movement, free trade, free anything etc etc etc.
Just payments versus receipts.
Are we in profit are are we in debt or are we balanced?

Does anyone know?

This was asked several times particularly in the run up to the referendum.
Have you forgotten?
"About balanced", seemed to have some consensus but one should not overlook benefits to being a member of course.
Like subs when you were in the scouts.

Tarif free food imports being an important one.
But there are plenty of others.
Cornwall (and parts of Wales), of course, had a bit more than their "fair" share of funding for various projects/schemes on account of them being relatively poor.

If we didn't pay so many billions to the EU every year with so little in return we'd have more money to help poorer regions in the UK. At the moment we pay billions to help poorer areas in other EU countries. Why? I don't mind giving money to people in need, such as the starving in Africa, but I see no reason why one single penny of my pay should end up in the pocket of someone in Poland or Greece where they might not be as affluent as we are here but they are certainly not poor.

[PDQ Mobile]

Not taking sides here, and not making a point.

Question:

There's only so much money about.
If we pay the EU our dues, and we get money back for fishing and farming and Objective One etc, what's the balance?
If the balance is zero or thereabouts, why pay out and then receive?
Are we financially in profit or loss?

Not counting other benefits with respect to free movement, free trade, free anything etc etc etc.
Just payments versus receipts.
Are we in profit are are we in debt or are we balanced?

Does anyone know?

This was asked several times particularly in the run up to the referendum.
Have you forgotten?
"About balanced", seemed to have some consensus but one should not overlook benefits to being a member of course.
Like subs when you were in the scouts.

Tarif free food imports being an important one.
But there are plenty of others.
Cornwall (and parts of Wales), of course, had a bit more than their "fair" share of funding for various projects/schemes on account of them being relatively poor.

If we didn't pay so many billions to the EU every year with so little in return we'd have more money to help poorer regions in the UK. At the moment we pay billions to help poorer areas in other EU countries. Why? I don't mind giving money to people in need, such as the starving in Africa, but I see no reason why one single penny of my pay should end up in the pocket of someone in Poland or Greece where they might not be as affluent as we are here but they are certainly not poor.

I guess you will give the £350 million we "save"to the NHS. Though that particular myth was pretty thoughly discredited long ago.

As things stand Brexit has already cost the UK many many times that figure in beaurocracy.

It is true that the other members don't want us to leave.
They have a positive vision of solidarity, tolerance and hopeful optimism.
Whereas here we are more isolationist and narrow.

The truth will come out on the 31st of October.

[roubaixtuesday]

Not taking sides here, and not making a point.

Question:

There's only so much money about.
If we pay the EU our dues, and we get money back for fishing and farming and Objective One etc, what's the balance?
If the balance is zero or thereabouts, why pay out and then receive?
Are we financially in profit or loss?

Not counting other benefits with respect to free movement, free trade, free anything etc etc etc.
Just payments versus receipts.
Are we in profit are are we in debt or are we balanced?

Does anyone know?

This was asked several times particularly in the run up to the referendum.
Have you forgotten?
"About balanced", seemed to have some consensus but one should not overlook benefits to being a member of course.
Like subs when you were in the scouts.

Tarif free food imports being an important one.
But there are plenty of others.
Cornwall (and parts of Wales), of course, had a bit more than their "fair" share of funding for various projects/schemes on account of them being relatively poor.

If we didn't pay so many billions to the EU every year with so little in return we'd have more money to help poorer regions in the UK. At the moment we pay billions to help poorer areas in other EU countries. Why? I don't mind giving money to people in need, such as the starving in Africa, but I see no reason why one single penny of my pay should end up in the pocket of someone in Poland or Greece where they might not be as affluent as we are here but they are certainly not poor.

Essentially,

1. Economically it's too our advantage to be part of a prosperous single market. Everybody gains, even though the poorer gain proportionally more.

To put it another way: where do you think Nissan sell all those cars?

2. Politically we are all Europeans. We broadly share the same culture, heritage and values, and objectives, and sticking together helps us against the rest of the world.

To put it another way: it's good for us that Latvia is on our side, on the front line against Putin, and that Spain is democratic rather than fascist.

[roubaixtuesday]

For Mick: it's about 4 billion euros.

https://europa.eu/european-union/about- ... kingdom_en

But it's economic benefits of single market membership far outweigh this.

[Oldjohnw]

I don't know the actual figures but of course we are net contributors. Mathematically it would be impossible for every country to be a net beneficiary. And since the UK is rather proud that it is the 5th(?) largest economy there are no surprises.

That is the nature of community. Plus, we have the longest period of peace in history and w get a much stronger negotiating springboard, as we'll find out soon enough - Mr Fox, despite his claim that doing deals would be easy, has only managed 11 out of 40.

[roubaixtuesday]

I don't know the actual figures but of course we are net contributors. Mathematically it would be impossible for every country to be a net beneficiary. And since the UK is rather proud that it is the 5th(?) largest economy there are no surprises.

That is the nature of community. Plus, we have the longest period of peace in history and w get a much stronger negotiating springboard, as we'll find out soon enough - Mr Fox, despite his claim that doing deals would be easy, has only managed 11 out of 40.

And note none of these are on better terms than the EU deals, most of them indeed worse, for instance:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft.com ... bf8f989972

Which vividly demonstrates how the trade "upside" odd Brexit is, in fact, the precise opposite.

[horizon]

For Mick: it's about 4 billion euros.

https://europa.eu/european-union/about- ... kingdom_en

But it's economic benefits of single market membership far outweigh this.

Am I right in thinking that the GDP of the UK is around £2tn? Which makes our net contribution about half one thousandth of GDP. Not bad for 70 years of peace.

PS Please check my maths!