Keeping up with the latest Brexit News

Which option would you prefer?

  • Leave with no deal

    Votes: 122 74.4%
  • Leave with the WA without the backstop

    Votes: 42 25.6%

  • Total voters
    164
  • Poll closed .

psikey

Distinguished Member
If Russia invaded the Ukraine and then on to Poland what would the EU do about it?
Nothing, because they need Russian gas.

If the EU decided to fight a war with Russia, should the UK get involved? Given their attitude towards paying into NATO, I doubt it.
Does it matter? One nuke goes then 3000* more follow. Only France & UK could even touch them.

We have about 300 between us.

The Nuclear Deterent we have (that Corbyn wants to give up) may encourage them to stop at France & UK.

*Assumption that 50% dont work.
 
Last edited:

LX200GPS

Active Member
No for this:



I don't condone anyone breaking the law and can't wait till cash is fully replaced so that "Money in Hand" jobs can't happen avoiding tax like most of us have to pay.

And no, I've always had work done for me with receipt, warranty and paid VAT as needed.
No everyone who gets paid in cash avoids paying tax. Do you also get a receipt from the person who mows your lawn or cleans your windows?
 

psikey

Distinguished Member
No everyone who gets paid in cash avoids paying tax. Do you also get a receipt from the person who mows your lawn or cleans your windows?
Lazy! I mow my own lawns and wash my own car. Window cleaner now does Bank Transfer for payment.

I have a few builder/trade mates and all earn double what they declare.
 

raduv1

Distinguished Member
Wow this is a funny old world we live in where AV members target of a tax dodge is a lil cash in hand and the likes of Amazon , Google etc rake in billions without paying due tax. What's good enough for them big guys is good enough for all.
 

Pacifico

Distinguished Member
Wow this is a funny old world we live in where AV members target of a tax dodge is a lil cash in hand and the likes of Amazon , Google etc rake in billions without paying due tax. What's good enough for them big guys is good enough for all.
The Single Market working as designed. :smashin:
 

LX200GPS

Active Member
Lazy! I mow my own lawns and wash my own car. Window cleaner now does Bank Transfer for payment.

I have a few builder/trade mates and all earn double what they declare.
Not everybody has the ability to do their own gardening - OAP's for example - so nothing to do with being lazy is it?
Have a word with your mates and explain that if everyone avoided paying the correct amount of tax did so, then the system collapses. A bit like fare dodging on the transport system. Some people think HMRC are a bit thick and they will never be investigated. Trust me they have their spreadsheets, systems and so on to ensure a builder, gardener or electrician will expect to earn a certain amount per year. And that spreadsheet will differ depending on the regiion of the country. Just because they haven't been investigated yet doesn't mean they will get away with it forever. Once they are investigated their life, and those of their family members, will become a misery. You are probably paying more income tax because your mates are paying less.
My advice is free and worth every penny!
 
Last edited:

psikey

Distinguished Member
Not everybody has the ability to do their own gardening - OAP's for example - so nothing to do with being lazy is it?
Have a word with your mates and explain that if everyone avoided paying the correct amount of tax did so, then the system collapses.
My constant argument with them :( Exactly what I say to them. One of them did get investigated by HMRC and they had their arses covered. Biggest problem for them recently is how to get rid of all the old £20 notes they have in time!

I agree regarding big corporations but with many tradesman (& gardeners etc.) their will be a large amount of tax being avoided there too. A cashless economy (as its going) will eliminate most of that.

My Mum is 80 and my uncle is 78. They both still do their own gardening. We are rugged & tight up here in Yorkshire :D
 
Last edited:

ostewart

Active Member
by a tiny amounts in the ‘.x’ of a percentage point range.

whilst saying there would be a near term boost. They also made no comment on long term beyond 3 years.

a tiny price to pay for what I see as future prosperity and sovereignty.

I keep coming back to it - the price of everything the value of nothing.
"sovereignty" could you point out where this has been lost whilst being in the EU? I'm curious, as it is a word that the leavers love yet when we show we still have soverignty they don't like it (court case saying proroguing of parliament was unlawful).
 

EarthRod

Distinguished Member
"sovereignty" could you point out where this has been lost whilst being in the EU? I'm curious, as it is a word that the leavers love yet when we show we still have soverignty they don't like it (court case saying proroguing of parliament was unlawful).
Straight away I can think of two:
1. EU law overrides UK statute law.
2. EU rules, directives and decisions undermine parliamentary democracy.
 

mdbarber

Active Member
"sovereignty" could you point out where this has been lost whilst being in the EU? I'm curious, as it is a word that the leavers love yet when we show we still have soverignty they don't like it (court case saying proroguing of parliament was unlawful).
you are wasting your effort, the arguments against yours completely ignore the fact that for 30+ years "we" are the EU, we had the same opportunity for creating the legislation that rules the EU as anyone else.
Separatist mentality sees the EU as a entity that is totally distinct from the UK and therefore cannot align the fact of losing sovereignty over the UK is gaining sovereignty over europe.
 

Rasczak

Distinguished Member
1. EU law overrides UK statute law.
EU law is made with full input by UK representatives both appointed (by the Government) and directly elected by the people. The said laws also offer significant discretion to the relevant member state on how they are implemented.

2. EU rules, directives and decisions undermine parliamentary democracy.
EU rules, directives and decisions are subject to EU Parliamentary scrutiny. Indeed, given the EU elections use regional lists, they represent a far more democratic system than the Westminster elections. Furthermore the Westminster Parliament also has the ability and opportunity to scrutinise and influence how EU laws are enacted.

It is ironic that you raise this at the very time a British Prime Minister has called a General Election because he doesn't like his actions and laws being subject to Parliamentary scrutiny!
 

richp007

Distinguished Member
Don't have any doubt that it will.
I posted it in the wrong thread, but in the GE thread I posted a bit more than Panavision did about Johnson's ideas toward NI and the deal.

If he's really scrutinised on this aspect of it, he'll flounder. And I expect Farage in particular to pounce.
 

Panavision

Well-known Member
Boris seems to suggest that there is no need with checks, but I doubt he can allow this. I think he is lying or doesn't know what he agreed to.
 

richp007

Distinguished Member
Boris seems to suggest that there is no need with checks, but I doubt he can allow this. I think he is lying or doesn't know what he agreed to.
He can't allow it. So he's breaking the deal, lying, or doesn't understand it.

Not understanding it is probably the worst, as he wanted Parliament to pass it in a matter days. And after weeks he still doesn't get it himself. Farcical.
 

Stuey1

Well-known Member
Equally indefensible as it is remarkable.

Let's hope this sort of contradiction is brought up in the debates.
Lets start by saying this isn't a defence but a question...

Is he not actually (potentially) correct, it would surely be for the UK prime-minister to decide if there will be checks on goods going from NI to the rUK - goods going the other way which could then make their way into the EU would be the issue if I am not mistaken., or am I mistaken?
 

mdbarber

Active Member
Lets start by saying this isn't a defence but a question...

Is he not actually (potentially) correct, it would surely be for the UK prime-minister to decide if there will be checks on goods going from NI to the rUK - goods going the other way which could then make their way into the EU would be the issue if I am not mistaken., or am I mistaken?
If only it were that simple(like Boris)
As I understand it, if he is to retain the Good Friday agreement there must be no hard border between north and south, if he doesn't do checks on transit between NI and the rUK then there is essentially no border between the EU and the rUK, not what any brexiter wants otherwise there is no point to brexit ("Taking back control" of the borders etc )
 

Aj33

Well-known Member
No one is going to like the following statement around NI and Brexit:

it seems to me that we are all dancing around to appease what are essentially terrorists (IRA etc.).

maybe that is too simplistic.

the above comment is not a hill I am prepared to die on. But an observation. I am happy to be persuaded otherwise.
 

richp007

Distinguished Member
Lets start by saying this isn't a defence but a question...

Is he not actually (potentially) correct, it would surely be for the UK prime-minister to decide if there will be checks on goods going from NI to the rUK - goods going the other way which could then make their way into the EU would be the issue if I am not mistaken., or am I mistaken?
No it concerns goods from NI to GB. Johnson has contradicted what is in his own deal as part of the protocols of the new arrangement with the EU. Not only that, but by saying this he's implying that both Barclay and Gove are wrong.

(Remember Barclay also got it wrong himself too in parliament a few weeks back).

He wanted Parliament to sign off on this in days, when he still doesn't get it himself it seems, even now. People are questioning too if there's other aspects of the deal he doesn't understand. It's pretty astounding and is actually the type of thing you'd expect from someone like Trump.

I hope he gets questioned on it in the coming weeks. It's important stuff and vital for business to know what they have to do. People talk about Brexit uncertainty, it doesn't get much more uncertain than your own PM providing false information.
 
Last edited:

klaxhu

Well-known Member
Lets start by saying this isn't a defence but a question...

Is he not actually (potentially) correct, it would surely be for the UK prime-minister to decide if there will be checks on goods going from NI to the rUK - goods going the other way which could then make their way into the EU would be the issue if I am not mistaken., or am I mistaken?
His own DexEU already contradicted him. The policy is clear in the WA. The guy is a sensationalist speaker with zero substance in what he says.

I hope people will hold him accountable through their vote and not take all the lies he says at face value.

Oh, wait.... (the irony)
 

Ruperts slippers

Distinguished Member
My constant argument with them :( Exactly what I say to them. One of them did get investigated by HMRC and they had their arses covered. Biggest problem for them recently is how to get rid of all the old £20 notes they have in time!

I agree regarding big corporations but with many tradesman (& gardeners etc.) their will be a large amount of tax being avoided there too. A cashless economy (as its going) will eliminate most of that.

My Mum is 80 and my uncle is 78. They both still do their own gardening. We are rugged & tight up here in Yorkshire :D
This is just man down the pub talk.
Cash is a legal tender, self employed, business owners do not pay the same amount of tax as PAYE, there are numerous tax concessions available to help businesses. After all, unlike PAYE, businesses are self funding and self sufficient, with the help of an accountant and the HMRC, people can mitigate the amount of tax they pay. One of the prime motivating factors, attractors to being self sufficient.

I know that window cleaners for instance, always have a percentage of turnover outstanding due to non or slow payment, cashless is likely to make this worse, so easy to avoid when no money is exchanged between two parties.
I myself, take card payments, transfers, take deposits to mitigate any problems, arguments. I also run my business very, very tax efficiently. I do not begrudge paying tax, however there are wastages by government and those who are undeserving of my time and subsequent earnings that contribute to their income (Benefits).
 

Ruperts slippers

Distinguished Member
you are wasting your effort, the arguments against yours completely ignore the fact that for 30+ years "we" are the EU, we had the same opportunity for creating the legislation that rules the EU as anyone else.
Separatist mentality sees the EU as a entity that is totally distinct from the UK and therefore cannot align the fact of losing sovereignty over the UK is gaining sovereignty over europe.
You're using a very narrow definition of sovereignty, assuming power is equally represented and distributed. You're also confused over how law exists between the two parties. We have a conflict between common law (UK) and Roman law (EU), the two can exist side by side in a spirit of cooperation, however we can also see the conflicts created.

Another oft snippet of information is the EU and the UK have always had a frosty relationship, two WW are a devastating example of this. Post WW, neither the EU or the UK wanted either party to be part of the political bloc, de Gaulle describing the UK as an American trojan horse. So in effect separatist mentally has always existed between both parties.
The old POLITICAL rivalries and tensions still exist between the UK, EU AND RUSSIA.
The global trading agreement's have worked well, however we have always had more in common with the US than the UK when it comes to political alliances, history proves that.
 

mdbarber

Active Member
You're using a very narrow definition of sovereignty, assuming power is equally represented and distributed. You're also confused over how law exists between the two parties. We have a conflict between common law (UK) and Roman law (EU), the two can exist side by side in a spirit of cooperation, however we can also see the conflicts created.

Another oft snippet of information is the EU and the UK have always had a frosty relationship, two WW are a devastating example of this. Post WW, neither the EU or the UK wanted either party to be part of the political bloc, de Gaulle describing the UK as an American trojan horse. So in effect separatist mentally has always existed between both parties.
The old POLITICAL rivalries and tensions still exist between the UK, EU AND RUSSIA.
The global trading agreement's have worked well, however we have always had more in common with the US than the UK when it comes to political alliances, history proves that.

I did not strictly define sovereignty in my post nor allude to any other definition so how you can make such a blanket statement is beyond me.
Instead of using the word "conflict" try thinking of the difficulties in aligning large complex structures such as the legal framework of the EU and UK as a challenge to be met only by those worthy.
Obviously those with separatist mentalities will simplify that to "we can't be bothered" or "it is up to others to appease us!"
You have no need to inform me of the "frosty relationship" I am old enough to have witnessed much of it, mostly presented by the idiot tabloids who have held a persistent campaign against EU/EC membership since it's advent, of course those same media were in the pay of those with most to gain from a divide and conquer strategy worked upon the less informed masses.
 

mdbarber

Active Member
PS sorry forgot about the "special relationship" we have with the US as announced by Mr Trump about the same time Ford announced the massive job losses in the UK, lot of good that relationship is.
 

Iain42

Well-known Member
Instead of using the word "conflict" try thinking of the difficulties in aligning large complex structures such as the legal framework of the EU and UK as a challenge to be met only by those worthy.
Obviously those with separatist mentalities will simplify that to "we can't be bothered" or "it is up to others to appease us!"
Personally I do not believe that it is a good thing to align things like the legal framework of different countries. What is right for one country may not be right for another. I'm not saying country A is better than country B, just different. This "one size fits all" mentality is something we should look to avoid.
 

Trending threads

Latest news

Samsung applies for Q-Symphony trademark for TVs and soundbars
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Best Hi-Fi Products 2019 - Editor's Choice Awards
  • By Ed Selley
  • Published
McIntosh releases DA2 Digital Audio Module Upgrade Kit
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Sky TV offers cheaper Sky Q box with updated features
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Fyne Audio unveils its first home install loudspeaker line up
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published

Latest threads

Top Bottom