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 .
Status
Not open for further replies.
You sound fairly confident of passing this test yourself, personally I think you'd be rather disappointed with the outcome if we ever go down this route. :D

I am not sure I would pass it, but it would serve me right! Better read up and do my homework for the next vote?
 
Are you here to actually discuss or just looking for a fight? Because to me you really come across as the latter in a super arrogant way as well.

QUOTED POST MOD DELETED

Blimey, what was I saying? Please don't judge me by your standards, it isn't just not true but it really doesn't add anything to this thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He might be thick as bricks but I bet he knows all of the words to the 'Oh Jeremy Corbyn' song! :laugh:
 
I am also very interested to hear this. But not here, f2f over a beer. Cause here he can just copy whatever crap someone else wrote.

Exactly.

There are people out there who are much more intelligent than I, so it's much easier and simpler to read and copy from memory their words from various websites rather than try and formulate or parse a sentence or two myself. Especially with something like 'sovereignty'.

Go to school and college and read books someone else wrote, listen to lecturers given by someone and spoken in a language I understand but other people in the past evolved. Post up on a forum someone else devised and typing on a laptop designed and manufactured by other people, lit by a light bulb and in the warmth and comfort of a house built by other people.

Strange old life.
 
Mindless remainers only voted remain because they were told to by the Government and the City.


See how easy that was? :)

I fully agree that there will be generalisations on both sides, along with a mix of following peers and also stupidity. Personally, I voted to Remain for a few reasons;

Firstly, in a selfish way, I've never felt the huge negativity as a result of the UK being a member of the EU. I work for a global manufacturing organisation that has its' Corporate history split as Anglo-Dutch and has done for the last 125 years so have always benefited from simple trade across borders. I like to pay my mortgage, so it stands to reason that the company who employ me need to continue to make profits. We've already had cascades from our CEO suggesting that leaving the EU could have a large (still relatively unknown) impact on the way the company operates.

Secondly, I still struggle to understand what benefits we as a country will gain. I've read a cross-spectrum of news/reports/investigations from both sides of the argument and, whilst Remain is the "better the devil you know" approach, the Leave benefits still seem vague. UK Sovereignty isn't something I've ever (personally) felt is something diminished by EU membership and I personally don't have a huge amount of faith in our Government to do any better when they're on their own!

Finally, whilst I've traveled to countries around the world where I needed to apply for visas (USA, India, Indonesia, Australia), it's considerably simpler, and therefore one less hassle, to use the freedom of travel within the EU borders. Again, this is a selfish reason as it means my family can enjoy easier, cheaper, travel within the EU but I'd like to enjoy it as much as I can.

We are very lucky in the UK that we live in a democratic society and are given the freedom of choice on many things. However, the more I see of the 'team' assembled to negotiate the UK's withdrawal from the EU, the more I think we're making a massive mistake that will have repercussions for years to come. I'm all for taking risks when your heart leads you but they should still only be taken when there's a clear goal.
 
Not sure you read the rest of that post before jumping on the line about people, "wanting to leave the EU". Specifically, the part about people blindly calling for it without actually knowing why.
How do you know people are blindly calling for it? How can you claim to know all the details of people's lives?

However, out of genuine interest, could you explain to me how the EU takes my country's sovereignty and how I will see a change when we take it back?
The EU dictates taxation in many areas.

There has to be a tax on energy use. You couldn't make pensioners exempt from paying tax on heating even if you want to.

It controls tax on fuel. You can't reduce tax on fuel in rural garages. People in rural garages need a garage as it can be their supermarket and because otherwise they might have to drive miles to fill up. If you wanted to help out rural garages by having them set less tax on fuel and have more money to stay in business you can't.

VAT is governed by EU and the upper and lower rates it is set at. The UK can't voluntarily remove VAT on tampons.

The UK couldn't individually have stronger regulations on children's clothing regarded as fancy dress regarding being fire proof. Fancy dress clothes were regarded as toys.

To bring about any kind of change required a long process of being agreed by all member states. A countries sovereign government can change things incredibly rapidly if necessary.

The UK government is directly accountable to its people. As a result some things brought in in a budget were scrapped in less than 24 hours. A UK government is very aware it can be voted out.

When we leave, the current UK proposal regarding our farming is that farmers will have to be more eco friendly to continue to get subsidys. Something those on the environment side have pushed for for years and never happened. In the past France blocked any such proposal as their farmers used to spray merde round Paris to prevent it happening.

Want more?
 
Last edited:
It’s all very well saying “better the devil we know” but it’s not really a case of the devil we known, is it?

Look how much things have changed in the forty years we’ve been in, depending on who you listen to we were voting to stay in a common market, but look how much more feature creep there’s been since then.

Can anyone say with any degree of confidence where the EU will be in 5, 10, 20... years? Assuming it even still exists?

Again, depending on who you listen to there might be an EU army, Turkey may or may not join, they’re looking to expand Eastwards i was reading this morning. How many of those to the East are going to be net contributors?

If the question was do you want to leave or remain with exactly what we have now, no more, no less, then many people (maybe even myself) might well have chosen to vote Remain instead.
 
How do you know people are blindly calling for it? How can you claim to know all the details of people's lives?


The EU dictates taxation in many areas.

There has to be a tax on energy use. You couldn't make pensioners exempt from paying tax on heating even if you want to.

It controls tax on fuel. You can't reduce tax on fuel in rural garages. People in rural garages need a garage as it can be their supermarket and because otherwise they might have to drive miles to fill up. If you wanted to help out rural garages by having them set less tax on fuel and have more money to stay in business you can't.

VAT is governed by EU and the upper and lower rates it is set at. The UK can't voluntarily remove VAT on tampons.

The UK couldn't individually have stronger regulations on children's clothing regarded as fancy dress regarding being fire proof. Fancy dress clothes were regarded as toys.

To bring about any kind of change required a long process of being agreed by all member states. A countries sovereign government can change things incredibly rapidly if necessary.

The UK government is directly accountable to its people. As a result some things brought in in a budget were scrapped in less than 24 hours. A UK government is very aware it can be voted out.

When we leave the current UK proposal regarding our farming is that farmers will have to be more eco friendly to continue to get subsidys. Something those on the environment side have pushed for for years and never happened. In the past France blocked any such proposal as their farmers used to spray merde round Paris to prevent it happening.

Want more?

Thanks for your summary. Not sure it needed the aggressive sign off but I appreciate the effort.

That's the first I've read about the EU taxation laws so I've just done some investigations. From my first search, I brought back two particular results which address the statement of the EU forcing the UK VAT.

Result one - Daily Telegraph Article from June 2016;

We cannot set fair taxes as long as Britain remains in the EU

Clearly a passionate anti-EU article that leads with the headline, "We cannot set fair taxes as long as Britain is in the EU". It lays out a similar argument to the one you put above and specifically highlights the "Tampon tax", and reduced tax rates on domestic fuel then leads on to a bit of a ramble about Corporation Tax avoidance and the EU taking sides with the companies attempting to avoid tax (rather than focusing on the actual companies themselves?). But, the underlying theme of the article is that the EU forces the UK to set higher tax rates because it's part of the same club. Ok, seems like a pretty conclusive article. However, there's a summary box at the bottom which states;

***********************************************************************
At a glance | What Brexit will mean for… your money, investments and currency
  • UK taxes and state pensions are set by the UK Government, so there is no change anticipated in those areas.
  • Isas are exclusive to the UK too, so would not be at risk.
  • The Financial Services Compensation Scheme protects deposits of up to £75,000 per bank, and £50,000 at investment and mortgage firms. Compensation limits are harmonised across the EU. After leaving, the UK would have free reign to raise or lower these.
  • It is unclear exactly what the UK equity markets will do in the run up to Brexit. For example, falls in the value of the pound could stand to benefit companies with high proportions of foreign income. However, domestically focused sectors would stand to fall, and there would be a fog of trade uncertainty to contend with.
  • Uncertainty may hold back British markets in the run up to Brexit. Markets could also be swayed by credible polls or information that show a change to the status-quo as the date grows near.
***********************************************************************

I've highlighted the first statement. So, which one is it?

The second alternative result I got from the same search is a BBC 'Reality Check' article;

Does the EU control UK VAT rates?

This begins by summarising the option available to the UK Government (that it chooses not to implement)

**************************************************************************
Reality Check verdict: EU rules mean the UK cannot reduce VAT on goods and services below 15%, the standard rate of VAT in the EU. The standard rate of VAT in the UK is 20%, so the government could reduce it by up to 5% today if it wanted. Domestic fuel is on a special list of pre-approved goods and services that are subject to lower VAT rates and it would require the agreement of all other EU members to reduce it further.

****************************************************************************

It also addresses the "Tampon Tax" and it appears that the proposal to cut that tax to 0% has been agreed with by EU and is being progressed?

"The EU is currently dealing with allowing the UK to lower the VAT on sanitary products to 0%. The EU finance ministers have endorsed the plan, which the European Commission pledged to finalise in 2016."

According to what I can find, the tax on sanitary products was reduced to 5% in 2001 and is standardised across all EU member countries as part of the trading block, which is the point of the EU.
 
Whatever the examples are, we are taking things in isolation: ie taxation, tariffs, impact on markets. Nobody talks about how they correlate or influence each-other and the impacts on the little man: the poor voter who thought he would get more because Nigel said so.
It is scary that people believe there are simple solutions to our problems.

Could it be that the EU helped our governments hide their shortcomings and delay valuable reforms on NHS, education, etc? (Things not regulated by the EU!)

I hope when reality hits it will be too late cause then and only then our kids will know what matters and at least they will do their homework and will not blindly vote for slogans on buses like their parents. Hope they will get more involved, active on shaping decisions and be open to debates with arguments and not just “we will figure it out somehow later”.

Weaviemx5 - I am waiting for sonic67 to lecture you now on how the BBC is not a reliable source. Just wait...
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your summary. Not sure it needed the aggressive sign off but I appreciate the effort.
"Want more?" Was a serious question. There's lots of examples I could give.

Why My American Students Used to Gasp in Horror When they Learnt About the EU

Controlling migration, regulations and taxation are all powers lots of countries take for granted.

  • UK taxes and state pensions are set by the UK Government, so there is no change anticipated in those areas.
Depends on your view. Member states can set VAT within a certain upper and lower level.

For instance, the UK government can reduce VAT from 20p to 15p. What the UK government couldn't do was remove VAT from things the EU had decided on. Tampons came up a lot as VAT is supposed to be for "luxury" items. I doubt many women have thought, "I'll treat myself tonight" and bought some tampax on the way home.


  • For example, falls in the value of the pound could stand to benefit companies with high proportions of foreign income.
Saw this yesterday.

UK boat industry buoyed by weak pound
The second alternative result I got from the same search is a BBC 'Reality Check' article;

Does the EU control UK VAT rates?

This begins by summarising the option available to the UK Government (that it chooses not to implement)

**************************************************************************
Reality Check verdict: EU rules mean the UK cannot reduce VAT on goods and services below 15%, the standard rate of VAT in the EU. The standard rate of VAT in the UK is 20%, so the government could reduce it by up to 5% today if it wanted. Domestic fuel is on a special list of pre-approved goods and services that are subject to lower VAT rates and it would require the agreement of all other EU members to reduce it further.
Exactly. As I said above.

You can't remove VAT without EU approval. There is scope to lower it to a certain degree. Not to remove it, or raise and lower beyond those parameters.
It also addresses the "Tampon Tax" and it appears that the proposal to cut that tax to 0% has been agreed with by EU and is being progressed?

"The EU is currently dealing with allowing the UK to lower the VAT on sanitary products to 0%. The EU finance ministers have endorsed the plan, which the European Commission pledged to finalise in 2016."

According to what I can find, the tax on sanitary products was reduced to 5% in 2001 and is standardised across all EU member countries as part of the trading block, which is the point of the EU.
And a sovereign country can remove the lot. And right now.

Why is there tax on an essential item at all?

If your kid had gone up in flames as they were dressed as a witch on bonfire night and now had horrible burns and scarring for life, a sovereign country could ban fancy dress classed as toys and order all goods sold as such must meet the same standards as all children's clothing. It could be done before another item was sold and another kid burned.

Instead it takes years of getting an agreement from all EU countries and any one can impose their own changes or veto it.

Again as with French farmers holding their government to ransom and why farming subsidies can't be related to green issues.

Farm subsidies 'must be earned' - Gove

The issue was highlighted last year when BBC News revealed that taxpayers are paying more than £400,000 a year to subsidise a farm where a billionaire Saudi prince breeds racehorses.

Environmentalists will applaud the promise of change; they blame the CAP for the huge loss of wildlife in the British countryside.
 
Weaviemx5 - I am waiting for sonic67 to lecture you now on how the BBC is not a reliable source. Just wait...

I'm hoping the use of two clearly opposite example viewpoints of the same topic will negate that and lead to genuine conversation. :smashin: As you say, there's obviously no simple answer for any of the major questions around Brexit and I guess the alternative views show how we are all different people with different thoughts and feelings. As a result, one persons' reckless risk is another persons' impassioned leap of faith.
 
Sonic- on your farm subsidies point: are you aware that at least two uk regions who voted 60% + leave were solely subsidised by EU development funds and now they are crying for their funding? This to my point of people not even knowing what planet they are on...
 
Whatever the examples are, we are taking things in isolation: ie taxation, tariffs, impact on markets. Nobody talks about how they correlate or influence each-other and the impacts on the little man: the poor voter who thought he would get more because Nigel said so.
How immigration changed a Lincolnshire town

There is also a problem with local housing. Because some workers come temporarily, they do not mind housing themselves poorly for a spell.

So 10 single workers may each pay £60 a week to share what was a three-bedroom house, netting the landlords £600 a week. That means a gross rental income from the house of perhaps £30,000 a year.

That is much more than local families can afford for those houses - and the housing supply has simply not kept up with demand.

Could it be that the EU helped our governments hide their shortcomings and delay valuable reforms on NHS, education, etc? (Things not regulated by the EU!)
We will now have a government directly answerable to us.

It won't be able to use the EU as a scapegoat. Another reason to leave.

I believe the EU has taken something like £200 billion from us. Could it be the NHS and education could have benefited from that?
Weaviemx5 - I am waiting for sonic67 to lecture you now on how the BBC is not a reliable source. Just wait...
I'm waiting for you to actually read my posts. I use the BBC as a source so you can't accuse me of bias.

Did the UK lose its sovereignty in 1972?

OK - but did we lose parliamentary sovereignty in 1972?
Yes, some of it. The big dog agreed to give up some kennel space.
 
"Want more?" Was a serious question. There's lots of examples I could give.

Why My American Students Used to Gasp in Horror When they Learnt About the EU

Controlling migration, regulations and taxation are all powers lots of countries take for granted.


Depends on your view. Member states can set VAT within a certain upper and lower level.

For instance, the UK government can reduce VAT from 20p to 15p. What the UK government couldn't do was remove VAT from things the EU had decided on. Tampons came up a lot as VAT is supposed to be for "luxury" items. I doubt many women have thought, "I'll treat myself tonight" and bought some tampax on the way home.



Saw this yesterday.

UK boat industry buoyed by weak pound

Exactly. As I said above.

You can't remove VAT without EU approval. There is scope to lower it to a certain degree. Not to remove it, or raise and lower beyond those parameters.

And a sovereign country can remove the lot. And right now.

Why is there tax on an essential item at all?

If your kid had gone up in flames as they were dressed as a witch on bonfire night and now had horrible burns and scarring for life, a sovereign country could ban fancy dress classed as toys and order all goods sold as such must meet the same standards as all children's clothing. It could be done before another item was sold and another kid burned.

Instead it takes years of getting an agreement from all EU countries and any one can impose their own changes or veto it.

Again as with French farmers holding their government to ransom and why farming subsidies can't be related to green issues.

Farm subsidies 'must be earned' - Gove

The issue was highlighted last year when BBC News revealed that taxpayers are paying more than £400,000 a year to subsidise a farm where a billionaire Saudi prince breeds racehorses.

Environmentalists will applaud the promise of change; they blame the CAP for the huge loss of wildlife in the British countryside.


Just to clarify, those points you've highlighted aren't mine, they're taken from the articles I linked to.

I understand your frustration but leaving the EU tomorrow won't suddenly make Theresa May announce that VAT has been scrapped. In you mind, why does our Government levy an additional 5% on top of the 15% figure forced upon us by the EU? If they only need to charge 15% VAT, why don't they?

You're clearly of the belief that being a sovereign country will make it much cheaper overnight but I'm (personally of course) not convinced that will happen. Of course, it's favourable for a Government to be able to blame the big bad wolf for them having to charge 15% VAT, well 20% when they add on their own 5% top up, but do you really believe that this will change at all after we've left?

As for the childrens' fancy dress outfits. Of course I don't want to see my children go up in flames but is it really the EU forcing that upon us or is it another focused article making that suggestion? I haven't thoroughly researched it but this article from October 2016 states that the UK Government promised a "fire prevention strategy" in September 2015 but at the time of the article hadn't made any changes?

Children's fancy dress costumes still a danger, say British fire chiefs

Is it really the EU forcing unsafe clothing onto our children or is there a certain amount of responsibility to be born by our own Government?
 
Sonic- on your farm subsidies point: are you aware that at least two uk regions who voted 60% + leave were solely subsidised by EU development funds and now they are crying for their funding? This to my point of people not even knowing what planet they are on...
Klaxhu are you aware you can't please everyone?
 
I believe the EU has taken something like £200 billion from us. Could it be the NHS and education could have benefited from that?

If only someone had put something like that on a bus. It would have been a massive vote winner :clap:
 
Is it really the EU forcing unsafe clothing onto our children or is there a certain amount of responsibility to be born by our own Government?

The point being, if we aren't happy with the way our Government are doing things, we can vote them out within five years. Maybe if we could do the same with the EU commissioners, there wouldn't be such an issue.
 
How immigration changed a Lincolnshire town

There is also a problem with local housing. Because some workers come temporarily, they do not mind housing themselves poorly for a spell.

So 10 single workers may each pay £60 a week to share what was a three-bedroom house, netting the landlords £600 a week. That means a gross rental income from the house of perhaps £30,000 a year.

That is much more than local families can afford for those houses - and the housing supply has simply not kept up with demand.

Rather than just read the quote you chose, I've just read the whole article which actually paints a more positive picture than just the issue of local rent/availability. Rather than selecting a paragraph to fit a narrative, it's much more informative to read the entire article. However, to follow the same paraphrasing, the final paragraph says a lot;

"Boston has been transformed by the expansion of the European Union to the east.

The pretty little town is energetic and bustling, but is visibly not the same place as it was. A UKIP councillor Viven Edge, told us that Boston had lost some of its "Lincolnshireness"."

 
I understand your frustration but leaving the EU tomorrow won't suddenly make Theresa May announce that VAT has been scrapped.
Please show me where I have said that.

Leaving the EU means the government is directly accountable to us.

If something happens, kid gets burned, rural petrol stations closing, pensioners can't afford heating, then if there is sufficient votes in it then the government can change the law or a party can put it in a manifesto and if elected then bring it in. A sovereign country can change laws. An EU country has to obey EU rules.
In you mind, why does our Government levy an additional 5% on top of the 15% figure forced upon us by the EU? If they only need to charge 15% VAT, why don't they?
Done after Labour left the country with a huge debt.

Note a sovereign country could raise VAT to 25p and reduce income tax proportionally.

You're clearly of the belief that being a sovereign country will make it much cheaper overnight
Nope. A sovereign country can alter VAT. I've never said it would happen. Please read the posts. A sovereign country has the flexibility.

but do you really believe that this will change at all after we've left?
A government directly answerable to the voters will do what it takes to get votes. Removing VAT won't be successful if the result is the economy crashes.
As for the childrens' fancy dress outfits. Of course I don't want to see my children go up in flames but is it really the EU forcing that upon us or is it another focused article making that suggestion? I haven't thoroughly researched it but this article from October 2016 states that the UK Government promised a "fire prevention strategy" in September 2015 but at the time of the article hadn't made any changes?

Children's fancy dress costumes still a danger, say British fire chiefs

Is it really the EU forcing unsafe clothing onto our children or is there a certain amount of responsibility to be born by our own Government?
The UK government has been trying for years to bring in tougher regulations. As a member of the EU it had to go by EU rules. Under EU rules fancy dress costumes were classed as toys rather than clothing. Outside the EU the lot could be changed tomorrow.
 
Rather than just read the quote you chose, I've just read the whole article which actually paints a more positive picture than just the issue of local rent/availability. Rather than selecting a paragraph to fit a narrative, it's much more informative to read the entire article. However, to follow the same paraphrasing, the final paragraph says a lot;

"Boston has been transformed by the expansion of the European Union to the east.

The pretty little town is energetic and bustling, but is visibly not the same place as it was. A UKIP councillor Viven Edge, told us that Boston had lost some of its "Lincolnshireness"."
Perhaps you should read about the effect on individual people.

You get a low wage. You can't get more as there's a huge influx of migrants who will do it if you won't.

You can't get a place as landlords would rather convert houses to multiple occupancy and get more money.

You want to have a place and a family. You never will. Which way will you vote?

Yes the town might be bustling with lots of new migrants and Polish food shops.

What about ordinary people?

Problem is to many people higher up the chain benefited. People owning property made more from renting out.

Big business benefited from cheap labour. Migrants benefited from working here and sending money home where the money went further.
 
Done after Labour left the country with a huge debt.

Note a sovereign country could raise VAT to 25p and reduce income tax proportionally.

Focusing on the VAT charged, as that's something that could be changed by the UK Government tomorrow if they really wanted to, why do you think it hasn't been dropped to 15%? It's clearly not because the EU forces our Government so is it more because of the state of our economy? Once we leave the EU, there's a chance that our economy will suffer due to uncertainty in the value of the pound (as already seen and shown in the UK boating industry article you linked to) so the Government will still be unlikely to reduce VAT.

My point is, whilst you feel that it's the fault of the EU, maybe there are bigger forces outside of our membership preventing things like a drop in the VAT level, like balancing our books?
 
Perhaps you should read about the effect on individual people.

You get a low wage. You can't get more as there's a huge influx of migrants who will do it if you won't.

You can't get a place as landlords would rather convert houses to multiple occupancy and get more money.

You want to have a place and a family. You never will. Which way will you vote?

Yes the town might be bustling with lots of new migrants and Polish food shops.

What about ordinary people?

Problem is to many people higher up the chain benefited. People owning property made more from renting out.

Big business benefited from cheap labour. Migrants benefited from working here and sending money home where the money went further.

Leaving the EU won't stop immigration, whatever people are hoping and believing. The UK Government will still allow immigration as big businesses (the ones who actually fund Governments) will still demand them. What did the people of Lincolnshire do before migrants came and picked the fruit and veg? I assume they received slightly higher low wages and the rich land owners still stayed rich off the back of them.

Maybe the anger should be directed at those controlling the flow of wages rather than those willing to work for slightly less? I realise that's a contentious statement but once the UK leaves the EU and the pound is worth a fraction of what it was 5 years ago, migrant workers will go to another country for seasonal work which will allow the local people to take back their low paid fruit picking jobs and all will be happy again. (sarcasm)
 
Klaxhu are you aware you can't please everyone?

What I am aware of is that you are quite selective in your outlaying the truth: so on this particular point you agree with me people have made highly uninformed decisions believing the writing on the bus instead of checking the very branch they were cutting below their feet? What you call that if NOT stupidity?

And here you go, just a page with the EU commission debunking most of the myths circulated in the media with facts: European Commission in the UK - European Commission

Yes, it does include tampons and size of bananas.
My personal favorite: Sex toys – Women to be forced to hand in old sex toys, Feb 2004
 
Last edited:
Leaving the EU won't stop immigration, whatever people are hoping and believing. The UK Government will still allow immigration as big businesses (the ones who actually fund Governments) will still demand them. What did the people of Lincolnshire do before migrants came and picked the fruit and veg? I assume they received slightly higher low wages and the rich land owners still stayed rich off the back of them.

Maybe the anger should be directed at those controlling the flow of wages rather than those willing to work for slightly less? I realise that's a contentious statement but once the UK leaves the EU and the pound is worth a fraction of what it was 5 years ago, migrant workers will go to another country for seasonal work which will allow the local people to take back their low paid fruit picking jobs and all will be happy again. (sarcasm)

Here you go, a good read to your question on who did the work "before": Who picked British fruit and veg before migrant workers?

(there was a better article I came upon recently but I have to look through my FB wall to find it)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom