Jump to content

call for new political party brexit


figgy
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

I wouldn't want to be a member if it was free purely because of a lack of control over potentially hundreds of millions coming here if they chose and many have. The numbers you quote are meaningless because we can open up whole new horizons of trade once we are free of the customs union so who knows what those new potential markets are worth. The EU has a huge trade deficit with us not the other way round, if they choose to impose tarriffs we would benefit. I don't give a toss about benefits to big business I care about our society and right now it is well and truly broken I appreciate not just because of EU migration but that is a start.

 

The hole point about the EU was that by connecting all of the countries together the less developed countries mostly the Poland Romania etc even Southern Irland would be helped to develop there industry and although at first people would move to the UK France Germany etc when there countries improved the people would move back home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The hole point about the EU was that by connecting all of the countries together the less developed countries mostly the Poland Romania etc even Southern Irland would be helped to develop there industry and although at first people would move to the UK France Germany etc when there countries improved the people would move back home.

So as one of the few nett contibutors the UK Taxpayer pays to improve everyone elses countries whilist our own goes down the pan, genius.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People voted out because theyve had enough of the EU meddling in our laws, our economy, our culture.

 

If you cant see past the haze of believing anyone who wanted that is some kind of ultra right wing knuckle dragger, then at least look at the way the EU are 'negotiating' our withdrawal .

 

Threats, financial demands and general unwillingness to play on a level field, all for 'daring' to leave.

 

These are not nice people, and we have upset their agenda.

 

 

Rewulf - great post.

 

I love the opinion, from some, that the public were somehow duped by the media. The moaners cannot accept that people made up their own minds - it's called democracy. They are arrogant and clueless.

Edited by Gordon R
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Rewulf - great post.

 

I love the opinion, from some, that the public were somehow duped by the media. The moaners cannot accept that people made up their own minds - it's called democracy. They are arrogant and clueless.

 

A large proportion of the public were duped by the media. If it had been impartial rather than in the main Pro EU then the majority for Brexit would have been larger. The tentacles of the EU propoganda machine and it's lackeys were everywhere but thankfully the majority saw through it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Quite, on first glance a fair number of people voted "out" because of "funny foreign people coming over here and living in out country"...

 

Interestingly enough a lot of those "johnny foreigners" that people are getting their knickers in a knot about are not EU nation citizens, and therefore are not party to EU migration laws. So, in the broadest UK sense, "in" or "out" makes not a jot of difference.

.[/background]

Brilliant! You really couldn't make this up!Simply because I stated my reasons to vote leave weren't economical you assume ( with typical remain arrogance ) it was down to immigration and that I'm a 'Johnny foreigner' hating racist!

Again; you really couldn't make this up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So as one of the few nett contibutors the UK Taxpayer pays to improve everyone elses countries whilist our own goes down the pan, genius.

 

If as you say our country is going down the pan it is the fault of our inept politicians letting the banks run the country with little or no rules to protect us from them.

 

Is it not a good idea to improve the life of other people living in Europe if they have more money then if our government has not let all of our industry to move to China we can sell stuff to them a win win situation I think.

 

I would rather our money went to them where it will be used properly than send it to some tin pot country leader in Africa etc to be put in the bank accounts of some corrupt leader.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If as you say our country is going down the pan it is the fault of our inept politicians letting the banks run the country with little or no rules to protect us from them.

 

Is it not a good idea to improve the life of other people living in Europe if they have more money then if our government has not let all of our industry to move to China we can sell stuff to them a win win situation I think.

 

I would rather our money went to them where it will be used properly than send it to some tin pot country leader in Africa etc to be put in the bank accounts of some corrupt leader.

 

Yes the overwhelming gratitude they are currently showing for our £500 Billion nett contribution to their coffers is quite humbling isn't it.

Edited by JRDS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ban me mods for this but *** ( 4 ****s sake)

 

It's not millions for starters, secondly it's not the EU's sole fault for our higher Immigration ( been going on for more than 75 years, well before the EU was even around).

Ill informed, bigoted and often a total lack of understanding of Global finance and Politics ( no, I'm no expert but at least I admit it)

 

Am I a 'moaning remainer' , nope, but I'm sick and tired of non factual arguements being used to belittle those who do wish to remain as part of the EU.

 

If your all so good with your keyboards then maybe check out the facts regarding 'Funding, Contributions, subsidies and my Legal Profession Stepsons favourite-- EU policies and legalities and our rights of Adoption

 

 

Anyway, hate to let facts get in the way of a good discussion and god forbid someone disagree and maybe wish to form a Political Party that is not in line with your views

 

I used to enjoy PW and it's 'Off topic' section, now it's either anti RSPCA, Chris Packham, BREXIT or similar

+1 I'm sick and tired of non factual arguments and tabloid statements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I voted to leave but the longer this goes on the more I think that it is going to end badly the only way that I can see to deal with NI is to have a border at the costal ports and air ports but if we did that the Scots would start up again wanting a land border so that they can stay in the EU.

 

Its the SNPScottish Nazi Party) not The Scots who might be agitating.

 

Blackpowder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Just out of sheer bedevilment...

 

Net benefit of EU membership to the UK in the region of 4-5% of GDP (or £62bn-£78bn a year) (CBI figures)

 

UK firms’ access to the Single Market goes beyond a standard free-trade agreement - the EU has eliminated tariff barriers and customs procedures within its borders, and has taken strides towards removing non-tariff barriers - such as different product regulations - by enforcing EU-wide competition law and coordinating product regulations

 

The Single Market also underpins access to European supply chains. In 2009 $207bn of the UK’s total of $293bn of exports to the rest of the EU27 was used as inputs to industries, rather than being consumed directly; and the UK imported $161bn of intermediates from the EU27 in 2009. Imported intermediates are important even to domestically-focused sectors: the health & social care sector used $19bn of imported intermediates (principally of pharmaceuticals and other chemicals)

 

The EU is a springboard for trade with the rest of the world through its global clout: it accounted for 23% of the global economy in 2012 in dollar terms. Through 30 trade deals negotiated by the EU, including the Single Market itself, British firms have full access to a $24 trillion market.

 

Investment flows across borders inside the EU roughly doubled following the introduction of the Single Market. As the EU’s leading investment destination, the UK was a key beneficiary: the EU accounted for 47% of the UK’s stock of inward FDI at the end of 2011, with investments worth over $1.2 trillion.

 

UK citizens have also benefited from free movement of labour – at least three-quarters of a million live in other EU countries.

 

The UK’s net contribution to the EU budget is around €7.3bn, or 0.4% of GDP. As a comparison that’s around a quarter of what the UK spends on the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, and less than an eighth of the UK’s defence spend. The £116 per person net contribution is less than that from Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Germany and the Netherlands.

 

 

On the other hand, perhaps you are right and there is not a single benefit to membership...

 

 

Don't go spoiling a good thread with facts :no:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Just out of sheer bedevilment...

 

Net benefit of EU membership to the UK in the region of 4-5% of GDP (or £62bn-£78bn a year) (CBI figures)

 

UK firms’ access to the Single Market goes beyond a standard free-trade agreement - the EU has eliminated tariff barriers and customs procedures within its borders, and has taken strides towards removing non-tariff barriers - such as different product regulations - by enforcing EU-wide competition law and coordinating product regulations

 

The Single Market also underpins access to European supply chains. In 2009 $207bn of the UK’s total of $293bn of exports to the rest of the EU27 was used as inputs to industries, rather than being consumed directly; and the UK imported $161bn of intermediates from the EU27 in 2009. Imported intermediates are important even to domestically-focused sectors: the health & social care sector used $19bn of imported intermediates (principally of pharmaceuticals and other chemicals)

 

The EU is a springboard for trade with the rest of the world through its global clout: it accounted for 23% of the global economy in 2012 in dollar terms. Through 30 trade deals negotiated by the EU, including the Single Market itself, British firms have full access to a $24 trillion market.

 

Investment flows across borders inside the EU roughly doubled following the introduction of the Single Market. As the EU’s leading investment destination, the UK was a key beneficiary: the EU accounted for 47% of the UK’s stock of inward FDI at the end of 2011, with investments worth over $1.2 trillion.

 

UK citizens have also benefited from free movement of labour – at least three-quarters of a million live in other EU countries.

 

The UK’s net contribution to the EU budget is around €7.3bn, or 0.4% of GDP. As a comparison that’s around a quarter of what the UK spends on the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, and less than an eighth of the UK’s defence spend. The £116 per person net contribution is less than that from Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Germany and the Netherlands.

 

 

On the other hand, perhaps you are right and there is not a single benefit to membership...

Any quote from the CBI is highly suspicious! They were part and parcel of the lies put out by the Remain camp. Do I care what they say? Not in a million years! Better to die on your feet, than live on your knees, which is what was happening in the EU ! Stuff 'em!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any quote from the CBI is highly suspicious! They were part and parcel of the lies put out by the Remain camp. Do I care what they say? Not in a million years! Better to die on your feet, than live on your knees, which is what was happening in the EU ! Stuff 'em!

+1

All this arguing to remain is irrelevant anyway, a referendum has been held and even if it was terrible for the country (not that I think it is) it doesn't change anything, the majority has spoken, all these remoaners need to move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A survey of more than 20,000 people by the London School of Economics and the University of Oxford has revealed that a majority of Britons — including many Remain voters — now want to see a so-called ‘Hard Brexit’.

Seen ahead of its official publication by BuzzFeed — an outlet generally unsympathetic to Brexit — the study’s results are said to “imply relatively low levels of support for the policies that would amount to a ‘soft’ Brexit – Single Market membership, ongoing EU payments, Free Movement, and the [Court of Justice of the European Union continuing to have jurisdiction in Britain]”.

BuzzFeed reports 67 per cent of survey respondents said they would prefer “No Deal” to Soft Brexit, whilst 68 per cent would opt for Hard over Soft Brexit.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/08/11/massive-study-voters-back-hard-brexit-full-immigration-controls/

 

 

Looks like a sizeable majority want a clean break and no half measures. Politicians please take note.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 2004 something happened which is still not really talked about as much as it should be when we discuss the EU. Ten countries were allowed to join, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia. Then in 2007 Bulgaria and Romania were slipped in as well. Why?

 

Most of these countries had economies that were dead in the water, they were never going to be significant trading partners. None of them qualified for membership under the criteria laid down so why did it happen? Nobody can really tell you

 

Their joining though was a fatal blow to the EU, the natural balance as a trading partnership was destroyed because they were a dead weight on the rest of the EU members.

 

Not immediately fatal admittedly, but the cracks and tensions that are appearing and getting bigger started when they joined.

Edited by Vince Green
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 2004 something happened which is still not really talked about as much as it should be when we discuss the EU. Ten countries were allowed to join, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia. Then in 2007 Bulgaria and Romania were slipped in as well. Why?

 

Most of these countries had economies that were dead in the water, they were never going to be significant trading partners. None of them qualified for membership under the criteria laid down so why did it happen? Nobody can really tell you

 

Their joining though was a fatal blow to the EU, the natural balance as a trading partnership was destroyed because they were a dead weight on the rest of the EU members.

 

Not immediately fatal admittedly, but the cracks and tensions that are appearing and getting bigger started when they joined.

 

The answer is in reply #33 :yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...