The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[NurembergVillan]

17 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Well apparently UK pay £220 per head for membership compared to Norway’s £140 per head contribution. 

That’s quite a large difference. 

That's far less than we'd pay for 6 months membership at a decent gym.

Shows what a load of old bollocks Brexit is.

[NurembergVillan]

2 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

It’s still a lot more than Norway pay

Probably the only thing in Norway that's cheaper than it is here!

[ml1dch]

 

What is wrong with these dickbags?

[bickster]

5 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Well apparently UK pay £220 per head for membership compared to Norway’s £140 per head contribution. 

That’s quite a large difference. 

We don’t pay by head of population so your idea of pitching one country against another in terms of ‘fairness’ which you appear to be alluding to is nonsense

its a percentage of gross national income plus the tariffs collected on the EUs behalf for imported goods plus a percentage of VAT.

We pay more because we collect more of the EUs money than Norway for starters

[Enda]

30 minutes ago, bickster said:

its a percentage of gross national income plus the tariffs collected on the EUs behalf for imported goods plus a percentage of VAT.

We pay more because we collect more of the EUs money than Norway for starters

Correct. Norway is also not eligible for any CAP payments.

The UK gets a rebate from the EU on its contributions. It is literally the only that gets this. Complaints about your contributions being too high relative to other countries are bonkers.

[tonyh29]

3 minutes ago, Enda said:

The UK gets a rebate from the EU on its contributions. It is literally the only that gets this. 

I’m sure I’ve read somewhere that Norway also receive rebates along with  EU Research grants  , incidentally  with these grants Iceland  even gets back more than it contributes 

 

[Enda]

5 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

I’m sure I’ve read somewhere that Norway also receive rebates along with  EU Research grants  , incidentally  with these grants Iceland  even gets back more than it contributes 

Iceland, a country of 12 and a half people, did really well on FP7. They reaped in €70m and that made their contribution negative. I don’t believe that happened for more than a year or two. I’m being facetious saying they only have 12 people but it really is a small enough country that one or two projects can swing the net contribution 

Norway is eligible for research grants, but does not get “The Rebate” which is a UK-specific thing Thatcher negotiated. Norway pays on net about as much as the UK, with no voting rights.

Of course looking at net contribution is  fool’s game. Compared to how much the average worker pays in tax the the fact is the EU is not that expensive a club. Access to the single market boosts millions of businesses every year. Looking at the net membership fee is missing the point.

[Chindie]

Looking at the net contribution and folding your arms and smugly declaring that as a reason to leave is moronic.

Countries don't do things out of the goodness of their hearts. The UK pays into the EU because it gets back enough to make it worth it. And evidently does - the single market is massive boon.

[Vive_La_Villa]

8 hours ago, bickster said:

We don’t pay by head of population so your idea of pitching one country against another in terms of ‘fairness’ which you appear to be alluding to is nonsense

its a percentage of gross national income plus the tariffs collected on the EUs behalf for imported goods plus a percentage of VAT.

We pay more because we collect more of the EUs money than Norway for starters

I can see how it may have looked that way but I assure you I wasn't alluding to that for a second. 

I was just trying to understand if there were any advantages of not being in the EU but still being part of the single market.  
 

[Vive_La_Villa]

7 hours ago, Enda said:

Complaints about your contributions being too high relative to other countries are bonkers.

6 hours ago, Chindie said:

Looking at the net contribution and folding your arms and smugly declaring that as a reason to leave is moronic.

I’m not sure anyone on the forum did any of the above to be fair lads.  Plus I doubt Brexiteers would even entertain a discussion of being part of the single market if it meant there was no change to freedom of movement.   

[chrisp65]

Yeah, but if we (UK) stop paying in, then we (England) will have 60 (or 3) new (or refurbished) hospitals (or generally health related buildings containing shopping outlets) over the next 3 (25 to 40) years. 

You (gammon punters) can’t look a gift horse (cold straight lie) like that in the mouth (arse).

Terms and conditions apply (won’t happen).

 

[chrisp65]

6 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

I can see how it may have looked that way but I assure you I wasn't alluding to that for a second. 

I was just trying to understand if there were any advantages of not being in the EU but still being part of the single market.  
 

Yes, there’s an advantage. You get all the trade and you pay all the fees, but you don’t have to worry about making the rules or deciding the future direction. All that rubbish will be done for you by Belgium, Malta and Denmark.

[Vive_La_Villa]

11 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Yes, there’s an advantage. You get all the trade and you pay all the fees, but you don’t have to worry about making the rules or deciding the future direction. All that rubbish will be done for you by Belgium, Malta and Denmark.

I was thinking more about if the Euro debt crisis reached tipping point again and there was major upheaval in Europe. Whether being out of the EU would help prevent contagion and reduce negative impacts on the Uk.

It probably wouldn’t to be fair. 

[Vive_La_Villa]

15 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Yes, there’s an advantage. You get all the trade and you pay all the fees, but you don’t have to worry about making the rules or deciding the future direction. All that rubbish will be done for you by Belgium, Malta and Denmark.

Looking at decisions our MP’s have made over the years that probably wouldn’t be a bad thing. 

[bickster]

1 minute ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Looking at decisions our MP’s have made over the years that probably wouldn’t be a bad thing. 

Looking at the one's some of them want to make if we leave scares the living shit out of me

[chrisp65]

12 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

I was thinking more about if the Euro debt crisis reached tipping point again and there was major upheaval in Europe. Whether being out of the EU would help prevent contagion and reduce negative impacts on the Uk.

It probably wouldn’t to be fair. 

In clunky big numbers, just over half of all our exports go to the EU.

With the absolute best trading conditions we are not going to replace that with new trade to USA, China, Brazil etc.. Not any time soon. So if there is a financial crisis in Europe in the next few years we have a serious problem. One we will have minimal ability to influence, if we’ve left the decision making to others.

Then there’s the other way of looking at it. The tories have used all their usual business and financial acumen over the last ten years to convert a gross debt of 60% of GDP in 2010 to a gross debt of 85% of GDP in 2019.

But we don’t talk about that, because we have to believe tories good with money, labour bad.

Our personal individual debt is also increasing and our banks are finding new ways to be slippery.

Imagine being outside of the EU club when we have our financial crisis. 

[Vive_La_Villa]

20 minutes ago, bickster said:

Looking at the one's some of them want to make if we leave scares the living shit out of me

Which ones scare you mate? 

[tonyh29]

6 hours ago, Enda said:

Iceland, a country of 12 and a half people, did really well on FP7. They reaped in €70m and that made their contribution negative. I don’t believe that happened for more than a year or two. I’m being facetious saying they only have 12 people but it really is a small enough country that one or two projects can swing the net contribution 

Norway is eligible for research grants, but does not get “The Rebate” which is a UK-specific thing Thatcher negotiated. Norway pays on net about as much as the UK, with no voting rights.

Of course looking at net contribution is  fool’s game. Compared to how much the average worker pays in tax the the fact is the EU is not that expensive a club. Access to the single market boosts millions of businesses every year. Looking at the net membership fee is missing the point.

 I didn’t mention net contributions that wasn’t me arguing that 

The web  refers to money Norway gets back but doesn’t specifically refer to it as a rebate so your point there is valid 

It’s not voting rights as such but doesnt  the EEA Joint Committee have the right to veto a rule if they wish ?  

Norway via the EEA also have a seat at various international bodies where they can directly input into legislations that the EU often adopt  , true , not voting rights but still an opportunity to influence them , tbf I don’t know how great that influence is .

[tonyh29]

25 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

In clunky big numbers, just over half of all our exports go to the EU.

With the absolute best trading conditions we are not going to replace that with new trade to USA, China, Brazil etc.. Not any time soon. 

The 2018 figures on exports to the EU have it as 46% , But why would we need to “replace that” I don’t think anyone is suggesting exports to the EU are going to drop to zero ?

 

the latest ONS figures also show exports to non EU countries growing twice as fast as exports to the EU a 4.2% increase in exports to non EU countries a 9% increase to the USA and 13% to China , Brazil I didn’t see a figure for .

 

so , a potential drop in exports to the EU appears to already be balancing out ? 

 

[Seat68]

4 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

The 2018 figures on exports to the EU have it as 46% , But why would we need to “replace that” I don’t think anyone is suggesting exports to the EU are going to drop to zero ?

 

the latest ONS figures also show exports to non EU countries growing twice as fast as exports to the EU a 4.2% increase in exports to non EU countries a 9% increase to the USA and 13% to China , Brazil I didn’t see a figure for .

 

so , a potential drop in exports to the EU appears to already be balancing out ? 

 

Really depends what those percentages are of. Friday is a typically lazy day for me, now I have to go look and see what the values are in figures.