Europe-Am I missing something?

olly300

Radiantsoul wrote: »

Is this an EU thing or local Belgium laws?

Different EU countries have different tax laws for companies depending on what they are doing i.e. sending employees to work in your own or client offices, exporting certain goods.

You have to check out each countries tax laws before doing anything as countries that you would think are fair are surprisingly not and vice versa.

A._Badger

Radiantsoul wrote: »

The Treaty of Rome was signed just 12 years after the last war between France and Germany. I doubt the possibility of war was close to zero at that time, of course war between Russia and the USA appeared more likely. But that scarcely put the chance of war at zero. The chance of war is far less likely now because ideological differences between the two nations have reduced.

I meant the chance of was between Gernany and France (or indeed anyone else). As for the USSR, the EU played not even the slightest role - that was NATO's job which, of course, the French famously shunned.

Radiantsoul wrote: »

I think the war in Yugoslavia was at least contained.

Again, not by the EU, it wasn't. That was NATO, too (rightly or wrongly).

Procrastinator333

A._Badger wrote: »

Pressures of 'having a life' meant I didn't get to read the comments on this thread after about lunchtime yesterday. But what a sorry bunch of nonsense the 'pro' lobby has come up with!

So suggesting that others on here don't have a life. Right. If everyone else is such a waste of space, don't post on here.

A._Badger wrote: »

As for the 'free trade' excuse, I can only assume that there must be a generation of lazy businessmen out there who have never traded with India, China, the USA, the former Comecon bloc etc et flppin' cetera!

If they are so feeble as to believe trade only takes place between countries without tariff barriers then we, as a trading nation, really are domed.

Business goes on where there is a will for it to be done. In my time, (and it wasn't so long ago) British engineering products were being traded for jars of jam with Eastern European countries who didn't have the hard currency to pay for them.

To say that subverting our entire political, social and legal system for the sake of few less trade restrictions on businessmen too feeble to cope with normal international trade is worse than pathetic. It's downright meretricious.

I note that again you ignored all of the points I raised. Double taxation treaties, compliance, local statutory requirements, locally biased suppliers.

I also note you didn't bother to expand on your experience. You have such strong views on this, I am actually keen to hear of direct experiences. Though not your whinning which is all that seems to have come out so far.

Who said we should "subvert our entire political, social and legal system"? Please quote them.

A._Badger wrote: »

In my time, (and it wasn't so long ago)

Perhaps that is the real issue here - you are just a bit long in the tooth and unable to deal with change.

nearlynew

When you talk about all these "treaties" don't forget they were signed by liars and thieves.

They didn't care then, and they don't care now.

And the same problems exist.

Procrastinator333

nearlynew wrote: »

When you talk about all these "treaties" don't forget they were signed by liars and thieves.

They didn't care then, and they don't care now.

And the same problems exist.

Do you ever post anything else? Every other sentence is just calling everyone a liar or a thief. I don't meant o be rude, but you come across as the sort of person who in reality does nothing but moan, never offers an alternative suggestion, just moans. It is easy to tear something down, much more difficult to suggest a better way.

nearlynew

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

It is easy to tear something down, much more difficult to suggest a better way.

there is a better way..........


don't trust liars and thieves.

A._Badger

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

So suggesting that others on here don't have a life. Right. If everyone else is such a waste of space, don't post on here.

I note that again you ignored all of the points I raised. Double taxation treaties, compliance, local statutory requirements, locally biased suppliers.

No, I didn't ignore them. You just failed to understand why I was referring to the myriad other markets in which real businessmen trade, where such barriers exist and trade goes on, regardless.

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

I also note you didn't bother to expand on your experience. You have such strong views on this, I am actually keen to hear of direct experiences. Though not your whinning which is all that seems to have come out so far.

Any idiot can claim any amount of experience on the Interweb. Anyone who isn't an idiot (and particularly so if they have any experience of actually running a business) will recognise from what I have written that I have experience in doing so myself - not just pushing a few figures around a spreadsheet. They might even be bright enough to work out where I have done (and in some cases continue to do) business,

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

Who said we should "subvert our entire political, social and legal system"? Please quote them.

What do you mean 'quote them'? Are you completely blind to the
legislative authority that the EU now exerts over the UK? Are you oblivious to the effect complying with EU regulations has on just about every aspect of life in this country from how we farm it to highest legal processes in the land?

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

Perhaps that is the real issue here - you are just a bit long in the tooth and unable to deal with change.

Alternatively, that you are simply to inexperienced to understand that not all change is for the better.

Procrastinator333

A._Badger wrote: »

No, I didn't ignore them. You just failed to understand why I was referring to the myriad other markets in which real businessmen trade, where such barriers exist and trade goes on, regardless.



Any idiot can claim any amount of experience on the Interweb. Anyone who isn't an idiot (and particularly so if they have any experience of actually running a business) will recognise from what I have written that I have experience in doing so myself - not just pushing a few figures around a spreadsheet. They might even be bright enough to work out where I have done (and in some cases continue to do) business,



What do you mean 'quote them'? Are you completely blind to the
legislative authority that the EU now exerts over the UK? Are you oblivious to the effect complying with EU regulations has on just about every aspect of life in this country from how we farm it to highest legal processes in the land?




Alternatively, that you are simply to inexperienced to understand that not all change is for the better.

I will make this my last post in this thread as it isn't actually any kind of debate. I tried several times for some sharing of views, experiences and debate. Instead you avoid questions, use soundbites and continue to throw poorly veiled insults.

I'm not advocating most of the stuff you are blowing your top over. I would like to see the powers of Europe tapered back. But I'm also able to see the obvious fact that it is far better to be at the table which discusses the policies and trade of the countries to whom over 50% of all our exports go instead of slamming that door and saying it doesn't matter.

If there is further power transfer to the EU, I will be pretty annoyed about it, and vote against it, but if it does happen, I will consol myself with the fact that however much it annoys me, you will be going positively apoplectic.

toby3000

MRSTITTLEMOUSE wrote: »

Being one who voted to stay out of the EU,I seem to remember we were doing alright on our own at the time anyway.
I've never seen any benefits at all,still waiting for them.

Britain's economy only kept going during the 1950s and 1960s because it had a protected home market and the Empire which it focused on, and made less and less effort to compete with the rest of Europe. Which is why we have no car manufacturing, for example; while France and Germany were competing with each other in a free market, UK manufacturers were propped up by protected markets, mergers and government help.

The European Union is based on Peace, Prosperity and Democracy. We take these so fro granted now that the EU is judged in different terms, but despite the supposed end of European Wars that the 'Concert of Nations' brought about we had major European wars in 1866, 1870, 1914 and 1939, plus the Crimenian War (1850s?). Europe's had its longest period of peace in history, and that's no small feat and wasn't inevitable.

The Treaty of Rome declares that the members of the EU/EC will work towards ever closer union. People should accept that this is what we signed up. In the 1960s and 70s the EU aimed to harmonise benefits, for example, though this has been forgotten about. While you may not like the fact that they make decisions, what are the bad ones? God forbid we force people to use better light bulbs. Next they'll be forcing us to wear seat belts.

As to the CAP, food production is a unique business, and one that has come to rely on subsidies in every part of the world. Our relentless desire for cheap food ensures that. I'm also pretty sure that the newer system puts a greater focus on environmental sustainability; so while it might be 'more efficient' for a farmer to use loads of nitrogen, it's actually better to pay him to use less and then not have to spend money filtering the polluted water and having devastated marine biology. That's ignoring the fact that in most European cultures food is of greater significance culturally than it is in the UK/USA.

Long post, sorry!