How will leaving the EU affect the UK housing market?

AdrianC

leveller2911 wrote: »

No I don't accept it. The UK govt is not allowed to discriminate against EU migrants.........

So, once again, how come 23 of 28 EU countries do EXACTLY what you say the UK is not allowed to by the EU?

<sigh> I'll try explaining again. Slowly. Countries are not allowed to discriminate against those who have other nationalities. So the UK can pay child benefit ONLY to children resident WITHIN the UK. So long as it does that for EVERYBODY, British or non-British. Right now, the UK will pay child benefit to a British person resident here if their child lives in Spain with the other parent, so has to pay child benefit to a Pole resident here if their child lives in Poland with the other parent.

BTW, this is all over about 50,000 children, or £50m/yr. The total child benefit bill is about £11.5bn,

The 2012 change to stop child benefit to higher-rate tax payers saved around £1bn/year - 40x as much.
The Daily Mail printed an article on how to get around that...
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/pensions/article-2192562/Trick-avoid-losing-child-benefit-boost-pension.html

The deal that Cameron came back from europe with also needs the approval of every single member so its quite possible it won't ever be implemented.........

It had it. That was what all the late nights and muttering back in February were about.

I am fully aware of what the Schengen Zone is and that we didn't sign up to Schengen and also what the EU is so how have I conflated the two?. Maybe you are getting confused with my posts so quote my conflation and I will be happy to clarify.

Great. So you know that the migration and asylum questions involved there were entirely to do with Schengen, and not the EU.

AdrianC

leveller2911 wrote: »

so the EU will enlarge in the future with only poor countries joining

Only if the UK - and ever single other EU country - approves the membership of each and every one of them.

Let's look at the current list of applicants, shall we?

Albania - Yeh, good luck with that...
FYROM - Greek veto, guaranteed.
Montenegro - Probably fairly uncontroversial, apart from they'll have to have one monumental anti-corruption cleanup to get anywhere near meeting acceptance.
Serbia - Slovenian and Croatian vetoes, guaranteed.
Turkey - Greek and Cypriot vetoes, guaranteed.

So of the five, only one is unlikely to be vetoed straight off, on principle, regardless of anything else. And that one doesn't stand a hope in hell of meeting any of the standards required.

There will be no more accession for quite some while.

leveller2911

AdrianC wrote: »

So, once again, how come 23 of 28 EU countries do EXACTLY what you say the UK is not allowed to by the EU?

<sigh> I'll try explaining again. Slowly. Countries are not allowed to discriminate against those who have other nationalities. So the UK can pay child benefit ONLY to children resident WITHIN the UK. So long as it does that for EVERYBODY, British or non-British. Right now, the UK will pay child benefit to a British person resident here if their child lives in Spain with the other parent, so has to pay child benefit to a Pole resident here if their child lives in Poland with the other parent.

You can patronise me if you wish but I clearly posted that the UK govt cannot discriminate against EU migrants under EU law.

BTW, this is all over about 50,000 children, or £50m/yr. The total child benefit bill is about £11.5bn,

Its the principle Adrian...........

Great. So you know that the migration and asylum questions involved there were entirely to do with Schengen, and not the EU.

Yes I am fully aware of the Schengen zone and how the UK did not sign up to it but.


"The European Commission wants a new quota system under which member states share out the estimated 1.3million people expected to arrive in Europe this year".

"Britain, which would be expected to take around 90,000, has been warned that – if it refuses – it will lose its right to send home migrants who should have made their claims elsewhere".


I don't read the Daily Mail but as you posted a link from one edition I thought I would too..

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3409334/Calais-migrants-win-human-right-live-here.html



My whole point is how the EU is not democratic and will use fair means and foul to get its way..

AdrianC

leveller2911 wrote: »

You can patronise me if you wish but I clearly posted that the UK govt cannot discriminate against EU migrants under EU law.

Correct, it can't. And 23 of 28 countries manage to do what you want without discriminating. So why can't the UK?

Or is discrimination what you actually want?

As for the asylum issues - it's very simple, again. The Wail was deliberately being disingenuous, because that's exactly what their target market want. I notice that the Wail headline includes a reference to "human rights", another nice easy hot-button, despite the fact that the ECHR is nothing whatsoever to do with the EU.

The UK has 100% control over our own asylum policy and non-EU migration, subject to our being a signatory to the various UN conventions. The EU cannot do ANYTHING to let non-EU nationals in to the UK. Schengen countries, though, devolve ALL of that to the Schengen zone - except several countries wanted to forget about that and have everything one-way.

Which, to be frank, sounds exactly what a lot of people want the UK to do with Europe.

My whole point is how the EU is not democratic and will use fair means and foul to get its way.

And your whole point is based on what I will charitably assume is confusion on your part, due to heavy misinformation.

leveller2911

AdrianC wrote: »

Let's look at the current list of applicants, shall we?

Albania - Yeh, good luck with that...
FYROM - Greek veto, guaranteed.
Montenegro - Probably fairly uncontroversial, apart from they'll have to have one monumental anti-corruption cleanup to get anywhere near meeting acceptance.
Serbia - Slovenian and Croatian vetoes, guaranteed.
Turkey - Greek and Cypriot vetoes, guaranteed.

I will have a wager with you that Turkey will see the bigger picture in all this and give up their claim to Cyprus as long as the Greeks and Cypriots vote for Turkey to join........... See ,all done and dusted with a simple deal. The Turkish Cypriots will stay and there will be an agreement.

The rest I can only see Serbia not being allowed to join in the near future..How about Ukraine? Whats your opinion on Ukraine ,all I can see is the EU making a huge effort to stick 2 fingers up at Russia.Not a great attitude if you want to keep Europe peaceful is it.

There will be no more accession for quite some while.

So as a pro EU voter you cannot tell me the limit to the EU expansion plans?. Doesn't that worry you at all?.

AdrianC

leveller2911 wrote: »

I will have a wager with you that Turkey will see the bigger picture in all this and give up their claim to Cyprus as long as the Greeks and Cypriots vote for Turkey to join........... See ,all done and dusted with a simple deal.

Well, no, because it isn't just the potential vetoes that are holding Turkey back from joining.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accession_of_Turkey_to_the_European_Union#Negotiation_progress
See those yellow, orange and red boxes in the third column? They all need to be green. Only 1 out of 35 is finalised.
See chapter 33, Financial and Budgetary Provisions? That's a big one.
See the sixth and seventh columns? Chapter Frozen/Unfrozen? They're the ones the EU aren't even looking at, because of the Cyprus situation. !!!!!!, the British military are still in Cyprus as peacekeepers...

How about Ukraine? Whats your opinion on Ukraine

Irrelevant. Ukraine haven't even applied to join.

,all I can see is the EU making a huge effort to stick 2 fingers up at Russia.Not a great attitude if you want to keep Europe peaceful is it.

I'm not sure that just shrugging and handing Putin his victory on a plate, and sod the wishes of the people who actually live there, is a better way to keep everything peaceful.

So as a pro EU voter you cannot tell me the limit to the EU expansion plans?. Doesn't that worry you at all?.

Right now, the UK has absolute control over who joins the EU. If we left, we would have absolutely no say whatsoever.

househuntingmad

The impact will be one of

a) Interest rates go up
b) Interest rates go down
c) Interest rates stay the same

leveller2911

AdrianC wrote: »

Correct, it can't. And 23 of 28 countries manage to do what you want without discriminating. So why can't the UK?

Or is discrimination what you actually want?

*Very important post coming up*

I want a UK Govt to decide on its policy and not an unelected political elite in Brussels.

As for the asylum issues - it's very simple, again. The Wail was deliberately being disingenuous, because that's exactly what their target market want. I notice that the Wail headline includes a reference to "human rights", another nice easy hot-button, despite the fact that the ECHR is nothing whatsoever to do with the EU.

As I said ,I don't read the Daily Mail purely because ,like every other newspaper including the Guardian will have an agenda.

Schengen countries, though, devolve ALL of that to the Schengen zone - except several countries wanted to forget about that and have everything one-way.

This kinda backs up my point .

Correct me if I'm wrong here but you mean Germany and Mrs Merkel?.. If so then IMO The EU is run by Germany and to a certain extent France but Germany seem to believe they run the EU and as such can do exactly what they want rather than what is best for the continent as a whole.

Germany ,in "doing its own thing" has cost the EU and Europe dearly and I hope we have another huge influx of migrants crossing from Libya etc so it shows up the EU for what it is and the UK public will have the good sense to vote to leave.

The EU is like the Titanic, it takes an absolute age to turn around ,by which time its hit the iceberg and its too late.

And your whole point is based on what I will charitably assume is confusion on your part, due to heavy misinformation.

That's your prerogative.............

AdrianC

leveller2911 wrote: »

I want a UK Govt to decide on its policy and not an unelected political elite in Brussels.

Good-oh, because that's exactly what we have now - together with an opt-out to keep it that way.

Correct me if I'm wrong here but you mean Germany and Mrs Merkel?

No, I mean those countries who like having the freedom of movement for their citizens to live elsewhere, but who have a major tantrum at the thought of Johnny Foreigner moving there.

<thinks> Sounds familiar.

leveller2911

AdrianC wrote: »

Well, no, because it isn't just the potential vetoes that are holding Turkey back from joining.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accession_of_Turkey_to_the_European_Union#Negotiation_progress
See those yellow, orange and red boxes in the third column? They all need to be green. Only 1 out of 35 is finalised.
See chapter 33, Financial and Budgetary Provisions? That's a big one.

i'm glad you have the faith..

See the sixth and seventh columns? Chapter Frozen/Unfrozen? They're the ones the EU aren't even looking at, because of the Cyprus situation. !!!!!!, the British military are still in Cyprus as peacekeepers...

And that can't be overcome?.

How many other countries has the UK been "peace keepers in" but no longer?.

Have visitors now so will pop back later.......