The EU: IN or OUT?

Dird

Kohoutek wrote: »

Absolutely. It's like the leave campaign's use of the false £350 million / week figure.

It's not though. If you bought something through TCB for £200 but with £50 cashback available, you still paid £200. And much like the MSE guide says, cashback can't be counted on. Also our net contributions have shot up since Poland etc joined: https://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN06091.pdf
Much like the mandatory 0.7% foreign aid amount, I don't see why UK tax payers should be funding life in Poland while we continue to get further and further into debt.
Look at all those countries taking out much more than they put in: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12176663/EU-Facts-how-much-does-Britain-pay-to-the-EU-budget.html

Kohoutek wrote: »

If you have to mislead people to make your point, that should set alarm bells ringing.

Then you shouldn't vote at all as if you vote 1 way Turks & Poles will invade en masse and take your jobs and if you vote the other way WW3 will commence

masonic

Dird wrote: »

It's not though. If you bought something through TCB for £200 but with £50 cashback available, you still paid £200. And much like the MSE guide says, cashback can't be counted on.

:rotfl: Thanks for injecting a bit of humour back into this thread. "...like the MSE guide says, cashback can't be counted on."

Kohoutek

Dird wrote: »

It's not though. If you bought something through TCB for £200 but with £50 cashback available, you still paid £200. And much like the MSE guide says, cashback can't be counted on.

It's not like that, because the rebate portion is never actually paid to the EU. It's also different because the rebate is guaranteed - the UK has a veto.

The £350 million figure also omits the money invested in the UK by the EU.

CLAPTON

Kohoutek wrote: »

It's not like that, because the rebate portion is never actually paid to the EU. It's also different because the rebate is guaranteed - the UK has a veto.

The £350 million figure also omits the money invested in the UK by the EU.

tell you what mate

you give me £50,000
and I will undertake to spend it on things I think are very important to you or to your neighbourhood

so you haven't really given any money away as you are getting it all back

you can PM your bank details

jimjames

Kohoutek wrote: »

It's not like that, because the rebate portion is never actually paid to the EU. It's also different because the rebate is guaranteed - the UK has a veto.

The £350 million figure also omits the money invested in the UK by the EU.

A bit like the rebuilding of Manchester. UK government contribution, £450k, EU contribution £21 Million.

But we don't get anything back do we...

Scarpacci

Kohoutek wrote: »

It's not like that, because the rebate portion is never actually paid to the EU. It's also different because the rebate is guaranteed - the UK has a veto.

If the UK has a veto on the rebate, why has our rebate decreased in the years since Thatcher secured it? It's been successively given up.

Now, whether this means we should be less concerned about the European Union and more concerned about the governments we've elected, it's clear somebody is not doing their part for the UK. Like with Britain's support for Turkish entry, we seem to do a better job advocating for the other side than we do for the British case.

EnglishMohican

jimjames wrote: »

A bit like the rebuilding of Manchester. UK government contribution, £450k, EU contribution £21 Million.

But we don't get anything back do we...

We get some of what was originally our money back in this case - but we have to put forward a case for our cause against all other causes. We have to argue for it and try to justify why we should have it. We get it because the EU decides in its wisdom to give us back some of what was originally our money. Or maybe it decides to spend it in Poland or Turkey or wherever it chooses in which case we would not get it back.

Dird

Kohoutek wrote: »

It's also different because the rebate is guaranteed

A rebate is guraranteed; the amount is not. For all you know we vote remain and the French turn around at the next negoatiation & say we get a 50p rebate, swiftly followed by this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYt5kspvTh0

Kohoutek

Dird wrote: »

A rebate is guraranteed; the amount is not. For all you know we vote remain and the French turn around at the next negoatiation & say we get a 50p rebate, swiftly followed by this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYt5kspvTh0

Well even if that happened, the economic consequence of a lower rebate would be very minor; the economic consequences of leaving the EU single market (our biggest trading partner) would be severe.

EnglishMohican

Kohoutek wrote: »

.......consequences of leaving the EU single market (our biggest trading partner) would be severe.

You state that as a fact but with no justification. Is this your opinion or are you repeating somebody else's opinion? If somebody else, then do they have a crystal ball or is it a forecast or a guess? If a forecast then is the model valid and are they genuinely neutral in the debate? Most parties who have provided a forecast are less than neutral in my opinion.

You ignore the (I believe) fact that they sell more to us than we sell to them - so following your logic, the consequences for the rump EU would also be severe unless they reached some sort of amicable compromise with the UK that allowed both parties to go on trading.