Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

phillw

adindas wrote: »

It has been discussed many times there are already various link about this.

Links to opinions.

The legal advice is that at least the majority of it is required under international law.

Some of the divorce bill covers our contributions during the implementation period, they obviously wouldn't be required if we go no deal.

You don't believe it because it doesn't match your opinion.

You seem to think you can order a meal, leave half way through eating it and then refuse to pay because you're no longer eating it.

adindas

phillw wrote: »

Links to opinions.

The legal advice is that at least the majority of it is required under international law.

You don't believe it because it doesn't match your opinion.

In this thread. I am not going to do any work for remainers.

phillw

adindas wrote: »

In this thread. I am not going to do any work for remainers.

Right, because the truth scares you. You'd rather just stick to your prejudice and fear of leave.

I wasn't asking for you to do any work, I was telling you that those links were to opinions and not facts.

A lot of people manipulating you are telling you that we don't legally have to pay it, so you believe them.

The government is saying that their legal advice is that the majority of the money has to be paid under international law. Google throws up loads of hits, if you cared about the truth then you'd have found them.

adindas

phillw wrote: »

Right, because the truth scares you. You'd rather just stick to your prejudice and fear of leave.

Find it in this thread. I am not going to do anywork for remainers. Even hard core remainers like "Herzloz" said UK admit UK are not legally required after getting involved in the discussion.

phillw

adindas wrote: »

Find it in this thread. I am not going to do anywork for remainers. Even hard remainers like "Herloz" said UK is not legally required after getting involved in the discussion.

I don't believe Herloz is involved in the negotiations, his is only an opinion. Nobody is going to use anything agreed in this thread as a guide for what should be done, you're just upsetting yourself for no reason.

We have to pay a large percentage of that money and we will do. Get over it.

adindas

phillw wrote: »

I don't believe Herloz is involved in the negotiations, his is only an opinion. Nobody is going to use anything agreed in this thread as a guide for what should be done, you're just upsetting yourself for no reason.

We have to pay a large percentage of that money and we will do. Get over it.

Nonone was saying Herzloz get involved in the negotiations. I am just referring that a hardcore brexiter who is always talking the good thing about EU admitted that UK is not legally required to pay after seeing a lot of links evidence. Now your turn to find it out.

UK is not "legally" required to pay the sum of EUR39bil. It is not my personal opinion.

If Uk wanted to pay it is just the gesture of a good will in exchange of a good trade deal. COnsidering Canada, Japan, do not pay a penny it is a very bad deal.

MobileSaver

adindas wrote: »

UK is not "legally" required to pay the sum of EUR39bil. It is not my personal opinion.

For the avoidance of doubt, the UK is legally required to pay its existing commitments to the EU for previously agreed projects and future pension liabilities etc.

The exact figure is not actually 39 billion as some of that is for future stuff if there is a deal but the bulk of the 39 billion is owed as per the above.

Herzlos

I'm not a hard-core remainer. I could easily get behind brexit if someone gave me anything to get behind.
I think there are parts of the debt we owe and parts we may not, and that the EU would need to battle itnoutin international courts to get us to pay up. The reality is that not paying it and looking unreliable will cost us far more.
It's also in no way related to a future deal. May keeps saying that to make the bill seem more palatable but she's a liar.

adindas wrote: »

Keep in mind the future trade deal that UK will get, it will not involve financial and other services.

You do realise that we're essentially a service economy, and that our financial sector is worth about 12% of our economy?

Kohoutek

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Trade isn't profit.

Likewise the 45% you quote is a gross figure. From it you need to deduct the imports together with the exports/reimports.

Why? What argument about Brexit being a good idea does having a balance of trade deficit deficit with the EU prove?

We have a balance of trade deficit with China for example too (and on a net basis, the whole world for that matter). Are you saying our trading relationship with China is bad too?

Thrugelmir wrote: »

How much does Brussels cost to run? Sending people all over Europe adds up as well. Public sector organisations unlike their private sector counterparts. Are renowned for wasting money.

The total budget is about €150-160bn a year, with about 70% coming from member state contributions, the rest from EU own funds.

That's hardly excessive given there are 28 member states and most of the budget is sent back to member states through CAP, structural funds etc. Cf the UK 2018 public budget which was about £660bn (€770bn).

About €9bn of that is administration. Again, not really a lot given there are 28 member states and all the institutions the EU operates.

kabayiri

You lot still trying to change each others minds?

I can point you in the direction of a perfectly good dead horse which needs flogging if you want!