We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder
Comments
-
Why would I when you would obviously rather carry on ignoring the page upon page of answers in here and in multiple other bits of this forum so that you can continue your own faux indignation at those who dared to vote to leave the UK?
I ignore stuff like "dared to vote" because it makes it sound like something daring, which it wasn't. I gave you a chance and that is all you could come up with.No wonder Farage's lot look like they're going to slaughter all-comers on May 23rd.
That is because Farage is good at conning you. If you can't see that now, I'm not sure there is hope.0 -
-
When Ireland and Luxembourg decided to slash their corporate tax rates to a level that put the U.K. and the rest of the EU at a competitive disadvantage and thus attract tax avoiding multinationals and ergo thousands of jobs, were they thinking of their “neighbour” interests?
No it wasn't. Which is why the EU are taking steps to stop that behavior.
The UK had to leave so that we could turn into a tax haven and the MP's would get rewarded by high paid jobs, while the country languishes with no money for government spending.Those supporting Farage are certainly being conned by a charlatan. But he is sucking them in for sure. Wonder why or how?
The how: Rebel rousing is easy. Just blame foreigners for everyones problems.
The why: Money, he wants to increase his money and decrease yours. His referendum night lie that he got caught out on proves that.0 -
-
No it wasn't. Which is why the EU are taking steps to stop that behavior.
The UK had to leave so that we could turn into a tax haven and the MP's would get rewarded by high paid jobs, while the country languishes with no money for government spending.
I only brought up CT rates as a riposte to the intimation that the U.K. uniquely in Europe seeks to act in a selfish manner. More than one voice in Ireland saying that they will not countenance the standardisation of CT rates in the Eurozone.
The economic policy of a future British Government will be determined by the type of political party the electorate votes for in a GE.
A post Brexit U.K. tax haven is not a given“Britain- A friend to all, beholden to none”. 🇬🇧0 -
I only brought up CT rates as a riposte to the intimation that the U.K. uniquely in Europe seeks to act in a selfish manner. More than one voice in Ireland saying that they will not countenance the standardisation of CT rates in the Eurozone.
The economic policy of a future British Government will be determined by the type of political party the electorate votes for in a GE.
A post Brexit U.K. tax haven is not a given
Standardisation is being mooted, but I doubt it will happen anytime soon in EU.
I suppose what irked me was the position of UK bemoaning low CT tax countries when UK could have done it themselves.0 -
Standardisation is being mooted, but I doubt it will happen anytime soon in EU.
I suppose what irked me was the position of UK bemoaning low CT tax countries when UK could have done it themselves.
The U.K. was not bemoaning other countries CT rates, it was me citing the practice as part of the discussion.“Britain- A friend to all, beholden to none”. 🇬🇧0 -
SouthLondonUser wrote: »Leavers were the majority at the referendum - true. I suppose the European elections will be a good test to see if sentiment and/or demographics have changed in the meanwhile (e.g. how many pro Brexit old people have died and how many pro EU young people are now eligible to vote?).
However, it is also true that:- It wasn't a binary choice; Remain has always meant the status quo; Brexit has always meant many incompatible things. If 48% of a family want to stay put, 26% want to go to France and 26% to Spain, the real majority is for staying put!
- most countries do not allow referendums on such matters, and that's a good thing, because allowing referendums on complex matters and on non-binary choices is recipe for disaster, as we have seen
- a qualified majority is needed for more trivial things; e.g. a 2/3 majority (please correct me if I am confusing numbers) is needed for the House of Commons to call an early election, yet a simple majority is sufficient for such a life-changing referendum? I have no words...
The biggest remain lie of all. Remain has never meant the status quo.
I have no words.....0 -
I thought we had gone over this already...The biggest remain lie of all. Remain has never meant the status quo.
I have no words.....
Cameron had tried to extract greater concessions, and failed. No one with half a brain could have possibly thought that anything would have changed materially after the referendum.
Was the message of the Remain campaign in any way ambiguous? Were some remainers saying it would be the status quo, while others were saying that no, things would change drastically? Who said that what would change how and why?
Sure, like anything in politics and in life, the EU can and will change. But, just like no one can realistically predict what will happen to the UK in 10 year's time, no one can realistically predict what will happen to the EU in 10 year's time. This doesn't mean that voting remain didn't mean choosing a single, clear option: the status quo.
Please explain yourself.0 -
SouthLondonUser wrote: »I thought we had gone over this already...
Cameron had tried to extract greater concessions, and failed. No one with half a brain could have possibly thought that anything would have changed materially after the referendum.
Was the message of the Remain campaign in any way ambiguous? Were some remainers saying it would be the status quo, while others were saying that no, things would change drastically? Who said that what would change how and why?
Sure, like anything in politics and in life, the EU can and will change. But, just like no one can realistically predict what will happen to the UK in 10 year's time, no one can realistically predict what will happen to the EU in 10 year's time. This doesn't mean that voting remain didn't mean choosing a single, clear option: the status quo.
Please explain yourself.
I don't have to explain anything. What part of 'ever closer union' don't you understand.
And, yes. We have been over this before many times.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards