advertisement


Oh Britain, what have you done (part ∞+24)?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Are you. Don't hold your breath.

When it comes to you infoming yourself I've learnt to not hold my breath.

whataboutism-issue-480x270.jpg


^ e.g. of whataboutism akimbo.
 
I object to paying my taxes in Leeds only to see them being spent in London, Cardiff and Edinburgh. Or I would if I were small-minded and didn't recognise that they are part of the same union.

You do though, inversely, make an important point. I think that there is a case to be made for decentralisation of aspects of government away from Westminster and out to the provinces. And with it might go aspects of tax raising and spending. You could refer to it as communitarianism, where we all have a stake in what most directly affects us.

If you are on one hand pro-Scottish independence, and on the opposite pro independence from the EU, this is a logical path.
 
Yes, and I think that some of this has informed me all along. I wasn't a 'hard' leaver in the referendum, I teetered on the ridgeline. I still do to some degree.

Your 'positive' argument for the EU is that it may (or may not) be bad, but it may be better than the US. That isn't a positive argument either.
The difference is that I’m advocating the status quo. I don’t really need a positive argument. It is for those who desire change to show the rest of us why we should desire it too.
 
There is no status quo. It's gone.

The remain campaign, and EU proponents through all of the years of the UK's membership, have failed to make a compelling case for the EU. It could be argued that had they done so, we would not have voted to leave. We have now voted to leave, and the battle has been won by those who desire change. But the war might not yet be over, there might yet be a second referendum. Make the case for the EU.
 
Do you think it's wrong for taxes raised in that London to subsidise other, poorer, regions of the country? I once worked with someone who thought London should be a separate 'country' and keep all its money for itself. I'm not sure he was joking.
Taxes and tariffs raised in the uk should be invested for the benefit of the UK in the UK.
 
There are two points there (neither of which relates to your oranges/Japanese cars point, either BTW). First, these are EU tariffs, so where else would they go? Second, the 'EU coffers' is a big and diverse pot. It may, perhaps, subsidise the setting up of a manufacturing plant elsewhere, but it might equally go to a regeneration project in the Rhondda, or large scale civil engineering work in the North East. So to conflate the collection of tariffs with subsidising our competitors is a bit of a stretch.

And then there's the question of foreign aid. Some EU subsidies, perhaps, for example, the car plant in Turkey, might well come under the heading of 'foreign aid'. The UK also does foreign aid, 0.7% of our GDP last time I checked. Most developed nations do. You have to look not just at the bald figures, but the objectives. It is conjecture on my part (CBA to check) but it does seem to me to be at least plausible that the rationale for the Turkey car plant was to create jobs in Turkey, to raise living standards, and reduce migration across the EU's southern border. That might, in the grand scheme of things, be of greater value to the community as a whole than the jobs associated with the car plant.

My point, really, being that it's not black and white, and painting it as such doesn't help.

After the Thatcher rebate we pay in £12 billion we get back 4 billion for projects in the Rhondda or northeast of England etc. Plus the £1,6 billion in tariffs giving a £9.6 billion membership/ subsidy/ assistance or whatever you would like to call it. There are many deprived areas in the UK where this money could be spent to good effect.

Fair competition is fine but giving EU grants, soft loans and subsidies to Eastern Europe to our competitors has resulted in factory migration from western Europe. It is said that for every factory job there are 4 or 5 supply jobs. As western Europe becomes poorer we will see more of the likes of Farage and populist governments.
 
After the Thatcher rebate we pay in £12 billion we get back 4 billion for projects in the Rhondda or northeast of England etc. Plus the £1,6 billion in tariffs giving a £9.6 billion membership/ subsidy/ assistance or whatever you would like to call it. There are many deprived areas in the UK where this money could be spent to good effect.

Fair competition is fine but giving EU grants, soft loans and subsidies to Eastern Europe to our competitors has resulted in factory migration from western Europe. It is said that for every factory job there are 4 or 5 supply jobs. As western Europe becomes poorer we will see more of the likes of Farage and populist governments.

The CBI estimates that the net benefit of EU membership is worth 4-5% of GDP to the UK, or £62bn-£78bn per year.
Would you like to try again?
 
After the Thatcher rebate we pay in £12 billion we get back 4 billion for projects in the Rhondda or northeast of England etc. Plus the £1,6 billion in tariffs giving a £9.6 billion membership/ subsidy/ assistance or whatever you would like to call it. There are many deprived areas in the UK where this money could be spent to good effect.

And we get access to one of the largest tariff free markets in the world. We may get the cost of membership back, but we'll lose far more by not being part of that market.
 
The hard Remain, and polite Leave (or whatever it is called today), BS from Brexiteers continues to stink up this thread.

There is only Remain or Leave, even for the people who have changed their minds.

Philip Hammond made this clear on The Andrew Marr Show at the weekend.

Jack
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top