FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Top 10 economic benefits of Brexit
Top 10 economic benefits of Brexit
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go..." These might not be economic, but is the best I can do Sovereignty Fish Straight bananas Blue passports Freedom Fish again Control our borders Rule Britannia The Queen Patriotic | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares" "No one cares". Thats why were in this mess! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares" More like screaming children who can't get their own way.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way. "Yet again. More belittling of people for having an understanding of what's going on in the world around them. Astounding. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
Yet again. More belittling of people for having an understanding of what's going on in the world around them.
Astounding."Reading your various posts you're very good at belittling people yourself. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares" You cared enough to read the thread and then comment. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
Yet again. More belittling of people for having an understanding of what's going on in the world around them.
Astounding."Says one of the chief insulters of others opinions. That's not astounding that's arrogance. Take a break you will do yourself some harm, like it or not we have left the EU, whatever you say or do wont make a jot of difference | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
Yet again. More belittling of people for having an understanding of what's going on in the world around them.
Astounding.
Reading your various posts you're very good at belittling people yourself."Where is your top 10 list? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
Yet again. More belittling of people for having an understanding of what's going on in the world around them.
Astounding.
Says one of the chief insulters of others opinions.
That's not astounding that's arrogance.
Take a break you will do yourself some harm, like it or not we have left the EU, whatever you say or do wont make a jot of difference "We have left, there is no going back but the comedy value of Brexit continues to deliver, it is the gift that keeps on giving | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way. "A bit like Britain with the EU. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way. "The OP asked for 10 economic benefits, you still haven’t answered  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
Yet again. More belittling of people for having an understanding of what's going on in the world around them.
Astounding.
Reading your various posts you're very good at belittling people yourself."I may make fun of the things people say But I wouldn't belittle anyone. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
Yet again. More belittling of people for having an understanding of what's going on in the world around them.
Astounding.
Says one of the chief insulters of others opinions.
That's not astounding that's arrogance.
Take a break you will do yourself some harm, like it or not we have left the EU, whatever you say or do wont make a jot of difference
We have left, there is no going back but the comedy value of Brexit continues to deliver, it is the gift that keeps on giving "these threads are the comedy mate lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
Yet again. More belittling of people for having an understanding of what's going on in the world around them.
Astounding.
Says one of the chief insulters of others opinions.
That's not astounding that's arrogance.
Take a break you will do yourself some harm, like it or not we have left the EU, whatever you say or do wont make a jot of difference
We have left, there is no going back but the comedy value of Brexit continues to deliver, it is the gift that keeps on giving these threads are the comedy mate lol"Yeah, but it’s Brexit that provides the comedy, I know and respect your reasons for voting to leave but it doesn’t drop it from being a clusterfuck | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
The OP asked for 10 economic benefits, you still haven’t answered "There is no point in answering because you just ignor what people post and then ask why have no one answered. It's the same story on evey thread. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
Yet again. More belittling of people for having an understanding of what's going on in the world around them.
Astounding.
Says one of the chief insulters of others opinions.
That's not astounding that's arrogance.
Take a break you will do yourself some harm, like it or not we have left the EU, whatever you say or do wont make a jot of difference
We have left, there is no going back but the comedy value of Brexit continues to deliver, it is the gift that keeps on giving these threads are the comedy mate lol
Yeah, but it’s Brexit that provides the comedy, I know and respect your reasons for voting to leave but it doesn’t drop it from being a clusterfuck "the clusterfuck Is the Tory governments handling of it tho if Corbyn had had a pair of balls and got his labour to back leave then maybe he could of done a better job of it upto now | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
The OP asked for 10 economic benefits, you still haven’t answered
There is no point in answering because you just ignor what people post and then ask why have no one answered.
It's the same story on evey thread."Or, there are no benefits. Hmmm | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
The OP asked for 10 economic benefits, you still haven’t answered
There is no point in answering because you just ignor what people post and then ask why have no one answered.
It's the same story on evey thread.
Or, there are no benefits.
Hmmm"no benefits ffs don’t tell sexy bugger he thinks all us leaver voters are on benefits lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"why not wait and see ? at the moment we are still in the transition so tied to the eu and its laws until dec 31st.The benefits or deficits are all speculation until we actually have control. With that i will leave you alone to carry on with depressing yourselves about what may or not happen and post again when we know. "  (thumb | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
Yet again. More belittling of people for having an understanding of what's going on in the world around them.
Astounding.
Says one of the chief insulters of others opinions.
That's not astounding that's arrogance.
Take a break you will do yourself some harm, like it or not we have left the EU, whatever you say or do wont make a jot of difference
We have left, there is no going back but the comedy value of Brexit continues to deliver, it is the gift that keeps on giving these threads are the comedy mate lol
Yeah, but it’s Brexit that provides the comedy, I know and respect your reasons for voting to leave but it doesn’t drop it from being a clusterfuck the clusterfuck Is the Tory governments handling of it tho if Corbyn had had a pair of balls and got his labour to back leave then maybe he could of done a better job of it upto now "Come on, you can’t blame Corbyn for this? We could have with a deal ages ago if the tories had backed May | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
The OP asked for 10 economic benefits, you still haven’t answered
There is no point in answering because you just ignor what people post and then ask why have no one answered.
It's the same story on evey thread."If you prefer telling us about your issues with champagne socialism, go for it, joker. A lot of bullshit posted here but content is more than thin or even non-existent. Is it so hard to answer questions about your post or do you regard conversations as one way traffic? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"why not wait and see ? at the moment we are still in the transition so tied to the eu and its laws until dec 31st.The benefits or deficits are all speculation until we actually have control. With that i will leave you alone to carry on with depressing yourselves about what may or not happen and post again when we know. "Really? We are 6 weeks from leaving and we still don’t know if or what the benefits will be? I have always respected your reasons for leaving because at least you gave them. I know we can’t predict but what are you hoping the benefits of Brexit will be | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
Yet again. More belittling of people for having an understanding of what's going on in the world around them.
Astounding.
Says one of the chief insulters of others opinions.
That's not astounding that's arrogance.
Take a break you will do yourself some harm, like it or not we have left the EU, whatever you say or do wont make a jot of difference
We have left, there is no going back but the comedy value of Brexit continues to deliver, it is the gift that keeps on giving these threads are the comedy mate lol
Yeah, but it’s Brexit that provides the comedy, I know and respect your reasons for voting to leave but it doesn’t drop it from being a clusterfuck the clusterfuck Is the Tory governments handling of it tho if Corbyn had had a pair of balls and got his labour to back leave then maybe he could of done a better job of it upto now
Come on, you can’t blame Corbyn for this? We could have with a deal ages ago if the tories had backed May "I’m not blameing him it’s not his fault he sat on the fence and had no balls it was to be expected I agreed with you on the cluster fuck amd tories to blame for there handling of it it’s not brexit it’s the shit way it’s been dealt with | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"why not wait and see ? at the moment we are still in the transition so tied to the eu and its laws until dec 31st.The benefits or deficits are all speculation until we actually have control. With that i will leave you alone to carry on with depressing yourselves about what may or not happen and post again when we know. "I know now. It’s costing business millions. On the update today regarding Covid the minister said we are encouraging business to prepare. They can’t prepare because the government still haven’t given us the rules or procedures in full. They are lining up to blame business for not being ready. We ask our government contacts daily and no answers are forthcoming on the details. What a shower of shit we have elected. The civil service and business are drowning while the bollocks is spouted by ministers. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"why not wait and see ? at the moment we are still in the transition so tied to the eu and its laws until dec 31st.The benefits or deficits are all speculation until we actually have control. With that i will leave you alone to carry on with depressing yourselves about what may or not happen and post again when we know. "Wait and see! That's all we're down to. Blimey. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
The OP asked for 10 economic benefits, you still haven’t answered
There is no point in answering because you just ignor what people post and then ask why have no one answered.
It's the same story on evey thread."Just give us 5 then. Or tell us what financial benefits your hoping we will get | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares "Just to emphasise my previous post, the gift the keeps on giving | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
Yet again. More belittling of people for having an understanding of what's going on in the world around them.
Astounding.
Says one of the chief insulters of others opinions.
That's not astounding that's arrogance.
Take a break you will do yourself some harm, like it or not we have left the EU, whatever you say or do wont make a jot of difference
We have left, there is no going back but the comedy value of Brexit continues to deliver, it is the gift that keeps on giving these threads are the comedy mate lol
Yeah, but it’s Brexit that provides the comedy, I know and respect your reasons for voting to leave but it doesn’t drop it from being a clusterfuck the clusterfuck Is the Tory governments handling of it tho if Corbyn had had a pair of balls and got his labour to back leave then maybe he could of done a better job of it upto now
Come on, you can’t blame Corbyn for this? We could have with a deal ages ago if the tories had backed May I’m not blameing him it’s not his fault he sat on the fence and had no balls it was to be expected I agreed with you on the cluster fuck amd tories to blame for there handling of it it’s not brexit it’s the shit way it’s been dealt with "The Torys have been in power for 10 years, they now have their Brexit ‘A team ‘ in charge, there is no one else to blame for this . If they fail to deliver it is totally Boris’s and the governments fault | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is not all about money any financial benefits will probably not show for 4 or 5 years. " It’s clearly not. Lol.
So what is it about? Proving the rest of the world that we still have a big cock despite it being the size of a nugget? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go..." Hi. We would honestly love to read your thoughts on the subject. No bitching or anything, the vote is done and dusted. Would love to read your thoughts though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is not all about money any financial benefits will probably not show for 4 or 5 years. " So what will be the immediate benefits ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is not all about money any financial benefits will probably not show for 4 or 5 years. " Unless your a tax evader there will be no financial benefits for 99% of the population. Oh hang on customs brokers are on a nice earner. Well until we start exporting even less and then they’ll start to feel the pinch too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"°° Watches eating popcorn °°" Sweet or salty ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is not all about money any financial benefits will probably not show for 4 or 5 years. It’s clearly not. Lol.
So what is it about? Proving the rest of the world that we still have a big cock despite it being the size of a nugget? "Grow up | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is not all about money any financial benefits will probably not show for 4 or 5 years. It’s clearly not. Lol.
So what is it about? Proving the rest of the world that we still have a big cock despite it being the size of a nugget? Grow up"No need. It’s exactly what Brexit is all about. Prove me wrong. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
Yet again. More belittling of people for having an understanding of what's going on in the world around them.
Astounding.
Says one of the chief insulters of others opinions.
That's not astounding that's arrogance.
Take a break you will do yourself some harm, like it or not we have left the EU, whatever you say or do wont make a jot of difference
We have left, there is no going back but the comedy value of Brexit continues to deliver, it is the gift that keeps on giving these threads are the comedy mate lol
Yeah, but it’s Brexit that provides the comedy, I know and respect your reasons for voting to leave but it doesn’t drop it from being a clusterfuck the clusterfuck Is the Tory governments handling of it tho if Corbyn had had a pair of balls and got his labour to back leave then maybe he could of done a better job of it upto now
Come on, you can’t blame Corbyn for this? We could have with a deal ages ago if the tories had backed May I’m not blameing him it’s not his fault he sat on the fence and had no balls it was to be expected I agreed with you on the cluster fuck amd tories to blame for there handling of it it’s not brexit it’s the shit way it’s been dealt with "I asked this before and didnt get an answer. Tell me a Brexit strategy which labour should have followed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is not all about money any financial benefits will probably not show for 4 or 5 years. " They should have put that on the side of a bus. We dont know the benefits yet..but you may seem time before the end of the next decade. A sure fire winner | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"why not wait and see ? at the moment we are still in the transition so tied to the eu and its laws until dec 31st.The benefits or deficits are all speculation until we actually have control. With that i will leave you alone to carry on with depressing yourselves about what may or not happen and post again when we know. "What were the top 10 economic benefits you had in mind when you voted for Brexit? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is not all about money any financial benefits will probably not show for 4 or 5 years. They should have put that on the side of a bus. We dont know the benefits yet..but you may seem time before the end of the next decade. A sure fire winner " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A remoaners cryfest "Tbh , that is all you have and all you ever had. You voted for Brexit to ‘annoy ‘ leave voters and the ‘left’. The decision to leave the EU used to annoy me, now it is comedy gold. watching leave voters struggling to give reasons why they voted and now claiming that a no deal will be a good outcome. The gift that keeps on giving | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A remoaners cryfest
Tbh , that is all you have and all you ever had. You voted for Brexit to ‘annoy ‘ leave voters and the ‘left’. The decision to leave the EU used to annoy me, now it is comedy gold. watching leave voters struggling to give reasons why they voted and now claiming that a no deal will be a good outcome. The gift that keeps on giving "They genuinely believe they are insulated from the shitstorm to come. It's going to be highly amusing when the penny drops. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A remoaners cryfest
Tbh , that is all you have and all you ever had. You voted for Brexit to ‘annoy ‘ leave voters and the ‘left’. The decision to leave the EU used to annoy me, now it is comedy gold. watching leave voters struggling to give reasons why they voted and now claiming that a no deal will be a good outcome. The gift that keeps on giving
They genuinely believe they are insulated from the shitstorm to come.
It's going to be highly amusing when the penny drops."It’ll be the EU’s fault. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A remoaners cryfest
Tbh , that is all you have and all you ever had. You voted for Brexit to ‘annoy ‘ leave voters and the ‘left’. The decision to leave the EU used to annoy me, now it is comedy gold. watching leave voters struggling to give reasons why they voted and now claiming that a no deal will be a good outcome. The gift that keeps on giving
They genuinely believe they are insulated from the shitstorm to come.
It's going to be highly amusing when the penny drops.
It’ll be the EU’s fault. "I blame jezza the daft racist. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There will not be any benefits from Brexit - there is not a person in this country who doesn’t realise this. The only “positives” I have heard from Brexit supporters fall into the category of either they wanted people who benefit from EU ties to suffer and/or they ‘feel’ uncomfortable if lesser people (foreigners at the EU) are regarded at best as equals - or at worst imagining that they they “rule over us.” The validation of this is all over social media, day in and day out where ardent Brexiters assert British superiority over the world and assure us all that we are so important, that walking away from the world is the best strategy because the world will come begging. This is all about Exceptionalism - nothing more, nothing less. The arguments made to join the Common Market in the 1970’s are even more valid today, than they were back then." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There will not be any benefits from Brexit - there is not a person in this country who doesn’t realise this. The only “positives” I have heard from Brexit supporters fall into the category of either they wanted people who benefit from EU ties to suffer and/or they ‘feel’ uncomfortable if lesser people (foreigners at the EU) are regarded at best as equals - or at worst imagining that they they “rule over us.” The validation of this is all over social media, day in and day out where ardent Brexiters assert British superiority over the world and assure us all that we are so important, that walking away from the world is the best strategy because the world will come begging. This is all about Exceptionalism - nothing more, nothing less. The arguments made to join the Common Market in the 1970’s are even more valid today, than they were back then." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There will not be any benefits from Brexit - there is not a person in this country who doesn’t realise this. The only “positives” I have heard from Brexit supporters fall into the category of either they wanted people who benefit from EU ties to suffer and/or they ‘feel’ uncomfortable if lesser people (foreigners at the EU) are regarded at best as equals - or at worst imagining that they they “rule over us.” The validation of this is all over social media, day in and day out where ardent Brexiters assert British superiority over the world and assure us all that we are so important, that walking away from the world is the best strategy because the world will come begging. This is all about Exceptionalism - nothing more, nothing less. The arguments made to join the Common Market in the 1970’s are even more valid today, than they were back then." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You guys need to give it a rest, it's not good for your mental health, you're like a jilted lover who just cant let go, they just looked stupid and no one cares More like screaming children who can't get their own way.
The OP asked for 10 economic benefits, you still haven’t answered
There is no point in answering because you just ignor what people post and then ask why have no one answered.
It's the same story on evey thread."We don't ignore the answers. We just disprove them and you lot don't like it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Top 10 economic benefits of Brexit these threads are the comedy mate lol" In relation to the thread title  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If Brexit is such a bad thing, why did all you guys vote for it?" For a laugh, | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A remoaners cryfest "It’s the next generation who will pay the price for this mess. Getting a skewered vote to go your way isn’t winning for anyone if our children are going to be worse off! Jingoism and racism are not a foundation for a good future. The UK is a large economy for now and has grown by being part of the EU but the impact of Brexit will just lead to our falling behind more dynamic countries. Being part of the EU gave us clout and trade advantages. Alone we don’t count for much at all. Sad but true. All you return to empire dreamers need to wake up to see our real place in the world order. It’s a lot lower than you think. With two trillion of debt partly due to COVID (but only around 5-8%) where is the money coming from to pay that off? We have always relied on growth and the subsequent increase in tax take to keep on top of debt interest. As our economy won’t grow as fast so that take will reduce and we are going to struggle to pay that interest never mind the capitol. Because we won’t have the new EU tax rules the rich elite tax evaders won’t be paying into the pot so it’s going to be average joe public and his PAYE. You can’t escape. Brexit is coming but I’m pretty sure it’s not the Brexit you thought you were voting for. Good luck | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"1. Brexit is Done. 2. The Majority Voted for It. 3. We're Free to be Who we Wanna' Be. 4. The Remainers really get upset by it. 5. The Remainers think that if they keep on talking about it it will somehow reverse itself. 6. Pick-up-Sticks. 7. I have a Blue Dress that would go really well with the Blue Passport. 8. My Pappa had a Green Driving Permit - Nostalgia shouldn't be underrated. 9. Brexit is Done. 10. Did I say 'Brexit is Done?' "You forgot, ‘you lost get over it’ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"1. Brexit is Done. 2. The Majority Voted for It. 3. We're Free to be Who we Wanna' Be. 4. The Remainers really get upset by it. 5. The Remainers think that if they keep on talking about it it will somehow reverse itself. 6. Pick-up-Sticks. 7. I have a Blue Dress that would go really well with the Blue Passport. 8. My Pappa had a Green Driving Permit - Nostalgia shouldn't be underrated. 9. Brexit is Done. 10. Did I say 'Brexit is Done?'
You forgot, ‘you lost get over it’ "Shoop. That was a serious error lol. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"1. Brexit is Done. 2. The Majority Voted for It. 3. We're Free to be Who we Wanna' Be. 4. The Remainers really get upset by it. 5. The Remainers think that if they keep on talking about it it will somehow reverse itself. 6. Pick-up-Sticks. 7. I have a Blue Dress that would go really well with the Blue Passport. 8. My Pappa had a Green Driving Permit - Nostalgia shouldn't be underrated. 9. Brexit is Done. 10. Did I say 'Brexit is Done?'
You forgot, ‘you lost get over it’
Shoop. That was a serious error lol."Bloody hell, I’m surprised you haven’t mentioned the staggering £3 we have to pay for the tv licence. Is it really you?  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"1. Brexit is Done. 2. The Majority Voted for It. 3. We're Free to be Who we Wanna' Be. 4. The Remainers really get upset by it. 5. The Remainers think that if they keep on talking about it it will somehow reverse itself. 6. Pick-up-Sticks. 7. I have a Blue Dress that would go really well with the Blue Passport. 8. My Pappa had a Green Driving Permit - Nostalgia shouldn't be underrated. 9. Brexit is Done. 10. Did I say 'Brexit is Done?'
You forgot, ‘you lost get over it’
Shoop. That was a serious error lol.
Bloody hell, I’m surprised you haven’t mentioned the staggering £3 we have to pay for the tv licence. Is it really you? "But sadly - Brexit doesn't change that. (but it will come  ) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If Brexit is such a bad thing, why did all you guys vote for it?" We're still waiting for that answer. No one seems to be able to give any reasons. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anybody given any real benefits yet? "Rolflmao No | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anybody given any real benefits yet? "It gives pussies something to whine about and leave voters something to laugh at? That's 2  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anybody given any real benefits yet?
It gives pussies something to whine about and leave voters something to laugh at? That's 2 "Why are people who understand the implications of leaving the EU "pussies". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anybody given any real benefits yet?
It gives pussies something to whine about and leave voters something to laugh at? That's 2 "We voted for Brexit for a laugh, just like the idiots in America who voted for Trump in 2016 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anybody given any real benefits yet?
It gives pussies something to whine about and leave voters something to laugh at? That's 2 "And they're economic benefits, eh? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anybody given any real benefits yet?
It gives pussies something to whine about and leave voters something to laugh at? That's 2 "Ok Clem | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anybody given any real benefits yet?
It gives pussies something to whine about and leave voters something to laugh at? That's 2
And they're economic benefits, eh?"You just asked for real benefits, the OP asked for economic benefits. I was replying to your post. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anybody given any real benefits yet?
It gives pussies something to whine about and leave voters something to laugh at? That's 2
Ok Clem "You really are a bit OCD about this, aren't you? Is it a side-effect of your medication? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anybody given any real benefits yet?
It gives pussies something to whine about and leave voters something to laugh at? That's 2
Ok Clem
You really are a bit OCD about this, aren't you? Is it a side-effect of your medication?"Yeah, are you pussies in America still whining about Donald losing | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well if you didn't read it at the time . . . here's a second chance . . . https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-what-next-reasons-be-positive-eu-referendum-jeremy-corbyn-a7104016.html "People don't really believe the Independent's stories on this forum. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well if you didn't read it at the time . . . here's a second chance . . . https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-what-next-reasons-be-positive-eu-referendum-jeremy-corbyn-a7104016.html
People don't really believe the Independent's stories on this forum."They have more credibility than your opinion | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anybody given any real benefits yet?
It gives pussies something to whine about and leave voters something to laugh at? That's 2
Ok Clem
You really are a bit OCD about this, aren't you? Is it a side-effect of your medication?
Yeah, are you pussies in America still whining about Donald losing "The pussies probably are, but not me - I would have voted Biden if I had the vote. I want Kamala Harris to succeed him and become potus. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well if you didn't read it at the time . . . here's a second chance . . . https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-what-next-reasons-be-positive-eu-referendum-jeremy-corbyn-a7104016.html
People don't really believe the Independent's stories on this forum."Yet they believe Bill Gates is Doctor Doom and the Queen is a Lizard . . . and . . . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well if you didn't read it at the time . . . here's a second chance . . . https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-what-next-reasons-be-positive-eu-referendum-jeremy-corbyn-a7104016.html
People don't really believe the Independent's stories on this forum.
They have more credibility than your opinion "Dunno about that. do they talk about "pussies"? That's the only way we can be sure they're on the money. Apparently. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well if you didn't read it at the time . . . here's a second chance . . . https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-what-next-reasons-be-positive-eu-referendum-jeremy-corbyn-a7104016.html
People don't really believe the Independent's stories on this forum.
They have more credibility than your opinion "That's good then. This article explains why remain voters always seem so angry. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-mental-health-a8866256.html | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anybody given any real benefits yet?
It gives pussies something to whine about and leave voters something to laugh at? That's 2
Ok Clem
You really are a bit OCD about this, aren't you? Is it a side-effect of your medication?
Yeah, are you pussies in America still whining about Donald losing
The pussies probably are, but not me - I would have voted Biden if I had the vote. I want Kamala Harris to succeed him and become potus."Why are the pussies whining though, can’t they accept defeat ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anybody given any real benefits yet?
It gives pussies something to whine about and leave voters something to laugh at? That's 2
Ok Clem
You really are a bit OCD about this, aren't you? Is it a side-effect of your medication?
Yeah, are you pussies in America still whining about Donald losing
The pussies probably are, but not me - I would have voted Biden if I had the vote. I want Kamala Harris to succeed him and become potus.
Why are the pussies whining though, can’t they accept defeat ? "You would have to ask them that question, but I get the impression you don't get to see a pussy very often | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well if you didn't read it at the time . . . here's a second chance . . . https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-what-next-reasons-be-positive-eu-referendum-jeremy-corbyn-a7104016.html
People don't really believe the Independent's stories on this forum.
They have more credibility than your opinion
That's good then. This article explains why remain voters always seem so angry.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-mental-health-a8866256.html
"It a good read, here is one about why leave voters are deluded https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-leave-voters-deluded -a8866256.html | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's good then. This article explains why remain voters always seem so angry. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-mental-health-a8866256.html " The Cold War gave my Parents that feeling too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anybody given any real benefits yet?
It gives pussies something to whine about and leave voters something to laugh at? That's 2
Ok Clem
You really are a bit OCD about this, aren't you? Is it a side-effect of your medication?
Yeah, are you pussies in America still whining about Donald losing
The pussies probably are, but not me - I would have voted Biden if I had the vote. I want Kamala Harris to succeed him and become potus.
Why are the pussies whining though, can’t they accept defeat ?
You would have to ask them that question, but I get the impression you don't get to see a pussy very often "Comparing my profile on here with yours I get it a lot more often than you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well if you didn't read it at the time . . . here's a second chance . . . https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-what-next-reasons-be-positive-eu-referendum-jeremy-corbyn-a7104016.html
People don't really believe the Independent's stories on this forum.
They have more credibility than your opinion
That's good then. This article explains why remain voters always seem so angry.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-mental-health-a8866256.html
It a good read, here is one about why leave voters are deluded
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-leave-voters-deluded -a8866256.html"Oh that's clever, you posted the same link. You really are the cleverest remain voter in the whole world | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anybody given any real benefits yet?
It gives pussies something to whine about and leave voters something to laugh at? That's 2
Ok Clem
You really are a bit OCD about this, aren't you? Is it a side-effect of your medication?
Yeah, are you pussies in America still whining about Donald losing
The pussies probably are, but not me - I would have voted Biden if I had the vote. I want Kamala Harris to succeed him and become potus.
Why are the pussies whining though, can’t they accept defeat ?
You would have to ask them that question, but I get the impression you don't get to see a pussy very often
Comparing my profile on here with yours I get it a lot more often than you "Lol, good one. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well if you didn't read it at the time . . . here's a second chance . . . https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-what-next-reasons-be-positive-eu-referendum-jeremy-corbyn-a7104016.html
People don't really believe the Independent's stories on this forum.
They have more credibility than your opinion
That's good then. This article explains why remain voters always seem so angry.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-mental-health-a8866256.html
"The article says it mainly affects older people. Most older people voted for brexit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's good then. This article explains why remain voters always seem so angry. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-mental-health-a8866256.html The Cold War gave my Parents that feeling too." And how did the Cold War turn out? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has anybody given any real benefits yet?
It gives pussies something to whine about and leave voters something to laugh at? That's 2
Ok Clem
You really are a bit OCD about this, aren't you? Is it a side-effect of your medication?
Yeah, are you pussies in America still whining about Donald losing
The pussies probably are, but not me - I would have voted Biden if I had the vote. I want Kamala Harris to succeed him and become potus.
Why are the pussies whining though, can’t they accept defeat ?
You would have to ask them that question, but I get the impression you don't get to see a pussy very often
Comparing my profile on here with yours I get it a lot more often than you
Lol, good one."Ha, don’t worry, nogreentickitis often leads to confusion and anger | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well if you didn't read it at the time . . . here's a second chance . . . https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-what-next-reasons-be-positive-eu-referendum-jeremy-corbyn-a7104016.html
People don't really believe the Independent's stories on this forum.
They have more credibility than your opinion
That's good then. This article explains why remain voters always seem so angry.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-mental-health-a8866256.html
"If you're not angry. You're not paying attention. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's good then. This article explains why remain voters always seem so angry. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-mental-health-a8866256.html The Cold War gave my Parents that feeling too. And how did the Cold War turn out?" Hmmm. The point was the mental health during, not the result of the Cold War. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well if you didn't read it at the time . . . here's a second chance . . . https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-what-next-reasons-be-positive-eu-referendum-jeremy-corbyn-a7104016.html
People don't really believe the Independent's stories on this forum.
They have more credibility than your opinion
That's good then. This article explains why remain voters always seem so angry.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-mental-health-a8866256.html
If you're not angry. You're not paying attention."Exactly, I guess because Bongo always sits on the fence he is apathetic about everything | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well if you didn't read it at the time . . . here's a second chance . . . https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-what-next-reasons-be-positive-eu-referendum-jeremy-corbyn-a7104016.html
People don't really believe the Independent's stories on this forum.
They have more credibility than your opinion
That's good then. This article explains why remain voters always seem so angry.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-mental-health-a8866256.html
If you're not angry. You're not paying attention."'Speak when you are angry and you will make the best speech that you will forever regret' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well if you didn't read it at the time . . . here's a second chance . . . https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-what-next-reasons-be-positive-eu-referendum-jeremy-corbyn-a7104016.html
People don't really believe the Independent's stories on this forum.
They have more credibility than your opinion
That's good then. This article explains why remain voters always seem so angry.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-mental-health-a8866256.html
If you're not angry. You're not paying attention."Yeah, I've seen that bumper sticker too. Trumpists put it on their pick-up trucks. Nice. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well, I'd love to stick around and wind you guys up some more, but I'll do my bit for your mental health and leave you to agree with each other "Nice trolling Bongo, try harder next time | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well, I'd love to stick around and wind you guys up some more, but I'll do my bit for your mental health and leave you to agree with each other
Nice trolling Bongo, try harder next time "It was rather like a kid running into a room and shouting "poo!" before running away again. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well, I'd love to stick around and wind you guys up some more, but I'll do my bit for your mental health and leave you to agree with each other
Nice trolling Bongo, try harder next time
It was rather like a kid running into a room and shouting "poo!" before running away again. "Ha, he does remind me of someone?? Offers nothing , tries to wind people up then leaves when he has failed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wages will rise and prices of imported goods will fall. That'll do. And I ain't gonna argue about it, just bookmark that statement and come back in 18-24 months and tell me I was right. Thanks "I like it, is that the price of all imported goods? Why will it take 2 years ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wages will rise and prices of imported goods will fall. That'll do. And I ain't gonna argue about it, just bookmark that statement and come back in 18-24 months and tell me I was right. Thanks
I like it, is that the price of all imported goods? Why will it take 2 years ? "Sorry, no just the ones we don't/can't produce. And forgot to say exports will rise. Because things don't happen overnight. Nite nite | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One simply exxample - there are numerous others . Senior City financier Edmund Truell, founder of the Pension Superfund and former Chairman of the London Pension Fund Authority, warns that the ECJ is deciding whether to upturn UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an imminent ECJ ruling are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. This is a flagrant example of how the UK can be severely damaged by continuing subjection to EU jurisdiction. Print Friendly, PDF & Email Yet again the UK is bracing itself for the unveiling of a European Court ruling which could have severely detrimental implications to the UK’s economy. The Pension SuperFund estimates a potential cost to the UK of over £160 billion. It could furthermore force the closure of all UK defined benefit (DB) pension funds. Mr Bauer, a worker from a now insolvent German company, has brought forward a case, which could have serious consequences to the UK Pension Protection Fund (PPF) and the wider British economy. The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) will release its judgement on the 19th December 2019 around Advocate-General Hogan’s opinion[1]. At its core, the question around the PSV v Bauer case focuses on the extent of the obligations to Member States from Article 8 of the Insolvency Directive[2]. Previously, it was determined by the ECJ that protecting pension schemes to a level that ensured that individuals receive at least 50% of the promised pension benefits was sufficient to comply with a Member State’s obligations. However, Advocate-General Hogan concluded that there was no basis to ensure only 50% of acquired pension benefits are protected. In his opinion, member benefits should be protected in full and the PPF should be funded to insurance company levels. There are four outcomes which could arise from the judgement on the 19th of December: A) the judgment does not pass in Mr Bauer’s favour, which would have limited direct implications to the PPF or sponsors of DB pension schemes; B) the judgement does go in favour of Mr Bauer, but affects pension funds only going from the date of the judgement forward, similarly to the Barber judgement[3]; or C) The judgment is in favour of Mr Bauer and is applied retrospectively; and/or D) The judgment deems that the PPF has to be funded immediately to insurance standards, which would have the severest effect on the pension market and the economy as a whole, as the UK-wide private sector full pension protection deficit is of the order of £1 trillion. If the judgement falls in favour of Mr Bauer and yet is applied only from the 19th of December onwards, it would need to be further specified if this applied to future service only for active members or for all pensioners. Though both would have a significant economic impact, the latter would be vastly more severe. Any adverse ruling would have catastrophic consequences. The Pension SuperFund expects then to see the closure of the £1.3 trillion of UK pension schemes still accruing benefits, in order to limit building up yet more exposure to DB pension liabilities. Fund sponsors would look to offload pensions to avoid the inevitably much higher PPF levies. Where employers are in trouble, the PPF will have to aim to recover full §75 pension debt and so many companies will be forced into bankruptcy. The NHS and other public sector bodies are already in a crisis caused by the byzantine pension tax rules. Universities are on strike. An adverse Bauer judgment could force the over-generous DB promises to be fully funded and pensions funds will have to close. Lastly, should the judgment fall in favour of Mr Bauer and be applied retrospectively, UK industry would not be able to handle the cost. The PPF would be rendered insolvent and would need to be wound up or bailed out at the cost of many, many billions. Since the PPF is a statutory company, it could only be wound up by an Act of Parliament, which would necessitate a government guarantee of funding. This case is a particularly clear example of how the European Union’s overarching rulings can and do have negative effects on the UK and its economy. The German pension system is not based on trust law, and pensions are more akin to deferred pay. Our Parliament has carefully established a pension protection system to work specifically for the UK market, thereby avoiding the detrimental effect an overarching ECJ ruling would have when our specific laws and structures are not properly taken into account. The ECJ can reach into the plumbing of UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an adverse ECJ ruling, which the Pension SuperFund estimates to be in the hundreds of billions of pounds, are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference." Hilarious | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One simply exxample - there are numerous others . Senior City financier Edmund Truell, founder of the Pension Superfund and former Chairman of the London Pension Fund Authority, warns that the ECJ is deciding whether to upturn UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an imminent ECJ ruling are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. This is a flagrant example of how the UK can be severely damaged by continuing subjection to EU jurisdiction. Print Friendly, PDF & Email Yet again the UK is bracing itself for the unveiling of a European Court ruling which could have severely detrimental implications to the UK’s economy. The Pension SuperFund estimates a potential cost to the UK of over £160 billion. It could furthermore force the closure of all UK defined benefit (DB) pension funds. Mr Bauer, a worker from a now insolvent German company, has brought forward a case, which could have serious consequences to the UK Pension Protection Fund (PPF) and the wider British economy. The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) will release its judgement on the 19th December 2019 around Advocate-General Hogan’s opinion[1]. At its core, the question around the PSV v Bauer case focuses on the extent of the obligations to Member States from Article 8 of the Insolvency Directive[2]. Previously, it was determined by the ECJ that protecting pension schemes to a level that ensured that individuals receive at least 50% of the promised pension benefits was sufficient to comply with a Member State’s obligations. However, Advocate-General Hogan concluded that there was no basis to ensure only 50% of acquired pension benefits are protected. In his opinion, member benefits should be protected in full and the PPF should be funded to insurance company levels. There are four outcomes which could arise from the judgement on the 19th of December: A) the judgment does not pass in Mr Bauer’s favour, which would have limited direct implications to the PPF or sponsors of DB pension schemes; B) the judgement does go in favour of Mr Bauer, but affects pension funds only going from the date of the judgement forward, similarly to the Barber judgement[3]; or C) The judgment is in favour of Mr Bauer and is applied retrospectively; and/or D) The judgment deems that the PPF has to be funded immediately to insurance standards, which would have the severest effect on the pension market and the economy as a whole, as the UK-wide private sector full pension protection deficit is of the order of £1 trillion. If the judgement falls in favour of Mr Bauer and yet is applied only from the 19th of December onwards, it would need to be further specified if this applied to future service only for active members or for all pensioners. Though both would have a significant economic impact, the latter would be vastly more severe. Any adverse ruling would have catastrophic consequences. The Pension SuperFund expects then to see the closure of the £1.3 trillion of UK pension schemes still accruing benefits, in order to limit building up yet more exposure to DB pension liabilities. Fund sponsors would look to offload pensions to avoid the inevitably much higher PPF levies. Where employers are in trouble, the PPF will have to aim to recover full §75 pension debt and so many companies will be forced into bankruptcy. The NHS and other public sector bodies are already in a crisis caused by the byzantine pension tax rules. Universities are on strike. An adverse Bauer judgment could force the over-generous DB promises to be fully funded and pensions funds will have to close. Lastly, should the judgment fall in favour of Mr Bauer and be applied retrospectively, UK industry would not be able to handle the cost. The PPF would be rendered insolvent and would need to be wound up or bailed out at the cost of many, many billions. Since the PPF is a statutory company, it could only be wound up by an Act of Parliament, which would necessitate a government guarantee of funding. This case is a particularly clear example of how the European Union’s overarching rulings can and do have negative effects on the UK and its economy. The German pension system is not based on trust law, and pensions are more akin to deferred pay. Our Parliament has carefully established a pension protection system to work specifically for the UK market, thereby avoiding the detrimental effect an overarching ECJ ruling would have when our specific laws and structures are not properly taken into account. The ECJ can reach into the plumbing of UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an adverse ECJ ruling, which the Pension SuperFund estimates to be in the hundreds of billions of pounds, are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference." Copy and pasted? What is the Print Friendly, PDF , email line all about | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wages will rise and prices of imported goods will fall. That'll do. And I ain't gonna argue about it, just bookmark that statement and come back in 18-24 months and tell me I was right. Thanks
I like it, is that the price of all imported goods? Why will it take 2 years ?
Sorry, no just the ones we don't/can't produce. And forgot to say exports will rise. Because things don't happen overnight. Nite nite "I see, that is amazing news, I can’t wait to get cut prices imports from the USA, I was going to get a new iPhone but I will wait until 2023 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One simply exxample - there are numerous others . Senior City financier Edmund Truell, founder of the Pension Superfund and former Chairman of the London Pension Fund Authority, warns that the ECJ is deciding whether to upturn UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an imminent ECJ ruling are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. This is a flagrant example of how the UK can be severely damaged by continuing subjection to EU jurisdiction. Print Friendly, PDF & Email Yet again the UK is bracing itself for the unveiling of a European Court ruling which could have severely detrimental implications to the UK’s economy. The Pension SuperFund estimates a potential cost to the UK of over £160 billion. It could furthermore force the closure of all UK defined benefit (DB) pension funds. Mr Bauer, a worker from a now insolvent German company, has brought forward a case, which could have serious consequences to the UK Pension Protection Fund (PPF) and the wider British economy. The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) will release its judgement on the 19th December 2019 around Advocate-General Hogan’s opinion[1]. At its core, the question around the PSV v Bauer case focuses on the extent of the obligations to Member States from Article 8 of the Insolvency Directive[2]. Previously, it was determined by the ECJ that protecting pension schemes to a level that ensured that individuals receive at least 50% of the promised pension benefits was sufficient to comply with a Member State’s obligations. However, Advocate-General Hogan concluded that there was no basis to ensure only 50% of acquired pension benefits are protected. In his opinion, member benefits should be protected in full and the PPF should be funded to insurance company levels. There are four outcomes which could arise from the judgement on the 19th of December: A) the judgment does not pass in Mr Bauer’s favour, which would have limited direct implications to the PPF or sponsors of DB pension schemes; B) the judgement does go in favour of Mr Bauer, but affects pension funds only going from the date of the judgement forward, similarly to the Barber judgement[3]; or C) The judgment is in favour of Mr Bauer and is applied retrospectively; and/or D) The judgment deems that the PPF has to be funded immediately to insurance standards, which would have the severest effect on the pension market and the economy as a whole, as the UK-wide private sector full pension protection deficit is of the order of £1 trillion. If the judgement falls in favour of Mr Bauer and yet is applied only from the 19th of December onwards, it would need to be further specified if this applied to future service only for active members or for all pensioners. Though both would have a significant economic impact, the latter would be vastly more severe. Any adverse ruling would have catastrophic consequences. The Pension SuperFund expects then to see the closure of the £1.3 trillion of UK pension schemes still accruing benefits, in order to limit building up yet more exposure to DB pension liabilities. Fund sponsors would look to offload pensions to avoid the inevitably much higher PPF levies. Where employers are in trouble, the PPF will have to aim to recover full §75 pension debt and so many companies will be forced into bankruptcy. The NHS and other public sector bodies are already in a crisis caused by the byzantine pension tax rules. Universities are on strike. An adverse Bauer judgment could force the over-generous DB promises to be fully funded and pensions funds will have to close. Lastly, should the judgment fall in favour of Mr Bauer and be applied retrospectively, UK industry would not be able to handle the cost. The PPF would be rendered insolvent and would need to be wound up or bailed out at the cost of many, many billions. Since the PPF is a statutory company, it could only be wound up by an Act of Parliament, which would necessitate a government guarantee of funding. This case is a particularly clear example of how the European Union’s overarching rulings can and do have negative effects on the UK and its economy. The German pension system is not based on trust law, and pensions are more akin to deferred pay. Our Parliament has carefully established a pension protection system to work specifically for the UK market, thereby avoiding the detrimental effect an overarching ECJ ruling would have when our specific laws and structures are not properly taken into account. The ECJ can reach into the plumbing of UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an adverse ECJ ruling, which the Pension SuperFund estimates to be in the hundreds of billions of pounds, are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. Copy and pasted? What is the Print Friendly, PDF , email line all about "I looked into it. He copied/pasted it from Briefings for Britain. They were formerly called Briefings for Brexit. They seem to push ERG guff. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One simply exxample - there are numerous others . Senior City financier Edmund Truell, founder of the Pension Superfund and former Chairman of the London Pension Fund Authority, warns that the ECJ is deciding whether to upturn UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an imminent ECJ ruling are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. This is a flagrant example of how the UK can be severely damaged by continuing subjection to EU jurisdiction. Print Friendly, PDF & Email Yet again the UK is bracing itself for the unveiling of a European Court ruling which could have severely detrimental implications to the UK’s economy. The Pension SuperFund estimates a potential cost to the UK of over £160 billion. It could furthermore force the closure of all UK defined benefit (DB) pension funds. Mr Bauer, a worker from a now insolvent German company, has brought forward a case, which could have serious consequences to the UK Pension Protection Fund (PPF) and the wider British economy. The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) will release its judgement on the 19th December 2019 around Advocate-General Hogan’s opinion[1]. At its core, the question around the PSV v Bauer case focuses on the extent of the obligations to Member States from Article 8 of the Insolvency Directive[2]. Previously, it was determined by the ECJ that protecting pension schemes to a level that ensured that individuals receive at least 50% of the promised pension benefits was sufficient to comply with a Member State’s obligations. However, Advocate-General Hogan concluded that there was no basis to ensure only 50% of acquired pension benefits are protected. In his opinion, member benefits should be protected in full and the PPF should be funded to insurance company levels. There are four outcomes which could arise from the judgement on the 19th of December: A) the judgment does not pass in Mr Bauer’s favour, which would have limited direct implications to the PPF or sponsors of DB pension schemes; B) the judgement does go in favour of Mr Bauer, but affects pension funds only going from the date of the judgement forward, similarly to the Barber judgement[3]; or C) The judgment is in favour of Mr Bauer and is applied retrospectively; and/or D) The judgment deems that the PPF has to be funded immediately to insurance standards, which would have the severest effect on the pension market and the economy as a whole, as the UK-wide private sector full pension protection deficit is of the order of £1 trillion. If the judgement falls in favour of Mr Bauer and yet is applied only from the 19th of December onwards, it would need to be further specified if this applied to future service only for active members or for all pensioners. Though both would have a significant economic impact, the latter would be vastly more severe. Any adverse ruling would have catastrophic consequences. The Pension SuperFund expects then to see the closure of the £1.3 trillion of UK pension schemes still accruing benefits, in order to limit building up yet more exposure to DB pension liabilities. Fund sponsors would look to offload pensions to avoid the inevitably much higher PPF levies. Where employers are in trouble, the PPF will have to aim to recover full §75 pension debt and so many companies will be forced into bankruptcy. The NHS and other public sector bodies are already in a crisis caused by the byzantine pension tax rules. Universities are on strike. An adverse Bauer judgment could force the over-generous DB promises to be fully funded and pensions funds will have to close. Lastly, should the judgment fall in favour of Mr Bauer and be applied retrospectively, UK industry would not be able to handle the cost. The PPF would be rendered insolvent and would need to be wound up or bailed out at the cost of many, many billions. Since the PPF is a statutory company, it could only be wound up by an Act of Parliament, which would necessitate a government guarantee of funding. This case is a particularly clear example of how the European Union’s overarching rulings can and do have negative effects on the UK and its economy. The German pension system is not based on trust law, and pensions are more akin to deferred pay. Our Parliament has carefully established a pension protection system to work specifically for the UK market, thereby avoiding the detrimental effect an overarching ECJ ruling would have when our specific laws and structures are not properly taken into account. The ECJ can reach into the plumbing of UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an adverse ECJ ruling, which the Pension SuperFund estimates to be in the hundreds of billions of pounds, are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. Copy and pasted? What is the Print Friendly, PDF , email line all about
I looked into it. He copied/pasted it from Briefings for Britain. They were formerly called Briefings for Brexit. They seem to push ERG guff."Haha, like I keep saying? The gift that keeps on giving | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"°° Watches eating popcorn °°" Bump. *takes some popcorn  *
So has anyone come up with 10 yet?
I saw the long pdf bumf and some crap about financial benefits coming in four or five years when Jacob Rees-Mogg is on record stating it would be at least 30.
So can we please have a solid ten points since we know what we voted for? Cheers! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One simply exxample - there are numerous others . Senior City financier Edmund Truell, founder of the Pension Superfund and former Chairman of the London Pension Fund Authority, warns that the ECJ is deciding whether to upturn UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an imminent ECJ ruling are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. This is a flagrant example of how the UK can be severely damaged by continuing subjection to EU jurisdiction. Print Friendly, PDF & Email Yet again the UK is bracing itself for the unveiling of a European Court ruling which could have severely detrimental implications to the UK’s economy. The Pension SuperFund estimates a potential cost to the UK of over £160 billion. It could furthermore force the closure of all UK defined benefit (DB) pension funds. Mr Bauer, a worker from a now insolvent German company, has brought forward a case, which could have serious consequences to the UK Pension Protection Fund (PPF) and the wider British economy. The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) will release its judgement on the 19th December 2019 around Advocate-General Hogan’s opinion[1]. At its core, the question around the PSV v Bauer case focuses on the extent of the obligations to Member States from Article 8 of the Insolvency Directive[2]. Previously, it was determined by the ECJ that protecting pension schemes to a level that ensured that individuals receive at least 50% of the promised pension benefits was sufficient to comply with a Member State’s obligations. However, Advocate-General Hogan concluded that there was no basis to ensure only 50% of acquired pension benefits are protected. In his opinion, member benefits should be protected in full and the PPF should be funded to insurance company levels. There are four outcomes which could arise from the judgement on the 19th of December: A) the judgment does not pass in Mr Bauer’s favour, which would have limited direct implications to the PPF or sponsors of DB pension schemes; B) the judgement does go in favour of Mr Bauer, but affects pension funds only going from the date of the judgement forward, similarly to the Barber judgement[3]; or C) The judgment is in favour of Mr Bauer and is applied retrospectively; and/or D) The judgment deems that the PPF has to be funded immediately to insurance standards, which would have the severest effect on the pension market and the economy as a whole, as the UK-wide private sector full pension protection deficit is of the order of £1 trillion. If the judgement falls in favour of Mr Bauer and yet is applied only from the 19th of December onwards, it would need to be further specified if this applied to future service only for active members or for all pensioners. Though both would have a significant economic impact, the latter would be vastly more severe. Any adverse ruling would have catastrophic consequences. The Pension SuperFund expects then to see the closure of the £1.3 trillion of UK pension schemes still accruing benefits, in order to limit building up yet more exposure to DB pension liabilities. Fund sponsors would look to offload pensions to avoid the inevitably much higher PPF levies. Where employers are in trouble, the PPF will have to aim to recover full §75 pension debt and so many companies will be forced into bankruptcy. The NHS and other public sector bodies are already in a crisis caused by the byzantine pension tax rules. Universities are on strike. An adverse Bauer judgment could force the over-generous DB promises to be fully funded and pensions funds will have to close. Lastly, should the judgment fall in favour of Mr Bauer and be applied retrospectively, UK industry would not be able to handle the cost. The PPF would be rendered insolvent and would need to be wound up or bailed out at the cost of many, many billions. Since the PPF is a statutory company, it could only be wound up by an Act of Parliament, which would necessitate a government guarantee of funding. This case is a particularly clear example of how the European Union’s overarching rulings can and do have negative effects on the UK and its economy. The German pension system is not based on trust law, and pensions are more akin to deferred pay. Our Parliament has carefully established a pension protection system to work specifically for the UK market, thereby avoiding the detrimental effect an overarching ECJ ruling would have when our specific laws and structures are not properly taken into account. The ECJ can reach into the plumbing of UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an adverse ECJ ruling, which the Pension SuperFund estimates to be in the hundreds of billions of pounds, are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference." Thanks for your time | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One simply exxample - there are numerous others . Senior City financier Edmund Truell, founder of the Pension Superfund and former Chairman of the London Pension Fund Authority, warns that the ECJ is deciding whether to upturn UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an imminent ECJ ruling are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. This is a flagrant example of how the UK can be severely damaged by continuing subjection to EU jurisdiction. Print Friendly, PDF & Email Yet again the UK is bracing itself for the unveiling of a European Court ruling which could have severely detrimental implications to the UK’s economy. The Pension SuperFund estimates a potential cost to the UK of over £160 billion. It could furthermore force the closure of all UK defined benefit (DB) pension funds. Mr Bauer, a worker from a now insolvent German company, has brought forward a case, which could have serious consequences to the UK Pension Protection Fund (PPF) and the wider British economy. The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) will release its judgement on the 19th December 2019 around Advocate-General Hogan’s opinion[1]. At its core, the question around the PSV v Bauer case focuses on the extent of the obligations to Member States from Article 8 of the Insolvency Directive[2]. Previously, it was determined by the ECJ that protecting pension schemes to a level that ensured that individuals receive at least 50% of the promised pension benefits was sufficient to comply with a Member State’s obligations. However, Advocate-General Hogan concluded that there was no basis to ensure only 50% of acquired pension benefits are protected. In his opinion, member benefits should be protected in full and the PPF should be funded to insurance company levels. There are four outcomes which could arise from the judgement on the 19th of December: A) the judgment does not pass in Mr Bauer’s favour, which would have limited direct implications to the PPF or sponsors of DB pension schemes; B) the judgement does go in favour of Mr Bauer, but affects pension funds only going from the date of the judgement forward, similarly to the Barber judgement[3]; or C) The judgment is in favour of Mr Bauer and is applied retrospectively; and/or D) The judgment deems that the PPF has to be funded immediately to insurance standards, which would have the severest effect on the pension market and the economy as a whole, as the UK-wide private sector full pension protection deficit is of the order of £1 trillion. If the judgement falls in favour of Mr Bauer and yet is applied only from the 19th of December onwards, it would need to be further specified if this applied to future service only for active members or for all pensioners. Though both would have a significant economic impact, the latter would be vastly more severe. Any adverse ruling would have catastrophic consequences. The Pension SuperFund expects then to see the closure of the £1.3 trillion of UK pension schemes still accruing benefits, in order to limit building up yet more exposure to DB pension liabilities. Fund sponsors would look to offload pensions to avoid the inevitably much higher PPF levies. Where employers are in trouble, the PPF will have to aim to recover full §75 pension debt and so many companies will be forced into bankruptcy. The NHS and other public sector bodies are already in a crisis caused by the byzantine pension tax rules. Universities are on strike. An adverse Bauer judgment could force the over-generous DB promises to be fully funded and pensions funds will have to close. Lastly, should the judgment fall in favour of Mr Bauer and be applied retrospectively, UK industry would not be able to handle the cost. The PPF would be rendered insolvent and would need to be wound up or bailed out at the cost of many, many billions. Since the PPF is a statutory company, it could only be wound up by an Act of Parliament, which would necessitate a government guarantee of funding. This case is a particularly clear example of how the European Union’s overarching rulings can and do have negative effects on the UK and its economy. The German pension system is not based on trust law, and pensions are more akin to deferred pay. Our Parliament has carefully established a pension protection system to work specifically for the UK market, thereby avoiding the detrimental effect an overarching ECJ ruling would have when our specific laws and structures are not properly taken into account. The ECJ can reach into the plumbing of UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an adverse ECJ ruling, which the Pension SuperFund estimates to be in the hundreds of billions of pounds, are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference." I’m not arguing on you EU point as I’ve not read the case. Look into government pension liabilities. One of the reasons we couldn’t join the Euro was due to our debts exceeding the EU limits. The Government pension fund is the one most at risk here and accounts for the vast majority of that liability of over a trillion. Yet another secret kept from joe public. Years of early retirement for the likes of policemen and salary linked pensions have been handed out to the civil service over decades. (Not now as much I agree). However that liability has become so obscene it has to be topped up by the private sector causing tax rises. Private companies who have not kept up their pension funds are exposed here and their staff or investors will be shafted. Nothing new there but I suspect the director dividends and bonus payments we’re still made. The Defined Benefit pensions mentioned are those usually reserved for major corporations in the past but most today are government pensions. It’s more or less a guaranteed income based on your years and salary. MPs pensions are a good example! The private sector has had to move away from DB pensions as they are too costly and usually they now have to take risks in the market and fingers crossed you retire at a good time. This whole case revolves around something similar to the banking crisis. Pretending there’s money in something when clearly there isn’t. The banks now have to pass much more severe stress tests. The pension crisis in this country is of our own making. This case is just exposing how much of a mess our governments have been sweeping under the carpet for decades. This rests at the feet of both Conservative and Labour so equal blame. If you’re going to work in the civil service get used to the lower pensions in the future just like the private sector as we can’t afford you anymore. Well unless you’re an MP of course! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"°° Watches eating popcorn °° Bump. *takes some popcorn *
So has anyone come up with 10 yet?
I saw the long pdf bumf and some crap about financial benefits coming in four or five years when Jacob Rees-Mogg is on record stating it would be at least 30.
So can we please have a solid ten points since we know what we voted for? Cheers!"Apparently we are going to be getting a pay rise and the copy and paste king said the other day we are all getting 8 ton. Yay | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There will not be any benefits from Brexit - there is not a person in this country who doesn’t realise this." That's clearly untrue. There are millions of them. Btw, did anyone come up with the Top 10 economic benefits yet? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One simply exxample - there are numerous others . Senior City financier Edmund Truell, founder of the Pension Superfund and former Chairman of the London Pension Fund Authority, warns that the ECJ is deciding whether to upturn UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an imminent ECJ ruling are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. This is a flagrant example of how the UK can be severely damaged by continuing subjection to EU jurisdiction. Print Friendly, PDF & Email Yet again the UK is bracing itself for the unveiling of a European Court ruling which could have severely detrimental implications to the UK’s economy. The Pension SuperFund estimates a potential cost to the UK of over £160 billion. It could furthermore force the closure of all UK defined benefit (DB) pension funds. Mr Bauer, a worker from a now insolvent German company, has brought forward a case, which could have serious consequences to the UK Pension Protection Fund (PPF) and the wider British economy. The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) will release its judgement on the 19th December 2019 around Advocate-General Hogan’s opinion[1]. At its core, the question around the PSV v Bauer case focuses on the extent of the obligations to Member States from Article 8 of the Insolvency Directive[2]. Previously, it was determined by the ECJ that protecting pension schemes to a level that ensured that individuals receive at least 50% of the promised pension benefits was sufficient to comply with a Member State’s obligations. However, Advocate-General Hogan concluded that there was no basis to ensure only 50% of acquired pension benefits are protected. In his opinion, member benefits should be protected in full and the PPF should be funded to insurance company levels. There are four outcomes which could arise from the judgement on the 19th of December: A) the judgment does not pass in Mr Bauer’s favour, which would have limited direct implications to the PPF or sponsors of DB pension schemes; B) the judgement does go in favour of Mr Bauer, but affects pension funds only going from the date of the judgement forward, similarly to the Barber judgement[3]; or C) The judgment is in favour of Mr Bauer and is applied retrospectively; and/or D) The judgment deems that the PPF has to be funded immediately to insurance standards, which would have the severest effect on the pension market and the economy as a whole, as the UK-wide private sector full pension protection deficit is of the order of £1 trillion. If the judgement falls in favour of Mr Bauer and yet is applied only from the 19th of December onwards, it would need to be further specified if this applied to future service only for active members or for all pensioners. Though both would have a significant economic impact, the latter would be vastly more severe. Any adverse ruling would have catastrophic consequences. The Pension SuperFund expects then to see the closure of the £1.3 trillion of UK pension schemes still accruing benefits, in order to limit building up yet more exposure to DB pension liabilities. Fund sponsors would look to offload pensions to avoid the inevitably much higher PPF levies. Where employers are in trouble, the PPF will have to aim to recover full §75 pension debt and so many companies will be forced into bankruptcy. The NHS and other public sector bodies are already in a crisis caused by the byzantine pension tax rules. Universities are on strike. An adverse Bauer judgment could force the over-generous DB promises to be fully funded and pensions funds will have to close. Lastly, should the judgment fall in favour of Mr Bauer and be applied retrospectively, UK industry would not be able to handle the cost. The PPF would be rendered insolvent and would need to be wound up or bailed out at the cost of many, many billions. Since the PPF is a statutory company, it could only be wound up by an Act of Parliament, which would necessitate a government guarantee of funding. This case is a particularly clear example of how the European Union’s overarching rulings can and do have negative effects on the UK and its economy. The German pension system is not based on trust law, and pensions are more akin to deferred pay. Our Parliament has carefully established a pension protection system to work specifically for the UK market, thereby avoiding the detrimental effect an overarching ECJ ruling would have when our specific laws and structures are not properly taken into account. The ECJ can reach into the plumbing of UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an adverse ECJ ruling, which the Pension SuperFund estimates to be in the hundreds of billions of pounds, are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. I’m not arguing on you EU point as I’ve not read the case. Look into government pension liabilities. One of the reasons we couldn’t join the Euro was due to our debts exceeding the EU limits. The Government pension fund is the one most at risk here and accounts for the vast majority of that liability of over a trillion. Yet another secret kept from joe public. Years of early retirement for the likes of policemen and salary linked pensions have been handed out to the civil service over decades. (Not now as much I agree). However that liability has become so obscene it has to be topped up by the private sector causing tax rises. Private companies who have not kept up their pension funds are exposed here and their staff or investors will be shafted. Nothing new there but I suspect the director dividends and bonus payments we’re still made. The Defined Benefit pensions mentioned are those usually reserved for major corporations in the past but most today are government pensions. It’s more or less a guaranteed income based on your years and salary. MPs pensions are a good example! The private sector has had to move away from DB pensions as they are too costly and usually they now have to take risks in the market and fingers crossed you retire at a good time. This whole case revolves around something similar to the banking crisis. Pretending there’s money in something when clearly there isn’t. The banks now have to pass much more severe stress tests. The pension crisis in this country is of our own making. This case is just exposing how much of a mess our governments have been sweeping under the carpet for decades. This rests at the feet of both Conservative and Labour so equal blame. If you’re going to work in the civil service get used to the lower pensions in the future just like the private sector as we can’t afford you anymore. Well unless you’re an MP of course! " I don’t mind so long as my pay equates to what I’d be getting if I did my job in the private sector, a 60% pay rise would come in pretty handy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One simply exxample - there are numerous others . Senior City financier Edmund Truell, founder of the Pension Superfund and former Chairman of the London Pension Fund Authority, warns that the ECJ is deciding whether to upturn UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an imminent ECJ ruling are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. This is a flagrant example of how the UK can be severely damaged by continuing subjection to EU jurisdiction. Print Friendly, PDF & Email Yet again the UK is bracing itself for the unveiling of a European Court ruling which could have severely detrimental implications to the UK’s economy. The Pension SuperFund estimates a potential cost to the UK of over £160 billion. It could furthermore force the closure of all UK defined benefit (DB) pension funds. Mr Bauer, a worker from a now insolvent German company, has brought forward a case, which could have serious consequences to the UK Pension Protection Fund (PPF) and the wider British economy. The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) will release its judgement on the 19th December 2019 around Advocate-General Hogan’s opinion[1]. At its core, the question around the PSV v Bauer case focuses on the extent of the obligations to Member States from Article 8 of the Insolvency Directive[2]. Previously, it was determined by the ECJ that protecting pension schemes to a level that ensured that individuals receive at least 50% of the promised pension benefits was sufficient to comply with a Member State’s obligations. However, Advocate-General Hogan concluded that there was no basis to ensure only 50% of acquired pension benefits are protected. In his opinion, member benefits should be protected in full and the PPF should be funded to insurance company levels. There are four outcomes which could arise from the judgement on the 19th of December: A) the judgment does not pass in Mr Bauer’s favour, which would have limited direct implications to the PPF or sponsors of DB pension schemes; B) the judgement does go in favour of Mr Bauer, but affects pension funds only going from the date of the judgement forward, similarly to the Barber judgement[3]; or C) The judgment is in favour of Mr Bauer and is applied retrospectively; and/or D) The judgment deems that the PPF has to be funded immediately to insurance standards, which would have the severest effect on the pension market and the economy as a whole, as the UK-wide private sector full pension protection deficit is of the order of £1 trillion. If the judgement falls in favour of Mr Bauer and yet is applied only from the 19th of December onwards, it would need to be further specified if this applied to future service only for active members or for all pensioners. Though both would have a significant economic impact, the latter would be vastly more severe. Any adverse ruling would have catastrophic consequences. The Pension SuperFund expects then to see the closure of the £1.3 trillion of UK pension schemes still accruing benefits, in order to limit building up yet more exposure to DB pension liabilities. Fund sponsors would look to offload pensions to avoid the inevitably much higher PPF levies. Where employers are in trouble, the PPF will have to aim to recover full §75 pension debt and so many companies will be forced into bankruptcy. The NHS and other public sector bodies are already in a crisis caused by the byzantine pension tax rules. Universities are on strike. An adverse Bauer judgment could force the over-generous DB promises to be fully funded and pensions funds will have to close. Lastly, should the judgment fall in favour of Mr Bauer and be applied retrospectively, UK industry would not be able to handle the cost. The PPF would be rendered insolvent and would need to be wound up or bailed out at the cost of many, many billions. Since the PPF is a statutory company, it could only be wound up by an Act of Parliament, which would necessitate a government guarantee of funding. This case is a particularly clear example of how the European Union’s overarching rulings can and do have negative effects on the UK and its economy. The German pension system is not based on trust law, and pensions are more akin to deferred pay. Our Parliament has carefully established a pension protection system to work specifically for the UK market, thereby avoiding the detrimental effect an overarching ECJ ruling would have when our specific laws and structures are not properly taken into account. The ECJ can reach into the plumbing of UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an adverse ECJ ruling, which the Pension SuperFund estimates to be in the hundreds of billions of pounds, are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference." And your interpretation as to how this will benefit individuals ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wages will rise and prices of imported goods will fall. That'll do. And I ain't gonna argue about it, just bookmark that statement and come back in 18-24 months and tell me I was right. Thanks "Ha ha ha! That is funny. Because we all know from basic GCSE economics that it is unlikely either of those things will happen. And even if there were large scale pay rises, then, inflation here we come! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One simply exxample - there are numerous others . Senior City financier Edmund Truell, founder of the Pension Superfund and former Chairman of the London Pension Fund Authority, warns that the ECJ is deciding whether to upturn UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an imminent ECJ ruling are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. This is a flagrant example of how the UK can be severely damaged by continuing subjection to EU jurisdiction. Print Friendly, PDF & Email Yet again the UK is bracing itself for the unveiling of a European Court ruling which could have severely detrimental implications to the UK’s economy. The Pension SuperFund estimates a potential cost to the UK of over £160 billion. It could furthermore force the closure of all UK defined benefit (DB) pension funds. Mr Bauer, a worker from a now insolvent German company, has brought forward a case, which could have serious consequences to the UK Pension Protection Fund (PPF) and the wider British economy. The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) will release its judgement on the 19th December 2019 around Advocate-General Hogan’s opinion[1]. At its core, the question around the PSV v Bauer case focuses on the extent of the obligations to Member States from Article 8 of the Insolvency Directive[2]. Previously, it was determined by the ECJ that protecting pension schemes to a level that ensured that individuals receive at least 50% of the promised pension benefits was sufficient to comply with a Member State’s obligations. However, Advocate-General Hogan concluded that there was no basis to ensure only 50% of acquired pension benefits are protected. In his opinion, member benefits should be protected in full and the PPF should be funded to insurance company levels. There are four outcomes which could arise from the judgement on the 19th of December: A) the judgment does not pass in Mr Bauer’s favour, which would have limited direct implications to the PPF or sponsors of DB pension schemes; B) the judgement does go in favour of Mr Bauer, but affects pension funds only going from the date of the judgement forward, similarly to the Barber judgement[3]; or C) The judgment is in favour of Mr Bauer and is applied retrospectively; and/or D) The judgment deems that the PPF has to be funded immediately to insurance standards, which would have the severest effect on the pension market and the economy as a whole, as the UK-wide private sector full pension protection deficit is of the order of £1 trillion. If the judgement falls in favour of Mr Bauer and yet is applied only from the 19th of December onwards, it would need to be further specified if this applied to future service only for active members or for all pensioners. Though both would have a significant economic impact, the latter would be vastly more severe. Any adverse ruling would have catastrophic consequences. The Pension SuperFund expects then to see the closure of the £1.3 trillion of UK pension schemes still accruing benefits, in order to limit building up yet more exposure to DB pension liabilities. Fund sponsors would look to offload pensions to avoid the inevitably much higher PPF levies. Where employers are in trouble, the PPF will have to aim to recover full §75 pension debt and so many companies will be forced into bankruptcy. The NHS and other public sector bodies are already in a crisis caused by the byzantine pension tax rules. Universities are on strike. An adverse Bauer judgment could force the over-generous DB promises to be fully funded and pensions funds will have to close. Lastly, should the judgment fall in favour of Mr Bauer and be applied retrospectively, UK industry would not be able to handle the cost. The PPF would be rendered insolvent and would need to be wound up or bailed out at the cost of many, many billions. Since the PPF is a statutory company, it could only be wound up by an Act of Parliament, which would necessitate a government guarantee of funding. This case is a particularly clear example of how the European Union’s overarching rulings can and do have negative effects on the UK and its economy. The German pension system is not based on trust law, and pensions are more akin to deferred pay. Our Parliament has carefully established a pension protection system to work specifically for the UK market, thereby avoiding the detrimental effect an overarching ECJ ruling would have when our specific laws and structures are not properly taken into account. The ECJ can reach into the plumbing of UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an adverse ECJ ruling, which the Pension SuperFund estimates to be in the hundreds of billions of pounds, are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. I’m not arguing on you EU point as I’ve not read the case. Look into government pension liabilities. One of the reasons we couldn’t join the Euro was due to our debts exceeding the EU limits. The Government pension fund is the one most at risk here and accounts for the vast majority of that liability of over a trillion. Yet another secret kept from joe public. Years of early retirement for the likes of policemen and salary linked pensions have been handed out to the civil service over decades. (Not now as much I agree). However that liability has become so obscene it has to be topped up by the private sector causing tax rises. Private companies who have not kept up their pension funds are exposed here and their staff or investors will be shafted. Nothing new there but I suspect the director dividends and bonus payments we’re still made. The Defined Benefit pensions mentioned are those usually reserved for major corporations in the past but most today are government pensions. It’s more or less a guaranteed income based on your years and salary. MPs pensions are a good example! The private sector has had to move away from DB pensions as they are too costly and usually they now have to take risks in the market and fingers crossed you retire at a good time. This whole case revolves around something similar to the banking crisis. Pretending there’s money in something when clearly there isn’t. The banks now have to pass much more severe stress tests. The pension crisis in this country is of our own making. This case is just exposing how much of a mess our governments have been sweeping under the carpet for decades. This rests at the feet of both Conservative and Labour so equal blame. If you’re going to work in the civil service get used to the lower pensions in the future just like the private sector as we can’t afford you anymore. Well unless you’re an MP of course! I don’t mind so long as my pay equates to what I’d be getting if I did my job in the private sector, a 60% pay rise would come in pretty handy." That was true historically I totally agree and the deal was you’d get a good pension. The stats now say the public sector pay has now outstripped private sector for similar level jobs. I think they’re excluding the city boys in this comparison
I’m not complaining about civil servants please don’t think that. I just think we should all get back what we pay in plus interest and no guarantees that are not funded by your own pension group. I include golden parachutes for MPs and senior civil servants getting far more as a percentage than you average civil servant compared to payments in.
The problem is that it’s not a big pot of money sitting there. it’s today’s tax payers paying those pensions.
An old neighbour of mine was a school teacher ( going back 15 years)
He told me that within two years his pension was higher than his salary. How the hell was that funded by him? It obviously wasn’t.
I don’t blame him for taking it as I know I would. I also know it’s not fair as a cleaner at his school would have faired far worse! They didn’t have final salary pensions.
Also how come a cleaner has to work until he or she is in their sixties but a policeman can retire early on his full pension? That policeman could work in the office I’m sure until he reaches a similar age.
I’m stamping my feet and holding my breath as it’s just not fair! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Getting a bit salty for the remoaners "No just waiting on your interpretation of the data in your post ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One simply exxample - there are numerous others . Senior City financier Edmund Truell, founder of the Pension Superfund and former Chairman of the London Pension Fund Authority, warns that the ECJ is deciding whether to upturn UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an imminent ECJ ruling are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. This is a flagrant example of how the UK can be severely damaged by continuing subjection to EU jurisdiction. Print Friendly, PDF & Email Yet again the UK is bracing itself for the unveiling of a European Court ruling which could have severely detrimental implications to the UK’s economy. The Pension SuperFund estimates a potential cost to the UK of over £160 billion. It could furthermore force the closure of all UK defined benefit (DB) pension funds. Mr Bauer, a worker from a now insolvent German company, has brought forward a case, which could have serious consequences to the UK Pension Protection Fund (PPF) and the wider British economy. The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) will release its judgement on the 19th December 2019 around Advocate-General Hogan’s opinion[1]. At its core, the question around the PSV v Bauer case focuses on the extent of the obligations to Member States from Article 8 of the Insolvency Directive[2]. Previously, it was determined by the ECJ that protecting pension schemes to a level that ensured that individuals receive at least 50% of the promised pension benefits was sufficient to comply with a Member State’s obligations. However, Advocate-General Hogan concluded that there was no basis to ensure only 50% of acquired pension benefits are protected. In his opinion, member benefits should be protected in full and the PPF should be funded to insurance company levels. There are four outcomes which could arise from the judgement on the 19th of December: A) the judgment does not pass in Mr Bauer’s favour, which would have limited direct implications to the PPF or sponsors of DB pension schemes; B) the judgement does go in favour of Mr Bauer, but affects pension funds only going from the date of the judgement forward, similarly to the Barber judgement[3]; or C) The judgment is in favour of Mr Bauer and is applied retrospectively; and/or D) The judgment deems that the PPF has to be funded immediately to insurance standards, which would have the severest effect on the pension market and the economy as a whole, as the UK-wide private sector full pension protection deficit is of the order of £1 trillion. If the judgement falls in favour of Mr Bauer and yet is applied only from the 19th of December onwards, it would need to be further specified if this applied to future service only for active members or for all pensioners. Though both would have a significant economic impact, the latter would be vastly more severe. Any adverse ruling would have catastrophic consequences. The Pension SuperFund expects then to see the closure of the £1.3 trillion of UK pension schemes still accruing benefits, in order to limit building up yet more exposure to DB pension liabilities. Fund sponsors would look to offload pensions to avoid the inevitably much higher PPF levies. Where employers are in trouble, the PPF will have to aim to recover full §75 pension debt and so many companies will be forced into bankruptcy. The NHS and other public sector bodies are already in a crisis caused by the byzantine pension tax rules. Universities are on strike. An adverse Bauer judgment could force the over-generous DB promises to be fully funded and pensions funds will have to close. Lastly, should the judgment fall in favour of Mr Bauer and be applied retrospectively, UK industry would not be able to handle the cost. The PPF would be rendered insolvent and would need to be wound up or bailed out at the cost of many, many billions. Since the PPF is a statutory company, it could only be wound up by an Act of Parliament, which would necessitate a government guarantee of funding. This case is a particularly clear example of how the European Union’s overarching rulings can and do have negative effects on the UK and its economy. The German pension system is not based on trust law, and pensions are more akin to deferred pay. Our Parliament has carefully established a pension protection system to work specifically for the UK market, thereby avoiding the detrimental effect an overarching ECJ ruling would have when our specific laws and structures are not properly taken into account. The ECJ can reach into the plumbing of UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an adverse ECJ ruling, which the Pension SuperFund estimates to be in the hundreds of billions of pounds, are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. I’m not arguing on you EU point as I’ve not read the case. Look into government pension liabilities. One of the reasons we couldn’t join the Euro was due to our debts exceeding the EU limits. The Government pension fund is the one most at risk here and accounts for the vast majority of that liability of over a trillion. Yet another secret kept from joe public. Years of early retirement for the likes of policemen and salary linked pensions have been handed out to the civil service over decades. (Not now as much I agree). However that liability has become so obscene it has to be topped up by the private sector causing tax rises. Private companies who have not kept up their pension funds are exposed here and their staff or investors will be shafted. Nothing new there but I suspect the director dividends and bonus payments we’re still made. The Defined Benefit pensions mentioned are those usually reserved for major corporations in the past but most today are government pensions. It’s more or less a guaranteed income based on your years and salary. MPs pensions are a good example! The private sector has had to move away from DB pensions as they are too costly and usually they now have to take risks in the market and fingers crossed you retire at a good time. This whole case revolves around something similar to the banking crisis. Pretending there’s money in something when clearly there isn’t. The banks now have to pass much more severe stress tests. The pension crisis in this country is of our own making. This case is just exposing how much of a mess our governments have been sweeping under the carpet for decades. This rests at the feet of both Conservative and Labour so equal blame. If you’re going to work in the civil service get used to the lower pensions in the future just like the private sector as we can’t afford you anymore. Well unless you’re an MP of course! I don’t mind so long as my pay equates to what I’d be getting if I did my job in the private sector, a 60% pay rise would come in pretty handy. That was true historically I totally agree and the deal was you’d get a good pension. The stats now say the public sector pay has now outstripped private sector for similar level jobs. I think they’re excluding the city boys in this comparison
I’m not complaining about civil servants please don’t think that. I just think we should all get back what we pay in plus interest and no guarantees that are not funded by your own pension group. I include golden parachutes for MPs and senior civil servants getting far more as a percentage than you average civil servant compared to payments in.
The problem is that it’s not a big pot of money sitting there. it’s today’s tax payers paying those pensions.
An old neighbour of mine was a school teacher ( going back 15 years)
He told me that within two years his pension was higher than his salary. How the hell was that funded by him? It obviously wasn’t.
I don’t blame him for taking it as I know I would. I also know it’s not fair as a cleaner at his school would have faired far worse! They didn’t have final salary pensions.
Also how come a cleaner has to work until he or she is in their sixties but a policeman can retire early on his full pension? That policeman could work in the office I’m sure until he reaches a similar age.
I’m stamping my feet and holding my breath as it’s just not fair! "In the unlikely scenario a police officer is never promoted from PC their salary will be £40,000 per year after approximately 10 years. What would that £40k per year do in the office for potentially 10-15 years? I can’t talk about all jobs but I know that there are certain parts of my job I could charge £100-£150 an hour for in the private sector. Currently I provide it as part of my very slightly above average wage I get working in the public sector. Thing is I want to work in the public sector because I want to help people and I accept I will earn less because of this. Part of that earning less is offset by the good pension I will get, that pension however is nowhere hear as good as if I’d started a few years earlier and had a final salary scheme. Perhaps what we should be doing is encouraging a race to the top rather than the bottom. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The public sector had a 6 year pay freeze.Pay hasn't moved in real terms since 2010. When that was lifted we got 1% Pensions have been slashed They have gone after the unions.1 Tory suggested that if the union were to offer advice on things like personal cases it should be done in their own time. Strikes can only be sanctioned if there is something like a 60%turn out. They have also gone after terms and conditions. You work till you are 67..unless you are loaded." we be lucky to live till we are 67 in the north. That’s a good innings in Teesside we have the shortest life expectancy here in the the U.K. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One simply exxample - there are numerous others . Senior City financier Edmund Truell, founder of the Pension Superfund and former Chairman of the London Pension Fund Authority, warns that the ECJ is deciding whether to upturn UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an imminent ECJ ruling are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. This is a flagrant example of how the UK can be severely damaged by continuing subjection to EU jurisdiction. Print Friendly, PDF & Email Yet again the UK is bracing itself for the unveiling of a European Court ruling which could have severely detrimental implications to the UK’s economy. The Pension SuperFund estimates a potential cost to the UK of over £160 billion. It could furthermore force the closure of all UK defined benefit (DB) pension funds. Mr Bauer, a worker from a now insolvent German company, has brought forward a case, which could have serious consequences to the UK Pension Protection Fund (PPF) and the wider British economy. The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) will release its judgement on the 19th December 2019 around Advocate-General Hogan’s opinion[1]. At its core, the question around the PSV v Bauer case focuses on the extent of the obligations to Member States from Article 8 of the Insolvency Directive[2]. Previously, it was determined by the ECJ that protecting pension schemes to a level that ensured that individuals receive at least 50% of the promised pension benefits was sufficient to comply with a Member State’s obligations. However, Advocate-General Hogan concluded that there was no basis to ensure only 50% of acquired pension benefits are protected. In his opinion, member benefits should be protected in full and the PPF should be funded to insurance company levels. There are four outcomes which could arise from the judgement on the 19th of December: A) the judgment does not pass in Mr Bauer’s favour, which would have limited direct implications to the PPF or sponsors of DB pension schemes; B) the judgement does go in favour of Mr Bauer, but affects pension funds only going from the date of the judgement forward, similarly to the Barber judgement[3]; or C) The judgment is in favour of Mr Bauer and is applied retrospectively; and/or D) The judgment deems that the PPF has to be funded immediately to insurance standards, which would have the severest effect on the pension market and the economy as a whole, as the UK-wide private sector full pension protection deficit is of the order of £1 trillion. If the judgement falls in favour of Mr Bauer and yet is applied only from the 19th of December onwards, it would need to be further specified if this applied to future service only for active members or for all pensioners. Though both would have a significant economic impact, the latter would be vastly more severe. Any adverse ruling would have catastrophic consequences. The Pension SuperFund expects then to see the closure of the £1.3 trillion of UK pension schemes still accruing benefits, in order to limit building up yet more exposure to DB pension liabilities. Fund sponsors would look to offload pensions to avoid the inevitably much higher PPF levies. Where employers are in trouble, the PPF will have to aim to recover full §75 pension debt and so many companies will be forced into bankruptcy. The NHS and other public sector bodies are already in a crisis caused by the byzantine pension tax rules. Universities are on strike. An adverse Bauer judgment could force the over-generous DB promises to be fully funded and pensions funds will have to close. Lastly, should the judgment fall in favour of Mr Bauer and be applied retrospectively, UK industry would not be able to handle the cost. The PPF would be rendered insolvent and would need to be wound up or bailed out at the cost of many, many billions. Since the PPF is a statutory company, it could only be wound up by an Act of Parliament, which would necessitate a government guarantee of funding. This case is a particularly clear example of how the European Union’s overarching rulings can and do have negative effects on the UK and its economy. The German pension system is not based on trust law, and pensions are more akin to deferred pay. Our Parliament has carefully established a pension protection system to work specifically for the UK market, thereby avoiding the detrimental effect an overarching ECJ ruling would have when our specific laws and structures are not properly taken into account. The ECJ can reach into the plumbing of UK pension arrangements that have been established for decades. The implications of an adverse ECJ ruling, which the Pension SuperFund estimates to be in the hundreds of billions of pounds, are potentially catastrophic to the wider UK economy. The UK should be able to govern its domestic pension industry without ECJ interference. I’m not arguing on you EU point as I’ve not read the case. Look into government pension liabilities. One of the reasons we couldn’t join the Euro was due to our debts exceeding the EU limits. The Government pension fund is the one most at risk here and accounts for the vast majority of that liability of over a trillion. Yet another secret kept from joe public. Years of early retirement for the likes of policemen and salary linked pensions have been handed out to the civil service over decades. (Not now as much I agree). However that liability has become so obscene it has to be topped up by the private sector causing tax rises. Private companies who have not kept up their pension funds are exposed here and their staff or investors will be shafted. Nothing new there but I suspect the director dividends and bonus payments we’re still made. The Defined Benefit pensions mentioned are those usually reserved for major corporations in the past but most today are government pensions. It’s more or less a guaranteed income based on your years and salary. MPs pensions are a good example! The private sector has had to move away from DB pensions as they are too costly and usually they now have to take risks in the market and fingers crossed you retire at a good time. This whole case revolves around something similar to the banking crisis. Pretending there’s money in something when clearly there isn’t. The banks now have to pass much more severe stress tests. The pension crisis in this country is of our own making. This case is just exposing how much of a mess our governments have been sweeping under the carpet for decades. This rests at the feet of both Conservative and Labour so equal blame. If you’re going to work in the civil service get used to the lower pensions in the future just like the private sector as we can’t afford you anymore. Well unless you’re an MP of course! I don’t mind so long as my pay equates to what I’d be getting if I did my job in the private sector, a 60% pay rise would come in pretty handy. That was true historically I totally agree and the deal was you’d get a good pension. The stats now say the public sector pay has now outstripped private sector for similar level jobs. I think they’re excluding the city boys in this comparison
I’m not complaining about civil servants please don’t think that. I just think we should all get back what we pay in plus interest and no guarantees that are not funded by your own pension group. I include golden parachutes for MPs and senior civil servants getting far more as a percentage than you average civil servant compared to payments in.
The problem is that it’s not a big pot of money sitting there. it’s today’s tax payers paying those pensions.
An old neighbour of mine was a school teacher ( going back 15 years)
He told me that within two years his pension was higher than his salary. How the hell was that funded by him? It obviously wasn’t.
I don’t blame him for taking it as I know I would. I also know it’s not fair as a cleaner at his school would have faired far worse! They didn’t have final salary pensions.
Also how come a cleaner has to work until he or she is in their sixties but a policeman can retire early on his full pension? That policeman could work in the office I’m sure until he reaches a similar age.
I’m stamping my feet and holding my breath as it’s just not fair!
In the unlikely scenario a police officer is never promoted from PC their salary will be £40,000 per year after approximately 10 years. What would that £40k per year do in the office for potentially 10-15 years?
I can’t talk about all jobs but I know that there are certain parts of my job I could charge £100-£150 an hour for in the private sector. Currently I provide it as part of my very slightly above average wage I get working in the public sector.
Thing is I want to work in the public sector because I want to help people and I accept I will earn less because of this. Part of that earning less is offset by the good pension I will get, that pension however is nowhere hear as good as if I’d started a few years earlier and had a final salary scheme.
Perhaps what we should be doing is encouraging a race to the top rather than the bottom. "The policeman can work and pay tax towards his pension like the rest of us do until retirement age and if like the public he wants to retire at 55 he can but his pension is reduced accordingly. His tax will go back towards paying him anyway so it’s cheaper than letting him retire . Most policeman spend half their lives in the office now anyway so he could free up another to patrol by doing admin . I’m not decrying anyone’s motives I’m saying the system is unfair regarding pensions as the more tax everyone pays makes them all hard up while working but in retirement a lot get a greater benefit from that tax than others! It’s needs balancing and it’s needs reform as we as a nation can’t afford it. It’s thats simple. I agree with your sentiment on race upwards and and agree you should earn more of you do the same job and have the same job security risk to make it even, but make the pension even too, otherwise it’s biased and wrong. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see the usual thing has happened Nobody can come up with one single solitary brexit benefit either economic it social so kust change the subject. Boris would be ever so proud of his little sheep" Selective reading? I gave a link with 10 very good benefits. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see the usual thing has happened Nobody can come up with one single solitary brexit benefit either economic it social so kust change the subject. Boris would be ever so proud of his little sheep" Hello. I pasted in the numerous benefits on another thread. On a simplistic basis each family will be £800 per annum better off. If I have any spare time I will paste it in again. However , to be realistic , a lot of people on here have no interest in assessing the benefits of Brexit and just want to swear at those who have undertaken detailed investigations into the financial and regulatory benefits | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see the usual thing has happened Nobody can come up with one single solitary brexit benefit either economic it social so kust change the subject. Boris would be ever so proud of his little sheep Hello. I pasted in the numerous benefits on another thread. On a simplistic basis each family will be £800 per annum better off. If I have any spare time I will paste it in again. However , to be realistic , a lot of people on here have no interest in assessing the benefits of Brexit and just want to swear at those who have undertaken detailed investigations into the financial and regulatory benefits " Yeah Pat, copy and pasting some fictional amount is right up there at the very top of undertaking detailed investigations..
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The policeman can work and pay tax towards his pension like the rest of us do until retirement age and if like the public he wants to retire at 55 he can but his pension is reduced accordingly. His tax will go back towards paying him anyway so it’s cheaper than letting him retire . Most policeman spend half their lives in the office now anyway so he could free up another to patrol by doing admin . I’m not decrying anyone’s motives I’m saying the system is unfair regarding pensions as the more tax everyone pays makes them all hard up while working but in retirement a lot get a greater benefit from that tax than others! It’s needs balancing and it’s needs reform as we as a nation can’t afford it. It’s thats simple. I agree with your sentiment on race upwards and and agree you should earn more of you do the same job and have the same job security risk to make it even, but make the pension even too, otherwise it’s biased and wrong. " What would the police officers do though? Seriously, what are all the 65 year old police constables going to do for their £40,000 salary, filing? Same for those 65 year old firefighters, is there really that much paperwork to do? Common sense says that we cannot have a one size fits all approach. We need to have different pension arrangements for some jobs than others. There are 40,000 nursing vacancies in the NHS at the moment, people who think the public sector has it easy could always retrain and take one of those jobs. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see the usual thing has happened Nobody can come up with one single solitary brexit benefit either economic it social so kust change the subject. Boris would be ever so proud of his little sheep Hello. I pasted in the numerous benefits on another thread. On a simplistic basis each family will be £800 per annum better off. If I have any spare time I will paste it in again. However , to be realistic , a lot of people on here have no interest in assessing the benefits of Brexit and just want to swear at those who have undertaken detailed investigations into the financial and regulatory benefits " With all due respect, this is embarrassing. Top ten economic Brexit benefits was the question posed and all we got was copy/paste from a biased website which, as people have highlighted here, is questionable. For what was supposed to be an “easy deal,” it should be straight forward for you to list these points instead of hiding behind a block of financial jargon. I’d be interested to see the points you mentioned in that other thread. Can you at least link us to that? Thanks. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see the usual thing has happened Nobody can come up with one single solitary brexit benefit either economic it social so kust change the subject. Boris would be ever so proud of his little sheep Hello. I pasted in the numerous benefits on another thread. On a simplistic basis each family will be £800 per annum better off. If I have any spare time I will paste it in again. However , to be realistic , a lot of people on here have no interest in assessing the benefits of Brexit and just want to swear at those who have undertaken detailed investigations into the financial and regulatory benefits " And when exactly are we getting this 8 ton? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see the usual thing has happened Nobody can come up with one single solitary brexit benefit either economic it social so kust change the subject. Boris would be ever so proud of his little sheep Hello. I pasted in the numerous benefits on another thread. On a simplistic basis each family will be £800 per annum better off. If I have any spare time I will paste it in again. However , to be realistic , a lot of people on here have no interest in assessing the benefits of Brexit and just want to swear at those who have undertaken detailed investigations into the financial and regulatory benefits " This £800 a year was debunked everytime you posted it. Yet you plough on regardless. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The public sector had a 6 year pay freeze.Pay hasn't moved in real terms since 2010. When that was lifted we got 1% Pensions have been slashed They have gone after the unions.1 Tory suggested that if the union were to offer advice on things like personal cases it should be done in their own time. Strikes can only be sanctioned if there is something like a 60%turn out. They have also gone after terms and conditions. You work till you are 67..unless you are loaded.we be lucky to live till we are 67 in the north. That’s a good innings in Teesside we have the shortest life expectancy here in the the U.K. " For the 1st time in a century life expectancy is going down in certain parts of the country. Boris should stick that on his manifesto. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue." They didnt call the uk "treasure island" in brussels for nothing mate. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue." I’ve been intrigued by how quitters find it so difficult to understand the financial benefits of being part of such a big economic union are not limited to money that is given back in grants by said union. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see the usual thing has happened Nobody can come up with one single solitary brexit benefit either economic it social so kust change the subject. Boris would be ever so proud of his little sheep Selective reading? I gave a link with 10 very good benefits. "You did I'm not sure I'll get any economic benefit from your blue dress but anyway.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see the usual thing has happened Nobody can come up with one single solitary brexit benefit either economic it social so kust change the subject. Boris would be ever so proud of his little sheep Hello. I pasted in the numerous benefits on another thread. On a simplistic basis each family will be £800 per annum better off. If I have any spare time I will paste it in again. However , to be realistic , a lot of people on here have no interest in assessing the benefits of Brexit and just want to swear at those who have undertaken detailed investigations into the financial and regulatory benefits " When is the payment coming? Maybe it will take the edge off the fall in the pound | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue.They didnt call the uk "treasure island" in brussels for nothing mate. "This statement speaks truths. We don't actually care about Brexit it is your country choice to deal with. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue." Is this a parody, or really what you think? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue." Yep just watch the eu collapse on The 1st of Jan | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see the usual thing has happened Nobody can come up with one single solitary brexit benefit either economic it social so kust change the subject. Boris would be ever so proud of his little sheep Selective reading? I gave a link with 10 very good benefits.
You did
I'm not sure I'll get any economic benefit from your blue dress but anyway.."That wasn't a link . . . scroll down the other one was . . . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue. Yep just watch the eu collapse on The 1st of Jan " the way some on here talk about the U.K. I think they would be happy to see the U.K. collapse on the 31st of jan | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue. Yep just watch the eu collapse on The 1st of Jan the way some on here talk about the U.K. I think they would be happy to see the U.K. collapse on the 31st of jan " It feels like a narrative is being written. If the UK tanks when Brexit hits home, it'll apparently be the fault of remainers. Somehow. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue. Yep just watch the eu collapse on The 1st of Jan the way some on here talk about the U.K. I think they would be happy to see the U.K. collapse on the 31st of jan " Huh? Remainers voted against this cluster fuck. Leavers voted for it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue. Yep just watch the eu collapse on The 1st of Jan the way some on here talk about the U.K. I think they would be happy to see the U.K. collapse on the 31st of jan " Quite the contrary, but sadly the government seems intent on making the rest of us suffer for the benefit of their culture capitalist pals. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue. Yep just watch the eu collapse on The 1st of Jan the way some on here talk about the U.K. I think they would be happy to see the U.K. collapse on the 31st of jan Huh? Remainers voted against this cluster fuck. Leavers voted for it." What clusterfuck? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue. Yep just watch the eu collapse on The 1st of Jan the way some on here talk about the U.K. I think they would be happy to see the U.K. collapse on the 31st of jan " Also, you wanted it, own it, and take responsibility for your actions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue. Is this a parody, or really what you think?" Well you could start by running Robert McCoy through Google. As for the black hole in the budget being a parody, the German news channels seem to think it's very real. The subject comes up quite regularly with doom and gloom predictions of how much it will cost the German taxpayer. Remoaners have been telling us for years about how much we get back. I didn't say it, they did. So if the EU miss the money so much then they can't be giving as much back as remoaners like us to think. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue. Is this a parody, or really what you think? Well you could start by running Robert McCoy through Google. As for the black hole in the budget being a parody, the German news channels seem to think it's very real. The subject comes up quite regularly with doom and gloom predictions of how much it will cost the German taxpayer. Remoaners have been telling us for years about how much we get back. I didn't say it, they did. So if the EU miss the money so much then they can't be giving as much back as remoaners like us to think." Unfortunately certain people are going to ignor your post or brand you a liar for making up this ridiculous statement. You're not allowed to have a different view of their beloved EU.! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue. Yep just watch the eu collapse on The 1st of Jan the way some on here talk about the U.K. I think they would be happy to see the U.K. collapse on the 31st of jan Huh? Remainers voted against this cluster fuck. Leavers voted for it. What clusterfuck? " Yeah as it's going swimmingly so far | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue. Is this a parody, or really what you think? Well you could start by running Robert McCoy through Google. As for the black hole in the budget being a parody, the German news channels seem to think it's very real. The subject comes up quite regularly with doom and gloom predictions of how much it will cost the German taxpayer. Remoaners have been telling us for years about how much we get back. I didn't say it, they did. So if the EU miss the money so much then they can't be giving as much back as remoaners like us to think." Epic use of the word remoaner Did you come up with that yourself? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue. Yep just watch the eu collapse on The 1st of Jan the way some on here talk about the U.K. I think they would be happy to see the U.K. collapse on the 31st of jan Huh? Remainers voted against this cluster fuck. Leavers voted for it. What clusterfuck? " Have you heard of brexit? Have a Google, and you'll find out. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue. Yep just watch the eu collapse on The 1st of Jan the way some on here talk about the U.K. I think they would be happy to see the U.K. collapse on the 31st of jan Huh? Remainers voted against this cluster fuck. Leavers voted for it. What clusterfuck? Yeah as it's going swimmingly so far " It is now. It would have done sooner if it wasn't for the amount of anti Democrats in parliament, particularly on the labour and Liberal benches. At least we don't get to see the likes of Thornbury, Swinson and Soubry on TV screens any more , bonus | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"From a German MEP Leading German eurosceptic MEP Gunnar Beck celebrated Brexit as a move that has saved Britain sending billions of pounds to the European Union’s coronavirus recovery fund and slammed the German Chancellor Angela Merkel for acting like a “superpower”. “Good news! Brexit has saved Britain €80 billion – roughly the sum the recovery fund would have cost Britain,” he said." What do the remaining 99% of his colleagues think? Who cares about this guy think? You lot don’t seem to care about experts, economics etc... but you have a hard on listening to a lone wolf. For one guy saying this, I can find you 999 who say the opposite. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue. Is this a parody, or really what you think? Well you could start by running Robert McCoy through Google. As for the black hole in the budget being a parody, the German news channels seem to think it's very real. The subject comes up quite regularly with doom and gloom predictions of how much it will cost the German taxpayer. Remoaners have been telling us for years about how much we get back. I didn't say it, they did. So if the EU miss the money so much then they can't be giving as much back as remoaners like us to think." To be honest. As soon as you start saying "remoaner" it invalidates whatever you're saying. If possible try to make the point without childish insults. By all means, be critical of what people are saying. But labelling others with silly names just makes your arguments unreadable. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose Robert McCoy could come up with a few benefits. Since the Brexit vote I've been intrigued by a couple of things though. The most recent is that on here (and in the outside world) the very same people who slag off Trump for making legal challenges to the election result have been supporting every legal challenge to overturn Brexit. It seems that "every vote counts" only applies when they win. The other thing is tha the remoaners are constantly telling us about how much of Britain's money comes back from Brussels. Meanwhile on the other side of the channel they are scratching their heads about how they can fill the black hole in the budget caused by losing Britain's contribution. Maybe the aforementioned Robert McCoy could give them a few tips. Surely if they were giving Britain so much money back then they would be delighted to see us go. Or maybe someone speaks with forked tongue. Yep just watch the eu collapse on The 1st of Jan the way some on here talk about the U.K. I think they would be happy to see the U.K. collapse on the 31st of jan Huh? Remainers voted against this cluster fuck. Leavers voted for it. What clusterfuck? Yeah as it's going swimmingly so far It is now. It would have done sooner if it wasn't for the amount of anti Democrats in parliament, particularly on the labour and Liberal benches. At least we don't get to see the likes of Thornbury, Swinson and Soubry on TV screens any more , bonus "Boris the anti democrat eh? Cant argue with you there tbf. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"From a German MEP Leading German eurosceptic MEP Gunnar Beck celebrated Brexit as a move that has saved Britain sending billions of pounds to the European Union’s coronavirus recovery fund and slammed the German Chancellor Angela Merkel for acting like a “superpower”. “Good news! Brexit has saved Britain €80 billion – roughly the sum the recovery fund would have cost Britain,” he said. What do the remaining 99% of his colleagues think? Who cares about this guy think? You lot don’t seem to care about experts, economics etc... but you have a hard on listening to a lone wolf. For one guy saying this, I can find you 999 who say the opposite. " Would you like to list the 999 to which you refer ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A remoaners cryfest
Tbh , that is all you have and all you ever had. You voted for Brexit to ‘annoy ‘ leave voters and the ‘left’. The decision to leave the EU used to annoy me, now it is comedy gold. watching leave voters struggling to give reasons why they voted and now claiming that a no deal will be a good outcome. The gift that keeps on giving
They genuinely believe they are insulated from the shitstorm to come.
It's going to be highly amusing when the penny drops.
It’ll be the EU’s fault.
I blame jezza the daft racist."now you've mentioned Jeremy Corbyn you must get Diane Abbott's in somewhere | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A remoaners cryfest
Tbh , that is all you have and all you ever had. You voted for Brexit to ‘annoy ‘ leave voters and the ‘left’. The decision to leave the EU used to annoy me, now it is comedy gold. watching leave voters struggling to give reasons why they voted and now claiming that a no deal will be a good outcome. The gift that keeps on giving
They genuinely believe they are insulated from the shitstorm to come.
It's going to be highly amusing when the penny drops.
It’ll be the EU’s fault.
I blame jezza the daft racist. now you've mentioned Jeremy Corbyn you must get Diane Abbott's in somewhere "you mean long blink lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There will not be any benefits from Brexit - there is not a person in this country who doesn’t realise this. The only “positives” I have heard from Brexit supporters fall into the category of either they wanted people who benefit from EU ties to suffer and/or they ‘feel’ uncomfortable if lesser people (foreigners at the EU) are regarded at best as equals - or at worst imagining that they they “rule over us.” The validation of this is all over social media, day in and day out where ardent Brexiters assert British superiority over the world and assure us all that we are so important, that walking away from the world is the best strategy because the world will come begging. This is all about Exceptionalism - nothing more, nothing less. The arguments made to join the Common Market in the 1970’s are even more valid today, than they were back then." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A remoaners cryfest
Tbh , that is all you have and all you ever had. You voted for Brexit to ‘annoy ‘ leave voters and the ‘left’. The decision to leave the EU used to annoy me, now it is comedy gold. watching leave voters struggling to give reasons why they voted and now claiming that a no deal will be a good outcome. The gift that keeps on giving
They genuinely believe they are insulated from the shitstorm to come.
It's going to be highly amusing when the penny drops.
It’ll be the EU’s fault.
I blame jezza the daft racist. now you've mentioned Jeremy Corbyn you must get Diane Abbott's in somewhere " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"From a German MEP Leading German eurosceptic MEP Gunnar Beck celebrated Brexit as a move that has saved Britain sending billions of pounds to the European Union’s coronavirus recovery fund and slammed the German Chancellor Angela Merkel for acting like a “superpower”. “Good news! Brexit has saved Britain €80 billion – roughly the sum the recovery fund would have cost Britain,” he said. What do the remaining 99% of his colleagues think? Who cares about this guy think? You lot don’t seem to care about experts, economics etc... but you have a hard on listening to a lone wolf. For one guy saying this, I can find you 999 who say the opposite. Would you like to list the 999 to which you refer ? " I will when you and the quitters have told us the benefits of brexit. The same question has been here for months without any answers. All yours! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The policeman can work and pay tax towards his pension like the rest of us do until retirement age and if like the public he wants to retire at 55 he can but his pension is reduced accordingly. His tax will go back towards paying him anyway so it’s cheaper than letting him retire . Most policeman spend half their lives in the office now anyway so he could free up another to patrol by doing admin . I’m not decrying anyone’s motives I’m saying the system is unfair regarding pensions as the more tax everyone pays makes them all hard up while working but in retirement a lot get a greater benefit from that tax than others! It’s needs balancing and it’s needs reform as we as a nation can’t afford it. It’s thats simple. I agree with your sentiment on race upwards and and agree you should earn more of you do the same job and have the same job security risk to make it even, but make the pension even too, otherwise it’s biased and wrong. What would the police officers do though? Seriously, what are all the 65 year old police constables going to do for their £40,000 salary, filing? Same for those 65 year old firefighters, is there really that much paperwork to do? Common sense says that we cannot have a one size fits all approach. We need to have different pension arrangements for some jobs than others. There are 40,000 nursing vacancies in the NHS at the moment, people who think the public sector has it easy could always retrain and take one of those jobs." Don’t get me started on firemen. A very close mate of mine is a fireman and he refused promotion as it meant 9-5 and he would have to give up the two part time jobs doubling his salary. How does he have the time to do that, but not work more hours as a fireman. Btw he retired at 50. He still does one of the jobs as a Brick layer so yes well past doing anything physical lol. He’s a good mate so he won’t mind me calling him a twat. And he fancies my wife who teases him so all good. There’s a lot the the older guys and ladies can do regarding health and safety in our society. Most of their work is RTAs not fires anymore. Look at the police stations and regional offices. There are loads of civilian staff who back up the police. You’re not telling me these bright spark officers can’t be put to some of those tasks at 50 years old . Rubbish. Community police support etc There not disabled they’re fit enough. An interesting fact in the NHS There is one admin person for every front line member of staff. So for every nurse cleaner or doctor there is someone pushing paper. The NHS is awash with Managers and Directors who manage each other mostly judging by how long the waiting lists are. Maybe get rid of a lot of that management layer and pay the nurses doctors and auxiliaries more and they will be queuing up. 10,000 of those vacancies are Eastern European’s who have gone home since the Brexit vote. Good eh! Also how is possible for my sister in law to quit her role in the NHS and then be taken on as a contractor two weeks later at three times the rate? Who the fuck authorises that as value for money. Bank nursing is rife as it’s better to quit and get two to three times the rate as agency. If you quit you should be taken on at the same cost and these greedy agencies should be told where to get off. Pay them better in the first place is my view. Also give flexible hours as that’s what people want if they have family. Pay pro rata and job share etc. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
