FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Lies about lies.....
Lies about lies.....
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Interesting debate on bbc1 this morning. "Should politicians be prosecuted/jailed for telling lies?"
During the programme it was said that the Boris/Gove bus lied about our contributions to the EU (£350 million a week) and that we would spend it on the NHS instead. This has become an accepted truth.....
But is it? The bus message said "we send £350 million a year to the EU." ...This is actually true! [what it ignores is that some of this money then finds its way back..via EU funding of various projects/regional grants/farm subsidies etc... but all of these are currently under the full control of the EU commisions]. A failure to give the whole story...but not actually a lie!
The rest of the message "lets fund our NHS instead" was not a promise or a statement...which again seems to have become the accepted truth..... It is actually just a suggestion...nothing more, nothing less.
But these "truths" have now been allowed to pass into common usage...by journalists, presenters and politicians alike.
I'm sure there are many more.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Of course politicians who deliberately mislead should be prosecuted and jailed. As should any person holding Public Office (as defined in law). There is something very wrong when those who seek and are entrusted with offices of power are held to a lower standard of probity than the rest of us who entrust them to wield power on our behalf. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The message said this...
I quote it from the bus itself lol
Leaders of the Vote Leave campaign appear to have backtracked on their claim that £350 million a week spent on EU membership would go towards the NHS. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The message said this...
I quote it from the bus itself lol
Leaders of the Vote Leave campaign appear to have backtracked on their claim that £350 million a week spent on EU membership would go towards the NHS."
The issue is not any single message by any single person holding public office or any organisation that seeks power. The issue is should those in or attempting to gain public office be held to a lower or higher standard of probity than those they seek power over? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Interesting debate on bbc1 this morning. "Should politicians be prosecuted/jailed for telling lies?"
During the programme it was said that the Boris/Gove bus lied about our contributions to the EU (£350 million a week) and that we would spend it on the NHS instead. This has become an accepted truth.....
But is it? The bus message said "we send £350 million a year to the EU." ...This is actually true! [what it ignores is that some of this money then finds its way back..via EU funding of various projects/regional grants/farm subsidies etc... but all of these are currently under the full control of the EU commisions]. A failure to give the whole story...but not actually a lie!
The rest of the message "lets fund our NHS instead" was not a promise or a statement...which again seems to have become the accepted truth..... It is actually just a suggestion...nothing more, nothing less.
But these "truths" have now been allowed to pass into common usage...by journalists, presenters and politicians alike.
I'm sure there are many more...."
Like going into the pub and buying a beer - pay for it with a £50 note - it costs £50 a pint? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Interesting debate on bbc1 this morning. "Should politicians be prosecuted/jailed for telling lies?"
During the programme it was said that the Boris/Gove bus lied about our contributions to the EU (£350 million a week) and that we would spend it on the NHS instead. This has become an accepted truth.....
But is it? The bus message said "we send £350 million a year to the EU." ...This is actually true! [what it ignores is that some of this money then finds its way back..via EU funding of various projects/regional grants/farm subsidies etc... but all of these are currently under the full control of the EU commisions]. A failure to give the whole story...but not actually a lie!
The rest of the message "lets fund our NHS instead" was not a promise or a statement...which again seems to have become the accepted truth..... It is actually just a suggestion...nothing more, nothing less.
But these "truths" have now been allowed to pass into common usage...by journalists, presenters and politicians alike.
I'm sure there are many more...."
Trouble is that Westminster would be deserted! They'd all be doing porridge  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"The message said this...
I quote it from the bus itself lol
Leaders of the Vote Leave campaign appear to have backtracked on their claim that £350 million a week spent on EU membership would go towards the NHS."
You misquoted! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt"
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The message said this...
I quote it from the bus itself lol
Leaders of the Vote Leave campaign appear to have backtracked on their claim that £350 million a week spent on EU membership would go towards the NHS.
You misquoted!"
Nah |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
Any thread about lying politicians has got to include Trump. He is a habitual liar about the most daft and ridiculous things which fall well well short of the office of the president. I recent example is he said he had a phone call from the Boys Scouts of America saying his speech was the best ever. The boy scouts had actually had to issue an apology for the political nature of his speech and denied that anyone had had a phone call with him. The same about a phone call with the president of Mexico, which again was denied, this time by the Mexican government.
This isn't a difference of opinion, or twisting a certain statistic to suit a political agenda. These are just flat out lies for no reason other than to massage Trump's ego.
Obviously these examples are just small scale, basically insignificant lies, but if he is lying about the small stuff like this, how can we trust him on the big stuff?
At the end of the day, one side is lying, so who do you trust the word of more, the Boy Scouts, or Trump. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It's simple...You can't be a politician without telling lies. How good of a politician you are depends on how good you are at telling lies. If a politician opens their mouth to breathe... They're telling fucking lies..I think any politician deliberately miss leading the public for party political gains should be jailed. Thailand style!!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Sorry but I'm going to have to object.
Not all politicans lie, this general mistrust of politicans and people in high places comes from the fact that we don't punish the fragrant breaches.
We all knew Tony Blair lied about wmds , we didn't need no 10 million pound chilcot report 20 years after the fact, anybody that actually followed the war knew he'd lied in the first week when
A they found no wmds
B the first thing they secured was the oil wells
Tony Blair along with half his cabinet should have been sent down in 2003 while holding office, do not pass go, do not collect another term.
Anybody with any common sense knows David Kelly didn't commit suicide, its just bullshit to make people "get on with their lives".
This has been getting progressively worse for 50 years where now we're at a point where nobody seems to care anyway |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!"
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt"
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
"
How much do you think? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
How much do you think? "
Why are you answering a question with a question |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt"
Jobs are advertised, and people are paid, in gross terms.
They never actually get that in their bank accounts, and then have to pay the taxman back an amount. The tax is taken off before it goes anywhere.
Buy they'll always tell you their earnings as a gross amount, and not net. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Jobs are advertised, and people are paid, in gross terms.
They never actually get that in their bank accounts, and then have to pay the taxman back an amount. The tax is taken off before it goes anywhere.
Buy they'll always tell you their earnings as a gross amount, and not net."
And? This is not a tax. This is a discount that has been negotiated.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!"
You are correct £350 million per week is the gross figure which vote leave used. The net figure is around £250 million per week after the rebate and other subsidies are deducted. Nigel Farage never joined the official vote Leave campaign and was part of the Grassroots out campaign and the Leave.EU campaign he always said vote Leave should have used the net figure of £250 million per week it still is a massive amount we pay to the EU and would've still been convincing enough to persuade people to vote Leave. Vote Leave said they deliberately used the higher gross figure to get people in the country talking about the massive amounts we pay to the EU, it clearly worked because people are still talking about it now. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"Like going into the pub and buying a beer - pay for it with a £50 note - it costs £50 a pint?"
No, it is like going into a pub and seeing that a pint of beer is £3.50 on the menu, but there is a sign behind the bar saying 50p off beer this month. You paying £3 for your beer, getting you beer and enjoying it. And then telling everyone you paid £3.50 for your beer and it tastes like shit.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
You are correct £350 million per week is the gross figure which vote leave used. The net figure is around £250 million per week after the rebate and other subsidies are deducted. Nigel Farage never joined the official vote Leave campaign and was part of the Grassroots out campaign and the Leave.EU campaign he always said vote Leave should have used the net figure of £250 million per week it still is a massive amount we pay to the EU and would've still been convincing enough to persuade people to vote Leave. Vote Leave said they deliberately used the higher gross figure to get people in the country talking about the massive amounts we pay to the EU, it clearly worked because people are still talking about it now. "
Ahh, so you agree with Dominic Cummings then in that the leave vote would not have won without the lies on the bus then? And that people were indeed duped by it?
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
You are correct £350 million per week is the gross figure which vote leave used. The net figure is around £250 million per week after the rebate and other subsidies are deducted. Nigel Farage never joined the official vote Leave campaign and was part of the Grassroots out campaign and the Leave.EU campaign he always said vote Leave should have used the net figure of £250 million per week it still is a massive amount we pay to the EU and would've still been convincing enough to persuade people to vote Leave. Vote Leave said they deliberately used the higher gross figure to get people in the country talking about the massive amounts we pay to the EU, it clearly worked because people are still talking about it now.
Ahh, so you agree with Dominic Cummings then in that the leave vote would not have won without the lies on the bus then? And that people were indeed duped by it?
-Matt"
It wasn't a lie though was it. As explained on the thread it was the gross figure. Nigel Farage said the net figure of £250 million per week would've still convinced people to vote leave anyway. Remoaners just like to have a whinge about it because you lost. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
You are correct £350 million per week is the gross figure which vote leave used. The net figure is around £250 million per week after the rebate and other subsidies are deducted. Nigel Farage never joined the official vote Leave campaign and was part of the Grassroots out campaign and the Leave.EU campaign he always said vote Leave should have used the net figure of £250 million per week it still is a massive amount we pay to the EU and would've still been convincing enough to persuade people to vote Leave. Vote Leave said they deliberately used the higher gross figure to get people in the country talking about the massive amounts we pay to the EU, it clearly worked because people are still talking about it now.
Ahh, so you agree with Dominic Cummings then in that the leave vote would not have won without the lies on the bus then? And that people were indeed duped by it?
-Matt
It wasn't a lie though was it. As explained on the thread it was the gross figure. Nigel Farage said the net figure of £250 million per week would've still convinced people to vote leave anyway. Remoaners just like to have a whinge about it because you lost. "
I'm not whinging about anything. This thread was about lies. The OP posted that the phrase 'We send £350M to the EU each week' was not a lie. It was. As both you and I have just stated.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
How much do you think?
Why are you answering a question with a question "
Because I want to know what you think the figure is, without looking it up, or being told what it is. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
The rest of the message "lets fund our NHS instead" was not a promise or a statement...which again seems to have become the accepted truth..... It is actually just a suggestion...nothing more, nothing less.
"
Oh, come on. It was part of an official campaign. You can't just make "suggestions" to try and influence people to your side and then have absolutely zero follow up when you win.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
How much do you think?
Why are you answering a question with a question
Because I want to know what you think the figure is, without looking it up, or being told what it is."
Why do you want to know if I know or not.
I asked a question about a specific point.
Do you know what the figures are, and if so why dont you share that information with us. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
How much do you think?
Why are you answering a question with a question
Because I want to know what you think the figure is, without looking it up, or being told what it is.
Why do you want to know if I know or not.
I asked a question about a specific point.
Do you know what the figures are, and if so why dont you share that information with us."
Its £146m a week, less than half what the bus claims, and more than £100m a week less than what even Centaur is claiming. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
How much do you think?
Why are you answering a question with a question
Because I want to know what you think the figure is, without looking it up, or being told what it is.
Why do you want to know if I know or not.
I asked a question about a specific point.
Do you know what the figures are, and if so why dont you share that information with us.
Its £146m a week, less than half what the bus claims, and more than £100m a week less than what even Centaur is claiming. "
According to the House of Commons briefing paper of 31/07/2017, the net figure is £207m |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
How much do you think?
Why are you answering a question with a question
Because I want to know what you think the figure is, without looking it up, or being told what it is.
Why do you want to know if I know or not.
I asked a question about a specific point.
Do you know what the figures are, and if so why dont you share that information with us.
Its £146m a week, less than half what the bus claims, and more than £100m a week less than what even Centaur is claiming.
According to the House of Commons briefing paper of 31/07/2017, the net figure is £207m"
Are you including the money given to private institutions such as research grants, or just money given to the government? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
How much do you think?
Why are you answering a question with a question
Because I want to know what you think the figure is, without looking it up, or being told what it is.
Why do you want to know if I know or not.
I asked a question about a specific point.
Do you know what the figures are, and if so why dont you share that information with us.
Its £146m a week, less than half what the bus claims, and more than £100m a week less than what even Centaur is claiming. "
Thats not right,
We currently pay £35 million nett per day,
Thats £245 milliion nett per week
Which is around £14 billion nett per year
Of the £14 billion paynent to the EU we get around 6 billion a year back nett in grants and subsidies
You seem to be quite short on your estimates there |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
How much do you think?
Why are you answering a question with a question
Because I want to know what you think the figure is, without looking it up, or being told what it is.
Why do you want to know if I know or not.
I asked a question about a specific point.
Do you know what the figures are, and if so why dont you share that information with us.
Its £146m a week, less than half what the bus claims, and more than £100m a week less than what even Centaur is claiming.
Thats not right,
We currently pay £35 million nett per day,
Thats £245 milliion nett per week
Which is around £14 billion nett per year
Of the £14 billion paynent to the EU we get around 6 billion a year back nett in grants and subsidies
You seem to be quite short on your estimates there"
Wrong, maybe you should have looked it up after all!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week"
Right, rebates and contributions to the government, but what about the money that the EU gives to private institutions such as research projects? Remember the question asked by Hot Couple NW was "... how much do we send over compared to how much we get in subsidies and PROJECT FUNDING". (My emphasis) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week"
Those gross and net contributions should be *billions* not *millions* they are our annual contributions.
Our gross contribution before the rebate is £17.6bn per annum. After the rebate of £4.1bn we have a gross contribution of £13.6bn.
13.6bn per annum is £261Bn per week. So to say that we "Send £350M / week to the EU" is false. Simple.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week
Those gross and net contributions should be *billions* not *millions* they are our annual contributions.
Our gross contribution before the rebate is £17.6bn per annum. After the rebate of £4.1bn we have a gross contribution of £13.6bn.
13.6bn per annum is £261Bn per week. So to say that we "Send £350M / week to the EU" is false. Simple.
-Matt"
Ha, you got muddled there as I did!
£261m per week |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week
Those gross and net contributions should be *billions* not *millions* they are our annual contributions.
Our gross contribution before the rebate is £17.6bn per annum. After the rebate of £4.1bn we have a gross contribution of £13.6bn.
13.6bn per annum is £261Bn per week. So to say that we "Send £350M / week to the EU" is false. Simple.
-Matt
Ha, you got muddled there as I did!
£261m per week "
Oh ffs. Yes, sorry. £261m per week.
Once we work it out correctly, maybe we should write it on the side of a big red bus then we'll remember it.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
One of the biggest liars in politics is Nick Clegg and his broken promise for the Lib dems on tuition fees. Same can be said in similar ways for Corbyn and Labour now when he said he would sort out student debt in the general election campaign but now he's distanced himself from it now he's worked out cancelling all student debt would cost over £100 billion. Corbyn seems to be getting off lightly though because he lost the general election, but the spotlight was more on Clegg because he went into government with Cameron. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
How much do you think?
Why are you answering a question with a question "
Because that's what they always do...they think they're intellectually superior to everyone else on here. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"
The rest of the message "lets fund our NHS instead" was not a promise or a statement...which again seems to have become the accepted truth..... It is actually just a suggestion...nothing more, nothing less.
Oh, come on. It was part of an official campaign. You can't just make "suggestions" to try and influence people to your side and then have absolutely zero follow up when you win.
"
You mean like Corbyn's suggestion that he'd wipe all student debt?
Or can he say wtf he wants, because he didn't win? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"One of the biggest liars in politics is Nick Clegg and his broken promise for the Lib dems on tuition fees. Same can be said in similar ways for Corbyn and Labour now when he said he would sort out student debt in the general election campaign but now he's distanced himself from it now he's worked out cancelling all student debt would cost over £100 billion. Corbyn seems to be getting off lightly though because he lost the general election, but the spotlight was more on Clegg because he went into government with Cameron. "
Provide the figures as THAT was costed out in the Labour manifesto...or is this just hot air yet again from you....like i said its a tried and tested brexit way to feed lies |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
How much do you think?
Why are you answering a question with a question
Because that's what they always do...they think they're intellectually superior to everyone else on here."
Well if the shoe fits  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
How much do you think?
Why are you answering a question with a question
Because I want to know what you think the figure is, without looking it up, or being told what it is.
Why do you want to know if I know or not.
I asked a question about a specific point.
Do you know what the figures are, and if so why dont you share that information with us.
Its £146m a week, less than half what the bus claims, and more than £100m a week less than what even Centaur is claiming.
Thats not right,
We currently pay £35 million nett per day,
Thats £245 milliion nett per week
Which is around £14 billion nett per year
Of the £14 billion paynent to the EU we get around 6 billion a year back nett in grants and subsidies
You seem to be quite short on your estimates there
Wrong, maybe you should have looked it up after all! "
Ok 13 billion instead of 14 but we do get about 6 billion back in grants and subsidies
And that includes payments to the public and private organisations
So depending on your point of view
Membership of the EU could be a good thing
Or
Leaving the EU that money could be spent more effectively
So we spend 13 billion to get back 6 billion
Who,what,where, does that remaining 7 billiong go to
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week"
Mercury have you read the briefing paper that you refer to?
it says "Accounting for these receipts results in the UK making an average net contribution of £7.1 billion between 2010 and 2014.”
So £7.1bn spread over 52 weeks equals around £136m per week according to your source. Are you going to either admit that you therefore made a mistake, or that you yourself are lying on a thread about lying? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week
Mercury have you read the briefing paper that you refer to?
it says "Accounting for these receipts results in the UK making an average net contribution of £7.1 billion between 2010 and 2014.”
So £7.1bn spread over 52 weeks equals around £136m per week according to your source. Are you going to either admit that you therefore made a mistake, or that you yourself are lying on a thread about lying?"
That 7.1 billion is whats left after we get grants and subsidies of around 6 billion as I said above
So the nett payment is nearly 14 billion, again like I said above.
So we actually hand over what amounts to 35 million a day which is 245 million a week
I assume the EU then takes all the interest and then gives us back the money in grants and subsidies
Which then probably gives you your figure of 135 million a week |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week
Mercury have you read the briefing paper that you refer to?
it says "Accounting for these receipts results in the UK making an average net contribution of £7.1 billion between 2010 and 2014.”
So £7.1bn spread over 52 weeks equals around £136m per week according to your source. Are you going to either admit that you therefore made a mistake, or that you yourself are lying on a thread about lying?
That 7.1 billion is whats left after we get grants and subsidies of around 6 billion as I said above
So the nett payment is nearly 14 billion, again like I said above.
So we actually hand over what amounts to 35 million a day which is 245 million a week
I assume the EU then takes all the interest and then gives us back the money in grants and subsidies
Which then probably gives you your figure of 135 million a week "
I think you are getting yourself in a bit of a muddle there, and your figures are out of line with Mercury's be quite a considerable margin. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"
Ok 13 billion instead of 14 but we do get about 6 billion back in grants and subsidies
And that includes payments to the public and private organisations
So depending on your point of view
Membership of the EU could be a good thing
Or
Leaving the EU that money could be spent more effectively
So we spend 13 billion to get back 6 billion
Who,what,where, does that remaining 7 billiong go to
"
It goes towards funding the services and benefits we enjoy as part of being an EU member.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"
The rest of the message "lets fund our NHS instead" was not a promise or a statement...which again seems to have become the accepted truth..... It is actually just a suggestion...nothing more, nothing less.
Oh, come on. It was part of an official campaign. You can't just make "suggestions" to try and influence people to your side and then have absolutely zero follow up when you win.
You mean like Corbyn's suggestion that he'd wipe all student debt?
Or can he say wtf he wants, because he didn't win?"
But he never said that, did he?
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7886
it's all there
And here
http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7886 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week
Mercury have you read the briefing paper that you refer to?
it says "Accounting for these receipts results in the UK making an average net contribution of £7.1 billion between 2010 and 2014.”
So £7.1bn spread over 52 weeks equals around £136m per week according to your source. Are you going to either admit that you therefore made a mistake, or that you yourself are lying on a thread about lying?"
I've not had chance to read every sentence. I'm flat out busy and only popped in during a rare 10 mins coffee break.
I was quoting from the most upto date figures that I could quickly find. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week
Mercury have you read the briefing paper that you refer to?
it says "Accounting for these receipts results in the UK making an average net contribution of £7.1 billion between 2010 and 2014.”
So £7.1bn spread over 52 weeks equals around £136m per week according to your source. Are you going to either admit that you therefore made a mistake, or that you yourself are lying on a thread about lying?
I've not had chance to read every sentence. I'm flat out busy and only popped in during a rare 10 mins coffee break.
I was quoting from the most upto date figures that I could quickly find."
So you just read the headline and got the figures wrong by 35%? That's quite a bit out, but then the figure on the bus was out by a lot more. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week
Mercury have you read the briefing paper that you refer to?
it says "Accounting for these receipts results in the UK making an average net contribution of £7.1 billion between 2010 and 2014.”
So £7.1bn spread over 52 weeks equals around £136m per week according to your source. Are you going to either admit that you therefore made a mistake, or that you yourself are lying on a thread about lying?
I've not had chance to read every sentence. I'm flat out busy and only popped in during a rare 10 mins coffee break.
I was quoting from the most upto date figures that I could quickly find.
So you just read the headline and got the figures wrong by 35%? That's quite a bit out, but then the figure on the bus was out by a lot more."
But why quote an average? If you want to make the figure lower, why not include 1990 - 2010 as well?
I've just checked fact finder, and they are saying that we "send" £13.1billion to the EU. The rebate is automatic, everything else has to be given back.
So the truthful answer to the question 'how much per week so we spend to Brussels?" Is £252 million". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week
Mercury have you read the briefing paper that you refer to?
it says "Accounting for these receipts results in the UK making an average net contribution of £7.1 billion between 2010 and 2014.”
So £7.1bn spread over 52 weeks equals around £136m per week according to your source. Are you going to either admit that you therefore made a mistake, or that you yourself are lying on a thread about lying?
I've not had chance to read every sentence. I'm flat out busy and only popped in during a rare 10 mins coffee break.
I was quoting from the most upto date figures that I could quickly find.
So you just read the headline and got the figures wrong by 35%? That's quite a bit out, but then the figure on the bus was out by a lot more.
But why quote an average? If you want to make the figure lower, why not include 1990 - 2010 as well?
I've just checked fact finder, and they are saying that we "send" £13.1billion to the EU. The rebate is automatic, everything else has to be given back.
So the truthful answer to the question 'how much per week so we spend to Brussels?" Is £252 million"."
I quoted from the source that you gave, they are the ones who have averages it out over that time scale! If you’re not happy then chose a different source! To say “everything else has to be given back” goes to the £50 note to pay for a pint of beer analogy.
But even if we ignore all that, and go back to the original point of the thread. You previously said that £350 per week figure was true, when its not. Right? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week
Mercury have you read the briefing paper that you refer to?
it says "Accounting for these receipts results in the UK making an average net contribution of £7.1 billion between 2010 and 2014.”
So £7.1bn spread over 52 weeks equals around £136m per week according to your source. Are you going to either admit that you therefore made a mistake, or that you yourself are lying on a thread about lying?
I've not had chance to read every sentence. I'm flat out busy and only popped in during a rare 10 mins coffee break.
I was quoting from the most upto date figures that I could quickly find.
So you just read the headline and got the figures wrong by 35%? That's quite a bit out, but then the figure on the bus was out by a lot more.
But why quote an average? If you want to make the figure lower, why not include 1990 - 2010 as well?
I've just checked fact finder, and they are saying that we "send" £13.1billion to the EU. The rebate is automatic, everything else has to be given back.
So the truthful answer to the question 'how much per week so we spend to Brussels?" Is £252 million"."
 which is what Nigel Farage has been saying all along the net figure is around £250 million a week. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week
Mercury have you read the briefing paper that you refer to?
it says "Accounting for these receipts results in the UK making an average net contribution of £7.1 billion between 2010 and 2014.”
So £7.1bn spread over 52 weeks equals around £136m per week according to your source. Are you going to either admit that you therefore made a mistake, or that you yourself are lying on a thread about lying?
I've not had chance to read every sentence. I'm flat out busy and only popped in during a rare 10 mins coffee break.
I was quoting from the most upto date figures that I could quickly find.
So you just read the headline and got the figures wrong by 35%? That's quite a bit out, but then the figure on the bus was out by a lot more.
But why quote an average? If you want to make the figure lower, why not include 1990 - 2010 as well?
I've just checked fact finder, and they are saying that we "send" £13.1billion to the EU. The rebate is automatic, everything else has to be given back.
So the truthful answer to the question 'how much per week so we spend to Brussels?" Is £252 million".
I quoted from the source that you gave, they are the ones who have averages it out over that time scale! If you’re not happy then chose a different source! To say “everything else has to be given back” goes to the £50 note to pay for a pint of beer analogy.
But even if we ignore all that, and go back to the original point of the thread. You previously said that £350 per week figure was true, when its not. Right?"
£350 million per week is the correct Gross figure. The correct net figure is around £250 million per week. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week
Mercury have you read the briefing paper that you refer to?
it says "Accounting for these receipts results in the UK making an average net contribution of £7.1 billion between 2010 and 2014.”
So £7.1bn spread over 52 weeks equals around £136m per week according to your source. Are you going to either admit that you therefore made a mistake, or that you yourself are lying on a thread about lying?
I've not had chance to read every sentence. I'm flat out busy and only popped in during a rare 10 mins coffee break.
I was quoting from the most upto date figures that I could quickly find.
So you just read the headline and got the figures wrong by 35%? That's quite a bit out, but then the figure on the bus was out by a lot more.
But why quote an average? If you want to make the figure lower, why not include 1990 - 2010 as well?
I've just checked fact finder, and they are saying that we "send" £13.1billion to the EU. The rebate is automatic, everything else has to be given back.
So the truthful answer to the question 'how much per week so we spend to Brussels?" Is £252 million".
I quoted from the source that you gave, they are the ones who have averages it out over that time scale! If you’re not happy then chose a different source! To say “everything else has to be given back” goes to the £50 note to pay for a pint of beer analogy.
But even if we ignore all that, and go back to the original point of the thread. You previously said that £350 per week figure was true, when its not. Right?"
I wish it was £350 per week!
And no, I've never said that figure is correct. I've always used a net figure, and to quote £350 million per week was misleading. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week
Mercury have you read the briefing paper that you refer to?
it says "Accounting for these receipts results in the UK making an average net contribution of £7.1 billion between 2010 and 2014.”
So £7.1bn spread over 52 weeks equals around £136m per week according to your source. Are you going to either admit that you therefore made a mistake, or that you yourself are lying on a thread about lying?
I've not had chance to read every sentence. I'm flat out busy and only popped in during a rare 10 mins coffee break.
I was quoting from the most upto date figures that I could quickly find.
So you just read the headline and got the figures wrong by 35%? That's quite a bit out, but then the figure on the bus was out by a lot more.
But why quote an average? If you want to make the figure lower, why not include 1990 - 2010 as well?
I've just checked fact finder, and they are saying that we "send" £13.1billion to the EU. The rebate is automatic, everything else has to be given back.
So the truthful answer to the question 'how much per week so we spend to Brussels?" Is £252 million".
I quoted from the source that you gave, they are the ones who have averages it out over that time scale! If you’re not happy then chose a different source! To say “everything else has to be given back” goes to the £50 note to pay for a pint of beer analogy.
But even if we ignore all that, and go back to the original point of the thread. You previously said that £350 per week figure was true, when its not. Right?
£350 million per week is the correct Gross figure. The correct net figure is around £250 million per week. "
Do we send £350m per week to the EU, yes or no? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week
Mercury have you read the briefing paper that you refer to?
it says "Accounting for these receipts results in the UK making an average net contribution of £7.1 billion between 2010 and 2014.”
So £7.1bn spread over 52 weeks equals around £136m per week according to your source. Are you going to either admit that you therefore made a mistake, or that you yourself are lying on a thread about lying?
I've not had chance to read every sentence. I'm flat out busy and only popped in during a rare 10 mins coffee break.
I was quoting from the most upto date figures that I could quickly find.
So you just read the headline and got the figures wrong by 35%? That's quite a bit out, but then the figure on the bus was out by a lot more.
But why quote an average? If you want to make the figure lower, why not include 1990 - 2010 as well?
I've just checked fact finder, and they are saying that we "send" £13.1billion to the EU. The rebate is automatic, everything else has to be given back.
So the truthful answer to the question 'how much per week so we spend to Brussels?" Is £252 million".
I quoted from the source that you gave, they are the ones who have averages it out over that time scale! If you’re not happy then chose a different source! To say “everything else has to be given back” goes to the £50 note to pay for a pint of beer analogy.
But even if we ignore all that, and go back to the original point of the thread. You previously said that £350 per week figure was true, when its not. Right?
I wish it was £350 per week!
And no, I've never said that figure is correct. I've always used a net figure, and to quote £350 million per week was misleading."
Sorry Mercury, yes I meant £350m per week, and I was getting you confused with the OP who said "The bus message said "we send £350 million a year to the EU." ...This is actually true! " |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"Briefing Paper CBP7886 31/07/2017
Gross Contribution £17.6m
Net Contribution £10.8m
That's with all our rebates/contributions.
Equates to £207m per week
Mercury have you read the briefing paper that you refer to?
it says "Accounting for these receipts results in the UK making an average net contribution of £7.1 billion between 2010 and 2014.”
So £7.1bn spread over 52 weeks equals around £136m per week according to your source. Are you going to either admit that you therefore made a mistake, or that you yourself are lying on a thread about lying?
I've not had chance to read every sentence. I'm flat out busy and only popped in during a rare 10 mins coffee break.
I was quoting from the most upto date figures that I could quickly find.
So you just read the headline and got the figures wrong by 35%? That's quite a bit out, but then the figure on the bus was out by a lot more.
But why quote an average? If you want to make the figure lower, why not include 1990 - 2010 as well?
I've just checked fact finder, and they are saying that we "send" £13.1billion to the EU. The rebate is automatic, everything else has to be given back.
So the truthful answer to the question 'how much per week so we spend to Brussels?" Is £252 million".
I quoted from the source that you gave, they are the ones who have averages it out over that time scale! If you’re not happy then chose a different source! To say “everything else has to be given back” goes to the £50 note to pay for a pint of beer analogy.
But even if we ignore all that, and go back to the original point of the thread. You previously said that £350 per week figure was true, when its not. Right?
I wish it was £350 per week!
And no, I've never said that figure is correct. I've always used a net figure, and to quote £350 million per week was misleading.
Sorry Mercury, yes I meant £350m per week, and I was getting you confused with the OP who said "The bus message said "we send £350 million a year to the EU." ...This is actually true! ""
It did, and £350million per week is our annual gross Contribution averaged out weekly.
The net figure should have been used. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
How much do you think?
Why are you answering a question with a question
Because that's what they always do...they think they're intellectually superior to everyone else on here.
Well if the shoe fits "
Answering a question with a question displays ignorance, no valid argument and a complete lack of intellect |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
How much do you think?
Why are you answering a question with a question
Because that's what they always do...they think they're intellectually superior to everyone else on here.
Well if the shoe fits
Answering a question with a question displays ignorance, no valid argument and a complete lack of intellect"
Does it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
How much do you think?
Why are you answering a question with a question
Because that's what they always do...they think they're intellectually superior to everyone else on here.
Well if the shoe fits
Answering a question with a question displays ignorance, no valid argument and a complete lack of intellect
Does it?"
Hes from the Centaur school so you wont get no sense out of him....and hot air and no substance the usual brexit mentality....but personally i think theres a much darker side to him than just a UKkiper |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
How much do you think?
Why are you answering a question with a question
Because that's what they always do...they think they're intellectually superior to everyone else on here.
Well if the shoe fits
Answering a question with a question displays ignorance, no valid argument and a complete lack of intellect
Does it?"
Very much so and I'm sure most would agree |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"But we don't send £350M to the EU a week. So it is a lie. It is a simple figure that can easily be looked up and fact checked. Why do you STILL believe it, despite being told umpteen times it is incorrect?
-Matt
It's the "gross" figure..... we all know the nett figure is significantly lower. That was the point I was making....which you clearly missed!
No. I didn't miss your point. You point was that the wording 'We send £350m a week to the EU' was not a lie. It is a lie. We don't send £350M a week to the EU. There is a thing called the 'rebate' that was negotiated. This figure is taken off before we send any money anywhere. It is completely seperate to the fact we get a lot of the money back in subsidies and project funding.
-Matt
Just as a matter of interest how much do we send over compared to how much we get back in subsidies and project funding
And over the last 10 years what are the same figures
How much do you think?
Why are you answering a question with a question
Because that's what they always do...they think they're intellectually superior to everyone else on here.
Well if the shoe fits
Answering a question with a question displays ignorance, no valid argument and a complete lack of intellect
Does it?
Very much so and I'm sure most would agree"
Would they? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
What is it with people...
question:
What should happen when politicians deliberately mislead the electorate for any reason other than National Security?
answer:
Brexit!
question:
what should be done about sneaking privatisation of the NHS?
answer:
Brexit!
question:
What should be done about the systematic gutting of HM Armed Forces?
answer:
Brexit!
Question:
What should be done about the rising divide between the top 1% and the rest of the population?
answer:
Brexit!
The answer to every social and political question is now brexit!
WTF!
These problems were there before the referendum! These problems have been building since the introduction of deregulation and privatisation under Thatcher! At what point will people pull their heads out of their respective arses and realise that BREXIT is a symptom of a disease and the disease is unregulated capitalism and the ultra right wing neo nazi politics it breeds. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What is it with people...
question:
What should happen when politicians deliberately mislead the electorate for any reason other than National Security?
answer:
Brexit!
question:
what should be done about sneaking privatisation of the NHS?
answer:
Brexit!
question:
What should be done about the systematic gutting of HM Armed Forces?
answer:
Brexit!
Question:
What should be done about the rising divide between the top 1% and the rest of the population?
answer:
Brexit!
The answer to every social and political question is now brexit!
WTF!
These problems were there before the referendum! These problems have been building since the introduction of deregulation and privatisation under Thatcher! At what point will people pull their heads out of their respective arses and realise that BREXIT is a symptom of a disease and the disease is unregulated capitalism and the ultra right wing neo nazi politics it breeds. "
Its been said to me that i voted in the general election for brexit.... i never i voted for a lot more than just that.....brexit is done ...i voted remain i accept the result....but just wait and see....these lot in power now will use it as an excuse for more years and years of austerity....shit there still blaming the last labour government for the banking crisis  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"Interesting debate on bbc1 this morning. "Should politicians be prosecuted/jailed for telling lies?"
During the programme it was said that the Boris/Gove bus lied about our contributions to the EU (£350 million a week) and that we would spend it on the NHS instead. This has become an accepted truth.....
But is it? The bus message said "we send £350 million a year to the EU." ...This is actually true! [what it ignores is that some of this money then finds its way back..via EU funding of various projects/regional grants/farm subsidies etc... but all of these are currently under the full control of the EU commisions]. A failure to give the whole story...but not actually a lie!
The rest of the message "lets fund our NHS instead" was not a promise or a statement...which again seems to have become the accepted truth..... It is actually just a suggestion...nothing more, nothing less.
But these "truths" have now been allowed to pass into common usage...by journalists, presenters and politicians alike.
I'm sure there are many more...."
the problem with that particular advert is that if that had been advertising a product as such it would have been taken down.....
and why do we know this....
because the ASA (advertising standards authority) actually came out and said so.... and actually as the leave side to remove it because it didn't meet the advertising standard for "true"
but as a political ad it used a loophole to get around it..... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
so just to re-cap the thread so far ... the leave campaign has been proven to now be lying about the lies they told pre-referendum .... glad we got that sorted |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Interesting debate on bbc1 this morning. "Should politicians be prosecuted/jailed for telling lies?"
During the programme it was said that the Boris/Gove bus lied about our contributions to the EU (£350 million a week) and that we would spend it on the NHS instead. This has become an accepted truth.....
But is it? The bus message said "we send £350 million a year to the EU." ...This is actually true! [what it ignores is that some of this money then finds its way back..via EU funding of various projects/regional grants/farm subsidies etc... but all of these are currently under the full control of the EU commisions]. A failure to give the whole story...but not actually a lie!
The rest of the message "lets fund our NHS instead" was not a promise or a statement...which again seems to have become the accepted truth..... It is actually just a suggestion...nothing more, nothing less.
But these "truths" have now been allowed to pass into common usage...by journalists, presenters and politicians alike.
I'm sure there are many more....
the problem with that particular advert is that if that had been advertising a product as such it would have been taken down.....
and why do we know this....
because the ASA (advertising standards authority) actually came out and said so.... and actually as the leave side to remove it because it didn't meet the advertising standard for "true"
but as a political ad it used a loophole to get around it....."
If that's so then why are companies allowed to advertise job vacancies with the gross annual figure? Surely if what you say is true companies would not be allowed to do this and would be forced to advertise jobs with the net figure after deductions like income tax and national insurance are taken away. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Interesting debate on bbc1 this morning. "Should politicians be prosecuted/jailed for telling lies?"
During the programme it was said that the Boris/Gove bus lied about our contributions to the EU (£350 million a week) and that we would spend it on the NHS instead. This has become an accepted truth.....
But is it? The bus message said "we send £350 million a year to the EU." ...This is actually true! [what it ignores is that some of this money then finds its way back..via EU funding of various projects/regional grants/farm subsidies etc... but all of these are currently under the full control of the EU commisions]. A failure to give the whole story...but not actually a lie!
The rest of the message "lets fund our NHS instead" was not a promise or a statement...which again seems to have become the accepted truth..... It is actually just a suggestion...nothing more, nothing less.
But these "truths" have now been allowed to pass into common usage...by journalists, presenters and politicians alike.
I'm sure there are many more....
the problem with that particular advert is that if that had been advertising a product as such it would have been taken down.....
and why do we know this....
because the ASA (advertising standards authority) actually came out and said so.... and actually as the leave side to remove it because it didn't meet the advertising standard for "true"
but as a political ad it used a loophole to get around it.....
If that's so then why are companies allowed to advertise job vacancies with the gross annual figure? Surely if what you say is true companies would not be allowed to do this and would be forced to advertise jobs with the net figure after deductions like income tax and national insurance are taken away. "
LOL |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Interesting debate on bbc1 this morning. "Should politicians be prosecuted/jailed for telling lies?"
During the programme it was said that the Boris/Gove bus lied about our contributions to the EU (£350 million a week) and that we would spend it on the NHS instead. This has become an accepted truth.....
But is it? The bus message said "we send £350 million a year to the EU." ...This is actually true! [what it ignores is that some of this money then finds its way back..via EU funding of various projects/regional grants/farm subsidies etc... but all of these are currently under the full control of the EU commisions]. A failure to give the whole story...but not actually a lie!
The rest of the message "lets fund our NHS instead" was not a promise or a statement...which again seems to have become the accepted truth..... It is actually just a suggestion...nothing more, nothing less.
But these "truths" have now been allowed to pass into common usage...by journalists, presenters and politicians alike.
I'm sure there are many more....
the problem with that particular advert is that if that had been advertising a product as such it would have been taken down.....
and why do we know this....
because the ASA (advertising standards authority) actually came out and said so.... and actually as the leave side to remove it because it didn't meet the advertising standard for "true"
but as a political ad it used a loophole to get around it.....
If that's so then why are companies allowed to advertise job vacancies with the gross annual figure? Surely if what you say is true companies would not be allowed to do this and would be forced to advertise jobs with the net figure after deductions like income tax and national insurance are taken away. "
Maybe because there's so many different tax codes out there 
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Interesting debate on bbc1 this morning. "Should politicians be prosecuted/jailed for telling lies?"
During the programme it was said that the Boris/Gove bus lied about our contributions to the EU (£350 million a week) and that we would spend it on the NHS instead. This has become an accepted truth.....
But is it? The bus message said "we send £350 million a year to the EU." ...This is actually true! [what it ignores is that some of this money then finds its way back..via EU funding of various projects/regional grants/farm subsidies etc... but all of these are currently under the full control of the EU commisions]. A failure to give the whole story...but not actually a lie!
The rest of the message "lets fund our NHS instead" was not a promise or a statement...which again seems to have become the accepted truth..... It is actually just a suggestion...nothing more, nothing less.
But these "truths" have now been allowed to pass into common usage...by journalists, presenters and politicians alike.
I'm sure there are many more....
the problem with that particular advert is that if that had been advertising a product as such it would have been taken down.....
and why do we know this....
because the ASA (advertising standards authority) actually came out and said so.... and actually as the leave side to remove it because it didn't meet the advertising standard for "true"
but as a political ad it used a loophole to get around it.....
If that's so then why are companies allowed to advertise job vacancies with the gross annual figure? Surely if what you say is true companies would not be allowed to do this and would be forced to advertise jobs with the net figure after deductions like income tax and national insurance are taken away.
Maybe because there's so many different tax codes out there
"
It's easier to get a straight answer from Kelly-Anne Conway than out of Centaur, he is just trying to distract you from the lying campaigns that he supported. The difference between what the UK gives to the EU and what they get back is around £130-140m, nowhere near the £350m a week bullshit that the OP and Centaur are trying to convince people is real. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"Interesting debate on bbc1 this morning. "Should politicians be prosecuted/jailed for telling lies?"
During the programme it was said that the Boris/Gove bus lied about our contributions to the EU (£350 million a week) and that we would spend it on the NHS instead. This has become an accepted truth.....
But is it? The bus message said "we send £350 million a year to the EU." ...This is actually true! [what it ignores is that some of this money then finds its way back..via EU funding of various projects/regional grants/farm subsidies etc... but all of these are currently under the full control of the EU commisions]. A failure to give the whole story...but not actually a lie!
The rest of the message "lets fund our NHS instead" was not a promise or a statement...which again seems to have become the accepted truth..... It is actually just a suggestion...nothing more, nothing less.
But these "truths" have now been allowed to pass into common usage...by journalists, presenters and politicians alike.
I'm sure there are many more....
the problem with that particular advert is that if that had been advertising a product as such it would have been taken down.....
and why do we know this....
because the ASA (advertising standards authority) actually came out and said so.... and actually as the leave side to remove it because it didn't meet the advertising standard for "true"
but as a political ad it used a loophole to get around it.....
If that's so then why are companies allowed to advertise job vacancies with the gross annual figure? Surely if what you say is true companies would not be allowed to do this and would be forced to advertise jobs with the net figure after deductions like income tax and national insurance are taken away. "
How would a potential employer know what my tax code is? How would they know what my net figure would be? Its hard enough for me to work it out half the time! My tax code is different to your tax code likely. So what I take home will be different to what you take home. What is one of us has student loans? What about childcare credit? What about if one of us gets a disability credit? What if I have already used up my tax allowance by pay from another job? So how do you propose a company advertise the net figure? As usual, you haven't thought this through have you?
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"Hey, good news guys. You know that £350M we promised to give to the NHS? Well we only need to give half that now!" -- a Tory strategist deep in their lair.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-eu-divorce-bill-half-pay-brexit-leave-campaign-referendum-350-million-brussels-a7881286.html
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
""Hey, good news guys. You know that £350M we promised to give to the NHS? Well we only need to give half that now!" -- a Tory strategist deep in their lair.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-eu-divorce-bill-half-pay-brexit-leave-campaign-referendum-350-million-brussels-a7881286.html
-Matt"
It says "Furthermore, the £8.1bn sum for the annual bill would fall further if the Treasury figures included payments from Brussels into private-sector organisations in the UK.
The Horizon 2020 scientific research programme and funding for education, training, youth and sport through the Erasmus+ scheme together receive about £1.5bn annually."
So if we include these, how much more do we send to the EU than we get back?
Can anyone help me with the maths? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"so just to re-cap the thread so far ... the leave campaign has been proven to now be lying about the lies they told pre-referendum .... glad we got that sorted"
And Project Fear was, of course, all true?
Both sides made fanciful claims, but on balance, I think the "we are all doomed!" scaremongering from the Remainers was worse. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"so just to re-cap the thread so far ... the leave campaign has been proven to now be lying about the lies they told pre-referendum .... glad we got that sorted
And Project Fear was, of course, all true?
Both sides made fanciful claims, but on balance, I think the "we are all doomed!" scaremongering from the Remainers was worse."
Many parts of so called "project fear" have actually happened though haven't they. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
""Hey, good news guys. You know that £350M we promised to give to the NHS? Well we only need to give half that now!" -- a Tory strategist deep in their lair.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-eu-divorce-bill-half-pay-brexit-leave-campaign-referendum-350-million-brussels-a7881286.html
-Matt
It says "Furthermore, the £8.1bn sum for the annual bill would fall further if the Treasury figures included payments from Brussels into private-sector organisations in the UK.
The Horizon 2020 scientific research programme and funding for education, training, youth and sport through the Erasmus+ scheme together receive about £1.5bn annually."
So if we include these, how much more do we send to the EU than we get back?
Can anyone help me with the maths? "
The whole concept of that bus was an insult to the people of this country as it debased the economic consequences of our EU Membership to a zero sum conclusion. That said, the Remain campaign did very little to effectively counter the lie.
I spoke to a delivery driver whilst on holiday the other week and he said that he hated the idea of all that money being sent to the EU and at the time he didn't care if it was £1 million or £350 million. He then went on to say that it was only after the referendum that it became clear to him that the money is invested rather than spent and his view now is that as an analogy, he would be an idiot to stop paying £500 per month to rent his van because that £500 he pays means that he can earn £4,000 a month by using the van.
And yes, he now regrets voting Leave and he blames only himself for not being prepared to think things through and being motivated by simple messages. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
""Hey, good news guys. You know that £350M we promised to give to the NHS? Well we only need to give half that now!" -- a Tory strategist deep in their lair.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-eu-divorce-bill-half-pay-brexit-leave-campaign-referendum-350-million-brussels-a7881286.html
-Matt
It says "Furthermore, the £8.1bn sum for the annual bill would fall further if the Treasury figures included payments from Brussels into private-sector organisations in the UK.
The Horizon 2020 scientific research programme and funding for education, training, youth and sport through the Erasmus+ scheme together receive about £1.5bn annually."
So if we include these, how much more do we send to the EU than we get back?
Can anyone help me with the maths?
The whole concept of that bus was an insult to the people of this country as it debased the economic consequences of our EU Membership to a zero sum conclusion. That said, the Remain campaign did very little to effectively counter the lie.
I spoke to a delivery driver whilst on holiday the other week and he said that he hated the idea of all that money being sent to the EU and at the time he didn't care if it was £1 million or £350 million. He then went on to say that it was only after the referendum that it became clear to him that the money is invested rather than spent and his view now is that as an analogy, he would be an idiot to stop paying £500 per month to rent his van because that £500 he pays means that he can earn £4,000 a month by using the van.
And yes, he now regrets voting Leave and he blames only himself for not being prepared to think things through and being motivated by simple messages."
While we're talking of anecdotal evidence I spoke to someone who voted Remain at work a few weeks ago. Conversion moved onto the EU and Brexit he said he believed the project fear of the remain campaign at the time and all the prophets of doom who predicted armageddon for the country if we voted Leave but now in hindsight he can see non of it has come true or materialised. He now wishes he had voted Leave as non of the Remain campaign predictions have happened. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"so just to re-cap the thread so far ... the leave campaign has been proven to now be lying about the lies they told pre-referendum .... glad we got that sorted
And Project Fear was, of course, all true?
Both sides made fanciful claims, but on balance, I think the "we are all doomed!" scaremongering from the Remainers was worse.
Many parts of so called "project fear" have actually happened though haven't they. "
Really!!!
Please enlighten us all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
If the remain campaign had said 'if we vote to leave the EU then 12 months from now we will see a fall in unemployment, record numbers in work, an increase in manufacturing output and higher inward investment than any other EU country' then what would have been the result? Oh ye, the leave vote would have been twice as high |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"so just to re-cap the thread so far ... the leave campaign has been proven to now be lying about the lies they told pre-referendum .... glad we got that sorted
And Project Fear was, of course, all true?
Both sides made fanciful claims, but on balance, I think the "we are all doomed!" scaremongering from the Remainers was worse.
Many parts of so called "project fear" have actually happened though haven't they.
Really!!!
Please enlighten us all."
Surely its been done to death now, you can't really be ignorant of it. You are just pretending to be ignorant, right? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
I'm loving where this thread has gone.
The gross figure....the net figure...the subsidies...the grants....
Could be anything between £14 billion a year and £3 sixpence halfpenny a week.
I think ALL the figures are either lies or guesses...regardless of the sources....because no-one here, in government or in the EU has a feckin clue!
No wonder they can't get the budget signed off or independently audited. No-one knows what it is. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"I'm loving where this thread has gone.
The gross figure....the net figure...the subsidies...the grants....
Could be anything between £14 billion a year and £3 sixpence halfpenny a week.
I think ALL the figures are either lies or guesses...regardless of the sources....because no-one here, in government or in the EU has a feckin clue!
No wonder they can't get the budget signed off or independently audited. No-one knows what it is."
So if you believe that all figures are a lie, then you are also saying that the bus is a lie. Therefore you lied in the OP when you said it was true! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
I said they could be lies, or guesses..... equally they could ALL be true. Depending on your point of view or how you choose to measure them.
I'm sure you can enlighten us with who it was that said "There are three kinds of lies...... Lies, damn lies and statistics" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"I said they could be lies, or guesses..... equally they could ALL be true. Depending on your point of view or how you choose to measure them.
I'm sure you can enlighten us with who it was that said "There are three kinds of lies...... Lies, damn lies and statistics""
Benjamin Disraeli |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"I said they could be lies, or guesses..... equally they could ALL be true. Depending on your point of view or how you choose to measure them.
I'm sure you can enlighten us with who it was that said "There are three kinds of lies...... Lies, damn lies and statistics""
Sorry to be a stickler, but you didn't say they could all be true, you said "I think ALL the figures are either lies or guesses." |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"so just to re-cap the thread so far ... the leave campaign has been proven to now be lying about the lies they told pre-referendum .... glad we got that sorted
And Project Fear was, of course, all true?
Both sides made fanciful claims, but on balance, I think the "we are all doomed!" scaremongering from the Remainers was worse.
Many parts of so called "project fear" have actually happened though haven't they. "
Which ones?
And please, be specific, and don't try to fanny around and avoid quoting facts, like you regularly do. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"so just to re-cap the thread so far ... the leave campaign has been proven to now be lying about the lies they told pre-referendum .... glad we got that sorted
And Project Fear was, of course, all true?
Both sides made fanciful claims, but on balance, I think the "we are all doomed!" scaremongering from the Remainers was worse.
Many parts of so called "project fear" have actually happened though haven't they.
Which ones?
And please, be specific, and don't try to fanny around and avoid quoting facts, like you regularly do."
How about £92bn in extra spending in monetary and fiscal policy since the referendum? That wasn't meant to happen?
A more than 90% drop in EU nurses registering in the UK since the referendum. You were told that the NHS would be negatively effected, but that was labelled project fear.
You were told it would negatively impact our defence, however that was labelled again as project fear, yet a £700m black hole opened in the defence budget.
There are just three very specific facts just to start you off. So I wonder what you tactic will be, will you try and pretend that those 3 things haven't happened, or that they weren't part of "project fear"? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Someone obviously doesn't understand monetary and fiscal policy. Nursing applications were still oversubscribed last time I looked and what has this supposed 700 million got to do with the vote? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"How about £92bn in extra spending in monetary and fiscal policy since the referendum? That wasn't meant to happen?"
So, how is that down to Brexit?
"A more than 90% drop in EU nurses registering in the UK since the referendum. You were told that the NHS would be negatively effected, but that was labelled project fear."
"Since 2011, there has been an annual cap of 20,700 standard visas to non-EU workers, unless professions are protected.
In 2014/15, just over one quarter of places were used for healthcare occupations.
The change will mean nurses are one of the professions which can be granted unlimited numbers of standard visas, as long as they have the backing of a UK employer."
"You were told it would negatively impact our defence, however that was labelled again as project fear, yet a £700m black hole opened in the defence budget."
And how is that down to Brexit? Did we suddenly go to war with someone?
"There are just three very specific facts just to start you off. So I wonder what you tactic will be, will you try and pretend that those 3 things haven't happened, or that they weren't part of "project fear"?"
You spent the last half hour researching this, and that's the best you can do?
Here's a couple of names for you, Mark Carney, Mervin King, see what they said before, and then after, the vote.
All the Project Fear predictions are wrong...
Economy... on the up.
Unemployment.. still trending down.
Construction... booming.
Try again dude.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
""How about £92bn in extra spending in monetary and fiscal policy since the referendum? That wasn't meant to happen?"
So, how is that down to Brexit?
"A more than 90% drop in EU nurses registering in the UK since the referendum. You were told that the NHS would be negatively effected, but that was labelled project fear."
"Since 2011, there has been an annual cap of 20,700 standard visas to non-EU workers, unless professions are protected.
In 2014/15, just over one quarter of places were used for healthcare occupations.
The change will mean nurses are one of the professions which can be granted unlimited numbers of standard visas, as long as they have the backing of a UK employer."
"You were told it would negatively impact our defence, however that was labelled again as project fear, yet a £700m black hole opened in the defence budget."
And how is that down to Brexit? Did we suddenly go to war with someone?
"There are just three very specific facts just to start you off. So I wonder what you tactic will be, will you try and pretend that those 3 things haven't happened, or that they weren't part of "project fear"?"
You spent the last half hour researching this, and that's the best you can do?
Here's a couple of names for you, Mark Carney, Mervin King, see what they said before, and then after, the vote.
All the Project Fear predictions are wrong...
Economy... on the up.
Unemployment.. still trending down.
Construction... booming.
Try again dude.
"
.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
""How about £92bn in extra spending in monetary and fiscal policy since the referendum? That wasn't meant to happen?"
So, how is that down to Brexit?
"A more than 90% drop in EU nurses registering in the UK since the referendum. You were told that the NHS would be negatively effected, but that was labelled project fear."
"Since 2011, there has been an annual cap of 20,700 standard visas to non-EU workers, unless professions are protected.
In 2014/15, just over one quarter of places were used for healthcare occupations.
The change will mean nurses are one of the professions which can be granted unlimited numbers of standard visas, as long as they have the backing of a UK employer."
"You were told it would negatively impact our defence, however that was labelled again as project fear, yet a £700m black hole opened in the defence budget."
And how is that down to Brexit? Did we suddenly go to war with someone?
"There are just three very specific facts just to start you off. So I wonder what you tactic will be, will you try and pretend that those 3 things haven't happened, or that they weren't part of "project fear"?"
You spent the last half hour researching this, and that's the best you can do?
Here's a couple of names for you, Mark Carney, Mervin King, see what they said before, and then after, the vote.
All the Project Fear predictions are wrong...
Economy... on the up.
Unemployment.. still trending down.
Construction... booming.
Try again dude.
"
The extra £92bn was to do with Brexit according the the chancellor and governor of the Bank of England. You appear to be ignorant of this even having happened. How long will it take for us to recoup that money?
We are short of nurses now, we have had a massive reduction in the EU nurses coming, yet the government hasn't changed any rules to offset this fact with non-EU nurses have they? Perhaps this is because they would find Brexit political suicide to admit that immigration will have to remain the same or increase after Brexit.
This is from Full Fact "A cap of 20,700 on employer-sponsored skilled migration (Tier 2 general) was introduced in April 2011 and has so far not been a binding constraint on work-based migration because the number of applications has been less than the limit. Minimum skill and language requirements were increased." So if the cap has never been reached, it wont make a difference if you make it unlimited, there arent enough wanting to come here. The NHS is suffering and will continue to suffer.
You again seem to be completely ignorant of the £700m deficit in the defence budget, let alone what caused it. It was the massive fall in the £. A lot of defence equipment is procured overseas you see.
So thats just three things you were warned would happen, that have indeed happened. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Someone obviously doesn't understand monetary and fiscal policy. Nursing applications were still oversubscribed last time I looked and what has this supposed 700 million got to do with the vote?"
Really?
So that is why there are 8,000 unfilled nursing posts in the NHS (according to NHS england). But shit on the NHS Cunt is going to recruit an army of nurses to fill those vacancies...
Of course since last week Student Nurses bursaries have been abolished so anyone entering that profession now gets to 3 or 4 years paying £9,000 a year tuition and running up a student loan to live while working 37 hours a week + in NHS hospitals for NO PAY!
Would you sign up for that knowing that at the end of it you will be lucky to earn £24,000pa? And if you would not sign up for that why do you think anyone else would?
And before you ask what has that to do with £700 million, that's about what it would cost to to have kept bursaries and extended Student Nurses training to ensure that there would be enough nurses to fill the gap caused by loss of EU nurses coming to work in the NHS due to brexit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Someone obviously doesn't understand monetary and fiscal policy. Nursing applications were still oversubscribed last time I looked and what has this supposed 700 million got to do with the vote?
Really?
So that is why there are 8,000 unfilled nursing posts in the NHS (according to NHS england). But shit on the NHS Cunt is going to recruit an army of nurses to fill those vacancies...
Of course since last week Student Nurses bursaries have been abolished so anyone entering that profession now gets to 3 or 4 years paying £9,000 a year tuition and running up a student loan to live while working 37 hours a week + in NHS hospitals for NO PAY!
Would you sign up for that knowing that at the end of it you will be lucky to earn £24,000pa? And if you would not sign up for that why do you think anyone else would?
And before you ask what has that to do with £700 million, that's about what it would cost to to have kept bursaries and extended Student Nurses training to ensure that there would be enough nurses to fill the gap caused by loss of EU nurses coming to work in the NHS due to brexit."
Why bring Corbyn into this? And bursaries kept the numbers of nurses in training down. Yes they will pay for an education in nursing. Maybe look at the numbers |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The extra £92bn was to do with Brexit according the the chancellor and governor of the Bank of England. You appear to be ignorant of this even having happened. How long will it take for us to recoup that money? "
I wouldn't trust either of them as far as I could shit.
Hammond is an Arch-Remoaner, and will do anything to wreck our plans to exit, and Mark Carney couldn't be trusted to count to anything above ten without having to take his shoes and socks off. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"You again seem to be completely ignorant of the £700m deficit in the defence budget, let alone what caused it. It was the massive fall in the £. A lot of defence equipment is procured overseas you see."
Huge fall?
Aug 8th 2016... Sterling/Dollar exch rate 1.3038.
Aug 8th 2017... Sterling/Dollar exch rate 1.2986
Rates rise, rates fall, what would you have blamed it on if we had voted to remain? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
""The extra £92bn was to do with Brexit according the the chancellor and governor of the Bank of England. You appear to be ignorant of this even having happened. How long will it take for us to recoup that money? "
I wouldn't trust either of them as far as I could shit.
Hammond is an Arch-Remoaner, and will do anything to wreck our plans to exit, and Mark Carney couldn't be trusted to count to anything above ten without having to take his shoes and socks off. "
Yet they are the men in charge of monetary (MPC) and fiscal policy. They spent it, it happened, you might not like it, but it's real. "Project fear" warned of £30bn of measures, in reality it was more than 3 times that! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
""The extra £92bn was to do with Brexit according the the chancellor and governor of the Bank of England. You appear to be ignorant of this even having happened. How long will it take for us to recoup that money? "
I wouldn't trust either of them as far as I could shit.
Hammond is an Arch-Remoaner, and will do anything to wreck our plans to exit, and Mark Carney couldn't be trusted to count to anything above ten without having to take his shoes and socks off.
Yet they are the men in charge of monetary (MPC) and fiscal policy. They spent it, it happened, you might not like it, but it's real. "Project fear" warned of £30bn of measures, in reality it was more than 3 times that! "
Spent it on what? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
""The extra £92bn was to do with Brexit according the the chancellor and governor of the Bank of England. You appear to be ignorant of this even having happened. How long will it take for us to recoup that money? "
I wouldn't trust either of them as far as I could shit.
Hammond is an Arch-Remoaner, and will do anything to wreck our plans to exit, and Mark Carney couldn't be trusted to count to anything above ten without having to take his shoes and socks off.
Yet they are the men in charge of monetary (MPC) and fiscal policy. They spent it, it happened, you might not like it, but it's real. "Project fear" warned of £30bn of measures, in reality it was more than 3 times that! "
Carney made some dire predictions, and then after the vote had to concede that he was wrong, the guy shouldn't be left in charge of a lemonade stall ffs. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
""You again seem to be completely ignorant of the £700m deficit in the defence budget, let alone what caused it. It was the massive fall in the £. A lot of defence equipment is procured overseas you see."
Huge fall?
Aug 8th 2016... Sterling/Dollar exch rate 1.3038.
Aug 8th 2017... Sterling/Dollar exch rate 1.2986
Rates rise, rates fall, what would you have blamed it on if we had voted to remain?"
Maybe you know more about defence than RUSI?
I saw this on the BBC and thought you should see it:
Ministry of Defence 'facing extra £700m costs post Brexit' - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37034337 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
""The extra £92bn was to do with Brexit according the the chancellor and governor of the Bank of England. You appear to be ignorant of this even having happened. How long will it take for us to recoup that money? "
I wouldn't trust either of them as far as I could shit.
Hammond is an Arch-Remoaner, and will do anything to wreck our plans to exit, and Mark Carney couldn't be trusted to count to anything above ten without having to take his shoes and socks off.
Yet they are the men in charge of monetary (MPC) and fiscal policy. They spent it, it happened, you might not like it, but it's real. "Project fear" warned of £30bn of measures, in reality it was more than 3 times that!
Carney made some dire predictions, and then after the vote had to concede that he was wrong, the guy shouldn't be left in charge of a lemonade stall ffs."
Yet he is governor of the bank of England. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
""You again seem to be completely ignorant of the £700m deficit in the defence budget, let alone what caused it. It was the massive fall in the £. A lot of defence equipment is procured overseas you see."
Huge fall?
Aug 8th 2016... Sterling/Dollar exch rate 1.3038.
Aug 8th 2017... Sterling/Dollar exch rate 1.2986
Rates rise, rates fall, what would you have blamed it on if we had voted to remain?
Maybe you know more about defence than RUSI?
I saw this on the BBC and thought you should see it:
Ministry of Defence 'facing extra £700m costs post Brexit' - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37034337"
You just keep banging on about those three points, haven't you got anything else lol? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"
You just keep banging on about those three points, haven't you got anything else lol?"
There are plenty of others, most of which have been covered in depth on other threads. This thread is about lies, and you implied that "project fear" was all lies, when in fact many of the predictions have come true.
If you want to discuss "project fear" in more detail, then you can start a new thread about it. I will be happy to contribute, we don't need to take this particular thread any further off topic. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
You just keep banging on about those three points, haven't you got anything else lol?
There are plenty of others, most of which have been covered in depth on other threads. This thread is about lies, and you implied that "project fear" was all lies, when in fact many of the predictions have come true.
If you want to discuss "project fear" in more detail, then you can start a new thread about it. I will be happy to contribute, we don't need to take this particular thread any further off topic. "
"many of the predictions have come true"
Many?
Is 3 classed as many now? And, as I have pointed out, I don't think you have made a cogent argument that they have in fact "come true". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
You just keep banging on about those three points, haven't you got anything else lol?
There are plenty of others, most of which have been covered in depth on other threads. This thread is about lies, and you implied that "project fear" was all lies, when in fact many of the predictions have come true.
If you want to discuss "project fear" in more detail, then you can start a new thread about it. I will be happy to contribute, we don't need to take this particular thread any further off topic. "
The comments being made are completely on topic, so no need for a new thread. This is a thread about politicians or campaigns or parties who tell ties and the Remain project fear was a campaign full of bullshit. You say many things they predicted came true, but you can only come up with 3 that are vaguely linked at best. Most normal rational thinking people can now see that over a year after the referendum the vast majority of the remain campaign project fear predictions were bullshit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Did the Eurozone indulge in "fiscal easing" policies?"
I presume you mean the fiscal policy of quatative easing. To be honest it doesn't matter what the EU or the US or the G8 or G20 are doing with there economies. The UK didn't need it before the referendum, but it did need it immediately after. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
You just keep banging on about those three points, haven't you got anything else lol?
There are plenty of others, most of which have been covered in depth on other threads. This thread is about lies, and you implied that "project fear" was all lies, when in fact many of the predictions have come true.
If you want to discuss "project fear" in more detail, then you can start a new thread about it. I will be happy to contribute, we don't need to take this particular thread any further off topic.
The comments being made are completely on topic, so no need for a new thread. This is a thread about politicians or campaigns or parties who tell ties and the Remain project fear was a campaign full of bullshit. You say many things they predicted came true, but you can only come up with 3 that are vaguely linked at best. Most normal rational thinking people can now see that over a year after the referendum the vast majority of the remain campaign project fear predictions were bullshit. "
Amen brutha |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Just one point... I found the red bus... and it does indeed say we send 350 million a week to the EU.
However, below it, it says "Lets fund the NHS instead"
No mention of paying the £350 million into the NHS.
Just sayin'. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Did the Eurozone indulge in "fiscal easing" policies?
I presume you mean the fiscal policy of quatative easing. To be honest it doesn't matter what the EU or the US or the G8 or G20 are doing with there economies. The UK didn't need it before the referendum, but it did need it immediately after. "
No it didn't |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Did the Eurozone indulge in "fiscal easing" policies?
I presume you mean the fiscal policy of quatative easing. To be honest it doesn't matter what the EU or the US or the G8 or G20 are doing with there economies. The UK didn't need it before the referendum, but it did need it immediately after.
No it didn't"
The monetary policy committee disagreed with you. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"the leavers still lying about their lies .... glad we cleared that up
If you are telling a lie about a lie wouldn't that make it the truth. "
you wouldn't know as you only ever tell lies |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"the leavers still lying about their lies .... glad we cleared that up
If you are telling a lie about a lie wouldn't that make it the truth.
you wouldn't know as you only ever tell lies"
Hey watch it hes got more verifications than you so it must be true  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"the leavers still lying about their lies .... glad we cleared that up
If you are telling a lie about a lie wouldn't that make it the truth.
you wouldn't know as you only ever tell lies
Hey watch it hes got more verifications than you so it must be true "
You still got a bee in your bonnet about that comment. It must have really got to you. Some people are just more successful in life others like you less so. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"the leavers still lying about their lies .... glad we cleared that up
If you are telling a lie about a lie wouldn't that make it the truth.
you wouldn't know as you only ever tell lies
Hey watch it hes got more verifications than you so it must be true
You still got a bee in your bonnet about that comment. It must have really got to you. Some people are just more successful in life others like you less so. "
Or desperate |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
""How about £92bn in extra spending in monetary and fiscal policy since the referendum? That wasn't meant to happen?"
So, how is that down to Brexit?
"A more than 90% drop in EU nurses registering in the UK since the referendum. You were told that the NHS would be negatively effected, but that was labelled project fear."
"Since 2011, there has been an annual cap of 20,700 standard visas to non-EU workers, unless professions are protected.
In 2014/15, just over one quarter of places were used for healthcare occupations.
The change will mean nurses are one of the professions which can be granted unlimited numbers of standard visas, as long as they have the backing of a UK employer."
"You were told it would negatively impact our defence, however that was labelled again as project fear, yet a £700m black hole opened in the defence budget."
And how is that down to Brexit? Did we suddenly go to war with someone?
"There are just three very specific facts just to start you off. So I wonder what you tactic will be, will you try and pretend that those 3 things haven't happened, or that they weren't part of "project fear"?"
You spent the last half hour researching this, and that's the best you can do?
Here's a couple of names for you, Mark Carney, Mervin King, see what they said before, and then after, the vote.
All the Project Fear predictions are wrong...
Economy... on the up.
Unemployment.. still trending down.
Construction... booming.
Try again dude.
"
How about the prediction that the £ would drop in value by 20%....yup, it has. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
""You again seem to be completely ignorant of the £700m deficit in the defence budget, let alone what caused it. It was the massive fall in the £. A lot of defence equipment is procured overseas you see."
Huge fall?
Aug 8th 2016... Sterling/Dollar exch rate 1.3038.
Aug 8th 2017... Sterling/Dollar exch rate 1.2986
Rates rise, rates fall, what would you have blamed it on if we had voted to remain?"
Um the massive drop was 23rd June 2016 - nice try but bollocks btw
Here's another example.
Pound Euro July 2014 1.42
Pound Euro today 1.10
Go figure |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Did the Eurozone indulge in "fiscal easing" policies?
I presume you mean the fiscal policy of quatative easing. To be honest it doesn't matter what the EU or the US or the G8 or G20 are doing with there economies. The UK didn't need it before the referendum, but it did need it immediately after.
No it didn't"
So they did it just for fun???? Don't talk utter tosh |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"Did the Eurozone indulge in "fiscal easing" policies?
I presume you mean the fiscal policy of quatative easing. To be honest it doesn't matter what the EU or the US or the G8 or G20 are doing with there economies. The UK didn't need it before the referendum, but it did need it immediately after.
No it didn't
So they did it just for fun???? Don't talk utter tosh"
The UK started fiscal easing in 2009, some £550bn being injected into the monetary system.
The Eurozone started fiscal easing in January 2015, meant to last until 2016 but extended well into 2017.
The injection of capital is to help ease a recession, and whilst the extra £70bn the BOE put in in August last year may well be put down to Brexit uncertainty, the concept has been around since the 1990s. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Did the Eurozone indulge in "fiscal easing" policies?
I presume you mean the fiscal policy of quatative easing. To be honest it doesn't matter what the EU or the US or the G8 or G20 are doing with there economies. The UK didn't need it before the referendum, but it did need it immediately after.
No it didn't
So they did it just for fun???? Don't talk utter tosh
The UK started fiscal easing in 2009, some £550bn being injected into the monetary system.
The Eurozone started fiscal easing in January 2015, meant to last until 2016 but extended well into 2017.
The injection of capital is to help ease a recession, and whilst the extra £70bn the BOE put in in August last year may well be put down to Brexit uncertainty, the concept has been around since the 1990s."
Right so you agree that billions of £ of QE has happened as a result of brexit. No one has claimed that this was a new fiscal policy measure, so I don't know what point you are trying to claim a there.
So you have to admit, that at least this part of "project fear" has come true. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"Did the Eurozone indulge in "fiscal easing" policies?
I presume you mean the fiscal policy of quatative easing. To be honest it doesn't matter what the EU or the US or the G8 or G20 are doing with there economies. The UK didn't need it before the referendum, but it did need it immediately after.
No it didn't
So they did it just for fun???? Don't talk utter tosh
The UK started fiscal easing in 2009, some £550bn being injected into the monetary system.
The Eurozone started fiscal easing in January 2015, meant to last until 2016 but extended well into 2017.
The injection of capital is to help ease a recession, and whilst the extra £70bn the BOE put in in August last year may well be put down to Brexit uncertainty, the concept has been around since the 1990s.
Right so you agree that billions of £ of QE has happened as a result of brexit. No one has claimed that this was a new fiscal policy measure, so I don't know what point you are trying to claim a there.
So you have to admit, that at least this part of "project fear" has come true. "
You said it yourself!
"The UK didn't need it before the referendum but it did need it immediately after"
Is the Eurozone "fiscal easing" because of Brexit? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Did the Eurozone indulge in "fiscal easing" policies?
I presume you mean the fiscal policy of quatative easing. To be honest it doesn't matter what the EU or the US or the G8 or G20 are doing with there economies. The UK didn't need it before the referendum, but it did need it immediately after.
No it didn't
So they did it just for fun???? Don't talk utter tosh
The UK started fiscal easing in 2009, some £550bn being injected into the monetary system.
The Eurozone started fiscal easing in January 2015, meant to last until 2016 but extended well into 2017.
The injection of capital is to help ease a recession, and whilst the extra £70bn the BOE put in in August last year may well be put down to Brexit uncertainty, the concept has been around since the 1990s.
Right so you agree that billions of £ of QE has happened as a result of brexit. No one has claimed that this was a new fiscal policy measure, so I don't know what point you are trying to claim a there.
So you have to admit, that at least this part of "project fear" has come true.
You said it yourself!
"The UK didn't need it before the referendum but it did need it immediately after"
Is the Eurozone "fiscal easing" because of Brexit?"
Sorry, to clairify I meant that before the referendum, say in the year or two before, the bank of England wasn't saying that the UK economy needed QE (there is no such thing as fiscal easing), it was only needed after the referendum as a direct result of the referedum. You can read this in the letter from the Governor to the Chancellor that is published on the BofE website. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"Did the Eurozone indulge in "fiscal easing" policies?
I presume you mean the fiscal policy of quatative easing. To be honest it doesn't matter what the EU or the US or the G8 or G20 are doing with there economies. The UK didn't need it before the referendum, but it did need it immediately after.
No it didn't
So they did it just for fun???? Don't talk utter tosh
The UK started fiscal easing in 2009, some £550bn being injected into the monetary system.
The Eurozone started fiscal easing in January 2015, meant to last until 2016 but extended well into 2017.
The injection of capital is to help ease a recession, and whilst the extra £70bn the BOE put in in August last year may well be put down to Brexit uncertainty, the concept has been around since the 1990s.
Right so you agree that billions of £ of QE has happened as a result of brexit. No one has claimed that this was a new fiscal policy measure, so I don't know what point you are trying to claim a there.
So you have to admit, that at least this part of "project fear" has come true.
You said it yourself!
"The UK didn't need it before the referendum but it did need it immediately after"
Is the Eurozone "fiscal easing" because of Brexit?
Sorry, to clairify I meant that before the referendum, say in the year or two before, the bank of England wasn't saying that the UK economy needed QE (there is no such thing as fiscal easing), it was only needed after the referendum as a direct result of the referedum. You can read this in the letter from the Governor to the Chancellor that is published on the BofE website. "
The challenge now is to get all this extra money back out of the system! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Did the Eurozone indulge in "fiscal easing" policies?
I presume you mean the fiscal policy of quatative easing. To be honest it doesn't matter what the EU or the US or the G8 or G20 are doing with there economies. The UK didn't need it before the referendum, but it did need it immediately after.
No it didn't
So they did it just for fun???? Don't talk utter tosh
The UK started fiscal easing in 2009, some £550bn being injected into the monetary system.
The Eurozone started fiscal easing in January 2015, meant to last until 2016 but extended well into 2017.
The injection of capital is to help ease a recession, and whilst the extra £70bn the BOE put in in August last year may well be put down to Brexit uncertainty, the concept has been around since the 1990s."
So the extra money was, as the BoE said, a direct consequence of Brexit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Did the Eurozone indulge in "fiscal easing" policies?
I presume you mean the fiscal policy of quatative easing. To be honest it doesn't matter what the EU or the US or the G8 or G20 are doing with there economies. The UK didn't need it before the referendum, but it did need it immediately after.
No it didn't
So they did it just for fun???? Don't talk utter tosh
The UK started fiscal easing in 2009, some £550bn being injected into the monetary system.
The Eurozone started fiscal easing in January 2015, meant to last until 2016 but extended well into 2017.
The injection of capital is to help ease a recession, and whilst the extra £70bn the BOE put in in August last year may well be put down to Brexit uncertainty, the concept has been around since the 1990s.
Right so you agree that billions of £ of QE has happened as a result of brexit. No one has claimed that this was a new fiscal policy measure, so I don't know what point you are trying to claim a there.
So you have to admit, that at least this part of "project fear" has come true.
You said it yourself!
"The UK didn't need it before the referendum but it did need it immediately after"
Is the Eurozone "fiscal easing" because of Brexit?
Sorry, to clairify I meant that before the referendum, say in the year or two before, the bank of England wasn't saying that the UK economy needed QE (there is no such thing as fiscal easing), it was only needed after the referendum as a direct result of the referedum. You can read this in the letter from the Governor to the Chancellor that is published on the BofE website. "
Going back to the currency devaluation the ex governor of the bank of England Mervyn King did say the bank of England had been trying to devalue the pound for at least a couple of years before Brexit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Did the Eurozone indulge in "fiscal easing" policies?
I presume you mean the fiscal policy of quatative easing. To be honest it doesn't matter what the EU or the US or the G8 or G20 are doing with there economies. The UK didn't need it before the referendum, but it did need it immediately after.
No it didn't
So they did it just for fun???? Don't talk utter tosh
The UK started fiscal easing in 2009, some £550bn being injected into the monetary system.
The Eurozone started fiscal easing in January 2015, meant to last until 2016 but extended well into 2017.
The injection of capital is to help ease a recession, and whilst the extra £70bn the BOE put in in August last year may well be put down to Brexit uncertainty, the concept has been around since the 1990s.
Right so you agree that billions of £ of QE has happened as a result of brexit. No one has claimed that this was a new fiscal policy measure, so I don't know what point you are trying to claim a there.
So you have to admit, that at least this part of "project fear" has come true.
You said it yourself!
"The UK didn't need it before the referendum but it did need it immediately after"
Is the Eurozone "fiscal easing" because of Brexit?
Sorry, to clairify I meant that before the referendum, say in the year or two before, the bank of England wasn't saying that the UK economy needed QE (there is no such thing as fiscal easing), it was only needed after the referendum as a direct result of the referedum. You can read this in the letter from the Governor to the Chancellor that is published on the BofE website.
Going back to the currency devaluation the ex governor of the bank of England Mervyn King did say the bank of England had been trying to devalue the pound for at least a couple of years before Brexit. "
Yet the monetary policy committee didn't say the same, funny that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Did the Eurozone indulge in "fiscal easing" policies?
I presume you mean the fiscal policy of quatative easing. To be honest it doesn't matter what the EU or the US or the G8 or G20 are doing with there economies. The UK didn't need it before the referendum, but it did need it immediately after.
No it didn't
So they did it just for fun???? Don't talk utter tosh
The UK started fiscal easing in 2009, some £550bn being injected into the monetary system.
The Eurozone started fiscal easing in January 2015, meant to last until 2016 but extended well into 2017.
The injection of capital is to help ease a recession, and whilst the extra £70bn the BOE put in in August last year may well be put down to Brexit uncertainty, the concept has been around since the 1990s.
Right so you agree that billions of £ of QE has happened as a result of brexit. No one has claimed that this was a new fiscal policy measure, so I don't know what point you are trying to claim a there.
So you have to admit, that at least this part of "project fear" has come true.
You said it yourself!
"The UK didn't need it before the referendum but it did need it immediately after"
Is the Eurozone "fiscal easing" because of Brexit?
Sorry, to clairify I meant that before the referendum, say in the year or two before, the bank of England wasn't saying that the UK economy needed QE (there is no such thing as fiscal easing), it was only needed after the referendum as a direct result of the referedum. You can read this in the letter from the Governor to the Chancellor that is published on the BofE website.
Going back to the currency devaluation the ex governor of the bank of England Mervyn King did say the bank of England had been trying to devalue the pound for at least a couple of years before Brexit. "
But before we move away from QE, will you admit that your so called "project fear" said this would happen? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Go back to whether we should lock up liars, we do everyone else.
People in the UK have criminal records for being a public nuisance feeding pigeons.
That says it all about the small minded nature of vast swathes of the UK.
And for those that voted to leave due to immigration I'm afraid I've got bad news. Since we are an ageing population with declining birth rate, we absolutely rely on importing people to balance the books. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
A good legal view on why criminal charges against the leave campaign would be unlikely:
http://defencebrief.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/criminal-charges-for-brexit-bus-claims.html
In short, for fraud claims you would have to prove the perpetrator did it for *financial* gain, not political. Which is unlikely. And for misuse of office claims considering Johnson, Gove and Stuart were all campaigning against the position of their party, it would be hard to argue they were campaigning as part of their office.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Did the Eurozone indulge in "fiscal easing" policies?
I presume you mean the fiscal policy of quatative easing. To be honest it doesn't matter what the EU or the US or the G8 or G20 are doing with there economies. The UK didn't need it before the referendum, but it did need it immediately after.
No it didn't
So they did it just for fun???? Don't talk utter tosh
The UK started fiscal easing in 2009, some £550bn being injected into the monetary system.
The Eurozone started fiscal easing in January 2015, meant to last until 2016 but extended well into 2017.
The injection of capital is to help ease a recession, and whilst the extra £70bn the BOE put in in August last year may well be put down to Brexit uncertainty, the concept has been around since the 1990s.
Right so you agree that billions of £ of QE has happened as a result of brexit. No one has claimed that this was a new fiscal policy measure, so I don't know what point you are trying to claim a there.
So you have to admit, that at least this part of "project fear" has come true.
You said it yourself!
"The UK didn't need it before the referendum but it did need it immediately after"
Is the Eurozone "fiscal easing" because of Brexit?
Sorry, to clairify I meant that before the referendum, say in the year or two before, the bank of England wasn't saying that the UK economy needed QE (there is no such thing as fiscal easing), it was only needed after the referendum as a direct result of the referedum. You can read this in the letter from the Governor to the Chancellor that is published on the BofE website.
Going back to the currency devaluation the ex governor of the bank of England Mervyn King did say the bank of England had been trying to devalue the pound for at least a couple of years before Brexit.
But before we move away from QE, will you admit that your so called "project fear" said this would happen? "
I don't recall anybody saying there would be QE if there was a vote to leave. Who said it? And as it turned out it was unnecessary, it was just a ploy to ease market fears, which recovered pretty quick anyway. It might actually help your arguement if you knew what QE was |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Go back to whether we should lock up liars, we do everyone else.
People in the UK have criminal records for being a public nuisance feeding pigeons.
That says it all about the small minded nature of vast swathes of the UK.
And for those that voted to leave due to immigration I'm afraid I've got bad news. Since we are an ageing population with declining birth rate, we absolutely rely on importing people to balance the books. "
A Ponzi scheme you mean? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
