Britain's May asks EU to help her end Brexit sniping at home

[sawadee1947]

It is only the beginning of a horrible end. At the end UK will pay. "If you want to dance, you have to pay the band."

[sirineou]

1 hour ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

Would you not accept that the EU has a vested interest in brokering a deal that is in both sides best interests for the long term?

 

I, along with most Brixiteers, have never said that a divorce bill is not payable.

 

Your analogy, or using divorce, or using leaving a golf club is perfectly valid....but, in my divorces I never agreed the financial terms until all other matters were agreed. 

I absolutely agree in a mutually beneficial agreement, any reasonable person would, IMO that's what  the EU is trying to achieve, they will not, and can not allow the UK to leave leave "easily",  and maintain a "special relation" ,

I am sure the UK is not the only one who considers themselves "special" .

If they allow the UK to leave  "easily" and with a "special relationship" , it would be the beginning of the end for the EU, which will soon find itself in a turbulent sea of "special relationships".  

In your divorce you negotiated  your financial separation within the framework of conventional norms and not demand a "special relationship" different than what available to others divorcing.

"sure you get half of the house honey, but I want you to blow me  once a week afterwards!" LOL

1 hour ago, chrissables said:

So you think Britain should pay an unknown and unquantified sum of money because they were a net contributor and you believe they have a legal obligation to pay?

 

What if one of the non net contributing countries decided to leave and for example they had been receiving 50 million a year in benefits.  I presume the EU would continue to pay these benefits until article 50  came into effect? And then of course there would be the transition period also the EU should keep paying through. I think we know the answer to that!

 

 

No I don't think the UK should pay an "unknown and unquantified "sum of monies, nono one does, and no one would. They should enter and complete negotiations on the subject  and IMO if such negotiations are unsuccessful perhaps seek a third uninterested party (is such party exists) to arbitrate the matter. 

I don't understand the last paragraph. If I understand this correctly, a decision to leave is not official until Article 50 comes in affect any previous decisions are unofficial and until such time it is business as usual  and agreed.

 

Edited October 21, 2017 by sirineou
Typo (sea, not see) lol

[sirineou]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

47,567,453,675.23 

 

(Euro)

Not a lot of money IMO

Am I missing something (I am american and don't know as much as you all do about this)

If you assume that the UK agrees on half of it, it then leaves about 23 billion on the table. The UK is holding the UK economy hostage over this??

Why not agree on the full amount, with a payment schedule over a  length of years and either inflate your way out of it or , after you get your special relationship be slow to pay ?

I am sure all this drama will cause the UK a lot more than 23 billion.

PS: if I am correct the UK annual budget is £772 billion.

 

Edited October 21, 2017 by sirineou
Postscript addition

[Jip99]

32 minutes ago, sirineou said:

I absolutely agree in a mutually beneficial agreement, any reasonable person would, IMO that's what  the EU is trying to achieve, they will not, and can not allow the UK to leave leave "easily",  and maintain a "special relation" ,

I am sure the UK is not the only one who considers themselves "special" .

If they allow the UK to leave  "easily" and with a "special relationship" , it would be the beginning of the end for the EU, which will soon find itself in a turbulent sea of "special relationships".  

In your divorce you negotiated  your financial separation within the framework of conventional norms and not demand a "special relationship" different than what available to others divorcing.

"sure you get half of the house honey, but I want you to blow me  once a week afterwards!" LOL

No I don't think the UK should pay an "unknown and unquantified "sum of monies, nono one does, and no one would. They should enter and complete negotiations on the subject  and IMO if such negotiations are unsuccessful perhaps seek a third uninterested party (is such party exists) to arbitrate the matter. 

I don't understand the last paragraph. If I understand this correctly, a decision to leave is not official until Article 50 comes in affect any previous decisions are unofficial and until such time it is business as usual  and agreed.

 

 

 

I have an excellent relationship with both ex wives (no blow jobs though).

 

I like to think that this was largely because we discussed, and agreed, the terms of access to children, financial support and division of assets based on the long term best interests of all parties involved.

 

Don’t you think that matters might progress better if the EU adopted a similar attitude? The concept of making the ‘guilty party’ bleed never achieves this objective..... an objective that I believe the EU has no interest in whatsoever.

[Grouse]

21 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Not a lot of money IMO

Am I missing something (I am american and don't know as much as you all do about this)

If you assume that the UK agrees on half of it, it then leaves about 23 billion on the table. The UK is holding the UK economy hostage over this??

Why not agree on the full amount, with a payment schedule over a  length of years and either inflate your way out of it or , after you get your special relationship be slow to pay ?

I am sure all this drama will cause the UK a lot more than 23 billion.

PS: if I am correct the UK annual budget is £772 billion.

 

Correct! It's peanuts.

 

2 Trillion GDP

 

Amortise 40 Billion over 10 years?

 

How many Big Macs is that?

 

Brexiteers are so mean, miserly and myopic! ?

[sirineou]

1 minute ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

I have an excellent relationship with both ex wives (no blow jobs though).

 

I like to think that this was largely because we discussed, and agreed, the terms of access to children, financial support and division of assets based on the long term best interests of all parties involved.

 

Don’t you think that matters might progress better if the EU adopted a similar attitude? The concept of making the ‘guilty party’ bleed never achieves this objective..... an objective that I believe the EU has no interest in whatsoever.

Sorry about the BJ losses, I hope you have made adequate arrangement elsewhere to mitigate the situation, LOL

 Same here, me and my Ex are best friends, after all we do have a daughter together and talk often about her wellbeing. People that see as together often say "you two are divorced?  Why?"

We too got together and had an amicable , reasonable, agreement to move forward.

IMO in the UK , EU situation there are a lot of politics involved,  both within the respective blocks and local to individual countries.

 

[Jip99]

5 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Sorry about the BJ losses, I hope you have made adequate arrangement elsewhere to mitigate the situation, LOL

 Same here, me and my Ex are best friends, after all we do have a daughter together and talk often about her wellbeing. People that see as together often say "you two are divorced?  Why?"

We too got together and had an amicable , reasonable, agreement to move forward.

IMO in the UK , EU situation there are a lot of politics involved,  both within the respective blocks and local to individual countries.

 

 

 

I love your penultimate paragraph ......”We too got together and had an amicable, reasonable, agreement to move forward”.

 

Wouldn’t it be nice if you could hear those words in a joint statement from Junker and May...... ??

[Grouse]

It is not beyond the wit of man to resolve this. Even I know the solution.

 

It involves staying in the single market and customs union

 

It involves dramatically cutting net migration from EU AND outside EU but not as a flat rate. Limited by country, skill level and other factors

 

It involves improving EU democratic priciples

 

It involves increasing outer ring national sovereignty.

 

It retains EU environmental and human rights laws

 

And so on.....

 

Give me some peasant supreme on gnocchi and I'll tell all.

 

We need to get this out of the way and focus on important issues at home ?

 

 

[Jip99]

11 minutes ago, Grouse said:

It is not beyond the wit of man to resolve this. Even I know the solution.

 

It involves staying in the single market and customs union

 

It involves dramatically cutting net migration from EU AND outside EU but not as a flat rate. Limited by country, skill level and other factors

 

It involves improving EU democratic priciples

 

It involves increasing outer ring national sovereignty.

 

It retains EU environmental and human rights laws

 

And so on.....

 

Give me some peasant supreme on gnocchi and I'll tell all.

 

We need to get this out of the way and focus on important issues at home ?

 

 

 

 

What a a pity that Cameron couldn’t see that - or at least convince his EU cohorts that such change was necessary.

[sirineou]

28 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Correct! It's peanuts.

 

2 Trillion GDP

 

Amortise 40 Billion over 10 years?

 

How many Big Macs is that?

 

Brexiteers are so mean, miserly and myopic! ?

 Please forgive any mathematical errors.

The total amount is about 6% of the current annual budget , if amortized over a length of years, as budgets increase, progressively becoming a smaller percentage of the annual budget. The annual payment becoming less than .5% 

Are they kidding me? 

IMO not paying it and moving forward negotiating in a more amicable,  cooperative environment would cost the UK a lot more.

Am I missing something ,

or is May trying to cause such pain and force a second referendum?  Call me paranoid but it sounds to me as if she is sabotaging the negotiations. 

[xylophone]

2 hours ago, sirineou said:

Right or wrong, the UK as did all the other countries got together in what they call the EU and agreed to go some place and jointly share their proportion of the cost.  

 Now they want to leave but don't want to pay their share!! The EU is not stopping them from leaving, is not even forcing them to pay, It is simply saying , if you want to discuss a special  relationship , pay your bill .

The UK, as part of the EU,  agreed to pay their share of costs for plans made for the future.

 

The UK wants to pull out and the EU is saying, well, pay the costs you agreed as part of plans for the future........much the same as you would with a business partner who wanted to pull out of an agreement you had made, as it was agreed after all, and you would have every right to do so.

 

No difference and if the Brexit crew can't see that then it is their lack of understanding with regards to business relationships (and common sense) that is causing the problem.

[Grouse]

8 minutes ago, sirineou said:

 Please forgive any mathematical errors.

The total amount is about 6% of the current annual budget , if amortized over a length of years, as budgets increase, progressively becoming a smaller percentage of the annual budget. The annual payment becoming less than .5% 

Are they kidding me? 

IMO not paying it and moving forward negotiating in a more amicable,  cooperative environment would cost the UK a lot more.

Am I missing something ,

or is May trying to cause such pain and force a second referendum?  Call me paranoid but it sounds to me as if she is sabotaging the negotiations. 

Correct! It beats me ?

[aright]

44 minutes ago, Grouse said:

It is not beyond the wit of man to resolve this. Even I know the solution.

 

It involves staying in the single market and customs union

 

It involves dramatically cutting net migration from EU AND outside EU but not as a flat rate. Limited by country, skill level and other factors

 

It involves improving EU democratic priciples

 

It involves increasing outer ring national sovereignty.

 

It retains EU environmental and human rights laws

 

And so on.....

 

Give me some peasant supreme on gnocchi and I'll tell all.

 

We need to get this out of the way and focus on important issues at home ?

 

 

No Remainers are going to accept an economic downturn no matter how short.

They pay no mind to what happens if as a result of "whatever" we have to remain part of the EU.

In his speech of a few weeks ago Juncker made it obvious that iho any weaknesses in the economic and political model could be improved by more Europe. Mr Macron endorsed this view a few weeks later 

He wants to see much more harmonisation and centralisation across all EU countries. As a result of this sentiment the UK would almost certainly be forced to adopt the Euro.

Control of our country would slowly evaporate only to be replaced by a German and French timetable.

We have from memory about 70 UK MEP's in Brussels out of a total of about 700. What possible way can 10% of the voters influence outcomes.

The real question for us; is it better to be a fee thinking, self determining, unimpeded trading nation  or part of a federal bureaucracy?  

[xylophone]

16 minutes ago, aright said:

The real question for us; is it better to be a fee thinking, self determining, unimpeded trading nation  or part of a federal bureaucracy?  

Ok if the Brexiteers want that, then pay the bill that was agreed for plans made and accepted at the time, and go on their way..........simple really.

[Grouse]

14 minutes ago, aright said:

No Remainers are going to accept an economic downturn no matter how short.

They pay no mind to what happens if as a result of "whatever" we have to remain part of the EU.

In his speech of a few weeks ago Juncker made it obvious that iho any weaknesses in the economic and political model could be improved by more Europe. Mr Macron endorsed this view a few weeks later 

He wants to see much more harmonisation and centralisation across all EU countries. As a result of this sentiment the UK would almost certainly be forced to adopt the Euro.

Control of our country would slowly evaporate only to be replaced by a German and French timetable.

We have from memory about 70 UK MEP's in Brussels out of a total of about 700. What possible way can 10% of the voters influence outcomes.

The real question for us; is it better to be a fee thinking, self determining, unimpeded trading nation  or part of a federal bureaucracy?  

I think you are quite wrong

 

I see no animosity from the EU

 

There are perfectly rational routes forward to the benefit of all (with the exception of feudal slave driving fat cats)

 

Why do you think the other 27 are not our friends? I assume you that more binds us together than separates us ?

 

Talk to us about what you consider sticking points in my manifesto?

[Jip99]

40 minutes ago, xylophone said:

The UK, as part of the EU,  agreed to pay their share of costs for plans made for the future.

 

The UK wants to pull out and the EU is saying, well, pay the costs you agreed as part of plans for the future........much the same as you would with a business partner who wanted to pull out of an agreement you had made, as it was agreed after all, and you would have every right to do so.

 

No difference and if the Brexit crew can't see that then it is their lack of understanding with regards to business relationships (and common sense) that is causing the problem.

 

 

It it was never a blank cheque though.... and adding European fringe countries only adds to the ‘takers’.

 

 

..and unaudited accounts make it difficult to calculate a settlement that takes account of reparations and future responsibilities. 

 

 

That said, I am not one who believes that a debt is not due and whilst the amount is largely irrelevant it is inextricably linked the terms of the future relationship. 

[aright]

3 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I think you are quite wrong

 

I see no animosity from the EU

 

There are perfectly rational routes forward to the benefit of all (with the exception of feudal slave driving fat cats)

 

Why do you think the other 27 are not our friends? I assume you that more binds us together than separates us ?

 

Talk to us about what you consider sticking points in my manifesto?

There are no sticking points in your manifesto; it is very laudable. In the past you have said better to remain in and effect change from within. If we could you and I would be brothers in arms . Unfortunately  I have explained to you with the voting ratio against us and with so many unelected, unaccountable, imposing, top officials in the EU I don't think this is possible. I don't regard the 27 other nations as enemies and if they want a federal bureaucracy  good luck to them but I don't want that for me or my country. You presumably do .

In this and my last post I have explained to you why I don't think it will be possible to change the EU's stated ambitions.

I look forward to your details as to your perfectly rational routes forward to the benefit of all. If you can convince me I will change. 

 

[Grouse]

1 minute ago, aright said:

There are no sticking points in your manifesto; it is very laudable. In the past you have said better to remain in and effect change from within. If we could you and I would be brothers in arms . Unfortunately  I have explained to you with the voting ratio against us and with so many unelected, unaccountable, imposing, top officials in the EU I don't think this is possible. I don't regard the 27 other nations as enemies and if they want a federal bureaucracy  good luck to them but I don't want that for me or my country. You presumably do .

In this and my last post I have explained to you why I don't think it will be possible to change the EU's stated ambitions.

I look forward to your details as to your perfectly rational routes forward to the benefit of all. If you can convince me I will change. 

 

OK, you and me.

 

Lets go to Brussels and speak the truth.

 

Are you up for it?

[Khun Han]

24 minutes ago, xylophone said:

Ok if the Brexiteers want that, then pay the bill that was agreed for plans made and accepted at the time, and go on their way..........simple really.

 

The EU has now provided a list of costed schemes which the UK is party to. According to PM May, government accountants and lawyers are going through the paperwork line by line. That seems reasonable enough to me.

[Grouse]

Just now, Khun Han said:

 

The EU has now provided a list of costed schemes which the UK is party to. According to PM May, government accountants and lawyers are going through the paperwork line by line. That seems reasonable enough to me.

Where can we access that?

[aright]

23 minutes ago, Grouse said:

OK, you and me.

 

Lets go to Brussels and speak the truth.

 

Are you up for it?

Are you paying? I understand a night out on Rue d'Aerschot can be very enjoyable.

I hope you are not going to disappoint me and not give me your perfectly rational routes forward.

[chrissables]

4 hours ago, dunroaming said:

It is not an unknown and unquantified sum of money.  As May says they are going through it line by line as the British people would expect and then that will determine the amount.  A transition period would then cost about another 20 billion and she has already committed to pay that should the EU agree to such a period.

 

You may think that this is unfair but this was always going to be the case.  Something Johnson and the boys avoided telling you.  May has said we will pay the correct amount, it is just a case of what that is.

 

Instead of keeping on about how unfair the EU are being, why are you not furious with the Brexit boys who lied about the facts of Brexit? 

If it is known and quantified, please share it. To date i have not seen or heard of a quantified amount. 

 

Give details if you are able, which i doubt.

[chrissables]

3 hours ago, sirineou said:

I absolutely agree in a mutually beneficial agreement, any reasonable person would, IMO that's what  the EU is trying to achieve, they will not, and can not allow the UK to leave leave "easily",  and maintain a "special relation" ,

I am sure the UK is not the only one who considers themselves "special" .

If they allow the UK to leave  "easily" and with a "special relationship" , it would be the beginning of the end for the EU, which will soon find itself in a turbulent sea of "special relationships".  

In your divorce you negotiated  your financial separation within the framework of conventional norms and not demand a "special relationship" different than what available to others divorcing.

"sure you get half of the house honey, but I want you to blow me  once a week afterwards!" LOL

No I don't think the UK should pay an "unknown and unquantified "sum of monies, nono one does, and no one would. They should enter and complete negotiations on the subject  and IMO if such negotiations are unsuccessful perhaps seek a third uninterested party (is such party exists) to arbitrate the matter. 

I don't understand the last paragraph. If I understand this correctly, a decision to leave is not official until Article 50 comes in affect any previous decisions are unofficial and until such time it is business as usual  and agreed.

 

Actually at this time the EU are demanding payment without quantifying it.

 

They (EU and UK) should have the costs decided by an independent court. I believe the EU would not want this as their demands can't be quantified. 

[chrissables]

2 hours ago, Grouse said:

It is not beyond the wit of man to resolve this. Even I know the solution.

 

It involves staying in the single market and customs union

 

It involves dramatically cutting net migration from EU AND outside EU but not as a flat rate. Limited by country, skill level and other factors

 

It involves improving EU democratic priciples

 

It involves increasing outer ring national sovereignty.

 

It retains EU environmental and human rights laws

 

And so on.....

 

Give me some peasant supreme on gnocchi and I'll tell all.

 

We need to get this out of the way and focus on important issues at home ?

 

 

You are funny, i am sure the EU would never do, that is why we are where we are.

[chrissables]

1 hour ago, xylophone said:

The UK, as part of the EU,  agreed to pay their share of costs for plans made for the future.

 

The UK wants to pull out and the EU is saying, well, pay the costs you agreed as part of plans for the future........much the same as you would with a business partner who wanted to pull out of an agreement you had made, as it was agreed after all, and you would have every right to do so.

 

No difference and if the Brexit crew can't see that then it is their lack of understanding with regards to business relationships (and common sense) that is causing the problem.

So following the law is bad? Who wrote the laws?

[chrissables]

1 hour ago, xylophone said:

Ok if the Brexiteers want that, then pay the bill that was agreed for plans made and accepted at the time, and go on their way..........simple really.

What bill has been agreed?

[taipeir]

 Please forgive any mathematical errors. The total amount is about 6% of the current annual budget , if amortized over a length of years, as budgets increase, progressively becoming a smaller percentage of the annual budget. The annual payment becoming less than .5% 

Are they kidding me? 

IMO not paying it and moving forward negotiating in a more amicable,  cooperative environment would cost the UK a lot more.

Am I missing something ,

or is May trying to cause such pain and force a second referendum?  Call me paranoid but it sounds to me as if she is sabotaging the negotiations. 

 

May didn't even vote for Brexit, she's not naturally hard Brexit.She is being pushed to make a big song and dance by hard-line Tory MPs.and the need to avoid tabloid headlines such as 'sold us down the river' etc.

 

It's all politics, the actual amount is piddley compared to the damage to the UK finance industry , lack of investment , job losses and increased borrowing costs.

 

Oh yeah and the going through.the budget line by line is also the stuff of fantasy. These are future projections of costs they are going to be different projections. The reality is they will negotiate a number that will be acceptable to both sides.

 

The Brexit exit bill is not the most important issue it's actually not going to really impact the UK that much fiscally.

 

Brits better hope waffler in chief Boris Johnson doesn't becomes PM never seen a bigger bullshitter and completely untrustworthy.....it seems a plummy accent , brass balls and Eton chums can make one go a long way.

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

[Khun Han]

3 hours ago, chrissables said:

Actually at this time the EU are demanding payment without quantifying it.

 

They (EU and UK) should have the costs decided by an independent court. I believe the EU would not want this as their demands can't be quantified. 

 

The EU's pet court, the ECJ, backed away from this a while ago. That, per se, has to send up a red flag.