So what did the Brexit supporters gain?

[Ricardo]

22 hours ago, GuestHouse said:

Very many of the 1.6 million unemployed are unemployable.

 

However Brexit's economic plans might have a cure for that.

 

If Brexit manages to create markets around the world for British turnips, even the most unemployable could be put to work digging for victory.

 

 

Keep looking for work, and something will turnip turn up eventually ?

 

Good news for Swedes, Britain's en-root to recovery ?

 

The green-shoots of recovery are Brussels-sprouting ?

 

Sorry  ...  it's a slow, and worryingly persistently-dry, morning up in Chiang Mai !

[SgtRock]

On 8/23/2016 at 10:52 PM, sandyf said:

Only people that have never been an employer would make delusional statements like that.

 

I have been an employer.

 

If you think it is a delusional statement provide evidence to back up your statement.

 

There is a small % of unemployed that are lazy, feckless and have no interest in finding a job as they are better of being unemployed.

 

The Welfare State is part of the problem, when welfare payments are the equal or better than paid, gainful employment

 

A nice little pattern is developing here.

 

There appears to be a little pack of very bitter remainers 

 

Woof Woof

Edited August 25, 2016 by SgtRock

[SgtRock]

23 hours ago, GuestHouse said:

Very many of the 1.6 million unemployed are unemployable.

 

However Brexit's economic plans might have a cure for that.

 

If Brexit manages to create markets around the world for British turnips, even the most unemployable could be put to work digging for victory.

 

 

 

Woof Woof

 

Any independent sources to back up your diatribe ?

 

This little gem will go straight over your head.

 

'' As long as you are capable of using a spade, you will always find a job ''

[bartender100]

80% of all fish caught in the 12 mile radius of the UK is by other EU nations, who then dump 50% of it to compile with EU regulations.

Thats a fact

 

The fishing industry in the UK could create up to 50,000 new jobs

[SgtRock]

17 hours ago, GuestHouse said:

Sgt.Rock's 1.6 million unemployed who he argues are why the UK doesn't need immigrants are not going to fill the skills and knowledge gap, nor go out into the wider world and win business for the UK.

 

You really must stop showing your ignorance.

 

Quote

Degree degradation: With too many university graduates and not enough jobs, many are finding themselves woefully underemployed

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/editorials/degree-degradation-with-too-many-university-graduates-and-not-enough-jobs-many-are-finding-10461190.html

 

Quote

Thousands of new graduates out of work, figures show

A third of working graduates took jobs as cleaners, office juniors and road sweepers six months after leaving universi

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/11699095/Thousands-of-new-graduates-out-of-work-figures-show.html

 

I understand that for you bitter woof - woofs this will be difficult to comprehend.

 

The UK's unemployment figure comes from the number of people claiming JSA, which currently stands at  1.6 Million.

 

JSA can only be claimed for a period of 6 months . There are no long term sick, lazy, incapable or any other reprobate within the JSA figures. They have all been moved onto other benefits, as was started by Thatcher around 1980.

 

Now stop barking at the moon.

Edited August 25, 2016 by SgtRock

[SgtRock]

10 hours ago, sandyf said:

Quite. the UK has bred a generation that have been taught extremely well by their parents on how to milk the benefit system

 

These people are not included in the unemployment figures.

 

JSA, where the unemployment figure comes from, can only be claimed for 6 months.

 

The well taught generation of how to milk the system do not claim JSA ( The odd newbie benefit scrounger accepted, everyone has to start somewhere ). They have much better pickings.

 

For someone so vocal.....................

 

 

[GuestHouse]

1 hour ago, SgtRock said:

 

Woof Woof

 

Any independent sources to back up your diatribe ?

 

This little gem will go straight over your head.

 

'' As long as you are capable of using a spade, you will always find a job ''

 

Perhaps we should dismiss all the foreigners working in the UK's NHS (11% of all NHS staff are foreigners, 14% of the professionally qualified clinical staff are foreigners and 26% of NHS doctors are foreigners).

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/26/nhs-foreign-nationals-immigration-health-service

 

And yes I'm all for cutting welfare handouts, but let' start by tackling the big welfare scroungere.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/06/benefits-corporate-welfare-research-public-money-businesses

 

 

[SgtRock]

10 minutes ago, GuestHouse said:

 

Perhaps we should dismiss all the foreigners working in the UK's NHS (11% of all NHS staff are foreigners, 14% of the professionally qualified clinical staff are foreigners and 26% of NHS doctors are foreigners).

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/26/nhs-foreign-nationals-immigration-health-service

 

And yes I'm all for cutting welfare handouts, but let' start by tackling the big welfare scroungere.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/06/benefits-corporate-welfare-research-public-money-businesses

 

 

 

Your post would have some merit if I had came across a post where anyone was calling for foreigners to be rounded up en mass and thrown out of the UK.

 

As I have not seen such a post, then the above is nothing but off topic garbage.

 

Thank you for your non contribution

 

 

[rockingrobin]

2 hours ago, SgtRock said:

 

These people are not included in the unemployment figures.

 

JSA, where the unemployment figure comes from, can only be claimed for 6 months.

 

The well taught generation of how to milk the system do not claim JSA ( The odd newbie benefit scrounger accepted, everyone has to start somewhere ). They have much better pickings.

 

For someone so vocal.....................

 

 

Contributions based JSA can be claimed for 6 month if meeting the requirements, however income based JSA   has no such restrictions.

The JSA will count towards the cliament count figures but not necessarily to the official UK unemployment statistics from LFS

[dick dasterdly]

Does anyone  have a link to statistics as to who are net 'payers' when it comes to UK tax and NI?

 

I ask as decades ago () I was doing some educational qualification or the other, and at that time gathered that those with children (who weren't paying higher rates of tax) were subsidised by those without children and those paying high tax rates.

 

It would be interesting to learn whether or not this is the case.

[Orac]

Does anyone  have a link to statistics as to who are net 'payers' when it comes to UK tax and NI?

 

I ask as decades ago ([emoji20]) I was doing some educational qualification or the other, and at that time gathered that those with children (who weren't paying higher rates of tax) were subsidised by those without children and those paying high tax rates.

 

It would be interesting to learn whether or not this is the case.

I think that is pretty much a given since, in the vast majority of cases, those with children will be getting free healthcare and education.

[sandyf]

7 hours ago, SgtRock said:

 

These people are not included in the unemployment figures.

 

JSA, where the unemployment figure comes from, can only be claimed for 6 months.

 

The well taught generation of how to milk the system do not claim JSA ( The odd newbie benefit scrounger accepted, everyone has to start somewhere ). They have much better pickings.

 

For someone so vocal.....................

 

 

You really should get your facts right before shouting off. You are getting mixed up between LFS and Claimant Count, the LFS figure is currently 1,641,000.

 

" The labour force is a better guide to unemployment because the claimant count only includes those eligible for benefits. "

 

Claimant count and Labour Force survey measure of unemployment in UK

• In Dec 2015, according to Labour Force Survey there were 1.69 million unemployed people (5.1% of the working population) – Labour force survey
• In Dec 2015, according to Claimant count, there were 760,000 unemployed 2.2%
• See: UK unemployment

http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/8/unemployment/the-true-level-of-unemployment-in-uk/

[SgtRock]

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

You really should get your facts right before shouting off. You are getting mixed up between LFS and Claimant Count, the LFS figure is currently 1,641,000.

 

" The labour force is a better guide to unemployment because the claimant count only includes those eligible for benefits. "

 

Claimant count and Labour Force survey measure of unemployment in UK

• In Dec 2015, according to Labour Force Survey there were 1.69 million unemployed people (5.1% of the working population) – Labour force survey
• In Dec 2015, according to Claimant count, there were 760,000 unemployed 2.2%
• See: UK unemployment

http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/8/unemployment/the-true-level-of-unemployment-in-uk/

 

I do have my facts correct.

 

Quote

In reality, depending on what you choose to count, unemployment in the UK could be as low as 1.6 million, or somewhere above 11 million or so.

In reality, depending on what you choose to count, unemployment in the UK could be as low as 1.6 million, or somewhere above 11 million or so.

The lower figure is the number of people currently claiming jobseeker's allowance, the UK's primary unemployment benefit. The higher is the number of adults aged 16 to 64 who are not currently in employment, though using such a figure obviously hugely distorts reality: it includes people such as stay-at-home parents, long-term disabled people unable to work, and those who choose not to work for other reasons.

The higher is the number of adults aged 16 to 64 who are not currently in employment, though using such a figure obviously hugely distorts reality: it includes people such as stay-at-home parents, long-term disabled people unable to work, and those who choose not to work for other reasons.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/reality-check-with-polly-curtis/2012/feb/16/unemployed-uk-how-many

 

Put your digging implement back in the shed.

Edited August 25, 2016 by SgtRock

[GuestHouse]

Going back to the OP's question.

 

It would seem the right to have the UK pealed off by the US and then shafted by US multinationals:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/25/war-of-words-eu-us-tax-avoidance-starbucks-apple-amazon

 

Cui Bono?

[SgtRock]

48 minutes ago, GuestHouse said:

Going back to the OP's question.

 

It would seem the right to have the UK pealed off by the US and then shafted by US multinationals:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/25/war-of-words-eu-us-tax-avoidance-starbucks-apple-amazon

 

Cui Bono?

 

Location:Somewhere very nice.

 

Is your somewhere very nice an Asylum somewhere ?

 

This article is about a spat between the US and the EU, not about the UK or Brexit, therefore nothing to do with the topic or OP.

 

It does, however, highlight very nicely a major reason why the UK should leave the corrupt Union AKA the EU

 

Quote

The commission has already ruled that tax advantages negotiated by Starbucks with the Netherlands government and by the Italian carmaker Fiat with Luxembourg amounted to illegal state aid, with €20m-€30m potentially owed by each company. In January, the commission took a preliminary view that Amazon’s deal with Luxembourg also amounted to state aid. A final decision is pending.

 

Or do you just need someone to blame for this paragraph, should it become reality ?

 

Quote

Lew’s white paper threatened retaliation, saying the US “continues to consider potential responses should the commission continue its present course”. Existing tax treaties could be revised and this would have a “chilling effect” on US investment into Europe, it claimed.

 

All at the link you provided.

Edited August 26, 2016 by SgtRock

[sandyf]

22 hours ago, SgtRock said:

 

I do have my facts correct.

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/reality-check-with-polly-curtis/2012/feb/16/unemployed-uk-how-many

 

Put your digging implement back in the shed.

That says it all, you obviously think nothing has changed since 2012.

[GuestHouse]

12 hours ago, SgtRock said:

 

Location:Somewhere very nice.

 

Is your somewhere very nice an Asylum somewhere ?

 

This article is about a spat between the US and the EU, not about the UK or Brexit, therefore nothing to do with the topic or OP.

 

It does, however, highlight very nicely a major reason why the UK should leave the corrupt Union AKA the EU

 

 

Or do you just need someone to blame for this paragraph, should it become reality ?

 

 

All at the link you provided.

 

One of the benefits of the 'Fair Usage' rules here on TVF is, that if followed, they encourage members to read the whole of the source that has been linked to, rather than rely on selective quotations.

 

Reading the whole of the source that I linked it is clear that the EU has ruled that member states within the EU have acted illegally in assisting US corporations to avoid taxation. The US government on the other hand has abandoned its usual demands that nations do not give subsides to business and has also abandoned its pursuit of corporations who avoid taxes, provided that the nations are not the US and the tax avoidance isn't sending tax free cash to US corporates. 

 

The US government's reaction to the EU acting to ensure taxes are paid in the EU is to threaten retaliation. Which is precisely why this is a Brexit issue. 

 

The EU is the single biggest integrated market in the world, the UK (if removed from the EU) has nowhere near the bargaining power of the EU when faced with threats from the US. 

 

The choice is stark - allow US corporations to conduct business without paying tax or face retaliation from the US government. 

 

The UK can do that alone or can remain in the EU and face up to the US government (and the US government's blatant support of  US corporations) as a member of the EU.

 

Once again we see who the real winners from Brexit would be - The Corporate world. 

 

 

 

[elliss]

On 8/24/2016 at 11:36 PM, dick dasterdly said:

Does anyone  have a link to statistics as to who are net 'payers' when it comes to UK tax and NI?

 

I ask as decades ago () I was doing some educational qualification or the other, and at that time gathered that those with children (who weren't paying higher rates of tax) were subsidised by those without children and those paying high tax rates.

 

It would be interesting to learn whether or not this is the case.

.

         Statistics ,  ha ha ,  what a  fool  believes .  same  as open university  degree  , useless.

[cumgranosalum]

Before Brext remainers were "scaremongers" - now that many of the "scares{" have been shown to be valid Brexiteers resort to stop complaining and get used to it...they seem to have a problem with connecting themsleves to what has happened (just like bfore the referendum)

 

Here's a nice summary of Brexit arguments....

 

The top 10 reasons Brexit isn't working, according to Brexiteers

.

 

 - 

[Khun Han]

^ If the New Statesman article you referenced was factual, rather than just a bizarre second-guessing opinion piece, it might have been worth your effort in linking to it.

[SgtRock]

Guesthouse.

 

Your link 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/25/war-of-words-eu-us-tax-avoidance-starbucks-apple-amazon

 

Headline for your link

 

Quote

War of words hots up between US and EU over tax avoidance

 

I will ask you again what this article has got to do with the Topic ?

 

What your article highlights, very clearly is.

 

1. There is widespread corruption in the EU at Government Level

 

2. There is a possibility of a trade war looming between the US and the EU.

 

IMO, both these points are valid reasons for getting out of the EU. Not as you seem to think, they are reasons to stay in the EU.

 

10 hours ago, GuestHouse said:

The choice is stark - allow US corporations to conduct business without paying tax or face retaliation from the US government. 

 

 

EU's problem, not the UK's. The UK is not facing a trade war with the US, the EU is. Now from where I am sitting looking in. I do not want to be part of the EU that is involved in a trade war with the US, I want to be out of the EU picking up the benefits of that US - EU trade war.

 

10 hours ago, GuestHouse said:

The UK can do that alone or can remain in the EU and face up to the US government (and the US government's blatant support of  US corporations) as a member of the EU.

 

 

This article highlights a US - EU problem. Or what are we really saying ? The EU is pissing their pants at the thought of having to stand up to the US without the UK to hold their hand and wipe their collective @sses.

 

But to take it back to topic.

 

Today, as we speak, the brexit supporters have gained nothing. Brexit has not happened so it will be pretty difficult to actually gain anything until Brexit occurs.

 

What has happened is the 3 EU mouthpieces that were screaming from the rooftops about how the UK was going to pay dearly and that there would be no negotiations before A50 was triggered have been shown up for the fools that they are.

 

1. Negotiations are being conducted on a daily basis, no A50 triggered yet.

2. There will be no hard exit, it is not in anyones interest and Merkel, the real power in the EU has already said this is what will happen.

 

So although off topic, it was a brilliant article for highlighting some of the reason why a Brexit is the right decision.

Edited August 27, 2016 by SgtRock

[GuestHouse]

6 hours ago, Khun Han said:

^ If the New Statesman article you referenced was factual, rather than just a bizarre second-guessing opinion piece, it might have been worth your effort in linking to it.

 

Since when have facts ever played a part in the Brexit campaign?

[cumgranosalum]

6 hours ago, Khun Han said:

^ If the New Statesman article you referenced was factual, rather than just a bizarre second-guessing opinion piece, it might have been worth your effort in linking to it.

unfortunately you clearly don't understand how opinions are expressed or you wouldn't be referring to things as "factual" - why doesn't that surprise me?

[GuestHouse]

5 hours ago, SgtRock said:

Guesthouse.

 

Your link 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/25/war-of-words-eu-us-tax-avoidance-starbucks-apple-amazon

 

Headline for your link

 

 

I will ask you again what this article has got to do with the Topic ?

 

What your article highlights, very clearly is.

 

1. There is widespread corruption in the EU at Government Level

 

2. There is a possibility of a trade war looming between the US and the EU.

 

IMO, both these points are valid reasons for getting out of the EU. Not as you seem to think, they are reasons to stay in the EU.

 

 

EU's problem, not the UK's. The UK is not facing a trade war with the US, the EU is. Now from where I am sitting looking in. I do not want to be part of the EU that is involved in a trade war with the US, I want to be out of the EU picking up the benefits of that US - EU trade war.

 

 

This article highlights a US - EU problem. Or what are we really saying ? The EU is pissing their pants at the thought of having to stand up to the US without the UK to hold their hand and wipe their collective @sses.

 

But to take it back to topic.

 

Today, as we speak, the brexit supporters have gained nothing. Brexit has not happened so it will be pretty difficult to actually gain anything until Brexit occurs.

 

What has happened is the 3 EU mouthpieces that were screaming from the rooftops about how the UK was going to pay dearly and that there would be no negotiations before A50 was triggered have been shown up for the fools that they are.

 

1. Negotiations are being conducted on a daily basis, no A50 triggered yet.

2. There will be no hard exit, it is not in anyones interest and Merkel, the real power in the EU has already said this is what will happen.

 

So although off topic, it was a brilliant article for highlighting some of the reason why a Brexit is the right decision.

 

Erm.... The UK is still a member or the EU. Any dispute between the US and the EU remains a dispute that directly impacts the UK. 

 

Come back again with your arguments that the UK is not a member of the EU.

 

Meanwhile the US government is supporting tax evasion by US companies in the EU (which includes the UK) and is threatening retaliation against the EU (which includes the UK), if the EU (which includes the UK) take action to ensure that US corporations doing business in the EU (which includes the UK) pay taxes on their profits in the EU (which includes the UK). 

 

The EU (which includes the UK) has identified illegal tax dealings by some member states and is now ruling on the taxes due by a number of US multinationals that run into tens of billions of dollars owed to nation states across the EU (which includes the UK).

 

The UK can face the threats from the US alone, or face these threats from the US as a member of the EU (which includes the UK). Tens of billion's of dollars of unpaid taxes are owed and the US government is standing behind US corporations that have acted illegally. 

 

It is an almost perfect example of why the UK is in a stronger bargaining via the EU (which includes the UK) than if the UK faces the might of the US government and its willingness to support illegal behaviour of its own corporations.

 

"So what did the Brexit supporters gain?"

 

Brexit, if it actually happens, will deliver the UK into a very weak bargaining position with the US. 

 

 

Edited August 27, 2016 by GuestHouse

[SgtRock]

1 hour ago, GuestHouse said:

Meanwhile the US government is supporting tax evasion by US companies in the EU (which includes the UK) and is threatening retaliation against the EU (which includes the UK), if the EU (which includes the UK) take action to ensure that US corporations doing business in the EU (which includes the UK) pay taxes on their profits in the EU (which includes the UK). 

 

The EU (which includes the UK) has identified illegal tax dealings by some member states and is now ruling on the taxes due by a number of US multinationals that run into tens of billions of dollars owed to nation states across the EU (which includes the UK).

 

I have identified your problem.

 

1. You cannot differentiate between the EU central politburo and the EU a combination of 28 Countries.

 

2. You do not understand what is actually going on with the article that you provided.

 

Your 1st paragraph above says it all.

 

1. Contrary to what you think. The US is not supporting tax evasion in the EU by US Companies operating in the EU

 

When you understand the difference between tax avoidance and an illegal tax deal struck by a Government and a US Company, we might be able to talk.

 

Until then, I would be wasting my time.

[Khun Han]

11 hours ago, cumgranosalum said:

unfortunately you clearly don't understand how opinions are expressed or you wouldn't be referring to things as "factual" - why doesn't that surprise me?

 

Frankly, the fact that you think that an ardent remainer journalist trying to put himself inside a brexiter's head to predict the future with a remainer slant is somehow pertinent or relevant is more than surprising: It's idiocy personified. If I were a remainer, I would be embarrassed to link such a daft piece of writing, just as I would never be interested in that type of 'journalism' from a brexiter. It's all just literary garbage.

[cumgranosalum]

43 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Frankly, the fact that you think that an ardent remainer journalist trying to put himself inside a brexiter's head to predict the future with a remainer slant is somehow pertinent or relevant is more than surprising: It's idiocy personified. If I were a remainer, I would be embarrassed to link such a daft piece of writing, just as I would never be interested in that type of 'journalism' from a brexiter. It's all just literary garbage.

The very concept of "getting inside a Brexiteer's head" makes any rational mind boggle!

 

Poor old Brexiteers - everyone is looking at them accusingly and they haven't a leg to stand on. 

I don't think there is a moment in history in any country where such a large portion of a population has publicly humiliated themselves so profoundly and now they have to face the fact they were part of the daftest decision of the4 century.

 

There is no way thinking person would want to put themselves in that headspace!

 

 

[Ricardo]

"they haven't a leg to stand on" ?

 

Perhaps it shows just how disconnected the UK-politicians are perceived to be, that so many people turned out to vote against their advice, a protest-vote which unexpectedly carried-the-day ?

 

Or perhaps it shows a level of concern about Immigration, which over-rides any rational thought, about the other consequences of Brexit ?

 

Or perhaps it demonstrates that, while the entry of the UK into the EEC forty-years-ago has produced many positive results, the recent steps to expand from Western-Europe into a much-larger block does not have sufficient support among the Brits ?

 

Or perhaps it shows that there are a number of serious divisions in the UK, which aren't being addressed sufficiently robustly, the economic need of Scotland & Northern-Ireland to stay within the socialist support-network, or the South-East vs the rest-of-England split ?

 

Or a perfect-wave combination of these & other factors ?

[Khun Han]

19 hours ago, cumgranosalum said:

The very concept of "getting inside a Brexiteer's head" makes any rational mind boggle!

 

Poor old Brexiteers - everyone is looking at them accusingly and they haven't a leg to stand on. 

I don't think there is a moment in history in any country where such a large portion of a population has publicly humiliated themselves so profoundly and now they have to face the fact they were part of the daftest decision of the4 century.

 

There is no way thinking person would want to put themselves in that headspace!

 

 

 

Getting inside a brexiter's head (but with his remainer slant of course) is exactly what the hack did in the NS article you linked, so I'm not sure why you're getting your knickers in a twist over the concept. But I suspect you're one of that small-but-vocal band of bitter remainers (like MacGregor Marshall) who use mainly condescention and insults as their idea of debate  .

[i claudius]

What did Brexit supporters gain ? well for a start the pleasure of reading all the whiners who wanted to remain on here ,i read your posts, laugh and think tough titty , moan on , you still lost and we WON