Britain cannot be blackmailed by EU over exit bill: minister

[chang50]

4 minutes ago, KunMatt said:

 

Anybody from the UK who sides with the EU when they are clearly thing to extort the UK is a traitor, right?

 

But which race are you saying Brexiteers are racist against??

 

1) I don't think they are clearly trying to extort the UK,so no

2) Despite your obvious lack of comprehension skills I would have thought it was blatantly obvious I do not think all brexiteers are racist and that I was merely pointing out by analogy the absurdity of your generalization that remainers are traitors which by the way is a highly offensive slur.Especially to those remainers who have served their country in some capacity of which there are many.

[KunMatt]

Surely the huge economic upside of Brexit exceeds 5% of 1 years GDP? So pay up and move on....If not, what's the point?
 
As for English racism, I think that applies to any non-Anglo Saxon with or without a British passport [emoji52]

Why would you just pay up a figure the EU pulled out of their <deleted> without even asking how they got to that figure. You automatically siding with the EU when they are ripping us off just proves where your loyalties lie. How about everything we invested in in the EU. That just evaporates? Is this what happens in a "divorce"??

[ilostmypassword]

2 minutes ago, chang50 said:

1) I don't think they are clearly trying to extort the UK,so no

2) Despite your obvious lack of comprehension skills I would have thought it was blatantly obvious I do not think all brexiteers are racist and that I was merely pointing out by analogy the absurdity of your generalization that remainers are traitors which by the way is a highly offensive slur.Especially to those remainers who have served their country in some capacity of which there are many.

Well, by Kunmatt's earlier argument, the guy who is conducting the negotiations, David Davis is a traitor since he clearly voted against the will of the overwhelming majority (according to Kunmatt) and supported the Iraq War. Therefore, the hard line that Davis is taking must be a treacherous one designed to undermine the UK.

[chang50]

1 minute ago, ilostmypassword said:

Well, by Kunmatt's earlier argument, the guy who is conducting the negotiations, David Davis is a traitor since he clearly voted against the will of the overwhelming majority (according to Kunmatt) and supported the Iraq War. Therefore, the hard line that Davis is taking must be a treacherous one designed to undermine the UK.

I'm guessing logical thought and Kunmatt are less than familiar..

[Grouse]

5 minutes ago, KunMatt said:

 

Why would you just pay up a figure the EU pulled out of their <deleted> without even asking how they got to that figure. You automatically siding with the EU when they are ripping us off just proves where your loyalties lie. How about everything we invested in in the EU. That just evaporates? Is this what happens in a "divorce"??

 

Because, amortised over 10 years it's damn all and insignificant compared to the consequences of running out of time with no deal. It's a monkey trap. Let go and get on with the big issues ?

[ilostmypassword]

2 minutes ago, chang50 said:

I'm guessing logical thought and Kunmatt are less than familiar..

I'll let his comments speak for him.

[chang50]

2 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Because, amortised over 10 years it's damn all and insignificant compared to the consequences of running out of time with no deal. It's a monkey trap. Let go and get on with the big issues ?

But but it's all about jingoistic bluster and showing them who's boss and not losing face never mind if we blunder into a trap in the process lol.

[KunMatt]

But but it's all about jingoistic bluster and showing them who's boss and not losing face never mind if we blunder into a trap in the process lol.

I find it bizarre that there are Brits who love the EU dictorship more than they do their own country and would side with them, especially when they are obviously trying to extort us.

Totally bizarre.

Luckily you traitors are in the minority and we made the correct decision for the future of the UK in spite of you.

[chang50]

7 minutes ago, KunMatt said:

 

 

I find it bizarre that there are Brits who love the EU dictorship more than they do their own country and would side with them, especially when they are obviously trying to extort us.

Totally bizarre.

Luckily you traitors are in the minority and we made the correct decision for the future of the UK in spite of you.

 

Blunder on,son.

[aright]

9 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Because, amortised over 10 years it's damn all and insignificant compared to the consequences of running out of time with no deal. It's a monkey trap. Let go and get on with the big issues ?

So what are the consequences of running out of time with no deal?  A tariff of 2.4% to get our goods into the EU. I wonder what our charges will be for manufactures from the EU wanting to sell their goods in the UK. We are the largest purchaser of Mercedes cars in the EU outside Germany. What tariff should we apply to them or do you feel Germany will be happy to lose that business ? The £9 billion net contribution to the EU  we will save is equivalent to a 7% tariff. World trade prices are cheaper outside the EU. 

I feel a MacBeth moment coming on 

You see her eyes are open!

Aye but their sense is shut!

 

Lady Macbeth hated being a part of Europe is why she said

" Out, damned spot! Out, I say." 

 

[3NUMBAS]

EU monkeys are just obstinate ,and think blighty will just roll over because thats the way david cameron used to be but times have changed and they havent taken it in yet..80  billion is taking the wee wee. its their last chance to screw the brits before the gravy train stops in its tracks..but UK takes in more goods than UK sends them so its shooting themselves in the feet

[3NUMBAS]

28 minutes ago, chang50 said:

But but it's all about jingoistic bluster and showing them who's boss and not losing face never mind if we blunder into a trap in the process lol.

you forget about the EU army which is brewing in europe ,,no chance of UK joining that idea .plus many other problems of staying in EU

[Grouse]

I see no signs of major EU manufacturers breaking ranks. They understand the benefit of mutual close cooperation.

 

I'm not going to list all the calamities that will result from crashing out but ponder this. Much of our major export manufacturing is a result of foreign direct investment. The Japanese, Americans will NOT appreciate us being outside the single market and customs union. They will force massive compensation in the short term and leave in the long term.

 

Duty on cars without a Euro1 rating will be 10%. Cakes will be 20%. Shall I go on?

 

 

 

Sure we may be able to import some foods cheaper but what will that do for our agriculture.

 

No, the Cons want a much weaker pound and much lower corporation tax. Weak labour and environmental regulations

 

Who will benefit? Not most of those who foolishly voted Brexit.

 

Meantime, we want Germany to spend 80 billion a year on munitions? Great! Just great!

Edited September 2, 2017 by Grouse

[aright]

What if any of these export items, with evidence or a cogent argument, will be substantially reduced as a result of Brexit 

1. Machinery including computers: US$60.3 billion (14.7% of total exports)
2. Vehicles : $51.7 billion (12.6%)
3. Pharmaceuticals: $32.6 billion (8%)
4. Gems, precious metals: $27.5 billion (6.7%)
5. Electrical machinery, equipment: $27.1 billion (6.6%)
6. Mineral fuels including oil: $26.2 billion (6.4%)
7. Aircraft, spacecraft: $20.7 billion (5.1%)
8. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $17.2 billion (4.2%)
9. Plastics, plastic articles: $11.2 billion (2.7%)
10. Organic chemicals: $10.8 billion (2.6%)

Edited September 2, 2017 by aright

[Grouse]

1 minute ago, aright said:

What if any of these export items, with evidence or a cogent argument, will be substantially reduced as a result of Brexit 

1. Machinery including computers: US$60.3 billion (14.7% of total exports)
2. Vehicles : $51.7 billion (12.6%)
3. Pharmaceuticals: $32.6 billion (8%)
4. Gems, precious metals: $27.5 billion (6.7%)
5. Electrical machinery, equipment: $27.1 billion (6.6%)
6. Mineral fuels including oil: $26.2 billion (6.4%)
7. Aircraft, spacecraft: $20.7 billion (5.1%)
8. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $17.2 billion (4.2%)
9. Plastics, plastic articles: $11.2 billion (2.7%)
10. Organic chemicals: $10.8 billion (2.6%)

I'll investigate and revert with Duty rates and VAT rates

[aright]

Why bother? Any exports on the list which go into non EU countries will attract the same rates. Any that go into the EU will possibly go in at a 2.4% tariff which is the current average EU tariff. This will not cripple our trade and should we impose a 2.4% tariff on EU goods coming in to the UK we will be a net gainer because we import more EU goods than we export.

[chercheur888]

On 01/09/2017 at 4:18 PM, Ricardo said:

The EEC-negotiators seem desperate to fix the divorce pay-off first, before getting-down to discussing the other details, this is the sort of thinking which helped cause the vote & result in-the-first-place !

 

Then again, now that Labour are back-peddling fast on the decision to depart, maybe they hope there's a chance we might yet change our minds, and continue paying-in 15% of their annual-budget ? 

 

They may come to regret wasting ever more time at this stage, then again so might we, hopefully someone in Whitehall is contingency-planning for a no-agreement exit-deal !

I am sure the EEC negotiators are extremely desperate, especially as the EEC does not exist since 1993

[Bundooman]

21 hours ago, sirineou said:

Unless you agreed to do so when you joined. 

As I said in an other post , I dont know a lot about this subject other than what I read in the papers and hear on TV , but I do believe the disagreement is  over the , What the Brits agreed to pay when they joined, what they have paid so far, and how much is still owed.

As I said in an other post, no one  is stopping the Brits from leaving,  but before talking  of any future relationship please pay as what you owe as.

Would you not say the same to any of your friend who owes you money??

And just exactly how much do you think UK owes the EU? You say yourself, "I don't know a lot about this subject other than what I read in the papers and hear on TV", so where is proof that UK 'owes' the EU a vast sum of money? For What? Where was this laid down in black and white? Who signed such an agreement? Who, within the EU in the last 15 months has actually quoted chapter and verse where this 'agreement' exists?

Don't write nonsense!

[Jip99]

10 minutes ago, Bundooman said:

And just exactly how much do you think UK owes the EU? You say yourself, "I don't know a lot about this subject other than what I read in the papers and hear on TV", so where is proof that UK 'owes' the EU a vast sum of money? For What? Where was this laid down in black and white? Who signed such an agreement? Who, within the EU in the last 15 months has actually quoted chapter and verse where this 'agreement' exists?

Don't write nonsense!

 

 

Consider it akin to a Pattaya bar fine.

 

 

The cash cow is leaving the building and someone needs to replace that loss of earnings.

 

 

Pimps and whores of the EC......

 

No different.

 

[Bundooman]

18 hours ago, sirineou said:

The first rule in debating is never ask a question to which you don't already know the answer.

But I am not here simply to debate but curious to know , so I will ask a question of which I don't know the answer but have serious suspicions.

   When the EU entered into long term projects wasn't Britain consulted? and didn't the sign on ?

If they did not, then case closed but if they did then they are liable.

It should be a simple forensic accounting project to research the number of  projects the UK signed on, (they must keep records) determine their cost , and calculate the UK's share of it.

  

 

No.When the EU enters long term agreements - other countries are consulted and thereafter, vote for or against accordingly. The EU has consistently ignored the wishes of the British people. If we don't agree to something - we should not be liable. We didn't agree to the policy of the monstrous and wasteful, failed, EU butter and meat mountains, the wine lakes and the milk lakes. It was foisted upon us.

The EU is failing miserably and produces less confidence in most member states, who are reliant on massive handout that UK was and is horrified by. Greece and Italy, rooted in widespread corruption (Far more so than Thailand, I might add) held Brussels to ransom until they got their noses in the handout trough. France and Spain are next.

The EU, (Brussels), do what they want - regardless of the full membership of the UK. Don't tell us that we owe the EU a ridiculous amount of monies - we're still waiting for reimbursement from rebuilding Europe for them after Germany, together with Vichy France and Italy, destroyed the continent in their failed attempt at world domination. 

WE don't need to be told "We owe them money"!

[RuamRudy]

35 minutes ago, Bundooman said:

No.When the EU enters long term agreements - other countries are consulted and thereafter, vote for or against accordingly. The EU has consistently ignored the wishes of the British people. If we don't agree to something - we should not be liable. We didn't agree to the policy of the monstrous and wasteful, failed, EU butter and meat mountains, the wine lakes and the milk lakes. It was foisted upon us.

That is not how unions work - if every country had a veto or opt-out, nothing would ever happen.

That said, if your approach was to be adopted then it would allow Scotland to secede from the UK and remain in the EU. I can get behind that...

[RuamRudy]

11 hours ago, aright said:

Why bother? Any exports on the list which go into non EU countries will attract the same rates. Any that go into the EU will possibly go in at a 2.4% tariff which is the current average EU tariff. This will not cripple our trade and should we impose a 2.4% tariff on EU goods coming in to the UK we will be a net gainer because we import more EU goods than we export.

 

It is entirely possible that I am missing something here, but all those categories of exports you listed are exported to non EU countries via EU negotiated trade deals. Why do you assume that the terms of those deals will be grandfathered to the UK?

[aright]

4 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

 

It is entirely possible that I am missing something here, but all those categories of exports you listed are exported to non EU countries via EU negotiated trade deals. Why do you assume that the terms of those deals will be grandfathered to the UK?

The EU does not have trade deals with the rest of the world as much as they would like to have them. They (we) trade "openly" with China and the USA.....however they are working on trade deals 

Grouse is unpalatable to a few on this forum (sorry Grouse) but very acceptable to me; and in American and Chinese Bars. Trade deals don't affect peoples taste . Why would our cousins stop drinking Grouse when we leave the EU? 

Why would those countries raise tariffs because we are not in the EU? In fact on a quid pro quo basis there might be a reduction in tariff. 

I think it is reasonable to assume those markets are currently happy with the arrangement (they could change it if they weren't). Perhaps you could give us your reasons why you feel they might increase tariffs when we leave, 

Scottish whisky is a quarter of U K food and drink exports 

More Scottish Whisky is sold in France in a month than Cognac in a year

Japan and China are immense Scotch drinkers, Japan with water and ice, China with cold green tea.

Exports of Scottish Whisky earn £125 every second.

Another stand out export which along with Gin makes for a globally desired export.

One other observation which I'm sure everyone has observed. Thailand feels it can protect and improve its Spirits and  Wine industry by putting punitive tariffs on their importation. It serves no purpose nothing has improved. The way to force them to improve is to zero rate their tariff. 

 I will repeat what I said earlier If you have the global products and services people want you don't need a trade deal. 

For any one who hasn't seen it Professor Patrick Minfords  piece on post #88 is well worth a see. Perhaps the Remainers could tell us where he got it wrong.

Edited September 3, 2017 by aright

[chrissables]

4 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

 

It is entirely possible that I am missing something here, but all those categories of exports you listed are exported to non EU countries via EU negotiated trade deals. Why do you assume that the terms of those deals will be grandfathered to the UK?

The EU automatically puts a tax tariff on good exported from the EU.

 

We could actually charge less, there is no need for a trade deal to sell to countries outside the EU.

[dundee48]

On ‎02‎/‎09‎/‎2017 at 8:01 AM, sirineou said:

"But we've paid our bill. We've paid everything and more for the last 40 years.  "

But the EU disagrees.  

I have no privileged knowledge who is right or wrong, but  I am sure a bunch of forensic  accountants should be able to settle this easily .

 

   

The EU would not allow a team of forensic accountants within a thousand miles of their accounts.

[sirineou]

7 hours ago, Bundooman said:

And just exactly how much do you think UK owes the EU? You say yourself, "I don't know a lot about this subject other than what I read in the papers and hear on TV", so where is proof that UK 'owes' the EU a vast sum of money? For What? Where was this laid down in black and white? Who signed such an agreement? Who, within the EU in the last 15 months has actually quoted chapter and verse where this 'agreement' exists?

Don't write nonsense!

why would I have any  specific amount in mind? what do I know about the accounting of the EU?

  I am not even saying that the EU number is right or the UK number is wrong,  all I am saying is that the position of some in the remain in camp , that the  bill should not be payed because the UK will no longer derive benefit from these projects is wrong and I have explained my position in great detail, I might be wrong but I think I am right..

    Where is the Proof? I am sure both the UK and the EU keep records of their agreements. If your government does not have a record of the agreements they entered in then I am afraid EU and foreigners ar the least of your problems.

    Instead of accusing the EU of Blackmail (which they do for your consumption, and you seem to eat it up) they should provide a list of the projects they agree they entered in, the amount they think they owe, and why, then the UK will come up with their own list , the amount they think UK owns and why.

This how this things work and I am sure this is how thing are working and will work.

    It is a simple concept to grasp for anyone who has the slightest understanding of bilateral contracts.and instead of accusing  me of nonsense please show me how what I say is nonsense otherwise I would be forced to stoope to your level of argument and say

"I am rubber you are glue. anything you say bounces of off me and sticks on you "  NaNaNa Poopie  !!!!

 

 

Edited September 3, 2017 by sirineou
typo

[Khun Han]

11 minutes ago, sirineou said:

why would I have any  specific amount in mind? what do I know about the accounting of the EU?

  I am not even saying that the EU number is right or the UK number is wrong,  all I am saying is that the position of some in the remain in camp , that the  bill should not be payed because the UK will no longer derive benefit from these projects is wrong and I have explained my position in great detail, I might be wrong but I think I am right..

    Where is the Proof? I am sure both the UK and the EU keep records of their agreements. If your government does not have a record of the agreements they entered in then I am afraid EU and foreigners ar the least of your problems.

    Instead of accusing the EU of Blackmail (which they do for your consumption, and you seem to eat it up) they should provide a list of the projects they agree they entered in, the amount they think they owe, and why, then the UK will come up with their own list , the amount they think UK owns and why.

This how this things work and I am sure this is how thing are working and will work.

    It is a simple concept to grasp for anyone who has the slightest understanding of bilateral contracts.and instead of accusing  me of nonsense please show me how what I say is nonsense otherwise I would be forced to stoope to your level of argument and say

"I am rubber you are glue. anything you say bounces of off me and sticks on you "  NaNaNa Poopie  !!!!

 

 

 

The EU is resolutely refusing to provide any detail or breakdown of the exit bill it wants us to pay. It has, however, asked us to make an offer (with detailed breakdown).

[Baerboxer]

On 9/1/2017 at 3:09 PM, Thakkar said:

Nick Macpherson (@nickmacpherson2)
1/9/17, 3:39 pm

"Blackmail" is the perpetual cry of the smaller negotiator with the weaker hand. #getagrip

 

And it's not so much blackmail as an open threat. Pay us what we demand and do as we say or we won't even talk about what you want. 

 

And of course if the UK paid up whatever was asked, and agreed to legal domination there's no guarantee the EU would be reasonable on anything else.

 

Bully tactics - the realm of those who think their the stronger.

 

Does it work - check out when the US met the North Vietnamese in Paris for negotiations.

[Baerboxer]

9 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

The EU is resolutely refusing to provide any detail or breakdown of the exit bill it wants us to pay. It has, however, asked us to make an offer (with detailed breakdown).

 

Usual negotiating trick. 

[sirineou]

24 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

The EU is resolutely refusing to provide any detail or breakdown of the exit bill it wants us to pay. It has, however, asked us to make an offer (with detailed breakdown).

It is not the EU that is asking them to leave, It is the UK who wants to leave , the onus is on them

I am sure the UK must have their own records of agreement they signed in. All they need to do is provide a number they think is correct and provide collaborating evidence supported by pertinent documents. 

If the EU disagrees, then  the onus is on them to support their position.

Personally I believe the EU is correct , because if they were not the UK will be following the above procedure and rubbing their face in it, but they are not. so they engage in acrimony to cover their own  incompetence and/or political aspirations..

 

 

Edited September 3, 2017 by sirineou
typo