UK PM Johnson says 39 billion pound divorce bill not due in no-deal Brexit

[Mavideol]

3 minutes ago, transam said:

We are talking money here, the UK had to pay the USA's bills because of the axis aggression, now they are asking for cash because we want to walk...5555

 

Greece thinks like me and they are in the EU fold..

2 wrongs doesn't make one right and Greece? you couldn't find anything better as a reference 555

[puipuitom]

5 hours ago, Sticky Wicket said:

less than 1% WOW

And the rest of the staff they will hire locally, in the EU. The London staff… can look for a new job.

[Sticky Wicket]

Just now, transam said:

What country are you from....?

UK 

 

The farm subsidy system that spends €50bn (£44bn) a year on achieving none of its objectives. It is among the most powerful drivers of environmental destruction in the northern hemisphere. Because payments are made only for land that’s in “agricultural condition”, the system creates a perverse incentive to clear wildlife habitats, even in places unsuitable for farming, to produce the empty ground that qualifies for public money. These payments have led to the destruction of hundreds of thousands of hectares of magnificent wild places across Europe.

It is also arguably the most regressive transfer of public money in the modern world. Farmers are paid by the hectare for owning or using land; so the more you have, the more you get. While in the UK benefits for poor people are capped at £20,000 (outside London), these benefits for the rich are uncapped. Some landowners receive £1m or more. You don’t even have to live in the EU to take this money: you just have to own land here. Among the benefit tourists sucking up public funds in the age of austerity are Russian oligarchs, Saudi princes and Texas oil barons.

[transam]

Just now, david555 said:

 

No, fink it's Scotland...????

[Mavideol]

1 minute ago, transam said:

What country are you from....?

you didn't know ? Irish,  how's that sound 555

[transam]

Just now, Sticky Wicket said:

UK 

 

The farm subsidy system that spends €50bn (£44bn) a year on achieving none of its objectives. It is among the most powerful drivers of environmental destruction in the northern hemisphere. Because payments are made only for land that’s in “agricultural condition”, the system creates a perverse incentive to clear wildlife habitats, even in places unsuitable for farming, to produce the empty ground that qualifies for public money. These payments have led to the destruction of hundreds of thousands of hectares of magnificent wild places across Europe.

It is also arguably the most regressive transfer of public money in the modern world. Farmers are paid by the hectare for owning or using land; so the more you have, the more you get. While in the UK benefits for poor people are capped at £20,000 (outside London), these benefits for the rich are uncapped. Some landowners receive £1m or more. You don’t even have to live in the EU to take this money: you just have to own land here. Among the benefit tourists sucking up public funds in the age of austerity are Russian oligarchs, Saudi princes and Texas oil barons.

And you think the UK is the only one regarding where EU dosh goes too..Does the UK decide where EU money is allocated, don't fink so...

[Mavideol]

1 minute ago, Sticky Wicket said:

UK 

 

The farm subsidy system that spends €50bn (£44bn) a year on achieving none of its objectives. It is among the most powerful drivers of environmental destruction in the northern hemisphere. Because payments are made only for land that’s in “agricultural condition”, the system creates a perverse incentive to clear wildlife habitats, even in places unsuitable for farming, to produce the empty ground that qualifies for public money. These payments have led to the destruction of hundreds of thousands of hectares of magnificent wild places across Europe.

It is also arguably the most regressive transfer of public money in the modern world. Farmers are paid by the hectare for owning or using land; so the more you have, the more you get. While in the UK benefits for poor people are capped at £20,000 (outside London), these benefits for the rich are uncapped. Some landowners receive £1m or more. You don’t even have to live in the EU to take this money: you just have to own land here. Among the benefit tourists sucking up public funds in the age of austerity are Russian oligarchs, Saudi princes and Texas oil barons.

you are talking about the UK, your own people scamming each other's? humm didn't thought about that one, did BJ cover that topic, he still has more (like that)  hiding

[puipuitom]

5 hours ago, jonwilly said:

The only thing the EU ever wanted from UK is money to fulfill it's Dream of a united Socialist Europe.

German has always been the biggest payer and France will never pay it's fair share. 

Up to about 1850 France was biggest most powerful nation in Europe, then Bismark started to unify the German speaking peoples.

This led first to the Franco-Prussian war then the 2 World Wars. Europe was trashed as a result and Britain all but bankrupted.

The EU was Europe's attempt to find a total peace and they need the UK's money to do it hence their attitude to a nation state wanting out

That's why they left the UK so long outside….till 15 years after the creation of the EEC.

[david555]

18 minutes ago, transam said:

No, fink it's Scotland...????

So you admit / declare  Scotland is not U.K. by this answer on the cartoon (as it mentioned U.K.)  you realize that  …..?? ????

[Forethat]

18 minutes ago, Mavideol said:

since we are at it..... EU to stop sending subsidy money to the UK farmers

I don't think that'll make a huge difference. To give you an idea: 2013, 19,613 UK farmers received EU subsidies at a total value of €833.3M (that's millions). The same year, 219,078 French farmers received €6,5B (that's billions) in subsidies. 

 

To be fair to the French, six and a half billion euros to subsidise there farmers so they can sell their produce to the UK sounds like a lot but, given that the subsidies for 2008-2010 were close to €11B, it's an absolute bargain.

 

It doesn't take a massive student loan to realise why EU are so keen to collect a made up divorce bill - especially since the aforementioned subsidies are likely to grow when the eurocrats in Brussels refuses to negotiate a deal with UK that would make it possible for the French farmers to actually sell their produce. A reasonable guess is that the EU subsidies to the French farmers grow well above €12B the first year post Brexit. Maybe even higher.

 

[stephenterry]

2 hours ago, Nigel Garvie said:

Wonderful to have such a well informed expert on TV who knows the views of "All the other countries in the World". The falangs I talk to, from many many, different countries tell me the we were currently the laughing stock of the world. The general view was that they knew we had plenty of sad pensioners living in a fantasy glorious past, but how could a whole country be so incredibly stupid?

Exactly, the old leaver pensioners on this site live in the past - one or two even have averters to demonstrate this. 

[Chomper Higgot]

What Johnson says is seldom rooted in truth, let alone reality.

 

[david555]

10 minutes ago, puipuitom said:

That's why they left the UK so long outside….till 15 years after the creation of the EEC.

Oh..! those good old days whiteout …..????

[stephenterry]

2 hours ago, <deleted> dasterdly said:

And this is how interesting topics get 'dragged down' as posters start bickering about completely 'off topic' points....☹️

 

At the end of the day, the most interesting point (IMO) is how much the UK legally owes the EU - and it's certainly not 39bn!

 

The OP indicates that it's likely to be 7-9 bn in the event of 'no deal'.  Admittedly, this is the opinion of Sky News and Brit. govt. lawyers. - but it sounds about right.

Your point being? Of course the UK owes money to the EU for projects committed to, so what?

[stephenterry]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

I wonder where you get your numbers from?

You only have to be on top of things, but apparently you're not.

[ThaiBunny]

2 hours ago, Nigel Garvie said:

Wonderful to have such a well informed expert on TV who knows the views of "All the other countries in the World". The falangs I talk to, from many many, different countries tell me the we were currently the laughing stock of the world. The general view was that they knew we had plenty of sad pensioners living in a fantasy glorious past, but how could a whole country be so incredibly stupid?

I've yet to encounter someone in my wide circle of expat friends who mentions it without someone else raising it first. On the other hand I've often seen posts from posters from various countries about something that's happened in their own country exclaim "It's made us the laughing stock of the world".  In my experience most people here frankly couldn't care what happens in other countries apart from their own and Thailand and certainly none of them have any real knowledge of current affairs elsewhere across the world

[stephenterry]

51 minutes ago, transam said:

Much the same as Germany hasn't paid anyone for their WW2 sh_t eh...

for god's sake -do you always live in the past? get a grip on today's reality.

[stephenterry]

34 minutes ago, Sticky Wicket said:

The sooner the better

I wouldn't go talk to UK farmers if I was you. They would probably tell you to go where the sun don't shine.

[david555]

6 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

for god's sake -do you always live in the past? get a grip on today's reality.

"……………… get a grip on today's reality."

 

Wouldn't you getting depressed with this outcome for the country..?

[puipuitom]

4 hours ago, Cadbury said:

As Nigel Farage describes it is "nothing more than a ransom demand plucked out of the air". He refers to the EU as the "Mafia" which he is forced to change to "gangsters".

He goes on to counter that the UK has invested more than 200 billion pounds in the EU and as such are part owners of the EU furniture. 

 

Just wait, what Farage will say about these EU gangsters, when they stop paying his salary and pension per 1 Nov

[stephenterry]

31 minutes ago, Sticky Wicket said:

UK 

 

The farm subsidy system that spends €50bn (£44bn) a year on achieving none of its objectives. It is among the most powerful drivers of environmental destruction in the northern hemisphere. Because payments are made only for land that’s in “agricultural condition”, the system creates a perverse incentive to clear wildlife habitats, even in places unsuitable for farming, to produce the empty ground that qualifies for public money. These payments have led to the destruction of hundreds of thousands of hectares of magnificent wild places across Europe.

It is also arguably the most regressive transfer of public money in the modern world. Farmers are paid by the hectare for owning or using land; so the more you have, the more you get. While in the UK benefits for poor people are capped at £20,000 (outside London), these benefits for the rich are uncapped. Some landowners receive £1m or more. You don’t even have to live in the EU to take this money: you just have to own land here. Among the benefit tourists sucking up public funds in the age of austerity are Russian oligarchs, Saudi princes and Texas oil barons.

and your recommendations to resolve this is?

[puipuitom]

5 hours ago, BritManToo said:

How did that work out for Germany after WW2?

Did they ever pay?

 

I'd tell the EU (aka the 4th Reich, a united Europe under German rule) to take their 39B out of the money and interest Germany still owes.

I must confess… in the by you called 4th Reich, economic developments since 1945 are a LOT better than in the UK...

[stephenterry]

1 minute ago, puipuitom said:

I must confess… in the by you called 4th Reich, economic developments since 1945 are a LOT better than in the UK...

Another example of a Brit living in the past.

[david555]

1 minute ago, puipuitom said:

Just wait, what Farage will say about these EU gangsters, when they stop paying his salary and pension per 1 Nov

Same farage with the ….gangsters... opportunist #1

[puipuitom]

4 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I have to admit I don't know the details about China.

But one thing is obvious: China is HUGE. They can get away with a lot more things than others because other countries want to export something to the billion Chinese citizens. 

It's not fair but then nobody said this world is fair.

Yes, HUGE, but very difficult to sell to the Chinese. And as soon as they have copied it, they do not need to import anymore.

[Forethat]

33 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

Your point being? Of course the UK owes money to the EU for projects committed to, so what?

The question is whether there's a legally binding agreement that makes the UK financially liable for projects that are not directly related to the UK.

 

For instance, the EU agreed to part-fund the construction of the S5 motorway between Nowe Marzy and Bydgoszcz in Poland. The project was drafted on April 11 2019. The EU’s European Regional Development Fund contributes €255,1M through the EUs Infrastructure and Environment programme. This is an example of a project where - according to EU - UK is financially liable. If the projects overspend (which it is likely to), May's deal states that the UK should pay for that as well.

 

So the question is, should the UK even pay for this motorway in the first place Of course not. It is equivalent to a divorce where the husband and wife agree to build a house. Before the house is built the wife wants to divorce and the husband then claims that she should pay for the construction of the house. In EU terms, if the wife doesn't pay, they will beat her up. In addition, the husband has decided that if he wants to change the plan and add a swimming pool, a four-car garage and a wine cellar, the wife should pay for that as well.

 

While I'm at it, please find attached a map outlining a few future EU infrastructure projects around Europe that are part-funded by the so-called 'settlement bill'. The black and red 'lines' on the map indicate new railways and motorways - most of them receiving hundreds of millions of Euros in EU funding. There are a couple of regional projects in the UK as well, mostly related to broadband improvements and fibre optic cable work valued at a couple of million Euros.

 

No, there's neither a moral nor legal obligation for UK to pay EU one single dime.

 

[puipuitom]

3 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I have to admit I also never learned EUisch.

But it seem at G7 they all talk to each other somehow. I guess there must be a trick involved.

As the British do not speak any other language, and pupils in the EU all learn English, this language is chosen to communicate.

[david555]

10 minutes ago, Forethat said:

The question is whether there's a legally binding agreement that makes UK financially liable for projects that are not directly related to UK.

 

For instance, EU agreed to part fund the Construction of the S5 motorway between Nowe Marzy and Bydgoszcz in Poland. The project was drafted April 11 2019. The EU’s European Regional Development Fund contributes €255,1M through EUs Infrastructure and Environment programme. This is an example of a project where - according to EU - UK is financially liable. If the projects overspends (which it is likely to), May's deal states that UK should pay for that as well.

 

So the question is, should UK even pay for this motorway in the first place Of course not. It is equivalent to a divorce where the husband and wife agrees to build a house. Before the house is built the wife wants to divorce and the husband then claims that she should pay for the construction of the house. In EU terms, if the wife doesn't pay, they will beat her up. In addition, the husband has decided that if he wants to change the plan and add a swimming pool, a four car garage and a wine cellar, the wife should pay for that as well. 

 

While I'm at it, please find attached a map outlining a few future EU infrastructure projects around Europe that are part funded by the so called 'settlement bill'. The black and red 'lines' on the map indicate new railways and motorways - most of them receiving hundreds of millions of Euros in EU funding . There are a couple of regional projects in the UK as well, mostly related to broadband improvements and fibre optic cable work valued at a couple of million Euros.

 

No, there's neither a moral nor legal obligation for UK to pay EU one single dime.

 

"The question is whether there's a legally binding agreement that makes UK financially liable for projects that are not directly related to UK."

 

 

I understand your point as divorce announced …., but , question is ….. extensions are made more than once ….and this could or should make you still a member …..difficult judging , like always ...U.K. even more 1 foot in 1 out .

I think E.U. would never accepted anymore a member in this way 

 

De Gaulle was clairvoyant long before , we must admit...

[stephenterry]

No, there's neither a moral nor legal obligation for UK to pay EU one single dime.

 

I would suggest, if the UK government agreed to these projects they have an obligation to fund them. And it's pounds, not dimes.

[david555]

just now        Boris can whistle it this time....

 

Jennifer Rankin in Brussels

Mon 26 Aug 2019 10.10 BST

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/26/eu-would-block-trade-deal-if-britain-reneged-on-brexit-bill

EU 'would block trade deal if Britain reneged on Brexit bill' 
UK must honour its debts before starting to negotiate trade deal, say Brussels sources

The European Union would refuse to negotiate a trade deal with the UK if the government reneged on the Brexit bill, EU sources have said.

At the G7 summit in Biarritz, Boris Johnson said it was a “simple statement of reality” that the UK would withhold much of the £39bn financial settlement agreed by Theresa May, in the event of a no-deal.Brussels sources have warned that future trade talks would be blocked until the UK agreed to a settlement.

The financial settlement was a “totemic” issue for EU member states, one official said. “The message will be ‘honour your debts, or we are not even going to start talking about a trade deal,” the source said, reflecting a widespread view among diplomats.

 

more....