It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

EU Discusses Brexit Position as U.K. Threatens to Quit Talks

page: 1
9

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 21 2017 @ 06:52 PM
link   
EU Discusses Brexit Position as U.K. Threatens to Quit Talks

So, before the UK bus can leave the EU station, the ticket price must be negotiated. I had a sneaky suspicion that the rubber would never hit the Brexit road.

Can anyone explain to me why the UK should have to pay a single pence to leave the EU? Much less anywhere between 5 and 100 billion pounds?

What if the UK refuses to pay anything? Would that mean they couldn't leave? Why does the UK need to negotiate anything? Wouldn't a simple "Cheerio, old chaps, and best wishes in your future endeavors!" suffice?

Prediction: The UK should prepare to be named the most racist nation in Europe. If Brexit is pushed forward, the UK will be this century's Confederate States.




posted on May, 21 2017 @ 07:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
EU Discusses Brexit Position as U.K. Threatens to Quit Talks

So, before the UK bus can leave the EU station, the ticket price must be negotiated. I had a sneaky suspicion that the rubber would never hit the Brexit road.

Can anyone explain to me why the UK should have to pay a single pence to leave the EU? Much less anywhere between 5 and 100 billion pounds?

What if the UK refuses to pay anything? Would that mean they couldn't leave? Why does the UK need to negotiate anything? Wouldn't a simple "Cheerio, old chaps, and best wishes in your future endeavors!" suffice?

Prediction: The UK should prepare to be named the most racist nation in Europe. If Brexit is pushed forward, the UK will be this century's Confederate States.


There's no reason why the UK should pay a penny. But the EU commission is desperate for cash to fund all their pensions, MEP salaries, subsidized housing and dinners. Effectively, they are a ponzi scheme that takes money from the wealthiest countries, and gives it to the poorest ones. Many of those countries are poor because after World War II, they were told to give away their own manufacturing industries in order to become tourist destinations for the rest of Europe. Others are now poor because of the social agendas they forced onto themselves or others.

Then Germany is desperate to relocate 1 million refugees, all of which would require intensive eduation in order to allow them to get onto the workforce. Italy, Spain and Portugal are being overloaded with refugees shipped across by NGO's rescue ships (over 4000/week). In the UK, it costs around £100,000 to integrate a single non-English speaking refugee.

So you can see where these astronomical sized numbers are coming from.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 07:43 PM
link   
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

They use it for populism during the elections now i guess.

It is a settlement between both parties, the biggest part of the bill consists of agreed projects of which the share have yet to be payed by the UK, also the contribution for the period 2014/2020 that was agreed to and pension for britisch europarlementarians.

There is however a lot more going on in England, my jaws are falling to the floor after the Tory manifesto, uncosted to hide the needed tax increase, how the poor and elderly will be hit hard by these measures.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

The hefty bill is being attempted simply to deter other nations from doing the same and jumping off the sinking ship.

Hope UK tells them to "bugger off" and goes about their business.



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 01:25 AM
link   
Well, the key here is to see what the EU are proposing. Granted the UK has to "pay up" where there are commitments that continue to run, so long as the benefit is two-way. The same principle means that the EU should "buy out" the UK's share in e.g. buildings and assets.

Hopefully the Brexit negotiations will be transparent, so that if thhere is a 100 B bill, then we can all see what it contains.

Personally, I think the EU will do everything it can to disadvantage the UK, including playing on Scottish and Irish nationalism. It's now in the EUs interest to have a weakened and weak UK. Whe I say EU, I mean France and Germany.

Got to ask yourself "who are the good Europeans"?



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 02:41 AM
link   
Hefty bill is both an attempt to cover a shortfall and also to scare other member nations.

Ongoing BREXIT thread here....

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi
Well, the key here is to see what the EU are proposing. Granted the UK has to "pay up" where there are commitments that continue to run, so long as the benefit is two-way. The same principle means that the EU should "buy out" the UK's share in e.g. buildings and assets.




This is the key, both sides will come with their list of mutual agreed commitments that must be met before talks can start on the future relation between the EU and the UK.

100 billion is quite a sum, it doesn't bode well that the UK now says no deal is better than a bad deal.
Understandeble from their perspective in the light of their financial commitments, however, it will certainly weigh on future relations because trust is of great importance.

The UK has enjoyed an exceptional position within the EU, i really wonder what has been agreed with Cameron should the even better EU deal which he negotiated for the UK be rejected in the Brexit vote.



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:30 PM
link   
We have to pay as we owe £12 Bn in Eu liabilities, aroound £50Bn in Cohesion Funds (projects already agreed to that we haven't paid yet) and the costs of relocating EU Bank, EU medicine etc... plus around £20Bn in debt.



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 12:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
Can anyone explain to me why the UK should have to pay a single pence to leave the EU? Much less anywhere between 5 and 100 billion pounds?

Not sure they have these in the UK. But leaving the EU seems to resemble trying to get out of a time share. Where years ago you attended some fancy meeting and were convinced by some sharp dressed men and women that joining this "exclusive community" had untold benefits. Years later you have to pay to get out of the deal you have come to regret even signing in the first place.



posted on May, 22 2017 @ 01:13 PM
link   
Like most things we'll have costs that we've agreed to pay and our sub then we've got a slab of the EU financial float which can mitigate a good chunk.

Theres two views in what we owe as its a bit vague that once we leave the EU then theres nothing to pay but since we still want access to certain EU parts it might not be the best to go in too hard.



posted on Jun, 11 2017 @ 08:41 AM
link   
Changes on the UK govt behavior in regards to Brexit will increase the magnitude of infight and terrorism within the UK and the EU.



posted on Jun, 11 2017 @ 08:51 AM
link   
a reply to: VictorVonDoom

That's the Freedom of being in the EU gets you, no sovereignty​ of your own nation and you have to pay through the nose to escape the harmony of the EU. I'd expect something like that escape clause from the Warsaw Pact, not the EU.



posted on Jun, 11 2017 @ 09:05 AM
link   
We can walk away without paying a thing, though we'd get no deal on trade or agreement about foreign nationals here or in the eu.

While I agree in principle with meeting our obligations re projects we already signed up to, if they play silly buggers over the money, there will come a point where it would be cheaper to just break off and rely on wto rules and have the government subsidise exports up to the value of these tarriffs.


Hopefully it'll be more sensible.

Time will tell.
edit on 52pSun, 11 Jun 2017 09:06:52 -050020172017-06-11T09:06:52-05:00kAmerica/Chicago30000000k by SprocketUK because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2017 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

Subsidise British exports ? With taxpayers money ?
I don't think so.



posted on Jun, 11 2017 @ 10:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheShippingForecast
a reply to: SprocketUK

Subsidise British exports ? With taxpayers money ?
I don't think so.


to clarify, if the eu wants 100bill for us to leave with free access.
It may be cheaper to leave on wto terms if the cost of subsidising our exports to negate the tarriffs does not exceed, say 20 bill a year. It would be highly likely we'd get a deal within 5 years.
Get it now?



posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 10:34 AM
link   
I don't understand why is the UK not already out of any talks with the EU! Frankly they should have just left, without a deal.
On the other hand I would warn EUro#ers against unionist revisionist hysteria, from trying to avoid brexit.



posted on Jun, 20 2017 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flanker86
I don't understand why is the UK not already out of any talks with the EU! Frankly they should have just left, without a deal.
On the other hand I would warn EUro#ers against unionist revisionist hysteria, from trying to avoid brexit.


Because this is a fantastically complicated matter, with all kinds of implications for diplomacy, agriculture, industry, the economy as a whole, etc, etc? We can't just push a button and get ejected out of the EU in an instant. It doesn't work like that.



new topics

top topics



 
9

log in

join