Britain asked to cough up £1.9 billion to the EU
- Thread starter Danthus
- Start date
or... DUM DUM DUNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
The pm tells lies?
Undoubtedly
But this is excuse that they think the public will be ok with, lol just lol
Well they will be upset for about a day or two then forget about it lol. People have short memories or something new comes along.
Wouldn't even cover 6500...
And we get a majority of it straight back again and then we make far more than the net difference on increased trade
Just employ Polish ones. Should be fine
I will take that job, I will give you all bed baths for 1.7 billion pounds per annum.
Why would the EU countries, which, even without the UK, represent ~20% of the entire world's economy, sign a free trade agreement with the puny, possibly Scotland-less, UK?
GDP, looking at some more exact data it is around 0.01% of GDP
This puny island is the 6th largest economy in the world, and on track to overtake France to become the 5th. Why on earth would we be excluded when a whole host of other smaller countries are allowed?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_free_trade_agreements
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 13,671
- Location
- La France
Socialism : everyone has to be dragged down to the same level of misery.
http://www.investingreece.gov.gr/default.asp?pid=21
As you can see, UK companies invested heavily in Greece until 2007 and they're still one of the main sources of investments. Those investments produce profit and a lot of that profit is repatriated (it goes back to the UK). Now try to find another non-EU country with a very different culture, language and religion in which UK companies can invest without much hassle, paperwork, visas for employees etc etc (you won't find it).
Greece may be on the receiving end of the EU budget but the EU budget is a very small franction of the EU economy, which is where the UK and the other rich countries get their benefits.
It's like income tax for the self employed: they make payments on account of their current year's liability based on last years' figures. If they tank, then they get a lot of that cash back (they would have overpaid tax), if they have a good year, there will be a balance to pay (as they would have underpaid tax)
We're having to pay more because the original amounts paid (paid "on account") were based on a certain level of performance. We exceeded that performance when it came to the final calculation, so owe more "tax". Germany underperformed compared with their payment on account.
It is like tax: if you earn more money you pay more tax.
When you pay tax you pay it at a rate that is expected that you will come out about right by the end of the year and get a small rebate, but if somewhere a long the line you suddenly got a big bonus or pay rise but didn't adjust your tax rate accordingly then you will end up owing tax at the end of the year.
The other important thing to note this isn't about recent improvements to the UK economy, this is about changing the way gross income is measured and then retroactively recalculating the charges going back to 1995. Something Britain agreed to do and had the ability to negotiate at the time.
Hang on - if the formulas used to calculate this are well known and the treasury already knew full well how our own economy was doing in relation to other economies, how could they not have anticipated this? Do they not have even the most basic insight into their international agreements and the associated costs?