Nope. If it's done in good faith (i.e. not just to buy negotiation time whilst we still say we're leaving) then it's out of the EU's hands.GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Out of interest if Parliament decided to revoke Article 50 could the EU reject that option?
Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
I was talking to someone in the pub yesterday who knows a lot about it (an expert on parliamentary procedure who works for the department of exiting the EU) who believed that the Queen would have no choice other than to go along with it.nil_desperandum wrote:The main issue with Raab's plan is that it politicises the role of the Queen.
She won't like this at all, and for this reason it's just about certain I think that she would ultimately have to side with Parliament against the PM.
To do otherwise would jeopardise the future role of the Monarchy.
However, he was of the view that other mechanisms would be used to prevent it before it got to that situation.
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
We'd still be paying into the EU, still not able to make our own trade deals, still having freedom of movement, etcelwaclaret wrote:Fact is gives most of the original referendum to both sides and heals the rift ... we’ve left and control what EU laws we chose to follow or withdraw from. Power returns to Parliament. pro- brexit and we leave the EU pro- brexit.
We also leave with terms that Remainers accept is the best deal within the EU and take it out. Retainers get what they want and also makes remain unnecessary as a position, as they by their own admission have a better deal than any new application could achieve.
Then all that needs sorting out is what Europe needs to mak3 it happen that way and see if it’s in our thinking.... a much reduced negotiation... doable by October.
I can't really see what is in it for the leave side.
-
- Posts: 8985
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
- Been Liked: 2009 times
- Has Liked: 2904 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Control of any future legislation, and the possibility to change any laws as needs be once we’re out. Most importantly a sensible way of disentangling from Europe at a sensible and managed pace, rather than throwing the baby out with the bath water by trying to do everything at once..aggi wrote:We'd still be paying into the EU, still not able to make our own trade deals, still having freedom of movement, etc
I can't really see what is in it for the leave side.
The object of most sensible people is for it to be as painless and non- fractious as possible. Leave get to leave, and future legislation is firmly back in Parliaments control, to adapt the relationship as they see fit.
Remainders get “their best deal” better than any return option is likely to be.
At the end f this we all have to settle down at some point so make it as painless for all as possible for leave and remainders alike.
It’s what I always thought it would happen... and remains imho the only way to bring everyone back together post leave.
-
- Posts: 7310
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
- Been Liked: 1827 times
- Has Liked: 3964 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
How interesting, and to my way of thinking - surprising.aggi wrote:I was talking to so c.f.meone in the pub yesterday who knows a lot about it (an expert on parliamentary procedure who works for the department of exiting the EU) who believed that the Queen would have no choice other than to go along with it.
However, he was of the view that other mechanisms would be used to prevent it before it got to that situation.
I would have thought that in the !ight of historical events she would have had to support the democratically elected Parliament rather than the potential "tyrant".
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Suspect that bringing people back together now is a pipe dream, and its between complete chaos with a functioning economy or complete chaos with one that is struggling to deal with unprecedented levels of turmoil due to people not understand reality.elwaclaret wrote:Control of any future legislation, and the possibility to change any laws as needs be once we’re out. Most importantly a sensible way of disentangling from Europe at a sensible and managed pace, rather than throwing the baby out with the bath water by trying to do everything at once..
The object of most sensible people is for it to be as painless and non- fractious as possible. Leave get to leave, and future legislation is firmly back in Parliaments control, to adapt the relationship as they see fit.
Remainders get “their best deal” better than any return option is likely to be.
At the end f this we all have to settle down at some point so make it as painless for all as possible for leave and remainders alike.
It’s what I always thought it would happen... and remains imho the only way to bring everyone back together post leave.
Its a no brainer really for people who really try to do what is best for the country.
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
And you confirmed your concerning attitude to them in your reply.Burnley Ace wrote:The question was “where have I mentioned dangerous extremists?”
You mentioned dangerous extremists not me! You have even saved me the job of cutting and pasting it.
'
Another remoaner who simply cannot accept Ringo has had one over him!
RingoMcCartney wrote:In the future when millions no longer vote , because " why bother they do what they want to do" it will only take a relatively small number of votes to elect dangerous extremists.
You and only you must be unable to see your casual attitude to spectre of this country electing "dangerous extremists"Burnley Ace wrote:I don’t have a problem with that, in fact I would encourage it. I would rather a smaller electorate wha have some understanding of the issues than some of the fickle voters that have a vote now
Your point blank refusal to accept you said what you said now places you along your fellow pig headed remoaners,
Martin_p, Lancaster claret, nil desperadum and the rest.
Congratulations!
Last edited by RingoMcCartney on Sun Jun 09, 2019 8:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 8985
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
- Been Liked: 2009 times
- Has Liked: 2904 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Sadly I can’t argue. The whole thing has been mismanaged from the start... by both sides.Lancasterclaret wrote:Suspect that bringing people back together now is a pipe dream, and its between complete chaos with a functioning economy or complete chaos with one that is struggling to deal with unprecedented levels of turmoil due to people not understand reality.
Its a no brainer really for people who really try to do what is best for the country.
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Again, the leave side have to own their mistakeselwaclaret wrote:Sadly I can’t argue. The whole thing has been mismanaged from the start... by both sides.
It is them who insisted on the red lines
It is them who insisted on triggering Article 50
it is them who refused to back a deal that would have seen us out of the EU already
It is them who refuse to acknowledge that the uber Brexit isn't backed by the majority of the country and therefore cannot happen.
Leave have messed this up, not remain.
These 3 users liked this post: Imploding Turtle Greenmile longsidepies
-
- Posts: 3549
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
- Been Liked: 654 times
- Has Liked: 2894 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
You can block and bold whatever you want.RingoMcCartney wrote:And you confirmed your concerning attitude to them in your reply.
Another remoaner who simply cannot accept Ringo has had one over him!
You and only you must be unable to see your casual attitude to spectre of this country electing "dangerous extremists"
Your point blank refusal to accept you said what you said now places you along your fellow pig headed remoaners,
Martin_p, Lancaster claret, nil desperadum and the rest.
Congratulations!
Did I write “dangerous extremists “ yes or no?
Did you write “dangerous extremists” yes or no?
One of your many difficulties is that you don’t know the meaning of some of the words you use. Do you ever check a dictionary before you post?
You are the only person that mentioned dangerous extremists because that’s your fantasy not mine. Try to be more precise with the words you use.
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
I don't think Parliament can revoke Article 50 as such, because only the government can revoke Article 50. But Parliament can instruct the government to revoke Article 50.aggi wrote:Parliament could revoke Article 50 without any permission required from the EU.
They shouldn't but it is possible (and much more likely than Raab's plan).
The question then is, what happens if the government refuses? If the [insert PM's name] government decides to treat the "Article 50 revocation" bill as a vote of confidence, the PM could immediately resign and ask the Queen to dissolve Parliament. At that point, Parliament needs to find a new PM who can carry the support of the House, or else have another General Election.
Which leads to two further questions. One - while it's certain that the Tories don't want a general election under those circumstances; do Labour want one? And Two - what happens if there isn;t time for the Genral Election before October 31st?
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Hahaha!Burnley Ace wrote:You can block and bold whatever you want.
Did I write “dangerous extremists “ yes or no?
Did you write “dangerous extremists” yes or no?
One of your many difficulties is that you don’t know the meaning of some of the words you use. Do you ever check a dictionary before you post?
You are the only person that mentioned dangerous extremists because that’s your fantasy not mine. Try to be more precise with the words you use.
Yes! I wrote "dangerous extremists"
And , no, you did not write "dangerous extremists "
But the fact remains you replied to my suggestion that, with an electorate that no longer believes in democracy, it would take fewer voters to elect dangerous extremists.
And your reply you posted, showed that you, " didn't have a problem with that" and , in fact, it was actually something you "would encourage!!!!!!!!"
RingoMcCartney wrote:In the future when millions no longer vote , because " why bother they do what they want to do" it will only take a relatively small number of votes to elect dangerous extremists.
You're right. I'm the only person that mentioned electing dangerous extremists.Burnley Ace wrote:I don’t have a problem with that, in fact I would encourage it. I would rather a smaller electorate wha have some understanding of the issues than some of the fickle voters that have a vote now
You're the only person who said they had "no problem with it" and would actually "encourage it"
Last edited by RingoMcCartney on Sun Jun 09, 2019 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 3549
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
- Been Liked: 654 times
- Has Liked: 2894 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
At last an admission from Ringo that he was wrong and had tried to put words in my mouth! I’m not going to gloat or try to humiliate him, all I will do is accept his apology and we can all move on.RingoMcCartney wrote:
Yes! I wrote "dangerous extremists"
And , no, you did not write "dangerous extremists "
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Congratulations!Burnley Ace wrote:At last an admission from Ringo that he was wrong and had tried to put words in my mouth! I’m not going to gloat or try to humiliate him, all I will do is accept his apology and we can all move on.
It's only early and we're barely half way through the year. However, I'd like to nominate you for the message board "Mutton Head of the Year" award 2019. For your contribution to those who resolutely refuse to hold their hand up in the face of the blindingly obvious !
Weapons grade stubbornness!
Ps. I'm casting my vote while I still can. Once the likes of Burnley Ace take over the electorate will become far more limited.
-
- Posts: 14566
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Well it's a good job remain didn't spend the last few years doing their best to block brexit at every single opportunity then isn't it really.....Lancasterclaret wrote:Again, the leave side have to own their mistakes
It is them who insisted on the red lines
It is them who insisted on triggering Article 50
it is them who refused to back a deal that would have seen us out of the EU already
It is them who refuse to acknowledge that the uber Brexit isn't backed by the majority of the country and therefore cannot happen.
Leave have messed this up, not remain.
This user liked this post: RingoMcCartney
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Burnley Ace wrote:At last an admission from Ringo that he was wrong and had tried to put words in my mouth! I’m not going to gloat or try to humiliate him, all I will do is accept his apology and we can all move on.
It's a concerning and bizarre idea that, in 2019, somebody "doesn't have a problem" and would "encourage" , the election of "dangerous extremists" .as result of a limited number of voters.
You've got to assume its the by-product of a limited gene pool.
Are you from Bacup?
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Trawden?
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
I think the wording was slightly grey, it needed to be by democratic process or similar I seem to remember. It's not 100% what that actually means.dsr wrote:I don't think Parliament can revoke Article 50 as such, because only the government can revoke Article 50. But Parliament can instruct the government to revoke Article 50.
The question then is, what happens if the government refuses? If the [insert PM's name] government decides to treat the "Article 50 revocation" bill as a vote of confidence, the PM could immediately resign and ask the Queen to dissolve Parliament. At that point, Parliament needs to find a new PM who can carry the support of the House, or else have another General Election.
Which leads to two further questions. One - while it's certain that the Tories don't want a general election under those circumstances; do Labour want one? And Two - what happens if there isn;t time for the Genral Election before October 31st?
The point was more that it can be revoked and the EU can't stop us doing that. I don't think it will actually happen
-
- Posts: 3549
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
- Been Liked: 654 times
- Has Liked: 2894 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Now Ringo, stop with your fantasy, stop trying to attribute words to me that I never wrote. I accepted your apology, time to move on. You are the only person mentioning dangerous extremists.RingoMcCartney wrote:It's a concerning and bizarre idea that, in 2019, somebody "doesn't have a problem" and would "encourage" , the election of "dangerous extremists" .as result of a limited number of voters.
You've got to assume its the by-product of a limited gene pool.
Are you from Bacup?
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
I’d leave it mate. Everyone knows Wrongo is wrong, just let him continue to post his inane ‘victory’ posts and look stupid.Burnley Ace wrote:At last an admission from Ringo that he was wrong and had tried to put words in my mouth! I’m not going to gloat or try to humiliate him, all I will do is accept his apology and we can all move on.
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Burnley Ace wrote:Now Ringo, stop with your fantasy, stop trying to attribute words to me that I never wrote. I accepted your apology, time to move on. You are the only person mentioning dangerous extremists.
And you're the only one who is , apparently , cool with the idea-
RingoMcCartney wrote:In the future when millions no longer vote , because " why bother they do what they want to do" it will only take a relatively small number of votes to elect dangerous extremists.
Burnley Ace wrote:I don’t have a problem with that, in fact I would encourage it. I would rather a smaller electorate wha have some understanding of the issues than some of the fickle voters that have a vote now
Roughlee?
-
- Posts: 25697
- Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
- Been Liked: 4644 times
- Has Liked: 9849 times
- Location: Glasgow
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
On your final paragraph i tend to agree that neither major party wants an election this year,the Tories understandably because they'll get a drubbing,but i'm not convinced Labour really wants to take over the punished chalice of brexit just yet,regarding the time restraints normally the obvious solution would be another extension,but the EU might have to make the running,if they want to give the HOC breathing space to sort itself out.dsr wrote:I don't think Parliament can revoke Article 50 as such, because only the government can revoke Article 50. But Parliament can instruct the government to revoke Article 50.
The question then is, what happens if the government refuses? If the [insert PM's name] government decides to treat the "Article 50 revocation" bill as a vote of confidence, the PM could immediately resign and ask the Queen to dissolve Parliament. At that point, Parliament needs to find a new PM who can carry the support of the House, or else have another General Election.
Which leads to two further questions. One - while it's certain that the Tories don't want a general election under those circumstances; do Labour want one? And Two - what happens if there isn;t time for the Genral Election before October 31st?
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Don't turn into Ringo Sid, we only have the room and the sanity level for one of them!GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Well it's a good job remain didn't spend the last few years doing their best to block brexit at every single opportunity then isn't it really.....
Uber Brexiteers are the reason we haven't left yet. Not remain.
This user liked this post: LeuvenClaret
-
- Posts: 7310
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
- Been Liked: 1827 times
- Has Liked: 3964 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Purely coincidentally this article has appeared on BBC WEBSITE this morning that appears to provide some supporting evidence for what I wrote yesterday about people's changing attitudes to immigration.nil_desperandum wrote:How do you know?
As Ringo will tell you:there were only 2 options on the paper leave or remain.
Leave won by a pretty narrow margin of we're honest.
52%- so not much of a majority, so how can you categorically state, (as I notice you have done) that free movement is a red line.
Are you saying that all those 52% cast their vote because of free movement, or do you think it's possible that there were bigger issues for many of them?
Any leaver who actually analyses this should conclude that there is no obvious benefit to exchanging freedom of movement in and out of the EU to freedom of movement in and out of (eg) India or any other Sub-continent country that we try to strike anew deal with.
Additionally, of course, quite a few people are only just acknowledging that freedom of movement works both ways, and that it will have serious consequences for us and particularly the future prospects of our younger generation.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48545143" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Amongst its findings:
in April, a regular Ipsos Mori survey found immigration was a concern for 11% of people - the lowest level since 2001.
While in March, an earlier Ipsos Mori poll for BBC Crossing Divides found that British adults expressing positive views about immigration's impact outnumbered those with negative views.
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
It seems that Boris Johnson has now decided that rather than spend the money he claims will be saved by Brexit on the NHS that he would prefer to use £10bn to provide tax cuts to the better off and well heeled pensioners by raising the threshold at which the 40 % tax band kicks in. At the same time he is proposing to raise national insurance contributions for the less well off and is considering reducing business taxes even further.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 51631.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
How anybody can believe that this man is fit to lead the country or that he understands and represents the "man in the street" is beyond me.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 51631.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
How anybody can believe that this man is fit to lead the country or that he understands and represents the "man in the street" is beyond me.
These 2 users liked this post: nil_desperandum longsidepies
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Hmm, you mean someone like Boris Johnson? Or maybe the coke snorting hypocrite Michael Gove?Ringo wrote: it will only take a relatively small number of votes to elect dangerous extremists.
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
But we already have that if we remain and that's always been the position. If there is ever any legislation that we disagree with then we can leave.elwaclaret wrote:Control of any future legislation, and the possibility to change any laws as needs be once we’re out. Most importantly a sensible way of disentangling from Europe at a sensible and managed pace, rather than throwing the baby out with the bath water by trying to do everything at once..
The object of most sensible people is for it to be as painless and non- fractious as possible. Leave get to leave, and future legislation is firmly back in Parliaments control, to adapt the relationship as they see fit.
Remainders get “their best deal” better than any return option is likely to be.
At the end f this we all have to settle down at some point so make it as painless for all as possible for leave and remainders alike.
It’s what I always thought it would happen... and remains imho the only way to bring everyone back together post leave.
There is current legislation that people disagree with (or at least that they believe they disagree with) and that's why we voted leave. Saying that we are going to remain until the next thing that comes up that we disagree with isn't going to convince anyone.
Also, we really don't want to be in the situation where every single piece of EU legislation becomes a battleground on whether we stay in the EU. The country would never get anything done.
-
- Posts: 8985
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
- Been Liked: 2009 times
- Has Liked: 2904 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
But we’re not going to remain, we’d be leaving having reached agreement that from now all future acts need to be adopted by Parliament not vetoed from Europe. The power to change laws dictating our law changes in relation to Europe, with time to settle EU concerns in an I pressured environment. One piece of legislation at time.aggi wrote:But we already have that if we remain and that's always been the position. If there is ever any legislation that we disagree with then we can leave.
There is current legislation that people disagree with (or at least that they believe they disagree with) and that's why we voted leave. Saying that we are going to remain until the next thing that comes up that we disagree with isn't going to convince anyone.
Also, we really don't want to be in the situation where every single piece of EU legislation becomes a battleground on whether we stay in the EU. The country would never get anything done.
-
- Posts: 14566
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
I won't turn into RingoLancasterclaret wrote:Don't turn into Ringo Sid, we only have the room and the sanity level for one of them!
Uber Brexiteers are the reason we haven't left yet. Not remain.
However leaving the EU has been blocked by remain as much as possible, not just by the bumbling leavers.
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Peter Foster of the Telegraph on the divorce bill, which will have to be paid whoever is in charge.
https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/11 ... 2048446465" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/11 ... 2048446465" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
- Posts: 12359
- Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
- Been Liked: 5209 times
- Has Liked: 920 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Sounds like project fear nonsense to me. Im sure DSR and Crosspools will be along soon to confirm the 'true' position on the divorce billLancasterclaret wrote:Peter Foster of the Telegraph on the divorce bill, which will have to be paid whoever is in charge.
https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/11 ... 2048446465" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
- Posts: 5329
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:00 pm
- Been Liked: 1641 times
- Has Liked: 400 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
You rang m'Lord?Devils_Advocate wrote:Sounds like project fear nonsense to me. Im sure DSR and Crosspools will be along soon to confirm the 'true' position on the divorce bill
Good timing for me having a quick scoot at this board while grabbing some lunch.
I have read Peter Foster's twitter thread. He concedes that if we leave with no deal (the only situation where Boris would withhold it) the agreement on how much we pay would be political, not legal.
So in essence he is suggesting that we would be over a barrel after no deal and would have to pay up. He is disagreeing with all those pundits today who are outraged and say it is a legal requirement no matter what.
I do feel Foster's judgement is flawed. Why? Because power resides in who holds the money in most walks of life. For the divorce bill, the EU want our money. For the trade deal, the EU (mainly) want our money due to our trade deficit. For the participation in EU projects, the EU want our money (and expertise).
The crux here is how little we are asking for, just some wiggle room on the backstop. I feel certain we will get it.
-
- Posts: 12359
- Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
- Been Liked: 5209 times
- Has Liked: 920 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
I actually said your name 3 times staring into a mirror in a darkened room but I guess thats pretty much the same thingCrosspoolClarets wrote:You rang m'Lord?
This user liked this post: CrosspoolClarets
-
- Posts: 1856
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:37 am
- Been Liked: 548 times
- Has Liked: 31 times
- Location: South Manchester
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Oh dear. I assume you are thinking about the £350million per week slogan on the bus?Cryssys wrote:It seems that Boris Johnson has now decided that rather than spend the money he claims will be saved by Brexit on the NHS that he would prefer to use £10bn to provide tax cuts to the better off and well heeled pensioners by raising the threshold at which the 40 % tax band kicks in. At the same time he is proposing to raise national insurance contributions for the less well off and is considering reducing business taxes even further.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 51631.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
How anybody can believe that this man is fit to lead the country or that he understands and represents the "man in the street" is beyond me.
If so, that's a different pot of money.
If you read your link again it is talking about this tax break coming from the money that has been set aside by the Chancellor for a No Deal Brexit.
Not that I agree with what he is proposing to spend the money on mind. It's just that if you are going to get upset with him.....could you get correctly upset with him?
-
- Posts: 5329
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:00 pm
- Been Liked: 1641 times
- Has Liked: 400 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
I started off thinking along these lines, then I began to see it as wonderful news.Cryssys wrote:It seems that Boris Johnson has now decided that rather than spend the money he claims will be saved by Brexit on the NHS that he would prefer to use £10bn to provide tax cuts to the better off and well heeled pensioners by raising the threshold at which the 40 % tax band kicks in. At the same time he is proposing to raise national insurance contributions for the less well off and is considering reducing business taxes even further.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 51631.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
How anybody can believe that this man is fit to lead the country or that he understands and represents the "man in the street" is beyond me.
The rate is £50,000 if one includes personal allowances.
So, by and large, everybody earning £30,000 or more has a big career limitation - do they take a promotion in years to come, with all the hassle and pressure that entails, for little extra money? For many, this affects the issue of whether their wife stays at home or works part time to look after the kids (I firmly believe kids suffer if they don't). They may have company cars and other benefits in kind that push them over that threshold. The tax rate is a key issue for those under £50k, not just over it.
A worker earning £50,000 brings home £3,128 monthly after tax .
A worker earning £70,000 brings home £4,094. It's a decent increase, not life changing.
I would though increase the national insurance threshold to 12% to make sure the total % paid is the same throughout the lower band (in fact I would abolish NI and merge it into income tax). The overall tax percentage by income level should always slope up, not down.
So back to Boris, I feel he is promising to give a massive rump of the country something to strive for, to graft for. With Corbynomics, where is the incentive to progress a career, bosses will get increasingly sneered at and then hammered with tax. It will ruin the country.
And yes, we do have to tackle left behind areas, food banks, homelessness and genuine poverty. But the personal allowance and the minimum wage are probably fair currently and the higher rate threshold does serve as a barrier to many.
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Thats quite a take.CrosspoolClarets wrote:I started off thinking along these lines, then I began to see it as wonderful news.
The rate is £50,000 if one includes personal allowances.
So, by and large, everybody earning £30,000 or more has a big career limitation - do they take a promotion in years to come, with all the hassle and pressure that entails, for little extra money? For many, this affects the issue of whether their wife stays at home or works part time to look after the kids (I firmly believe kids suffer if they don't). They may have company cars and other benefits in kind that push them over that threshold. The tax rate is a key issue for those under £50k, not just over it.
A worker earning £50,000 brings home £3,128 monthly after tax .
A worker earning £70,000 brings home £4,094. It's a decent increase, not life changing.
I would though increase the national insurance threshold to 12% to make sure the total % paid is the same throughout the lower band (in fact I would abolish NI and merge it into income tax). The overall tax percentage by income level should always slope up, not down.
So back to Boris, I feel he is promising to give a massive rump of the country something to strive for, to graft for. With Corbynomics, where is the incentive to progress a career, bosses will get increasingly sneered at and then hammered with tax. It will ruin the country.
And yes, we do have to tackle left behind areas, food banks, homelessness and genuine poverty. But the personal allowance and the minimum wage are probably fair currently and the higher rate threshold does serve as a barrier to many.
Course, to those of us who can see it for what it is, its a tax cut for the rich.
At least its a Brexit benefit for all...I mean a few right?
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
You’ve missed your calling, you should be a Tory spin doctor!CrosspoolClarets wrote:I started off thinking along these lines, then I began to see it as wonderful news.
The rate is £50,000 if one includes personal allowances.
So, by and large, everybody earning £30,000 or more has a big career limitation - do they take a promotion in years to come, with all the hassle and pressure that entails, for little extra money? For many, this affects the issue of whether their wife stays at home or works part time to look after the kids (I firmly believe kids suffer if they don't). They may have company cars and other benefits in kind that push them over that threshold. The tax rate is a key issue for those under £50k, not just over it.
A worker earning £50,000 brings home £3,128 monthly after tax .
A worker earning £70,000 brings home £4,094. It's a decent increase, not life changing.
I would though increase the national insurance threshold to 12% to make sure the total % paid is the same throughout the lower band (in fact I would abolish NI and merge it into income tax). The overall tax percentage by income level should always slope up, not down.
So back to Boris, I feel he is promising to give a massive rump of the country something to strive for, to graft for. With Corbynomics, where is the incentive to progress a career, bosses will get increasingly sneered at and then hammered with tax. It will ruin the country.
And yes, we do have to tackle left behind areas, food banks, homelessness and genuine poverty. But the personal allowance and the minimum wage are probably fair currently and the higher rate threshold does serve as a barrier to many.
-
- Posts: 14566
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Weird how a well thought out answer is dismissed as spin or an interesting take because it doesn't match someone's political views.
Some of you are way to entrenched.
Some of you are way to entrenched.
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
It’s not a well thought out answer. People are not being held back in their careers by the 40% tax band, it’s rubbish.GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Weird how a well thought out answer is dismissed as spin or an interesting take because it doesn't match someone's political views.
Some of you are way to entrenched.
-
- Posts: 14566
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
That was a quick poll you did to establish that answer.martin_p wrote:It’s not a well thought out answer. People are not being held back in their careers by the 40% tax band, it’s rubbish.
So because you don't believe it, you've decided it's true for everyone in that wage bracket?
There will be people out there who will find other ways to 'earn' the extra money that won't see them being put into the higher tax bracket, that much is obvious.
That could be in the form of shares in a business etc.
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Of course it's spin. Crosspools is trying to justify giving tax cuts to those who are already better off. You couldn't wish for a better Tory.GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Weird how a well thought out answer is dismissed as spin or an interesting take because it doesn't match someone's political views.
Some of you are way to entrenched.
-
- Posts: 14566
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
What's the alternative then?Cryssys wrote:Of course it's spin. Crosspools is trying to justify giving tax cuts to those who are already better off. You couldn't wish for a better Tory.
Most of us know the tax system isn't the greatest at collecting the right amounts and is full of loopholes, that's where the real is.
There is also the train of thought that if middle to higher earners have a higher tax threshold they'll also have more disposable income etc.
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Its a tax break for the wealthy.GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Weird how a well thought out answer is dismissed as spin or an interesting take because it doesn't match someone's political views.
Some of you are way to entrenched.
I mean, I know you like to be controversial but that is what it is.
Brexit was supposed to be about giving a lot of money to where it was needed.
This is 100% the exact opposite of that.
But yeah, Brexit is going to just work out fine and dandy for exactly the people who are telling you why you have to vote for it.
You starting to think that maybe you where sold a pup yet? Or is the evidence not overwhelming enough yet?
-
- Posts: 14566
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
I haven't been sold a pup on anything, not sure why you think I have.Lancasterclaret wrote:Its a tax break for the wealthy.
I mean, I know you like to be controversial but that is what it is.
Brexit was supposed to be about giving a lot of money to where it was needed.
This is 100% the exact opposite of that.
But yeah, Brexit is going to just work out fine and dandy for exactly the people who are telling you why you have to vote for it.
You starting to think that maybe you where sold a pup yet? Or is the evidence not overwhelming enough yet?
So tax breaks are fine for the lower earners to free up their income but not for the middle to higher earners?
Brexit will be whatever it ends up being, life won't change much for most people, I've said that before.
-
- Posts: 2228
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:37 am
- Been Liked: 1354 times
- Has Liked: 440 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Erm, not giving tax cuts to those who are already better off?GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:What's the alternative then?
These 2 users liked this post: Bordeauxclaret Lancasterclaret
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
So, you have £10bn to spend pounds and you agree that the best thing to do with it is give tax cuts to the middle classes?GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:What's the alternative then?
There is also the train of thought that if middle to higher earners have a higher tax threshold they'll also have more disposable income etc.
-
- Posts: 14566
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Looks like this is more about low earners complaining about middle to higher earners having more disposable income...
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Looks like some people can't see the wood for the trees.GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Looks like this is more about low earners complaining about middle to higher earners having more disposable income...
-
- Posts: 14566
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
Maybe you should chop some down then.Lancasterclaret wrote:Looks like some people can't see the wood for the trees.
Everyone needs disposable income to spend, it's how the economy works.
Middle earners spend to maintain their lifestyle and are squeezed like lower earners.
Higher earners are probably better off most of the time anyway, but the train of thought is likely to be more disposable income = more spending within the UK etc.
I can see the reasoning for it, but I'm not politically loyal to one party unlike you and a majority of others on here.
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth
I'm not loyal to one party either, but tax breaks for the rich areGodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Maybe you should chop some down then.
Everyone needs disposable income to spend, it's how the economy works.
Middle earners spend to maintain their lifestyle and are squeezed like lower earners.
Higher earners are probably better off most of the time anyway, but the train of thought is likely to be more disposable income = more spending within the UK etc.
I can see the reasoning for it, but I'm not politically loyal to one party unlike you and a majority of others on here.
tax breaks for the rich
That is what they are.
If you link that to all the Brexiteer bullshit, then it looks even worse.
But I expect nothing else at the moment as a hell of a lot of people would rather (it appears) take hits all over the place than admit they are wrong.