Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

[Hobbit]

The videos show that many people didn’t have a clue what they were voting for ( something which always gets dismissed ) and also people voted purely to get rid of immigrants ( something that always gets dismissed )



You keep saying that as if it makes it all better ?

Eu grants forced the UK into putting money into areas that previously they weren’t bothered about because they were outside the London financial hub areas -

why did these areas have to go down the line of EU grants - because their own government did nothing for them - areas under “managed decline” , areas left to rot with no investment from their own government - well now they need to fully fund all these projects that the EU grants covered - should be ok , plenty of money back in the coffers to go around the whole of the UK


Do they not have to better then ? Is that not a critical reason for leaving ? To do better on our own.



“Bitter whingers” - For someone who very quick to point fingers at others for using derogatory comments you are the first to use them yourself - maybe before you start to ask for comments to stop you should being a hypocrite and look in the mirror and see all the issues you yourself have caused on here - of course you won’t , you arrogance doesn’t allow it. Don’t think there is anything worthwhile for you left to say now.

But what is the metric for knowing what a person voted for? Many people decided to vote on a very narrow criteria, e.g. immigration. Is that wrong? It might be against our own metric but not their own. And that's what politics is about, an opinion. Some may well have been sucked in by some of the lies (on both sides) but I'd hazard a guess they only saw it as an affirmation of their own, already, formed beliefs.

The did the EU 'force' the govt of the day to invest in certain areas, or negate managed decline, is one neither you, I or anyone can prove. Hanging our respective hats on it only highlight our own bias. But the litmus test for that is, bluntly, prove that is the case. We can't...

Bitter whingers or jubilant partying Leavers; is there anything actually wrong in being either. Both sides invested enormous energy and passion in their cause and, rightfully, will show a lot of emotion in the outcome. Respect it. When someone stops showing passion they no longer care.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

But what is the metric for knowing what a person voted for? Many people decided to vote on a very narrow criteria, e.g. immigration. Is that wrong? It might be against our own metric but not their own. And that's what politics is about, an opinion. Some may well have been sucked in by some of the lies (on both sides) but I'd hazard a guess they only saw it as an affirmation of their own, already, formed beliefs.

It’s not wrong at all - it was just dismissed as a reason constantly when it was mentioned

The did the EU 'force' the govt of the day to invest in certain areas, or negate managed decline, is one neither you, I or anyone can prove. Hanging our respective hats on it only highlight our own bias. But the litmus test for that is, bluntly, prove that is the case. We can't...

Liverpool - an area left to decline by Tory gorvnments , same with areas in Wales - no financial investment from the UK government before the EU grants etc - why were these areas ignored by governments ? Because they didn’t imo provide the neccesary profit for the UK ( mainly Tory ) governments.

Bitter whingers or jubilant partying Leavers; is there anything actually wrong in being either. Both sides invested enormous energy and passion in their cause and, rightfully, will show a lot of emotion in the outcome. Respect it. When someone stops showing passion they no longer care.

It’s more the pure hypocritical nature of someone constantly complaining about people judging others in regards how they voted and also about people using derogatory comments when the poster themselves has been one of the biggest culprits

The whole EU debate has been a very interesting one - i learnt a lot from what I have read from some people but two people have ruined the whole debate time and time again on here - SILH and Socket Rocket and it’s a shame because I have no doubt they had valid points in tbe middle of some of their posts but unfortunately the constant going over and over again with the arrogant responses drowned it out

Maybe it’s time to close the thread and look at debating the future now

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-51341735

??‍

 

[Papas1982]

 

[Papas1982]

Not sure why the score fo my mate has attached. But this was the greeting at the course.

Now I was pro brexit for work reasons, but this doesn't exactly help the image of golf clubs full. Of old racist men ??

 

[ScienceBoy]

Liverpool - an area left to decline by Tory governments , same with areas in Wales - no financial investment from the UK government before the EU grants etc - why were these areas ignored by governments ? Because they didn’t imo provide the neccesary profit for the UK ( mainly Tory ) governments.

I saw first hand how Liverpool changed from 2003 to 2009, i lived right in the heart of the city for good chunks of a 4 year period as a student. It was amazing!

 

[Hobbit]

I saw first hand how Liverpool changed from 2003 to 2009, i lived right in the heart of the city for good chunks of a 4 year period as a student. It was amazing!

But the UK joined the EU in 1973... I lived within commuting distance to Liverpool through the 70's. Though anecdotal I well remember the strikes at Vauxhall and the docks. A huge amount of the managed decline was 'led' by the unions. Businesses closed because the canker of extreme unionism spread. The govr didn't run those businesses, they were privately owned. Are successive govts to blame for their demise?

Seriously, the "docker's tanner" was a huge joke around that time. I also remember, vaguely, Sir Geoffrey Howe's comments, he was in Thatcher's Cabinet, that Liverpool should be left to sink. Hesletine and Thatcher ripped him a new one.

I'd seriously argue that there is a reality gap between the stories handed down on grandma's knee about what the Tories did to Liverpool and what reality actually is. Yes, Tory govts have always looked after Tory constituencies but, equally, I can remember Blair winning Sedgefield in the NE and the difference that made.

 

[ScienceBoy]

But the UK joined the EU in 1973

I know nothing of Liverpool 1973-2003, but it was a very different city by 2009. When I arrived it felt neglected and left behind. In 2009 it was an amazing place for a city break.

I will say right now, other than the name "capital of culture" I know nothing about who funded the change and I could not use it in any argument for or against the EU.

 

[SocketRocket]

It’s not wrong at all - it was just dismissed as a reason constantly when it was mentioned


Liverpool - an area left to decline by Tory gorvnments , same with areas in Wales - no financial investment from the UK government before the EU grants etc - why were these areas ignored by governments ? Because they didn’t imo provide the neccesary profit for the UK ( mainly Tory ) governments.



It’s more the pure hypocritical nature of someone constantly complaining about people judging others in regards how they voted and also about people using derogatory comments when the poster themselves has been one of the biggest culprits

The whole EU debate has been a very interesting one - i learnt a lot from what I have read from some people but two people have ruined the whole debate time and time again on here - SILH and Socket Rocket and it’s a shame because I have no doubt they had valid points in tbe middle of some of their posts but unfortunately the constant going over and over again with the arrogant responses drowned it out

Maybe it’s time to close the thread and look at debating the future now

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-51341735

??‍

You seem ignorant on the way EU grants work. People dont get a sudden huge bung of cash out the blue from the EU because they think it might come on handy in a local area. The local authorities have to make up plans and apply for funding, if approved they get around 50% of the funding. The 50% from the EU is (as i have explained)our own money anyhow, so we pay for all of it.

Regarding your comments on Posters ruining the thread then by all means point your finger at me if it comforts you but I think its more due to the fact you have a need to portray yourself as some kind of saintimonious arbitration service while in fact thats so ironic its side splitting.

You will no doubt continue your normal method of posting diatribes of verbal dhiareah in an attempt to wear the other person down but I have nothing else to hear from you on this subject so carry on with the twaddle as I am just not interested in it.

 

[Hobbit]

You seem ignorant on the way EU grants work. People dont get a sudden huge bung of cash out the blue from the EU because they think it might come on handy in a local area. The local authorities have to make up plans and apply for funding, if approved they get around 50% of the funding. The 50% from the EU is (as i have explained)our own money anyhow, so we pay for all of it.

Regarding your comments on Posters ruining the thread then by all means point your finger at me if it comforts you but I think its more due to the fact you have a need to portray yourself as some kind of saintimonious arbitration service while in fact thats so ironic its side splitting.

You will no doubt continue your normal method of posting diatribes of verbal dhiareah in an attempt to wear the other person down but I have nothing else to hear from you on this subject so carry on with the twaddle as I am just not interested in it.

I think you miss a very important point in the grants process. Depending on the financial size of the application, it is the national govt that agrees the need to apply for the grant. The EU then agrees to fund half of it, in the UK example. 17 of the CAPEX EU grants to Liverpool were supported by an application from govt level.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

You seem ignorant on the way EU grants work. People dont get a sudden huge bung of cash out the blue from the EU because they think it might come on handy in a local area. The local authorities have to make up plans and apply for funding, if approved they get around 50% of the funding. The 50% from the EU is (as i have explained)our own money anyhow, so we pay for all of it.

Regarding your comments on Posters ruining the thread then by all means point your finger at me if it comforts you but I think its more due to the fact you have a need to portray yourself as some kind of saintimonious arbitration service while in fact thats so ironic its side splitting.

You will no doubt continue your normal method of posting diatribes of verbal dhiareah in an attempt to wear the other person down but I have nothing else to hear from you on this subject so carry on with the twaddle as I am just not interested in it.

So do you, we got a 10K grant at the Golf Club for our new Simulator/Training room from the EU, our Local Authority wanted nothing to do with it.

We applied directly to the EU, the only indirect sort of help we got from the Local Authority was their letter rejecting our bid, which we then used as part of our case for an EU Grant.

 

[Kellfire]

Liverpoolphil said:
Right now the UK still need to abide by E.U. laws etc without having a say in them

Yup you're right but one of the issues I have with the EU is that it is the unelected crowd in Brussels who decide on the 'Law(s)' to be brought forward for 'rubber'stamping by the elected Parliament members who may have a veto but little else. I'd guess that bringing a 'new' law, that's not already in-train, would take more that the remaining period of our membership.

I’d be very interested to know which laws in particular the EU have stopped the UK from implementing that you think would have benefitted us. Please, share?

 

[Hobbit]

If we're going to go down the route of who gives what where... the numbers for 2018, 2019 aren't available yet, are £15.8bn contributed. £5.6bn given back in direct and indirect grants - for clarity, direct grants do not receive 50% local funding and are wholly EU subsidised. Over and above that there is the rebate, leaving a net contribution to the EU of just over £4bn.

If the UK govt honours its pledge to continue the funding till the end off... can't remember or ar5sed... the UK will save £4bn... flippin' wow.

Anyone who wants to split the hairs over £4bn, crack on. In reality, its peanuts in terms of the national economy and not worth the effort.

 

[drdel]

It might be worth remembering the UK joined the ERM but it screwed us and we left. Just as well..

 

[SocketRocket]

I think you miss a very important point in the grants process. Depending on the financial size of the application, it is the national govt that agrees the need to apply for the grant. The EU then agrees to fund half of it, in the UK example. 17 of the CAPEX EU grants to Liverpool were supported by an application from govt level.

When I said the Authorities it may well be the government that makes the application but the requirement would come from the local/regional authority.

 

[Deleted member 1740]

I know nothing of Liverpool 1973-2003, but it was a very different city by 2009. When I arrived it felt neglected and left behind. In 2009 it was an amazing place for a city break.

I will say right now, other than the name "capital of culture" I know nothing about who funded the change and I could not use it in any argument for or against the EU.

Absolutely spot on.

The majority of the money came from EUgrants and investment.

IIRC for every £1 Liverpool puts in, we get back £6 from EU. not no more.

 

[robinthehood]

If we're going to go down the route of who gives what where... the numbers for 2018, 2019 aren't available yet, are £15.8bn contributed. £5.6bn given back in direct and indirect grants - for clarity, direct grants do not receive 50% local funding and are wholly EU subsidised. Over and above that there is the rebate, leaving a net contribution to the EU of just over £4bn.

If the UK govt honours its pledge to continue the funding till the end off... can't remember or ar5sed... the UK will save £4bn... flippin' wow.

Anyone who wants to split the hairs over £4bn, crack on. In reality, its peanuts in terms of the national economy and not worth the effort.

No it's 350 million a week, every week all going to the NHs

 

[SocketRocket]

So do you, we got a 10K grant at the Golf Club for our new Simulator/Training room from the EU, our Local Authority wanted nothing to do with it.

We applied directly to the EU, the only indirect sort of help we got from the Local Authority was their letter rejecting our bid, which we then used as part of our case for an EU Grant.

I'm reffering to regional development grants not a golf club simulator.

 

[Deleted member 1740]

But the UK joined the EU in 1973... I lived within commuting distance to Liverpool through the 70's. Though anecdotal I well remember the strikes at Vauxhall and the docks. A huge amount of the managed decline was 'led' by the unions. Businesses closed because the canker of extreme unionism spread. The govr didn't run those businesses, they were privately owned. Are successive govts to blame for their demise?

Seriously, the "docker's tanner" was a huge joke around that time. I also remember, vaguely, Sir Geoffrey Howe's comments, he was in Thatcher's Cabinet, that Liverpool should be left to sink. Hesletine and Thatcher ripped him a new one.

I'd seriously argue that there is a reality gap between the stories handed down on grandma's knee about what the Tories did to Liverpool and what reality actually is. Yes, Tory govts have always looked after Tory constituencies but, equally, I can remember Blair winning Sedgefield in the NE and the difference that made.

“Managed decline” was the words used.

 

[Kellfire]

It might be worth remembering the UK joined the ERM but it screwed us and we left. Just as well..

Which laws though?

 

[Hobbit]

“Managed decline” was the words used.

I know they were, and I know who used them. I was putting a different perspective on what is the truth. I don't doubt a lot of what went on was Tory led but, equally, reality is somewhere between what you believe and what is the Tory truth. By all means continue to believe your version, I don't have a problem with that at all, and I'll continue to believe something inbetween.