Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 37

Thread: EU "Subsidys"

  1. #1

    EU "Subsidys"

    I am confused on this subject, on the news they keep blarting on about EU subsidy's being carried on by taxpayers, when we do get away from the unelected clusterf*ck that is based in Brussels, Are we or are we not NETT CONTRIBUTORS?, if we are then surely the payments would go direct to recipients, instead of out to EU & back again?
    (The Unspeakable In Pursuit Of The Uneatable.) " If I can help, I will help!." Former S.A.C.S. member!

  2. #2
    As per normal you are confused

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by finnbear270 View Post
    the payments would go direct to recipients, instead of out to EU & back again?
    That's what they're talking about doing isn't it?

  4. #4
    Maybe missing the point?, They are making it sound like we will be in deficit by this, as usual talking Britain down.
    (The Unspeakable In Pursuit Of The Uneatable.) " If I can help, I will help!." Former S.A.C.S. member!

  5. #5
    I think that what is being proposed is that farm and research grants that currently come from the EU will be paid after Britain leave the EU but will be paid instead directly from Britain (rather than Britain contributing to the EU and then getting some back in grants).
    Kieran

  6. #6
    This media reporting really grips my s**t. Where the hell do they imagine the money comes from in the first place that goes to the EU to pay Grants, Research Budgets, et al.....

    Sure as hell it's not out of Angelas (Angulars) pocket.

    When we EVENTUALLY get out of the EU mire, at least we 'should' have the discretion to decide where 100% of our ex contributions go. (I did say 'should').

    Sceptical? - moi?

  7. #7
    SD Regular
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    East Midlands M1/M69 Junction 21
    Posts
    5,381
    When we EVENTUALLY get out of the EU mire, at least we 'should' have the discretion to decide where 100% of our ex contributions go. (I did say 'should').
    Oh no! Not if that affects the Tory Party's "special interest" supporters it won't!

    Basically, as anyone but a optimist might have hoped, the Tories have now seen to it that their "constituency" of wealthy farmers (as against struggling farmers) will continue to receive the millions in tax‚yer money that they received under the Common Agricultural Policy handout scheme.

    So of this XX billions pounds we sent to Brussels and of which YY billion pounds (2.4 billion pounds I read) was then given to farming the UK taxpayer will now pay that directly instead of via Brussels.

    So maybe a bit of honesty by the "Leave" people should have said that the UK taxpayer would save XX billion leaving the EU less, of the course, the 2.4 billion, and other billions, that they'll still be expected to pay to keep landed Tory supporting farmers, and Labour/Liberal university lecturers in subsidies.

    But, we've taken back control, folks....not it appears of where our money is STILL going to go to subsidise farmers and universities...but by cutting out the special interests that now will have only ONE group of politcos to lobby (in Westminster) instead of two...

  8. #8
    I'm not at all sure why any commercial concern needs to be underpinned by the taxpayer, nobody is compelled to go into business in the first place, nor carry on with it when it becomes uneconomic

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by finnbear270 View Post
    I am confused on this subject, on the news they keep blarting on about EU subsidy's being carried on by taxpayers, when we do get away from the unelected clusterf*ck that is based in Brussels, Are we or are we not NETT CONTRIBUTORS?, if we are then surely the payments would go direct to recipients, instead of out to EU & back again?
    The problem will be the cost to the tax payer of re writing so many laws + the contribution to the EU we will need to pay to stay in the free market + the cost of administration of the subsidies (previously managed by the eu) + the cost of re negotiation of all current trade agreements.

    The negotiations for the TTIP trade agreement with the USA have taken 3 years to date and I am sure most would be horrified at the cost to the tax payer of those negotiations. We will now have to do this across the globe and it will no doubt take decades and cost billions

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by timbrayford View Post
    I'm not at all sure why any commercial concern needs to be underpinned by the taxpayer, nobody is compelled to go into business in the first place, nor carry on with it when it becomes uneconomic
    In full agreement.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 25-04-2016, 13:59
  2. *SOLD* Hunter's Video DVDs: "Hunting in Poland" and "Up High in Norway"
    By Pine Marten in forum Other Items
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-08-2015, 17:55
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 23-08-2014, 13:54
  4. For Sale "Nite Ize" LED Dog Collars & "Spot-Lit" Clip On LED
    By Monarch Country Products in forum Dogs
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 16-04-2013, 20:12
  5. Of "Bulk" Densities, "Solid" Densities, "Energy" Densities & Precision Reloading
    By gitano in forum Ammunition, Reloading & Ballistics
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 22-01-2012, 16:01

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •