In other words : IMO, Brexiters come over as demented obsessives in current publicity.
That's a big terrible mainstreammedia conspiracy presumably
Nonsense. The subsidies our farmers get are a small amount of what we pay to subsidise the EU.
That is not what I have claimed. I pointed out that we do not purchase those drugs because of the expense - so it is very clear that out of the EU we WOULD have money to spend on those drugs if we spent the same amount of money. There is nothing false about that.
Except the 'fella' pointed out a fact - not an unsupported scaremongering prediction!
It is much 'smaller' than what we pay to subsidise the EU.
It is less per head after what comes back than Norway pays to trade in the single market.
Maybe I'll respond to that after you have provided support for your claim of " volumes of outright lies" - have a good sleep - you sound like you need it. ;o)Stevlin : Thanks for that reply.
(I'll be back on this thread ASAP but I need to crash early, tonight)
None of your reply really answered my question though -- how well are Brexit actually doing, publicity-wise, and in pragmatic election-strategy terms, at advancing any sensible arguments to leave the EU??
So what? We shouldn't be paying anything at all!! It is trading with Europe from which we derive benefit....not being members of the EU!! - and Norway are far more wealthier than we are per capita - and gain far for from their trade with the EU that the little that they pay in membership fee.
Stevlin, the UK can afford those cancer drugs. Now. We'll also be able to afford them if we leave the EU. But they won't get bought.
It's a false claim that we would spend that money on those drugs.
Then we could comfortably pay that from our EU subsidy which is far larger than that, and, use the balance to pay for those devilishly unaffordable cancer drugs. That would be better value than paying farmers to leaving their land untouched wouldn't it? - and we would be able to import far cheaper food products too!
Affordability doesn't come into it. If we can afford to subsidise the EU, then clearly, outside of the EU we could afford to spend that EU subsidy on cancer drugs. That appears to me to be simple enough to understand. You are entitled to vote whichever way you want - but if you are that easily swayed, I wonder what the main reasons were that caused you to favour leaving in the first place!
Why don't you read the posts again! - I didn't claim that they would be spent on drugs. In the event of Brexit, the EU subsidy savings may not be borrowed at all - in order to reduce the deficit. I stated that the money COULD be spent on drugs - which was merely an example of how British citizens could benefit directly from the huge EU subsidy fee......for a change.
Where does cancer drugs come into it? Do you really think any money saved in the short run would be spent on drugs or the NHS? If so why?
Umm
We could spend the money on lots of things, why mention cancer drugs?
Geeez - I quoted how some expensive cancer drugs are being denied patients because of cost, purely as an example of how British citizens are being denied life extending drugs because of the expense, yet the UK is paying a huge subsidy to the EU ......that doesn't fit well with me.
Did he now? Well well, do you think that the Yanks would be prepared to cede elements of sovereignty to a foreign body?. It is clear that the USA would prefer a 'friendly' voice in the future USSE than out of it. Hell, if he likes the EU that much, why don't the USA apply to join ?- the consideration of Turkey's application demonstrates that it is not necessary to be a European country , as the vast majority of Turkey is in Asia.The USA have arranged several FT deals with others , including Mexico - but they certainly wouldn't consider removing border controls with Mexico would they? - in fact, Trump even wants to build a huge wall between the USA and Mexico.
What a ridiculous comment to make!
I used that as an example - be free to suggest you own preference for where that huge EU subsidy could be spent!
William of Walworth said:
What a load of crap!! Exactly what privileged position are we in wrt the EU?? Big business naturally do quite well out of the EU - after all, they get to export their products without having to pay tariffs - because the tax-payer is virtually paying to facilitate that via subsidising the EU. The EU have initiated many proposals which the UK objected to - because of QMV, and ALL our businesses have to cope with EU red -tape ,whether or not they trade with the EU. Being in the EU does not appear to have stopped the huge corporations/large businesses from legally avoiding the payment of taxes on huge profits made in the UK has it??
