The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (63 Viewers)

[skybluetony176]

Top quote was 4 hours ago Tony

Are you joining the Don’t read like Astute club? I’ve just said exactly that in the post you’ve quoted.

 

---

[skybluetony176]

And you mentioned it for the first time 4 hours ago?

So if you keep chatting shite and then mention it in a different way a day or two later it must all be ignored other than the ine comment you point out to everyone?

And back to the House of Lords. So they want what is best for everyone like you keep saying yet they get paid milliins between them each year yet don't have to declare a penny. And for this they must defend the EU and do what they can for the EU. And once we leave the EU the payments will stop. And how about the freedom of information act question that wasn't answered on the subject as there is no need to answer the question as the EU has said they don't have to declare what they get off them. But we do know parts like Mandelson gets 33k a year off them and Neil Kinnock gets nearly 100k a year. Yet they are not in it for themselves?

Sounds like a Tony plot.

Sounds like you’re an idiot.

 

[Astute]

Sounds like you’re an idiot.

I am nothing like you.

So how about the House of Lords that you say are after what is best for us then?

 

[martcov]

I have explained to you how the EU charter isn't law. Yet you still pretend not to know.

So when do you want to start with a truthful debate?

Or we can go back on to your favourite House of Lords where they get money off the EU and don't have to declare it. And in return they have to back the EU.

Or have you stopped mentioning them for a reason?

There are over 700 lords. Which ones work for the EU?

 

[martcov]

And you mentioned it for the first time 4 hours ago?

So if you keep chatting shite and then mention it in a different way a day or two later it must all be ignored other than the ine comment you point out to everyone?

And back to the House of Lords. So they want what is best for everyone like you keep saying yet they get paid milliins between them each year yet don't have to declare a penny. And for this they must defend the EU and do what they can for the EU. And once we leave the EU the payments will stop. And how about the freedom of information act question that wasn't answered on the subject as there is no need to answer the question as the EU has said they don't have to declare what they get off them. But we do know parts like Mandelson gets 33k a year off them and Neil Kinnock gets nearly 100k a year. Yet they are not in it for themselves?

Sounds like a Tony plot.

Sounds like a load of bollocks from Breitbart or UKIP. 33k for Mandelson is peanuts. No way would he be selling his soul for so little money. Do you think he would back leaving if somebody offered to cover him losing ( which I don’t believe he would) the 30000? Just Brexit crap from the Express.

 

[martcov]

I am nothing like you.

So how about the House of Lords that you say are after what is best for us then?

They are after what is best for us. Keeping us as close to the EU as possible. They ( a majority) don’t give a toss about blue passports and Juncker’s drinking habits. They ( a majority ) don’t have to pander to people who think that the EU is a super state with it’s own army.

 

[Astute]

Sounds like a load of bollocks from Breitbart or UKIP. 33k for Mandelson is peanuts. No way would he be selling his soul for so little money. Do you think he would back leaving if somebody offered to cover him losing ( which I don’t believe he would) the 30000? Just Brexit crap from the Express.

For just a small amount of work with the EU? The vast majoriry work a lifetime for much less.

 

[martcov]

For just a small amount of work with the EU? The vast majoriry work a lifetime for much less.

Yes, ask Farage about gravy training it in the EU. Point is that for these people 33000 is really peanuts. Not worth selling your soul for. Anyway, who are the Lords that have sold their souls to the EU? Are they a majority or a significant number?

 

[Astute]

They are after what is best for us. Keeping us as close to the EU as possible. They ( a majority) don’t give a toss about blue passports and Juncker’s drinking habits. They ( a majority ) don’t have to pander to people who think that the EU is a super state with it’s own army.

That is your opinion.

Like I said they don't have to disclose what they get from the EU as the EU says so. Our freedom of information rules are made useless by EU rules. So we can't find out who or how much. But it is many millions each year. And for this they have to fully back the EU.

And the EU has said these payments will stop if we leave.

I wonder why they are really trying their best to keep us in the EU

 

[Astute]

Yes, ask Farage about gravy training it in the EU. Point is that for these people 33000 is really peanuts. Not worth selling your soul for. Anyway, who are the Lords that have sold their souls to the EU? Are they a majority or a significant number?

33k a year is about the lowest payment. And Mandelson was caught having lians and not declaring them again just a few years ago.

And yes Farage gets money from them. Is he a Lord or are you trying to go off track?

 

[martcov]

Well here’s the general principal Tony I’m the attached. Essential socialist parties view EU worker rights as a con and a minimum standard we wouldn’t go below anyway.

I fail to see what your point is on their popularity- it’s a case of ideology - the main parties are not ideologically based as need support of all classes - the likes of the socialist parties and national front and EDL are true representations of left and right ideolological thinking.

Why socialists should support a British exit

Actually they want to destroy the EU and create a socialist super state in it’s place. Many leavers think that the EU is already a super state. Shows how screwed up leave is. You can want to leave because it is a right wing super state or because it is a left wing super state.

 

[martcov]

That is your opinion.

Like I said they don't have to disclose what they get from the EU as the EU says so. Our freedom of information rules are made useless by EU rules. So we can't find out who or how much. But it is many millions each year. And for this they have to fully back the EU.

And the EU has said these payments will stop if we leave.

I wonder why they are really trying their best to keep us in the EU

So you don’t know how many, or if any are voting against Brexit for the EU because of money?

What payments and to whom will stop if we leave? Farage will get his pension whatever happens. Who will lose out personally?

Our freedom of information laws. Says it all. I thought we were ruled by the EU? Now it is about our laws.

 

[martcov]

33k a year is about the lowest payment. And Mandelson was caught having lians and not declaring them again just a few years ago.

And yes Farage gets money from them. Is he a Lord or are you trying to go off track?

No, I am trying to work out why Farage will get his pension, but others won’t continue to receive money from the EU. What money is this? When and why does it stop?

 

[Astute]

So you don’t know how many, or if any are voting against Brexit for the EU because of money?

What payments and to whom will stop if we leave? Farage will get his pension whatever happens. Who will lose out personally?

Our freedom of information laws. Says it all. I thought we were ruled by the EU? Now it is about our laws.

I have already posted links on the subject. That is why it went very quiet on the remain whatever the cost side on here.These payments don't have to be declared because of EU rules. And because the EU says this the freedom of information act doesn't count. But the freedom of information act means all public money should be available.

Yet another lack of transparency from the EU that you back.

 

[Astute]

No, I am trying to work out why Farage will get his pension, but others won’t continue to receive money from the EU. What money is this? When and why does it stop?

The EU has said it won't pay them after we leave. But why should we pay massive pensions given by someone else which are unobtainable by the vast majority?

The House of Lords have become very pro EU since that was announced. What a coincdence. Just before thay they had announced that we wouldn't have to pay any Brexit bill as it wouldn't stand up in any court.

 

[skybluetony176]

33k a year is about the lowest payment. And Mandelson was caught having lians and not declaring them again just a few years ago.

And yes Farage gets money from them. Is he a Lord or are you trying to go off track?

From what I’ve read 30 lords are ex MEP’s and receive an EU pension. 7 off these are ex commissioner and receive an extra £31K for this. No MEP is at risk of losing their pension if they speak out against the EU regardless if they’re a lord or not. Farage would have forfeited his long ago if there was any truth in that. The 7 that were commissioners could potentially lose the extra £31K if they speak out. So it’s nonsense to say the House of Lords would lose their EU pensions if they speak/vote against the EU. Only 30 receive a pension as ex MEP’s and only 7 of those receive an extra payment that could be lost.

 

[Astute]

From what I’ve read 30 lords are ex MEP’s and receive an EU pension. 7 off these are ex commissioner and receive an extra £31K for this. No MEP is at risk of losing their pension if they speak out against the EU regardless if they’re a lord or not. Farage would have forfeited his long ago if there was any truth in that. The 7 that were commissioners could potentially lose the extra £31K if they speak out. So it’s nonsense to say the House of Lords would lose their EU pensions if they speak/vote against the EU. Only 30 receive a pension as ex MEP’s and only 7 of those receive an extra payment that could be lost.

And who said about speaking against the EU? They are supposed to speak for the EU. And could lose it all when we leave.


EU WILL NOT pay for UK Lords pension pots: German MEP blasts peers' £10m Brussels pensions
Busy now but tell me what is wrong and I will prove you wrong again.

 

[skybluetony176]

And who said about speaking against the EU? They are supposed to speak for the EU. And could lose it all when we leave.


EU WILL NOT pay for UK Lords pension pots: German MEP blasts peers' £10m Brussels pensions
Busy now but tell me what is wrong and I will prove you wrong again.

As always the devil is in the detail. Even the article says over 20. The correct number is 30. Doesn’t tell you any of that in the headline. Of those 30, 7 are ex commissioners. Commissioner have to swear allegiance to the EU. This is why those 7 could lose payments. Again it doesn’t tell you that in the article and the headline gives an entirely different impression altogether. There are almost 800 members in the House of Lords. 30 members isn’t even 5%, not that they can lose their pensions anyway. And the 7 that could lose payments don’t even represent 1%. If you watch the video the German MEP is also taking about all ex EU civil servants, he’s not specifically talking about the 30 lords who were MEP’s in isolation. Again, it doesn’t tell you that in either the headline or the article. Nigel Farage isn’t losing his annual pension from the EU of £73K for speaking out against or not speaking for (however you want to word it) and neither is anyone else. Regardless of if they’re a lord or not. As I say the exception will be the payments ex EU commissioners get having sworn an allegiance to the EU. I don’t actually know the details of that and I guarantee that you do either. It could be very hard to lose them payments it could be very easy, I don’t know. What I do know is that 1% or 5% for that matter isn’t a majority. The EU doesn’t have the stranglehold that you and the express headline are trying to paint on the House of Lords with regards to pensions. You may just have to accept that there are other reasons that the Lords has rejected the brexit bill. Do you actually know if all these ex MEP’s and Commissioners even voted against the Bill?

 

[Astute]

As always the devil is in the detail. Even the article says over 20. The correct number is 30. Doesn’t tell you any of that in the headline. Of those 30, 7 are ex commissioners. Commissioner have to swear allegiance to the EU. This is why those 7 could lose payments. Again it doesn’t tell you that in the article and the headline gives an entirely different impression altogether. There are almost 800 members in the House of Lords. 30 members isn’t even 5%, not that they can lose their pensions anyway. And the 7 that could lose payments don’t even represent 1%. If you watch the video the German MEP is also taking about all ex EU civil servants, he’s not specifically talking about the 30 lords who were MEP’s in isolation. Again, it doesn’t tell you that in either the headline or the article. Nigel Farage isn’t losing his annual pension from the EU of £73K for speaking out against or not speaking for (however you want to word it) and neither is anyone else. Regardless of if they’re a lord or not. As I say the exception will be the payments ex EU commissioners get having sworn an allegiance to the EU. I don’t actually know the details of that and I guarantee that you do either. It could be very hard to lose them payments it could be very easy, I don’t know. What I do know is that 1% or 5% for that matter isn’t a majority. The EU doesn’t have the stranglehold that you and the express headline are trying to paint on the House of Lords with regards to pensions. You may just have to accept that there are other reasons that the Lords has rejected the brexit bill. Do you actually know if all these ex MEP’s and Commissioners even voted against the Bill?

But you and Mart are not a high percentage of those who have spoken on this thread. But you do a high percentage of the messages that are pro EU. And you don't even get paid by the EU.

Have another read of what Elmar Brok has said. Kinnock and his wife would lose out on about 100k a year alone. And on top of all these payments how many of them are landowners that would lose out even more each year from the EU?

 

[Grendel]

But you and Mart are not a high percentage of those who have spoken on this thread. But you do a high percentage of the messages that are pro EU. And you don't even get paid by the EU.

Have another read of what Elmar Brok has said. Kinnock and his wife would lose out on about 100k a year alone. And on top of all these payments how many of them are landowners that would lose out even more each year from the EU?

Also a significant proportion never vote, they follow Party whip mostly and are massively over represented compared to parliament with EU Lib Dem sycophants

 

[skybluetony176]

But you and Mart are not a high percentage of those who have spoken on this thread. But you do a high percentage of the messages that are pro EU. And you don't even get paid by the EU.

Have another read of what Elmar Brok has said. Kinnock and his wife would lose out on about 100k a year alone. And on top of all these payments how many of them are landowners that would lose out even more each year from the EU?

All of which has zero to do with the points I’ve raised. I’m not even sure Neil Kinnock is a member of the House of Lords is he? Land owners who receive farming subsidies will still receive subsidies post brexit, they’ll just receive them from the U.K. not the EU. You also fail to mention that many of those landowners in the Lords also back brexit.

 

[Astute]

All of which has zero to do with the points I’ve raised. I’m not even sure Neil Kinnock is a member of the House of Lords is he? Land owners who receive farming subsidies will still receive subsidies post brexit, they’ll just receive them from the U.K. not the EU. You also fail to mention that many of those landowners in the Lords also back brexit.

Lord Kinnock

So why will landowners still get subsidies?

So which landowners that get money from the EU just for owning land voted against the EU?

 

[skybluetony176]

Lord Kinnock

So why will landowners still get subsidies?

So which landowners that get money from the EU just for owning land voted against the EU?

Because they will. It was a big claim of the leave campaign and Gove is already talking about the new mechanisms of how it will be assessed and distributed. Currently Sir James Dysons farming business is one of the largest recipients of EU farming subsidies and he’s extremely pro brexit.

EU SUBSIDY MADNESS: Millions given to UK billionaires while REAL farmers fight to survive

 

[Astute]

Because they will. It was a big claim of the leave campaign and Gove is already talking about the new mechanisms of how it will be assessed and distributed. Currently Sir James Dysons farming business is one of the largest recipients of EU farming subsidies and he’s extremely pro brexit.

EU SUBSIDY MADNESS: Millions given to UK billionaires while REAL farmers fight to survive

Which is exactly what I and others have been saying. Many billions are given away each year by the EU to landowners not to grow that wouldn't have grown food anyway. But those who need the money would hardly see much if anything at all. Yet the French farmers get an absolute fortune.

And the biggest joke is that the money that goes to the rich in the UK is counted as what comes back to us out of the payments that we presently make. Then you get the same old comment that we get half of the money back. No we don't. The EU decides where every penny goes. And it isn't back into the tax payers coffers where it came from.

So Dyson will lose out. But 1.6m is nothing to him. But yet another self made very rich person who thinks we will do well outside the confines of the EU.

 

[skybluetony176]

Which is exactly what I and others have been saying. Many billions are given away each year by the EU to landowners not to grow that wouldn't have grown food anyway. But those who need the money would hardly see much if anything at all. Yet the French farmers get an absolute fortune.

And the biggest joke is that the money that goes to the rich in the UK is counted as what comes back to us out of the payments that we presently make. Then you get the same old comment that we get half of the money back. No we don't. The EU decides where every penny goes. And it isn't back into the tax payers coffers where it came from.

So Dyson will lose out. But 1.6m is nothing to him. But yet another self made very rich person who thinks we will do well outside the confines of the EU.

As do many members of the House of Lords who are land owners but pro brexit. So far today you’ve concluded that the House of Lords don’t want brexit because they’ll all lose their EU pensions when in fact less than 5% receive an EU pension and that they’re all rich land owners who don’t want brexit as they’ll lose hand outs when many rich land owners are pro leave and will continue to get handouts when we leave just from British government directly rather than via the EU. Anything else I can educate you on today as all this seems to be news to you. Like I said, you’re going to have to find new reasons for why they keep voting down brexit regulation.

 

[skybluetony176]

Which is exactly what I and others have been saying. Many billions are given away each year by the EU to landowners not to grow that wouldn't have grown food anyway. But those who need the money would hardly see much if anything at all. Yet the French farmers get an absolute fortune.

And the biggest joke is that the money that goes to the rich in the UK is counted as what comes back to us out of the payments that we presently make. Then you get the same old comment that we get half of the money back. No we don't. The EU decides where every penny goes. And it isn't back into the tax payers coffers where it came from.

So Dyson will lose out. But 1.6m is nothing to him. But yet another self made very rich person who thinks we will do well outside the confines of the EU.

Also you don’t know that Dyson will lose £1.6M. The government haven’t worked out yet how they’re going to pay out farming subsidies post brexit. He might even end up getting more for all we know.

 

[Astute]

As do many members of the House of Lords who are land owners but pro brexit. So far today you’ve concluded that the House of Lords don’t want brexit because they’ll all lose their EU pensions when in fact less than 5% receive an EU pension and that they’re all rich land owners who don’t want brexit as they’ll lose hand outs when many rich land owners are pro leave and will continue to get handouts when we leave just from British government directly rather than via the EU. Anything else I can educate you on today as all this seems to be news to you. Like I said, you’re going to have to find new reasons for why they keep voting down brexit regulation.

EU pensions plus money for the landowners. They are supposed to be impartial. And as you agreed there are also some that have to push what is best for the EU.

 

[Astute]

Also you don’t know that Dyson will lose £1.6M. The government haven’t worked out yet how they’re going to pay out farming subsidies post brexit. He might even end up getting more for all we know.

The money for Dyson isn't farm subsidies. It is money for owning land. Just like untold landowners get. And it is money they shouldn't get. Have you seen how many billions gets wasted in this way?

 

[Grendel]

As do many members of the House of Lords who are land owners but pro brexit. So far today you’ve concluded that the House of Lords don’t want brexit because they’ll all lose their EU pensions when in fact less than 5% receive an EU pension and that they’re all rich land owners who don’t want brexit as they’ll lose hand outs when many rich land owners are pro leave and will continue to get handouts when we leave just from British government directly rather than via the EU. Anything else I can educate you on today as all this seems to be news to you. Like I said, you’re going to have to find new reasons for why they keep voting down brexit regulation.

For a start a significant percentage are wedded to the one party that has always opposed leaving the EU

James Dysons views on Europe change direction like the weather

 

[martcov]

For a start a significant percentage are wedded to the one party that has always opposed leaving the EU

James Dysons views on Europe change direction like the weather

Bit like Astute‘s views. Voted remain. Propagates leave. Claims to be neutral. Whatever happens he can rightly claim to have predicted it.

 

[martcov]

EU pensions plus money for the landowners. They are supposed to be impartial. And as you agreed there are also some that have to push what is best for the EU.

A small percentage of Lords, some of whom are pro Brexit.

 

[martcov]

Which is exactly what I and others have been saying. Many billions are given away each year by the EU to landowners not to grow that wouldn't have grown food anyway. But those who need the money would hardly see much if anything at all. Yet the French farmers get an absolute fortune.

And the biggest joke is that the money that goes to the rich in the UK is counted as what comes back to us out of the payments that we presently make. Then you get the same old comment that we get half of the money back. No we don't. The EU decides where every penny goes. And it isn't back into the tax payers coffers where it came from.

So Dyson will lose out. But 1.6m is nothing to him. But yet another self made very rich person who thinks we will do well outside the confines of the EU.

Yes, strange that. The very rich see benefits in leaving. Is that the same rich and elite that common man stuck two fingers up to at the referendum? Or was it the capitalist club EU? Or socialists in the EUSSR? Getting confused as to who leavers are actually against... the very rich? Capitalists or EUSSR socialists... I am just a normal guy who actually sees the benefits of the EU and cannot, literally, understand the constant attempted justifications and contradictory motives for leaving. Seems to me that people just say anything that comes into their heads. The most thought out arguments were in the socialist link from Grendel. No blue passport, no racism, no bs, just fair arguments. Which I didn’t agree with in total, but I could see their reasoning.

 

[skybluetony176]

The money for Dyson isn't farm subsidies. It is money for owning land. Just like untold landowners get. And it is money they shouldn't get. Have you seen how many billions gets wasted in this way?

It’s farming subsidies. He gets it because he’s the land owner. It’s all in the article I linked for you. I have seen how many millions are wasted this way but it is naive to believe that they won’t carry on post brexit, it will. The only difference is it won’t be going via the EU. It will still be the taxpayer paying for it also.

 

[Astute]

It’s farming subsidies. He gets it because he’s the land owner. It’s all in the article I linked for you. I have seen how many millions are wasted this way but it is naive to believe that they won’t carry on post brexit, it will. The only difference is it won’t be going via the EU. It will still be the taxpayer paying for it also.

So show us how you know that landowners will be given money for owning land. Farming subsidies are given by the EU to keep prices for food high. We are not self sufficient. So why would we pay farmers not to grow?

Britain’s wealthiest people raking in millions in agricultural subsidies

 

[skybluetony176]

For a start a significant percentage are wedded to the one party that has always opposed leaving the EU

James Dysons views on Europe change direction like the weather

Tories have the single biggest representation in the Lords. Coupled with the DUP, UUP and even UKIP members, then you have to factor in pro brexit labour peers, even cross benchers and independents must have serious numbers of leavers given (as we’re often reminded) over half the population voted leave. You wouldn’t think it would be an issue to get it passed given Lib Dem’s only has 98 members in comparison. Maybe just maybe these people are intelligent and connected enough to understand that the government with it’s brexit vision are trying to sell a bad deal.

James Dyson is a Brexiteer and campaigned for it. He also seems to favour no deal of late.