EU-BREXIT - Page 41 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Europe's nation states, the E.U. & Russia.

Moderator: PoFo Europe Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
By B0ycey
#14948111
Nonsense wrote:NONSENSE- What you fail to understand is that there are 'obligations' by government to pensioners through the arrangements of funding the Basic State Pension since it began over 100 years ago.
Those obligations arise, because current workers fund the retired, as with past, present & future generations.

If you are suggesting that arrangement needs tearing up, then it is patently obvious that it's state theft to either continue taking pension contributions from current-future workers, or, to pay compensation-for-inflation to current pensioners, at a rate that is less than the RPI.

The TORIES are already pulling the wool over the younger working generations through the auto-enrolment scheme in place.
The young are naïve about politics, you only get properly 'educated' with experience gained through aging, a luxury the elderly do not share equally with the young.

You are wrong(IMHO)to believe that public spending cannot be cut further before pensions, but, consider the £40 BILLION a year in taxes foregone, in order that the rich-better off, can stuff their pension funds with poorer taxpayers funding their reliefs, that's where the cuts should be made & some of it used to equalise the 'Old'-'New' Basic State Pension levels.

The level of the nations debt will spiral with no deal, because of the sheer numbers of additional people here from Europe,
(over 3 million) who will be potentially paid benefits when the economy goes tits up, that's where Theresa MAY made another gaffe today.

She is a performing liability, the cost to the country of her being in Downing Street is unsustainable, she has to go, if she doesn't, the Tory Party will.


I tell you what is real theft @Nonsense, the elderly destroying the youths future because they don't want someone with a funny accent living next door to them. #Brexit.

You don't get it and Decky touched up on it. Your NI and taxes pays for services that include far more than pensions. If the government has a lack of funds due to economic uncertainty or recession, they are not going to start slashing things that have already been slashed to the bone already. They are going to start meating up the cash cow. That is pensions. It is a cash burden and its fantasy to think it will be untouched. And in a way that is fair actually. The elderly wanted Brexit and it will be the elderly who should pay for it. And if you have a problem with that then complain to Farage or Johnson. Don't start complaining that as that is how it has always been so that is how it should be. Because a riot in the street will create more damage with a horde of angry workers than a horde of angry pensioners. Get real.
User avatar
By anarchist23
#14948143
anarchist23 wrote:Theresa May relies on the DUP for a Tory majority and therefore she is at the beck and call of the of the unionists.


BITTER ROW WITH THE DUP LEFT THERESA MAY UNABLE TO MAKE ANY PROGRESS DURING BREXIT TALKS WITH EU LEADERS

A BITTER row with the DUP left Theresa May unable to deliver any progress to EU leaders on Brexit talks – prompting them to reject her Chequers plan.
Ministers are in secret negotiations with the Ulster unionist party over a new bid by the PM to break the negotiations deadlock...
Mrs May wants to establish a different system of rules for goods in Northern Ireland than Great Britain as the missing part of a backstop plan to ensure the Irish border remains open.
But DUP leaders are refusing to agree the move, which they argue would split up the United Kingdom.
And any extra regulatory barriers without the Northern Irish people’s express consent would be a serious breach of the Good Friday peace agreement, they insist.
A senior DUP source told The Sun: “We have told Theresa that we will never allow her to divide up the UK’s single market, and we will never budge on that”.
No10 must get the full backing of the unionist party’s 10 MPs or Mrs May’s wafer thin Commons majority will disappear.
The PM’s failure to deliver the final part of the Northern Ireland backstop to EU leaders at a summit in Salzburg lead them to lash out at her and kill her Chequers plan, Brussels sources have claimed.
Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar was alleged to have begged her to produce a finished plan to take pressure off him from opponents in Dublin.
Instead, Mrs May promised to bring forward the proposals “soon”.
The DUP’s Westminster leader Nigel Dodds said: “The DUP continues to engage with the Government regularly and intensely at all levels to hold the Government to its commitments”.
Mrs May’s pitch to EU leaders to win them round to her Chequers deal at a dinner on Wednesday night was also claimed to have been disastrous.
One EU diplomatic described it as “bizarre”, and accused her of just reading out an article to them that she had penned in German newspaper Die Welt earlier in the week.
No10 aides insisted the claim was false, but conceded the PM had used speaking notes to address the 27.
Mrs May’s “Chequers or nothing” ultimatum to the leaders – delivered in an interview with BBC Panorama on Monday – also angered them.
And the final nail in the coffin was a detailed annihilation of the economic part of the Chequers proposal from EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier over a lunch meeting of the 27 leaders without Mrs May on Thursday.
The Frenchman gave specific examples of how Britain’s plan would decimate the EU’s steel and chemical industries, according to sources.
He also explained how the Commission was compromising on the EU version of the backstop, hours after Mrs May had curtly rejected it outright.
A senior diplomatic source told The Sun the “stark contrast” between the performances of the PM and Mr Barnier had persuaded leaders to act.
They said: “He managed to convince them Chequers can’t work like it’s written. They all believed him, that he really was genuinely trying to find solutions.
“It was triggered during the debate that people thought no, we have to move on now.
“Because if we don’t move on in October we’ll arrive in November with zero progress. Then we’re just organising a failure for November.”
On Mrs May’s humiliating day, they added: “There was no ambush. There was a mismanagement of expectations on the UK side about what would happen.”
Recent briefings by Number 10 about splits in the EU, plus warm overtones towards the UK from Poland and Hungary, hardened leaders’ resolve.
The 27 leaders had arrived in Salzburg originally wanting to help Mrs May by choreographing a soft landing for a Brexit deal.
An EU official added: “It’s true there was an expectation of de-dramatisation going into this summit and we saw that with Barnier offering a new version of a backstop beforehand.
“That got offered to de-dramatise but that was undermined by the op-ed Theresa May published, and to an EU audience as well, where she completely dismissed the proposed Irish backstop and put things back into the sovereignty narrative.
“We are concerned a little bit that the British game plan here is to push the backstop to the very end.”

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7318775/b ... n-ireland/
User avatar
By Nonsense
#14948273
Decky wrote:How is that different to any other benefit? :?: You pay income tax and national insurance every week (or at least I do, I know the rich have accountants to avoid paying tax) so the dole is there if you loose you job, ditto for housing benefit, the NHS and everything else.

Why is it pensioners think pensions are somehow magically different to everything else? Either you believe workers have already earned their benefits as they pay for them every single week (the correct answer) or you believe that workers should pay tax and national insurance but get jack shit back (the Tory answer).

What you can't do is cherry pick and decide pensions are magically different to everything else for no reason whatsoever. :roll:

Edit: Also

Image

Brexit will be a glorious success, there are plenty of other countries out there.

Image



By your answer, it's clear that you don't understand the system.

The clue is in the words, 'National Insurance'.

Losing your job, getting treatment on the N.H.S, claiming benefits are the premium that employees pay for such things, that is what National Insurance is paid for.

It was Labour that introduced the 'Link' between the state pension & earnings.

It was a 'top up' scheme called, State Earnings Related Pension Scheme(SERPS)1978.

It was introduced to fill the gap where people were not part of employer-based pension schemes, of which incidentally, the employers treated the funds as part of their own little thiefdom(think Robert MAXWELL-stole £400 MILLION from the pension fund of the company he owned-before committing suicide) , whereby they could decide if THEY were even going to pay you a pension at all, no matter how long you had worked for them.,
If you left their employ, you left any 'right' to a company pension behind, there were no protective rights to company pensions.

Back in 1946 when the Beveridge Report recommended the introduction of a National Insurance Fund, it was planned that pensions be paid from contributions from employees, employers & the state.
The last of which is, was & always will be responsible for INFLATION that devalues pensions paid to the retired, that's what the 'state' contribution part is meant for.

People think that pensioners get annual 'increases' in the state pensions, they DO NOT, what they actually get, is COMPENSATION FOR LOSS OF VALUE DUE TO INFLATION CAUSED BY GOVERNMENT DEFICIT SPENDING & DEBT.


Pensions are different to benefits, they are entitlements based upon contributions in work, the full entitlement only given once the conditions of contributions is met(30 years), that is different to benefits, which are claimed, as and when the need arises.
The Additional State Pension, Graduated according to earnings, from which higher contributions were made, later became SERPS, later, 'opt-outs' were allowed with 'generous' subsidies given by the government to employers operating those occupational schemes, because it would save the government money when those people retired, as a 'deduction' was made from the additional earnings related element of their pensions- a typical government 'con'.

In 1927, the tax relief for additional pensions contribution relief was introduced, currently costing £40 BILLION+ per annum, that benefits the rich & better-off in the main.

It should be abolished, as private finance companies are in fact the main beneficiaries of it, it's seen as easy pickings by them, suggest it's scrapping, those company exec's would throw a very public paddy over the suggestion & that would tell you how they benefit from it.

The 'NEW' state pension scheme(2016)is such a scheme where the pension can\is classed as a benefit, because it is different to the 'old' scheme, however the earnings related element can still mean an enhanced pension for higher earners(as usual-after all, it's a 'Tory' measure).
It's different in that the earnings related part has been fused into the 'basic' element & therefore only a 'basic' pension or benefit will be paid in future.

Elderly people have always known that they paid for their pension entitlement, employers schemes were never 'guaranteed' to be paid at any level, or even at all, in effect, the majority were scams perpetrated on employees.

The apparent 'generosity' of the 'New' basic state pension has already proven to be illusory, simply by comparing to housing cost(rents)for instance, so poverty, albeit relative, is still the lot of the future pension, just as it nearly always has been.
User avatar
By anarchist23
#14948278
Yesterdays tweet by President to the European Council, Donald Tusk, really rattled Theresa May to such an extent that she had her impromptu news conference on the lack of respect by the EU towards the U.K.
In Tusks post that triggered Theresa May reaction, is picture with her holding some desserts. He accused her of cherry picking in the talks on Brexit.
And the text on his post is a clear dig:
“A piece of cake, perhaps? Sorry, no cherries.”




[center-img]http://i68.tinypic.com/2e2qf77.jpg[/center-img]
User avatar
By Nonsense
#14948287
B0ycey wrote:I tell you what is real theft @Nonsense, the elderly destroying the youths future because they don't want someone with a funny accent living next door to them. #Brexit.

You don't get it and Decky touched up on it. Your NI and taxes pays for services that include far more than pensions. If the government has a lack of funds due to economic uncertainty or recession, they are not going to start slashing things that have already been slashed to the bone already. They are going to start meating up the cash cow. That is pensions. It is a cash burden and its fantasy to think it will be untouched. And in a way that is fair actually. The elderly wanted Brexit and it will be the elderly who should pay for it. And if you have a problem with that then complain to Farage or Johnson. Don't start complaining that as that is how it has always been so that is how it should be. Because a riot in the street will create more damage with a horde of angry workers than a horde of angry pensioners. Get real.



BOycey-"
I tell you what is real theft @Nonsense, the elderly destroying the youths future because they don't want someone with a funny accent living next door to them. #Brexit.

NONSENSE-And you believe the nonsense that you write, I can only guess that you are an age at which you were brought up by the state with an automatic sense of entitlement, without responsibility for earning it, which is NOT what people of my generation ever thought the sacrifices we made would ever be made available to people for nothing.

I have grandchildren whom I am proud of, with my encouragement, they have a work ethic, they are academically bright, they are in businesses that will survive whatever the economy does & they are\will be well rewarded financially over their working lives.

The idea that you think I or any other 'Brexiteer' care about neighbourly accents, is just ludicrous , in FACT, I have helped migrants to obtain good jobs & careers.

NOT only that, I have fought lousy employers through my own initiated union actions, gained media & public support for it as well despite the interruptions caused to the public as a result.
So NO, the 'Left' can teach me nothing about social justice, I have practised what I believe in & I am proud of what I achieved in a lifetime of work.

None of the above makes me a 'Left' or 'Right' winger, they are all divisive, narrow-minded & out for themselves.

I believe in having a population level in this & other european countries, that are politically-economically centered on the indigenous populations, with migrants only having a work visa or temporary status to remain conditional on them being able to support themselves without state support, for which paying income taxes does not entitle them to benefit expectations.

It's the 'basis' in which people are here that is the bone of contention, NOT that foreigners are here, that is not a problem, it's the political social engineering that is the problem & the E.U is at the heart of that problem because it created it.
User avatar
By Nonsense
#14948291
anarchist23 wrote:Yesterdays tweet by President to the European Council, Donald Tusk, really rattled Theresa May to such an extent that she had her impromptu news conference on the lack of respect by the EU towards the U.K.
In Tusks post that triggered Theresa May reaction, is picture with her holding some desserts. He accused her of cherry picking in the talks on Brexit.
And the text on his post is a clear dig:

[center-img]http://i68.tinypic.com/2e2qf77.jpg[/center-img]


NONSENSE- Theresa MAY has been caught in the headlights of the E.U's exposure of the nonsense that is Chequers & is now found to be a female eunuch without any clothes on.

It was that obvious a two year old could see it coming, Chequers is a mirror reflection & rejection of what the E.U stands on, the so-called 'four freedoms'.
She wanted to scrape a way around them in her simplistic miniscule brain capacity & now finds there was never any logic to her infantile brainwave called 'Chequers'.
User avatar
By Beren
#14948293
I feel somewhat sorry for Theresa May actually. It was David Cameron, a typical toff, or rather toff of toffs, who pulled the Conservative Party out of the European People's Party and founded a Eurosceptic European parliamentary group. It was also him who called the Brexit referendum, and when Leave won, it was him who resigned and left all the shit he'd cumulated to Theresa May to deal with, who just cannot let it go even if it buries her.

David Cameron should be forced to eat shit each day in the rest of his life.

Cabinet at war after May’s humiliation in Salzburg
Last edited by Beren on 22 Sep 2018 23:55, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By anarchist23
#14948298
European Council President Donald Tusk is back peddling and is grovelling to boot.
He said he was a "true admirer" of the PM Theresa May. Who is he kidding? lol

European Council President Donald Tusk has said a compromise with the UK over Brexit is "still possible", after Theresa May warned she was prepared to walk away from talks.
In a statement, Mr Tusk said he was a "true admirer" of the PM.
But he defended the EU's approach and said it was in fact Mrs May who had been "tough" and "uncompromising".

Mrs May on Friday demanded more respect from Brussels after EU leaders rejected a major part of her Brexit plan.
She had tried to sell her blueprint, which was agreed by ministers at Chequers, to EU countries at a summit in Salzburg, Austria, this week.
But the EU said the new economic partnership she had put forward "will not work" and risked "undermining the single market".
'Close friend'
The UK is due to leave the EU on 29 March 2019 - but the two sides are trying to reach a deal by November so it can be ratified in time.
Mr Tusk issued a statement on Friday evening, hours after Mrs May delivered her own speech in Downing Street in which she said the EU's rejection of her plan without offering an alternative was "unacceptable".
Mr Tusk said EU leaders at the summit had treated her proposals with "all seriousness" and said they were a "step in the right direction".
Britain had known about the EU's reservations over the Chequers plan for weeks, he added.
Mr Tusk said: "While understanding the logic of the negotiations, I remain convinced that a compromise, good for all, is still possible.
"I say these words as a close friend of the UK and a true admirer of PM May."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45610768
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#14948339
anarchist23 wrote:It's obvious after the vote supporting Brexit that the EU will make an example of the UK. The EU wants to send the message to the member states saying that if any of you are thinking of leaving then just look at the mess the UK has got itself into.
A second referendum is the only solution for Britain.


Eu can't accept a deal that will damage the integrity of the EU. This has nothing to do with the EU wanting to punish the UK. There are certain kind of deals that can't be allowed to happen. (Because it is far more damaging to the EU than an exit of UK from EU with no deal scenario)

There is a group within the EU that thinks that(UK punishment and profit from it) but they are currently under control. UK is making it harder and harder though to keep them in check. Unlike the EU, UK did not rain in their hardliners and that is why our leadership is a bit frustrated and we are getting what we are getting.

If this continues for 1 to 3 months then the moderates within the EU will have to concede to the hardliners though. A deal would be literally impossible if that happens.

There is a reason that Tusk has been so agressive lately. As much as i understand and know, he is the unofficial leader of the hard liners and has been that since the day one. Is he the biggest and the baddest among them? Hard to say nowadays. His position is also shaky, when there was progress under Barnier then there was hope and talks that Barnier might replace Tusk as the president of the European Council. So i suppose, if a deal happens then Barnier will become president but if it doesn't happen then Tusk will remain(Well somebody from his camp of sorts). In a sense he is Barniers political rival and visa versa.
By foxdemon
#14948344
@JohnRawls I can’t see how a hardline EU position is viable. Given all the other strains around Europe, a hardline with Britain might just bring the whole edifice of the Brussels establishment down.

They have to take a compromising and conciliatory position because their hand is very weak, on a continental basis. Britain could play much harder if they wanted to.
By Decky
#14948352
Nonsense wrote:It was introduced to fill the gap where people were not part of employer-based pension schemes, of which incidentally, the employers treated the funds as part of their own little thiefdom(think Robert MAXWELL-stole £400 MILLION from the pension fund of the company he owned-before committing suicide) , whereby they could decide if THEY were even going to pay you a pension at all, no matter how long you had worked for them.,
If you left their employ, you left any 'right' to a company pension behind, there were no protective rights to company pensions.


You don't need to tell me any of this, my grandfather started his apprenticeship as an electrician at 14 years old and (apart from when he was conscripted into the army) worked for that company as a direct employee for his whole life. Do you know what he got as a pension? £0, jack shit nothing. When the company went bust the capitalist stole every singe penny of every single workers pension.

This "broke" businessman who couldn't pay anyone pensions "somehow" started a new business 2 years later. I wonder where the seed money for that came from? You don't need to tell socialists anything about workplace pensions, they are a fraud and anyone who pays into one is a moron. You might as well just put your wages right into the employers pocket.
User avatar
By Nonsense
#14948364
Decky wrote:You don't need to tell me any of this, my grandfather started his apprenticeship as an electrician at 14 years old and (apart from when he was conscripted into the army) worked for that company as a direct employee for his whole life. Do you know what he got as a pension? £0, jack shit nothing. When the company went bust the capitalist stole every singe penny of every single workers pension.

This "broke" businessman who couldn't pay anyone pensions "somehow" started a new business 2 years later. I wonder where the seed money for that came from? You don't need to tell socialists anything about workplace pensions, they are a fraud and anyone who pays into one is a moron. You might as well just put your wages right into the employers pocket.


We have a meeting of minds, finally, PHEW!! :rockon:

Now, out of interest to you, remember Nick LEESON, who broke Baring's Bank as a 'fat cat' broker?

Here is his very sound advice to anyone with a little nest egg or thinking of making a long term pension pot:

Do you use an independent financial adviser? =

LEESON -I would never use any financial adviser. They are salespeople. When you see a broker or a bank manager they have something to sell. They may be doing things in your interest, but their main task is to make money out of you. One of the reasons for the recent banking crisis is that people put too much trust into what they are told by those working in finance this is because they have not been properly educated about personal finance.

Our education system should have personal finance on the school curriculum. It really is not that complicated, but banks and advisers try to make it sound so difficult to understand so they can make money out of us.

= Do you invest in stocks and shares? =

LEESON-"I have a pension fund I look after myself I buy and sell shares within the fund but not on a daily basis. I do my trading on the internet. I would not give my money to someone else to look after. It is important to stay in control and get to decide how your pension fund is invested".


He is of course, no longer in his previous career, keeping control of all of one's assets-NOT allowing anyone else to 'manage' it is your only guarantee of keeping what you started out with.
Last edited by Nonsense on 23 Sep 2018 10:37, edited 1 time in total.
By B0ycey
#14948365
Nick Leeson is in control of his own money? By going with his previous history he might as well pissed it all away then. :lol:
User avatar
By Nonsense
#14948366
B0ycey wrote:Nick Leeson is in control of his own money? By going with his previous history he might as well pissed it all away then. :lol:


:cheers: Have one on me. :lol:
User avatar
By Beren
#14948368
foxdemon wrote:@JohnRawls I can’t see how a hardline EU position is viable. Given all the other strains around Europe, a hardline with Britain might just bring the whole edifice of the Brussels establishment down.

They have to take a compromising and conciliatory position because their hand is very weak, on a continental basis. Britain could play much harder if they wanted to.

How is the Chinese space debris falling down on Europe, cangaroo boy? Do you still follow the story? :lol:
By Decky
#14948371
Nonsense wrote:We have a meeting of minds, finally, PHEW!! :rockon:

Now, out of interest to you, remember Nick LEESON, who broke Baring's Bank as a 'fat cat' broker?

Here is his very sound advice to anyone with a little nest egg or thinking of making a long term pension pot:

Do you use an independent financial adviser? =


I don't need one, I invest all of my disposable income at the pub or off license like any respectable worker. Shares are gambling, even if you win it's the devil's money.
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#14948378
foxdemon wrote:@JohnRawls I can’t see how a hardline EU position is viable. Given all the other strains around Europe, a hardline with Britain might just bring the whole edifice of the Brussels establishment down.

They have to take a compromising and conciliatory position because their hand is very weak, on a continental basis. Britain could play much harder if they wanted to.


You are severely overestimating EU problems. The only real problems that we have right now: Immigration crysis and anti-EU parties. The greek issue was more or less sorted out(Not in the best way), so is the PIGS situation(Pretty okay). But even if those issues were raging on at full force, it still wouldn't be a massive problem.

You think that we are some kind of sickly person which we are not. The media likes to hype it up but the reality is:

1) We are sanctioning Russia and hurting our economy.
2) We had economic problems with Greece and PIGS.
3) We have immigration issues because of refugees.
4) We have UK leaving the EU.

And even despite that, we are still growing economically. We are actually growing around 2 percent which is decent. (As a whole) We were around 2.5 percent as a whole last year. (Official statistics for US were 2.3 for comparison)
User avatar
By Seeker8
#14948411
foxdemon wrote:I can’t see how a hardline EU position is viable. Given all the other strains around Europe, a hardline with Britain might just bring the whole edifice of the Brussels establishment down.

They have to take a compromising and conciliatory position because their hand is very weak, on a continental basis. Britain could play much harder if they wanted to.

Possibly the dumbest take on brexit I've read yet. Do you have U.K tabloids in Australia or something? The "They need need us more than we need them" line. :lol:

Are the E.U having to stockpile food and medicine in case of no deal? Cause the U.K are. Will the E.U have zero trade deals? I wonder how the rest of the world will negotiate with the U.K when they know we are absolutely desperate for trade deals? Will they be kind and generous or will they take full advantage for themselves? I wonder.

---

What do you all think about this:

SCOTTISH Brexit secretary Michael Russell has demanded Theresa May apologise after her government was caught “pleading with the EU to do nothing to help Scotland.”

Notes that were leaked to a national newspaper earlier this week revealed that officials in Brussels had been briefed by Whitehall to find a solution to the Irish border in a way “that it is not applicable for Scotland.”

The Scottish Government has long said any deal which allows Northern Ireland to effectively remain in the single market – which the EU says is the only way for the North to remain in the UK, and the Republic to remain in Europe without a hard border – must also be available to Scotland.

Last December, Nicola Sturgeon tweeted: “If one part of UK can retain regulatory alignment with EU and effectively stay in the single market (which is the right solution for Northern Ireland) there is surely no good practical reason why others can’t.”

http://www.thenational.scot/news/16896978.michael-russell-theresa-may-must-issue-an-apology-to-scotland/

I really wonder how the mind of a Scottish Unionist works when reading stuff like this. How pathetic is it to want to be ruled by someone who actively tries to harm your interests.
  • 1
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 328

How about Russia uses a battle field nuclear we[…]

@Tainari88 , @Godstud @Rich , @Verv , @Po[…]

World War II Day by Day

March 29, Friday Mackenzie King wins Canadian el[…]

Hmmm, it the Ukraine aid package is all over main[…]