Ukip. All discussion here please.

I don't need to suggest anything, the numbers speak louder than words ever could: the UK needs £5bn's worth of EU goods and services more than the EU needs goods and services from the UK.

 

Anything beyond the above (which is simply bare facts) is hypothesis and conjecture - and mine is that the UK would most likely still be buying £5bn's worth of EU goods and services more than the EU buys off the UK, whether within the EU or not.

 

Lest you manage to weed execs and directors the length and breadth of the UK off Beemers and Audis, and 2.4 families off VW/Seat/Skoda identicars, not to forget Hyundais and other Eastern Europe (EU)-made 'Korean' cars, of course. That should help the number a bit, especially after No.11 starts raising luxury goods-rated VAT (or equivalent - grab your tax history book ) on them

 

No the UK buys 5 bn more goods from the EU, as to if it needs to is conjecture on your behalf.

No the UK buys 5 bn more goods from the EU,

Thank you for vindicating my earlier post so eloquently.

as to if it needs to is conjecture on your behalf.

and can I have that in English please? (or French or German, your choice)

Thank you for vindicating my earlier post so eloquently.

and can I have that in English please? (or French or German, your choice)

 

Plain English if you can't understand it I suggest you take the English test again.

Plain English if you can't understand it I suggest you take the English test again.

 

OK then, since you're being contrarian for the sake of it, I'll have a go at interpreting, but don't complain if I get it wrong

 

"No the UK buys 5 bn more goods from the EU, as to if it needs to is conjecture on your behalf"

 

is this bit in bold supposed to mean:

 

"as to whether the UK needs to buy 5 bn more goods from the EU, is conjecture on your behalf"?

 

If that is the case...You know what a balance of trade is, right?

 

So, if the balance of trade between the UK and the EU is a deficit of £5 billion a month (seems high to me, but hey-ho, mjw47's figure) in favour of the EU, it is a fact that the UK buys £5bn's worth of good and services from the EU more than the EU buys good and services from the UK per month.

 

There's nothing remotely conjectural about it, it's basic maths and logic: if the UK didn't need that extra £5bn's worth of EU stuff, it wouldn't be buying it, and the fact is that it has

 

So, are you sure you still want to call it "conjecture" on my behalf? I suggest that you read my earlier post #1729 again.

Edited October 24, 2014 by L00b

Try this http://www.ons.gov.uk/...ktrade/january-2014/stb

 

Then click on 'Trade in Goods-EU Analysis' in the left hand column.

 

It states that in the three months ending January 2014 the deficit in trade between the UK and EU was £17.6 Billion.

 

And yes Loob, it seemed high to me as well!

 

There are 196 countries on this planet, and England/Britain have been at war with all but 22 of them throughout our history.

 

This may come as a major shock to you, but we are not the most popular country in the world.

 

 

 

I'm shocked I'm sure I read somewhere..

 

......................EVERYONE LOVES A WINNER

 

and when it comes to war that is something that we generally do... WIN!

 

We'll probably get round to the remaining 22 eventually. Not saying that's a good thing but it does look a little like a trend, and trending I'm told is popular these days.

.

.

.

I'm shocked I'm sure I read somewhere..

 

......................EVERYONE LOVES A WINNER

 

and when it comes to war that is something that we generally do... WIN!

 

We'll probably get round to the remaining 22 eventually. Not saying that's a good thing but it does look a little like a trend, and trending I'm told is popular these days.

.

.

.

 

I think you need to take a refresher course in English/British history.

 

Try telling the Americans, French, Irish, Afghans,Spanish or Dutch just for starters that we 'generally WIN.'

 

Take a look at some of these.

 

1066 invasion of England by French Normans, resulting in conquest.

 

1453 Battle of Bordeaux, the final decisive battle in the hundred years war, which ended in an overwhelming French victory and the end of English ambitions to own large parts of France.

 

This country still goes on about Agincourt which was a battle won in a war ( the 100 years war ) that was lost.

 

1667 Medway. The Dutch sailed a fleet up the Thames, bombarded the city center put landing parties ashore and took what the wanted. They then sailed down to Chatham Royal dockyard and helped themselves to five Royal Navy ships including the Navy's flagship. The treaty which followed was favourable to the Dutch.

 

1842,1880,1919 Afghanistan. All defeats leading to withdrawal with tail between legs. We never seem to learn with this one do we?

 

1915 Gallipoli 1916 Iraq. Defeated by the Turks in both over 200,000 British deaths at Gallipoli.

 

1741 Battle of Cartegena de Las Indias. Ever wonder why, for all the British influence in so many parts of the world there is none in South and Central America?

Well this was the reason, overwhelming victory by the Spanish against a British force that totally outnumbered them.

 

We still go on about the Armada but Cartegena took place 150 years later and had an enormous effect on world history.

 

Throw in the American and Irish Wars of Independence, and quite a few more and the 'generally WIN' comment starts to look a bit weak.

Edited October 24, 2014 by mjw47

I agree with what Jonathan Arnott says.

 

Arnott was at the Sage Centre in Gateshead and he was very good when I heard his speech. I think Cameron is wasting his time trying to negotiate our membership in the EU.

 

Anti-EU wingers in Cameron's own party should push for a referendum on EU membership as soon as possible, and definitely before the next election.

I agree with what Jonathan Arnott says.

 

Arnott was at the Sage Centre in Gateshead and he was very good when I heard his speech. I think Cameron is wasting his time trying to negotiate our membership in the EU.

 

Anti-EU wingers in Cameron's own party should push for a referendum on EU membership as soon as possible, and definitely before the next election.

 

I've never heard of Jonathan Arnott. Who is he?

 

1667 Medway. The Dutch sailed a fleet up the Thames, bombarded the city center put landing parties ashore and took what the wanted. They then sailed down to Chatham Royal dockyard and helped themselves to five Royal Navy ships including the Navy's flagship. The treaty which followed was favourable to the Dutch.

 

 

yeah sure. The Brits got New York in that treaty. The Dutch got Suriname.

 

which one would you rather have?

yeah sure. The Brits got New York in that treaty. The Dutch got Suriname.

 

which one would you rather have?

 

Again I believe that a slight refresher on English/British history may be called for.

 

New York came under English control in 1664 three years before the battle of Medway.

 

Suriname was captured by the Dutch in 1667, the same year and part of the same war as the battle of Medway.

 

The Dutch held on to Suriname until 1975 when it became independent.

 

The British lost New York in 1782.

 

Incidentally, even if your above claim had been true you are aware that at the time New York was nothing like what it developed into, and Suriname was a Country?

while it is true to say that the Dutch did do rather well out of the 1667 Treaty of Breda, the British had the big solace of having their conquest of New Netherland confirmed. New Netherland did not consist solely of New York anyway, but also Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware too, making it massively more sizable than Suriname which is only just a little bit bigger than New York state, the USA's 27th largest, is in any case.