Brexit humiliation

[noseall]

Unless I was reading it wrong, the way I read it, it shows the grasping EU in a bad light.

Lol, the anti EU rags NEVER show the EU in a good light.
You and those crap Tory rags imagine this is down to EU greed? We currently have the most anti-EU government in power, this country has ever seen. You think for one second they'd keep sending the EU money if they hadn't agreed to?

Silly mottie

 

[noseall]

My brother-in-law was paying quite a bit to his ex-wife after divorcing her. Cost a bit for a while but it’s all over now and both Mrs Mottie and her sister have just been repaid a sizeable chunk of cash that they loaned him now that he is finally free of his shackles. That’s how divorces work. It’s all going to plan.

Did he agree to pay her?

 

[Mottie]

Lol, the anti EU rags NEVER show the EU in a good light…….
Silly Mottie

Perhaps you should stop quoting from them then?
Silly Noseall.

 

[Mottie]

Did he agree to pay her?

Yep, gave her the house and a percentage of his pension. Was still paying the mortgage four years after he moved out. Reckons it was worth every penny.

 

[ajohn]

It's odd that one country refers to the uk in a way that sounds like gross britainia. Could be more apt now with a direct english translation.

Great has long since gone. Not very patriotic but unfortunately true.

(especially of wrongdoing) very obvious and unacceptable.
"gross human rights abuses"

 

[Mottie]

Well I assumed you believed it.

The EU set up in some areas has defined time periods. That is likely to figure in continuing some payments but it seems that works both ways - EU projects here continue until the period ends but as I said this gov decided to remain in some projects. They are often expensive ones so cost needs to be spread between countries. They usually result in jobs in these countries or use of facilities by all. In some ways it's a method of matching the USA. One of the EU's aims.

Sorry for quoting from a link that the thread starter, Noseall, posted. Perhaps you could take it up with him?

 

[JP_]

First sign of madness - talking to yourself.

Second sign of madness - talking to mad people!

Hang on a minute ...

 

[ajohn]

Perhaps you could take it up with him?

Probably no point. Politics is getting like religion especially on the right. It needs faith as all religions do. Faith doesn't need proof. In this case though the results are experienced. In most cases the unquestioning faith remains.

Fact is most serious problems countries experience are global issues. It's rather easy to view those as local issues = more confusion.

The UK's fundamental problems are jobs, investment and available markets other than selling what ever to ourselves even imports. Summed up by a Tory who didn't like where Thatcher was heading which in this areas wasn't really mentioned. He said "You can't run an economy by selling hamburgers to each other". In short some sort of balance is needed.

 

[Pat ex]

No. He had major headaches and expense as do most people at the early stages of the divorce. Ask them all ten years on whether it would have been better to stay married because of the initial cost and legal wrangling and I doubt if you’ll find many that will say yes.

And some realise their mistake and get back with the ex.
They even remarry.

 

[Mottie]

And some realise their mistake and get back with the ex.
They even remarry.

Got a percentage on that?

 

[ajohn]

Maybe I should have added an economic shift away from worrying about trade balances.

From a web page about Keynesian economics
However, in more recent years, since the end of the Bretton Woods system in 1971, with the increasing influence of Monetarist schools of thought in the 1980s, and particularly in the face of large sustained trade imbalances, these concerns – and particularly concerns about the destabilising effects of large trade surpluses – have largely disappeared from mainstream economics discourse[89] and Keynes' insights have slipped from view.[90] They are receiving some attention again in the wake of the financial crisis of 2007–08.[91]

The Keynes' insight is effectively there is a problem so gov steps in. He effectively believed that gov public works can have some control of economic cycles.

An argument on trade deficits is that the exporter will have loads of money and will want to invest it and some will go to their markets. Japan has been an example that illustrates that. Maybe we should allow China to build HS2.

​

 

[Pat ex]

Got a percentage on that?

Whatever the percentage is, it is not comparable to Brexit.
There's only ever been one Brexit.

 

[Mottie]

Whatever the percentage is, it is not comparable to Brexit.
There's only ever been one Brexit.

Theres only one person I know on here who has remarried their wife but it’s very rare - in fact apart from Richard Burton, I’ve never heard of it before. If we assume that the ratio is 50 to 1, it’s more likely that Brexit is one of the 50 and not the 1.

 

[Pat ex]

Theres only one person I know on here who has remarried their wife but it’s very rare - in fact apart from Richard Burton, I’ve never heard of it before. If we assume that the ratio is 50 to 1, it’s more likely that Brexit is one of the 50 and not the 1.

It's actually 15%, that's 15 in a hundred.
But as I said, the percentage is not comparable because one event happens frequently, and the other has happened only once.

 

[Mottie]

It's actually 15%, that's 15 in a hundred.
But as I said, the percentage is not comparable because one event happens frequently, and the other has happened only once.

Is that government figures, your own guesstimate or spiel from a 'divorce lawyer'?