Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ireland to contribute €16 billion more than it receives to EU in next 7 years

Options
145791019

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 25,585 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    More.

    Do you think 2 billion a year is worth more for public spending in Ireland for the irish taxpayers or send to Brussels

    Let me get this straight

    Ireland has recieved over 40 Billion from the EU, Over the years, now that they are a net contribution country you don't think they should have to pay?


  • Posts: 5,369 [Deleted User]


    If much of our current success is down to the EEC/EU which we joined in 1973, how come Ireland was an under-developed backwater for most of the 70's and 80's with one in five unemployed and people flying out as soon as they got their degrees?
    What did the EU do in the early 90's to turn that around?
    Or a better question is what did we do ourselves?

    You can't be serious with this. You really can't. Can you?

    What turbed in the 90s was that the years of investment started paying off. That's years of eu support to pay that unemployment benefit, build and run the infrastructure, allow the population to become highly educated and build areas like the ifsc.

    Please, explain how any of that would have been possible without being given billions from the EU? We were broke!


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭View


    The UK want to leave. Europe said ok. Europe said you must not undercut us and must stick to EU standards. UK said no we are leaving. We are independent we can do as we please. EU say no.

    Hotel California

    I didn't mention anything about us leaving. Debate is possible regarding eu budget contributions without spitting the dummy and leaving.

    No, that is not right.

    Rather the UK’s Brexiters are demanding that the EU countries (including us) provide them with an extraordinarily generous level of access to the EU’s markets. Based on that request, the EU countries have made the response you mention.

    Were it a case that the U.K.’s Brexiters had just wanted to leave and disappear off into the sunset, the EU countries wouldn’t have made the response you mention, as there would have been no need for the EU countries to make any such response.


  • Registered Users Posts: 900 ✭✭✭sameoldname


    UK leaving on wto rules and the EU having zero say in how the UK operates seems the best option so.

    I'm sure the people of the UK are glad that you think that is best for them. Maybe you can set up a GoFundMe for them too?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    Let me get this straight

    Ireland has recieved over 40 Billion from the EU, Over the years, now that they are a net contribution country you don't think they should have to pay?

    Fair is fair. Time to pay the piper. I'm sure MM fought the case for Ireland though.

    We don't have a choice.
    If we want to pay or not is irrelevant.

    That 2 billion a year will be felt throughout the country


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭View


    UK leaving on wto rules and the EU having zero say in how the UK operates seems the best option so.

    Sovereignty of uk fishing waters also

    The U.K. has already left.

    In doing so, their Brexiters entered into a WA and Political Declaration in which they stated they wished to negotiate a post-Brexit agreement with the EU countries that far exceeds basic “WTO rules” (and yes they included fisheries as part of that).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    View wrote: »
    The U.K. has already left.

    In doing so, their Brexiters entered into a WA and Political Declaration in which they stated they wished to negotiate a post-Brexit agreement with the EU countries that far exceeds basic “WTO rules” (and yes they included fisheries as part of that).

    That agreement isnt happening. The uk want a favorable deal while also having complete sovereign control

    The EU also want a deal while forcing the uk to stick to EU standards and not undercutting the bloc.

    It ain't happening.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭View


    Fair is fair. Time to pay the piper. I'm sure MM fought the case for Ireland though.

    We don't have a choice.
    If we want to pay or not is irrelevant.

    That 2 billion a year will be felt throughout the country

    Given that our entire economy operates on us being a member of the EU, our “return on investment” far exceeds the 2 billion a year that it is claimed that our membership will cost us.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,711 ✭✭✭StupidLikeAFox


    Fair is fair. Time to pay the piper. I'm sure MM fought the case for Ireland though.

    We don't have a choice.
    If we want to pay or not is irrelevant.

    That 2 billion a year will be felt throughout the country

    Would you prefer to be in Spains/Italys/Greeces position? That is - getting a load of money from the EU but also having an economy that is ****ed?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,364 ✭✭✭micosoft


    Tefral wrote: »
    Whilst I appreciate this, and honestly its the correct statement to make, don't forget the non direct monetary benefit Ireland gives up with say our massive territorial waters and fishing rights. So its not as clear cut.

    We are handing up a massive resource and getting money in return.

    This myth has been done to death on boards and elsewhere...It's simply not true.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    View wrote: »
    Given that our entire economy operates on us being a member of the EU, our “return on investment” far exceeds the 2 billion a year that it is claimed that our membership will cost us.

    As I said time to pay the piper.

    We are powerless. When you get your electricity bill in the post you pay it but I doubt you jump for joy when you see the envelope.

    We don't have to be happy about it but we don't have a choice


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭View


    There will never be true unity. There are too many different cultures and opinions. Anyone who goes against the forced rule from Brussels is made to be a villain. I predict a constant steady rise of anti eu sentiment. We are seeing it throughout Europe already. If a euro sceptic party takes control in France at next election all bets are off

    There is no such thing as “forced rule from Brussels” in the EU.

    The EU is an international organisation which, like all international organisations, exists at the behest of its members and whose rules are set by its members.

    Any member state that decides it doesn’t want to be a member is free to leave. No one is going to force them to remain a member so your claims of “forced rule” are nonsense.


  • Registered Users Posts: 900 ✭✭✭sameoldname


    That agreement isnt happening. The uk want a favorable deal while also having complete sovereign control.

    There is no type of trade deal with any country on Earth where you don't have to cede some control in order to allow enforcement of the rules of the deal by both parties. The UK has been asking for this for years now and that's why the EU has called the UK's demands as fantasy thinking. The UK want 2 mutually exclusive things, hence the term "Cakeism".
    Honestly, 4 years and you know none of this?
    It ain't happening.

    That we can agree on.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    View wrote: »
    There is no such thing as “forced rule from Brussels” in the EU.

    The EU is an international organisation which, like all international organisations, exists at the behest of its members and whose rules are set by its members.

    Any member state that decides it doesn’t want to be a member is free to leave. No one is going to force them to remain a member so your claims of “forced rule” are nonsense.

    European law supersedes national law. Ie you are forced

    "According to the precedence principle, European law is superior to the national laws of Member States. The precedence principle applies to all European acts with a binding force. Therefore, Member States may not apply a national rule which contradicts to European law.

    The precedence principle guarantees the superiority of European law over national laws. It is a fundamental principle of European law. As with the direct effect principle, it is not inscribed in the Treaties, but has been enshrined by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)."


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,002 ✭✭✭greenfield21


    What's the link between multinationals and ireland been in the EU?. For example US pharma companies come here to profit from ripping of US consumers. Am I right in thinking this is a tax treaty Ireland has with the US and nothing got to do with the EU. I'd love to see the spread of profits and know how much we are actually taking from the EU. In Pharma I'd say it is very small. If anything the EU is sort of gaining by having the resource and knowledge of these companies and may actually be in net postive on tax.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭View


    As I said time to pay the piper.

    We are powerless. When you get your electricity bill in the post you pay it but I doubt you jump for joy when you see the envelope.

    We don't have to be happy about it but we don't have a choice

    If your “return on investment” far exceeds the amount of your investment, you aren’t “paying the piper”, as you are better off from making the investment.

    We could, of course, exercise our choice, leave the EU thus saving on the investment and forego our “return on investment” but that would leave us worse off, not better off.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    View wrote: »
    If your “return on investment” far exceeds the amount of your investment, you aren’t “paying the piper”, as you are better off from making the investment.

    We could, of course, exercise our choice, leave the EU thus saving on the investment and forego our “return on investment” but that would leave us worse off, not better off.

    I never once mentioned that Ireland should leave the EU.

    Did you know that EU law supersedes national law


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    European law supersedes national law. Ie you are forced

    That would be a much more compelling point if we had no part in the making of EU laws.

    We do, so it isn't.


  • Registered Users Posts: 900 ✭✭✭sameoldname


    European law supersedes national law. Ie you are forced

    "According to the precedence principle, European law is superior to the national laws of Member States. The precedence principle applies to all European acts with a binding force. Therefore, Member States may not apply a national rule which contradicts to European law.

    The precedence principle guarantees the superiority of European law over national laws. It is a fundamental principle of European law. As with the direct effect principle, it is not inscribed in the Treaties, but has been enshrined by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)."

    No, you negotiate the laws first, then you agree to be bound by them. There's no forcing.

    Look, I know that you have ~850 posts in 56 days, which is about 1 post an hour, every single day assuming you sleep. So clearly you don't have the time to put a lot of thought into your posts but it would help the discussion a lot if you could put a little effort into your replies.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,364 ✭✭✭micosoft


    More.

    Do you think 2 billion a year is worth more for public spending in Ireland for the irish taxpayers or send to Brussels

    I think 2 Billion a year is literally bargain of the century.

    For that piddling investment we get:

    8 Billion in Corporation Tax from MNC's

    4 Billion in Income Tax by MNC employees.

    That's before we even consider the massive return Irish Business make from being in the EU.

    It's fairly obvious that we get at least a 10:1 return on our investment.

    Aside from the fact the 2 Billion is building markets for high value Irish Goods in the longer term.

    And leaving aside the moral and reputional benefits to our position.

    Your analysis is not even wrong. We would not have the 2 billion to spend on our selves. We would be broke. Which brings me to the question - your position is so far against Irelands interests and for the interests of people that would harm Ireland - Brexiteers for example - I have to ask whose views do you represent?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    Graham wrote: »
    That would be a much more compelling point if we had no part in the making of EU laws.

    We do, so it isn't.

    Bottom line is EU law supersedes national law. Therefore there is no sovereign control. Brussels controls what countries can do or not do.

    According to the precedence principle, European law is superior to the national laws of Member States. The precedence principle applies to all European acts with a binding force. Therefore, Member States may not apply a national rule which contradicts to European law.

    The precedence principle guarantees the superiority of European law over national laws. It is a fundamental principle of European law. As with the direct effect principle, it is not inscribed in the Treaties, but has been enshrined by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,364 ✭✭✭micosoft


    I never once mentioned that Ireland should leave the EU.

    Did you know that EU law supersedes national law

    Did you know that Ireland is a member of the EU and creates EU law?


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Bottom line is EU law supersedes national law.

    but you're still pretending we have no say in what becomes EU law.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    micosoft wrote: »
    I think 2 Billion a year is literally bargain of the century.

    For that piddling investment we get:

    8 Billion in Corporation Tax from MNC's

    4 Billion in Income Tax by MNC employees.

    That's before we even consider the massive return Irish Business make from being in the EU.

    It's fairly obvious that we get at least a 10:1 return on our investment.

    Aside from the fact the 2 Billion is building markets for high value Irish Goods in the longer term.

    And leaving aside the moral and reputional benefits to our position.

    Your analysis is not even wrong. We would not have the 2 billion to spend on our selves. We would be broke. Which brings me to the question - your position is so far against Irelands interests and for the interests of people that would harm Ireland - Brexiteers for example - I have to ask whose views do you represent?

    You think that the EU are happy with Ireland's tax deals with multinationals?

    Quite the opposite


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭View


    European law supersedes national law. Ie you are forced

    "According to the precedence principle, European law is superior to the national laws of Member States. The precedence principle applies to all European acts with a binding force. Therefore, Member States may not apply a national rule which contradicts to European law.

    The precedence principle guarantees the superiority of European law over national laws. It is a fundamental principle of European law. As with the direct effect principle, it is not inscribed in the Treaties, but has been enshrined by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)."

    EU law only applies in areas covered by the EU Treaties, so your quote above is either quoted out of context or inaccurate. In addition, that isn’t something any of our democratically elected governments (or Dails) have ever had a problem with, much less sought to change at EU level (as they are free to do).

    And, as membership of the EU is voluntary and a member state is free to terminate it, no member state is ever “forced”, rather they “exercise their sovereignty” and choose to be members of the EU, just like they do with every other international organisation they are members of.

    You may disagree with how we exercise our sovereignty but that doesn’t mean we have to ignore democracy to appease you.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    Graham wrote: »
    but you're still pretending we have no say in what becomes EU law.

    No we don't. What happens if we vote against something and lose?
    The law is still enacted and forced upon us. We cannot make our own law either. We are forced

    EU law supersedes national law


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 491 ✭✭YellowBucket


    The thing I don’t see on these comparisons though are the net benefit of being a member. A huge % or our economy relies on access to that market and there are other rather hard to quantify benefits like freedom of movement.

    Being a net contributor the budget just means we’re no longer poor. Also we received huge amounts of money when we were one of the less wealthy members.

    The whole point of the thing is to pool some resources and hopefully allow less well off members to catch up. We did that. Others will so that too and the net economic benefit to us is a big, wealthy, broad European economy to trade with.

    My view of it is you can either fall into the Brexit arguments or see the big picture. I would hope we are somewhat more likely to do the later than our British neighbours did.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    View wrote: »
    EU law only applies in areas covered by the EU Treaties, so your quote above is either quoted out of context or inaccurate. In addition, that isn’t something any of our democratically elected governments (or Dails) have ever had a problem with, much less sought to change at EU level (as they are free to do).

    And, as membership of the EU is voluntary and a member state is free to terminate it, no member state is ever “forced”, rather they “exercise their sovereignty” and choose to be members of the EU, just like they do with every other international organisation they are members of.

    You may disagree with how we exercise our sovereignty but that doesn’t mean we have to ignore democracy to appease you.

    The choice is basically submit to EU law or leave

    EU law supersedes national law.

    https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM:l14548


  • Registered Users Posts: 900 ✭✭✭sameoldname


    The choice is basically submit to EU law or leave

    Are you even reading what you're replying to?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    Are you even reading what you're replying to?

    Nope.

    EU law supersedes national law. That's the bottom line.

    Posters going around in circles but at the end of the day the EU decides what is or isnt policy for everyone.


Advertisement