On Thu, 02 Nov 2017 11:33:41 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , Nightjar
wrote:

On 02-Nov-17 9:11 AM, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Nightjar
wrote:

On 01-Nov-17 9:50 PM, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Nightjar
wrote:

Blame whoever created the graph (I was looking at and who labelled
it with small figures. However, that doesn't change my point that,
in the grand scheme of things, what we pay to the EU isn't really a
big part of government spending. Indeed, taking the actual cost,
after the rebate and what we get back, it comes to less than 0.5% of
GDP and even the most optimistic of the believable predictions
suggest that our GDP will drop by more than that as a result of Brexit.

Leaving the EU isn't about that.

I doubt there is a single unified vision of Brexit for all those who
voted to leave and the money was certainly one of the reasons given at
the time.

If that's the case then the focus on the money by those wishing to
remain under the auspices of this undemocratic EU is unwarranted.

I have previously provided arguments against all and every reason put
forward by the Leave campaign. This is just one of them, but it gets
attention because it is particularly easy to prove wrong.

No you haven't. AFAIK, you've not addressed the undemocratic and
protectionist nature of the EU, and that it represents a form of
oligarchical government that the UK has spent 200 years evolving away
from.

So like I said, you have an 'agenda' that is very different from most.

India, China, Russia, and the US are all too big, as entities that can
be governed fairly and without repression. Not that I hold out any
hopes of them being broken up any time soon. The EU is heading and by
its own admission straight into the same basket. Our leaving will help
prevent that.

You hope ... assuming any parallels can be drawn in the first place.

So, you are basically a 'Little Englander' ... you want us to be an
independent island and think we can all still enjoy the same level of
lifestyle as we were when within the EU or we did some time in the
past?

Whilst it's nice to have a cause (and I believe yours is well
meaning), what *proof* do you have that if we achieve your (personal)
goal, that we will actually all be better off because of it?

Like you don't like the noise and pollution from the main road outside
your shop but it does make it easy to get stock delivered and give
easy access to customers. Whilst your idea of moving to the country
could make your life more comfortable, could you (and your business)
still survive?

Sometimes it really is better to be with the 'devil you know' and 'the
grass isn't always greener on the other side' ...

Cheers, T i m