The EU debate - Part III

But if it's wealthy, which is what was claimed previously, why hasn't it already happened?

Surely there are currently plenty of more deserving countries if the same criteria is applied?

 

That's a 3% drop not 10%

 

I'm certainly not claiming Poland is wealthy. Only that it is wealthier.

If you look at growth in the EU it is generally the poorer nations that are growing fastest.

 

I agree, but thats the Gov for you allowing it to happen, so many British companies sold off, greedy shareholders for you.

 

You're not, but others did when I asked previously.

I still don't see why, if Poland is growing, they still get subsidies at the expense of others.

I still don't recall voting on this policy or reading it in a manifesto.

 

If Poland is getting wealthier why do so many still want to come to the UK?

 

How are they stopping us from assisting the Steel industry here?

The Germans have subsidised their heavy industry via 3BN euro per annum worth of energy subsidies in the last 3 years

 

To visit family?

 

The vote has created uncertainty in both the UK and in the rest of the EU. I don't think it's totally unreasonable to ask for unveiling of some plans to form a basis for negotiations and to bring some certainty, and hopefully, stability to both sides

 

Because the steel industry isn't a bank.

One of a number of links. Some offer other reasons too.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35933904

 

The UK steel market cannot compete, simple as!

China produces more steel than the world can use now!..

 

No they didn't. It was merely pointed out to you that they had the fastest growing economy in Europe.

This alone does not make them 'wealthy' it means they're on the right track.

The were starting from a very low base.

If you are 'your people' are the experts on EU funding that you purported to be, you'd surely understand the in depth reasons why Poland qualifies for the subsidies that they receive btw?

 

It all depends on you starting position. If you GDP was €500 per capita a growth rate of 20% would only increase it to €600 so probably more in need of assistance than a country with a GDP of €5000 but with a growth of only 0.1%.
As I vote in Spain for European elections I didn't see the various manifestos last time, but from what I saw of previous ones there weren't any that were useful.

 

It's not unreasonable for them to ask, but the answer "When we are ****ing ready" is also not unreasonable.
Our government need to act in the best interests of the UK, thats their job, **** the other member states, our government should not give them one ounce of consideration on this decision, they do whats best for the UK and nothing else.
You all act as if you want the UK to leave now, **** it up, and leave us all in the ****?

 

Most immigration from eastern Europe is currently Bulgaria and Romania who joined the union later.
More came from those two countries last year than Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia combined

 

I've never claimed to be an expert on EU funding, and the "us" comment was explained. If that's all you've got to go with you may as well give up.

There's a trend when a decent conversation gets going, that you and another couple rapidly change it to bullshit and bollocks.

Give yourself a day off, and join in the conversation.

 

Which avoids the fact that they became uncompetitive in the market as our own Govt didn't help them in the same way the Germans help their heavy industry

One of the reasons why we didn't, is that we didn't challenge the EU over it, and still haven't

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d91c122c-f828-11e5-96db-fc683b5e52db.html#axzz4JfORdlRE

'market forces' at it's finest.

 

I can totally accept what you're saying. I just can't help think that if someone has undemocratically decided to be generous with my money, there are countries more in need than Poland.

 

Thats one of my main issues with the EU.
The EU needs to act in the best interests of the majority of their member states, if the UK is not in that majority, it gets shafted, because the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, and I understand thats the only way they can operate fairly.
My problem with that is, I don't live in France, Italy, Germany, or Spain, and I don't pay in to, or elect, their governments, so I really couldn't give a solitary **** what negatively impacts on them

 

I can't follow the article, but you seem to suggest that the government failed them in the first place, so why should they help them now. Which misses the point that they can't because the EU won't let them.