Why Do We Give Parasites The Vote?
Society & Culture1 min ago
How Come The 'brexiters' Have Not Mentioned This?
https:/
Theresa May had it much tougher than she had imagined at the G20.
Theresa May had it much tougher than she had imagined at the G20.
Answers
As others have said, there was a lot ‘
17:20 Tue 06th Sep 2016
First of all the figures, Eddie (provided by the Royal Society):
“The UK is one of the largest recipients of research funding in the EU. Over the period 2007 – 2013 the UK received €8.8 billion out of a total of €107 billion expenditure on research, development and innovation in EU Member States, associated and third countries. This represents the fourth largest share in the EU.”
So it should represent the fourth largest share since the UK is the third largest contributor. Even so, at around €1.3bn (around £1bn) per annum it is only around 10% of the sum the UK provides to the EU.
However, fascinating as this all is (and we could debate the finer details endlessly) none of it, absolutely none of it, is the point. Although we could argue over whether the UK’s contribution to the EU budget is £10bn, £20bn, or something in between, it is fairly common ground that we get back about half the sum we pay in (to be spent as directed). There are loads of organisations and institutions which are beneficiaries of what is euphemistically called “EU support”. This is, in fact, half of the UK taxpayers’ dosh which is shovelled over to Brussels to be dribbled back only to be spent as directed. The other half (that of it that does not disappear in “administration” such as paying to run the five presidents of the various carriages of the EU gravy train) is provided to other member nations. Among the recipients of the EU’s largesse with other people’s money recently has been Poland (to improve their airport terminals) and Bulgaria (to improve their highways).
Whether or not the UK decides to fund its various research programmes should not be a matter for the EU. What UK taxpayers’ money is spent on should be a matter for the UK Parliament. This is what Brexit is about. If you have concerns that the UK will not continue to fund the projects you hold dear you should be even more concerned whether the EU will be willing or able to do so. The Eurozone in particular is in desperate shape and crises are looming over Greece and (especially) Italy. Just because they are doling out half of our money to Cambridge institutions now there is no guarantee they will do so forever - though of course our contributions will continue. And if they decide to stop there will be precious little the UK's MEPs will be able to do about it.
“The UK is one of the largest recipients of research funding in the EU. Over the period 2007 – 2013 the UK received €8.8 billion out of a total of €107 billion expenditure on research, development and innovation in EU Member States, associated and third countries. This represents the fourth largest share in the EU.”
So it should represent the fourth largest share since the UK is the third largest contributor. Even so, at around €1.3bn (around £1bn) per annum it is only around 10% of the sum the UK provides to the EU.
However, fascinating as this all is (and we could debate the finer details endlessly) none of it, absolutely none of it, is the point. Although we could argue over whether the UK’s contribution to the EU budget is £10bn, £20bn, or something in between, it is fairly common ground that we get back about half the sum we pay in (to be spent as directed). There are loads of organisations and institutions which are beneficiaries of what is euphemistically called “EU support”. This is, in fact, half of the UK taxpayers’ dosh which is shovelled over to Brussels to be dribbled back only to be spent as directed. The other half (that of it that does not disappear in “administration” such as paying to run the five presidents of the various carriages of the EU gravy train) is provided to other member nations. Among the recipients of the EU’s largesse with other people’s money recently has been Poland (to improve their airport terminals) and Bulgaria (to improve their highways).
Whether or not the UK decides to fund its various research programmes should not be a matter for the EU. What UK taxpayers’ money is spent on should be a matter for the UK Parliament. This is what Brexit is about. If you have concerns that the UK will not continue to fund the projects you hold dear you should be even more concerned whether the EU will be willing or able to do so. The Eurozone in particular is in desperate shape and crises are looming over Greece and (especially) Italy. Just because they are doling out half of our money to Cambridge institutions now there is no guarantee they will do so forever - though of course our contributions will continue. And if they decide to stop there will be precious little the UK's MEPs will be able to do about it.
New Judge
First of all the figures, Eddie (provided by the Royal Society):
“The UK is one of the largest recipients of research funding in the EU. Over the period 2007 – 2013 the UK received €8.8 billion out of a total of €107 billion expenditure on research, development and innovation in EU Member States, associated and third countries. This represents the fourth largest share in the EU.”
_______________________________-
EDDIE51
Will the government be able to match the £8.8 billion a year and keep it up for the 25 or so years that a typical research project takes from instigation to market?
_____________________________________
Who has got their wires crossed here?
Remainers promised instant catastrophe — but it’s not happening, Britain’s economy is confounding the doom-mongers as spending rises, unemployment falls and consumers seem thoroughly cheerful. What Brexit will eventually mean for the UK economy is still uncertain and turbulence is inevitable, but those who said that leaving the EU would lead to economic collapse are already looking silly, so what are they to do now? Well, there's always Eddie.
There were some ‘Remainers’ forecasting catastrophe it is true. There were a few idiots making silly predictions on both sides, but that has already been discussed several times. The vast majority of us who wanted to stay part of the EU weren't forecasting anything though, and just thought that on balance we were better off in than out. We have yet to find out if that is true or not. I hope that I was wrong, but it is far too early to tell.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.