Family & Relationships10 mins ago
Illegal Immigrants Facing Deportation
British expats in Spain who have failed to register as residents face deportation due to Brexit.
[register as resident = liable for tax]
https:/
[register as resident = liable for tax]
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Chinajan. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Read a book on the advantages of being a member of the EU ? No, of course not. Even if some minor compensatory advantages could be found, they would pale into insignificance compared to the cost of having a foreign elite dictate to your nation, thus losing control and status as a nation. So reading it would not be a profitable use of one's time. Besides, chances are, whatever advantage was claimed could conceivably be supplied by a more amicable agreement between nations, should the will to do so exist.
//But would it matter if it did?//
Not to me it wouldn't. It depends how you foresee the EU panning out (because its current format is certainly not the "end game"). My view is that the ultimate aim is to create a European Federal State - a single nation - where individual nations are relegated to simple parishes with little or no say in their affairs. I would not want that to happen for reasons which are too lengthy to go into here. So with that in mind, the UK would be effectively "sold" because it might be too expensive to resist EU membership. And for me, the UK is not for sale to anybody at any price and most certainly not to a bunch of anti-democratic foreign spivs.
Thankfully the issue will not now arise but in any case I believe the UK's membership of the EU has cost it dearly over the last forty years and leaving can only improve the balance sheet.
Not to me it wouldn't. It depends how you foresee the EU panning out (because its current format is certainly not the "end game"). My view is that the ultimate aim is to create a European Federal State - a single nation - where individual nations are relegated to simple parishes with little or no say in their affairs. I would not want that to happen for reasons which are too lengthy to go into here. So with that in mind, the UK would be effectively "sold" because it might be too expensive to resist EU membership. And for me, the UK is not for sale to anybody at any price and most certainly not to a bunch of anti-democratic foreign spivs.
Thankfully the issue will not now arise but in any case I believe the UK's membership of the EU has cost it dearly over the last forty years and leaving can only improve the balance sheet.
//Are you suggesting my colleague was wrong – and it was not the fault of the EU he could not get the school of his choice for his children?//
You need to rationalise the argument a bit more closely.
As a condition of our EU membership, any of around 450m people from across the bloc had the unconditional right to settle and work here and, as a consequence, have their children educated at UK State schools. Local Authorities do their best to forecast demand for the schools under their control and provide the forecast number of places. This is a bit difficult when there is the potential for so much uncontrolled influx.
To give you some idea of the problems it presents, when the eastern expansion of the EU took place in 2004 the percentage of the UK population who were born in the EU was about 1.5%. The UK decided not to take advantage of the seven year moratorium on migration from those countries and between 2004 and 2016 that percentage rose to over 6%. Upon the 2004 expansion it was estimated that migration from those countries would be "no more than 10,000" per annum. In the first three years the total figure was 230,000. By 2014 the total was more than 800,000. So it was little wonder that Local Authorities struggle to provide sufficient school places.
So your colleague is wrong - it was not the fault of the EU that he could not get the school of his choice for his children. It was, in fact, the fault of the UK government for laying the country open to such a ridiculous scheme which allows such uncontrolled and unconditional rights of settlement to so many people. But he was right to cast his vote the way he did because the only way to end that preposterous situation was for the UK to leave the EU. In short, his actions were right but his reasoning was wrong.
The population is wrong when it "blames" the EU for the things it does that they don't like. They had no control over what the EU does (which is one of the things that many people don't like). The blame lies with successive UK governments for allowing the country's affairs to be increasingly removed from their remit.
The seeds of Brexit were sown in 1992 when that nice Mr Major signed the Maastricht Treaty - the first significant move towards a federal Europe. They were nurtured through successive increments towards that goal and our membership's fate was effectively sealed when Gordon Brown signed the Lisbon Treaty (originally entitled the "EU Constitution") in 2009. Mr Cameron tried and failed to recover the electorate's confidence in the EU. He asked for next to nothing in the way of "reform" and came back with slightly less than that. Your friend may not have known it, but he was simply doing the only thing he could - the only thing any of us have been given the opportunity to do - to end the nauseous farce that was our EU membership.
You need to rationalise the argument a bit more closely.
As a condition of our EU membership, any of around 450m people from across the bloc had the unconditional right to settle and work here and, as a consequence, have their children educated at UK State schools. Local Authorities do their best to forecast demand for the schools under their control and provide the forecast number of places. This is a bit difficult when there is the potential for so much uncontrolled influx.
To give you some idea of the problems it presents, when the eastern expansion of the EU took place in 2004 the percentage of the UK population who were born in the EU was about 1.5%. The UK decided not to take advantage of the seven year moratorium on migration from those countries and between 2004 and 2016 that percentage rose to over 6%. Upon the 2004 expansion it was estimated that migration from those countries would be "no more than 10,000" per annum. In the first three years the total figure was 230,000. By 2014 the total was more than 800,000. So it was little wonder that Local Authorities struggle to provide sufficient school places.
So your colleague is wrong - it was not the fault of the EU that he could not get the school of his choice for his children. It was, in fact, the fault of the UK government for laying the country open to such a ridiculous scheme which allows such uncontrolled and unconditional rights of settlement to so many people. But he was right to cast his vote the way he did because the only way to end that preposterous situation was for the UK to leave the EU. In short, his actions were right but his reasoning was wrong.
The population is wrong when it "blames" the EU for the things it does that they don't like. They had no control over what the EU does (which is one of the things that many people don't like). The blame lies with successive UK governments for allowing the country's affairs to be increasingly removed from their remit.
The seeds of Brexit were sown in 1992 when that nice Mr Major signed the Maastricht Treaty - the first significant move towards a federal Europe. They were nurtured through successive increments towards that goal and our membership's fate was effectively sealed when Gordon Brown signed the Lisbon Treaty (originally entitled the "EU Constitution") in 2009. Mr Cameron tried and failed to recover the electorate's confidence in the EU. He asked for next to nothing in the way of "reform" and came back with slightly less than that. Your friend may not have known it, but he was simply doing the only thing he could - the only thing any of us have been given the opportunity to do - to end the nauseous farce that was our EU membership.
// I used to know Brits who lived in Spain but flew back to the UK for t prescriptions and to attend interviews for their benefits.//
waiting with a happy heart in Alphaville polyclinic no 1 (cancer) on a saturday am, some old gent came in - - and told the nurses how Malaga was only a few hours away. Later in sashayed the chief exec of alphaville and effusively thanked the consultant for taking on her father ! jaw dropping stuff.
waiting with a happy heart in Alphaville polyclinic no 1 (cancer) on a saturday am, some old gent came in - - and told the nurses how Malaga was only a few hours away. Later in sashayed the chief exec of alphaville and effusively thanked the consultant for taking on her father ! jaw dropping stuff.
NJ: //As a condition of our EU membership, any of around 450m people from across the bloc had the unconditional right to settle and work here.............//
Correct, but even then, even buying a property there does not denote that you are a 'resident', all of this hangs on the question of 'residency' which is something every citizen in the EU should/must declare.
For example, many of the most vocal remainer MPs in the Brexit debate such as Dominic Grieve(France) Anna Soubry (Portugal) etc. own properties within those countries, but are registered as residents of the UK & as such are declared by those countries quite rightly as tourists & as such must come under the conditions of those countries laws in relation to tourism.
Correct, but even then, even buying a property there does not denote that you are a 'resident', all of this hangs on the question of 'residency' which is something every citizen in the EU should/must declare.
For example, many of the most vocal remainer MPs in the Brexit debate such as Dominic Grieve(France) Anna Soubry (Portugal) etc. own properties within those countries, but are registered as residents of the UK & as such are declared by those countries quite rightly as tourists & as such must come under the conditions of those countries laws in relation to tourism.
Yes I quite see that Khandro.
But the thread here seems to have diverged somewhat into a Brexit discussion. Hymie is wondering whether his colleague was wrong in his assertion that the EU was to blame for the lack of school places. Whether or not the 800,000 migrants from Eastern Europe registered themselves in the UK or not they still would have had children who needed education.
But the thread here seems to have diverged somewhat into a Brexit discussion. Hymie is wondering whether his colleague was wrong in his assertion that the EU was to blame for the lack of school places. Whether or not the 800,000 migrants from Eastern Europe registered themselves in the UK or not they still would have had children who needed education.
Clarification in this morning's Express:
https:/
As I said, these people have not declared residency, simply treated the Costa del Sol as if it were Blackpool del Sol.
https:/
As I said, these people have not declared residency, simply treated the Costa del Sol as if it were Blackpool del Sol.
Latest Posts
New I V F Rules?? Why Do They Even Do It...
News17 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles31 mins ago
ChatterBank67 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles108 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles129 mins ago
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.