Brexit

Grumpy David wrote:Worst (and least likely case) is holidays needing tourist visa waiver forms like the kind we currently have to fill in for going to the USA. They're 10 minutes work online and really not a big deal.

I definitely can't see any scenario where a full visa is needed. My visa to work in the USA in 2012 wasn't much of a hassle in terms of paperwork. I remember having to visit the USA embassy but that was the only irritating thing about it.

I'd rather not do any paperwork and pay my annual £1 contribution or whatever it was that I have been contributing over the years unfortunately that's going bye bye

Even applying to be a citizen of an EU state will probably work out better in the long run. One time thing, avoid any travel fees, being able to vote in EU parliament, less stressful travel throughout the EU.

Lucien wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Lucien wrote:A significant number of people being dual citizens is not good for the UK.

Are you talking about dual citizenship in general or just the proposed dual citizenship with the EU?

In general.

Why?

Lucien wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Lucien wrote:A significant number of people being dual citizens is not good for the UK.

Are you talking about dual citizenship in general or just the proposed dual citizenship with the EU?

In general.

I'm struggling to see why that would be.

How is that money being lost from the UK economy? How do you know it would be spent in the UK if it wasn't being spent on an EU citizenship? People might have spent it on holidays abroad, or just sat on it rather than spending it. Hell, even when people are spending, most of the money ends up leaving the country anyway given how much we import.

Lucien wrote:

Lagamorph wrote:

Lucien wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Lucien wrote:A significant number of people being dual citizens is not good for the UK.

Are you talking about dual citizenship in general or just the proposed dual citizenship with the EU?

In general.

Why?

It depends on set-ups countries have with each other, but generally speaking a country shouldn't want a high proportion of dual citizens if money is going out of the country. With the UK/EU for example, 10 million people each paying £100 a year to the EU would equate to a billion pound loss each year from the UK economy; however both those figures (amount wanting EU citizenship + yearly contribution) are likely to be far higher.

You're talking about the proposed EU citizenship there.

I asked why it is bad for the UK to have a significant number of dual citizens in general. I wondered because I can think of at least 1.8 million British citizens who have an automatic dual citizenship with another country....

Or are you saying that dual citizens in general are likely to be sending lots of money out of the country? Because if so, firstly it's none of your business what people do with their own money and secondly do you have anything to back that statement up?

But regardless of if they have dual citizenship, they're still living in the UK. How is their money leaving the UK economy? They're having to pay bills and buy goods/services in the UK just like anybody else without dual citizenship.

Lucien wrote:
To be clear: Dual citizenship is bad for any country if it results in lots of money leaving the host country. Now, given that, why would the UK government allow it (if they're able to stop it) when it comes to the EU situation? They might vote for a guaranteed red mark on the balance sheet, but I doubt it.

A guaranteed red mark? How much do you think the EU would charge and how much do you think even the most pro-EU person would be willing to pay?

Let's say it cost roughly the same as a new UK passport, but per year. Call it £100 to be more in favour to your argument. Sod it, let's be absolutely ridiculous and use silly figures and times that by 5 and make it £500 per year. And let's say 1 million UK citizens go for it. Absolutely stupid numbers there, but they favour your side of the argument and i'm willing to go with them.

£500million is roughly 0.64% of the UK annual national budget (approx £780billion). Not exactly a big dent, and remember we are talking about peoples earnings after they have already paid their income tax and national insurance to the government. Of course that's less money in people's pockets to spend in the UK, but do you really think that 0.64% of the UK annual budget (and remember we are actually talking about a sum a hell of a lot lower than that) is worth worrying about or would send the UK into a "guaranteed red mark on the balance sheet"? And do you really think that the sort of person that wants to retain and is willing to pay for EU citizenship is also the sort of person that spends absolutely all of their money in the UK every year?

So even with my absolutely ridiculously sky high figures, it would barely even be noticed. Unlike for instance the money certain Tory MPs send to the Cayman Islands each year..... Or the taxes that certain national and international companies "avoid" each year.....

Edit:

Lucien wrote:

Lagamorph wrote:But regardless of if they have dual citizenship, they're still living in the UK. How is their money leaving the UK economy? They're having to pay bills and buy goods/services in the UK just like anybody else without dual citizenship.

If the EU charged you £100 per year then that money leaves the country. Now imagine half the country doing that. I can't see the government letting that happen (unless the overall Brexit deal makes up for it).

Ahh you have numbers now!

33million (roughly half the UK - and there is no way half would pay it) x £100 = £3.3billion. That's pretty high, although we are again using silly figures. That's still not going to send us into the red. And it would never be half of the UK signing up for it. And still wouldn't be any of your business how people choose to spend their own money.

The government would have no say in it unless they banned dual citizenship (highly unlikely) or if the EU only offered it as part of a deal with the government (highly possible). I agree it's unlikely to ever happen, I disagree with your odd idea that dual citizens cost the country money - no much that it would be a "guaranteed red mark".

As mentioned above, the government wouldn't really lose anything, people would only be spending their own cash, they'd still be paying taxes, shopping etc. And you're crazy if you think millions and millions would spend £100 a year on it.

Lucien wrote:

Lagamorph wrote:But regardless of if they have dual citizenship, they're still living in the UK. How is their money leaving the UK economy? They're having to pay bills and buy goods/services in the UK just like anybody else without dual citizenship.

If the EU charged you £100 per year then that money leaves the country. Now imagine half the country doing that. I can't see the government letting that happen (unless the overall Brexit deal makes up for it).

You are right, we should also ban companies from other countries as money is saving the uk, should also be people going on holiday or going to other countries too as they may spend money on other countries and don't want money to leave....

The government do have a say though, in that they could just tax it to the point where it becomes too expensive (cigarettes etc).

Rex Kramer wrote:The government do have a say though, in that they could just tax it to the point where it becomes too expensive (cigarettes etc).

I'm not sure the UK government could tax something like an EU citizenship. Can the government collect any tax from a dual citizen who's renewing their non-UK passport?

Lagamorph wrote:

Rex Kramer wrote:The government do have a say though, in that they could just tax it to the point where it becomes too expensive (cigarettes etc).

I'm not sure the UK government could tax something like an EU citizenship. Can the government collect any tax from a dual citizen who's renewing their non-UK passport?

I guess that technically they can tax anything they like. They aren't going to bother over £100 a year (or whatever) though.

Grumpy David wrote:

Christ, if I watch that bunch of banana splits I'll end up breaking my own TV.

Half the country isn't going to subscribe to EU citizenship, they voted not to be part of it. I would imagine no more than 20% would actually bother. Regardless, this is such a minor issue, particularly compared to those companies not paying tax or not enough.

Moggy wrote:

Grumpy David wrote:

Christ, if I watch that bunch of banana splits I'll end up breaking my own TV.

I can't watch David Davies, it just depresses me too much. He's heading up our exit from the EU and I wouldn't trust him to find his own arse with a map and a mirror.

Rex Kramer wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Grumpy David wrote:

Christ, if I watch that bunch of banana splits I'll end up breaking my own TV.

I can't watch David Davies, it just depresses me too much. He's heading up our exit from the EU and I wouldn't trust him to find his own arse with a map and a mirror.

In my scenario he can't even find a map and mirror to begin with.

He's one hell of a useless banana split.

Rex Kramer wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Grumpy David wrote:

Christ, if I watch that bunch of banana splits I'll end up breaking my own TV.

I can't watch David Davies, it just depresses me too much. He's heading up our exit from the EU and I wouldn't trust him to find his own arse with a map and a mirror.

In my scenario he can't even find a map and mirror to begin with.

He's one hell of a useless banana split.

Qikz wrote:

Rex Kramer wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Grumpy David wrote:

Christ, if I watch that bunch of banana splits I'll end up breaking my own TV.

I can't watch David Davies, it just depresses me too much. He's heading up our exit from the EU and I wouldn't trust him to find his own arse with a map and a mirror.

In my scenario he can't even find a map and mirror to begin with.

He's one hell of a useless banana split.

He never double posts though.

He's so much of a useless banana split every insult about him appears twice without me being able to stop it.