Need help?

curley · #**18741** 19.03.2019, 18:25

	Quote:
	That's because it's actually the opposite. The proposal (which I guess has just been passed?) requires the applicant to have worked at least three months in a new country before aggregating total period of employment and claiming benefits at the rate provided by the new country. #FakeNews #WhyReadPastTheHeadline? But it keeps the anti-EU fanbois (antifanbois?) happy.

Would you please not ignore the anti-EU fangirls

Indeed, totally different (thanks for the link).
In fact, it sounds kind of reasonable to me. (Yes, that surprises me

)

#**18742** 19.03.2019, 18:35

	Quote:	curley
	Would you please not ignore the anti-EU fangirls

Fanbois are genderless. Or non-binary, or something.

#**18743** 19.03.2019, 18:48

	Quote:
	Link? Not finding it on Google.

Hope you enjoy Dutch. (could not find English)

Dutch paper:
https://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/3299...eringstoerisme

Belgium paper: https://www.hln.be/nieuws/binnenland...ring~a91ce8b4/

#**18744** 19.03.2019, 18:52

	Quote:
	That's because it's actually the opposite. The proposal (which I guess has just been passed?) requires the applicant to have worked at least three months in a new country before aggregating total period of employment and claiming benefits at the rate provided by the new country. #FakeNews #WhyReadPastTheHeadline? But it keeps the anti-EU fanbois (antifanbois?) happy.

Nice proposal.. but from what date is it?

However your proposal clearly is not what has been agreed upon today.

So stop calling me fake news, I have newspapers from more than one country backing me up

marton · #**18745** 19.03.2019, 19:05

	Quote:
	Nice proposal.. but from what date is it? However your proposal clearly is not what has been agreed upon today. So stop calling me fake news, I have newspapers from more than one country backing me up

Why don't you give a link to the source, the actual EU work, rather than to newspapers which may not be accurate?

#**18746** 19.03.2019, 19:11

	Quote:	marton
	Why don't you give a link to the source, the actual EU work, rather than to newspapers which may not be accurate?

I've provided news articles from two different sources from two different countries in which even a minister is quoted saying exactly what I said. I've proven my point.

If you disagree just try to prove me wrong.

They agreed on how it should be, and will put it into a vote for which it already is clear there is a large majority, only some of the richer country's are against, but their expansion drift is starting to bite them more and more since it has costed them the strong voice they had previously.

curley · #**18747** 19.03.2019, 19:16

When is the next friendly vote in GB and what will it be about?

marton · #**18748** 19.03.2019, 19:43

	Quote:
	I've provided news articles from two different sources from two different countries in which even a minister is quoted saying exactly what I said. I've proven my point. If you disagree just try to prove me wrong. They agreed on how it should be, and will put it into a vote for which it already is clear there is a large majority, only some of the richer country's are against, but their expansion drift is starting to bite them more and more since it has costed them the strong voice they had previously.

I do not disagree, it is simply the case that this proposal is not shown anywhere on the EU web sites

So it will be put to a vote, your first statement "EU just passed a new ruling..." is false news.
If you cannot find a link then just give us the proposal number, every EU proposal has an identification number.

#**18749** 19.03.2019, 19:59

	Quote:	marton
	I do not disagree, it is simply the case that this proposal is not shown anywhere on the EU web sites So it will be put to a vote, your first statement "EU just passed a new ruling..." is false news. If you cannot find a link then just give us the proposal number, every EU proposal has an identification number.

Have fun finding it.

This is what they agreed on and what will be voted on, a clear majority is already certain so this is what it will be.

marton · #**18750** 19.03.2019, 20:17

	Quote:
	Have fun finding it. This is what they agreed on and what will be voted on, a clear majority is already certain so this is what it will be.

On which date is this vote planned?

#**18751** 19.03.2019, 20:24

	Quote:
	Hope you enjoy Dutch.

No, most of us don't, but presumably you do. This is the English Forum, please provide a translation of at least the relevant parts of the stories. We ask this of all posters. Thanks.

#**18752** 19.03.2019, 20:25

	Quote:
	Have fun finding it. This is what they agreed on and what will be voted on, a clear majority is already certain so this is what it will be.

Why should we find a link to back up your claim?

#**18753** 19.03.2019, 20:26

	Quote:	marton
	On which date is this vote planned?

If it was mentioned in the articles you would not ask me

#**18754** 19.03.2019, 20:29

	Quote:
	Why should we find a link to back up your claim?

Still waiting for you to tell from when your proposal was since it bears not a single date on it?

Previous proposal from the end of last year even was one day instead of a month, so yours must be even older and thus completely irrelevant.

For the rest you can ask al you please, I provided proof and even a quoted minister who says I am correct in this info. What you do with that is not my problem, so don't make it my problem since you for whatever reason don't agree with it.

#**18755** 19.03.2019, 20:30

	Quote:
	No, most of us don't, but presumably you do. This is the English Forum, please provide a translation of at least the relevant parts of the stories. We ask this of all posters. Thanks.

Short translation of what is important from the articles is in my first post about this.

enjoy

SponPlague · #**18756** 19.03.2019, 20:33

	Quote:	curley
	Would you please not ignore the anti-EU fangirls Indeed, totally different (thanks for the link). In fact, it sounds kind of reasonable to me. (Yes, that surprises me )

Sounds fair to me, too!

Jim2007 · #**18757** 19.03.2019, 20:37

	Quote:
	Hope you enjoy Dutch. (could not find English) Dutch paper: https://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/3299...eringstoerisme Belgium paper: https://www.hln.be/nieuws/binnenland...ring~a91ce8b4/

Did you bother to read the links you post or are you following in the steps of Lotz1983???

All that happened is that the negotiations between EP and the member states have reached agreement on what will be proposed to the Council. Nothing has been finalised, for the simple reason these people have no power to do so. And it would not be the first time that the Council went a different way.

Bottom line is that nothing has been agreed by the EU so far. But I guess facts are of no importance to you.

SponPlague · #**18758** 19.03.2019, 20:39

I remember Death Cigarettes: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_(cigarette)

The taxman was losing a shedload of VAT from online cigarette sales shipped from Luxembourg, and, eventually, I forget the countries but the ruling was that the document (German) the British text was translated fom was a mis-translation of the original in a third language.

So maybe various countries are mistranslating what’s been agreed or intended here?

#**18759** 19.03.2019, 20:39

	Quote:
	Have fun finding it. This is what they agreed on and what will be voted on, a clear majority is already certain so this is what it will be.

How does "Samen met Duitsland, België, Denemarken, Oostenrijk en Luxemburg is verzet aangetekend. Maar genoeg om de plannen tegen te houden, is het nog niet"* (from your Dutch newspaper link) accord with "a clear majority is already certain"? You do realise that there is slightly more than 11 countries on the EU, right?

*"Opposition was registered together with Germany, Belgium, Denmark, Austria and Luxembourg. But it is not enough to stop the plans."

3Wishes · #**18760** 19.03.2019, 20:41

Google Translate of first article (copyright to the website and all that jazz)

	Quote:
	Fear of benefit tourism BRUSSELS - The Netherlands and five more Western European countries are firmly opposed to Brussels' plans to relax the rules for exporting unemployment benefits. Benefit tourism is in danger and the risk of fraud is increasing, it is feared. According to the current compromise plans between the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Member States, EU citizens with sufficient employment history can work elsewhere after one month, taking their unemployment benefits to their country of origin for a period of six months. The Netherlands finds this very unfair and argues for three months, just as it is now. Initially, unemployment benefits would have been within one day if it had been up to Parliament. Together with Germany, Belgium, Denmark, Austria and Luxembourg, opposition has been made. But it is not yet enough to stop the plans. On a meeting with colleagues in Brussels, Minister Koolmees (Social Affairs) expressed his deep concern about the state of affairs on Friday. Another round of negotiations is planned for next Tuesday between the EU Presidency, which is currently very much in favor of Romania, the Commission and Parliament. Hurry Great Tit denounced the lack of transparency and the hurry that is now suddenly made with the proposals. "A hasty completion will damage the quality of the legislation. We cannot do in a few months what our experts have cost more than a year. " It is no surprise that countries from Eastern and Central Europe, from which many labor migrants head to the west, do see the WW plans. For unemployment benefits it is necessary that there is an employment history, but that does not necessarily have to be in the Netherlands. A Romanian or Bulgarian who works here can then return to his country of origin on the basis of a Dutch unemployment benefit. Since wages are much lower there, there is a good chance that the benefit will be higher than what can be earned there, so it is not really an incentive to look for a job again. No work incentive The unemployment benefit plans are part of a much broader package of measures to better coordinate social security in the various EU countries. According to figures from 2016, the Netherlands exported 4462 benefits. Only 21 people found a job within three months. That is the period that now applies. The system should be aimed at getting people back to work. But there is no incentive whatsoever for foreign governments to help their returned nationals on Dutch benefits find a job. For comparison: In the Netherlands almost half of the unemployed have a new job within three months. Great tit fears European mess. "The statistics show that someone who stays in the Netherlands has a 100 times higher chance of getting back to work than someone who exports his benefits," the D66 minister told his colleagues.

No official decision or vote mentioned there. Maybe it's in the other paper.