Guided Missile

It's hard not to insult you when the WTO rules as they apply post Brexit are explained in the links I posted, but as you can't be bothered to read them, I'll explain. We can apply whatever tariffs we chose, up to the maximum allowed under WTO rules. Whatever level we chose, we have to impose the same tariff levels to MFN's (Most Favoured Nations), unless it is with a nation with which we have a trade agreement, where the tariffs are determined in that agreement. Countries usually impose tariffs when they seek to protect their domestic producers. In the case of oranges, there is no reason to impose the EU level of tariffs on imported oranges, for instance, which means that we charge zero tariffs on Spanish oranges, as we do at the moment, but we then have to charge zero to MFN's which are likely to have more efficient orange producers, thus our costs go down. So, we are leaving an area that is laughingly called a free trade area, when it should be called a protectionist trade area, which uses both tariffs and regulatory barriers to protect, for instance, inefficient French farmers. The cheaper food we will enjoy will benefit the low income families more than the middle class liberals like you. It is just, like you, most are not clever enough to see through the EU and believe all they read in the Guardian. Now, back on ignore for being lazy and thick....

After Brexit and in the event of a no deal, the UK will not have to charge tariffs on anything unless we want to. So, in the case of oranges, for instance, where we have no domestic production, why would we impose tariffs to protect Spanish growers? We will eliminate the EU imposed 16% tariff on oranges and pay less to the most efficient orange growers, probably those from Brazil or Florida unless the Spanish are more efficient. I know this freedom may be difficult for you to understand, but your condition is known as the Stockholm Syndrome, which you and shurlock will recover from eventually.

You realise that Brexit won, mate? I think you're the guy in denial. The analyses I quoted were comparing no deal with Mays deal. Oh, and a second referendum hope you were clinging to has been flushed down the pan, so best face it. We're leaving...

A more recent paper that describes the benefits of a "no deal" Brexit can be found here. I was particularly interested in the economic analysis of the potential opportunities described by Roger Bootle. He is one of the City of London’s best-known economists. He is Chairman of Capital Economics, which he founded in 1999, and an Honorary Fellow of the Institute of Actuaries. From 1998 to 2017 Roger was a Specialist Adviser to the House of Commons Treasury Committee. He was formerly Group Chief Economist of HSBC and, under the previous Conservative government, he was appointed one of the Chancellor’s panel of Independent Economic Advisers, the so-called ‘Wise Men’. In 2012, Roger and a team from Capital Economics won the Wolfson Prize, the second biggest prize in Economics after the Nobel. He appears to agree with Martin Howe, QC, who I quoted above. All in all, a well balanced article from a number of perspectives and a relief from the usual uninformed cr@p from the liberal media.

Typical clueless ad hominem attack. It is always better to tackle the ball, rather than the player. Now, rather than listening to James Delingpole, who is obviously not an expert on tariffs, or even worse, Dominic Grieve, QC, who you'd go to, if you wanted legal advice on Occupational Health & Safety ("i.e. an ambulance chaser"), I have always listened to those best qualified. I have personal experience with 8, New Square, a chambers who specialise in IP law. In particular, to advance this particular argument, the go-to guy there is Martin Howe, QC, whose wide-ranging EU law practice focuses on free movement of goods and services and EU regulatory law. So, for those that are interested, he published an interesting article here, back in August, 2018, which explained why the UK would be better off under WTO rules. Introduction: It's worth reading the whole article. He normally charges £5,000 a day, for advice Conclusion:

Alex Salmond charged with two counts of attempted rape as he faces 14 offences Jeez...

Chukka Khan't...

In case you don't know who I'm talking about, he's an RT presenter:

Meanwhile, in Italy, this article describes their view of the EU:

Being a member of the EU and the GFA being "valid" is no guarantee that there won't be sectarian violence in Ireland, Northern Ireland or mainland Britain, you moron.

The famous B&Q speech prior to the referendum:

This is what you posted: Do you have any other terrorist organisations or countries, you think the UK should surrender it's sovereignty to?

So, the British government should moderate their Brexit plans, to prevent the Real IRA from setting off car bombs in the UK?

I can't help thinking about the tweet I quoted earlier in the thread: Given the two quotes below, maybe the above tweet was on the money.

You really are a grade A out of touch w@nker and the latest article in the Telegraph shows by just how much. It was state aid, so I look forward to your grovelling apology. Now back on ignore for you for being a clueless windbag and all round enemy of the working class (Oh and a w@nkstain)

Read it carefully, Herbert. Slovakia, which has a population of 5.45 million, is in line to receive €15.2 billion under the European Structural and Investment Funds. Slovakia then provided state aid to JLR, which, apparently doesn't seem to bother the EU, only the 5,000 JLR workers losing their jobs. Those interested may wonder where the f*** the EU get their money to dole out. That's right. From the same place the EIB gets their money from to provide state aid to Ford to move the Transit factory to Turkey. Rich northern EU countries, who get it from their tax payers. Of course, a champagne socialist like you believes in money trees.... So, UK taxpayers subsidise state aid to a "UK" car manufacture to move jobs from the UK to Slovakia. I'm so annoyed, I think I'm going to vote for Jeremy Corbyn. He'll teach the EU all about state aid...

...and this sums the whole thing up... "if it had not opened the £1.5 billion factory in Slovakia it would have opened a plant in Mexico instead." Trump shot the Mexican deal down, obviously and JLR have no loyalty to the UK or the EU. It's all about the cheap money. No deal exit and then 25% tariff on Land Rovers and Transits will work for us then. It'll work for Trump, you mark my words.

The rest of it is fairly important: Sounds fair to the champagne socialists on here, apparently....

To recap, Herbert... I've highlighted the turds in the answer the European Commission gave to help you (Turkey, Pre-Accession country???). I can also provide the reason for the layoffs by Ford and JLR, both announced prior to Brexit, which you should be able to understand, below, : My point, you clueless cum stain on the fabric of society, is that Brexit is not the reason that JLR are laying of staff or moving to Slovenia. It because they need to cut costs to satisfy their shareholders, helped by EU state aid that has been provided to Slovakia and is legal under EU rules because it is a poor country and the UK is too rich to qualify for such state aid. It's meant to distort the market so JLR move there. It is also why the British workers, who are displaced by such state aid, voted in their millions to leave the EU. Now, get back to counting your bunse for your recommendation to the government that they should spend £100m on alternatives to Dover...

Meanwhile, the Daily Telegraph catches up with me, here and exposes how the lefties on this thread are being done like kippers by a large Indian corporate bul$h!tter: Brexit, innit...

Here's a photo of the first recruit. Ex-stasi so should be perfect for the job:

Jesus, I just realised why Herbert has been in such a bad mood today. He recommended that the government spend £100M on avoiding problems at Dover and they want their £500 back.

You do realise it's not me in that photo, Herbert? Now, back in your box, or I'll re-post your Dover saga, cement, gravel and all...

Les gilets jaunes popping out to the cashpoint today: Anna Soubry must have been there, as well: "The Rothschilds financed Hitler, today it's Macron."