Pap… and how long were they kept in Poverty before the EU/EEC? not just decades, but a few hundred years since we invaded? You cant lay it all one door no matter how convenient it might seem to do so…
Come on CB, you can do better than that, did you also chuckle at the made up shit about straight bananas, or worse banning of Ba ba Blacksheep?
And whilst it might sound a bit daft to think about small unique businesses, there are many in this country that export a large proportion of their goods… if sales suffer due to tariffs (and I have no idea if they will or not), who will suffer? someone will be out of work… it mightily be 1 out of a staff of 10, but its still one person, one job…
“Such action may include replicating existing EU treaties that grant preferential access to goods from LDCs”
It’s written by a German political think tank, and clearly designed to convey the worst possible case scenario along with a strong anti-brexit message. Any economic damage to these countries can easily be avoided if we decided to do something along the lines of what the report itself suggests above.
So yes, it’s a scare story.
IF we chose to do so… which is part of the issue, these things take time and resource and will helping out LDCs be on the priority list? I doubt it, we will see…
The headline implies that we won’t. It reminds me of a clickbait story my wife panicked about recently, “If your dog travels in your car unsecured by a seat harness you could find yourself in prison for six months…”
Further reading suggested that could indeed be the case. However, it assumes that A/ you become distracted by the dog while driving. B/ a police officer observes it happening. C/ you refuse to pay the £50 spot fine. D/ you fail to attend the magistrates court, or ignore their order to pay the spot fine. E/ you ignore their £1000 contempt penalty. If all the above happened, yes, you could go to prison, but obviously that’s not what the headline suggests. I’d say that this German study is making a pile of theoretical assumptions, and the story has plainly been given an agenda-driven headline to complement the equally agenda-driven study.
1 Like
I accept that in part, but did you really think that our priorities post Brexit will be worrying about the implications for LDCs?
I have no idea. Do you think they’ll not simply temporarily replicate a swathe of existing tariffs in the same way as they propose to do with other EU/UK legal and financial arrangements?
Possibly, but why not say so? Would it not be ‘sensible’ to cover such things if it were taht simple and stifle any such ‘scare stories’?
We are in the dark, because they have fuck all idea how to manage all this…
How do you know they haven’t already said so? I’m not ploughing through every question in hansard, but there’s enough mp’s interested in developing countries that my guess is it could have been queried in the house over the last couple of years.
To be fair, I don’t, but if they have, it should be a quick response to such articles, but even discussion might not mean any agreement or how this sort of thing might roll out… I doubt though
the rest are going to be really busy because tooth hurts are staying.
2 Likes
Very good, consider it stolen 
Here’s another for you…
An old lady came into my dental surgery, dropped her bloomers and laid back in the chair.
I said “I’m a dentist, not a gynaecologist.”
“I know,” she replied. “I want you to take my husband’s teeth out.”
1 Like
Remainers love the little numbers. Four percent! That’s all.
It’s the big ones,like 1.3 million majority, or 17.4m votes cast in favour of Leave that scare them.
17.4 to of how how many eligible to vote?.. would not be majority mind… 
The 'Will of 17.4 million is a fair statement, NOT the will of the people
The will of the majority who voted will suffice.
Abstaining is a perfectly legitimate position to take in a vote. Happens all the time in Parliament. Famously happened just before the Welfare Bill in 2015, when Labour MPs were asked to abstain on the welfare bill.
In the context of Brexit, abstention is basically “don’t know” or “don’t care”. I am sure that either camp would agree that their lack of participation is a fairly poor reason to overturn the verdict of those that voted.
As I keep repeating, the largest demographic not to vote was the under 25s, they are also the ones whinging the most about what they are going to lose. If they had bothered to vote the result would have been remain (all surveys suggest this).
I think I’m going to call them the Morisette generation!!
Maybe they shoyld note the youth unemployment figures throughout the EU too.
1 Like
It’s because they’re all making use of the freedom of travel to travel and not do work!
And they call us Generation X
1 Like
Can i claim to be under 25 and will anyone believe me?