In article , pamela
writes
On 21:16 7 Oct 2017, bert wrote:

In article , pamela
writes
On 16:55 5 Oct 2017, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 05/10/17 14:41, pamela wrote:
On 21:58 3 Oct 2017, bert wrote:

In article , pamela
writes
On 01:52 2 Oct 2017, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 01/10/17 23:06, pamela wrote:
For the most part, the EU was mutually beneficial for
those who were in it.

Only the politicians, Frech Farmers and German car makers
Everyne else got a **** deal

In that case we shouldn't worry if we get no concessions in
these negotiations because, according to what you wrote, we
will still be better off.

Great.

Well yes, because we could subsidise all our exports to the
EU and still be better off.

Dp you have any links or cites to support that? I would be
interested to see them.

Why? Can't you think for yourself?

Oh. No. I forgot. You are a lefty-recieved-wisdom-remoaner and
you believe what people tell you.

As long as they work at the Beeb or write for the Guardian

Bless!

There must be some data to prove or disprove the claim that "we
can subsidise all our exports to the EU and still be better
off."

Yes there is - or was. So long ago I cant' be bothered to go
looking again for someone who seems to have just woken up to
Brexit and wants to go over all the old arguments again and
again. I don't really care if you believe it or not.

Maybe it's worth checking in case the data has changed and the idea
is no longer true. It doesn't have a ring of truth about it.
Then go and check it and come back and cite somewhere which says it is
not true.
--
bert