The European Union, or the EU, consists of 28 member states in Europe. Ranging from many different cultures, languages, and beliefs, the EU engulfs 7.5% of the world population. Created after WWII, its main purpose was to create and maintain peace and security throughout Europe. It strived for economic development, to protect human rights and to promote their principals globally. To become a member of the EU, countries had to abide by all rules and regulations. They also had to go through many restrictions and requirements for membership. The United Kingdom, had been a member of the EU for many years but this has since changed as of June of 2016, when UK voters decided to leave the EU. Citizens, officials and members of parliament have …show more content…
One reason why Britain should leave the EU is because of how it will advance their nation economically. By regaining full sovereignty it leads their country to advance economically, as they will be able to speak for themselves. As the EU sets specific regulations, it prohibits the UK from doing something that could help them. With their own rules, the UK can trade with whomever they please. The UK can additionally control all plans and legislations that can adhere to help them, rather than how 70% of UK laws were passed by the EU . The problem that arose was that the officials in Brussels are not near, and can’t see the people they are affecting when deciding problems. When being in the EU all rules pertain to all countries who differ geographically and socially. Britain would also be able to have a seat at the World's Trade Organization where they can further focus on building up their country, rather than relying on others to help them. (EU/UK #2). Additionally, by leaving the EU, the UK can increase their economy by improving trade, leading their total GDP to rise. UK exports outside the EU is growing, which means that when the UK leaves, they will still be trading with other countries. Also, many need to realize that just because the UK is leaving the EU, it doesn’t mean that they are to stop trading with each other. It is in the best interest of both the EU and the UK to continue trade amongst each other as the UK bought more of their products than the UK sold them. (EU/UK #2) Most importantly, if trade continues to do well, the country's total GDP could actually rise 1.6% (EU/UK #3). Similarly, by leaving the EU, the UK are committing to an investment then can positively change their country for the good. Once again, because the UK can set their own rules and regulations, they would be doing so
The benefits of the European Union outweigh the costs. Ever since the end of World War II, countries in the EU have been helped economically, politically, and culturally.
With a GDP of 18.3 trillion US dollars for the EU, that is, a quantity of money and about one trillion dollars higher than the US! (Document A)! According to Document A, the European Union's highest GDP is 3.9 trillion and Germany in the lead! Germany had essentially joined the EU because for more money. There are a lot of benefits of joining the EU, maybe just to have a lot of money, or be a more powerful strong country and not to be a hovel.
In conclusion, the European Union has “merged” the countries of Europe. It has developed a common currency called the Euro’s, and a Parliament located in Belgium, Luxembourg, and France. Also, ALL of the countries of the Union are affected when one country is affected. This is important because the continent of Europe had become very weak after the wars and they needed to strengthen, and the European Union keeps the countries of Europe strong and economically fit.
In answering the above question, I shall address myself first to examining manufacturing exports and the British position, followed by a word on the Imperial Preference which hindered British trade flows with the rest of the world. I shall go on to talk more generally about whether there has been a decline in the aggregate economy (essentially exploring the pessimistic implied in the title). Further, I shall argue that the British economy has performed well against some serious cultural and structural constraints and should not be subjected to unduly negative analysis.
In conclusion, the benefits of the UK’s membership in the EU outweigh the costs. The most significant benefit is the access they have to the single market as this has managed to benefit quite Access to single market is aiding this inward investment
To demonstrate, Harold Macmillan, Britain's finance minster held many economic concerns over the possible outcomes of Britain joining the EEC and the possible damage to its Commonwealth. (Doc 7) Macmillan described how the United Kingdom faced a dilemma, it could either stay out of the EEC and lose trade advantages to the European market or join and result in the collapse of its own system of favoring trade within its Commonwealth. Seemingly trapped between, Britain is forced to look one way or another and as a result, those such as Macmillan became extremely doubtful and concerned over the prospect of a united Europe. While the idea was not entirely out of the question, it only served to deter those who pushed for a unification as these issues caused many to remain undecided and unsure of which path to take. Furthermore, France's willingness to stay in the EEC hinged on the very decisions Britain will make as declared by Charles de Gaulle, President of France. (Doc 8) As stated by Macmillan Britain had two paths to take, one that would lead it into the EEC or one that would keep it out. Gaulle however declared that if Britain entered the EEC unhinged with no restrictions, it would push France out of the market for the very reason it joined in the first place. Not only does this mean that the very notion of unification remained extremely uncertain
Britain tried to prevent the Spanish companies doing this under British legislation, however, this case set a precedent wher... ... middle of paper ... ... ent are instructed when and how to vote by the party whips. The limit on what Parliament can do is therefore in reality set by the views of the Cabinet as to the best political decision. Having said that, a great deal of law is not at all political in content and similar rules would be constructed no matter which political party was in power.
The EU is a union of sovereign European states who share sovereignty based on treaty. The union also possesses competences in policy sectors with exclusive jurisdiction in the area of Economic and Monetary Union while others are shared with Member States (MS), the other powers belong to MS as derived from the conferral of powers art 5(2) TEU, 2(1) TFEU art.3 & 4 TFEU additionally other powers have been offered by the decisions of the European Court for direct effect on citizens
The main arguments to leave are to control immigration, reject the excessive bureaucracy (and associated cost) of Brussels and to lower prices for goods and services in the United Kingdom. I will focus on the economic argument to leave: leaving the European Union will save money by lowering prices and abstaining from "membership fees."
I will firstly look at each one individually and how it is organised then analyse its powers and responsibilities before comparing them and drawing up my conclusions. However I would like to note that there are many different interpretations and parameters of ‘powerful’ which make it difficult to answer the question. The EU was established in 1992 by the Maastricht Treaty. It comprises what are known as three ‘pillars’.
“From time to time it is worth reminding ourselves why twenty-seven European nation states have come together voluntarily to form the partnership that is the European Union.” 1
On the one hand, without international relations from the EU, Britain is economically and socially vulnerable. While Britain’s exit from the EU may define Britain’s power according to British citizens, the type of power that matters is relative power, which is the power when it is being compared to other states. If the other states do not recognize Britain as a force of power, then its exit from the EU is pointless. On the other hand, by discontinuing the benefits granted by the EU, Britain declines the assistance that could have helped the country to become more powerful. In other words, Brexit decreases a source of gathering power for Britain, since the EU not only offers economic opportunities, but it also provides useful information so that the member states can behave accordingly. Overall, realism suggests that while Brexit increases Britain’s confidence in being powerful, it also decreases the country’s power in a way.
China’s economical strength comes from its international trades as the economy has grown to a rate of 10.3% in 2010. It has become the world’s largest exporter in the global economy. In the area of trade, three major strengths of China are 1) it is the single most important challenge for the European Union (EU) trade policy, 2) China is the second trade partner behind the U.S., and 3) it is the EU’s biggest source of imports by far with the dramatic increase in the EU-China trades over the recent years. The EU exports of goods to China were 113.1 billion Euros and in imports was 281.9 billion Euros in 2010. The service exports were 18 billion Euros and in imports were 13 billion Euros in 2009. China has also established trades with Australia. Recently, the two countries have been cooperating and assisting each other in industries such as agriculture, energy and minerals as they continue their free trade agreements (Jia Qinglin).
However local governments both here in the US and abroad are either banning or “heavily restricted the sale of the products” stating they “are threatening
would decline all its influence in EU rules, and it will stop following them, also the financial services passport will remain, but over time it values remain. Also Britain will contributes to EU budget, but will pay less, than countries in EU. But this scenario have few problems, first in that case Britain will have to get concessions not only in pro- migration Ester Europe, but also from France and Netherlands, , which do not want to set a precedent for anti-EU populists. Also, second problem, that it could be not enought for Britain. Because EU thinks, that they can find compromise, just then when it is on carefully limited migration curbs. And also, EU wants that Britain will be a rule-taker on the single market, and listen and follow EU on everything from financial services to digital policy. Also this scenario could be that , relations between Britain and the EU would be strained, but solid enought to agrre on tariff transition, and also agree trade terms. Also it is clear that Eu and Brtiain will not agrred on sovereignty or immigration, because the price is to high, and they will not find solution which will be good for both sides. But it is big chance that agreement on trading, will be successful, because if not both side will have