Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The pros and cons of Brexit
Fair trade and free trade introduction
The pros and cons of Brexit
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The pros and cons of Brexit
Introduction On June 24th 2016, the world was shocked to learn of Britain’s desire to leave the European Union. Of all the issues that arose during the Brexit referendum campaign, none was as dominant as that of immigration. In fact, Britain’s decision to leave the EU revealed its public’s lack of awareness on the place of immigrants in its economy as well as an understanding on the concept of free trade, as free trade involves the free movement of people, goods, and services. To be sure, immigration was the dominant issue because the British felt economically and culturally threatened by increased levels of immigration in Europe and the United Kingdom; it is therefore very likely that the EU will maintain its policy of visa-free migration.
Background Section The Brexit referendum was a vote held in Britain on June 23rd 2016 in all countries that comprised Great Britain. Its’ aim was to have the British people vote on whether or not Britain should remain a part of the EU. The result of the referendum was one that both took the
…show more content…
They include the following: the eventual abolition of the EU’s visa-free policy; “the creation of trade agreements; globalization, and the possible division of the United Kingdom for good”.
Contending Arguments Supporters in favour of Brexit argue that the prospect of higher wages in Britain are an attractive factor for lots of immigrants. Opponents against Brexit argue that reduced immigration lowers the standard way of life for native Britons. They explain that Britons who are going through financial hardship can relate to the economic crash of 2008 and 2009, not to immigration. Supporters also argue that a lack of available housing and the diminishing reputation of the white British working-class has been largely due to the arrival and success-respectively-of immigrants.
My
This essay will address whether New Labour contained policies with which it wished to pursue, or was solely developed in order to win elections. It is important to realise whether a political party that held office for approximately 13 years only possessed the goal of winning elections, or promoted policies which it wished to pursue. If a party that held no substance was governing for 13 years, it would be unfair to the people. New Labour was designed to win elections, but still contained policies which it wished to pursue. To adequately defend this thesis, one must look at the re-branding steps taken by New Labour and the new policies the party was going to pursue. Through analysis, it will be shown that New Labour promoted policies in regards
”Examine the extent to which the benefits of UK membership in the European Union outweigh the costs”
Immigrants have been a key part of The United States’ development into a first-world nation. Their impact on the nation is dichotomous; parts of society have actively sought to increase immigration, while other parts have actively fought against its expansion. The types of immigrants have changed throughout American history - the perception of immigrants has not. Economics has dominated the argument of immigration, as pro-immigration individuals seek to financially benefit from the influx of immigrants and anti-immigration individuals seek to limit the financial damages caused by immigration. The arguments made by opponents of immigrants reveal strong economic fears, while also revealing fears
Due to the EU’s apparent unpopularity, Politicians can find it difficult to show any enthusiasm as it could prove to be a disadvantage in an election. Jones et al, (2006, p.803) believe that people’s opinion on the EU is very important, and one which politicians take notice of, they state “UK public opinion on European issues has to be taken account of. The difficulty is that many members of the public regard the EU as remote until some threat to the British life is perceived, such as the abolition of the pound if the government were to join EMU.”
Firstly to justify why countries limit their immigrations, there should be knowledge of the different types of immigrants as there are different reasons to leave from one country and move into another. In the last 30 years, the number of international immigrants has been estimated 191 million worldwide, two times as before. As ...
Without a doubt, the European continent has been through a lot over the last few decades. From World War 2, to the iron grip of Soviet Russia on half of the continent, many problems have arisen and been dealt with. Unfortunately, Europe has had a rough few years when it comes to the somewhat newer issue of immigration and immigrant groups. While some countries have managed immigration better than others, nations such as France and Italy have had their fair share of problems and continue to pass legislation that is flawed and draws criticism from other countries. The issue has gotten better in recent years, and various European countries have made great progress towards their immigration policies. In addition, various ethnic groups have been the target of government profiling and discrimination. Most notably the Romani people, who have faced discrimination for hundreds of years and continue to do so at the hands of various Eastern and Western European governments. The many setbacks and gains towards immigration are more clearly visible when looked at on a case-by-case basis, such as the individual policies of Italy, France, and the European Union as a whole.
First, immigrants come to the U.S. to work and bring valuable skills which help grow the economy despite the negative views surrounding their part in the U.S. economy. Since the 2008-2009 recession the view on immigration and its effects on the economy has been more negative than positive (Peri, 2012). A study done by Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government found that about 50 percent of American adults believe that immigrants burden the country because they, “take jobs, housing, and healthcare”, while the other 50 percent believe that, “immigrants strengthen the country due to their hard work and talents” (Delener & Ventilato, 2008). Over the past decade, “over half of the increase in the U.S. labor force,… was the result of immigration-l...
One of the arguments made is that the immigrants take the jobs of native born U.S. citizens and limits the opportunities and wages presented to the native people. These claims have been made due to the fact that many immigrants enter the country willing to work for lower wages than most native people and, therefore, obtain jobs. Some other claims include that immigrants create a depreciation and deficit in the economy. It has also been said that immigrants have placed major strains on government spending because of financial help that is initially presented to many immigrants when they enter the country. Those who argue against immigration claim that immigrants normally take advantage of welfare opportunities, taking these expenditures away native people and depleting the economy of the U.S. Although there is a substantial amount of evidence disproving these claims, many of these beliefs continue to be supported due to the short term effects immigration has on the economy. Studies have shown that although immigration shows slightly negative effects of the economy in the short run, there’s virtually no consequences to be faced in the long run, in fact there are a series of benefits that come out of immigration. Moreover, immigrants have been accused
This paper will discuss the arguments for and against immigration within the United States addressing topics related to employment, healthcare, increased poverty and increased country revenue. I am against immigration because I believe it is out of control and it...
Bohuslav Sobotka, the Czech prime minister, said the following in a recent interview as a warning ‘immigrants may bring about the collapse of the EU.’ Refugees are intruders and impose burdens onto other countries. Refugees will take jobs and resources from struggling
With the recent Paris attacks and rumors of foreboding ISIS attacks, the topic of immigration comes up quite often in conversations. Topics such as how the immigrants should be dealt with, what exactly are the benefits and/or detriments of immigration, Donald Trump’s immigration plan, et cetera are usually discussed. With immigration gradually becoming a trending issue, various people have expressed their thoughts through means like social media and news sites. Joining this movement, this will be another text on the topic of immigration. The benefits of immigration will be presented, false information will be proven wrong, and why some people oppose immigration will be explained and discussed. Immigration should be widely accepted rather than
Under the terms of the 1972 Act it has always been clear that it was the duty of a United Kingdom court, when delivering final judgment, to override any rule of national law found to be in conflict with any directly enforceable rule of Community law.’ [R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame (no. 2) 1 AC 603, 658-59 (per Lord Bridge)]. Therefore it can be said that the UK retains parliamentary sovereignty in the sense that it can also leave the EU. However the UK voluntarily and knowingly entered the agreement and thus sacrificed parliamentary sovereignty which in turn restricts parliament’s legislative powers and so constitutional law in turn.
But while policymakers talk about the economic benefits of immigration, many voters remain unconvinced (Ratcliffe, 2014). “British people feel unsettled by the flux and change brought on by immigration. Public attitudes towards immigration are hardening and showing no signs of abating. Politicians and policymakers are faced with the formidable challenge of reconciling the effects of globalisation with an intangible sense of loss of identity across many communities in the UK” (Sachrajda and Griffith, 2014:5). As stated in The Guardian (2014), immigration creates challenges for public services, which are creaking under the weight of the additional demand. Furthermore many schools are unprepared to accommodate children with EASL (English as a second language) whilst hospitals are full of foreign patients who have failed to register with their local GP and social housing lists are growing ever longer. In some regards it is not just the increased numbers but also the changing nature of immigration that has created these impacts, as said by Sunder Katwala, director of British Future. Equally, there is a higher rate of “churn” – immigrants staying here on a temporary basis - that is also changing the dynamic of the way they relate to their communities (Slack,
Immigration poses an ongoing debate in which people are becoming increasingly unsure as to whether immigrants are benefiting their society. This paper will examine three of the main benefits of immigration: the increase in diversity it provides, the rise in skills and labor and the benefits to the economy. Immigration leads to cross-cultural integration, therefore increasing ethnic variety. This increase in diversity is beneficial as it leads to improvements in society, as well as educational development. Increased immigration also means there are more skills and experts available to the hosting countries, as well as extra workers to take up jobs that need filling. Immigration also leads to improvements in the economy as taxes are paid and employment and wages increase.
In Europe, immigration has always been a part of its history, but large-scale migration has been in more recent years. In a 13-year span from 1960 to 1973 there was a major increase in the number of foreign workers in the work force. The percent doubled from 3 percent to six percent of workers in the