In June of 2016, the United Kingdom voted in a national referendum to withdraw from the European Union. The vote was close, but it passed and people from around the world are wondering why the people of the United Kingdom decided to vote to leave. There is some speculation around the matter to this day, but a few months later, there are some clear reasons. The citizens of the United Kingdom voted to withdraw from the European Union because of the economic downfalling of the European Union, the increase in patriotism among countries, and the controversy of immigration. Due to the conflicts in the Middle East and Europe areas there has been a large increase in immigration to other countries. Because of this increase in immigration the citizens …show more content…
At first, however, most experts claimed that leaving the European Union would rain disaster to the United Kingdom as they would lose trade agreements, business would fall and unemployment would further increase. Although, citizens were also questioning if the joining of the European Union was even beneficial. The BBC reports on the EU referendum, stating, “far more people felt left behind and untouched by the economic benefits of five decades of EU involvement” (“Eight Reasons Leave”). The questioning of the European Union’s capability and power to maintain economic and employment stability further pushed voters to withdraw from the Union. As well, the supports of the Leave movement also claimed that leaving the European Union would decrease wasted spending. This figure is said to be in the three hundred million euros, according to the BBC (“Eight Reasons Leave”). With this much money being spent on the European Union by the United Kingdom, it allowed citizens to see the amount of money they could spend on their own country, also showing the increase in patriotism. With the uncertainty of the economic stability of the European Union, and the significant financial spending from the United Kingdom, this was a strong case for the withdraw
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.
Immigration can be defined as passing foreigners to a country and making it their permanent residence. Reasons ranging from politics, economy, natural disasters, wish to change ones surroundings and poverty are in the list of the major causes of immigration in both history and today. In untied states, immigration comes with complexities in its demographic nature. A lot of cultural and population growth changes have been witnessed as a result of immigration. In the following paper, I will focus on how immigration helps United States as compared to the mostly held view that it hurts America.
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 ...
Immigration has undergone much change since the 20th century. However, a lot of the motives behind immigration and adaptation to a new culture and way of life have remained the same.
Immigrants leave their countries in search for a better life and improvement of their situation. There is no singular reason for immigration; motivations range from better economic prospects to political safety. As of late, the number of immigrants living in the United States is an estimated 11 million. Those who immigrate are expected to contribute to the United States culturally, politically, and economically. Yet, full assimilation becomes difficult to achieve when the immigrant is made into “the other” by the country of reception.
To enable Britain to fulfil its part of the United Kingdom’s responsibilities within the European Union.
Migration has been a major part of human living and also animals, people migrate for various reasons such as seeking better lives, family, job opportunity, availability of social amenities etc. immigration policies were put in place to monitor and decide who immigrate to a country and these policies have been present since 1906, and these polices have had different reasons for their enactment and these reasons change as time and era changes (Baglay, 2014). The early policies were racially based restriction, economic growth, multiculturalism, restriction on refugee and economic immigration (Baglay, 2014). The Communitarian approach used by Michael Walzer to explain immigration policy is similar to Canadian immigration policy. This paper seeks to discuss and analyze the articles by Joseph Carens and Michael Walzer, explaining the different perspectives of explaining immigration policies. The paper would summarize and contrast the author’s main arguments. It would take a stand on which argument is more persuasive in explaining immigration policy and give reason for this position. It would also use other articles to support or refute each argument made by Joseph Carens and Michael Walzer. Lastly this paper would explain and come to a conclusion of if any of these arguments apply to Canadian immigration policy and give examples of these similarities. Carens and Walzer had very different view on immigration and open border, Carens used the Liberal perspective of explaining open border.
The United State’s immigration policy has undergone great change since the turn of the 20th century. Many things have contributed to this change, such as political problems, poverty, lack of jobs, and in fact our changing policy. The countries affected by these problems may have changed but the problems themselves have not. No matter what the location or time period, people have been driven from their homeland as result of political disputes. There will always be poor, 3rd world countries that can not create a prosperous environment for their people. As a result of general poverty, few jobs are available, which forces citizens to look beyond the borders for work. Our changing immigration policy is motivation for some immigrants to come to America. If the U.S. is accepting a high number of one country’s immigrants, than many of their citizens will emigrate for America, some legally and others illegally. The United State’s has changed its immigration policy many times in the last 100 years but the reasons for resettlement have remained generally the same.
Some immigrants are force to move to the United States because the situation of their countries are hard. The flow of Mexican
These are very exciting times for our country, we are now part of the largest economic community the world has ever seen, opening the doors of opportunity for us, the Irish citizens, everywhere we look. Ireland's membership of the EU is seen by most to be of great benefit to the country as it will solidify the foundations of our economy as well as increase the awareness of Ireland as an investment opportunity for multi national companies; however, some will argue that the change would be detrimental to our nation in the long run.
Despite being one of the wealthiest areas in the world, the EU faces the growing problem of prolific inequality in wealth and competitiveness across the diverse group of countries. This is dramatically represented in the differences of income between Europe’s richest and poorest regions: inner London and Romania. Inner London’s per capita income is a staggering 290% of the EU’s average versus Romania with a per capita income of a meager 23% of the EU average. The European Union has recognized this problem and has taken action by implementing “Cohesion” policies intended to encourage economic convergence, competiveness and financial unity. To reach these goals the EU has allocated a significant part of the taxes levied on member nations to the “Structural Funds.” These funds are comprised of three financial instruments amounting to a total of around €308 billion: over a third of the EU budget. The Structural Funds are designed to help areas in need, generally with GPD’s of less than 75% of the EU average. They are supposed to direct the money in ways to capitalize on the economic comparative advantages of the different areas in the EU through the financing of projects ranging from: improving education to investing in infrastructure to environmental protection. Supporters of the funds define these projects as an “inherent part of the European idea and European project” (Hubner) and point to areas that have exhibited high growth, like Ireland, as proof of its success. To what extent, however, are these claims true? Looking past the glorified and falsely correlated successes in the EU, a careful observer can see the flaws in this policy and would question how much these funds actually improve the state of the European economy.
Immigration is a controversial topic that features conflicting opinions on a global scale. This is because skeptics believe that immigrants are taking away the original culture and traditions of individual societies, whereas, those supporting immigration believe that immigrants in fact enrich the culture of the host countries and provide great benefits to the country overall. This ongoing debate regarding immigration has led to the increased difficulty in gaining national citizenship in some countries, such as Saudi Arabia. Other countries, however, welcome immigrants as they believe foreigners are valuable to society. Immigration around the world should be encouraged as immigrants increase diversity, add to the amount of skills and labor opportunities available to the countries they move to, and improve the economy.
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
The United Kingdom was a member of the European Union. The European Union is an example of the second most integrated arrangement, the economic union. Therefore, voting to leave is a direct effort to reverse regional economic integration.
It is clear that talks about Brexit will not end quickly, and most important question is, what will happen in future. Well it could be claimed that is three different endings how this situation could end. Firstly one of the scenario is that Brexit happened and the U.K. completely leaves EU. In that case firstly British currency, the pound sterling, will fall down even more, than in the start after referendum. Also it will have consequences not only in Britain but also in the hole world, for example , some other countries, will see how Britain left European Union, and they will also will spoke to leave EU. So British leaving EU will have wide ranging repercussions on the other countries who look into EU skeptically also it will help Euro-skeptic