Brexit and the future of the EU

[The Comrade]

bigot

[spacemonkey]

[John Galt]

is the economist a fine thing to quote homer?

started off 44 Remain/38 leave months ago and we're at 43 leave/42 remain

http://www.economist.com/Brexit

[exploited]

[spacemonkey]

[lnrw]

[ToddStarnes]

Not exactly an unbiased documentary. The jist of the opening sequence can be summarized as "the EU is complicated and random citizens on the street just can't figure it out". Who cares.

Then there's the bizarre segment in the middle which seems designed to stoke historical tensions between Brits and Germans as a rationale to oppose the EU. Odd.

Then there's the list of laws for your average Joe, which is disingenuous at best, dishonest at worst (a fuller breakdown of some of its lies is here: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/gabriel ... 68070.html ).

The discussion of the harm to the fishing industry is fine, but it lacks context. Many trade agreements harm one industry and benefit others. The crux of the issue is not whether one industry is harmed; it's whether - in the aggregate - the nation at issue benefits as a whole. This isn't addressed in this documentary beyond the bald assertion by a conservative, euroskeptic MP that the EU has done more economic harm than good.

Then there's the long segment on protectionism and how this harms the EU, which is bizarre for a Trump supporter like you since Trump trumpets (hehe) the benefits of protectionism all the time. Make up your mind, friend. I oppose protectionism on general principles, however, so I agree with this criticism to an extent. But then the doc goes on to discuss how the EU has removed protectionist measures, which has resulted in harm to the EU economy. Bizarre.

[lnrw]

what figment causes you to imagine i'm a trump supporter?

[lnrw]

the huff post doesn't say the laws don't exist, it just says the author wants them.

[ToddStarnes]