Have you ever been in a relationship where your partner persistently denigrates you to no end, blaming you for things that aren't your fault, and generally acts like an intolerable twit? Then they eventually break up with you, but then claim that they can still be 'friends with benefits' with you, as if the constant abuse and emotional negligence had no weight to them, and they never realized that it had weight to you. What would you say to the offer of a 'casual relationship?'
That, in a nutshell, is what happened with the United Kingdom and the European Union in what will be described as one of the worst decisions in the 21st century, sitting somewhere alongside invading Iraq and Keeping Up with the Kardashians.
The 'Brexit,' as it is termed, is the permanent extrication of the United Kingdom from the European Union. There were two sides to the debate: the meager Remain camp, which couldn't articulate anything besides doom and gloom should the UK leave, and the Leave camp, which couldn't articulate anything besides doom and gloom should the UK remain.
Much has been said about this campaign. A lot of what the Leave camp said was outright falsehood sitting somewhere between, well, the reasoning for the invasion of Iraq and the physical appearances of everyone on Keeping Up with the Kardashians. (Little know, or, really, well publicized fact: EU migrants to the UK are a net positive in terms of tax income versus welfare distribution, but the Leave camp didn't mention it.)
And so, in a moment of great fugue in which some people voted Leave because they figured the UK would remain anyway (yes, it happened plenty, as documented by too many articles that aggravate me), the country voted to split from the European Union, 52% to 48%.
Keep in mind that a referendum isn't legally binding. The government will have to enact Article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon, which details the secession proceedings in far too few words, even though the majority of parliamentarians support remaining. But, moving on.
Leave camp has said that they'd be able to negotiate a deal to remain in the European single market. European ministers have responded by saying that the UK will do no such thing. So, what does this mean?
Higher prices and wage stagnation, along with jobs moving from the UK to mainland Europe, mostly in the finance sector which is a huge economic powerhouse for the country. JPMorgan has already declared 1000 jobs moving to the mainland. It won't be long until others follow suit. The UK was dependent on the single market for the free movement of goods back and forth; now, it will face import tariffs, and not just to Europe, but to other areas of the world where the EU has trade agreements.
For a bit of context, the UK joined the European Community in a referendum in 1975. In the 70s, the UK was the sick man of Europe, suffering from high inflation and wage stagnation. Up until recently, its economy (on paper) was the second strongest in Europe, though given Brexit, that will certainly change.
And then there's the issue of migrants, which was likely the central issue that many took as why they wanted to leave the European Union. Like I stated above, European migrants are a net tax benefit to the UK government. The Leave camp also said that the UK sent 'GBP350 million per week to the EU,' a 'fact' that has been debunked so many times that it ought to be only whispered in sanitariums. In fact, Leave camp leader and brutish turnip Nigel Farage recanted that little bit of factual excrement after the results were in. So why did people vote to leave?
The demographics were split between young and old, educated and less so. Those who grew up as part of the EU wanted it more than those who viewed their youths through glasses so rosy that one might think they're peering through the bloodletting they've inflicted upon the UK.
I concede that the EU needs democratic governmental reforms. I've always said that and I'm a fan of the damn organization, because I know that the good it does, regardless of how little it's reported on, outweighs all the times it's blamed for the maladies of the mundane. And now, the UK will have no chance to actually inspire positive change in the EU, except for demonstrating to other right-wing nationalist movements in other countries how bad an idea it is to leave.
I am, as I once heard while living in the UK, gobsmacked. Speechless. Completely and utterly stunned by not only the negligence on the part of the prime minister in campaigning to remain, but by the people who voted to leave because they felt their 'essential Britishness' was being attacked or degraded. Failed Aflac duck spokesman and Leave campaigner Boris Johnson can now tromp towards the leadership of the country while Turnip Farage gets handed a United Kingdom that may not be united for much longer, given the signals from Scotland and Northern Ireland that they are considering their own referenda to leave.
The Leave campaigners won't get the lofty goals they described to their angry followers. They won't get a 'special arrangement' with the EU. They'll be shown as the petulant children they are, rebelling for the sake of the act. And then, who knows, perhaps those angry followers will turn their anger towards the correct target when that happens.
Showing posts with label uk. Show all posts
Showing posts with label uk. Show all posts
Friday, June 24, 2016
Sunday, March 9, 2014
Post-hoc
I've been a bit neglectful of my blog of late, and I'm hoping that it is for two not unworthy reasons: the first is that I've been interning with a small nonprofit three days a week, and also I have been searching for a full-time job that can pay me a livable wage; the second is that I've been rewriting the second book I wrote and finished last year, and preliminarily, I find it to be better than the previous version. Will I shop it around to agents? Eventually, though I'm not sure how 'commercial' my work is.
On a more important note, Ukraine. Over the past month, it's exploded into a Cold War-esque geopolitical nightmare for the west. Russian troops (in unmarked uniforms for the plausible deniability) occupy Crimea, which has voted to secede from the Ukraine and become a part of Russia. Vladimir Putin, the all-but-a-sultan of Russia, has stated that the recent ouster of former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych posed a threat to the ethnically Russian people living in Crimea; thus, the intervention, even though Putin has also said that there is no way to tell if those are really Russian troops. (Confusing, I know)
There needs to be a brief bit of background on this whole issue:
The costs for that, however, would be large. The shipping, tariff, and import duties, not to mention the establishment of transit areas through which the gas can be safely delivered to Eastern Europe would likely cost more than the current Gazprom pipeline setup. Thus, the EU hasn't implemented the pernicious sanctions that it could; at least, not yet.
This is Europe's trump card over Russia: cutting off Russia from all gas imports would cause the Russian stock market and economy to take a nosedive due to the estimated loss of profits, and the ruble would drop internationally. 60% of Russia's state income comes from export of gas and oil, and the EU is its largest customer. It is the one pressure point the west has on Putin, and they are hesitant to use it.
One should hope, however, that the EU is willing to take the dramatic step in terms of international presence and make a stand against Russia's incursion into Ukraine. This entire debacle raises ghosts of the 1990s, when the incipient EU found itself impotent in the face of the Balkans crisis; one would think that, in light of those confusing and tumultuous times, the EU would be able to make the difficult, yet right, decision.
Of course, then there are the business interests. One shouldn't be surprised that David Cameron's government is espousing pro-business, anti-EU positions; honestly, would anyone expect anything less? In this situation, however, even Germany, which receives 40% of its gas imports from Russia, has been hesitant in taking a strong stand against Russia.
The EU Council of Ministers, the European Parliament, the European Commission, the EU High Representative, etc. etc. etc.; they were all established in order to create a prominence for Europe in international affairs. One preening windbag (or the preening windbags in his party) shouldn't be enough to stop what is the only reasonable course of action for the EU: impose trade sanctions on Russia, targeting gas imports. With a united voice, the EU can deescalate the situation. After all, the European economy can be recovered, but the people who fought and died against Yanukovych's crackdown in the Maidan cannot.
That's all for now,
On a more important note, Ukraine. Over the past month, it's exploded into a Cold War-esque geopolitical nightmare for the west. Russian troops (in unmarked uniforms for the plausible deniability) occupy Crimea, which has voted to secede from the Ukraine and become a part of Russia. Vladimir Putin, the all-but-a-sultan of Russia, has stated that the recent ouster of former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych posed a threat to the ethnically Russian people living in Crimea; thus, the intervention, even though Putin has also said that there is no way to tell if those are really Russian troops. (Confusing, I know)
There needs to be a brief bit of background on this whole issue:
- the first point of note is that, before the protests in Kiev began, Ukraine was preparing to enter the EU by making the standard array of changes (see Copenhagen Criteria).
- President Yanukovych was renowned among leaders for his corruption, and quickly accepted money from Russia, turning his back on the Copenhagen Criteria and the EU, which was supported by a majority of the Ukrainian population.
- Russia supplies around 1/3 of all gas imported in the EU.
- Half of all Russian gas that enters the EU goes through Ukraine.
- A 1994 agreement between the US and Ukraine recognizes the border of the then-new state of the Ukraine.
- Russia maintains a naval base in Crimea, which would likely no longer be leased to the Russians should Ukraine enter the EU. The base maintains a strategic Cold War position as the place of first strike against the west in case of an all-out war.
The costs for that, however, would be large. The shipping, tariff, and import duties, not to mention the establishment of transit areas through which the gas can be safely delivered to Eastern Europe would likely cost more than the current Gazprom pipeline setup. Thus, the EU hasn't implemented the pernicious sanctions that it could; at least, not yet.
This is Europe's trump card over Russia: cutting off Russia from all gas imports would cause the Russian stock market and economy to take a nosedive due to the estimated loss of profits, and the ruble would drop internationally. 60% of Russia's state income comes from export of gas and oil, and the EU is its largest customer. It is the one pressure point the west has on Putin, and they are hesitant to use it.
One should hope, however, that the EU is willing to take the dramatic step in terms of international presence and make a stand against Russia's incursion into Ukraine. This entire debacle raises ghosts of the 1990s, when the incipient EU found itself impotent in the face of the Balkans crisis; one would think that, in light of those confusing and tumultuous times, the EU would be able to make the difficult, yet right, decision.
Of course, then there are the business interests. One shouldn't be surprised that David Cameron's government is espousing pro-business, anti-EU positions; honestly, would anyone expect anything less? In this situation, however, even Germany, which receives 40% of its gas imports from Russia, has been hesitant in taking a strong stand against Russia.
The EU Council of Ministers, the European Parliament, the European Commission, the EU High Representative, etc. etc. etc.; they were all established in order to create a prominence for Europe in international affairs. One preening windbag (or the preening windbags in his party) shouldn't be enough to stop what is the only reasonable course of action for the EU: impose trade sanctions on Russia, targeting gas imports. With a united voice, the EU can deescalate the situation. After all, the European economy can be recovered, but the people who fought and died against Yanukovych's crackdown in the Maidan cannot.
That's all for now,
Das Flüg
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
An Open Letter to David Cameron
His eyes likely won't see this, nor will his ears hear of this from his aides, but I'm going to write it because it matters to me.
Mr. Prime Minister,
I'm not going to address your subservience to US policy, as I would typically do. I'm not going to talk about the iniquitous decisions you've made regarding the public services in the UK. I'm not even going to mention your party's eschewing of the EU regardless of the benefits it confers to the UK. Instead, this is personal.
I'm an Anglophile. From a young age, I fed myself a steady diet of British culture, starting with Harry Potter and continuing with Monty Python to the works of Charles Dickens and the daily morning cup of Earl Grey. That wasn't the simplest thing to do, as my father is an immigrant of Argentina (and was once deported from the UK years ago, or so he says), but I was luckily a self-sufficient kid in the ways of the Internet. I imbibed it like the holy grail it was to me.
Understandably, I wanted to go to a university in the UK. I was accepted to several, though I ultimately ended up at the London School of Economics, an extremely prestigious institution, as you know. I was overjoyed, I can tell you that. I had high hopes of obtaining a job, work visa sponsorship, and in good time, UK/EU dual citizenship with the US. Hell, I've even mapped out my dream retirement options: getting a cottage in Cornwall where I could grow vegetables in the garden, or opening a small, friendly pub in London called the Drunken Ass (with a donkey on the sign) where I could serve patrons a tall one without the annoying music or overbearing noise of a match. It would just be a place for friends to congregate and enjoy each other's time, except on karaoke Thursdays. That's a special day.
What's wrong with that dream? Like any other cherished photograph, it has chipped away with experience. I had several interviews in London, very good ones, I might add, but when the conversation turned to my work availability and visa issues, a dark, foreboding silence befell the room each time before I was told that my prospective employers don't do visas.
Here I am, back in the desolate suburbia of New Jersey where I passed through my adolescence in relative ennui, and all I can think about is being back in London. It's unfair to allow someone to become so enamored with a city and then tell them that, because they aren't a native, they haven't a chance of staying there. I'm not unique in this respect: other Americans from my Master's program are trying to stay and are riding out the extent of their visas (until January), after which point they'd have no choice but to return to the United States. I had the misfortune of having to move out of my flat, and since I had no job, there was no point in paying for an ephemeral hope of a job that would sponsor my visa.
I believe that the old visa rules, since you so dutifully decided that immigrants were "bad," dictated that students who obtained a degree with a UK university could stay for two years past their graduation. Now, it's six months, which is a troublesome time limit because renting a room or a flat for six months is harder than one might think.
All we want to do is work to improve both our own lives and the lives of those around us. We want to pay taxes, support the social system that you are so ardently privatising, and enjoy the cultural gravitas of England. Instead, you and your xenophobic lot are making it harder for even EU immigrants to come to the UK.
You're not an empire. You're an island that is part of a greater federal entity that is the EU. Give up the illusions of your past delinquencies and accept that you no longer have influence without the EU. What's more, without an influx of skilled migrants, you only hurt your own economy. If someone with an advanced degree wishes to work within the UK, why shouldn't they have the chance to do so? To keep jobs "British?" What of those who want to become British? Should they not have the same chance to do so?
Mr. Cameron, you're not unreasonable. Your surprising adherence to the Syria vote in Parliament shows that. I only wish that you'd realise that the UK is no longer in a position to exclude people who want to become a part of your society. We are skilled and we want to bring our abilities to you, whether we're doctors, or lawyers, or entrepreneurs, or engineers, or political strategists, or the like.
Don't punish us simply because we're not native-born in the UK or the EU. Borders now mean very little. If a migrant such as myself, who paid my £750 a month in rent (not including utilities, mind you) and my £17,000 in student fees, wishes to stay and live in the UK, what reason is there for not allowing me to do so?
I'll pay the bloody Council tax. I'll gladly pay into every single social service that deducts from my paycheck through taxes because those social services are integral to the functioning of the state. I'll work a terrible entry-level job that hardly pays above the visa minimum salary. I only ask that you give us, the lot of us who want to stay, the chance to do it. We aren't a drain on your society, like so many conservatives would say; that's anodyne and illogical. Why would we drain something we so desire?
Mr. Prime Minister,
I'm not going to address your subservience to US policy, as I would typically do. I'm not going to talk about the iniquitous decisions you've made regarding the public services in the UK. I'm not even going to mention your party's eschewing of the EU regardless of the benefits it confers to the UK. Instead, this is personal.
I'm an Anglophile. From a young age, I fed myself a steady diet of British culture, starting with Harry Potter and continuing with Monty Python to the works of Charles Dickens and the daily morning cup of Earl Grey. That wasn't the simplest thing to do, as my father is an immigrant of Argentina (and was once deported from the UK years ago, or so he says), but I was luckily a self-sufficient kid in the ways of the Internet. I imbibed it like the holy grail it was to me.
Understandably, I wanted to go to a university in the UK. I was accepted to several, though I ultimately ended up at the London School of Economics, an extremely prestigious institution, as you know. I was overjoyed, I can tell you that. I had high hopes of obtaining a job, work visa sponsorship, and in good time, UK/EU dual citizenship with the US. Hell, I've even mapped out my dream retirement options: getting a cottage in Cornwall where I could grow vegetables in the garden, or opening a small, friendly pub in London called the Drunken Ass (with a donkey on the sign) where I could serve patrons a tall one without the annoying music or overbearing noise of a match. It would just be a place for friends to congregate and enjoy each other's time, except on karaoke Thursdays. That's a special day.
What's wrong with that dream? Like any other cherished photograph, it has chipped away with experience. I had several interviews in London, very good ones, I might add, but when the conversation turned to my work availability and visa issues, a dark, foreboding silence befell the room each time before I was told that my prospective employers don't do visas.
Here I am, back in the desolate suburbia of New Jersey where I passed through my adolescence in relative ennui, and all I can think about is being back in London. It's unfair to allow someone to become so enamored with a city and then tell them that, because they aren't a native, they haven't a chance of staying there. I'm not unique in this respect: other Americans from my Master's program are trying to stay and are riding out the extent of their visas (until January), after which point they'd have no choice but to return to the United States. I had the misfortune of having to move out of my flat, and since I had no job, there was no point in paying for an ephemeral hope of a job that would sponsor my visa.
I believe that the old visa rules, since you so dutifully decided that immigrants were "bad," dictated that students who obtained a degree with a UK university could stay for two years past their graduation. Now, it's six months, which is a troublesome time limit because renting a room or a flat for six months is harder than one might think.
All we want to do is work to improve both our own lives and the lives of those around us. We want to pay taxes, support the social system that you are so ardently privatising, and enjoy the cultural gravitas of England. Instead, you and your xenophobic lot are making it harder for even EU immigrants to come to the UK.
You're not an empire. You're an island that is part of a greater federal entity that is the EU. Give up the illusions of your past delinquencies and accept that you no longer have influence without the EU. What's more, without an influx of skilled migrants, you only hurt your own economy. If someone with an advanced degree wishes to work within the UK, why shouldn't they have the chance to do so? To keep jobs "British?" What of those who want to become British? Should they not have the same chance to do so?
Mr. Cameron, you're not unreasonable. Your surprising adherence to the Syria vote in Parliament shows that. I only wish that you'd realise that the UK is no longer in a position to exclude people who want to become a part of your society. We are skilled and we want to bring our abilities to you, whether we're doctors, or lawyers, or entrepreneurs, or engineers, or political strategists, or the like.
Don't punish us simply because we're not native-born in the UK or the EU. Borders now mean very little. If a migrant such as myself, who paid my £750 a month in rent (not including utilities, mind you) and my £17,000 in student fees, wishes to stay and live in the UK, what reason is there for not allowing me to do so?
I'll pay the bloody Council tax. I'll gladly pay into every single social service that deducts from my paycheck through taxes because those social services are integral to the functioning of the state. I'll work a terrible entry-level job that hardly pays above the visa minimum salary. I only ask that you give us, the lot of us who want to stay, the chance to do it. We aren't a drain on your society, like so many conservatives would say; that's anodyne and illogical. Why would we drain something we so desire?
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
A Serious Man Post
Since I haven't done a political piece in a while, I figure that the one person who actually reads my blog (You) would appreciate something well-written and erudite. Hooray for consideration!
What's on my mind right now is the possible connection between the release of the Lockerbie bomber and BP's drilling contract with Libya. Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, also known as the Lockerbie Bomber, was sentenced for life imprisonment after the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, which killed 270 people. (There is speculation that he was simply a scapegoat, but that is a topic about which I know too little.) He was released last year to a hero's welcome in Libya due to a diagnosis of terminal prostate cancer. This obviously raised quite the disturbance in Scotland, as many wondered why a man who senselessly killed hundreds should be given compassion at the end of his life. But, that is only the beginning of the story.
It seems that BP, the highly-revered defenders of all that is black and grimy, influenced the UK government's decision to release Megrahi in order to secure an oil contract with Libya. If BP did not already seem like the dominatrix of the world, whipping us while we enjoyed it, now BP appears to be Hedonism Bot from Futurama, basically doing whatever feels like it would give them pleasure.
Corporate greed at its finest. So, what happens now? Well, if I were president (which only happens in approximately 3 of the infinite parallel universes), I would likely cut all contracts with BP, have them fined, and send them to work on the next Michael Bay movie because, let's face it, Transformers 2 was worse than waterboarding.
On a side note, I'm pretty sure those Russian spies caught in the US were the rejects from the KGB, since the information they were searching for could easily be found on the internet. Hell, it's posted on whitehouse.gov, opensecrets.org, etc. They were probably the kids who ate the crayons during KGB school.
That's all for now,
Das Flüg
P.S. Check out my friend's and my Youtube channel at www.youtube.com/uguestsproductions. You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll subscribe to our channel because you love us. :)
What's on my mind right now is the possible connection between the release of the Lockerbie bomber and BP's drilling contract with Libya. Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, also known as the Lockerbie Bomber, was sentenced for life imprisonment after the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, which killed 270 people. (There is speculation that he was simply a scapegoat, but that is a topic about which I know too little.) He was released last year to a hero's welcome in Libya due to a diagnosis of terminal prostate cancer. This obviously raised quite the disturbance in Scotland, as many wondered why a man who senselessly killed hundreds should be given compassion at the end of his life. But, that is only the beginning of the story.
It seems that BP, the highly-revered defenders of all that is black and grimy, influenced the UK government's decision to release Megrahi in order to secure an oil contract with Libya. If BP did not already seem like the dominatrix of the world, whipping us while we enjoyed it, now BP appears to be Hedonism Bot from Futurama, basically doing whatever feels like it would give them pleasure.
Corporate greed at its finest. So, what happens now? Well, if I were president (which only happens in approximately 3 of the infinite parallel universes), I would likely cut all contracts with BP, have them fined, and send them to work on the next Michael Bay movie because, let's face it, Transformers 2 was worse than waterboarding.
On a side note, I'm pretty sure those Russian spies caught in the US were the rejects from the KGB, since the information they were searching for could easily be found on the internet. Hell, it's posted on whitehouse.gov, opensecrets.org, etc. They were probably the kids who ate the crayons during KGB school.
That's all for now,
Das Flüg
P.S. Check out my friend's and my Youtube channel at www.youtube.com/uguestsproductions. You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll subscribe to our channel because you love us. :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)