Rupert Myers has an interesting take on the Brexit, noting that he is concerned that those on the wrong side of the vote have lost some say on how to deal with wrinkles in the impending departure from the EU. He makes some good points. However, one thing that struck me was when he said it impossible to know who was right because there isn't a Control Britain that is remaining in the EU. I disagree. In a few years time, it will be possible to compare the economic growth of the UK to that of the EU. It will be possible to compare the trajectories of France and Britain prior to the split and what happens to each afterward. If the UK goes into an economic tailspin while the EU experiences a booming economy, the anti-Brexit group will have cause to say "We told you so." If it goes the other way, then the pro-Brexit crew will gloat. Of course, the economy isn't the only issue. The UK is escaping the barely controlled immigration that is sweeping Europe. Ten years hence, will Britain be an island of calm compared to a continent besieged by Islamic terrorists? That too could favor the Brexit.
Let us consider the case of America leaving the British Empire in 1776. There was a control and it is called Canada. Let's do some simple comparisons. What is the per capita income of Canada vs. the United States? $46,000 vs. 57,000. England has done better than Canada in this metric, having a per capita of $50,000, but that is still short of the United States. Economically, splitting from the British Empire has proven a good decision. I have no doubt that Canadians could offer alternate metrics that demonstrate that they are better off for having stayed. It comes down to priorities. As the Brexit was mostly framed on economics, that is the best indicator for whether Brexit was wise or foolish.
No comments:
Post a Comment