Is the UK leaving the EU a good thing?:

The young generation doesn't understand that the EU doesn't just mean free travel through Europe. The EU is an economic burden upon the UK for these facts: 1.) The EU houses the "P.I.G.S." (Portugal, Ireland, Greece, and Spain) of which all have economic growth rates at an average of 0.8% which is 2.3% the global avg of 3.1%, also the "P.I.G.S."have a combined GDP to Debt ratio of 124.725% which means their debt is bigger than their average GDP/GNP. This high Debt rate and low economic development cause for the Euro to become less and less of a valuable currency causing for other EU economies to suffer as a result. 2.) The UK was better off before they joined the EU, The UK joined the EU in January 1 1973 and literally about 3 months later they fell into a recession. Their EGR (Economic Growth Rate) fell from 5% to -1% and then -2.7%. Their economic growth rate now stands at 0.4% due to EU economic regulations of which cost the UK $27.4 Billion a year however when we add EU programs that benifit the UK the cost comes down to a loss of $3 Billion a year to the UK.  3.)  The EU doesnt cut off trade to non-EU economies like the vote remain campaign claim in fact Switzerland a non-EU country Exports $63.9 billion in trade into the EU and has been called one of the EU's most valuable trading partner. 4.) The Pound and Global markets will most likely recover quickly. For the only reason for the economic drop is because foreign and local investors being  paranoid sold their stock so that they do not take an immediate loss, however now is the perfect time for new investors to invest in the UK's economy for the stocks are worth less due to the selling frenzy, and this less value makes it cheaper for wall street to purchase stock which is how the economy will recover quickly. anyways the DOW (basically the industrial avg.) has had worse hits this year even with it dropping 2,000 points between Aug. 18-aug 25.

5.) Last and not least the EU is an Undemocratic institution in which EU officials are not elected by the populous rather by representatives elected by representatives of whom where elected by representatives of who finally where elected by the people (that's a long and vulnerable line in which corruption can take place), also EU law is superior to any laws made by its member states which means that the EU can literally create legislation for foreign Gov's. without the consent of the majority of the nations populous and representatives. 6). Also I understand this was a British referendum and the vote Leave campaign won and choose Freedom over Fear  and that is truly great. Also the young voters may not even fully grasp the complexity of the issue, I say this because how many 18-24 year olds do you know can understand advanced economics and political shifts? I'm guessing not a lot maybe you say about 27% do. Well then you've got how Brexit will be looked in the future as a good thing. 

Sources:

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/spain/gdp-growthhttp://www.tradingeconomics.com/portugal/gdp-growth
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/ireland/gdp-growth
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/greece/gdp-growth
http://europa.eu/about-eu/countries/index_en.htm
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/spain/government-debt-to-gdp
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/ireland/government-debt-to-gdp
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/greece/government-debt-to-gdp
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/portugal/government-debt-to-gdp
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/gdp-growth
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlargement_of_the_European_Union
http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/countries/switzerland/
http://www.science20.com/robert_inventor/can_a_new_rule_trigger_a_second_eu_referendum_petition_signatures_over_10_of_total_votes_cast-175369
http://www.bbc.com/news/politics/eu_referendum/results

The Dangers of Assassination:

Recently Donald J. Trump had an assassination attempt foiled earlier today. This made me think what are the consequences of assassination? When a politician, figure head, or President is assassinated within the U.S. it can only bring harm no matter how disliked he/ she is. For when a politician/ President/ figure head is assassinated it causes for the U.S. to look weak and to overreact with more crushing policies. Also when a politician, figure head, or President is assassinated they are almost always looked at in a positive way, so the reasoning behind assassination becomes erased and the person goes down as a hero in American history regardless of their record. Also this type of violent action can cause for more types of violence to break out due to the seeming "simplicity" of the crime. This can ultimately lead to political parties protesting, riots, and even higher crime rates. So before you go around saying that you would "totally assassinate someone" if you had the chance think of the destruction you could potentially cause.

Gun Control?:

"Gun Control?" This notion has been brought up by Obama and the left, right after Americas most deadly mass shooting. When in reality the question should be "Islam Reformation?". For this shooting wasn't committed on the basis that he saw his gun one day and said "hey I think ill go kill some innocent people!". This act of radical Islamic terrorism was committed by a man of whom pledged allegiance to ISIS/ ISIL, and then went on to slaughter innocent people of the LGBTQ community in an act of Islamic Jihadism. All the while Muslims everywhere say "oh, that's not the real Islam!". If this is not "Real Islam" then why aren't Muslims fighting back against this threat, why aren't people in America and the Middle East signing up to fight against something they see damaging to their faith? The reason why they are not doing so is for one of two reasons, you decide which one you believe; 1.) they are scared for their own lives (even though Islam rewards martyrs), or 2.) they actually silently believe in the type of Islam being used and are just saying its not "Real Islam" so that they can stay in the country. If Muslims actually believe that this type of Islamic Jihadism is a false representation of their religion then they should stand up and actually fight for it to be destroyed. Now we will move on to the main topic "Gun Control".

Many Senators, Congressmen, Presidents (Obama), and many civilians are calling for more strict gun control laws after this recent attack, and this is where I actually admit the Democrats have a point. The Democrats say that they do not wish to ban certain gun types, as of now they wish to make it illegal for convicted felons, people of whom are on the U.S. terror watch list and people on the U.S. no fly list to be banned from purchasing firearms. This law makes total and complete logical sense for why would any felon, potential terrorist, or someone of whom is banned from flying be allowed to buy a firearm? Some say that he may be placed there on accident and its not right to take his 2nd amendment right away because of a mistake, however would you rather gamble up to now 50 lives on the prospect that they may not use the gun for violence? The logical answer is no, therefore this legislation is a more moderate form of legislation. For it doesn't remove types of guns from public arms, and it doesn't bar law abiding citizens from owning a gun, what it does do, is it makes it vastly harder for a potential terrorist to buy a gun. However this issue should not be brought up in light of a horrendous terrorist attack as a way to push the liberal agenda forward, instead they should have given it a week or two then attempted to pass legislation.

Are the Worlds Economic Powers Stable?:

Recently there has been no news covering any economic issues that face the U.S. and the world, so I decided to investigate the worlds economy. The truth is, is that most major economic powers are starting to fail, such as Germany of whom has an economic growth rate of 0.7%, which is 2.6% below the global average of 3.3%, while the worlds biggest economic power the U.S. has a growth rate of 2.2%, which is 1.1% below the global average. This means that while countries such as Papua New Guinea having growth rates of 5.4% prosper in new investors and better standards of living, economic powers such as France (0.3%), Germany (0.7%), U.S. (2.2%), Luxembourg (2.2%), South Korea (3%), Japan (1.6%), Russia (1.3%), Brazil (2.5%), Canada (2%), Mexico (1.1%), Argentina (2.9%), Cuba (2.7%), Spain (-1.2%), Portugal (-1.4%), Greece (-3.3%), UK (1.7%), Ireland (0.2%), and many more, will slowly economically collapse due to  debt, and due to reduced standards of living causing revolts. However when you add the amount of debt to GDP to these nations it becomes even scarier, for economic powers such as Japan have 226% debt to GDP, which is 126% above 100% which is usually the line before a nation defaults, this means that Japan is a ticking time bomb for collapse, for Greece has already defaulted and they are at 176% debt to GDP, therefore Japan could default at any moment and cause for billions of dollars in investments to be lost. However the scariest amount of debt to GDP rate thrown out there is the U.S.'s, the U.S. claims that their debt to GDP rate is 96.7% however it really is 149% for they do not calculate in Medicare, Social security and some other federal institutions. Therefore the U.S. has crossed that white line of debt in which most nations default, and instead of admitting to the American people about how much debt the U.S. is in they have covered it up. Overall most economic powers economies are sick and they are not getting better and most countries are trying to trick their own people into believing its fine when overall it is getting worse each day.







*Sources: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/germany/gdp-growth, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2015/update/02/, https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=Papua+new+guinea+economic+growth+rate, http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=66&c=pp&l=en, http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG/countries/CU?display=graph, http://www.tradingeconomics.com/japan/government-debt-to-gdp, http://www.usdebtclock.org/, http://www.nationaldebtclocks.org/debtclock/unitedstates, http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GC.DOD.TOTL.GD.ZS

Should Obama Endorse Hillary?:

Recently President Barack H. Obama, commented that he would soon endorse Hillary, however this will come after his and Bernie Sanders meeting that is scheduled for tomorrow (6/9/16). However this could become problematic for Obamas administration, for his administration is currently leading the investigation into Hillary Clinton's email use, though the case is almost resolved, and Hillary will most likely be found innocent, if there is any new evidence revealed through the case then Obamas administration could be called politically biased on the case. This could ultimately have even more drastic results on Hillarie's campaign of which she may have to be reevaluated by a new Independent Council of which would prolong Hillarie's investigation, and would ultimately give Donald J. Trump more ammo to use during the general election. Overall if President Obama wishes to make sure that his actions do not hurt his administration nor Hillarie's campaign he should wait until the investigation is finished, however he will most likely not do so, for he will want to give Hillary some of his supporters, support.


*Sources: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2016/06/08/White-House-Obama-wont-endorse-Clinton-until-after-Thursday-meeting-with-Sanders/1411465429148/, http://hqcomoxvalley.com/2016/06/obama-ready-to-endorse-clinton/, http://finance.yahoo.com/video/obama-endorse-hillary-215606394.html, and many other news networks and websites. To get more in depth with this story go online and look it up, BTW trigger warning not every view on the internet will cater to your needs.

Should the UK leave the EU?:

Recently the United Kingdoms has called for a referendum regarding its membership in the European Union. The referendum of which was legalized under the "European Union Referendum Act 2015", will allow for UK citizens to vote on whether or not the UK should leave the EU. Many politicians within the EU and UK parliaments have said that leaving the EU could cause for drastic economic consequences as well as the UK possibly losing its "border" in Calais. However most of these claims would most likely not be enacted for countries such as Switzerland, San Marino, Norway, Monaco, and many others of which the EU still frequently trades with, and of which the EU respects, and has treaties with. Therefore the only consequences of the UK leaving the EU is that the UK will escape an undemocratic authoritarian union, in which their member states are oppressed and forced to comply to the laws given to them. Also if the UK leaves the EU then the UK will once again have access to its offshore fishing areas, of which the EU confiscated and split off to other countries such as Belgium, Netherlands, and many others. Overall the UK has much to benefit from leaving the EU and not much to lose.

*Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum,_2016, http://news.sky.com/story/1708390/eu-osborne-warning-over-capital-flight-cost, http://debatewise.org/debates/784-the-uk-should-leave-the-european-union/, and many other news networks and websites. To get more in depth with this story go online and look it up, BTW trigger warning not every view on the internet will cater to your needs.

Bernie Has Fallen:

Recently Democratic Presidential candidate, and self-proclaimed "Socialist", Bernie Sanders, has almost been removed from this Presidential race. Democratic Candidate Hillary Clinton, has reached the amount of delegates needed to win the Democratic nomination which is 2,383. Despite this Bernie has decided to stick in the race for he believes that he can persuade some of Hillarie's "Super Delegates" to join his cause (Hillary has 517 Super Delegates). However this call to arms by Bernie Sanders is a very hypocritical move on part of the Sanders campaign, for Hillary has the majority "Pledged Delegates" (Hillary has 1,812). The reason why Bernie's campaign is being hypocritical is that he has said repeatedly in the past that "Super Delegates," are illegal and undemocratic. However now he is begging for these same "Illegal Delegates" to vote for him, this is understandable however for he does have a point in saying that he has a stronger chance at winning against Mr. Trump than Hillary. Overall though whether you support Hillary, or Bernie, the people have voted and the majority of people have decided to go with Hillary even when super delegates are removed, and even when traditionally anti democrat states are removed.


*Sources: http://www.hindustantimes.com/world/hillary-clinton-clinches-democratic-presidential-nomination-ap-delegate-count/story-psNU5qMYjkqYzP2C4qrJNJ.html, http://www.nationalmemo.com/bernie-sanderss-superdelegate-hypocrisy/, and many other news networks and websites. To get more in depth with this story go online and look it up, BTW trigger warning not every view on the internet will cater to your needs.