un sito di notizie, fatto dai commentatori

Perchè la Brexit non è solo una questione commerciale [EN]

0 commenti

Ambrose Evans Pritchard per il Telegraph (link alternativo) critica l’atrofia politica ed economica a cui – a suo avviso – sarebbe condannata l’Unione Europea a causa della eccessiva avversione al rischio dei regolatori europei, responsabili di aver imposto leggi troppo stringenti ed economicamente dannose. La scelta di uscire dall’Unione sarebbe quindi uno scenario desiderabile per il Regno Unito.

EU’s ‘precautionary principle’ and the utopian goal of zero-risk is the enemy of economic dynamism and the kiss of death for tech start-ups and artificial intelligence.
It is manipulated by vested interests, who game the regulatory committees to shut out rivals. It lies behind the pseudo-science of Europe’s ban on GMO crops[…] The consequence of refusing to tweak genes for better yields is that EU farming relies more on chemicals, just as Europe’s horror of gas fracking and nuclear power cause it to burn more coal.[…]

The EU may seem a formidable economic superpower when viewed from within the parochial Westminster and Brussels bubbles. The Article 50 process gave Europe the whip hand and further flattered the illusion of EU supremacy, as did the cacophony of Parliament before the Johnson landslide.
But if your angle of view is global, Europe looks more like a basket case. Americans and Asians scratch their heads and wonder whether the EU will ever get its act together. It wasted a decade trying to save its dysfunctional monetary union, while nation states in East Asia that are not part of any comparable union grew at four or five times the pace, diversified into hi-tech, and ran away with the prize.


Immagine da pixabay.

Commenta qui sotto e segui le linee guida del sito.