Best bud in Engerland had this to say : (didn't get his permission to post his position, but I guess I can accept any arguments on his behalf)
"We were in favour of Brexit and think its time we took back some of our own responsibilities, rather than let nameless and faceless bureaucrats run our country and decide our rules. I am all in favour of immigration but logic dictates you cant have a system where 500 mil can come in if they want and you cant stop them. How on earth do you plan anything on that basis. For example it may take say 2 years to build a hospital but 50000 people could come in in a matter of days. It defies any kind of sense.
Take the minimum wage which is about $14 per hour in the UK. Its half that in Poland and a quarter in Bulgaria. So all the bright people come to the UK, France , Germany and leave in their own country those of lesser ability. So what chance do the people in Bulgaria have, for example, if all their bright people are in the richer countries. The rich get bigger and richer at the expense of the poorer. If it was a short term goal of the EU to make the minimum wage the same in every EU country then that would make sense. So much for a common (single) market.
Instead they concentrate in bankrupting Greece who owe 3 times their GDP in debt, and print money ( ie quantative easing) to bail out France , Italy, Spain and Portugal who all currently have crappy economies which would not allow them to join the EU if they weren't members already.
The question to which nearly everyone in the UK would answer "NO" to is this. If we weren't a member already would we join ???
The current crass hypocrisy of the Scottish nationalists in Scotland is two fold as they are monotonously repetitive about both remaining in the EU and being independent.
IF they had got their way when they had their independence referendum and voted to leave the UK the rules of the EU would have meant they couldn't join it. The other illogical argument is regarding Britain's nuclear deterrent. They voted en masse against renewing it saying they favoured conventional weapons( but lost). However , if they became independent they say they would rely on NATO. Unfortunately for their argument , it is a condition of NATO that they have to agree to be under the nuclear umbrella of the USA who mainly fund NATO.
We have new female prime minister, a wise choice, but not my first until Michael Gove stabbed Boris Johnson in the leadership battle.
The party in opposition , the Labour party, are in a real mess. In simple terms supporters of the party paid £3 to become a member and then voted for a leader someone who opposed almost every policy his party proposed when they were in government. After 10 months nearly all the 75 people he chose to help him run their parliamentary party have since resigned and he now cannot fill enough of the shadow posts. Shadow post are those who mirror the ruling government ones.So we have a Chancellor and a shadow Chancellor. A transport minister and a shadow transport minister, and so on. So now they are having a very divisive leadership battle which will last until late September, with this guy , Jeremy Corbyn, as one of the two candidates.
Politics are again interesting this side of the pond.
You however also have an "interesting" choice, Clinton or Trump. Good luck!!!
On both sides of the pond , as we say, you couldn't make it up.
PS. It is beyond my understanding why politicians here say that we should look farther than Europe and consider the whole world as having potential , on the basis that "Trade Deals" (the current mantra of politicians) , in reality Tariff and Quota agreements, are the driving force for business. The world has always been a market and generally its the politicians who don't understand
and screw it up. Its the business community who trades, gives opportunities for people and ideas and makes profits to fund it all, not governments.
Hope this cured your insomnia."
I guess an United States of Europe was/is a bad idea.