Увійти · Зареєструватися


Потік Статті Інформація

Автори / Bill West / Should the UK stay in the European Union?

Since the end of World War II, Europe has been strong and united, and the European Union is one of the signs of this unity. However, Eurosceptic voices become louder in modern political thought. The United Kingdom has always been one of the most individualistic states in the EU, so it was no surprise that it conducted the referendum in 2016 to decide whether to stay or leave the EU. The result of the referendum was not obvious because both opponents and supporters of the EU presented persuasive arguments proving their points of view.

Eurosceptics claim that leaving the European Union will bring huge financial benefits to the UK. The country will save much money as it will not be obliged to pay membership fees. They also believe that staying in the EU negatively influences internal affairs of the country. For example, the number of immigrants increases because any European can now live in Britain, according to EU laws. Moreover, Brexiters state that withdrawal from the EU will help their country to become an independent and influential nation capable of controlling all important aspects related to its international politics.

Nevertheless, leaving the European Union may cause serious economic problems. According to CBI, if Britain leaves the EU, it may lose 100 billion pounds and almost 1 million jobs by 2020. There are also heated debates about whether the UK will lose its power and influence in Europe or not. Withdrawal from the EU may decrease investments, as foreign investors will be unwilling to invest money in Britain if it is not the member of the EU. Finally, free trade between the European countries brings huge profits to Britain, and it is highly risky to leave the EU because it will be more difficult to sign new trade agreements.

To conclude, Britain’s withdrawal from the EU is a very controversial issue. Some time should pass to see whether leaving the European Union is a good idea for Britain or not.

Disadvantages to Becoming a World Heritage Site

In the last century, people became concerned about saving nature and history. Therefore, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) was created. This organization searches for and selects ecologically, historically or culturally important places which should be preserved and protected. These places are called World Heritage Sites, and nowadays there are about 1000 of them all over the world. This status, however, brings some problems.

Becoming a World Heritage Site means that the place is restored, saved, and added to the special list available to everyone. No doubt, this increases the number of tourists visiting the place. For instance, Cambodia’s world-famous Temples of Angkor received 2.5 million tourists in 2011 compared to 7500 tourists in 1993 when they had just been added to the World Heritage List. Unfortunately, people themselves can damage sites, and a huge number of tourists becomes a serious threat to nature and culture.

Local people who live near famous sites also face some problems, as their peaceful life is disturbed. All surrounding areas become commercialized, and all buildings are converted into hotels, restaurants, etc. This is especially problematic for religious places which are added to the list and with pharmacy research project ideas. Once a place is officially recognized as a World Heritage Site, it loses its soul and becomes just another tourist attraction unable to provide peace and spirituality.

Nevertheless, it is obvious that UNESCO can save many places because it provides financing for their rebuilding and protection. However, World Heritage Site status may bring serious problems which should be taken into consideration before adding a place to the World Heritage List.


Додав billwest 17 травня 2022

Про автора



Гостиница Днепропетровск |  Светильники Днепропетровск |  Рекламное агентство |  Сауны Днепропетровска