如何看待特朗普力挺UK脫歐？UK脫歐會對EU造成多大影響？

01-04

美國福克斯新聞頻道5日晚播出的訪談節目中，幾乎穩獲共和黨總統候選人提名的特朗普被問及對英國脫歐公投的看法。
「我想說，個人看來，他們（英國人）脫離歐盟會日子好一些，但我不是在提建議，只是我的感覺，」特朗普強調，他希望英國人根據自己的意願作出選擇，「我認為移民對歐盟來說已經成為可怕的問題」。
=============
英國將於6月23日就是否留在歐盟舉行全民公投。主張「脫歐」和「留歐」的兩大陣營近期均加大遊說力度，政、商界領袖人物紛紛登台拉票，雙方交鋒日趨白熱化。

公投拉票活動4月15日正式開啟以來，「脫歐」和「留歐」兩大陣營爭鬥的「火藥味」不斷變濃，英國社會各階層和各行業都捲入爭辯當中。在「留歐」陣營中，英國首相卡梅倫警告說，「脫歐」是對英國經濟最為不利的選擇，前首相布朗等呼籲民眾投票支持英國「留歐」。持「脫歐」立場的倫敦前市長鮑里斯·約翰遜說，英國應該通過「脫歐」收回每年交給歐盟的巨額「攤派費」，重新奪回對移民問題的控制權。此外，英國300多名企業領袖16日在《每日電訊報》聯名發表公開信，支持英國退出歐盟。
近一個月的民調顯示，「留歐」陣營和「脫歐」陣營的支持率不相上下，均處於40%至50%之間，呈交錯上升之勢。民調顯示，在與「脫歐」公投相關的問題中，最受民眾關注的是移民問題和經濟問題。在英國社會面臨的這兩大挑戰面前，對於到底是「留歐」還是「脫歐」更有利於應對挑戰，英國民眾甚感糾結。

特朗普再一次說對了

脫歐的勝利將是拯救人類文明的第一步，短期內會有一定困難，長期來看，各國都將得利，除了白左外沒有人會損失，大家都會得利

歐盟就是一條死路，這條將沉的巨輪早跳早好，今日不跳，十年後也要跳，邁出這一步很艱難，邁不出這一步幾十年後就死定了

如果歐盟退回到僅僅考慮經濟上的合作，僅僅考慮商品和資本的自由流通，而不是什麼都要管，我還是會支持歐盟的，然而現在，我只能支持解體它

白左真是不見棺材不掉淚，歐洲被他們搞成什麼鬼樣子了！

脫歐與獨立運動並不是一碼事，一邊說獨立一邊加入歐盟不是搞笑嗎？

獨立就是為了獲取權力，加入歐盟要上交權力，幹啥呢這是？

歐盟對蘇格蘭和加泰羅尼亞的危害絕對比英國和西班牙大得多，

英國脫歐公投僅剩不到兩周的時間，民調、官方喊話以及機構分析已進入到白熱化階段。

英鎊周五兌其他主要貨幣悉數下跌，因周末民調顯示英國人傾向於脫離歐盟。英國的脫歐公投將於6月23日舉行。

據ORB/INDEPENDENT調查，民調顯示英國45%的受訪者選擇留歐，55%選擇脫歐。

之前ITV民調顯示，受訪者中的45%表示他們將投票支持離開歐盟，支持「留歐」的為41%。

提前祝賀UK脫歐成功。超過10個點差距。留歐派睡不好了。

為了避免匯率差價。各國貨幣都停止了和英鎊自由浮動

學校已經要求未入學留學生提前交齊四年學費了

更新=====

不用說了。這個(Florida奧蘭多恐襲案)事情一出Trump收益不大。UK脫歐派真穩了。十天前還是脫歐：留歐43%：41%。昨天obit poll已經45%：35%。這個案子LGBT。Muslim，移民全部具備。在UK這樣一個大量Muslim，移民。LGBT國家簡直是完全對著UK去的

=======

大喜訊

結果由於這次槍擊案，最新民調脫歐派已經有19%的優勢，而距離公投只有10天了。

黃金「緊盯」英國脫歐公投民調！多頭須警惕「黑天鵝」消失風險

6月15日民調更新

《泰晤士報》14日公布由民調公司YouGov為該報專門進行的最新調查，數據顯示「脫歐」派的支持率上升至46%，而「留歐」派的支持率為39%，11%的受訪者表示「尚未決定」，4%的人表示不會投票。12日，該調查的結果是，「脫歐」與「留歐」支持率分別為43%和42%。

13日，英國《衛報》和民調機構ICM聯合進行的調查結果顯示，去掉「尚未決定」的選項後，「脫歐」派的支持率達到53%，留歐派支持率為47%，兩者差距6%。兩周前，該調查中「脫歐」和「留歐」支持率分別為52%和48%，差距4%。英國《每日電訊報》14日稱，民調機構ORB公司6月13日的調查顯示，在表示「一定會去投票」的受訪者中，「脫歐」派支持率(49%)首次超過「留歐」派(48%)。

評論 ICM和ORB poll比較可信

「BeLEAVE in Britain」，《太陽報》14日頭版的黑底白字異常醒目。該報稱，離開歐盟，英國將重新成為一個讓所有人羨慕嫉妒的強大國家;繼續留在歐盟，英國將面臨「悲涼的」未來，「被一個德國控制的、無休止擴張的聯邦國家吞沒」。

法新社14日稱，《太陽報》由默多克創建的傳媒帝國新聞集團控制，被認為支持的人往往能成為贏家，最著名的案例是，該報在英國1992年大選中明確支持保守黨，在一定程度上影響了選舉結果。《衛報》14日發文評論稱，長期反對歐盟的《太陽報》支持「脫歐」並不令人意外，但其象徵意義重大。《太陽報》曾是卡梅倫競選首相的支持者，現在轉而批評卡梅倫給選民「愚蠢的承諾」，這將給卡梅倫和他的「留歐」派重大打擊。

英國新聞時政周刊《本周》稱，根據民意調查，公眾普遍不信任政治家，選民們都在從朋友、電視新聞、或者其他媒體尋找答案。

看到英國網友說「我現在支持土耳其入盟了」

支持川普的看法，我認為脫離歐盟是符合英國利益的。以下是我以前寫過的一篇分析英國脫歐的小文，是從經濟角度進行的分析。本人英語水平不高，缺乏文采，望各位海涵。

The Reasons Why the United Kingdom Should Leave the European Union

A referendum is being held on 23, June to decide whether Britain should remain within the European Union, or leave the organization and go it alone. Should the United Kingdom leave the European Union? It is a complex topic, different people have different ideas and no one can predict the exact result. The Greatest uncertainty associated with leaving the European Union is that no country has ever done it before. Even though a number of scholars arguing that leaving the EU may cause great loses to the economy of Britain, in my view, leaving is still a better choice.

Before consider the reason of Brexit, we should talk about another important question: Would stay in the EU is good for the UK? The answer is 「yes.」 And if the UK decide to leave, it will face significant risks. People who support that the UK should stay in the EU arguing that many British jobs are directly linked to EU market, and there are lot of trade benefit of the EU』s common market. Moreover, if the United Kingdom decide to leave the European Union, here are potential dangers, I list them below. Whereas, I do not believe that they all can be really dangerous, and if we carefully check these statements below, we will find that they are not so bad for the UK.

1. Trade

The first cost of leaving is the investment and trade setbacks, and thereby affecting the United Kingdom』s employment and economy growth and people』s living standards. For Britain, the European Union is both its main source of foreign direct investment, but also its most important export destinations. About 50% of the UK』s export is direct access to the EU common market, if the UK renounce its membership of the European Union, the European Union』s zero-tariff policy and the free movement of goods and capital in the common market will also shut the door to the Britain.

Furthermore, once the results of the referendum is leaving, the United Kingdom will need to not only re-negotiate trade agreements with the EU, but also re-negotiate trade agreements with more than 60 countries who signed economy and trade agreements with the EU. If so, the United Kingdom may suffer a huge hit on its export and import during the transitional period of negotiations. And consider the difficulty of cooperation with third party countries will lead to decrease on the UK』s investment, reducing its attractiveness to foreign investors and economic competitiveness.

Even though this statement may be true, in my view, these problems can be overcome in the long-run. The only thing Britain need is a trade alliance, not a politic alliance, if the European Union cannot provide such a trade alliance, Britain should create one by itself. In my opinion, the UK should leave the EU but retain strong trading links with nations within the EU via re-negotiate. Actually, the UK have a couple of potential models to choose. In my view, the best way for the UK is to make a series of agreements with every country within the EU on a sector-by-sector basis, like what the Swiss do. Moreover, the UK also could enter into a customs union with the EU, if so, they only have to allow access to the free market in manufactured goods, but not include financial services, just like what Turkish do. We also need to remember that the UK is still a member of the World Trade Organization. Even the UK have to make a clean break with the EU, its membership in the World Trade Organization can still work as a basis for the UK』s international trade.

If the UK could re- negotiate a kind of Free Trade Agreement with other countries successfully, it will set to eliminate trade barrier in trade without regulations from the EU. As a consequence, the UK will build a new and powerful satiation in the international market, like the US or Canada. Even though the UK may suffer harmful lose during the re- negotiate period, it will have more benefit in the long-run.

2. Investment and Finance

If the British decide to retreat the European Union, the second largest cost may impact on the foreign investment, and it will have a significant impact on the financial services industry, one of the pillar industries of the UK.

At present, the proportion of the financial services industry in the United Kingdom』s GDP is about 8%, while the proportion of the labor market in the GDP was 3.4%. As the world"s largest foreign exchange trading destination, more than 40% of transactions in the world occurred in Britain. Britain has the world"s fourth largest bank and the third largest insurance industry, and it is also the international commodity trading center. However, once the UK』s exiting from the European Union become a reality, these advantages will be greatly reduced.

There is no doubt that Britain will face a great loss of investment if it decide to leave the European Union. About 50% of Britain』s exports are direct access to the EU market, if the UK decide to renounce its membership of the EU, the EU』s zero-tariff policy and the free movement of goods, capital are also shut the door to the UK. Moreover, London, one of the financial center in the world, will become less important in the international finance market because there is no strong backing of the EU to attract enough investment. Even though London is a world-class financial center, but its "hinterland" is still in the continental Europe. What is more, many investor see the UK as the gateway to Europe, enterprises set their investment bases in the UK before they enter to other EU- member countries. If the UK leave the common market of the EY, it is cannot be the European』s investment bridgehead anymore.

But in my view, every coin has two sides. I believe that London will always be a world-class financial center, nothing can change its position. Here are my reasons.

Firstly, it is difficult to hire enough high-skill financial employees in a low cost in the continental Europe. As we all know, Finance is a highly competitive industry. Consider the high-level social security in the continental Europe countries, such as France and Germany, make an inefficiency work environment and let the dismissal of employees became more difficult than in the United Kingdom, and the costs in the employees are also more expensive because of their social security system.

The second reason is the time zone. The difference of time zone between the United Kingdom and New York about five hours, while for a country in the continental Europe, for example Germany, the difference of time is six hours. After the financial globalization, the collaboration between the finance centers is very important. Five hours』 difference means that London』s afternoon after lunch have five-hour overlapping with the New York』s morning before the lunch. If there is an emergency need to be addressed, people in London only need to work until 10:00 p.m. then they and people in New York can work together to complete the day. If so, there have many convenient on arranging seminars, transfer, meetings and so on. This advantages is always exist, no matter whether the UK stays in the EU or not.

The third reason is cultural. Do not underestimate the importance of English as the international language of business. While Germany and France have a lot of people who can speak English, but after all, not it is not their mother language. Their employees cannot communicate with New York』s partners as good as British. And British culture and American culture are much closer than Germany and France, which can bring more convenient in the trade.

Furthermore, there are some international center do not have "hinterland", such as Bermuda and Singapore, their advantage is their low-regulation environment, which attract lots of enterprise over the world. If the UK decide to leave the EU, it will not need to obey regulations from EU. If so, the UK can provide a more open and less regulation environment than the EU, and enterprise may want to invest more in the UK and see the UK as a Bermuda in Europe. So the investment may not decrease in the long-run, only decrease in the short-run. As we know in the macroeconomics, the capital is neutral for a country in the long-run. So a loss of investment only in the short-run will not harm the UK』s economy in the long-run.

3. Employment

Leaving from the European Union may harm the UK』s employment. Recently, a study form PricewaterhouseCoopers, which commissioned by Confederation of British Industry, point out that leaving form European Union may make the UK lost more than one million jobs by 2020,and also could lose 100 billion of economic output, equivalent to 5% of the annual total GDP of the UK.

Gordon Brown, the form prime minister of the United Kingdom, wrote to The Guardian, pointed out that British must understand the EU provide more than 3 million jobs, and have 25 000 enterprises, 200 billion pounds of annual exports, and foreign investment of 45 billion pounds, is a great market which it is full of opportunities to Britain. And a lot of scholars believe that the UK』s standard of living, economic growth and employment will be significantly lower if the UK really leave the EU.

But these may not the whole truth. Actually, labor mobility appears limited even within the European. The main barriers to labor mobility is not government』s border controls, but the differences in culture and language. It is also true for the UK, but moreover, the UK is a labor inflow country rather than a labor outflow country, here are some reasons.

Firstly, as one of the most important trading entities in the world, the UK』s economy is stronger than most of the EU-member countries, it is the world"s fifth largest economy, and a world financial center. The UK is also one of the world"s richest, most economically developed countries and have a high living standard. The UK』s environment have a strong attraction, and attract people from all Europe. On the other side, most of British who enjoy a high living standard have less incentive to move to other countries in the EU.

The second reason is language. As we know, English is a world language, which be taught in the schools all over the world. So it is easy to see that many people of other countries in the EU whose mother language is not English, can still speak a good English. They can easily find jobs in the UK since the fact that they already have enough English skill. But for British, most of them cannot speak any foreign language, which became a significant barrier for them to work oversea.

As those points we discussed above, we can see if the UK』s government has right to control its border again, they can easily impose restrictions on the immigrant policy, then stop the foreigner labor to compete domestic work opportunities with British citizens. If so, it will domestic work opportunities to local people. Furthermore, even though the UK citizen may lose some work opportunities in the EU, the number will be less than the increasing jobs inside the UK.

After discussed all potential disadvantages above, now we know that all of these potential disadvantages may not as dangerous as people believe, and most of them will only occur in the short-run. Now we can start to consider the potential advantages if the UK leaves the European Union.

1. Border control and work opportunities

Border control will return back to the UK government』s hand. As long as the UK still in the EU, any attempt by the Government to control immigration in to the UK is futile. After leaving the EU, the UK government can make a new immigration policy, which can keep attracting high-skill employees around world and shut the door to low-skill workers. It can provide more work opportunities to UK』s local citizens, as I just mentioned above. These new work opportunities will improve citizen income and living standard, then help to develop local economy.

2. Membership fee saving

The UK will make a large membership fee saving. As we all know, the EU charges a membership fee from its membership country, just like every international organization do. This cost is a large amount of money, around 55 million pounds per day. If this cost can be saved, the UK』s government can reduce taxes, which can help to increase people』s income and promote consumption, then assist to develop the UK』s economy, as we already mentioned before.

3. Regulation

The UK will get rid of regulations from the EU. The only thing the UK really needs is free trade, not include regulations which are not always fit Britain』s interest. Actually, some of products of the UK will have more international competitiveness. What is more, the UK will provide a less regulated environment for enterprises, then the UK will attract more oversea investment from foreign enterprises.

4. Optimum currency area

Europe is not an optimum currency area. According economists』 research, from both the price and the quantity evidence to date, it is unlikely that the single currency and Single European Act reforms has yet turned the euro into an optimum currency area. Furthermore, as we already discussed above, and many statistics to prove that labor mobility is limited both between countries of the EU and within these countries.

In addition, there are three additional considerations. Firstly, because EU members have very different structures, they also have different export mixes and different vulnerabilities to identical economic disturbances. Secondly, fiscal federalism is quite limited in the EU. Because there is no substantial centralized fiscal capacity, country-specific shocks are not offset by any inflows of budgetary resources form currency-union partners. Third, the Maastricht Treaty left virtually all powers at the national level, giving the Eurosystem no explicit authority to oversee financial markets. So there is no useful financial stability policy in the EU.

Because all these problems, Europe cannot be an optimum currency area, which means that the Europe does not suit for a fixed exchange rate area, according the GG-LL model. As we know, even though the UK does not join the Euro area, the exchange rate of pound follow the Euro. Since Europe is not an optimum currency area, this situation is causing loss on the UK』s economy.

In my view, the UK exit from the EU, the exchange rate of pound would not need to link to the Euro, then the UK can accept floating exchange rate, which can avoid such a loss in the fixed exchange rate area, what is more, will also prevent the UK from being linked financial crises to the EU.

謝邀。

這個問題的起源要看英美霸權的交接和延續。

大不列顛的衰落的原因不是二戰中的損失（一戰損失更大），而是為了打贏二戰，被迫跟美國簽訂了《大西洋憲章》。

教科書一直說這是一個反法西斯的政治格局宣言以及戰後政治的規劃。

其實基本扯淡。

實際上是大英帝國放棄了全球英屬領地的貿易壁壘，放棄重商主義，換取美國對二戰的介入。

直白一點說，有個地主大戶，手下一堆佃農和僱工，規定手下人只能互相之間買東西，買別人東西要交一度稅，所以地主沒必要改進生產效率，也能賺大錢。

然後出現了一土匪，打的丫灰頭土臉，鬧著重新分地，為了讓隔壁表哥幫著打土匪，所以跟表哥說以後我不管手底下人買啥，都不收稅了。土匪打死了，地主家也沒餘糧了。

更耐人尋味的是土匪是表哥武裝起來的。

所以英國喪失了霸權，在自由貿易的光輝下，老美接棒，充足的勞動力和高效生產讓老美牛逼哄哄了很多年，然後，老美要開始搞壁壘了，因為實業干不過中國人了。。。。歷史一直在循環。

英法德搞得這個歐盟，實際上是一個半邦聯形式的政治組織，介於聯邦國家和部落聯盟之間，能苦幹累干各種貿易順差的德國佔便宜，其他混日子國家吃虧。英法在對歐盟的經濟上付出大於收穫，然後還有南歐等一堆高福利豬隊友。

但在政治上，這個聯盟的影響力遠遠大於阿盟那種阿斗。所以脫歐與留歐的分歧在於：

英國是否要繼續賠錢來獲得歐盟的政治影響，在未來歐洲整個為一個國家時成為主導因素。從而借屍還魂，使不列顛重新成為超級大國。

其實明白人都判斷歐洲已經不可能成為超級大國，甚至連牽制中美的作用也只在經濟層面。從中美的角度，是希望歐洲維持現狀或分裂的。區別是，美國希望英法德整合歐洲的資源，變成一個穩定且不威脅美國霸權的跟班，而中國直接希望跳過歐盟進行政治影響，並利用歐盟三強之間的利益矛盾進行分化。

卡中堂希望留歐證明他是個清醒的有長遠見識的對維持不列顛世界強國地位抱有幻想的理想主義愛國者。

跟李中堂差不多吧。

川普支持的原因我想更多的是實用主義，就算川普是英國首相，也會認為在自己不夠強大之前，進行戰略收縮並在大國間搖擺以獲取利益是最重要的，說白一些，商人出身的政治家可以不要臉，只要在實際上對國家好，都可以干。而理想主義者不行。

這也是川普可貴的地方。

之前小澤一郎也是這樣的人，可惜日本人選首相先要選「好人」。

看這三十年的政治格局。總體感覺還是天佑中華。

Trump和英國脫歐派都有孤立主義的傾向，認為自己國家承擔太多不必要的義務，為別的小國付出太多，收穫卻無幾，走到一起只是時間上的問題。

特朗普現在口頭上支持英國脫歐不重要，重要的是他上台後如何處理與歐洲傳統中右翼、新興極右翼的關係，還有是否默認歐盟解體(UK一旦退歐，歐盟就相當於解散)

1、猴年馬月果然會出大事。

2、上半年英國脫歐，下半年特朗普當選美國總統，上下半年的氣質才匹配。

3、藍領的民主擊敗了白領的民主，民主其實很粗暴。

4、英國脫歐了，接下來就該蘇格蘭脫英了。

5、盛夏，股市入冬。

謝邀！我支持英國退出歐盟，一直支持！（很多時候，理想只能當作理想，一定要強行把它變為現實的話，代價太大了。）這個和老唐沒關係，在他競選之前，我就這個觀點。英國退出歐盟不是最近才出現的，已經僵持很長時間了。（而且我也支持美國退出聯合國！）

題外話，英國，起碼是以前的英國，是最「睿智」的大國，愚蠢的一戰毀掉了英國，毀掉了整個歐洲，某種意義上也毀了這個世界，最後把這個世界拱手送給美蘇。美國某種程度上就像那個睡涼炕的小夥子，憑著一身火力，橫衝直撞，很多時候太過幼稚，太過善良。如果當時英國慢一些衰敗，能夠有實力和美國共同（牽制美國）維護世界秩序，可能是最好的一種選項。

特朗普競選的是美國總統，他不需要為英國人負責。英國脫離歐盟是風險很高，成本更高的事情。孤立主義在美國行得通在英國不一定，因為美國為了『世界和平』付出巨大，而英國卻在和歐盟巨大的貿易逆差中搭了順風車，而且英國不是申根區，受歐洲非法移民的影響較小，偷渡分子主要在加萊用卡車運人，很容易被海關查，而且想要偷渡去英國的都是英國當年非洲殖民地說英語的，某種意義上說法國還替英國擋下來了屎。。。

英國綠化情況和歐盟比有過之而無不及，在英國你能見到更多穿戴Burqa（蒙臉）的穆斯林。英國整體意識形態也和歐洲非常接近，工會強大，社會福利該有的一個都不少。事實上如果不是因為索羅斯在黑色星期三狙擊了英鎊，導致英鎊退出歐洲匯率機制，英國很可能已經加入了歐元區。英國和周圍歐洲國家的互動，貿易早就遠遠超過美國，和歐洲58%，和美國11%，大量的英國人在歐洲國家工作，也有大量的歐洲人在英國工作，退出歐盟將導致英國的人工成本，生產成本都大幅上升。

再補充一點數據，因為有人質疑英國和歐盟之間的貿易量，還有人說英國為歐盟擦了屁股：

英國向歐盟出口占出口58%，其中德國9.8%，荷蘭7.2%，瑞士7.1%，法國5.7%，相比美國11%，英國從歐盟進口佔63%，其中德國15%，荷蘭7.6%，法國6.3%，美國只有6.7%。被迫救助希臘大部分的資金都是德法出的，比如第一輪 €80bn救助資金里德國出了€22.4bn，佔28%，法國出了€16.8bn，佔21%，英國貌似沒有參與救助計劃，歐盟問他要￡1bn他沒有出。

總之特朗普說了一句可以吸引眼球，符合他孤立主義哲學，卻會傷害英國的話。但是誰在乎呢，英國人既不是美國人，也不是中國人。

如果我是美國人，我就反對英國推出歐盟。

畢竟千年攪屎棍，歐盟內多一個說的上話，並且和美國同文同種的大國，歐盟捏咕到一塊兒的可能性就越小。

反過來，英國退出歐盟，歐洲剩下什麼？德法意的歐洲核心，沒有英國制衡，法國成為唯一的核武國家，德國成為經濟中心，歐盟整合的可能性更大，一個統一的歐洲不符合美國利益。

但我們是中國人，我們需要團結一切可團結力量對給美國挖坑，也許英國退出歐盟後，我們可以聯合新歐盟？

反正只出一張嘴。這不又上頭條了嗎？免費廣告多好。絕大多數美國人根本不關心這個。可能在英國有一定影響，幫反退歐派多少拉一些票。

從歷史上看，一個統一的大陸是不利於島國的利益的，

英國要是真想加入歐盟，幹嘛不使用共同貨幣歐元，

一點淺見，

UK對歐盟本來就沒安好心，歷史上一直是大陸平衡政策，讓德法互撕。UK本身和德國和法國的歷史仇怨比中日還深。

看看UK和美國聯手，把歐元整的多慘，歐洲大陸國家財富蒸發了多少。

所以，一點不奇怪。UK經濟本身和歐盟捆綁不大，英鎊是硬通貨。

英國脫歐本身增加了全球經濟的不確定性，減緩了歐洲一體化的進程。英國為一體化的歐洲所做有限，它將獨立解決自身未來幾年的經濟苦果，需要美國的持續支持。反觀Trump，並未對此做出準備，他近期需要先贏下總統選舉。而且，他絕不會為布希家族和布萊爾政府在中東地區戰爭罪行買單，他認為美國的責任理應縮小，那不過是Trump這麼認為，他以為布希和他是兩個總統，但在美國之外的世界，他們兩一樣，都是美國總統，他這種到處送移民的路數，並不會讓美國強大，只會加劇這個世界對於美國的仇恨。至少他對英國脫歐叫喚得如此之歡，受其挑釁的歐盟記得。

在經濟發展與人的問題上做出抉擇並不難，除非已經被洗腦成了聖母婊。

對中東難民的援助就是理所應當，對歐盟的就成了累贅。

退歐派領導現在開始說「大家不要期望過高，脫歐不能完全解決問題」，大量的投票者開始後悔「我們究竟做了什麼」。所以，有些事情，無論對現行制度怎樣失望，也不要去相信一些投機者鼓吹的看似極簡的思路：脫歐就能解決穆斯林問題！修長城就能減少犯罪！投錢給p2p就能發達！

這些都是一樣一樣的（也包括川普）所有能號稱一鍵解決問題，給出超越現有政治經濟框架解決思路的人，最後只能帶來巨大的失望。只是試圖越過複雜的現實，利用人性的弱點。

在任何決定之前，呼喚想一想我們愛的世界究竟是什麼樣子的，想一想我們的過去，我們的未來。呼喚對問題的複雜思考和審慎的精神。

我是真的很喜歡漸進主義和改良主義，審慎精神和保守風範的那個英國呀。（客串公知完畢）

不管是什麼國家/地區，不管是什麼形式的分裂，美國什麼時候不支持過？

美國和英國面臨的一個共同問題就是國力已經有點承受不起目前負擔的義務了。

trump和英國的脫歐派，在解決這一方面問題的思路是一致的，就是要擺脫一些在他們看來無益的負擔，關起門來自己過小日子。英國有長期的光榮孤立傳統，美國在二戰前也長期堅持孤立主義。所以trump說這個話毫不意外。

看熱鬧的不怕事大