What Is Reuters Reporting?

If you read the Reuters.com website with regards to Britain opting out of the treaty to save the euro they are basically saying that it is a bad thing. Actually they said:

"It may be remembered as the day Europe lost patience with Britain, as most of the continent threw its lot in with EU founding members France and Germany and committed to binding their economies ever more tightly."

Europe lost patience with Britain? I seem to remember that every other news source reported it as David Cameron was unable to secure certain rights for the British financial market. Which surprisingly, as the British Prime Minister is what the guy is meant to do.

The treaty referendum is all about saving the euro - something Britain never opted in for - so why should British taxpayers have to bail out the countries that were so eager to give up their own currency for the euro? Plans for getting Canada, Mexico, and the United States on a single currency have been and gone. Why? Because Canada and the United States do not want to support Mexico. A harsh reality but it is why a single currency has never happened.

And while Reuters may be a U.S. based operation it should really read the proposed referendum before it starts reporting on the proceedings. The proposals are going to effect the global stock markets not just Europe. David Cameron wanted to make sure taxes were not going to be put on financial stock market transactions. So, all the big banks in the U.S. that hold euro zone bonds are about to get a new tax on top of the existing taxes. Which is either a loss of profit; or a charge that will be passed on to customers.

Reuters also stated: "Britain conducts more than half of its trade within the EU and could suffer on a broad range of financial regulation issues if the other countries decided to move forward as 26."

Really? More than half? Where did that figure come from?  Because according to all other sources Britain, at most trades 40% within the EU.

What Reuters has totally missed here is that Britain does not need the European Union. Britain paid 18 Billion into the European Union and got 10 Billion out of it in 2010. So if Britain is out of the European Union they automatically save 8 Billion a year.

And the claim that the European Union will make it difficult for Britain is ludicrous. With Britain out of the European Union if the European Union was to impose some harsh regulations Britain would retaliate I am sure.

Let us not forget who is leading this change - Germany and France. Two countries whose people didn't even want the euro but whose governments forced it upon them. And in these economic times it should be each country looking out for itself first and helping others second. Greece, Italy, and Spain all have the euro so when they go down the toilet the euro goes down the toilet which effects the other countries that have the euro; Britain is not one of them.

Yes Britain would be affected by withdrawing from the European Union but at the same time ask anyone living in Britain if they want to be in the Union; and the vast majority will tell you they don't. Why? Because European Union rules have taken away the fact that Britain rules Britain.

And if Germany and France want to cause issues because as a country Britain decides not to bankroll the euro anymore Britain has a few tricks up their sleeves too. First we can ask all people from Europe to apply for visas to travel to Britain. That way Britain would halve the immigrants and refugees entering Britain. How about an import tax on all European Union countries? Oh yeah, Reuters forgot to mention how much Britain buys from other European countries.

David Cameron made the right decision for Britain which was a nice change from the old days of Tony Blair kissing the ass of Europe just to turn round and get nothing for it. Britain as country was able to trade globally with every corner of the world before the European Union and can do so again if that is what happens.

And as a question to Reuters: Would you prefer President Obama to make decisions based on US needs or the needs of Canada and Mexico? Because you are trying to defend the second option when most Americans would pick the first option.

Maybe the European Union has just run its course. It wasn't exactly popular when it started. And to be honest last time the French laid down for the Germans it wasn't exactly that good for France. Except this time there may be nobody to bail them out of their troubles.