代写论文-检讨欧盟内部的地区差异。欧盟的区域一体化不是以共同发展、共同繁荣为目的的一体化。相反，欧盟完全相信放松对市场、劳动力和资本的管制，以及加快内部企业运转的举措，这些企业在其最自由的事务模式下，最终会导致不平等。因此，社会凝聚力在资本家中缺乏议程，他们往往会变得更富有，为国家贡献更高的GDP。欧盟为加快特定地区或城市发展而采取的集群发展战略让位于欧盟内部的不平衡发展(Ketels, Lindqvist和Solvell, 2008)。Boldrin和Canova(2001)注意到，20世纪80年代正在缩小的地区差异在90年代再次出现。有关欧盟内部曾存在地区平等的说法是错误的，毫无根据。
The issues of cohesion policy of the EU lie in its unanimous imposition of equal laws and taxes on the members. When a financial unstable nation, such as Spain or Greece, are made to follow the same rules as Germany, France and the UK, the disparities instead of reducing are strengthened to an extent that becomes severely difficult to reduce. As a result of the economic pre-conditions of UK, France, Germany, their GDP rose significantly after joining the EU, as they received access to new markets, but the weaker ones were fighting financial instability, resulting from the mixture of EU and national policies (Ezcurra and Pascual, 2007).
The following chart shows the GDP disparities among the member states of EU. There is a sharp difference between the Nordic countries, the UK and eastern EU nations. This belies the fact that EU was ever and shall, in the future, ever be capable of establishing economic equality among its members.
To penetrate and prove the inequality further, the below chart shows the growing divide in unemployment rates which across EU nations. The political, social, and economic ramifications are more harmful than equalising.
The highest to lowest unemployment ratio has risen from 1:3 in 2007 to 1:5 in 2017 (Courteille-Mulder, 2017), indicating a growing imbalance between nations in terms of rights and opportunities of equal employment. In other regions, Bratislava, a region revered as the sixth wealthiest region in the EU is not so, because the conditions and factors that describe such status are flawed and different from what they are used for other nations. Thus, the process or the methodology of declaring wealthy and less wealthy nations itself is questionable. The Bratislava mayor argues that due to such flawed methods of statistical analysis, the EU does not give as much funds as necessary, because the funds to be drawn depends on the economic performance of individual nations (Liptakova, 2017). Notwithstanding EU’s intention, such methods cultivate a culture of dissociation and disintegration among the citizens.
The biggest blow to the EU is the leaving of Britain from the bloc officially when the June 2016 referendum was announced. The reasons behind the “Leave” votes were due to the growing rift between UK and EU’s policy worldviews which were significantly contradictory. UK’s leadership felt that it would do much better if left alone and freed from EU obligations (Blockmans, 2016). Such misalignment of policy views comes when one nation, such as UK, becomes more powerful in the bloc and sees itself as a victim of being fathering other nations, when they don’t contribute substantially.
As regards to the structural funds plan of the EU, the region that falls below the average per capital income per person is 75% of the entire EU (Ertur and Koch, 2006). In proportion to the new accessions undertaken by EU, inequalities shall rise and not achieve a desired state of benchmark. It is noticed that the EU’s belief of pulling in more members to strengthen the bloc is actually fuelling more inequalities, because the new nations are already below the average per capital income per person of EU. Adding more members must not come at the expense of the already recovering weaker nations that are asked to wait longer for being eligible to break even or progress as per the objectives.