Advertisement

Newsletter: Opinion: Did ‘Brexit’ voters just walk Britain off a cliff?

Share

Happy Saturday, everyone. This is Matthew Fleischer, digital editor of The Times’ Opinion section, filling in for Paul Thornton.

Notice your 401(k) take a precipitous dip overnight? You are not alone. We can all thank Britain for voting Thursday to “Brexit” the European Union — a decision that is wreaking havoc on financial markets, and likely will for some time.

Whatever financial unease we’re feeling at the moment, however, is nothing compared with the toll the Brits just willed upon themselves. In a timely op-ed, Brian Klaas and Marcel Dirsus dissect the financial carnage that comes with roughly a sixth of the European Union economy deciding to secede, and the dangerous motivations behind such an obviously self-injurious move — motivations that are uncomfortably familiar here on this side of the pond.

We find ourselves in a moment of global fear. The democratic identities of Britain and the United States are under threat — not from immigrants or even changing values, but from nationalists and xenophobes exploiting citizens' darkest worries with populist projects, including Donald Trump’s campaign for the U.S. presidency and Brexit. To many voters, the world is a scary place. Terrorists seem to lurk everywhere. Uncertainty surrounds us. Change is rapid and some aren't keeping up. Unsurprisingly, politicians of many stripes are capitalizing on our fears to rally voters against trade, immigration and international cooperation.

The costs will be substantial. Economists, business leaders and scholars almost universally agree that Britain's retreat from the EU is a self-inflicted economic blunder. Recessions are contagious, and given London’s place as a global financial hub, Brexit will give Britain a particularly virulent cough. The pound’s value will likely tumble. The British treasury estimates that the nation’s households each stand to lose an average of £4,300, or about $7,000. And yet, tens of millions of voters were willing to take that hit.

» Click here to read more.

It’s no ‘Brexit’ in terms of contentiousness, but the rhetoric surrounding Metro’s plan to install a permanent sales tax on Los Angeles County residents for transportation projects is heating up. Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti personally went to bat for the tax in an op-ed. His rationale: Once you build a public mass transit system, you have to maintain it. L.A. Times

The Times editorial board also supports the tax — though not without reservations. “A time-limited tax,” it argues, “forces Metro and its political leaders to include the public in its decision making process, lay out its goals and be more judicious with taxpayer monies.” L.A. Times

Supreme Court Justice Sonya Sotomayor’s scathing dissent in Utah vs. Strieff, a 4th Amendment case about police searches, was a wake-up call for columnist Meghan Daum. “I have generally operated on the notion that if you're law-abiding, the police are nothing to be afraid of,” she writes. “I’m an NPR-listening, Obama-loving, supposedly enlightened liberal who’s supposed to think beyond that.” L.A. Times

Donald Trump's campaign doesn't have enough money for a three-bedroom home in Santa Monica, let alone a presidential race. In contrast, Hillary Clinton’s campaign had more than $42 million in cash on hand and raised $16 million more than Trump in May alone. That said, don’t dance on the Donald’s grave yet. L.A. Times

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook.

Advertisement