Immigration for economic reasons

[audiotech]

No i am not against Jobs going to India etc its just i want those Jobs to be tied to better pay and conditions. I am not arguing for Isolating the UK but i am arguing against the free market principles of economic migration.

In Indian call centres most of those who are employed there are graduates and earn the equivalent of a Doctor in that country.

 

[tbaldwin]

In Indian call centres most of those who are employed there are graduates and earn the equivalent of a Doctor in that country.

True enough but that does not mean that companies could not afford to pay them more if pressurised too.

 

[audiotech]

I think that Migration will always be difficult,its no solution to the problems of inequality and makes matters worse.
Any measures to stop the flow of Economic migrants that are effective could be described as Draconian but the effects of having no measures would be disastrous and lead to unimagined misery.

What measures do you suggest that are not already in place?

 

[audiotech]

True enough but that does not mean that companies could not afford to pay them more if pressurised too.

Then wouldn't the companies would go elsewhere?

 

[tbaldwin]

Good question.. A Bloody difficult one.....

I reckon that to start with we need to state clearly that taking Doctors and Nurses from Africa etc is totally wrong that more money should be spent on encouraging people in the UK into the NHS etc.
Massive reform of education and the benefits system.....

We should stop so many poles etc working in the UK....

Oh my god this is difficult.
And to be honest that is partly my point difficult decisions have to be made some really unpopular but saying Open Borders is really such a moronic load of shit and would lead to a Humanitarian Disaster.

 

[tbaldwin]

Then wouldn't the companies would go elsewhere?

I think the thing is too make sure that Consumer power plays a part that companies that dont sign up to International Labour rules are seen in the same way as Aparthied South Africa was.
At the moment Cpaital is free to go whereever it can make the largest profits just as im against the free flow of Labour,im also against the free flow of unregualted capital.

 

[audiotech]

Good question.. A Bloody difficult one.....

I reckon that to start with we need to state clearly that taking Doctors and Nurses from Africa etc is totally wrong that more money should be spent on encouraging people in the UK into the NHS etc.
Massive reform of education and the benefits system.....

These things have already happened 30,000 nurses, more Doctors, teachers etc. Now the benefit system? I notice no detail?

We should stop so many poles etc working in the UK....
Oh my god this is difficult.
And to be honest that is partly my point difficult decisions have to be made some really unpopular but saying Open Borders is really such a moronic load of shit and would lead to a Humanitarian Disaster.

It is difficult (and reactionary btw), and you fail to answer the question and return to the easy option of just slagging off the open borders argument, which is really not good enough.

 

[audiotech]

I think the thing is too make sure that Consumer power plays a part that companies that dont sign up to International Labour rules are seen in the same way as Aparthied South Africa was.
At the moment Cpaital is free to go whereever it can make the largest profits just as im against the free flow of Labour,im also against the free flow of unregualted capital.

A couple of "free" things you're against.

I'm off out now, I'll try and get back to this.

 

[tbaldwin]

It is difficult (and reactionary btw), and you fail to answer the question and return to the easy option of just slagging off the open borders argument, which is really not good enough.

Just cos its the easy option doesnt neccesarilly mean its wrong....
Its not reactionary in my opinion to slag off shite like open borders.

The answers on how you stop Economic migration are basically going to come down to realistic Carrott and Stick or Unrealistic all Carrott and no stick.

Now a lot of people will insist that any stick is bad but what is there alternative? what would they do if they were in charge?

 

[Crazy_diamond]

Good question.. A Bloody difficult one.....

I reckon that to start with we need to state clearly that taking Doctors and Nurses from Africa etc is totally wrong that more money should be spent on encouraging people in the UK into the NHS etc.
Massive reform of education and the benefits system.....

What are you saying here? You talk of "taking Doctors" as if they are press ganged or doing it against their will.

Can you tell me what RIGHT you have to deign these people from improving their lives and the lives of their families?

I think before you come out with sound bites like "I reckon that to start with we need to state clearly that taking Doctors and Nurses from Africa etc is totally wrong" you should maybe speak with a few Doctors and nurses that have come here from the developing world, from the people I know personally I can tell you many plan to stay in the UK for between 3 and 5 years and take the skills back to their own country.

Britain is no longer an empire and people living here need to remember that, what right have you to determine the future of people, do you have evidence that the Doctors and nurses coming to the UK are having a real detrimental effect on where they are leaving? Are you aware of the compensation paid by the British Government to the countries that they recruit from?

I always here this argument put forward about “us stealing Doctors and Nurses” but when you speak to the individuals conerned you tend to get a very different side of the argument.

 

[tbaldwin]

CD, Ive spoken to loads of Doctors and Nurses from Asia and Africa.
As usual im attacked for my ignorance by people making tired and lazy assumptions.

Loads of nurses i have spoken too have no intention to go back to the Phillipines etc some of them see the UK as a stepping stone to the US where they can get more money.

The incredibly silly comment of "What right do you have to deign these people from improving their lives" is shallow and pathetic.
I am commenting on what i think could or should be government policy. What right do you have to a different opinion....... What a load of infantile shite.

I am arguing that governments should act in the interests of the majority..
It kind of goes with the idea of Democracy and Socialism.
If your arguing that the rights of a few individuals to make as much money as they can overrides this fair enough. Lots of people do hold those Tory views but to say that anyone who doesnt has no right too is just Fascistic shit.

 

[audiotech]

Just cos its the easy option doesnt neccesarilly mean its wrong....
Its not reactionary in my opinion to slag off shite like open borders.

Did you slag off East German workers when they knocked down the Berlin wall and made it an open border?

The answers on how you stop Economic migration are basically going to come down to realistic Carrott and Stick or Unrealistic all Carrott and no stick. Now a lot of people will insist that any stick is bad but what is there alternative? what would they do if they were in charge?

Enough already with the Bugs Bunny analogy. Before demanding of others, why not give us your magic formula Brucie (I'm in charge)?

 

[blamblam]

But what about the people who object to a free for all immigration policy on the grounds of CLASS?

Why should the working class of the UK suffer wage cuts, worse working conditions, and pressure on local school places, pressure on local housing, local healthcare, public transport and the like?

All the above are in part as a consequence of mass immigration.

What benefit has the working class received from mass immigration?

Er, because the immigrants who have fled shitholes are working class as well?

You should extend your argument about organising with workers in the third world to improve their conditions in their original countries to those workers when they arrive here as well. If they were well-organised with native workers they wouldn't take low-wage jobs which bring other people's wages down.

 

[snorbury]

i'm an Internationalist and a Socialist.

international socialism sounds well dodgy

 

[Fong]

Since the British have probably sent more emigrants abroad than any other country in the world, taking over entire continents, slaughtering and dispossessing the original inhabitants and replacing them with their offspring, it seems more than a little mean-spirited to complain about a few migrants coming in the other direction!

I don't think truly open borders is something we'll see in our lifetimes, but it's not a bad ideal to be working towards.

Bit of a one sided view isn't it?

I mean, hasn't England and Britain as a whole been a hotbed of immigration from Europe through-out most of its history? Wasn't we invaded and taken over, wasn't our early Kings in fact French?

This whole idea that somehow, we only count the 200 years from the industrial revolution and pretend that somehow we are the only ones guilty of mass emigration is pretty sad to see.

So should all us English folk go emigrate to france and demand something because they came here 400 years ago, or maybe the Netherlands they were quite good at invading, or perhaps Germany, I mean their bloodline remains in our Royal family today.

Yes lets all rush into Germany and DEMAND something because 600 years ago they turned up here!!

Twatish argument.

Besides which, much as the English colonial years were harsh and caused much suffering they also brought about much improvement in many of the countries that we 'visited' just like much improvement was brought to this country by the Romans, oh nearly forgot about them, lets go to Italy and demand something too they were here nearly a thousand years ago, so clearly we DESERVE something from Italy now!!

Stupid stupid argument that only bothers to look at the last 200 years of history and ignores any positives in favour of harping on about the negatives.

Open borders is a ridiculous idea that would create poverty the world over, we are not capable as an industrial nation right now of housing the people that are already here, but somehow when 5, 10, 15 million people turn up because they think they will get something better here, things will improve?

We shouldn't be talking about open borders as a way to improve the lot of the worlds poorest people, we should be talking about improving conditions in their countries so that they don't feel the need to emigrate for a better life.

 

[spring-peeper]

so you're calling for some form of economic isolationism, maybe that would be good, but with global trade the way it is, it's never going to happen. There will always be Murdoch's and Mumbai call centres, the British working classes can not be protected, they must find a new way.

All businesses will look to lower the cost of their products by decreasing the wages. The jobs will always shift to the places with the lower cost of living.

In the new area, the workers will start to have more disposible income and the economy will start to grow. The workers that lost their jobs will suddenly have less disposible income and their economy starts to slow.

It isn't really necessary for the jobs to leave the country for this to happen. Around here it happens all the time. A large company relocates to somewhere more profitable and communities crumble.

It's not really about protecting your "British working classes", it's about marketing yourselves.

If you are competing against "Murdoch's and Mumbai call centres", then why is your community better?

 

[audiotech]

Open borders is a ridiculous idea that would create poverty the world over, we are not capable as an industrial nation right now of housing the people that are already here, but somehow when 5, 10, 15 million people turn up because they think they will get something better here, things will improve?

5, 10, 15 million? Bit of an exaggeration there Fong. Most people wish to stay in their own country to make a better life with their families and friends.

Figure it out, 0.17% was the proportion of people who came to Britain last year who ended up staying permanently.

There are all sorts of wild claims made that thousands of migrants who are on the brink of swamping the country. The facts tell a different story:

Around a quarter, 23 percent, of those classified as migrants into Britain between 1998 and 2002 were Britons returning from abroad according to the Office for National Statistics. 120,115 people were granted permits to work in Britain in 2002. The largest number, 27 percent, came from the Americas. The number coming from European countries was just 12 percent.

Immigration into Britain was 10 percent lower in 2002 than it was in 2001. Some 244,000 people entered Britain, while some 91,000 left, leaving a net gain of 153,000. 90 million people pass through Britain every year.

One in every 35 people in the world is a cross-country migrant. Of the world's 6.3 billion population in 2002, 175 million were living in a different country from the one they were born in.

There is room for legal migration of all kinds - with public assent, effectively policed borders and rules people trust. But more immigration must be accompanied by a tough inspectorate to protect all workers' rights, and a living wage as the minimum for all. Employers may moan about "red tape" and "regulation", but the government's description of Britain as the best place for global employers gives the game away. Those at the extreme end of the UK's "less regulated" workforce, highlights that the UK is still a low-wage, low-tax, low-employee protection economy. Is it any wonder then that people fear immigration when they see that it is used as a way to keep pay down.

 

[Fong]

5, 10, 15 million? Bit of an exaggeration there Fong. Most people wish to stay in their own country to make a better life with their families and friends.

Figure it out, 0.17% was the proportion of people who came to Britain last year who ended up staying permanently.

Well you can hardly quote statistics of today and say they mean anything in an open border debate. We don't have an open border and people know that, and few are willing to take the risk of dragging their family here and then being sent home again because they are an economic migrant, few are willing to go through the process of getting a visa and applying to become a citizen and all that this entails both time and cost wise.

If we had an open border policy, then I think we would see an increase in immigration to this country.

I do agree about keeping wages down through the use of cheap workers from abroad, but it is the same thing in reverse when Peugot move their factory to the home of the cheap workers and pay them a pittance.

I do believe tho that in an open borders situation all bets are off and no one, including myself, can really predict just what immigration/emigration there would be.

 

[Ryazan]

You're talking about the policy of allowing only skilled workers into the UK, I'm suggesting no such criteria. Let the poorest in the world into the UK and the disgruntled British who believe they are poor and hard done by can stop feeling sorry for themselves. I'm sick of hearing stories of immigrants dying for a chance of a better life and feel that open borders are the only option if we want to reduce xenophobia and racism. The UK hasn't always needed an immigration policy and those who believe we need one now are unable to come up with a workable one

No poor people exist in Britain? Are you thick?

 

[Ryazan]

look at the fat cats in their country homes exploiting the poor people in the poor countries, maybe the neo liberal system would grind to a halt if we allowed free movement, the current immigration policy is never going to stop it. What an insult to someone wanting to explore their world it is to say "sorry mate you can't come here, they need you back home", next you'll be suggesting a drop in UK taxes to stop the brain drain, oh no, that was Thatcher

Being an unskilled working class person, I would rather show solidarity with unskilled immigrant labourers for better working and living conditions, than with middle class hand-wringers who seek no wider reforms within society, except to allow a more wider exploitation of working class people, possible through lower waged work. There are ways of combating the negative affects of immigration, the people who big companies and smaller middle class businesses need to work for them. That is by forming stronger ways of unionisation. Whether you are indigenous or immigrant labour, the working class gets screwed, but one seems to be favoured over the other by some (as they have more of an added value in perceived morality stakes by the middle class). There is a habit of blaming the working class in this country for their poverty, and to discredit it, by talking of the poverty of immigrant workers and how they deserve more, but without really seeing anything through a class analysis, or often mistaking cause for effect, it seems to be deserving of being exploited more. Nothing about collectively improving their lives mind. just in terms of getting those good little obedient savages to do more work, for less pay, and to not complain while pouring my coffee. I know which side of the barricades I'll be on. And it won't be with liberal middle class people. It will be with immigrants and other British, low paid and unskilled workers.

It's a (working) class thing.

 

[spring-peeper]

I have a quick question - does the UK government provide minimum wage and safety legislation to protect workers?

 

[Ryazan]

For immigrant workers?

 

[Crazy_diamond]

CD, Ive spoken to loads of Doctors and Nurses from Asia and Africa.
As usual im attacked for my ignorance by people making tired and lazy assumptions.

Loads of nurses i have spoken too have no intention to go back to the Phillipines etc some of them see the UK as a stepping stone to the US where they can get more money.

The incredibly silly comment of "What right do you have to deign these people from improving their lives" is shallow and pathetic.
I am commenting on what i think could or should be government policy. What right do you have to a different opinion....... What a load of infantile shite.

I am arguing that governments should act in the interests of the majority..
It kind of goes with the idea of Democracy and Socialism.
If your arguing that the rights of a few individuals to make as much money as they can overrides this fair enough. Lots of people do hold those Tory views but to say that anyone who doesnt has no right too is just Fascistic shit.

And the point that they are not used in their own county? Who the fuck do you think you are? what business is it of yours if a doctor or nurse decides to better themselves and the prospects for their family by deigning them the right to work wherever they want to?

From our own comments it is clear you don’t know what you are talking about, you claim to be arguing against Government policy, yet your own words show you haven’t got a clue what that Government policy is! What does this mean? “I am arguing that governments should act in the interests of the majority” what Majority? I can only assume you are talking about a majority of the people of their own country and if their country has a lack of recourses in the area f Doctors and Nurses what do they do? The same a they do with any recourses they are short of they buy I more and that is what they have done to look after the majority of their people and you are saying that is wrong? It is a contradiction!

What about the choice of the individual doesn’t your form of “Democracy and Socialism” take that into account?

 

[spring-peeper]

For immigrant workers?

I'm going to assume that this is in response to my question, apologies if it wasn't.

Just in general, does you government have any protection/guidelines that protect the workers over there? It's more of a curiousity, trying to follow the thread type of question.

 

[Crazy_diamond]

Er, because the immigrants who have fled shitholes are working class as well?

You should extend your argument about organising with workers in the third world to improve their conditions in their original countries to those workers when they arrive here as well. If they were well-organised with native workers they wouldn't take low-wage jobs which bring other people's wages down.

If you read ALL my posts on this thread you'll find I have dealt with that

 

[tbaldwin]

And the point that they are not used in their own county? Who the fuck do you think you are? what business is it of yours if a doctor or nurse decides to better themselves and the prospects for their family by deigning them the right to work wherever they want to?

From our own comments it is clear you don’t know what you are talking about, you claim to be arguing against Government policy, yet your own words show you haven’t got a clue what that Government policy is! What does this mean? “I am arguing that governments should act in the interests of the majority” what Majority? I can only assume you are talking about a majority of the people of their own country and if their country has a lack of recourses in the area f Doctors and Nurses what do they do? The same a they do with any recourses they are short of they buy I more and that is what they have done to look after the majority of their people and you are saying that is wrong? It is a contradiction!

What about the choice of the individual doesn’t your form of “Democracy and Socialism” take that into account?

Oh Dear... Here we go again another lets all have apple pie type..... Hard choices have to be made. And that means disappointing some individuals. Your arguements that its in the interests of the majority of the UK that we take Nurses and Doctors from developing nations is obviously reactionary nonsense. It is hardly in the interests of 5 million people written off by the establishemnt that so many jobs in the NHS go to people from abroad.
Your Fascistic survival of the fittest views on migration i find a bit repugnant to be honest.
People arguing for open borders are arguing for policies that would lead to a humanitarian disaster. Badly thought out and ignorant.
Hopefully you might give the consequences of those arguements some thought before posting any more reactionary shit on here CD.

 

[audiotech]

Well you can hardly quote statistics of today and say they mean anything in an open border debate. We don't have an open border and people know that, and few are willing to take the risk of dragging their family here and then being sent home again because they are an economic migrant, few are willing to go through the process of getting a visa and applying to become a citizen and all that this entails both time and cost wise.

The stats were quoted to give an idea of the reality of today, rather than some no borders future. I would have thought that most economic migrants would bring no dependents and usually work to send money back home to their families? I would also think that most will return home? Some will start new families here, but hey nothing new in that.

If we had an open border policy, then I think we would see an increase in immigration to this country.

Well you contradict yourself further down your post, because there you say you don't know what would happen in a no borders scenario and you don't know.

I do agree about keeping wages down through the use of cheap workers from abroad, but it is the same thing in reverse when Peugot move their factory to the home of the cheap workers and pay them a pittance.

Whether the wage of a Peugot worker in Eastern Europe is really a "pittance" to another worker in that country is another matter. Mybe the economic system would be completely different on a no borders planet?

I do believe tho that in an open borders situation all bets are off and no one, including myself, can really predict just what immigration/emigration there would be.

Exactly, apart from the first bit. Using the term "all bets are off" suggests you're a pessimist, because you think nothing will change, that all nation states will be forever competing against each other (unfairly)?

 

[audiotech]

I have a quick question - does the UK government provide minimum wage and safety legislation to protect workers?

Both a minimum wage and health and safety legislation (that's ambiguous), but like most countries there's a black market, where exists other rules.

 

[spring-peeper]

Both a minimum wage and health and safety legislation (that's ambiguous), but like most countries there's a black market, where exists other rules.

Thanks. It was reading to me that the only protection that workers had was through unions. I was just curious.

 

[Ryazan]

Thanks. It was reading to me that the only protection that workers had was through unions. I was just curious.

It is really. Unofficial or otherwise. Unionisation is the best way for collective action against bosses. And not just unionisation in regard to what is laid down by those in authority in the already established unions. We need another fucking Minority Movement inside unions. With scope for wider and coordinated rank and filer action.