Immigration .. part of neo liberalism/Thatcherism??
- Thread starter durruti02
- Start date
As the UK's largest employer of teachers and nurses, the state has been trying to get more and more indigenous young people into it for years but it seemingly isn't working.
----------------------
Side issue: Do maybe some African states train people as nurses as an "export product" that will bring in foreign exchange receipts and/or bring enhanced skills back if they return "home" ????
----------------------
Side issue: Do maybe some African states train people as nurses as an "export product" that will bring in foreign exchange receipts and/or bring enhanced skills back if they return "home" ????
Isambard said:
They should increase wages for nurses and maybe some teachers...
Then they might not have such a problem.
Your 2nd point is a lot more complex. A lot of people in Africa would love for their kids to get trained so they could work in the west. Obviously this is only going to be possible for the fortunate few in most cases.
And yes some will send money home but is it the country as a whole that benefits or just a section of it.... As i said economic migration makes the world a more unequal place.
Clearly it is a smaller proportion of the population in African countries that get the opportunity to be trained as nurses. They are relatively privileged. But does that make them middle class? I’d say no, whether in Africa or Europe they sell their labour for money and that makes them working class.
When nurses go from Africa to Europe to work of COURSE the fruits of the money that they send back home are not distributed equally. It’s called like, “capitalism”, dude. But the African country gets foreign exchange into its banking system without strings attached from the World Bank and the like. The money goes into the local economy as it is spent by the family of the nurse overseas. Not trickle down but seep around. I can’t think of a specific example right now but there are villages in places like Romania that are visibly better off than neighbouring villages because a high proportion of the population have been abroad to work.
Even IF trained nurses were forced to stay in Africa does it necessarily follow that health care would improve?
No. The reasons for poor health care in Africa also lie elsewhere.
It’s interesting to be accused by a Blairite of being a “liberal” when you think you are of the left.
I’d suggest that it is hand wringing “Grauniad wiberals” who are dodging the real issues.
The self-flagellation “oh, Africa is so poor because we steal the best workers” enables them to personalise the issue and point the blame at the patient in a British hospital who is treated by an African nurse. They don’t link up the dots and realise that the reason Africa is so poor is that it is kept in that position by capitalism.
There’s a willingness to put the blame anywhere except where it lies:
Pay too low? Blame the Polish plumber.
Workplace racism? Blame the Australian backpacker.
Can’t get a flat? Blame the Turkish waiter.
African poverty? Blame the sick NHS patient.
Jesus, the capitalist class are laughing all the way to the bloody bank!
When nurses go from Africa to Europe to work of COURSE the fruits of the money that they send back home are not distributed equally. It’s called like, “capitalism”, dude. But the African country gets foreign exchange into its banking system without strings attached from the World Bank and the like. The money goes into the local economy as it is spent by the family of the nurse overseas. Not trickle down but seep around. I can’t think of a specific example right now but there are villages in places like Romania that are visibly better off than neighbouring villages because a high proportion of the population have been abroad to work.
Even IF trained nurses were forced to stay in Africa does it necessarily follow that health care would improve?
No. The reasons for poor health care in Africa also lie elsewhere.
It’s interesting to be accused by a Blairite of being a “liberal” when you think you are of the left.
I’d suggest that it is hand wringing “Grauniad wiberals” who are dodging the real issues.
The self-flagellation “oh, Africa is so poor because we steal the best workers” enables them to personalise the issue and point the blame at the patient in a British hospital who is treated by an African nurse. They don’t link up the dots and realise that the reason Africa is so poor is that it is kept in that position by capitalism.
There’s a willingness to put the blame anywhere except where it lies:
Pay too low? Blame the Polish plumber.
Workplace racism? Blame the Australian backpacker.
Can’t get a flat? Blame the Turkish waiter.
African poverty? Blame the sick NHS patient.
Jesus, the capitalist class are laughing all the way to the bloody bank!
tbaldwin said:
Hilarious, coming from the man whose argument at the end of the day boils down to a (paraphrased) "the darkies and the slavs coming over here, taking our jobs, taking our houses, shagging our women".
You have been the one harping on how the supposed "middle class" gain from migration becasue they can enjoy the outputs of migrants.
You revel in pinning the blame everywhere except where it lies: The system.
Isambard said:
Are you the same isamabard who tried to pretend that what i was saying was about "the darkies and slavs coming over and stealing our jobs and shagging our women" then you can hardly complain that i accuse you of talking crap.
Its just sad that after a few contributions you go back to that type of shit,it says a lot about the way you view people..
"Why do you think that capitalist countries have immigration controls? I mean if we were to believe Durritos one-sided analysis, why haven't all the capitalist countries abolished immigration controls?"
.. so they can control immigrants that are here .. simple .. immigrants who have overstayed their visas don't cause trouble ..
.. so they can control immigrants that are here .. simple .. immigrants who have overstayed their visas don't cause trouble ..
ResistanceMP3 said:
not sure about being dialectical .. i am though being materialist .. 99.999% of immigration through ALL history had been about resources/wages .. when the neanderthals or early homo saps moved/emigrated they didn't go north and west for the climate!!! they moved due to conflict for resources .. it IS true an incresing number of ww/c brits move for a better life as opposed to $$$ but still this is a minority
Rob Ray said:
I think you should be cynical of the people coming out with this arguement (which is well dodgy anyway)
The pensions industry obviously likes the idea that as people live longer the state can no longer meet pensioners needs. But people have been paying in for years and there is enough money to give all pensioners a decent life.
Europe's workforce is on course to fall 20% by 2050. This fact has *nothing* to do with the pensions industry - it is calculated by looking at population demographics. You are being totally clueless if you think that "people paying in" means that there is enough money to pay out pensions - they are severely underfunded - pensions are therefore paid out of taxation.tbaldwin said:
You keep banging on about "plundering the third world of skilled labours" but there is never a fixed supply of skilled workers. Many people only train to be nurses etc because they can pay for their training and find work in richer countries. It is simply untrue that these people would have trained anyway, or that they would be able to find the same jobs in their own countries. For people to be employed there need to be jobs in the first place - something that you completely ignore in your bogus arguments.
Furthermore, even if it seems to you like there are a *lot* of immigrants, in fact the numbers are very small when compared with the large populations of many developing countries. Other jobs are outsourced to these countries, money is sent back, skills are taken back, connections made and trade increases - all of whoch benefit the developing economies.
You on the other hand have a purely negative outlook - you don;'t have any kind of positive suggestions to make, you have no vision of what kind of development there should be nor do you have much of a clue about the international and globalised economy. Furthermore you try and dress you bullshit up in moral values - that you know better where people should work, what they want and what is best for them, and I can only conclude that you are an old fashioned nationalist authoritarian who has no respect for human rights and freedoms.
Isambard said:
Pointing out the different consequences of migration is not blaming immigrants. I have said several times that i dont blame anyone for trying to improve their lives...
As for your JOKE? Rather pathetic that you choose to misinterpret my views in that way... But perhaps you did think it was funny rather than a lie.
TeeJay said:
I believe in reparations to developing countries.
I believe in International Labour laws that all large companies hsould have to sign up to.
I think that is far more positive than "taking the skilled workers developing countries need most" to pay for pensions!!
Whats your vision?
TeeJay said:
so we are getting old .. lets get in a load of immigrants to do all the dirty work TJ!! .... is that honestly the sort of world you want to live in?? .. and the pensions thing is crap .. i think we are still the 4th richest country in the world .. there is enough money for all ..IF the rich give up their baubles
BUT you also say Tb doesn't understand job creation .. i do .. capitalist job creation .. and it does as much harm as good .. which is why i am saying immigration is part of CAPITALISM ..
i am saying we should be getting AWAY from that and aiming for SUSTAINABLE empolyment based on local good local work etc .. and aiming for a world in which people move by CHOICE instead of economic hardship
Similar threads
