Immigration "small benefit" to UK

[Spion]

Well, if I understood you correctly, you oppose Durrutti's view that immigration has bad effects for many people in this country, and primarily benefits the rich?

Wrong

You think immigration should be supported, and controlled less, not more?

Right

Well, in that case, you think it's in the interests of people in this country to have to compete for work with people from other countries. .

For the nth time, I think it's in the interests of migrant and existing workers to combine in trade unions and to take action to make the rich pay for jobs and housing etc. That is the opposite of workers competing with each other.

Incidentally, are you currently studying GCSE politics?

 

[audiotech]

Do you think the point of politics is to get into power so as to change things, or to be right all the time?

Do you think that elected representatives should try to represent the interests of their constituency?

The point of politics, as I see it, is for the downtrodden to seize power from those that exploit them.

All the elected representatives I've seen lately, appear to represent nobody but themselves.

 

[Demosthenes]

Line one and the fourth paragraph.

"In the long-term, I think it would be of more value to the people of the world if Britain elected a radical socialist government."

So, how's that rhetoric and straw man building.
I guess you mean - that's an aim you support, everyone supports it.
Only the problem is you support it, but only in theory, because you're not willing to concede in the slightest that the interest that many of your natural constituency have in not having their wages lowered by competition with people from other countries is anything other than racist, as you've said on several occasions.

The idea that they might know what their interests are better than you, doesn't seem to you to be legitimate, or even worth considering.

So, I've assumed you're saying that's an aim you support, -- but let me know if I've assumed too much. How else is it rhetoric and strawman building?

My view is that it's an aim you think you support, but in practice you don't, because you're not willing to represent the interests of people who might vote for you. You'd rather tell them they're wrong.

 

[tarannau]

Well, in that case, you think it's in the interests of people in this country to have to compete for work with people from other countries.
.

You do realise that we trade outside of our borders don't you? When was the last time you bought a British made TV for example?

Like it or not we do compete for workers from other countries, whether they're in our country or not. We're not thankfully going to be able to go back to 'buy british' campaigns and industries like British Leyland.

Shutting people out and insisting on restrictive immigration clauses doesn't work - more protected economies like France certainly haven't benefited.

 

[Demosthenes]

Ok, so Spion, you agree with Durrutti's thesis, but you think immigration should still be supported.

Well I think your view is self-contradictory myself.

But, it's a nice idea, everyone should unionise and not accept lower wages, - never mind that unions find it difficult to be effective any more.

So once everyone here have all got together in unionised unity, - what do you do when a whole bunch of other people come from other countries, and work for less, because their employers tell them that they're not going to be paid union rates, and if they join the union they'll lose their jobs.

Tell them to join the union? And so on, and so on.

 

[Spion]

Fucking hell, you're slow

 

[Demosthenes]

You do realise that we trade outside of our borders don't you? When was the last time you bought a British made TV for example?

Like it or not we do compete for workers from other countries, whether they're in our country or not. We're not thankfully going to be able to go back to 'buy british' campaigns and industries like British Leyland.

Shutting people out and insisting on restrictive immigration clauses doesn't work - more protected economies like France certainly haven't benefited.

Shit, no, educate me. I hadn't realised at all. ffs.

of course we compete with workers from other countries, in other countries.
The subject of this thread isn't the global marketplace, but the problem of the british welder who used to be able to get £10 -£12 for welding, but now can't get more than £7 because that's what the market rate is these days.

 

[Demosthenes]

Fucking hell, you're slow

The comment of someone whose arguments don't stack up and is starting to realise.

it's always the first resort of someone who's losing an argument to make rhetorical attacks on the intelligence of the person they're losing to without explaining why.

You don't explain why because you can't.

 

[Demosthenes]

The point of politics, as I see it, is for the downtrodden to seize power from those that exploit them.

All the elected representatives I've seen lately, appear to represent nobody but themselves.

Well, I don't think you're quite right about that. I think the labour-conservative alliance represents their constituency quite well. Their constituency is mainly those who've bought houses, and have an interest in the housing market staying strong. And that's by far the biggest issue in british politics. The problem is that those who don't have that interest, those who dont' own, generally don't vote at all because they reckon there isn't anyone who represents their interests.

I reckon maybe they're more or less right.

 

[Demosthenes]

For the nth time, I think it's in the interests of migrant and existing workers to combine in trade unions and to take action to make the rich pay for jobs and housing etc. That is the opposite of workers competing with each other.

Incidentally, are you currently studying GCSE politics?

I think you're overlooking the fact that unionisation makes little difference, when there's a large number of workers chasing a limited amount of work.
If there's not enough work to go round, then some people will always work for less rather than have no work at all.

You can tell them they shouldn't, but they might be inclined to reply, well it's do that, or my family'll be homeless, -- are you telling me I should make my family homeless?

Are you?

 

[audiotech]

"In the long-term, I think it would be of more value to the people of the world if Britain elected a radical socialist government."

So, how's that rhetoric and straw man building.
I guess you mean - that's an aim you support, everyone supports it.
Only the problem is you support it, but only in theory, because you're not willing to concede in the slightest that the interest that many of your natural constituency have in not having their wages lowered by competition with people from other countries is anything other than racist, as you've said on several occasions.

The idea that they might know what their interests are better than you, doesn't seem to you to be legitimate, or even worth considering.

So, I've assumed you're saying that's an aim you support, -- but let me know if I've assumed too much. How else is it rhetoric and strawman building?

My view is that it's an aim you think you support, but in practice you don't, because you're not willing to represent the interests of people who might vote for you. You'd rather tell them they're wrong.

That isn't the first line is it?

Your second paragraph here is balony. Pray tell where have I used, "on many occasions" the word "racist"?

Some of my 'constituents' are immigrants.

I represent the interests of those who belong to my trade union. Up to now, they've been alway's right.

 

[Demosthenes]

Bollocks!

You ARE anti-immigrant because you rail against immigration and demand British jobs for British workers.

It couldn't be clearer.

The implication I took is that you're implying that durrutti's way of thinking is racist.

If i got that wrong, sorry.

But, the implication is that you think there's something wrong with being anti-immigrant. What do you think's wrong with it. ?

Some of your "constituents" may well be ifrom other countries or the descendants of people from other countries. And certainly, it would be futile not to represent them. But in their case, well, from what I've heard, most of them seem to think there's too many people coming here from other countries as well.

 

[audiotech]

Well, I don't think you're quite right about that. I think the labour-conservative alliance represents their constituency quite well. Their constituency is mainly those who've bought houses, and have an interest in the housing market staying strong. And that's by far the biggest issue in british politics. The problem is that those who don't have that interest, those who dont' own, generally don't vote at all because they reckon there isn't anyone who represents their interests.

I reckon maybe they're more or less right.

So, as the housing market grinds to a halt, prices continue to fall, equity is lost, repossessions rise then what?

 

[Demosthenes]

So, as the housing market grinds to a halt, prices continue to fall, equity is lost, repossessions rise then what?

I guess we go through the same cycle again.

unless the government decides to underwrite people who can't pay their mortgages with housing benefit, so as to stop a big slump in the price of housing.

And I wouldn't rule that out.

 

[Demosthenes]

That isn't the first line is it?

Your second paragraph here is balony. Pray tell where have I used, "on many occasions" the word "racist"?

Some of my 'constituents' are immigrants.

I represent the interests of those who belong to my trade union. Up to now, they've been alway's right.

What is the first line then? Why not just quote me and explain what problem you ahve with what I said, -- it might avoid confusion.

 

[audiotech]

The implication I took is that you're implying that durrutti's way of thinking is racist.

If i got that wrong, sorry.

But, the implication is that you think there's something wrong with being anti-immigrant. What do you think's wrong with it. ?

Some of your "constituents" may well be ifrom other countries or the descendants of people from other countries. And certainly, it would be futile not to represent them. But in their case, well, from what I've heard, most of them seem to think there's too many people coming here from other countries as well.

Yes you did get it very wrong, durutti might be confused politically, but he's no racist.

The many people from other countries are mostly from A8 countries; in the rest of Europe; decided on agreement between European governments.

Millions of people born here in the UK now live permanently abroad (800,000 in Spain alone). What do you think would happen if the UK closed it's borders to migrants from Europe?

 

[audiotech]

What is the first line then? Why not just quote me and explain what problem you ahve with what I said, -- it might avoid confusion.

What exactly does it mean to "support workers of all nationalities" . ?

You already knew the answer to this shurely?

 

[audiotech]

I guess we go through the same cycle again.

unless the government decides to underwrite people who can't pay their mortgages with housing benefit, so as to stop a big slump in the price of housing.

And I wouldn't rule that out.

It seems they're willing to underwrite the banks, but people? I doubt it?

Anyway, Housing Benefit is assessed on income and savings. Less than £16,000 in the bank and on a very low income and you might get something towards your rent. Otherwise 'tough shit' is the common theme you'll find.

 

[tarannau]

Shit, no, educate me. I hadn't realised at all. ffs.

of course we compete with workers from other countries, in other countries.
The subject of this thread isn't the global marketplace, but the problem of the british welder who used to be able to get £10 -£12 for welding, but now can't get more than £7 because that's what the market rate is these days.

Aye, because artificially fixing the market rate up at £10-12 would really lead to welding work flooding back to Britain wouldn't it, the shipyards opening up again overnight. What difference does it make whether the welder's from Briatin or elsewhere - the likelihood is that there'll just be fewer welders at an artificially set rate.

Sadly we benefit from international trade in many ways, lose in others.

 

[Demosthenes]

Yes you did get it very wrong, durutti might be confused politically, but he's no racist.

Right, well, like I said sorry.

Why did you describe durrutti as anti-immigrant rather than anti-immgration though?

The many people from other countries are mostly from A8 countries; in the rest of Europe; decided on agreement between European governments.

Millions of people born here in the UK now live permanently abroad (800,000 in Spain alone). What do you think would happen if the UK closed it's borders to migrants from Europe?

Well, this is the problem. The thing is, we're not properly part of the EU anyway, cause we don't have the Euro, and we're not signed up to the social chapter. And that in itself has already been destructive of the well-intentioned attempt to promote the EU as a social democracy, in that because we compete unfairly against those in Europe who have implemented the social chapter, people in France have seen that their economy suffers in comparison, and voted in a real shit. (at least that's my guess)

The problem is that there's always been this tension between people who favour the EU because they think they'll get more social justice from Brussels, and those who think it's a good way of making capitalism more effective. At the moment, the latter group seem to be getting their way.

I think this is because the EU allowed us to opt out. I don't understand why they do this. I think it would be quite reasonable to say, if you're in, be fully in, and sign up to a proper social democratic Europe, have the Euro and the social chapter, or else leave.

I guess if we were competing with the rest of Europe on a level playing-field, then there wouldn't be a disproportionate amount of migration to Britain compared with the rest of Europe.

I kind of agree with Tony Benn on this. It is well-intentioned, and not unrealistic to expect more social justice from brussels than from westminster, but elected representatives shouldn't give away the power invested in them, to a power over which their electors can't have any control.

Overall, I think we should leave the EU, -- but being fully in is a reasonable alternative. But given how difficult it is to exercise democratic control on westminster, how much harder is it to exercise it on the EU?

 

[Demosthenes]

Ah so it was the "what does it mean to support workers of all nationalities?" question you thought was rhetorical and strawman building.

Well, what does it mean?
You see, I don't think saying that you support all workers everywhere is necessarily supportive, and I don't think believing that you do, is necessarily supportive.

It is unfortunate, but the only access that people have to political power is through national governments. And politically, I think that means you have to take a partly nationalist view, unethical though that stance is.

 

[Spion]

The comment of someone whose arguments don't stack up and is starting to realise.

it's always the first resort of someone who's losing an argument to make rhetorical attacks on the intelligence of the person they're losing to without explaining why.

You don't explain why because you can't.

No. I was just bored of repeating the same points over and over to someone whose mindset is stilted by not being able to see beyond trying to make capitalism work

 

[Demosthenes]

No. I was just bored of repeating the same points over and over to someone whose mindset is stilted by not being able to see beyond trying to make capitalism work

Fucking ridiculous. Me trying to make capitalism work. I'd like to see the UK abandon capitalism altogether, maybe first making investments in loads of other country's economies, so as to provide a national income so that we can then let the pound slide without starving.

My point is that it's because I think capitalism is hopeless, and anti-human, that it's necessary to be pragmatic about how to gain power. And refusing to recognise that the concerns many of the low-paid of all nationalities in this country, have about immigration, are legitimate is not pragmatic politics. It's well-intentioned, but stupid.

 

[Demosthenes]

In fact, these days, I kind of think that the goal of gaining power may be impossible anyway. But, all the same, I think there is still an unfilled electoral niche in british politics. And, maybe it's not impossible. Difficult to tell, when there's not even an attempt at producing a genuine radical alternative, though how you'd do that without plenty of money, I don't know.

eta:

No. I was just bored of repeating the same points over and over to someone whose mindset is stilted by not being able to see beyond trying to make capitalism work

And what's your answer to this one??

I think you're overlooking the fact that unionisation makes little difference, when there's a large number of workers chasing a limited amount of work.
If there's not enough work to go round, then some people will always work for less rather than have no work at all.

You can tell them they shouldn't, but they might be inclined to reply, well it's do that, or my family'll be homeless, -- are you telling me I should make my family homeless?

Are you?

 

[audiotech]

Ah so it was the "what does it mean to support workers of all nationalities?" question you thought was rhetorical and strawman building.

Well, what does it mean?
You see, I don't think saying that you support all workers everywhere is necessarily supportive, and I don't think believing that you do, is necessarily supportive.

It is unfortunate, but the only access that people have to political power is through national governments. And politically, I think that means you have to take a partly nationalist view, unethical though that stance is.

The first line was rhetorical, because you knew what the answer would be to the question put, despite your ignorant portrayal.

As I said, the straw man (on reflection looking more like two strawmen ) was built in the fourth para.

Access to political power? This is denied to the majority (even those who are elected themselves), by an all powerful executive.

You can take a nationalist view by any means, but I don't.

Ethics has got nowt to do with my decision on that btw.

 

[audiotech]

Right, well, like I said sorry.

Why did you describe durrutti as anti-immigrant rather than anti-immgration though?





Well, this is the problem. The thing is, we're not properly part of the EU anyway, cause we don't have the Euro, and we're not signed up to the social chapter. And that in itself has already been destructive of the well-intentioned attempt to promote the EU as a social democracy, in that because we compete unfairly against those in Europe who have implemented the social chapter, people in France have seen that their economy suffers in comparison, and voted in a real shit. (at least that's my guess)

The problem is that there's always been this tension between people who favour the EU because they think they'll get more social justice from Brussels, and those who think it's a good way of making capitalism more effective. At the moment, the latter group seem to be getting their way.

I think this is because the EU allowed us to opt out. I don't understand why they do this. I think it would be quite reasonable to say, if you're in, be fully in, and sign up to a proper social democratic Europe, have the Euro and the social chapter, or else leave.

I guess if we were competing with the rest of Europe on a level playing-field, then there wouldn't be a disproportionate amount of migration to Britain compared with the rest of Europe.

I kind of agree with Tony Benn on this. It is well-intentioned, and not unrealistic to expect more social justice from brussels than from westminster, but elected representatives shouldn't give away the power invested in them, to a power over which their electors can't have any control.

Overall, I think we should leave the EU, -- but being fully in is a reasonable alternative. But given how difficult it is to exercise democratic control on westminster, how much harder is it to exercise it on the EU?

I pretty much agree with what you say here, but I don't think leaving the EU is a realistic option. I think most people believe now that the UK integrating fully into Europe is envitable. What's the other option? Isolation? Taking on the might of the US and Asian markets?

 

[audiotech]

And refusing to recognise that the concerns many of the low-paid of all nationalities in this country, have about immigration, are legitimate is not pragmatic politics. It's well-intentioned, but stupid.

Nobody here is denying the concerns of many of the low-paid over the issue of immigration - this often confused with migration btw. Posters have already suggested what can be done, although in a small way, to remedy this.

It's the failure of this government to radically deal with the worst excesses of these exploitative practices that's at fault and it appears a failure to foresee/plan for the extra pressures put on certain services in certain areas.

 

[durruti02]

No.

no justification of that answer? .. no alternative?? .. thats poor mate

 

[durruti02]

Bollocks!

You ARE anti-immigrant because you rail against immigration and demand British jobs for British workers.

It couldn't be clearer.

you no they say when people do what you are doing they have lost the arguement

i expect a better standard of arguement from you mate

 

[durruti02]

Not being in favour of state controls on them entering the country you live in for a start, while at the same time campaigning to unionise migrant and existing workers and for jobs, services and housing for ALL paid for by taxing the rich

which is excatly what i agree with / and DO do .. LOL and a fuck site more than most on urban!! .. i actually have a stewards position where i recruit migrants into the union .. and we recently got back in house a whole section of mainly muslim pakistani and extremely badly paid workers .. we have got them back on equal/ good rates etc etc ..

your and MCs accusations against me just do not hold any water at all

you at one point NEED to deal with how immigration is being USED in ukinc today without slipping into MC's daft 'anti immigrant' nonsense