Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Byron

IMMIGRATION=Neo-COLONIALISM?

Recommended Posts

When the UK had loads of gunpowder and gun boats, we freebooted around the globe, invading backward countries and stealing their minerals, agricultural products etc.

We gave it a high moral ground because we were bringing Christianity and civilisation to the 'Natives'

We never gave a thought as to whether they wanted us (Which they didn't)

Eventually, (within my lifetime) colonialism became beyond the pale.

Nowadays, we do not freeboot around the globe, we just steal the skills and human resources of other countries.

When my wife lay dying in hospital, she had wonderful care from Filipino nurses, but I could not help thinking that somewhere in the Philippines, there was another person desperately needing the skills of the nurses whom we had inveigled to the UK with high wages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are missing one very important point.

We don't "steal" skills (or people). People will naturally gravitate to the place they think they have the best life chances. It happens within a country, it happens within a continent and it happens across a planet.

The same reason British, Irish, Dutch & Italians travelled to the USA in their millions over a hundred years ago is the reason the Filipino nurses move to the UK.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Futuroid said:

You are missing one very important point.

We don't "steal" skills (or people). People will naturally gravitate to the place they think they have the best life chances. It happens within a country, it happens within a continent and it happens across a planet.

The same reason British, Irish, Dutch & Italians travelled to the USA in their millions over a hundred years ago is the reason the Filipino nurses move to the UK.

 

Maybe, but there is something else in the equation these days.

For example, Lithuania has lost 370,000 people from a total population of only 3.3 million.  Most of these are thought to have come to the UK.

Is it moral for us to take in such a large fraction of their (presumably) most economically-active population simply to prop up our property bubble?

It's not like there aren't enough underemployed Brits already.

Lithuania is one of our EU colleague nations.  Surely we should not be undermining them like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"IMMIGRATION=Neo-COLONIALISM?"

No, immigration = freedom of choice. People choose to move to the UK by their own free will. There may be financial or political factors into it, and sometimes they may do it illegally, but there's nobody forcing them to do it.

Besides, if better laws result in a better economy, maybe it's beneficial to both countries if the most productive people move to the place where they can get the higher salary. This way they will be familiar with a better system and have a better chance of influencing their home country in the right direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, kzb said:

It's not like there aren't enough underemployed Brits already.

Unemployment is at recent record lows. Certainly there are many Brits in poorly paid work, but that is not due to immigrants. If you don't work to get the qualifications and skills the job market requires, someone else will.

Turning that around, how many UK companies have not offshored work because they can now tap into skilled labour from the EU? All paying PAYE / NI and Corporation Tax here rather than in some far flung corner of the world.

31 minutes ago, kzb said:

Lithuania is one of our EU colleague nations.  Surely we should not be undermining them like this.

We aren't undermining them - according to the HPC hive mind we are bankrolling them! :lol:

These people don't necessarily stay forever. Some will, but many will return, or move elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, kzb said:

Lithuania is one of our EU colleague nations.  Surely we should not be undermining them like this.

Allowing citizens freedom of movement is not undermining Lithuania. But giving benefits to people who are not already connected to the UK just because they have a pulse is undermining it. In fact, this encourages the least-productive people to move here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On unemployment one of course has to distinguish between the official unemployment rate in 2016 compared to the real rate of unemployment which is far higher to factor in all the zero hours/16 hours contract and temporary work, young people now in higher eduction effectively paying their own dole through tuition fee debt, people on disability instead of jobseekers, people having to take early retirement - and so on.

Then there's all the make work which wasn't necessary before when Britain had a more real economy. 

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/economy/2016/03/hidden-truth-behind-george-osborne-s-record-jobs

https://fullfact.org/news/true-unemployment-63-million-uk/

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, billybong said:

On unemployment one of course has to distinguish between the official unemployment rate in 2016 compared to the real rate of unemployment which is far higher to factor in all the zero hours/16 hours contract and temporary work, young people now in higher eduction effectively paying their own dole through tuition fee debt, people on disability instead of jobseekers, people having to take early retirement - and so on.

Ok, but everyone else is counting the numbers the same way / using the same tricks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Futuroid said:

Ok, but everyone else is counting the numbers the same way / using the same tricks.

I dare say in most developed countries there are a lot of similarities even close similarities but one of things that the official figures are used for is to claim that Britain's unemployment rate in 2016 is far better than years/decades ago (when those tricks weren't applied) and the official figures were more likely to be a better representation of the unemployment reality.  So they aren't comparing like with like within Britain.

Apparently the US is far more transparent and actually publishes a real unemployment rate figure.

 

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, crashbaby said:

"IMMIGRATION=Neo-COLONIALISM?"

No, immigration = freedom of choice. People choose to move to the UK by their own free will. There may be financial or political factors into it, and sometimes they may do it illegally, but there's nobody forcing them to do it.

So force is a no no, but is enticing perfectly acceptable? Same goal, different means, trying to take people another country might well need (and in to one that's already got far too many in this case). Actively trying to find health professionals from other countries that need them far more than the UK, for example, is very wrong in my eyes, even though no force is used.

The devil's in the detail though. Immigration between roughly equal countries, with equal give and take, is a rather different kettle of fish (and probably why it never seemed much of an issue in the EU before its ill-thought-out expansion).

Edited by Riedquat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, billybong said:

On unemployment one of course has to distinguish between the official unemployment rate in 2016 compared to the real rate of unemployment which is far higher to factor in all the zero hours/16 hours contract and temporary work, young people now in higher eduction effectively paying their own dole through tuition fee debt, people on disability instead of jobseekers, people having to take early retirement - and so on.

Then there's all the make work which wasn't necessary before when Britain had a more real economy. 

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/economy/2016/03/hidden-truth-behind-george-osborne-s-record-jobs

https://fullfact.org/news/true-unemployment-63-million-uk/

Very true also pro single parents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Futuroid said:

You are missing one very important point.

We don't "steal" skills (or people). People will naturally gravitate to the place they think they have the best life chances. It happens within a country, it happens within a continent and it happens across a planet.

The same reason British, Irish, Dutch & Italians travelled to the USA in their millions over a hundred years ago is the reason the Filipino nurses move to the UK.

 

So the USA had a massive welfare state and was offering highly-paid government jobs in the medical field in the 17th century?

The UK spends hundreds of billions of pounds a year trying to boost the incomes of the poor (or you could just call it vote buying) -- that is why there is a massive flow of migrants into the country.  It has nothing to do with people moving to the most economically productive areas.  The abysmal rates of growth in the UK and Europe completely undermine that argument.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Byron said:

When the UK had loads of gunpowder and gun boats, we freebooted around the globe, invading backward countries and stealing their minerals, agricultural products etc.

We gave it a high moral ground because we were bringing Christianity and civilisation to the 'Natives'

We never gave a thought as to whether they wanted us (Which they didn't)

Eventually, (within my lifetime) colonialism became beyond the pale.

Nowadays, we do not freeboot around the globe, we just steal the skills and human resources of other countries.

When my wife lay dying in hospital, she had wonderful care from Filipino nurses, but I could not help thinking that somewhere in the Philippines, there was another person desperately needing the skills of the nurses whom we had inveigled to the UK with high wages.

The philippines have massive population growth and so probably benefit from other countries helping provides jobs etc for these people.  (Not true for all countries).  I have met some other immigrants whose absence has greatly benefited their countries as they came here to live on benefits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, richc said:

So the USA had a massive welfare state and was offering highly-paid government jobs in the medical field in the 17th century?

The UK spends hundreds of billions of pounds a year trying to boost the incomes of the poor (or you could just call it vote buying) -- that is why there is a massive flow of migrants into the country.  It has nothing to do with people moving to the most economically productive areas.  The abysmal rates of growth in the UK and Europe completely undermine that argument.

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, billybong said:

On unemployment one of course has to distinguish between the official unemployment rate in 2016 compared to the real rate of unemployment which is far higher to factor in all the zero hours/16 hours contract and temporary work, young people now in higher eduction effectively paying their own dole through tuition fee debt, people on disability instead of jobseekers, people having to take early retirement - and so on.

Then there's all the make work which wasn't necessary before when Britain had a more real economy. 

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/economy/2016/03/hidden-truth-behind-george-osborne-s-record-jobs

https://fullfact.org/news/true-unemployment-63-million-uk/

Yep there are few proper jobs outside London really.

We have something like 843,000  "NEETs".  Young people 16-25 not in employment, education or training.  Not good for our society by any measure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that the loser countries will see the same thing as being beneficial.

The UK was a loser country in the 1970's as our expensively trained doctors went to the USA.

Remember the 'Brain Drain?'

We certainly made a fuss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no doubt that UK businesses are exploiting EEs for all they're worth. If I am wrong in that statement, then why have we seen wages for unskilled work stuck on NMW for years (which is below a living wage, unless you live in an HMO)? It's because EEs will put up with it because from their perspective, every pound saved goes a long way in their home country - and they can only save because of living a transient, live-in-an-HMO lifestyle.  UK businesses exploit this, while so-called lefties and unionists look the other way, and by doing so, keep workers' rights at the level an EE living in a caravan/HMO accepts.  The young indigenous Brit has had his/her rights eroded down to this level, but they have a much more costly road to walk down to meet their aspirations than their EE counterparts have.  What's not to love from a UK business perspective? Hard working. never-striking, obedient neo-slaves workers paid peanuts.  That's now also the level of the bar for indigenous Brit workers.  Don't like being paid peanuts? Why do we care? We've got a line of EE workers who'll do it.  And unions are pro-uncontrolled immigration - never thought they'd be part of the neo-liberal playbook, but then lieftist organizations have been consumed by neo-liberalism in the last 15 years.  If you're working class, the left is your enemy - they hate you.

Edited by canbuywontbuy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   101 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.