Well it's not been one singular upswing but a steady recovery up to this point, if the upswing were a dramatic few day affair I'd agree, but this has been weeks, nearly a month in the making.
Advertisement
by United Kingdom of Kent » Thu Jul 21, 2016 3:32 am
by Ostroeuropa » Thu Jul 21, 2016 3:32 am
by Great Nepal » Thu Jul 21, 2016 3:41 am
by Alvecia » Thu Jul 21, 2016 3:42 am
Great Nepal wrote:Because fuck all the evidence that says migrants as a collective are net benefit to the British economy, especially when contrasted with native population as a collective - we've got xenophobes to pacify!
by United Kingdom of Kent » Thu Jul 21, 2016 3:49 am
by Britanno 2 » Thu Jul 21, 2016 3:57 am
Great Nepal wrote:Because fuck all the evidence that says migrants as a collective are net benefit to the British economy, especially when contrasted with native population as a collective - we've got xenophobes to pacify!
by The Nihilistic view » Thu Jul 21, 2016 3:59 am
by Imperializt Russia » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:03 am
Wolfmanne2 wrote:TIL Jeremy Corbyn was a genocide denier.
http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2004-05/392
A. Motherfucking. Genocide. Denier.
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by Imperializt Russia » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:05 am
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by Arkolon » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:06 am
United Kingdom of Kent wrote:Vassenor wrote:
Given that one upswing apparently proves that there will be no long term economic consequences...
Well it's not been one singular upswing but a steady recovery up to this point, if the upswing were a dramatic few day affair I'd agree, but this has been weeks, nearly a month in the making.
by Ostroeuropa » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:06 am
Great Nepal wrote:Because fuck all the evidence that says migrants as a collective are net benefit to the British economy, especially when contrasted with native population as a collective - we've got xenophobes to pacify!
by Great Nepal » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:06 am
Britanno 2 wrote:Great Nepal wrote:Because fuck all the evidence that says migrants as a collective are net benefit to the British economy, especially when contrasted with native population as a collective - we've got xenophobes to pacify!
But surely it'd be worth it to keep us in the EU? From a pragmatic point of view, what would do more damage to the economy? Cutting non-EU migration or leaving the EU?
by Imperializt Russia » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:08 am
Ostroeuropa wrote:Great Nepal wrote:Because fuck all the evidence that says migrants as a collective are net benefit to the British economy, especially when contrasted with native population as a collective - we've got xenophobes to pacify!
They also depress wages, which leads to the natives being hesitant to work in the first place.
Low wages certainly aren't a benefit to the economy.
Without controlling for how wages would rise, you can't honestly say migrants are a benefit. Merely that they're more willing to work for slavemasters, and thus, cause the country to shift towards a more classist system.
This, in combination with the classist contempt the media and our elites have pushed that migrants "work harder" and such is a big reason for the anti-migrant backlash.
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by Ostroeuropa » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:08 am
United Kingdom of Kent wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36852805
Rather concerning, not entirely sure what the likelihood of him winning the election is but perhaps us European members of NATO should begin to be somewhat concerned. Do you think talk such as this may influence defence sending and purchases?
by Ostroeuropa » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:09 am
Imperializt Russia wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:
They also depress wages, which leads to the natives being hesitant to work in the first place.
Low wages certainly aren't a benefit to the economy.
Without controlling for how wages would rise, you can't honestly say migrants are a benefit. Merely that they're more willing to work for slavemasters, and thus, cause the country to shift towards a more classist system.
This, in combination with the classist contempt the media and our elites have pushed that migrants "work harder" and such is a big reason for the anti-migrant backlash.
Please explain to me, because I'm genuinely interested to hear it as I just don't understand, how migrants can depress wages when there is a minimum wage.
by Great Nepal » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:14 am
Ostroeuropa wrote:Great Nepal wrote:Because fuck all the evidence that says migrants as a collective are net benefit to the British economy, especially when contrasted with native population as a collective - we've got xenophobes to pacify!
They also depress wages, which leads to the natives being hesitant to work in the first place.
Low wages certainly aren't a benefit to the economy.
Without controlling for how wages would rise, you can't honestly say migrants are a benefit. Merely that they're more willing to work for slavemasters, and thus, cause the country to shift towards a more classist system.
This, in combination with the classist contempt the media and our elites have pushed that migrants "work harder" and such is a big reason for the anti-migrant backlash.
by The Nihilistic view » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:14 am
Ostroeuropa wrote:You can't really discuss long term economic consequences using abstracts, as people can't visualize it and there's too many factors in play.
The remain campaign fucked up by not doing something simple and easy to digest. I would have grabbed a pizza box from tesco and said;
"This costs 1.79. Here is how it is made."
And gone to all the various countries the ingrediants come from and such.
Then done a comparison with food made from multiple sources outside the EU and how much more difficult it is and how much more costly.
Abstracts don't sell well to the masses.
The problem is, however, that the overwhelming majority of brexiters explicitly said in a poll that they dont give a fuck about the economy, which highly suggests this was an immigration vote.
At that point, i'd have campaigned on a platform of cutting all outside the EU migration down to 10,000 (Which cameron said he'd do, but didn't, in a move of startling arrogance and massively misjudging the mood of the country.), but keeping inter-EU migration.
I'd also have pointed out that europeans are culturally similar to us compared to other foreigners.
by The Nihilistic view » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:16 am
by Imperializt Russia » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:16 am
United Kingdom of Kent wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36852805
Rather concerning, not entirely sure what the likelihood of him winning the election is but perhaps us European members of NATO should begin to be somewhat concerned. Do you think talk such as this may influence defence sending and purchases?
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by Imperializt Russia » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:19 am
Ostroeuropa wrote:Imperializt Russia wrote:Please explain to me, because I'm genuinely interested to hear it as I just don't understand, how migrants can depress wages when there is a minimum wage.
They depress wages to the minimum, and sometimes below that off the books. My local fair, for instance, is notorious for hiring poles and paying them a pittance. Minimum wage isn't particularly good.
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.
by The Nihilistic view » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:32 am
by Wolfmanne2 » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:39 am
Ostroeuropa wrote:The Archregimancy wrote:
Just as 'fucking hilarious', no doubt, as tying bacon to a synagogue.
Yes. That is likewise hilarious. Problem is that our media and institutions are obsessed with preventing mockery of Islam, so the jokes have to be done by "grafitti" of sorts rather than in person.
Zombie Jesus is also funny.
Mad hatters in jeans wrote:Yeah precipitating on everyone doesn't go down well usually. You seem patient enough to chat to us, i'm willing to count that as nice.
by Elepis » Thu Jul 21, 2016 5:20 am
by Ifreann » Thu Jul 21, 2016 5:34 am
Elepis wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:
The UK fulfills its NATO obligations. I actually support Trumps policy here. If a NATO country doesn't pay its 2% defense budget rate, doesn't also come to the aid of other NATO allies, etc, then they shouldn't be automatically protected.
well maybe it is not the migrants fault then. Maybe it is the companies who pay the wages, if they paid more to their workers as a whole, then there would be no undercutting
by Val Halla » Thu Jul 21, 2016 5:52 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Ancientania, BEEstreetz, Bombadil, Elejamie, Ethel mermania, Fartsniffage, Foxyshire, Ineva, Juristonia, Kubra, Neu California, San Lumen, Sarduri, Shrillland, Statesburg, Tiami, Trash Heap, Tungstan, Uiiop, Valrifall, Zurkerx
Advertisement