Gotta get those wages down so the shareholders are happy so they can move the company to ChinaQuote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Printable View
Gotta get those wages down so the shareholders are happy so they can move the company to ChinaQuote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
I believe I said economists, not delusional leftist union people.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Because employers like wages in the gutter.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
A better question is why a so-called Socialist is quoting a union of employers.
Economists think immigration is a good thing, they would see it as driving down real wages therefore increasing company profits, it does not matter if the wages are skilled or unskilled they would all go down due to lower costs of living driven by cheaper service wages.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shibumi
Delusional rightist people more like... immigration gives the fat cats cheaper labour so the natives can't get a job.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shibumi
Sorry, I meant national economists. Should have specified that.
Nice try, but no cigar, we have never had a vote on mass immigration and the issue has become (at least until recently) rather tasteless due to the media's obsession with the extremist views of both it's proponents and destractors, the views of most of the populace go unheard by the state and cowed by an intillectualism which seeks to undermine all opposition to it by constructing the apparatus of cultural guilt and moralism. Your eqation of a person voting Tory with being pro-immigration is incorrect, or for that matter voting labour with being pro-immigration (many of the working class are anti-immigration), I voted Tory because I abhor the champagne socilism of Labour more than washed down Thatcherism. Whatever you may think of the justification, it in no way implies I am pro-immigration.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
This is going to be an issue of great importance very soon in European political culture (indeed it may very well already be), the realisation that the silence (relatively) of the major parties on the issue of immigration has created and will continue to create an undercurrent in society verging upon xenophobia and racism (the proper racism whish we no longer really get in the West, I'm talking Hindustani type racism y'know the BJP and Co.), then it will no longer be an undercurrent but a viable and popular be cultural alternative to the current open minded society we currently enjoy, and then there will be trouble, perhaps the type involving mass racist violence and the destruction (or hiatus) of political and civil order.
Man is very much an animal, and within his society he occupies a "niche" or societal role, when a foriegn group then is allowed to enter into his society and compete with him for that niche animal incticnts will come to the fore, and foreign cultural bodies unless they possess either the backing of those whom rule society or themselves possess that power, will be acted against, to the native multiculturalism or mass immigration can be viewed as a dismembered limb of imperialism to the effect that they will inevitibaly justify violence as being mora;l;y justified and ethically correct. One need only look at how civilians and other innocents are targeted in the violence commited by those who believe themselves to be striving for some form of liberation.
I agree with those that wish to protect European culture, I disagree with those that extend that philosophy to American culture.
THIS!Quote:
Originally Posted by bopa the Magyar
what is sickeningly funny is that it is the very people who have supported multi-culturalism along with high net-immigration that are DIRECTLY responsible for the growing intolerance in British society.
what is worse is that they exhibit ZERO self-awareness and no ability to empathise, traits that would allow them to appreciate that they are not typical, and that their actions are antithetical to a large part of British society.
if these idiots are truly comitted to seeing greater tolerance of ethnic minorities, and a reduced racism at the extreme margins of politics, then they need to IMMEDIATELY quite their cretinous harping about diversity and support a reduction in immigration along with a renewed emphasis in assimilation.
The leftist church that's why. Multiculturalism is a religion that accepts no doubt, saying anything else means excommunication.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
So.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Hardline capitalists are now part of the leftist church too....?
I thought you said unions.... ?Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Culture is dead already, nothing immigrants can do to kill it.
Employers union, the NHO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
In short, the opponent of the labour unions.
They probably want cheap labour.
But HoreTore, I said economists - not exployer union. I later specified national economists (I assumed people understood that first time around though).
So you are using apples to compare oranges.
Is there anything left that isn't a conspiracy to screw over the "common man"?
lol wutQuote:
Originally Posted by Skullheadhq
That's the trading union, there is no employers union it doesn't exist. Cheap labour, good for them not for the economy. They get the few that get up before 12 and you get to feed the rest. A very conservative estimation is that multiculture has costed us 200.000.000.000 euro so far, a drain of 8.000.000.000 a year.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Ah, so that's why they call themselves "employers union"....? ("arbeidsgiverforening" in norwegian)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Anyway. I've only ever seen one comprehensive study on whether immigration adds more than it costs or not. And that study showed it on the whole added more than it costs. No, that's far from enough to draw conclusions, but drawing the conclusion that it costs more than it adds lacks even more basis in reality, and remains based solely on subjective feelings and opinions, not facts.
They call themselves the employers association.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
And we do do these studies here, and no there is no benefit it are billions that are leeched, 8 billion a year in fact. Gone. 8.000.000.000/15.000.000= WAY too much as it isn't exactly an enrichment as people from 100% white neighbourhoods demand you to know it is. If you don't know there is only one culture and it's multi watch your back
If a fellow Dutchie wants to correct me here's the place to do it
[insert total bull here]
100% white? The two classes I teach both have around 50% immigrants, and live in the kebab-capitol of Norway. In fact, a study that was done a few years ago(that I don't have atm, but I have referenced it here before), has shown that the parts of the country with the fewest immigrants are most hostile to immigraton, while the places with the most immigrants are the most positive. This fits nicely with the pro-immigration parties(Left and Socialist Left) having most of their support in urban areas(where most immigrants are found), and the right wingers(progress party) having lots of support in rural areas(where you won't find many immigrants).
And no benefit? Bah, they work and pay taxes, that is the benefit. What the only study I have ever seen found, was that immigrants contributed more in taxes than they recieved in benefits. Less than the rest of the population, sure, but still more than we spend on them.
I don't know where you get that figure from. The most an admittedly quick Google yields is a much more complex picture. An estimate by Pieter Lakeman of 5.9bn a year spent (but what about the money brought back in through tax revenues on stuff them immigrants buy for instance). OTOH there is apparently a 2003 study which claims a net loss of 43K over the lifetime of an immigrant. Non native Dutch make up about 20% of the population, so assuming this is what the figure refers to and applying a generous life time expectancy of about 74 years we get for a generous population estimate of 17M: 0.20 * (€43*10^3*17*10^6)/ 74 = €2.0*10^9 = €2.0bn per year. Or about one Icesave. ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Obviously, a town where 50 % of the people are immigrants, will be more positive towards immigrants than a town where there are only 10 %...
Was it really necessary to waste money on a study to learn that?
This was among the non-immigrant population, if that's what you're after.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andres
Comes from Nyfer, make it 7.200.000.000 a year by the way, 8 comes from ElsevierQuote:
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios
Wow, so immigrants make monet and pay taxes, so do the natives, not really something I see as positive.
Read. Immigrants cost us 7.200.000.000 a year, so there is no benefitQuote:
Originally Posted by bopa the Magyar
Cameron says we need to clow immagration http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13072509
Cable says this risks "inflaming extremism"
Isn't that the point? We are fostering a hostile group within our own borders.
Cable is as usual utterly ***-backwards on the matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
HE is the reason why extremism is being 'flamed'
Quote:
what is sickeningly funny is that it is the very people who have supported multi-culturalism along with high net-immigration that are DIRECTLY responsible for the growing intolerance in British society.
what is worse is that they exhibit ZERO self-awareness and no ability to empathise, traits that would allow them to appreciate that they are not typical, and that their actions are antithetical to a large part of British society.
if these idiots are truly comitted to seeing greater tolerance of ethnic minorities, and a reduced racism at the extreme margins of politics, then they need to IMMEDIATELY quite their cretinous harping about diversity and support a reduction in immigration along with a renewed emphasis in assimilation.
Nothing wrong with inflaming extremists as long as there's gassoline involved. Or did he mean something else.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla