The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Reply 60
tehjonny
Sorry, with what statistics and evidence (other than anecdotal)?

Because anecdotes don't prove ****e.

You said no-one with a family to support would do it. You were wrong.
Reply 61
Ronove
You said no-one with a family to support would do it. You were wrong.


Semantics. I should have said 'not many people'.
Reply 62
tehjonny
Semantics. I should have said 'not many people'.

Yes, you should.
Reply 63
Can we get back to the debate at hand then?
Reply 64
tehjonny
It is true for those with families. Who is going to endanger their families well-being with moralistic notions of 'I must work, it is the right thing to do!'. No-one.

If you can better provide for your family with benefits, you will take the benefits. Ideals don't come into it.


Actually, I know a couple. But anecdotal evidence isn't good enough for you right.

Mizzy, do you have children? I'm assuming not given the average age of ppl on here (sorry if I'm mistaken!). I, like you would rather work for less than take benefits for more, thats a pride thing. When you've got kids to look after pride doesn't mean much.


No, I'm 20, I don't have kids. And yep you're right about the pride thing, it's a matter of principles. If you can work, you work.

I find it quite funny Mizzy, that given our discussions revolving around AA, you're not actually being very understanding of the plight of many WC people.


How do you know that my family aren't working class? Can I see some statistics about the plight of working class people being worsened as a result of immigration? Is there a direct correlation?

When you mention the WC people, are you referring solely to white British working class people? You seem to have a very us vs them ideology.
Reply 65
mizzy87
Actually, I know a couple. But anecdotal evidence isn't good enough for you right.

No, I'm 20, I don't have kids. And yep you're right about the pride thing, it's a matter of principles. If you can work, you work.

How do you know that my family aren't working class? Can I see some statistics about the plight of working class people being worsened as a result of immigration? Is there a direct correlation?

When you mention the WC people, are you referring solely to white British working class people? You seem to have a very us vs them ideology.


No I'm not referring to white WC. However, you've made many an excuse for black unemployment. Now it comes to the majority white WC, you seem to be suggesting those that don't work are lazy?

I'm not sure if their is a correlation. I am not against immigration. I'm against this 'come one, come all' madness. We can't simply let everyone in!

Right. So, if a construction worker used to earning 13k a year (just enough to scrap by) is suddenly faced with falling wages with no similar fall in prices, he should 'just work'? He should just keep working in the knowledge it isn't enough to get by on? He should keep tramping into work daily, knowing that he could sit on his arse all day and better provide for his family?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/08/18/do1801.xml

Employment and unemployment are both up by nearly a quarter of a million. How can this be, when normally an increase in unemployment means a fall in the total number in work? Immigration, mainly from new EU members, is the main reason.

Should we worry about the wear and tear on the social fabric and pressure on public services that immigration brings? Or should we share Gordon Brown's view that immigration benefits the economy? Immigration produces both winners and losers, and I will argue that the losers deserve better.

This week's labour market statistics show that the number of people in work increased by 240,000 in the 12 months to June 2006 and that, over the same period, unemployment was up by 243,000. Immigration figures are always a long way behind and the latest statistics are for 2004, when net migration into the United Kingdom was 223,000.


Whenever academic studies of the effect on wages of immigration have been carried out, the evidence has been that an increase in the supply of unskilled labour leads to a fall in wages for the low paid. For example, a study of the impact of migration into America between 1979 and 1995, by George Borjas of Harvard, concluded that immigration had reduced the wages of unskilled workers (those without American high-school diplomas) by five percentage points.


Over the past few years, average prices of new homes for first-time buyers have increased sharply, often putting home ownership out of their reach. According to a Halifax survey, the average house price rose from about £86,000 in 2001 to £177,000 today. Immigration is not the only cause, and the tendency to live in smaller households has played its part, but no honest voice denies that immigration is a major factor. Moreover, immigration can be controlled, whereas the rate of family breakdown and the desire to live alone are not so easily influenced by the Government.


Between 1996 and 2004, net international migration has averaged 140,000 a year, when the Government's household projections, which are used to estimate the demand for housing, were based on 65,000 per year.

As the respected think-tank Migration Watch UK has shown, using the Government's own figures, over the same period the housing stock fell short of household formation by 370,000 and about 70 per cent of this shortfall was the result of additional immigration. There has been an impact on social housing, too.

Between 1997 and 2005, 167,000 additional social and local authority homes were built. So far I have mentioned only immigration, but, over that same period, 216,000 people were given asylum or exceptional leave to remain. This figure alone exceeds the number of social homes constructed.
Firstly, Segat, stfu. I know this isn't D&D so you can just sit there sounding like a 14 year old, but please don't, it's terrible form.

Secondly, tehjonny, stfu. There is no working class anymore. I live in a single parent family, my dad fixes washing machines all day and I worked at Mcdonalds for two and a half year. Yet we all have mobile phones, we have Sky, we don't thieve benefits and a car. The working class is a myth.

As for people doing labourish jobs having their markets flooded, so what? That's exactly what happened when conveyer belt manufacturing was invented, machines essentially flooding the market of the people who previously did that job. Shall we get rid of machines so people don't lose jobs.

How many cobblers do you know now? What about all the people that used to rear horses for carts? They became mechanics. If you want to keep your living, you need to evolve. Neither the world nor the government owe you a living, and if you can't provide something that people want or can't get anywhere else, you won't get paid. This has always been the case. If Polish immigrants are able to do the working class jobs for less than the British and still survive, then so can the British. If the British aren't willing to take the financial hit, they need to find a new job. Competition creates efficiency and meritocracy. I couldn't give a **** what happens to those who aren't efficient nor meritting of my money.

Basically, stop moaning.
Wow... three pages, and no one has pointed out (from what I can see) that the UK already HAS a points-based immigration system. It's called the Highly Skilled Migrants Programme, or some such.

When I'm making 23,000 pounds a year, I'll have enough points to qualify...
Reply 68
tehjonny
No I'm not referring to white WC. However, you've made many an excuse for black unemployment. Now it comes to the majority white WC, you seem to be suggesting those that don't work are lazy?
I wasn't referring to white unemployment, I was referring to unemployment of the working class in general. Stop thinking that I'm always attacking white people or something ffs, I'm not. And I haven't suggested laziness of anyone else at all, I just said the assertion you made that EVERYONE would go on benefits if they could get more money from it than working was false, and I used myself as an example. I'm not claiming to be speaking for an entire class in Britain here.

I'm not sure if their is a correlation. I am not against immigration. I'm against this 'come one, come all' madness. We can't simply let everyone in!

Right, so you're not even sure if there is a correlation between immigrants coming in and an increase in working class unemployment, yet that's what you've been ranting about on this thread. You're blaming unemployment in this country on immigrants when you're not even sure of the facts.

Right. So, if a construction worker used to earning 13k a year (just enough to scrap by) is suddenly faced with falling wages with no similar fall in prices, he should 'just work'? He should just keep working in the knowledge it isn't enough to get by on? He should keep tramping into work daily, knowing that he could sit on his arse all day and better provide for his family?

This again has nothing to do with immigration, more so discussing the welfare state.

Over the past few years, average prices of new homes for first-time buyers have increased sharply, often putting home ownership out of their reach. According to a Halifax survey, the average house price rose from about £86,000 in 2001 to £177,000 today. Immigration is not the only cause, and the tendency to live in smaller households has played its part, but no honest voice denies that immigration is a major factor. Moreover, immigration can be controlled, whereas the rate of family breakdown and the desire to live alone are not so easily influenced by the Government.

'Blame the immigrant' mentality again. Yes of course in terms of economics, the more demand there is for houses, with a lack of supply, the higher the prices go. There are many reasons for house prices increasing as dramatically as they have done though and simply pinning the entire blame onto immigrants is absurd.

I'm inclined to suggest that those rich fat cats who buy up 10 houses and put them up for rent, and then sell them a couple of years down the line when prices have gone up even more are more responsible for driving up house prices.
Reply 69
DanGrover
Firstly, Segat, stfu. I know this isn't D&D so you can just sit there sounding like a 14 year old, but please don't, it's terrible form.

Secondly, tehjonny, stfu. There is no working class anymore. I live in a single parent family, my dad fixes washing machines all day and I worked at Mcdonalds for two and a half year. Yet we all have mobile phones, we have Sky, we don't thieve benefits and a car. The working class is a myth.

As for people doing labourish jobs having their markets flooded, so what? That's exactly what happened when conveyer belt manufacturing was invented, machines essentially flooding the market of the people who previously did that job. Shall we get rid of machines so people don't lose jobs.

How many cobblers do you know now? What about all the people that used to rear horses for carts? They became mechanics. If you want to keep your living, you need to evolve. Neither the world nor the government owe you a living, and if you can't provide something that people want or can't get anywhere else, you won't get paid. This has always been the case. If Polish immigrants are able to do the working class jobs for less than the British and still survive, then so can the British. If the British aren't willing to take the financial hit, they need to find a new job. Competition creates efficiency and meritocracy. I couldn't give a **** what happens to those who aren't efficient nor meritting of my money.

Basically, stop moaning.


Right, so immigrants coming here for economic gain, and then living in ****ty conditions, and as such forcing the workers already here to take a hit in wages and as such living conditions, is a good thing for everyone now?

You obviously think the only thing that matters is GNP.

I'm perfectly happy to go out their and do the best I can for myself Dan. Many people are not in a position to do so. I know so many lads that work 50hrs a week just to feed and house themselves. They are trapped, they can't get qualifications because that would mean working less hours, which in turn would mean not enough money to live on.

Should those people just 'grin and bear it'?
Reply 70
mizzy87
I wasn't referring to white unemployment, I was referring to unemployment of the working class in general. Stop thinking that I'm always attacking white people or something ffs, I'm not. And I haven't suggested laziness of anyone else at all, I just said the assertion you made that EVERYONE would go on benefits if they could get more money from it than working was false, and I used myself as an example. I'm not claiming to be speaking for an entire class in Britain here.

Right, so you're not even sure if there is a correlation between immigrants coming in and an increase in working class unemployment, yet that's what you've been ranting about on this thread. You're blaming unemployment in this country on immigrants when you're not even sure of the facts.

This again has nothing to do with immigration, more so discussing the welfare state.

'Blame the immigrant' mentality again. Yes of course in terms of economics, the more demand there is for houses, with a lack of supply, the higher the prices go. There are many reasons for house prices increasing as dramatically as they have done though and simply pinning the entire blame onto immigrants is absurd.

I'm inclined to suggest that those rich fat cats who buy up 10 houses and put them up for rent, and then sell them a couple of years down the line when prices have gone up even more are more responsible for driving up house prices.


You didn't read the entire paragraph then. It states 'Immigration is not the only cause'. A proportion of the blame does lie at immigrants doorsteps. You don't become above criticism if you're not British mizzy.

The vast majority of studies do point to a correlation between increasing migration and decreasing wages. It isn't my job to provide them to you.

You are no more sure of the facts than I am at the end of the day.

I ask you mizzy, do you advocate an entirely open border policy, regardless of the social and economic ramifications? Why are we allowing mass immigration if we aren't sure what it will cause? I don't like the idea that my government operates a 'cross your fingers a hope' policy in regards to this issue.

I don't dislike immigrants. I don't have a problem with people coming here to do better for themselves. I do have a problem with people saying any form of immigration control would make us 'racist'. Most western countries have a FAR stricter immigration policy than we do. I don't hear them getting branded racist.
tehjonny
Right, so immigrants coming here for economic gain, and then living in ****ty conditions, and as such forcing the workers already here to take a hit in wages and as such living conditions, is a good thing for everyone now?


No, it's not good for everyone. It's good for the people willing to compete, and those who reap the benefits of an efficient and competitive market. The people that do not benefit are those who were used to a comfortable lifestyle free from competition and now find that their own laziness has earned them the inability to compete.

When people complaim about people taking their jobs, what they're actually complaining about is the fact that a lot of people have come along who are better at their job than they are. If they weren't, they wouldn't get work.

You obviously think the only thing that matters is GNP.


Couldn't give a ****, actually.
Reply 72
DanGrover
No, it's not good for everyone. It's good for the people willing to compete, and those who reap the benefits of an efficient and competitive market. The people that do not benefit are those who were used to a comfortable lifestyle free from competition and now find that their own laziness has earned them the inability to compete.

When people complaim about people taking their jobs, what they're actually complaining about is the fact that a lot of people have come along who are better at their job than they are. If they weren't, they wouldn't get work.


By 'willing to compete', you mean carrying on doing the same work whilst your wages go down year in year out? Those who reap the benefits of such an 'efficient and competitive market', are those that don't have to compete in the sectors of that market immigrants mainly take employment in.

You can't advocate economic competition when it isn't going to affect you. How many immigrants are coming here with Graphic Design qualifications? Not many I'd wager.

I'm not sure immigrants are all better at the job. I am sure some employers are willing to take a small cut in workforce capability for a large cut in workforce costs.

I feel most for the immigrants themselves. They come here thinking this is the land of milk and honey were anything is possible, a bastardised american dream as it were, only to find themselves sleeping 5 to a room, earning just enough to live on once they've sent a proportion of the wages back home.
I'm perfectly happy to go out their and do the best I can for myself Dan. Many people are not in a position to do so. I know so many lads that work 50hrs a week just to feed and house themselves. They are trapped, they can't get qualifications because that would mean working less hours, which in turn would mean not enough money to live on.


Where do they live that, upon working 50 hours a week, they can only just feed and house themselves? Even at minimum wage thats about £1k a month. You said feed and house themselves, where are they living, a Penthouse in Chelsea?

Should those people just 'grin and bear it'?


What are the alternatives? Stop immigration just because your chums aren't good enough at their job to fend of competition? In that case, he's the only one that gains, where as the Polish chap who's better at his job is stuck in a presumably saturated market, the consumers here are getting a worse product for their money, and our depleted industries, such as dentistry and engineering, are being starved of well-qualified european workers. Yeah, that sounds better.

Either that, or the government offers subsidies and protection to a dying industry. Because, as i'm sure you know, France's economy is an absolute power house at the moment.
tehjonny
Right. So saying 'all polish are this' is wrong. However, saying 'all english are that' is right. I do wonder...

In actual fact, both are false. It does say much that you've no problems with generalised attacks on the English, whilst railing against the similar against Poles.


What? It's a comment on how rediculous media. Not on English or Polish, on the media. My own opinions on the matter have remained strictly reserved, I think youll find.
Reply 75
DanGrover
Where do they live that, upon working 50 hours a week, they can only just feed and house themselves? Even at minimum wage thats about £1k a month. You said feed and house themselves, where are they living, a Penthouse in Chelsea?

What are the alternatives? Stop immigration just because your chums aren't good enough at their job to fend off competition? In that case, he's the only one that gains, where as the Polish chap who's better at his job is stuck in a presumably saturated market, the consumers here are getting a worse product for their money, and our depleted industries, such as dentistry and engineering, are being starved of well-qualified european workers. Yeah, that sounds better.

Either that, or the government offers subsidies and protection to a dying industry. Because, as i'm sure you know, France's economy is an absolute power house at the moment.


Minimum wage is what, 5.85 now? 5.85x40 = 234 squids. That is 936 quid a month. 300 rent. 636. 100 on food. 536. Keeping a car in order, say 200. 336. Tax etc, probs about 150 quid. 186. Divided by four is 46.50 a week to spend on yourself. Wow, what a life that must be. A whole 50quid to spend on yourself a week! Thats like, a draw, a couple of packs of ciggies, and perhaps a trip to the cinema. My, I truly envy them. Those are crap figures, but they give you an idea. It isn't poverty, but it isn't a happy life either. So you work 50 a week. That is still 100quid for yourself. Who knows what will come up? You might have to spend all your leisure money in a month on a trip to the dentists, or to get a new tyre for your car!

My chums work in shops mainly. You don't need any skills :p:. Again, you are assuming the only reason someone can lose their job is because they are bad at it. What if the boss justs find someone he can pay much less, cash in hand stylie?
Reply 76
tehjonny
So, if the British government introduced legislation that aided 10m Africans, but put 5m Brits in the dole queue, you would support it fully?


If it didn't deprive the Britons of their human or civil rights etc, then yes, of course I would. Wouldn't you?

You can't compare west to west movement with 3rd world to west movement. Whilst moving to London may gain a Scot economic opportunity, he can still get a job in Scotland. Same for the Spain/France example.


There's plenty of areas of high unemployment in the UK. I don't see a lot of the folk moving around.

Could you do this with two children and a mortgage? You are talking as if all the unemployed only have themselves to support.


I could rent. If I was very poor, I wouldn't see the problem with being unable to afford the luxury of private property ownership in a country like this. As for children, unless you can support them, you shouldn't have them.

If you can get more through the dole and child credits, what possible incentive is their to work?


It's good for your health, mental and physical, it means you're not a burden on society, it's often quite enjoyable, it gives you at least some purpose in your life.

If I didn't have a job, I'd be out doing voluntary work or something of that sort. Man cannot live by watching the telly alone.

Of course, if anyone can sustain anything more than the most basic standard of life on the dole, then I'd want to see it cut for this very reason.

tehjonny
Christ...I thought you understood economic principles...

Their is a good reason manufacturing collapsed in this country. We can't compete with emerging economies that can produce the same goods on the cheap via paying their workers less. Unskilled manufacturing is dead in this country because it isn't competitive for companies to engage in. Why in HELL would a company manufacture here, when they can do it Bangladesh for a third of the costs?


If we can reduce the cost of labour, then Britain would be quite capable of having manufacturing industries within it once more. We are, after all, attractive: decent environmental, politically stable, well developed transport links.

This country cannot make money from unskilled factory work. India and China have that base covered. What China+India can't do is produce complicated technical equipment of good quality.


Eventually they'll suffer the same problem that we do. And by that time, we'll be ****ed because we're not exporting anything that they can't make.
tehjonny
Minimum wage is what, 5.85 now? 5.85x40 = 234 squids.


You said 50 hours. That's 1170 a month.

That is 936 quid a month. 300 rent. 636. 100 on food. 536.


That's a lot for rent, but let's assume he's living in London and we can let it slide. That leaves him with 770.

Keeping a car in order, say 200. 336


What's he got, a roller? Tax = 115 for a standard little car, divided by 12 is just under a tenner a month. MOT is a one of payment of £40 odd, that's another £3 a month. Insurance should be at most £400 for a normal bloke with 3 years no claims. That's another £30 odd a month. That's a total of about £45 a month. You can usually go at least 300 miles on £40 of petrol, so I don't know where he works that he's going 1100 miles a month. Let's be fairer and call it £120.

£650

Tax etc, probs about 150 quid.


It's about 100.

£550.

Divided by four is 46.50 a week to spend on yourself.


£137.

Wow, what a life that must be. A whole 50quid to spend on yourself a week! Thats like, a draw, a couple of packs of ciggies, and perhaps a trip to the cinema.


Mathsowned.

My, I truly envy them. Those are crap figures, but they give you an idea. It isn't poverty, but it isn't a happy life either. So you work 50 a week. That is still 100quid for yourself. Who knows what will come up? You might have to spend all your leisure money in a month on a trip to the dentists, or to get a new tyre for your car!


And? Even if your numbers were correct, it's still not anyone elses problem. Again, why do you propose? Protectionism leads you to France, and stopping immigrations harms everyone apart from your chums with no skills.

My chums work in shops mainly. You don't need any skills :p:. Again, you are assuming the only reason someone can lose their job is because they are bad at it. What if the boss justs find someone he can pay much less, cash in hand stylie?


Then they're breaking the law, but personally I'd rather there was no minimum wage. To quote the wonderful decola on a similar issue, if the price of employing people is artificially raised, inevitably some jobs are going to be lost and then someone can't get any work, just because the government thinks that if they do take work, they're being exploited. Bet they're very thankful for that.
Reply 78
tehjonny

I ask you mizzy, do you advocate an entirely open border policy, regardless of the social and economic ramifications? Why are we allowing mass immigration if we aren't sure what it will cause? I don't like the idea that my government operates a 'cross your fingers a hope' policy in regards to this issue.

I don't dislike immigrants. I don't have a problem with people coming here to do better for themselves. I do have a problem with people saying any form of immigration control would make us 'racist'. Most western countries have a FAR stricter immigration policy than we do. I don't hear them getting branded racist.


You're acting as if we have an open borders policy already. We don't. Unless you're referring to the intake of asylum seekers, check this out: http://www.workpermit.com/uk/uk.htm. It looks pretty difficult to immigrate into this country from that.

When you say we have "mass immigration", are you referring to people coming from the EU? If you are, there's nothing we can do about that other than leave the EU, as EU policy on free movement isn't likely to change at all.

Which other western countries have a "FAR stricter" immigration policy than us? The big ones, France and Germany, take in more immigrants than we do.
Reply 79
tehjonny
Minimum wage is what, 5.85 now? 5.85x40 = 234 squids. That is 936 quid a month. 300 rent. 636. 100 on food. 536. Keeping a car in order, say 200. 336. Tax etc, probs about 150 quid. 186. Divided by four is 46.50 a week to spend on yourself. Wow, what a life that must be. A whole 50quid to spend on yourself a week! Thats like, a draw, a couple of packs of ciggies, and perhaps a trip to the cinema. My, I truly envy them. Those are crap figures, but they give you an idea. It isn't poverty, but it isn't a happy life either. So you work 50 a week. That is still 100quid for yourself. Who knows what will come up? You might have to spend all your leisure money in a month on a trip to the dentists, or to get a new tyre for your car!

My chums work in shops mainly. You don't need any skills :p:. Again, you are assuming the only reason someone can lose their job is because they are bad at it. What if the boss justs find someone he can pay much less, cash in hand stylie?


I've worked in shops part-time since I was 16. I honestly don't see why someone should be artificially be paid higher than the minimum wage for working in a shop. As you said, you don't need any skills, thus anyone can do it. So why do you expect to be paid higher?

Latest

Trending

Trending