Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Polish Man Beaten To Death In potential Hate Crime By Gang Of 20 In Essex Watch

    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lawyer3c)
    OK, so: a happier culture is "better" because happier people are more productive.

    Why is a culture that fosters greater productivity "better" than a culture that doesn't foster as much productivity?

    It is because a more productive society makes a wealthier and hence more powerful society.


    We can argue this all day. I know you're trying to basically find a way of distilling this down to "not objective". Few things are objective, 1 + 1 isn't objectively 2, the sky isn't objectively blue, and happiness and productivity aren't objectively good, and being hung drawn and quartered isn't objectively bad for the victim. However, there are certain axioms in the world that we accept in order to structure life. Happiness and productivity are good, 1 + 1 is the value of two, the sky is blue. By those axioms, western society is superior to Islamic culture. Spain alone produces more research than the entire Islamic world, for instance.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TercioOfParma)
    It is because a more productive society makes a wealthier and hence more powerful society.

    We can argue this all day. I know you're trying to basically find a way of distilling this down to "not objective". Few things are objective, 1 + 1 isn't objectively 2, the sky isn't objectively blue, and happiness and productivity aren't objectively good. However, there are certain axioms in the world that we accept in order to structure life. Happiness and productivity are good, 1 + 1 is the value of two, the sky is blue. By those axioms, western society is superior to Islamic culture.
    1. You concede you cannot justify picking one axiom over another (or at least you have given up attempting to do so).
    2. When you compare x culture to y culture by reference to the axiom of your choice, then obviously one will come out more favourably than the other. Now, if our axiom was piety, Islamic culture could be said to be superior to Western culture.

    Spain alone produces more research than the entire Islamic world, for instance.
    Not that it's at all relevant, but source? All I could find was a misquote of an article in The New Atlantis ("Spain and India each contribute more of the world’s scientific literature than those countries taken together" - but this is not "research" as we would commonly understand it: "although Spain is hardly an intellectual superpower, it translates more books in a single year than the entire Arab world has in the past thousand years").
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TercioOfParma)
    It is because, ultimately, people's needs depends on the hierarchy of needs. When you have a society that doesn't allow a minority to fulfil the very basic need of sex in a way they see fit, it makes them miserable. Miserable people are less productive and are at greater risk of mental issues.
    these people have lived their entire lives under this different form of society, its the norm for them, they aren't being whisked out of freedom into this oppression as you seem to imply
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lawyer3c)
    1. You concede you cannot justify picking one axiom over another (or at least you have given up attempting to do so).
    2. When you compare x culture to y culture by reference to the axiom of your choice, then obviously one will come out more favourably than the other. Now, if our axiom was piety, Islamic culture could be said to be superior to Western culture.
    .
    1) Well, some axioms have more impact than others. 1 + 1 = 2 has more impact than 2 x 2 = 4.
    2) Potentially. However, Piety doesn't have much of a real-world impact when compared with productivity and happiness, because you can compare the number of miracles to non-miracles and see it is almost negligible.

    (Original post by lawyer3c)
    Not that it's at all relevant, but source? All I could find was a misquote of an article in The New Atlantis ("Spain and India each contribute more of the world’s scientific literature than those countries taken together" - but this is not "research" as we would commonly understand it: "although Spain is hardly an intellectual superpower, it translates more books in a single year than the entire Arab world has in the past thousand years".
    I remember somebody saying it, It may well be books.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    these people have lived their entire lives under this different form of society, its the norm for them, they aren't being whisked out of freedom into this oppression as you seem to imply
    I said minority for a reason. I was referring to homosexuals. They know they're in the ****.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TercioOfParma)
    1) Well, some axioms have more impact than others. 1 + 1 = 2 has more impact than 2 x 2 = 4.
    This raises far more questions than it answers (what does "impact" mean? why is your definition of "impact" the right one? how can we measure this "impact"? etc).

    2) Potentially. However, Piety doesn't have much of a real-world impact when compared with productivity and happiness, because you can compare the number of miracles to non-miracles and see it is almost negligible.
    This is completely besides the point.

    I remember somebody saying it
    Not the best source, I must say.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lawyer3c)
    This raises far more questions than it answers (what does "impact" mean? why is your definition of "impact" the right one? how can we measure this "impact"? etc).
    You can derive 2 x 2 = 4 from 1 + 1 =2. Impact is how much it influences the real world on its own.

    (Original post by lawyer3c)
    This is completely besides the point.
    I am not sure It is, since Piety isn't that influential.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TercioOfParma)
    You can derive 2 x 2 = 4 from 1 + 1 =2. Impact is how much it influences the real world on its own.
    You are defining your own terms and not resolving any of the aforementioned issues.

    I am not sure It is, since Piety isn't that influential.
    Influential in what way? Why is your definition of influential the right one? Etc...
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lawyer3c)
    You are defining your own terms and not resolving any of the aforementioned issues.


    Influential in what way? Why is your definition of influential the right one? Etc...
    My definition of influential is correct because it reflects general usage of the word. Happiness and productivity has more influence on the world than piety.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TercioOfParma)
    My definition of influential is correct because it reflects general usage of the word. Happiness and productivity has more influence on the world than piety.
    Weak.
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TercioOfParma)
    No It doesn't, that is why we are discussing culture and not genetics. Pointing out that different cultures and an increase in competition for unskilled work causes issues isn't some racist statement, you'd be angry too if a completely new culture came in and made it hard for you to get a job.
    lol keep perpetuating the myth that eastern europeans are stealing working class jobs. Just an excuse for people to be lazy and play the victim.

    Also if someone somehow is struggling to find work over someone who can barely speak the language then I'd say thats more a reflection upon their own failings. (and dont retort about nonsense of keeping down wages, its totally unfounded).
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IamJacksContempt)
    lol keep perpetuating the myth that eastern europeans are stealing working class jobs. Just an excuse for people to be lazy and play the victim.

    Also if someone somehow is struggling to find work over someone who can barely speak the language then I'd say thats more a reflection upon their own failings. (and dont retort about nonsense of keeping down wages, its totally unfounded).
    They are.

    Well, as somebody who lives in a rural area, there are a good number of farmers who will pay extremely low wages to eastern europeans who pick apples in the fields.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WoodyMKC)
    Teenage gangs generally tend to be full of idiots. They'd gang up on someone English if they had a haircut or clothing items they didn't like the look of.
    Used to be terrible in my day.. pissed up gangs reguarly targeting individuals unlucky enough to walk by knocking them unconscious stamping on their head when down etc. Teens drinking on the streets isnt as common anymore round here but they were bad times
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TercioOfParma)
    That's not a completely insane suggestion. The influx of unskilled work from the former warsaw pact countries has made finding work for the working class much harder, and hence the anger and tension build. There is no doubt a cultural element too. Without the freedom of movement laws from the EU, this may have been avoided.
    That's a bold statement to make, and to me, a little old fashioned.
    Anyone know the employment stats for Essex? For unskilled work, how many EU immigrants is an individual likely to compete directly against?

    On an unrelated note, this makes me feel so sad. How someone's life has been snuffed out so carelessly
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TercioOfParma)
    They are.

    Well, as somebody who lives in a rural area, there are a good number of farmers who will pay extremely low wages to eastern europeans who pick apples in the fields.
    Thanks but "They are" doesn't really constitute as proof now does it?

    And how exactly is farmers paying low wages to eastern europeans picking apples in fields adversely effect British residents, most of whom wouldn't exactly be lining up for such a job?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Betelgeuse-)
    Used to be terrible in my day.. pissed up gangs reguarly targeting individuals unlucky enough to walk by knocking them unconscious stamping on their head when down etc. Teens drinking on the streets isnt as common anymore round here but they were bad times
    Same mate. I was a skater back in my teens as well and 10 years ago it wasn't really "normal" to be a skater, so naturally we ended up legging it from massive groups of chavvies on numerous occasions and got into several fights if we weren't outnumbered. As you said you don't see it much anymore, also lucky for me I'm a pretty big fella these days so I can walk through groups of teenagers and have them all move out of my way without saying a word :rofl:
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    That's a bold statement to make, and to me, a little old fashioned.
    Anyone know the employment stats for Essex? For unskilled work, how many EU immigrants is an individual likely to compete directly against?

    On an unrelated note, this makes me feel so sad. How someone's life has been snuffed out so carelessly
    Well, if you add more people to the workforce, especially a group that is known for hard work, then it will make it harder for the native population won't it?

    (Original post by IamJacksContempt)
    Thanks but "They are" doesn't really constitute as proof now does it?

    And how exactly is farmers paying low wages to eastern europeans picking apples in fields adversely effect British residents, most of whom wouldn't exactly be lining up for such a job?
    Well, It is a thing called logic. If you increase the number of people without increasing the number of jobs, you will have a lower chance of getting a job, won't you?

    Well, I think you'd be surprised. British people used to do the jobs, it is just that many people refuse to work for such low wages that the farmers are offering (I.E. Like £4 an hour, it is extremely low for illegal immigrants).
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WoodyMKC)
    Same mate. I was a skater back in my teens as well and 10 years ago it wasn't really "normal" to be a skater, so naturally we ended up legging it from massive groups of chavvies on numerous occasions and got into several fights if we weren't outnumbered. As you said you don't see it much anymore, also lucky for me I'm a pretty big fella these days so I can walk through groups of teenagers and have them all move out of my way without saying a word :rofl:
    We are prob a similar age and i would have been with more chavvy groups, some real nasty people mixed in. Saw them do some awful **** that could have easily turned into manslaughter charges. Madness
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TercioOfParma)
    Well, if you add more people to the workforce, especially a group that is known for hard work, then it will make it harder for the native population won't it?



    Well, It is a thing called logic. If you increase the number of people without increasing the number of jobs, you will have a lower chance of getting a job, won't you?

    Well, I think you'd be surprised. British people used to do the jobs, it is just that many people refuse to work for such low wages that the farmers are offering (I.E. Like £4 an hour, it is extremely low for illegal immigrants).
    No. It's a thing called talking out of your arse with absolutely no evidence to back up your ridiculous claims.

    http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/ea019.pdf

    Oh look Figure 6 on page 8; 'No relationship between changes in immigration and unemployment'.

    Figure 7; 'No relationship between changes in immigration and local wages'.

    I think I'll take LSE's empirical evidence over your "logic".


    And you're naive if you think the British workforce would be able to replace the labour on farms.

    http://www.fwi.co.uk/arable/farmers-...ker-scheme.htm

    HR manager at Corbey farmsL
    Last year, Cobrey employed 20 unemployed Brits for seasonal work, but none of them stayed for the whole season and most left after one day.“Most people who are unemployed in the UK don’t live where the work is available and they don’t want to do this sort of job,” she says.“The majority don’t want to come and cut asparagus for roughly the minimum wage. They think they’re worth more than that, but it’s still a very important job.”She insists that the SAWS scheme was the one thing that the UK Border Agency got right, as it allowed the best migrants to come and work in the UK, but only on restricted terms.Herefordshire soft fruit grower and NFU horticulture and potatoes board vice-chairman Anthony Snell says SAWS was well regulated and had been working well since the 1960s to help farms “bulk up” on seasonal staff shortages.He accuses the government of scrapping SAWS for short-term political gains to give the perception it is tackling immigration.But Mr Snell says SAWS was never about foreigners taking British people’s jobs.He would prefer to employ Brits, but maintains most unemployed workers don’t want low-skilled, seasonal manual labour – they want full-time jobs.“It would be nice to find unemployed Brits to do these jobs, but the work ethic is very different from what we’ve had from eastern Europeans in the past.”
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IamJacksContempt)
    No. It's a thing called talking out of your arse with absolutely no evidence to back up your ridiculous claims.

    http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/ea019.pdf

    Oh look Figure 6 on page 8; 'No relationship between changes in immigration and unemployment'.

    Figure 7; 'No relationship between changes in immigration and local wages'.

    I think I'll take LSE's empirical evidence over your "logic".


    And you're naive if you think the British workforce would be able to replace the labour on farms.

    http://www.fwi.co.uk/arable/farmers-...ker-scheme.htm

    HR manager at Corbey farmsL
    Last year, Cobrey employed 20 unemployed Brits for seasonal work, but none of them stayed for the whole season and most left after one day.“Most people who are unemployed in the UK don’t live where the work is available and they don’t want to do this sort of job,” she says.“The majority don’t want to come and cut asparagus for roughly the minimum wage. They think they’re worth more than that, but it’s still a very important job.”She insists that the SAWS scheme was the one thing that the UK Border Agency got right, as it allowed the best migrants to come and work in the UK, but only on restricted terms.Herefordshire soft fruit grower and NFU horticulture and potatoes board vice-chairman Anthony Snell says SAWS was well regulated and had been working well since the 1960s to help farms “bulk up” on seasonal staff shortages.He accuses the government of scrapping SAWS for short-term political gains to give the perception it is tackling immigration.But Mr Snell says SAWS was never about foreigners taking British people’s jobs.He would prefer to employ Brits, but maintains most unemployed workers don’t want low-skilled, seasonal manual labour – they want full-time jobs.“It would be nice to find unemployed Brits to do these jobs, but the work ethic is very different from what we’ve had from eastern Europeans in the past.”
    IT'S ****ING ILLEGAL THEY WON'T HAVE ANY GODDAM RECORDS OF IT. If we were talking about legal employment for these fields, sure, fine and fair enough. The thing is, it isn't.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.