Infowars: end benefits, end immigration

Watch
SpikeyTeeth
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#1
Enoch Powell made a very relevant observation back in 1968. You don’t need to defend these points with economics. It should be good enough for someone to say that they do not want a large degree of change.

The sentiment that immigration is bad for us because it changes our situation and we are entitled to want or not want change. When we don’t we are now less afraid to say so than under the terror is more oppressive political correctness in recent times, hence the rise of UKIP. When I use the word terror, I don’t use it lightly. People have lost their livelihoods for expressing an opinion or using a un-word.

As is happens Alex Jones’ Infowars has jumped on the bandwagon recently with the argument, end welfare and end immigration. When we consider this argument we need to realize that welfare is not something binary e.g. unemployed. It is a whole gradient of government subsidies to the poor from child benefit, upwards to housing subsidies.

0
reply
Sanctimonious
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#2
Report 7 years ago
#2
Alex Jones has an IQ equivalent to the temperature of an ice cube. Anything he says is usually a load of nonsense.

I cannot see this going down well on here.
4
reply
imtelling
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#3
Report 7 years ago
#3
Mass immigration = free market corporate capitalism on steroids.

left wingers who support mass immigration = sock puppets of corporate capitalists.
1
reply
illegaltobepoor
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4
Report 7 years ago
#4
(Original post by imtelling)
Mass immigration = free market corporate capitalism on steroids.

left wingers who support mass immigration = sock puppets of corporate capitalists.
Thumbs up + Rep.


(Original post by SpikeyTeeth)
As is happens Alex Jones’ Infowars has jumped on the bandwagon recently with the argument, end welfare and end immigration. When we consider this argument we need to realize that welfare is not something binary e.g. unemployed. It is a whole gradient of government subsidies to the poor from child benefit, upwards to housing subsidies.
Right lets just start with this. At the end of that clip there is a man selling medical supplements in a bottle and claiming it will give you great health & vitality. That should tell you something. The target market of infowars is a group of incredibly dumb people who think Alex Jones can guide them to freedom & salvation.

Now moving on.

Most of central USA republican territory favours something called free-market libertarianism. It is the ideal political ideology to let corporatism flourish. When there is no welfare and a open immigration policy workers become slaves to the highest bidder. Basically human beings become cattle.

But putting a end to all forms of immigration is a stupid policy as well. There are Engineers, Doctors and Scientists which our nation needs. These professions take at least 10 years to become fluent in. So we have no choice to attract these people to work in our nation and going all Nationalist, Corporate and Anti-Foreigner is a bad way to attract new skilled Labour.

We should give incentives to attract skilled Labour AND We should not open the doors to mass immigration for people with no skills.

Alex Jones solution for ending immigration and welfare is nothing more than a political appeasement act to make his dumb followers vote for a Government who want to screw working people and turn them into milk cows.
0
reply
The_Duck
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#5
Report 7 years ago
#5
Cause you know, removing the benefits system completely isnt just ****ing barbaric. You want people starving out on the streets in England?
0
reply
username207685
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#6
Report 7 years ago
#6
(Original post by imtelling)
Mass immigration = free market corporate capitalism on steroids.

left wingers who support mass immigration = sock puppets of corporate capitalists.
There's an inherent tension there, though. Free movement of labour helps both capital and labour (globally if not locally in more developed countries), and restricting it hurts capital but only helps the labour in the more prosperous regions while abandoning the rest of the world.

Unless there is a world-wide movement towards improving the rights of workers then restricting immigration just locks people out of better lives while we maintain the benefits we've accrued largely from siphoning wealth and resources from the same countries we would now force people to stay in.
0
reply
CryptoidAlien
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#7
Report 7 years ago
#7
Illegal Immigration reform? Why aren't they called invaders instead? #minorityprivledge
0
reply
yo radical one
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#8
Report 7 years ago
#8
>People have lost their livelihoods for expressing an opinion or using a un-word.

If you call Black people ******* (the N-word) and lose your job for doing so, I really do find it hard to have any sympathy; nobody loses their job for saying things like "I think immigration should be curbed a bit".
0
reply
bertstare
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#9
Report 7 years ago
#9
Lol Alex Jones, seriously?
0
reply
imtelling
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#10
Report 7 years ago
#10
(Original post by betaglucowhat)
There's an inherent tension there, though. Free movement of labour helps both capital and labour (globally if not locally in more developed countries), and restricting it hurts capital but only helps the labour in the more prosperous regions while abandoning the rest of the world.

Unless there is a world-wide movement towards improving the rights of workers then restricting immigration just locks people out of better lives while we maintain the benefits we've accrued largely from siphoning wealth and resources from the same countries we would now force people to stay in.
Free movement of labour doesn't help workers. It pits workers in dog eat dog competition for jobs and resources, which not only lowers wages, but also weakens workers rights.

Free movement of labour is a central pillar of global corporate capitalism.

Britains wealth was the result of technological advancement, which saw machines invented which could do the work of thousands of men in a fraction of the time. The agricultural, scientific and industrial revolutions all begun in Britain.

If Britain wants to help other countries, then poaching their human talent is not the way to go about it. Helping them become more technologically advanced helps everyone.
0
reply
username207685
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#11
Report 7 years ago
#11
(Original post by imtelling)
Free movement of labour doesn't help workers. It pits workers in dog eat dog competition for jobs and resources, which not only lowers wages, but also weakens workers rights.
Immigration doesn't do these things any more than population growth does. Capitalists do these things whenever they are legally allowed to, immigration is just another excuse. Additionally, they only happen to workers already in developed countries. The workers migrating away from deprivation, disease, and conflict are relatively much better off. Restricting the freedom of workers in order to reign in the abuses of capital is just replacing one form of oppression with another.

Britains wealth was the result of technological advancement, which saw machines invented which could do the work of thousands of men in a fraction of the time. The agricultural, scientific and industrial revolutions all begun in Britain.
And all of it fuelled by resources and wealth extracted from other countries.

If Britain wants to help other countries, then poaching their human talent is not the way to go about it. Helping them become more technologically advanced helps everyone.
Technological advancement is irrelevant without robust workers rights. As I said, without a global improvement of worker's rights to ensure that workers are paid what they deserve, work in safe conditions, are secure from wrongful termination and exploitative employment contracts etc. then restricting immigration is just abandoning the developing world to give capitalists here one less excuse to keep jobs at the minimum wage when they will always have many others. With those improvements in place then the state of immigration as it relates to workers is irrelevant.

Immigration is a red herring when the goal should be safeguarding workers rights both here and abroad.
1
reply
somalia99
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#12
Report 7 years ago
#12
(Original post by SpikeyTeeth)
Enoch Powell made a very relevant observation back in 1968. You don’t need to defend these points with economics. It should be good enough for someone to say that they do not want a large degree of change.

The sentiment that immigration is bad for us because it changes our situation and we are entitled to want or not want change. When we don’t we are now less afraid to say so than under the terror is more oppressive political correctness in recent times, hence the rise of UKIP. When I use the word terror, I don’t use it lightly. People have lost their livelihoods for expressing an opinion or using a un-word.

As is happens Alex Jones’ Infowars has jumped on the bandwagon recently with the argument, end welfare and end immigration. When we consider this argument we need to realize that welfare is not something binary e.g. unemployed. It is a whole gradient of government subsidies to the poor from child benefit, upwards to housing subsidies.

Alex Jones?

/thread.
0
reply
imtelling
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#13
Report 7 years ago
#13
(Original post by betaglucowhat)
Immigration doesn't do these things any more than population growth does. Capitalists do these things whenever they are legally allowed to, immigration is just another excuse. Additionally, they only happen to workers already in developed countries. The workers migrating away from deprivation, disease, and conflict are relatively much better off. Restricting the freedom of workers in order to reign in the abuses of capital is just replacing one form of oppression with another.



And all of it fuelled by resources and wealth extracted from other countries.



Technological advancement is irrelevant without robust workers rights. As I said, without a global improvement of worker's rights to ensure that workers are paid what they deserve, work in safe conditions, are secure from wrongful termination and exploitative employment contracts etc. then restricting immigration is just abandoning the developing world to give capitalists here one less excuse to keep jobs at the minimum wage when they will always have many others. With those improvements in place then the state of immigration as it relates to workers is irrelevant.

Immigration is a red herring when the goal should be safeguarding workers rights both here and abroad.

Mass immigration is a deliberate policy, which sees hundreds of thousands of cheap units of labour injected into the economy every year -- I use the term 'cheap units of labour' because this is exactly how the system sees them.

This policy impoverishes the working class of this country and it's the working class of this county who the left should be looking out for. This isn't to say immigration has to be stopped completely, it's just that it has to be more tightly controlled.

As for wealth, technology is all that matters. GDP is the result of productivity, nothing else. Technology greatly increases productivity and it's this massive increase in productivity which increases wealth for everyone. Workers rights are the icing in the cake, but without technology, you have no wealth. The poorest nations in the world are also the most technologically backwards.

To help these nations, you have to help them become more technologically advanced. It's the only way to help everybody, and not just a few.

As for Britains wealth, the industrial revolution was powered by coal; coal which was mined in Britain. Britain wasn't the only country to industrialise and make itself wealthy. Lots of countries, without empire, did the same and eventually became richer than Britain. So, it wasn't empire which made Britain rich, it was modern technology; much of which was invented in the 20th century long after the empire had gone.

Besides, the colonies were net burdens on the state.
0
reply
username207685
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#14
Report 7 years ago
#14
(Original post by imtelling)
Mass immigration is a deliberate policy, which sees hundreds of thousands of cheap units of labour injected into the economy every year -- I use the term 'cheap units of labour' because this is exactly how the system sees them.
There is no such thing as cheap labour if capitalists are required by law to pay workers a living wage. Again, immigration is no different to population growth - both change the same variables. The common factor is the ability of capitalists to lobby government for favourable legislation and to always make as much profit as possible. Wages for the majority of people have been stagnant or near-stagnant since the 70s-80s and net migration has only been consistently positive since the turn of the century. Immigration is not the problem.

This policy impoverishes the working class of this country and it's the working class of this county who the left should be looking out for. This isn't to say immigration has to be stopped completely, it's just that it has to be more tightly controlled.
Well, speaking as someone who is broadly left-wing I care about people, not just the British people. Perhaps you're thinking of right-wing populist nationalism - UKIP etc.

As for wealth, technology is all that matters. GDP is the result of productivity, nothing else. Technology greatly increases productivity and it's this massive increase in productivity which increases wealth for everyone. Workers rights are the icing in the cake, but without technology, you have no wealth. The poorest nations in the world are also the most technologically backwards.

To help these nations, you have to help them become more technologically advanced. It's the only way to help everybody, and not just a few.
The technology and GDP of a country are worthless if the produced wealth is all redistributed upwards to the wealthiest percentiles, workers are on zero hour contracts in dangerous conditions, paid a pittance and liable to be sacked for any reason without recourse.

As for Britains wealth, the industrial revolution was powered by coal; coal which was mined in Britain. Britain wasn't the only country to industrialise and make itself wealthy. Lots of countries, without empire, did the same and eventually became richer than Britain. So, it wasn't empire which made Britain rich, it was modern technology; much of which was invented in the 20th century long after the empire had gone.

Besides, the colonies were net burdens on the state.
Yeah, the point at which someone claiming to care about the welfare of people in developing countries starts defending imperialism and pretending colonial powers didn't benefit from the wealth, resources, and power they extracted from their colonies is about the point I bow out. Laters.
0
reply
Kanbei
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#15
Report 7 years ago
#15
(Original post by betaglucowhat)
Well, speaking as someone who is broadly left-wing I care about people, not just the British people. Perhaps you're thinking of right-wing populist nationalism - UKIP etc.
As someone who is broadly right-wing I would like to remind you that the world median household income is less than ten thousand dollars a year. Absolute free migration will quickly bring down the unskilled British workers' wages down to this level. The average British lifestyle is not even possible for the world's resource either because for a start, the Earth doesn't have enough resources to let everybody have meat and fish everyday and a car for each household. If you could bear with it, feel free do donate any of your income above this value to charities, eat vegetarian and don't use a car but I would hate to have people doing good at my expense. Yes I know, this is completely selfish and greedy. But I doubt anybody who lives in Britain can cast the first stone on my view.
0
reply
slade p
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#16
Report 7 years ago
#16
immigration should not end.
0
reply
PicardianSocialist
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#17
Report 7 years ago
#17
[QUOTE=illegaltobepoor;48299232]
Most of central USA republican territory favours something called free-market libertarianism.

I assume by republican you mean the Republican party. The Republicans are by means libertarians. They are conservatives: They favour restrictive social policies, immigration restrictions, and an interventionist foreign policy combined with status-quo state capitalism. Libertarians oppose all of that.


(Original post by imtelling)

Free movement of labour doesn't help workers. It pits workers in dog eat dog competition for jobs and resources, which not only lowers wages, but also weakens workers rights.
That's not true. It forces UK workers to compete with foreign workers, but it also forces foreign employers to compete with UK employers. Open borders would cause an equilibration of wages as employees move to higher paid jobs. That's how arbitrage works.
0
reply
username207685
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#18
Report 7 years ago
#18
(Original post by Kanbei)
As someone who is broadly right-wing I would like to remind you that the world median household income is less than ten thousand dollars a year. Absolute free migration will quickly bring down the unskilled British workers' wages down to this level.
Given that the law would prevent that from happening - nope.

The average British lifestyle is not even possible for the world's resource either because for a start, the Earth doesn't have enough resources to let everybody have meat and fish everyday and a car for each household. If you could bear with it, feel free do donate any of your income above this value to charities, eat vegetarian and don't use a car but I would hate to have people doing good at my expense. Yes I know, this is completely selfish and greedy. But I doubt anybody who lives in Britain can cast the first stone on my view.
I won't engage with your tu quoque fallacy, but I will just say that protecting the rights of workers does not necessitate the excessive resource consumption of Western nations.
0
reply
DErasmus
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#19
Report 7 years ago
#19
(Original post by imtelling)
Mass immigration = free market corporate capitalism on steroids.

left wingers who support mass immigration = sock puppets of corporate capitalists.
lol odd how the left wingers have become the reactionaries

welcome to the 21st century m8

immigrants are people (workers) too!
0
reply
Basilla
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#20
Report 7 years ago
#20
(Original post by Sanctimonious)
Alex Jones has an IQ equivalent to the temperature of an ice cube. Anything he says is usually a load of nonsense.

I cannot see this going down well on here.
An IQ of 273.15? That's ****ing impressive dude.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Poll: What factors affect your mental health most right now? Post-lockdown edition

Anxiousness about restrictions easing (21)
6.56%
Uncertainty around my education (35)
10.94%
Uncertainty around my future career prospects (37)
11.56%
Lack of purpose or motivation (46)
14.38%
Lack of support system (eg. teachers, counsellors, delays in care) (17)
5.31%
Impact lockdown had on physical health (14)
4.38%
Social worries (incl. loneliness/making friends) (31)
9.69%
Financial worries (22)
6.88%
Concern about myself or my loves ones getting/having been ill (14)
4.38%
Exposure to negative news/social media (19)
5.94%
Difficulty accessing real life entertainment (6)
1.88%
Lack of confidence in making big life decisions (34)
10.63%
Worry about missed opportunities during the pandemic (24)
7.5%

Watched Threads

View All