How do we think EU negotiations will go?
Discussion
B'stard Child said:
We can have thousands of imported doctors, nurses, lawyers, teachers, accountants or anything to be honest all over the £32K threshold but to my mind if their bins don't get emptied or the sewage doesn't flow away from the toilet they aren't going to want to stay very long.
sidlicks - this does not mean I am saying that bin people or sewage people should be on a min wage of £32K
Neither am I saying that all immigrants should have to earn £32k or not be admitted. But those making general comments about immigrants ‘adding economic value’ need to understand that this is far from the case for many.sidlicks - this does not mean I am saying that bin people or sewage people should be on a min wage of £32K
The UK is a low wage economy for 2 principal reasons, neither of which has anything to do with EU immigrants;
(1) We have appalling productivity. You cannot pay much for ineffectual work.
(2) We do not export many products or services that rely on low to medium skill workers, so those kind of workers are essentially servicing a small (and not hugely wealthy) home market.
(1) We have appalling productivity. You cannot pay much for ineffectual work.
(2) We do not export many products or services that rely on low to medium skill workers, so those kind of workers are essentially servicing a small (and not hugely wealthy) home market.
ORD said:
The UK is a low wage economy for 2 principal reasons, neither of which has anything to do with EU immigrants;
(1) We have appalling productivity. You cannot pay much for ineffectual work.
(2) We do not export many products or services that rely on low to medium skill workers, so those kind of workers are essentially servicing a small (and not hugely wealthy) home market.
Can you not make the leap between low productivity and high unskilled immigration?(1) We have appalling productivity. You cannot pay much for ineffectual work.
(2) We do not export many products or services that rely on low to medium skill workers, so those kind of workers are essentially servicing a small (and not hugely wealthy) home market.
Why invest 100k in a machine that will do the job of 10 men when you can employ 10 men for the one project the machine is immediately required for cheaper?
Then when the next project comes up, rather than having the machine already there you need to employ the 10 men again. Rinse and repeat.
No individual project takes the 100k hit but profitability is down long term whilst we have more people on lower salaries.
Off topic, but my take on Santa Barbara is that he or she may be a person with some degree of autism. I do not say this with any intention to insult. I agree that if he or she is a troll then he or she fails because of insufficient provocation and/or humour. The best trolls are those that drive you mega nuts and/or make you laugh.
Breadvan72 said:
Also the skills base is poor. The UK compares badly to similar nations in terms of education and training.
I agree. Closely related to my issue (1), I would think, but not quite the same point. The UK is overly reliant on its "elites" and, partly for that reason, has never seen much point in getting anyone else up to scratch (i.e. beyond basic schooling).
Ironically, that may well be the way that the World is going - only a small group of hugely skilled individuals will be able to generate value and will have to pay massive taxes to support everyone else ... but that is probably another (and even more depressing) conversation. It does make it fairly unlikely that the UK will suddenly start making and selling lots more stuff, though. That is nothing like the direction of travel.
ORD said:
The UK is a low wage economy for 2 principal reasons, neither of which has anything to do with EU immigrants;
(1) We have appalling productivity. You cannot pay much for ineffectual work.
If this is the case, then what is the reason for this? why are some sectors better than others.(1) We have appalling productivity. You cannot pay much for ineffectual work.
I am thinking of car manufacturing where the UK plants are regarded as the most efficient in Europe.
ORD said:
Garvin said:
Why? Everyone else? I do not understand such statements. If the EU is such a spiffing club then a) why is a penalty necessary; and b) why would everyone else drop out? These are question asked many times before but nobody, as yet, has been able to craft a credible answer. Can anyone here satisfy my curiosity on these questions?
Easy. If 'access to the Single Market' was a thing (which it isn't), it would obviously be a better choice than membership. All the benefits; none of the costs. 'Access' was never a thing, however, unless you are prepared to pay billions for it.
But if that is the only real sticking point why are the EU delaying the negotiation of such - it seems they want a bigger penalty to me and I still don't understand why!
TTwiggy said:
SantaBarbara said:
TTwiggy said:
You bothered to split the quotes up but couldn't stretch to actually addressing any of his points.
That was a pointless comment.Why bother?
Why are you so negative and so pessimistic all the time?
JagLover said:
Given that the issue is importing people who are burden on the taxpayer the design of that particular scheme help to ensure that those brought in are not a burden.
Once labour is properly priced then automation would take care of a great many low skilled jobs in any case. the issue is not whether natives would do the jobs, but why are we subsidizing businesses at public expense while increasing population density.
What evidence is there of substantial importation of burden people?Once labour is properly priced then automation would take care of a great many low skilled jobs in any case. the issue is not whether natives would do the jobs, but why are we subsidizing businesses at public expense while increasing population density.
Population density? The effect of migration is small when you look at the overall population. Cities are and have for some time been densely populated, but outside the cities the country is not, as some suggest, full up.
I add that I think that in any event we need a programme of building new towns with matching infrastructure, but we need that Brexit or no Brexit.
mx5nut said:
Let's see if you can last a whole day without dodging difficult questions with some variation of "i know u r but wot am i?"
Let’s see if you can last a whole day without posting nonsense and ignorant generalisations about ‘Brexiters’. You’ve already failed today, so maybe try tomorrow?Breadvan72 said:
What evidence is there of substantial importation of burden people?
Population density? The effect of migration is small when you look at the overall population. Cities are and have for some time been densely populated, but outside the cities the country is not, as some suggest, full up.
I add that I think that in any event we need a programme of building new towns with matching infrastructure, but we need that Brexit or no Brexit.
Not on my watch. About the only good thing about this country in the coming Corbyn years will be that we still have pleasant countryside!Population density? The effect of migration is small when you look at the overall population. Cities are and have for some time been densely populated, but outside the cities the country is not, as some suggest, full up.
I add that I think that in any event we need a programme of building new towns with matching infrastructure, but we need that Brexit or no Brexit.
SantaBarbara said:
TTwiggy said:
SantaBarbara said:
TTwiggy said:
You bothered to split the quotes up but couldn't stretch to actually addressing any of his points.
That was a pointless comment.Why bother?
Why are you so negative and so pessimistic all the time?
And now. You. Can go away. And leave. Me alone. Thank. You.
Not really wanting to get dragged into the "It's immigrants, innit?" fight, but..
Isn't the distinction we're trying to make between workers in industries where we have a shortage (fruit pickers, brain surgeons..) and industries where we have sufficient workers, but immigrant staff offer a (short term) drop in wages?
The social goal of most nations is to ensure (through minimum wage and high employment) that everyone who can contribute to society has the ability to do so, regardless of their skills and background etc. That includes the concept that, having contributed, each person can expect a minimum living standard.
So if we're bringing in immigrants who provide cheap labour simply because they're willing to accept a lower living standard, we're effectively lowering the minimum living standard of the country. In the process we're doing everyone a disservice.
I'm not sure how you codify that into an immigration policy, but should the idea be that in welcoming people into the country, we should also be ensuring that by our own living standards, they are not being exploited?
Isn't the distinction we're trying to make between workers in industries where we have a shortage (fruit pickers, brain surgeons..) and industries where we have sufficient workers, but immigrant staff offer a (short term) drop in wages?
The social goal of most nations is to ensure (through minimum wage and high employment) that everyone who can contribute to society has the ability to do so, regardless of their skills and background etc. That includes the concept that, having contributed, each person can expect a minimum living standard.
So if we're bringing in immigrants who provide cheap labour simply because they're willing to accept a lower living standard, we're effectively lowering the minimum living standard of the country. In the process we're doing everyone a disservice.
I'm not sure how you codify that into an immigration policy, but should the idea be that in welcoming people into the country, we should also be ensuring that by our own living standards, they are not being exploited?
Garvin said:
So that's it is it? Shell the EU some dosh for access to the Single Market. OK, doesn't seem much of a penalty to me!
But if that is the only real sticking point why are the EU delaying the negotiation of such - it seems they want a bigger penalty to me and I still don't understand why!
Perhaps you missed David Davis in committee this morning & I couldn't blame you for doing so, however, it throws a little sunlight on your question. DD essentially poured cold water on the no deal deal, you know the walking into oblivion no deal where we live in mud huts, barter with goat bones but have German made Blue passports. He used the phrase 'so improbable as to be off the scale', so if you follow the logic that the government is not countenancing non agreement on nuclear, aviation etc. in the absence of any trade deal, then it tells you who has the whip hand in negotiations. It's been pretty apparent since forever, but is one of those things that Brexiteers turn a cheek against, so I'm happy to point it out again.But if that is the only real sticking point why are the EU delaying the negotiation of such - it seems they want a bigger penalty to me and I still don't understand why!
sidicks said:
mx5nut said:
Let's see if you can last a whole day without dodging difficult questions with some variation of "i know u r but wot am i?"
Let’s see if you can last a whole day without posting nonsense and ignorant generalisations about ‘Brexiters’. You’ve already failed today, so maybe try tomorrow?Breadvan72 said:
Off topic, but my take on Santa Barbara is that he or she may be a person with some degree of autism. I do not say this with any intention to insult. I agree that if he or she is a troll then he or she fails because of insufficient provocation and/or humour. The best trolls are those that drive you mega nuts and/or make you laugh.
Like Eddie? 
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff