Thread: Letting the Commies in

Listening to the BBC this morning I was extremely pleased to hear that the UK is starting to grow some balls and stop the new members countris of the EU from invading and taking all of the jobs.

I looked into working back home a few months ago and questioned a few friends out there about what life was like on the job hunting front. Apparantely since Poland has been given freedom to enter the UK jobs have been snapped up by eastern Europeans willing to work for mininum wage.

Not good.

Every time they EU let's on of these poor underdeveloped countries joins it is slowly crippling itself.

Currently there is a serious drought of skilled labourers in Poland since they have all pissed off to where the money is, which is fair enough.

Hopefully the UK will be able to stick by its' guns and limit the influx of the latest member states Romania and Hungary.

I can see that the immigrants will do the jobs that the dole bluggers won't but they must also be reducing the opportunity of fresh graduates and experienced workers since companies can now hire graduates and experienced workers for less.

BBC article below.

Last Updated: Wednesday, 25 October 2006, 12:03 GMT 13:03 UK
E-mail this to a friend Printable version
Viewpoints: EU migration curbs

Limits will be set on the numbers of migrants coming to the UK from Hungary and Romania, Home Secretary John Reid says. His decision to introduce restrictions on the EU's newest members has provoked strong responses.

BRENDAN BARBER, TRADES UNION CONGRESS
TUC general secretary Brendan Barber has generally welcomed immigration from the newer EU states, and he says the latest Home Office plans could worsen working conditions for immigrants.
The UK government cannot stop the free movement of new EU citizens, nor can it prevent them working as self-employed once they are here.
More should be done to crack down on rogue employers


TUC general secretary Brendan Barber


Bogus self-employment and cash-in-hand jobs are two of the commonest ways that workers are exploited in the UK.
Undercutting legal rights such as the minimum wage drives down wages and conditions for all workers, and leads to tax evasion by both workers and their bosses.
The right response to EU enlargement is properly enforced rights that prevent the exploitation of anyone working in the UK - not measures that are more likely to increase the bad treatment of workers.
While we welcome the recognition in [the Home Office] statement that more should be done to crack down on rogue employers, they are neither broad nor effective enough to lift standards.



SUSAN ANDERSON, CONFEDERATION OF BRITISH INDUSTRY
The CBI has previously opposed any attempts to cap migration. But Susan Anderson, CBI director of human resources policy, says she welcomes the government's decision.
Migrant labour is vital to the UK. Recent migrant workers from central Europe have brought with them much-needed skills and hard work, to the benefit of our economy.
Businesses with a provable need for skilled migrant workers will still be able to hire staff from Romania and Bulgaria


CBI director of human resources policy Susan Anderson


The number of these workers coming to the UK has far exceeded expectations, though, so it is right to take a measured approach and apply temporary restrictions on Romania and Bulgaria.
An annual review of its policy will allow the government to monitor the emerging effects of migration on the labour market and on public services, and make changes as needed.
Under the government's plans, businesses with a provable need for skilled migrant workers will still be able to hire staff from Romania and Bulgaria, and sectors that are heavily reliant on seasonal migrant workers will be able to source unskilled labour.



CATHERINE DREW, INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH
The left-leaning think-tank believes the curbs will not stop Bulgarians and Romanians from coming to the UK and working illegally.
Catherine Drew, the IPPR's migration specialist, says John Reid's decision is politically motivated.
The policy they've announced is not an admission the government got it wrong last time around.
Public opinion has swayed against immigration


IPPR migration specialist Catherine Drew


There is plenty of evidence that the UK has benefited enormously from workers from the eight Eastern European nations which joined in 2004.
This is above all a political decision. If it had been left alone to economic evidence then Bulgarian and Romanian workers would be allowed to come.
But because the numbers of workers who have come in the past two years are so different to what they estimated, and public opinion has swayed against immigration, that is why the decision has been made.



RUTH LEA, CENTRE FOR POLICY STUDIES
The right-leaning think-tank questions the wisdom of unfettered immigration. CPS director Ruth Lea says she sympathises with what John Reid is trying to achieve.
When there was full employment, I think people were generally quite relaxed about immigration from central Europe.
If they come here and can't get work, they may well just go straight back home


CPS director Ruth Lea


The problem is that unemployment is rising and inflation is picking up. We might be facing a period of economic slow-down.
With this as a background, you may well want to restrict immigrants from coming into the country.
Although I sympathise with what he is trying to do, I can't see how John Reid can stop people from coming in. These countries will be full members of the EU and have a right to freedom of movement.
But if they come here and can't get work, they may well just go straight back home - so in that respect, market forces might just solve the problem for us.

This is the price that richer EU countries has to pay in order to get their poorer neighbours up to the same level.
England should take their part of that burden and stop whining.

Some countries may see an economical slowdown because of this.
The jobs/production does however stay within the union so EU in total will not be affected.

Anyone that does not agree that a Europe with countries at equal level is a safer and stronger Europe ?

So on top of letting in a huge number of refugees and assylum seekers we should also let in more people who can in theory after six months sign on for benefits as well.

I believe this is a right an EU country,.

There wouldn't be much point to the EU if the new members did not get a fair chance. The wall to the outside world is already high enough, there's no point in building more walls inside the EU. Then we might as well scrap the whole idea.

The first thing that should be done is to stop the ridiculous moving of the EU parliament back and forth every year which costs hundreds of millions of Euro. Silly use of tax money and resembles the middle ages where royal entourages changed dwellings between winter and summer.

Originally Posted by lom

This is the price that richer EU countries has to pay in order to get their poorer neighbours up to the same level.
England should take their part of that burden and stop whining.

Some countries may see an economical slowdown because of this.
The jobs/production does however stay within the union so EU in total will not be affected.

Anyone that does not agree that a Europe with countries at equal level is a safer and stronger Europe ?

and this is exactly the same reasoning the UK has avoided changing over to the Euro for about the last 10 years.

bladdy selfish attitudes prevailing

Was just chatting to my old man about this.

He is pro EU. Which suprised me.

He said that in Germany now the illegal workers are now being replaced by POles rather than Turks.

He thinks that it is viable for the EU to become a Federal group.

Just now the EU is the second largest trading group in the world.

He doesn't think that the EU army is ever going to happen though.

Originally Posted by lom

England should take their part of that burden and stop whining.

This is the first time that the UK has put any restrictions on employment of European citizens. My internet provider is running a poll and the results as of two minutes ago is below:-

Have your say

Is the Home Secretary right to limit the number of EU workers coming to work in the UK?

• Yes
  94.48 %
• No
  4.15 %
• I don't know
  1.36 %

I also believe that France has had restrictions in place for the last couple of years.

the same results would be most probably in any other country to the question:

Is the Home Secretary right to limit the number of the UK workers coming to work in xxx country?

or is only working class in the UK that brainwashed by the mass media and state propaganda and lacks understanding of the economic system they live in?

Originally Posted by massagelondon

would you be extremely pleased if some thai nationalists throw all foreign passport teachers from thailand, because they were taking place of locals?

I take issue with this.
English teachers are tolerated because they provide an 'expertise' which is in short supply in THailand. It is not uncommon nations adopt selective work permit and immigration procedures to ensure the countries national interests are served.

While I appreciate your explanation, re the international nature and impact of capitalism, I find it too simplistic to call the British working class "brainwashed" as an explanation for the disapproval of migration.

I do agree in that I believe Marxism may well see a revival within the next few years, when people in the most developed nations will increasingly feel the pressure of "free" markets and globalisation and will have to dismantle their the social reforms of the last century one by one, and workers movements in the former socialist countries will take shape - rather ironic, that exploitation of human and environmental resources should be most rampant now in "commmunist" China, for example.

Originally Posted by stroller

Apparantely since Poland has been given freedom to enter the UK jobs have been snapped up by eastern Europeans willing to work for mininum wage.

It's all to your advantage, low wages make the British economy more competitive worldwide, in turn creating more employment opportunities.
The Eastern Europeans are good for replenishing the decadent stock by introducing some new genes as well.

Stroller ... no intention to hijack this thread but I really thought it would be fair to point out that this train of though would indicate there is something we actually agree on because I believe the same thing about immigration in the US. Please clear it up for me ... are you PRO immigration ?

So you would be quite happy for the US to embrace Mexico and Haiti and let them travel into the country freely and work there.

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

Stroller ... no intention to hijack this thread but I really thought it would be fair to point out that this train of though would indicate there is something we actually agree on because I believe the same thing about immigration in the US. Please clear it up for me ... are you PRO immigration ?

I was posting tongue in cheek.
And the issue is not so much immigration as such, but temporary migration within the EU.

Migration across the EU is not a new thing at all, what is new here is that it's been deregulated over the years to a degree that mass migration from the newly joined member-states poses a serious problem to communities in the richer member-states.

The UK has the obligation to accomodate and contribute their part, on the other hand, I also believe in maintaining memberstates'autonomy to a degree which allows them to respond to situations such as this and regulate migration.

It's not a matter of pro- or against, in my view it's an issue between the EU and British national policy.

If the EU becomes cross-pollinated enough you might as well call it...uh...the United States of Europe.

If mass immigration takes place in a major European nation it will lose its identity? Will England still be called England if 'English' make up less than 50% of the population? Will it still be called Germany if Germans are only 1/3 of the citizenry?

We don't have that problem here because ethnically there is no such thing as an American per se.

Originally Posted by surasak

If the EU becomes cross-pollinated enough you might as well call it...uh...the United States of Europe.

If mass immigration takes place in a major European nation it will lose its identity? Will England still be called England if 'English' make up less than 50% of the population? Will it still be called Germany if Germans are only 1/3 of the citizenry?

We don't have that problem here because ethnically there is no such thing as an American per se.

Also, the people most likely to emmigrate to the US are already American citizens..... Mexicans, Columbians, etc....

Originally Posted by surasak

If mass immigration takes place in a major European nation it will lose its identity? Will England still be called England if 'English' make up less than 50% of the population? Will it still be called Germany if Germans are only 1/3 of the citizenry?

That's hypothetical, but not an impossible scenario within the existing laws.
Europe is not comparable to the US, let me say it differently from you: the states have a distinct cultural and national identity from each other, which have grown over hundreds of years. Any European Union with a future supported by the population needs to take this into account, changes are happening too fast, and anyway, the European government is a complete farce IMHO.

british population is dying out and emigrating - in order for the economy to exist is a workforce and it can be done only be giving work permits to immigrants.

I did not state that working class in britain is brainwashed - I did put a question mark at the end of the sentence. I do know that some workers in britain do have class consciousness - but unfortunately it's a minority, judging by the poll results.

The old "arguments" between those countries are mostly gone.

We only learned when to keep our mouths shut, but really - fekking frogs, fekking soapdodgers, fekking spaghettis...

Originally Posted by stroller

Originally Posted by surasak

If mass immigration takes place in a major European nation it will lose its identity? Will England still be called England if 'English' make up less than 50% of the population? Will it still be called Germany if Germans are only 1/3 of the citizenry?

That's hypothetical, but not an impossible scenario within the existing laws.
Europe is not comparable to the US, let me say it differently from you: the states have a distinct cultural and national identity from each other, which have grown over hundreds of years.

That's my point: immigration in most other countries is designed to keep as many of 'them' out as possible to preserve the inherent nature of the majority ethnic group's control over society and culture. Britain, France, Germany, Austria, Poland, Thailand, etc....all named after the predominant ethnic group. Under a unified Europe that could change until it's more like the U.S. where it's a potpourri of Heinz 57s.

I think immigration should not be allowed if it threatens cultural integrity. But we can't do that here because we aren't the same.

If you were to do a search on positions available in Poland you would find hundreds of them open now because of the mass migration of Poles.

Problem is that the salaries are a pittance and nobody else is going to go and take those jobs.

Maybe the only way to do things is to set all the salaries at the same rate and raise the red flags.

Maybe the only way to do things is to set all the salaries at the same rate and raise the red flags.

That's the long term aim. It's supposed to gradually level out to similar levels, living expenses and wages throughout the Union.
We'll have to travel further for a bargain holiday and cheap sex.