3 ms·

> Britain chose not to exercise this right in the first place, so it seems fallacious to suggest that the government would exercise further restrictions if it c

> Britain chose not to exercise this right in the first place, so it seems fallacious to suggest that the government would exercise further restrictions if it could. It's not fallacious and the UK did do that [0] for 7 years after they realised that the A8 migration estimates were incredibly wrong. > In the UK, despite all of this immigration we have rather low rates of unemployment, marginally lower than before the 2004 expansion of the EU First of all, no one here said immigration is causing unemployment, just wage stagnation for certain industries. Second of all, it's not "counterintuitive", immigrants tend to move to areas with low unemployment so I would expect the above to be the case anyway. Most immigrants wouldn't come if there were no jobs. > This soon hits the point in the modern globalised world that the industry just becomes uncompetetive and closes down, outsources, invests in labour reducing machinery, or moves But that's not what's happening here, as you said, the jobs are still here (low unemployment). They're not automated or outsourced, they're done manually for minimum wage (or lower) by hard working immigrants from poorer countries. I have to say, you kind of changed the topic. We were discussing about the existence of limitations for low skilled workforce, not whether or not Brexit was a good idea. [0] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25565302 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25565302

fao_ 9y ago
> Most immigrants wouldn't come if there were no jobs. That's fallacious. Perception of a market does not always match actual figures about that market.
- vilmosi 9y ago
  Probably but we're talking about the UK here.
jimnotgym 9y ago
> But that's not what's happening here, as you said, the jobs are still here (low unemployment). They're not automated or outsourced, they're done manually for minimum wage (or lower) by hard working immigrants from poorer countries. If this new labour force had not appeared are you seriously suggesting that UK employers would just have paid more and more to attract workers from other sectors? How would they remain competitive?
- vilmosi 9y ago
  So you're not actually answering the topic at hand or the majority of my replies... OK. > If this new labour force had not appeared are you seriously suggesting that UK employers would just have paid more and more to attract workers from other sectors? Yes?! That's how it works... You literally agreed in your previous comment that part of the reason for wage stagnation was the extra new labour force. > How would they remain competitive? The same way they were competitive before 2004 I guess. If your company relies on low skilled manual labourers working 12h a day for minimum wage or you go bankrupt... You should go bankrupt. It stops you from modernising and increasing productivity long term.
  - jimnotgym 9y ago
    > If your company relies on low skilled manual labourers working 12h a day for minimum wage or you go bankrupt... You should go bankrupt. It stops you from modernising and increasing productivity long term Yes they would go bankrupt or move production or automate...like I said originally. Perhaps this results in less jobs in the economy and the low skilled get paid less, the economy shrinks and every one gets poorer? There is an interaction between immigration and wage growth but it is not a simple or linear one.
    - vilmosi 9y ago
      > Yes they would go bankrupt or move production or automate...like I said originally. Yes you did. Did you miss the part where I replied to that? > Perhaps this results in less jobs in the economy and the low skilled get paid less, the economy shrinks and every one gets poorer? I'm sorry but what are you talking about? Shitty companies going bankrupt does not mean less jobs or lower wages, in fact the opposite. It's natural and a good thing in a free market. So I don't know what you are on about here. > There is an interaction between immigration and wage growth but it is not a simple or linear one. Oh for sure. Immigration can definitely increase wages and the economy and create jobs. But you forgot the low skilled part. Look, this thread has gone long enough and you're not addressing most of the things I write, so I don't see the point of this. All I wanted was to clarify that the UK did not in fact have any power to limit freedom of movement of workers from the EU, that's it. I never wanted to argue about anything else.

fao_ 9y ago

> Most immigrants wouldn't come if there were no jobs. That's fallacious. Perception of a market does not always match actual figures about that market.

vilmosi 9y ago
Probably but we're talking about the UK here.

jimnotgym 9y ago

> But that's not what's happening here, as you said, the jobs are still here (low unemployment). They're not automated or outsourced, they're done manually for minimum wage (or lower) by hard working immigrants from poorer countries. If this new labour force had not appeared are you seriously suggesting that UK employers would just have paid more and more to attract workers from other sectors? How would they remain competitive?

vilmosi 9y ago
So you're not actually answering the topic at hand or the majority of my replies... OK. > If this new labour force had not appeared are you seriously suggesting that UK employers would just have paid more and more to attract workers from other sectors? Yes?! That's how it works... You literally agreed in your previous comment that part of the reason for wage stagnation was the extra new labour force. > How would they remain competitive? The same way they were competitive before 2004 I guess. If your company relies on low skilled manual labourers working 12h a day for minimum wage or you go bankrupt... You should go bankrupt. It stops you from modernising and increasing productivity long term.
- jimnotgym 9y ago
  > If your company relies on low skilled manual labourers working 12h a day for minimum wage or you go bankrupt... You should go bankrupt. It stops you from modernising and increasing productivity long term Yes they would go bankrupt or move production or automate...like I said originally. Perhaps this results in less jobs in the economy and the low skilled get paid less, the economy shrinks and every one gets poorer? There is an interaction between immigration and wage growth but it is not a simple or linear one.
  - vilmosi 9y ago
    > Yes they would go bankrupt or move production or automate...like I said originally. Yes you did. Did you miss the part where I replied to that? > Perhaps this results in less jobs in the economy and the low skilled get paid less, the economy shrinks and every one gets poorer? I'm sorry but what are you talking about? Shitty companies going bankrupt does not mean less jobs or lower wages, in fact the opposite. It's natural and a good thing in a free market. So I don't know what you are on about here. > There is an interaction between immigration and wage growth but it is not a simple or linear one. Oh for sure. Immigration can definitely increase wages and the economy and create jobs. But you forgot the low skilled part. Look, this thread has gone long enough and you're not addressing most of the things I write, so I don't see the point of this. All I wanted was to clarify that the UK did not in fact have any power to limit freedom of movement of workers from the EU, that's it. I never wanted to argue about anything else.