3 ms·

The problem - or at least one of them, it seems - here is the speed of changes. Britons may be not that much against the lower-paid Eastern European, if their "

by avmich 3y ago

The problem - or at least one of them, it seems - here is the speed of changes. Britons may be not that much against the lower-paid Eastern European, if their "invasion" doesn't happen overnight and Britons have time to adjust. However it's harder to organize with binary choice "in EU - not in EU", maybe it needs to have a longer period of gradually allowing more and more of the change. Obviously you can't change education system or even re-train the existing workers in the face of sudden coming of a lot of maybe more narrowly specialized but cheaper workforce.

mrtksn 3y ago
As I said, there's no such thing as lower-paid Eastern Europeans. Whoever works in UK is employed under the same rules as the British. You might complain about expanding the talent pool but that's a good thing. If you think that expanding the talent pool is a bad thing, you can shut down schools and ban having kids to shrink talent pool in order to protect the current jobs. Also, nothing sudden happened in 2016 about Eastern Europeans, Poland joined 12 years before that and Bulgaria and Romania 9 years.
- avmich 3y ago
  I think we have different meanings here. When talked about low-paid Eastern Europeans, it means that in Poland or Bulgaria a certain work position offers smaller salaries than the same one in UK for many kinds of positions. This creates the pressure to the workers to migrate from Eastern Europe to UK, among other places. Expanding the talent pool is better for consumers of that pool, but worse for providers - that is, a UK worker earning some salary may find that his salary stagnates or reduces because of more workers with similar qualifications arrived from lower-paid Eastern Europe. So it a bit depends on definition. Shutting down schools and banning kids will lead to the same - but over a much longer time period which may be enough to more comfortably adapt; of course these two measures have severe unintended consequences. Yes, Brexit's 2016 isn't a year when a country from Eastern Europe joined EU - but could be a year when the consequences of such joining, accumulating over time, reached the level which allowed Brexiters to prevail.
  - mrtksn 3y ago
    See, expanding the pool only in one area can be bad for the providers but expanding it on all fronts is good for everyone. Why? Because you are compensated with money but you can’t consume money - you can benefit by exchanging it for a product or service and the more people are working the cheaper these are. For example, if a Polish person pushed your salary down by immigrating to UK, another Polish person who is a butcher pushes your cost of eating meat down too. Another one pushes down your health costs or transport costs. When it’s a free market, it automatically balances the economy. When you have too much money but too little people who create the product and services, it causes inflation. What creates prosperity in a society are working people, not numbers in the bank account going up.
    - avmich 3y ago
      Overall on average, yes. In practice it's hit or miss - if you're in the industry which doesn't have an influx of cheap competition, you net benefit from overall increase of competition, but if you're say a barber and there's a train of barbers from Czechoslovakia, your income suddenly drops and it will take quite a bit of competition in other areas to compensate the drop for you. So in the mean time you could be quite vocal about that price undercutting process.

by avmich 3y ago

mrtksn 3y ago

As I said, there's no such thing as lower-paid Eastern Europeans. Whoever works in UK is employed under the same rules as the British. You might complain about expanding the talent pool but that's a good thing. If you think that expanding the talent pool is a bad thing, you can shut down schools and ban having kids to shrink talent pool in order to protect the current jobs. Also, nothing sudden happened in 2016 about Eastern Europeans, Poland joined 12 years before that and Bulgaria and Romania 9 years.

avmich 3y ago
I think we have different meanings here. When talked about low-paid Eastern Europeans, it means that in Poland or Bulgaria a certain work position offers smaller salaries than the same one in UK for many kinds of positions. This creates the pressure to the workers to migrate from Eastern Europe to UK, among other places. Expanding the talent pool is better for consumers of that pool, but worse for providers - that is, a UK worker earning some salary may find that his salary stagnates or reduces because of more workers with similar qualifications arrived from lower-paid Eastern Europe. So it a bit depends on definition. Shutting down schools and banning kids will lead to the same - but over a much longer time period which may be enough to more comfortably adapt; of course these two measures have severe unintended consequences. Yes, Brexit's 2016 isn't a year when a country from Eastern Europe joined EU - but could be a year when the consequences of such joining, accumulating over time, reached the level which allowed Brexiters to prevail.
- mrtksn 3y ago
  See, expanding the pool only in one area can be bad for the providers but expanding it on all fronts is good for everyone. Why? Because you are compensated with money but you can’t consume money - you can benefit by exchanging it for a product or service and the more people are working the cheaper these are. For example, if a Polish person pushed your salary down by immigrating to UK, another Polish person who is a butcher pushes your cost of eating meat down too. Another one pushes down your health costs or transport costs. When it’s a free market, it automatically balances the economy. When you have too much money but too little people who create the product and services, it causes inflation. What creates prosperity in a society are working people, not numbers in the bank account going up.
  - avmich 3y ago
    Overall on average, yes. In practice it's hit or miss - if you're in the industry which doesn't have an influx of cheap competition, you net benefit from overall increase of competition, but if you're say a barber and there's a train of barbers from Czechoslovakia, your income suddenly drops and it will take quite a bit of competition in other areas to compensate the drop for you. So in the mean time you could be quite vocal about that price undercutting process.