4 ms·

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 smalle

by 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

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.