|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:53 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| You are talking about the Mexicans. It is very easy to say this is a problem. Those who come are thereupon exploited. |
Yes, I am. Not exclusively Mexicans but mostly. They decrease the wages of the other racial underclass and allow firms to import workers if they don't want to pay the prevailing wage.
| Quote: |
| In any case, bringing the Mexicans here will always be superior to sending the factories down there. Always. |
There are significant costs to creating a second racial underclass. Kuros, would you put your kids in a public school in California, Houston, Miami, NYC etc? That's a cost on you. How about health care? Incarceration? Section 8? A less skilled and talented work force? Eventually there will be a move to separate the SW back to Mexico. These are costs.
Which Fortune 500 firms were started by illegal Mexican immigrants? The lady who sells me a taco on the street after the pub is an entrepreneur but what is the cost of that taco to society?
Canada isn't out of the water either:
| Quote: |
TORONTO � A newly released intelligence report says hardline Islamist groups want to build a �parallel society� in Canada, which could undermine the country�s social cohesion and foster violence.
The de-classified Intelligence Assessment obtained by the National Post says extremists have been encouraging Muslims in the West to reject Western society and to live in �self-imposed isolation.� The report focuses on groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood and Hizb-ut-Tahrir, which do not advocate terrorist violence but promote an ideology at odds with core Western values.
�Even if the use of violence is not outwardly expressed, the creation of isolated communities can spawn groups that are exclusivist and potentially open to messages in which violence is advocated,� it says. �At a minimum, the existence of such mini-societies undermines resilience and the fostering of a cohesive Canadian nation.�
The report was written by the Integrated Threat Assessment Centre, which monitors threats to Canada�s national security and is composed of representatives of CSIS, the RCMP, Foreign Affairs, National Defence and other agencies. |
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Islamist+groups+seek+parallel+society+Canada+report/3827175/story.html#ixzz15OGja4cA
That's CSIS and the RCMP, not Stormfront. Which immigrants? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Quote: |
| In any case, bringing the Mexicans here will always be superior to sending the factories down there. Always. |
There are significant costs to creating a second racial underclass. Kuros, would you put your kids in a public school in California, Houston, Miami, NYC etc? That's a cost on you. How about health care? Incarceration? Section 8? A less skilled and talented work force? Eventually there will be a move to separate the SW back to Mexico. These are costs. |
What are you talking about, 'creating?' Does it look like the US is creating this problem, to you? I'm talking about mitigation of a reality.
There are no pro illegal immigrant policy makers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 11:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| What are you talking about, 'creating?' Does it look like the US is creating this problem, to you? I'm talking about mitigation of a reality. |
Yes. Allowing millions of poor and unskilled people from one country to settle in your country illegally is creating a problem. The laws are fine. Just enforce them.
This is similar to Alberta. It has for some reason imported thousands of people from Somalia. The AB gov just spent a few million bucks trying to teach a few thousand people democracy.
http://www.inews880.com/Channels/Reg/LocalNews/story.aspx?ID=1222552 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
comm
Joined: 22 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 11:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
There are no pro illegal immigrant policy makers. |
Of course there are. Some lawmakers support illegal immigration on the grounds that it shouldn't be illegal (and in the hopes that they will eventually be able to vote for said politician).
I'll find you a few after some sleep. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2010 7:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/kausfiles/2010/12/27/obama-and-inequality-no-new-brazils.html
| Quote: |
We're going to be hearing a lot about income inequality over the next few years. It may be an abstract concept, but it gets hits like Sarah Palin and attracts grant money like Cory Booker. Tim Noah's series on the subject was (rightly) so popular he got a book contract out of it. Jacob Weisberg's piece, in which he declares (plausibly) that Obama is losing the "war on inequality" has been up for a few hours and is already a magnet for impassioned comments.
There are two big questions to ask liberal opponents of income inequality. 1) What, exactly, is it about greater economic inequality that's so bad? and 2) What you gonna do about it? Let's take the first question.* Noah wrestles with it and concludes
I do not wish to live in a banana republic. There is a reason why, in years past, Americans scorned societies starkly divided into the privileged and the destitute. They were repellent.
Weisberg's answer also has a Latin flavor:
Moving toward an income distribution like Brazil's threatens individual happiness, social peace, and American values.
My own answer is that we care about income inequality because it corrodes social equality�i.e., whether we respect each other as equals. But if that's the reason, I'd argue, there are other methods (e.g., national service, a national health care system, safe and popular public spaces) that can directly give us more social equality than longshot liberal efforts to indirectly affect social equality by trying to "reverse" a "decades long trend toward income inequality" that is powered by fundamental shifts in technology and trade. **
But, hey, whatever. Let's assume the problem is income inequality. And none of us wants Brazil.
The question is then what makes Brazil Brazil. Is it wild riches at the top, or extreme poverty at the bottom? It seems pretty obvious, from what little I know of Brazil, that the problem is the bottom, not the top. We worry about Brazil because of the favelas, the huge impoverished shantytowns, and the crime coming out of them. We worry because it's hard to believe that if you're a poor Brazilian squatting in a shanty you can think of yourself as the social equal of a tycoon across town. And across town, thanks to all that crime, it seems impossible to lead a normal, American-style socially-egalitarian middle class life, at least without a full-time bodyguard. You're not about to go sit in the cheap seats at a soccer match or wander near your local favela while shopping. I had an affluent Brazilian friend who moved to New York City and would only consider living in Trump buildings, on the grounds that only they would have adequate security for someone of her class. I finally convinced her that no, this was America. You could really live almost anywhere you wanted. You didn't need a guard with a gun on every floor. And you could walk around.
If you're worried about incomes at the bottom, though, one solution leaps out at you. It's a solution that worked, at least in the late 1990s under Bill Clinton, when wages at the low end of the income ladder rose fairly dramatically. The solution is tight labor markets. Get employers bidding for scarce workers and you'll see incomes rise across the board without the need for government aid programs or tax redistribution. A major enemy of tight labor markets at the bottom is also fairly clear: unchecked immigration by undocumented low-skilled workers. It's hard for a day laborer to command $18 an hour in the market if there are illegals hanging out on the corner willing to work for $7. Even experts who claim illlegal immigration is good for Americans overall admit that it's not good for Americans at the bottom. In other words, it's not good for income equality.
Odd, then that Obama, in his "war on inequality," hasn't made a big effort to prevent illegal immigration--or at least to prevent illegal immigrration from returning with renewed force should the economy recover. He hasn't, for example, pushed to make it mandatory for employers to use the "E-Verify" system, or some other system, to check the legality of new hires, preferring to hold that reform hostage (sorry!) in order to try and achieve a larger "comprehensive" bill that included a conditional amnesty for the 11 or so million illegals already here. (In Washington, if something's obviously desirable that means it's a bargaining chip.) True, Obama has tried to make a big deal of his administration's deportation numbers, but only as a nose-holding effort to placate the right sufficiently to get a mass legalization bill through. And the deportation numbers themselves are suspect.
I'd argue Obama's main effort on immigration would, in fact, have made the inequality problem at the bottom worse. A "comprehensive" bill would almost certainly have attracted new illegals, but the efforts to stop them at the border might well have failed, as they failed after a similar 1986 bill. The result of that failure has been a looser labor market at the bottom. Lower unskilled wages. Even the emergence of favela-like shantytowns in California. You want Brazil? Obama's 2009-2010 immigration plan would bring us Brazil. Obama was putting coalition politics--pleasing Latino voters, and especially Latino politicians--over economics, at least egalitarian economics. |
No kidding. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2010 8:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mises,
You recognize the problem, but your solution is flawed.
To get rid of 'illegal immigration' we should offer amnesty and demand the minimum wage laws, and all other benefits, be enforced. Because they are in the shadows, immigrants are attractive. They needn't be paid a living wage, they can be exploited, they don't receive benefits. The status quo is unfair to everyone, and deportation is limp-wristed to stop it. This is basic black market theory applied to immigrants instead of drugs or prostitution. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2010 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40844625/ns/world_news-americas/
| Quote: |
Exodus
No one knows how many residents have left the city of 1.4 million since a turf battle over border drug corridors unleashed an unprecedented wave of cartel murders and mayhem. Business leaders, citing government tax information, say the exodus could number 110,000, while a municipal group and local university say it's closer to 230,000 and estimates by social organizations are even higher.
The tally is especially hard to track because Juarez is by nature transitory, attracting thousands of workers to high-turnover jobs in manufacturing, or who use the city across the Rio Grande from El Paso, Texas, as a waystation before they slip north illegally. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2011 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/feb/27/support-poll-support-far-right
| Quote: |
Huge numbers of Britons would support an anti-immigration English nationalist party if it was not associated with violence and fascist imagery, according to the largest survey into identity and extremism conducted in the UK.
A Populus poll found that 48% of the population would consider supporting a new anti-immigration party committed to challenging Islamist extremism, and would support policies to make it statutory for all public buildings to fly the flag of St George or the union flag.
Anti-racism campaigners said the findings suggested Britain's mainstream parties were losing touch with public opinion on issues of identity and race.
The poll suggests that the level of backing for a far-right party could equal or even outstrip that in countries such as France, the Netherlands and Austria. France's National Front party hopes to secure 20% in the first round of the presidential vote next year. The Dutch anti-Islam party led by Geert Wilders attracted 15.5% of the vote in last year's parliamentary elections.
Anti-fascist groups said the poll's findings challenged the belief that Britons were more tolerant than other Europeans. "This is not because British people are more moderate, but simply because their views have not found a political articulation," said a report by the Searchlight Educational Trust, the anti-fascist charity that commissioned the poll.
According to the survey, 39% of Asian Britons, 34% of white Britons and 21% of black Britons wanted all immigration into the UK to be stopped permanently, or at least until the economy improved. And 43% of Asian Britons, 63% of white Britons and 17% of black Britons agreed with the statement that "immigration into Britain has been a bad thing for the country". Just over half of respondents � 52% � agreed with the proposition that "Muslims create problems in the UK".
Jon Cruddas, the Labour MP who fought a successful campaign against the British National party in his Dagenham and Rainham constituency in east London, said that the findings pointed to a "very real threat of a new potent political constituency built around an assertive English nationalism". The report identified a resurgence of English identity, with 39% preferring to call themselves English rather than British. Just 5% labelled themselves European.
Earlier this month David Cameron delivered a controversial speech on the failings of "state multiculturalism". The speech was seized on by the anti-Islamic English Defence League, which said that the prime minister was "coming round" to its way of thinking. BNP leader Nick Griffin also welcomed the speech as a sign that his party's ideas were entering "the political mainstream".
The poll also identified a majority keen to be allowed to openly criticise religion, with 60% believing they "should be allowed to say whatever they believe about religion". By contrast, fewer than half � 42% � said "people should be allowed to say whatever they believe about race". |
First, it is not extremist for the English to want England to remain English. The Guardian has it backwards. Demanding that England stop being English is extremist.
Anyways, there we have it. Decades of multi-culti post-modern propaganda did not change human nature. We have built into us a preference for those similar to us. The reaction of the multi-cult extremists is:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1361068/Half-Britain-vote-far-Right-parties-gave-violence.html
| Quote: |
Former Foreign Secretary David Miliband and campaigning Left-wing Labour MP Jon Cruddas will officially unveil the report, produced for the Searchlight Education Trust, tomorrow.
They will also launch Searchlight�s Together project to tackle extremism among white and Islamic -communities with the slogan: �A plague on both their houses�. |
Double down. More propaganda. More PC. Never ever admit failure.
...
So the question then becomes how is this going to develop. Maybe the economy of England will improve tomorrow and maybe all the diversity problems will go away tomorrow. Or maybe the economy will continue to decline (as measured by English standards of living) and maybe the diversity problems will get worse.
Maybe a second Reconquista is unavoidable. Maybe whites in England will end up like whites in South Africa - a brutalized minority. For certain, the European continent is less stable as a result of mass third world immigration.
...
Or maybe the New Europeans will assimilate:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/28/turkish-pm-addresses-immigrants-germany
| Quote: |
Germany has hit back at explosive remarks by Turkey's prime minister, who told his compatriots that they should learn Turkish before German and resist assimilation into German society.
During a visit to Germany, Recep Tayyip Erdogan told 10,000 members of Germany's large Turkish community of his "growing unease" about the way immigrants are treated in Germany.
"You must integrate, but I am against assimilation ... no one may ignore the rights of minorities," he said, adding that individuals should have the right to practise their own faith.
"Our children must learn German but they must learn Turkish first," said Erdogan.
He added: "I want you to learn German, that your children learn German � they should study, get degrees. I want you to become doctors, professors and politicians in Germany."
Germany's foreign minister, Guido Westerwelle, promptly hit back, saying that the children of the 3.5-million-strong Turkish community should focus on German to improve their chances in life.
"Children growing up in Germany must learn German first," he said. "The German language is the key to integration for those growing up in Germany." |
Maybe not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
UknowsI
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2011 5:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
"You must integrate, but I am against assimilation ... no one may ignore the rights of minorities," he said, adding that individuals should have the right to practise their own faith.
|
I wonder if he would say the same thing to the Kurds in his own country. (I don't know anything about this politician in particular, I only base it on how Kurds have been treated in Turkey in general) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2011 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No time to play with you happy chappies, but I thought perhaps this article might be of interest to some of you.
| Quote: |
| Skilled jobs will go to the lowest bidder worldwide. A decline in middle class pay and job satisfaction is only just beginning |
| Quote: |
Western Europeans and Americans are about to suffer a profound shock. For the past 30 years governments have explained that, while they can no longer protect jobs through traditional forms of state intervention such as subsidies and tariffs, they can expand and reform education to maximise opportunity. If enough people buckle down to acquiring higher-level skills and qualifications, Europeans and Americans will continue to enjoy rising living standards. If they work hard enough, each generation can still do better than its parents. All that is required is to bring schools up to scratch and persuade universities to teach "marketable" skills. That is the thinking behind Michael Gove's policies and those of all his recent predecessors as education secretary.
But the financial meltdown of 2008 and the subsequent squeeze on incomes is slowly revealing an awful truth. As figures out last week from the Office for National Statistics show, real UK wages have not risen since 2005, the longest sustained freeze in living standards since the 1920s. While it has not hit the elite in banking, the freeze affects most of the middle class as much as the working class. This is not a blip, nor the result of educational shortcomings. In the US, which introduced mass higher education long before Britain, the average graduate's purchasing power has barely risen in 30 years. Just as education failed to deliver social democratic promises of social equality and mobility, so it will fail to deliver neoliberal promises of universal opportunity for betterment.
"Knowledge work", supposedly the west's salvation, is now being exported like manual work. A global mass market in unskilled labour is being quickly succeeded by a market in middle-class work, particularly for industries, such as electronics, in which so much hope of employment opportunities and high wages was invested. As supply increases, employers inevitably go to the cheapest source. A chip designer in India costs 10 times less than a US one. The neoliberals forgot to read (or re-read) Marx. "As capital accumulates the situation of the worker, be his payment high or low, must grow worse."
We are familiar with the outsourcing of routine white-collar "back office" jobs such as data inputting. But now the middle office is going too. Analysing X-rays, drawing up legal contracts, processing tax returns, researching bank clients, and even designing industrial systems are examples of skilled jobs going offshore. Even teaching is not immune: last year a north London primary school hired mathematicians in India to provide one-to-one tutoring over the internet. Microsoft, Siemens, General Motors and Philips are among big firms that now do at least some of their research in China. The pace will quicken. The export of "knowledge work" requires only the transmission of electronic information, not factories and machinery. Alan Blinder, a former vice-chairman of the US Federal Reserve, has estimated that a quarter of all American service sector jobs could go overseas. |
etc
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/feb/28/education-jobs-middle-class-decline |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2011 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ^ I know a specialized tax firm in Florida that outsourced all non-partner work to India. They let go virtually everybody. All transfer pricing done in India. Ironic. Transfer pricing allows firms to avoid US taxes. Now they can avoid US workers too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2011 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That was an interesting read Big Bird.
Its not just Europe or the States, its quite a few other countries as well.
One commentator on a newspaper I read, stated that he/she was made redundant in 1996 and was then paid $14 an hr. In 2011 the workers are still getting paid the same exact amount and with an annual inflation of 3%, thier wages dont compensate.
Its a mistake of many businesses who seem to think that they can carry out practices that wipe out the middle class and lower class and still expect to find a strong market for thier goods in those countries.
They then need to increase the cost of the goods sold to cover fixed costs due to thier lack of sales. Its a screwed up situation and I can see some western countries following the Middle East in protest. Its the smaller poorer nations that are getting hurt by food prices and the speculators but in time, even larger and wealthier western nations will feel the pain.
Its then that speculators will find out that once you killed the Golden Goose, the fox will start looking at you as thier next meal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kimbop
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2011 9:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
A Populus poll found that 48% of the population would consider supporting a new anti-immigration party committed to challenging Islamist extremism, and would support policies to make it statutory for all public buildings to fly the flag of St George or the union flag....
...The poll also identified a majority keen to be allowed to openly criticise religion, with 60% believing they "should be allowed to say whatever they believe about religion". By contrast, fewer than half � 42% � said "people should be allowed to say whatever they believe about race". |
I betcha the froglegs share similar sentiments.
Equality, Fraternity, Liberty:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TthhAmzr1S8 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2011 6:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Derb connects some trends:
http://takimag.com/article/europes_great_berm/print
| Quote: |
The world beyond our shores seems to be entering a zone of dangerous instability. Five years from now we may be looking back nostalgically at the decades 1980-2010 as an age of blessed tranquility when unsightly but skillful autocrats such as Mubarak (Egypt), Gaddafi (Libya), Ben Ali (Tunisia), Saleh (Yemen), and the Gulf�s monarchs kept their hungry, unemployed, and proliferating populations well suppressed.
Turmoil in these places is very bad news, and not only for the effect on oil prices. Real social collapse across the Maghreb / Mashriq (hereinafter �M/M�) belt could unleash great population movements, posing both political and ethical problems for Europe and North America.
We have already had reports of Tunisian refugees by the thousands setting sail for Italian territory. Libyans have been fleeing sideways into Tunisia and Egypt, but it may soon dawn on them, too, that Europe is a much more attractive destination. EU bureaucrats are all in a flutter as to how they would cope with a full-scale Camp of the Saints scenario.
The M/M countries may not be the biggest potential problems. Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, and Yemen have total fertility rates of 3.01, 3.01, 1.71, and 4.81 per woman respectively. Just across the Sahara you have Sudan at 4.93, Chad at 5.18, Ethiopia at 6.07, Mali at 6.54, and Niger at a sensational 7.68. (I�m taking my figures from the CIA World Factbook.)
Things are dire in these Sub-Saharan African nations. With ballooning populations putting more and more pressure on resources, things will get worse. Whether aid from the advanced world has been a help or a hindrance to these nations is much debated; but if the aid-giving nations get stuck in a long recession, as seems likely, we shall find out. (�Foreign aid tops the list of programs that most [Americans] would like to see cut.�)
These North African nations that have been boiling over this past few weeks are a great �berm,� a dike protecting Europe from hundreds of millions further south who face dwindling food resources and dysfunctional governments. Sub-Saharan Africans have been drifting up into the northern nations for decades: Libya is already 15-25 percent Sub-Saharan African. Many of Libya�s Africans would like to move on to Europe, and Gaddafi has taken billions in bribes from Italy to prevent their doing so:
[A]t the heart of the Rome-Tripoli friendship pact is what some critics say amounts to a gigantic bribe that allows Berlusconi�s government to fulfill an election promise to combat illegal immigration. The agreement committed Italy to pay Libya some 5 billion dollars, ostensibly as compensation for transgressions committed during three decades of Italian colonial rule.
If continuing disorder in North Africa coincides with a world economic crisis, we might enter a spell in which, for the first time since the Middle Ages, history is driven by great movements of primitive peoples. If we are lucky, these movements will be leaderless and disorderly. Should an Attila or a Temujin take charge, things might get really ugly.
This would mainly be Europe�s problem, at least at first. Observing American liberals as they watch Camp of the Saints play out in the Mediterranean would be interesting. The ethical conundrums implicit in coping with tens of millions of desperate African and Muslim migrants would be difficult to discuss�perhaps impossible, given the framework of familiar multicultural pieties.
Southern European nations� historical grievances might kick in. Piracy and kidnapping by the M/M nations plagued the south Mediterranean shoreline for centuries. Robert Davis�s book Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters tells the whole grisly story:
The effect on the European coastal populations was dramatic. Entire areas were depopulated. The author even sketches out an argument that the culture of baroque Italy was determined in part by a turning inward from the terrors of coastal life�from the �fear of the horizon� that afflicted all the regions subject to slave raiding. He tells us�that to this day there is an idiom in Sicilian dialect to express the general idea of being caught by surprise: pigliato dai turchi��taken by the Turks.� The distress of those left behind, deprived of a husband or father, is painful to read about.
And then Europe�s problem might become ours. Cheap hand-held GPS devices make the Atlantic crossing feasible for anyone bold enough. In fact, the USA has already received its first African boat people. They are not likely to be the last.
The boat-people issue is a major topic in Australian politics. Geographically, we are not much further from Third World desperation than Australia is, and technology is constantly shrinking the meaning of �remote,� anyway. Australia�s today may be our tomorrow.
We have some thinking to do here. Will we do it? With so many PC landmines in this zone, the smart money says no. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
