Profits up .. wages stagnate

[poster342002]

So who is to blame? The immigrants or the bosses? Please don't say "the immigrants" or "both" because that won't fly.

Who is to blame for the bosses encouraging more immigration in order to give themselves even more leverage over surplus labour? The bosses are, of course. It does not, therefore, make much sense to cheer them on by calling for same.

 

[nino_savatte]

Who is to blame for the bosses encouraging more immigration in order to give themselves even more leverage over surplus labour? The bosses are, of course. It does not, therefore, make much sense to cheer them on by calling for same.

Not sure what you're saying here. Are you suggesting that the bosses are greedy because of immigration? If you are, then that is the most ridiculous thing that I've heard in a long while.

 

[poster342002]

Not sure what you're saying here. Are you suggesting that the bosses are greedy because of immigration? If you are, then that is the most ridiculous thing that I've heard in a long while.

No, I'm saying the bosses are encouraging more immigration to further their own greedy ends.

 

[nino_savatte]

No, I'm saying the bosses are encouraging more immigration to further their own greedy ends.

You know, I keep hearing people say this sort of thing but I have not seen much evidence of it.

 

[Random]

You know, I keep hearing people say this sort of thing but I have not seen much evidence of it.

It's been a stated CBI policy for some time now. And the CBI has quite a big influence on government policy, with Digby Jones a minister now and all. To think that the corporations aren't influencing UK immigration policy seems rather naive.

 

[durruti02]

Yeah if you like.

The defeats of organised labour in Western Europe, particularly Britain, combined with the opening up of the former stalinist 'communist' states, the restoration of US global hegemony enabling imposition of globalisation (privatisation, reduction of tarfiffs etc, thus export of jobs), centralisation of capital, new technologies and yes immigration adding to this a large workforce of low paid workers, with little security, intense rates of exploitation, outside the protection of existing trade unions and labour laws, has enabled the capitalist class to sharply raise the rate of exploitation in the imperialist heartlands, reinforcing a division of core and peripherary workforces, with differing terms of conditions, security and wages.

The point though is what conclusions to draw-

for socialists and anyone pro working class I'd suggest it's for a united working class response, supporting union organisation, drawing in migrants to this, and all precarious workers into unified organisations of the working class operating when possible across international borders and to argue, propagandise and organise for proletarian revolution to wrest back the gains of the capitalists and organsie production under the democratic control and plan of workers' organisations.

Often durruti02 ends up agreeing with this- but why just raise immigration out of context? Yes you're right that capitalists paly off one section of workers against another- as always- and the recent masssive wave of migration is part of that. The answer though is revolutionary organisation of the working class

(((((((urbanrevolt))))))) my friend yes yes yes !!!

BUT a working class response on migration IS THE MISSING PIECE OF THE JIGSAW - we say everything else but are silent or worse on immigration .. and it destroys ALL our good work in other areas .. we are being ignored disbelieved etc etcc BECAUSE we are not putting a class response

p.s. it was not me agreeing with this on urban .. it was me who first PUT the arguement about a militant w/c response of orgnaising closed shop etc etc

 

[audiotech]

I've just found out that the GMB are balloting it's members (who work for local authorities) on whether to accept 2.75 percent and a minimum wage level of £6 per hour.

The union leadership are recommending accepting this offer.

 

[durruti02]

I wondered when the topic of immigration would rear its ugly head. What is it with you people and immigration? It's far too easy (not to mention lazy) to blame everything that takes place in the workplace on immigration. I have never, ever encountered such narrow minds and such lazy thinking in all of my life.

Naturally, none of you mentions greedy fatcat bosses or the fact that public sector workers are getting crap money because the government refuses to pay them the money that they're worth (while they award themselves huge pay increases).

for god sake you fucking moron ..the OP is ABOUT fat cat profits!! you disrupting again???

p.s. look in the mirror soft boy " I have never, ever encountered such narrow minds and such lazy thinking in all of my life"


edited soon after to say ... deep breath .. sorry for calling you a 'fucking moron" .. but that is about the dumbest post i have seen you do so far ..

 

[audiotech]

(((((((urban))))))) my friend yes yes yes !!!

BUT a working class response on migration IS THE MISSING PIECE OF THE JIGSAW - we say everything else but are silent or worse on immigration .. and it destroys ALL our good work in other areas .. we are being ignored disbelieved etc etcc BECAUSE we are not putting a class response

p.s. it was not me agreeing with this on urban .. it was me who first PUT the arguement about a militant w/c response of orgnaising closed shop etc etc

No silence at all. No to immigration controls is a class response. To argue for immigration controls is reactionary and can only divide the working class.

 

[durruti02]

You know, I keep hearing people say this sort of thing but I have not seen much evidence of it.

lolrof .. so you never read all the qoutes from digby Jones?? from the IoD?? from the CBI?? from various scum fatcat bosses that i posted over and over????? you never look at the politics of who employs cheap labour???

you are .. blind?? a disrupter?? thick??? i really don't know .. jesus wept

 

[durruti02]

No silence at all. No to immigration controls is a class response. To argue for immigration controls is reactionary and can only divide the working class.

MC are we really here again? you suggestting i support immigration control??? and me saying for the millionth time i do not, but that i support a campaign of workers action against cheap labour and for local sustainable employment???


and you think that simply arguing against immigration control is the ONLY neccessary revsoc response of action/prop???

 

[audiotech]

MC are we really here again? you suggestting i support immigration control??? and me saying for the millionth time i do not, but that i support a campaign of workers action against cheap labour and for local sustainable employment???


and you think that simply arguing against immigration control is the ONLY neccessary revsoc response of action/prop???

If someone is anti-immigrant yesiree.

Good luck with the C.W.A.A.C.L.F.L.S.E campaigning.

 

[durruti02]

If someone is anti-immigrant yesiree.

Good luck with the C.W.A.A.C.L.F.L.S.E campaigning.

thanks for your su[pport for CWAACLFLSE

no i really think you are wrong .. to just oppose an anti-immigrant .. who probably are the majority today .. with "i oppose immigration controls" will and does not work .. does it?????

it surely needs a broader analysis of why migration occurs and what can be done .. i would argue it also needs a basic ability to understand where that anti - immigrant is coming from to be able to counter their views

p.s. and yes i WOULD include being opposed to controls at some stage in the discussion

 

[audiotech]

it surely needs a broader analysis of why migration occurs and what can be done .. i would argue it also needs a basic ability to understand where that anti - immigrant is coming from to be able to counter their views

How very condescending of you.

 

[durruti02]

How very condescending of you.

why condescending? in what way?

it seems most people on here think anyone who is anti immigration is automatically racist .. surely far more condescending?

p.s. and let me get this staright .. when you argue with an anti-immigrationist you ONLY argue that you are against immigration controls? no discussion of why we have immigration?

 

[blamblam]

no one want to comment on the suggestion immigration is holding back wage increases?

oh yes, I know I blame working class people different countries for this, not the bosses.

"scapegoat"? what's that?? ffs

 

[durruti02]

oh yes, I know I blame working class people different countries for this, not the bosses.

"scapegoat"? what's that?? ffs

so TO BE AGAINST an economic processes is to AGAINST the victims??? not the perps???

jaysus icepick

are you against cheap labour exploitation?
are you against sweat shops??
are you against gang labour???

of course you are yet you are not AGAINST cheap labourers or against workers in sweat shops or against those who labour for gangmasters???

so why can you not see that to argue the bosses are USING immigration to keep down labour costs DOES NOT MEAN YOU ARE AGAINST THE VICTIMS OF THAT PROCESS BUT THAT YOU ARE AGAINST THE PERPETRATERS????

jesus wept?? marx weeps ..

 

[JoePolitix]

Public Service Announcement

Kindly don't drag Marx's name into your cesspit, ta.

p.s I got your other thread binned - you can thank me later.

 

[durruti02]

Kindly don't drag Marx's name into your cesspit, ta.

p.s I got your other thread binned - you can thank me later.

so what exactly is it that you disagree with in what i say?

p.s. you saw what marx said didn't you?

 

[audiotech]

why condescending? in what way?

it seems most people on here think anyone who is anti immigration is automatically racist .. surely far more condescending?

p.s. and let me get this staright .. when you argue with an anti-immigrationist you ONLY argue that you are against immigration controls? no discussion of why we have immigration?

Being against immigration when 800,000 brits are enconsed in Spain, with tens of thousands in the rest of Europe, countless more in the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the rest of the world comes accross as hypocritical and double standards to me. Oh and I'll add bonkers to that too.

How far historically on the subject of immigration and why it happens do you want me to go back to?

 

[urbanrevolt]

Been trying that for years. No-one wants to know or listen. People just look at you like you're mad and say they "don't want to make any trouble" - which is what protecting you employment rights (or just employment, full-stop) is thought of as nowadays.

I find this is the case nomatter what threats the workforce is currently facing. Eevryone always just wants to take the path of least resistance and hope the axe comes for somebody other than them.

I'm sure we had this discussion only a couple of weeks back. It's very hard in lots of places but in other places sustained systematic work over weeks, months, years does make a difference.

Whilst the whole ra-ra contributions of some on the left is very annoying and counter-productive after a while about how workers in my workplace are really up for a struggle, and how we're growing in confidence and therefore - must join A)Respect B) Campaign for a new workers' party c) some other whatever and how everything is really exciting we do need to be careful not to fall into over pessimistic gloom.

There are realc chances to make a difference, certain unions can and do win e.g RMT on quite a lot of issues where other unions just piss about.

The work is hard, long, slow, unglamourous and often unthanked but fuck it, it can be done and there are plenty of stories of small successess. We just need to join the dots, make links, share experiences, draw new activists in. And just occasionally politcs can be really empowering and exciting when you win.

 

[durruti02]

Being against immigration when 800,000 brits are enconsed in Spain, with tens of thousands in the rest of Europe, countless more in the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the rest of the world comes accross as hypocritical and double standards to me. Oh and I'll add bonkers to that too.

How far historically on the subject of immigration and why it happens do you want me to go back to?

but that is precisely the point and why your simplistic way of dealing with it is pointless .. immigration takes many differrent forms at differrent times and places .. it needs to be put in context .. and the rights of the indiviidual balanced against that of the community ..

yet again you have assumed i am de facto against immigration ( even though i have stated again a thousend times i am not but whatevre you have a short memory) .. it is all context!!!

we need to be clear about what immigration means in britain today and how that differrs from that in the 5ts or that to spain today .. and p.s. i know that many spainish are totally against brit migration .. and can you blame em

incidently i have always used your argeument when people say migrants have no rights to come here .. i always say they do, as we do to move to where we want .. BUT that ENTIRELY MISSES THE POINT OF THE FUNCTION AND AFFECT of immigration in the '00's .. it should not be just about individuals rights .. that is simply liberalism .. but how it affects communities ..

p.s. my argument also includes/means yuppies moving into inner cities, english speakers into cymreig areas, chelsea second homers into devon, manchester commuters into the Lakes - all at the expense of local communities .. but you never saw that did you?? you have fixed obsessed on some perceived racial slant to all this .. i can not explain why or understand you lack of understanding sadly

 

[audiotech]

but that is precisely the point and why your simplistic way of dealing with it is pointless .. immigration takes many differrent forms at differrent times and places .. it needs to be put in context .. and the rights of the indiviidual balanced against that of the community ..

yet again you have assumed i am de facto against immigration ( even though i have stated again a thousend times i am not but whatevre you have a short memory) .. it is all context!!!

we need to be clear about what immigration means in britain today and how that differrs from that in the 5ts or that to spain today .. and p.s. i know that many spainish are totally against brit migration .. and can you blame em

incidently i have always used your argeument when people say migrants have no rights to come here .. i always say they do, as we do to move to where we want .. BUT that ENTIRELY MISSES THE POINT OF THE FUNCTION AND AFFECT of immigration in the '00's .. it should not be just about individuals rights .. that is simply liberalism .. but how it affects communities ..

p.s. my argument also includes/means yuppies moving into inner cities, english speakers into cymreig areas, chelsea second homers into devon, manchester commuters into the Lakes - all at the expense of local communities .. but you never saw that did you?? you have fixed obsessed on some perceived racial slant to all this .. i can not explain why or understand you lack of understanding sadly

I was born into an immigrant community (one which saw the first riots involving race way back in the mid 60's), so I don't need a lecture on "indviduals and the community" thanks.

Assume what you like durruti02. Your assumption is wrong.

I don't live in Manchester, Devon, nor Wales (although, I've followed with interest Welsh nationalism over the years), nevertheless, I have experienced the results of property speculation in the inner city area I was born into.

My understanding is crystal clear on the matter.

 

[Random]

Being against immigration when 800,000 brits are enconsed in Spain, with tens of thousands in the rest of Europe, countless more in the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the rest of the world comes accross as hypocritical and double standards to me. Oh and I'll add bonkers to that too.

When Durutti has already said he's not anti-immigrant, not for immigration controls, and he's also a committed anti-racist, it seems a bit odd to simply deal with his points by calling him 'bonkers' and anti-immigrant.

In fact, it really just looks like an attempt to not deal with his actual points.

 

[nino_savatte]

It's been a stated CBI policy for some time now. And the CBI has quite a big influence on government policy, with Digby Jones a minister now and all. To think that the corporations aren't influencing UK immigration policy seems rather naive.

The simple truth is that bosses, being what they are, will always be greedy They were greedy in the early days of the industrial revolution before people emigrated to this country in search of work. If this has been "stated CBI policy for some time" then you won't object to providing me with a link.

 

[nino_savatte]

lolrof .. so you never read all the qoutes from digby Jones?? from the IoD?? from the CBI?? from various scum fatcat bosses that i posted over and over????? you never look at the politics of who employs cheap labour???

you are .. blind?? a disrupter?? thick??? i really don't know .. jesus wept

That's right, durutti, I'm "blind", "thick" and a "disrupter" because I don't buy into your scapegoating thesis.

You continue to blame the symptoms and refuse to look at the underlying causes. Why? Because, like your chums, you're a lazy thinker.

Does the word "dialectic" mean anything to you?

 

[Random]

The simple truth is that bosses, being what they are, will always be greedy They were greedy in the early days of the industrial revolution before people emigrated to this country in search of work. If this has been "stated CBI policy for some time" then you won't object to providing me with a link.

Are you saying then let's shut up about bosses being greedy as it's now old news? Looking at the particular boss strategies current today is crucial.

Here's what a quick google got me.

Sir Digby said plans to impose any limit on immigration would leave firms unable to recruit the skilled workers that they need.

He told BBC Radio 4's The World Tonight: "If we have a cap of any sort it will tie businesses' hands from the flexibility which is, after all, the hallmark of the British labour market. So we are not in favour of a cap.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4474997.stm

 

[nino_savatte]

Are you saying then let's shut up about bosses being greedy as it's now old news? Looking at the particular boss strategies current today is crucial.

Here's what a quick google got me.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4474997.stm

You still blame the symptoms but don't bother to look at the underlying causes. It's too easy for you and others on this thread to blame immigrants. So, in order to rationalise your thesis, you have enlisted the aid of the CBI. Nice.

 

[poster342002]

I'm sure we had this discussion only a couple of weeks back. It's very hard in lots of places but in other places sustained systematic work over weeks, months, years does make a difference.

Whilst the whole ra-ra contributions of some on the left is very annoying and counter-productive after a while about how workers in my workplace are really up for a struggle, and how we're growing in confidence and therefore - must join A)Respect B) Campaign for a new workers' party c) some other whatever and how everything is really exciting we do need to be careful not to fall into over pessimistic gloom.

There are realc chances to make a difference, certain unions can and do win e.g RMT on quite a lot of issues where other unions just piss about.

The work is hard, long, slow, unglamourous and often unthanked but fuck it, it can be done and there are plenty of stories of small successess. We just need to join the dots, make links, share experiences, draw new activists in. And just occasionally politcs can be really empowering and exciting when you win.

I'll believe it when I see it actually happen in a workplace I'm actually in - which I never have done in all my life.

 

[Random]

You still blame the symptoms but don't bother to look at the underlying causes. It's too easy for you and others on this thread to blame immigrants. So, in order to rationalise your thesis, you have enlisted the aid of the CBI. Nice.

I'd hope that after seeing my link you'd recgnise that the CBI see immigration as a crucial part of a 'flexible labour market'. Instead you're still attacking an 'anti-immigration' spectre that does not exist on this thread.