Should We Shrink Economy To Reduce Need For Immigration?

[Whitespirit66]

This is something I mentioned in a thread about a week ago - but the post and thread have mysteriously disappeared. What's the point of buying into the politicians mantra of economy, economy, economy if they just use it as a smokescreen for more immigration?

After all, mass immigration helps big business with unlimited cheap labour, so that they can call the tune on wages. The result is zero-hours contracts and the requirement of a minimum wage to stop the unlimited labour levels taking the pay rate down to even more of a pittance. Uncontrolled immigration is also a way that big business can grow it's number of customers.

So, is it worth endlessly trying to grow the economy, if the biggest benefactor is big business and very little in it for ordinary, indigenous people (yes, the immis. gain plenty)? I reckon, that mass immigration pushes up costs of many things for ordinary people - especially housing. Would you favour a smaller economy if it meant a better quality of life by not forever swelling the population numbers? We appear to have taken on an extra 4million in a few short years - and that's the official total. Undoubtably, the real total is higher.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Britain-poorer-means-cutting-immigration.html

 

[EFLImpudence]

Well, you've figured out capitalism.

Shouldn't have voted for Thatcher.

 

[Whitespirit66]

Yes, certainly can't deny it's capitaliosm - red in tooth and claw. One thing with Thatcher, at least she did make a pretence of letting the plebs have something in return. The wreckers running things now don't even bother with that.

The irony is with this particular kind of 'numbers' capitalism, it was the socialists (at least in name) who got the ball rolling.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Yes, in name only.

 

[JBR]

This is, of course, why continued membership of the EU is good for big business - or at least for big businessmen.

Shame about the poor indigenous workers, though.

 

[HawkEye244]

I would favor a smaller economy but really it's going that way anyway. Automation is increasing job obsolescence the world over, so there will be nobody to buy the goods these massive multinational companies produce because they won't have a job to earn the money to buy the goods. The whole cyclical cycle of consumption slows as a result, it's inevitable. IN theory we could make much more efficient use of resources but we don't because we live in a profit-driven economy which does not take into account environmental or humanitarian impact, it's purely profit focused at any expense, and for someone to gain advantage in the market place somebody has to lose, we've been taught this is the healthy side of capitalism but in real terms it's just a way of justifying someone being shafted or dehumanised within the system for the benefit of economic 'growth', and the farcical notion that it's in the interests of everyone

This is why I don't bother voting because it is humoring the notion that politicians have answers to problems they can't even fathom, their role is to get elected, make some money for themselves and pander to economic power, if they can please the people a little along the way (which they usually don't ) then that's about as good as it gets. Sadly people are not informed enough to know that the game of politics is exactly that and that nothing can ever change within the confines of that game, as George Carlin says ''politicians are there to give you the idea you have freedom of choice,.. you don't, you have no choice, you have owners, they own you''

 

[RNReindeer]

I would favor a smaller economy but really it's going that way anyway. Automation is increasing job obsolescence the world over, so there will be nobody to buy the goods these massive multinational companies produce because they won't have a job to earn the money to buy the goods. The whole cyclical cycle of consumption slows as a result, it's inevitable. IN theory we could make much more efficient use of resources but we don't because we live in a profit-driven economy which does not take into account environmental or humanitarian impact, it's purely profit focused at any expense, and for someone to gain advantage in the market place somebody has to lose, we've been taught this is the healthy side of capitalism but in real terms it's just a way of justifying someone being shafted or dehumanised within the system for the benefit of economic 'growth', and the farcical notion that it's in the interests of everyone

This is why I don't bother voting because it is humoring the notion that politicians have answers to problems they can't even fathom, their role is to get elected, make some money for themselves and pander to economic power, if they can please the people a little along the way (which they usually don't ) then that's about as good as it gets. Sadly people are not informed enough to know that the game of politics is exactly that and that nothing can ever change within the confines of that game, as George Carlin says ''politicians are there to give you the idea you have freedom of choice,.. you don't, you have no choice, you have owners, they own you''

So what is your view for the future of democracy?
As it seems to be a political construct, in you opinion, what are it's benefits?

 

[AronSearle]

I would favor a smaller economy but really it's going that way anyway. Automation is increasing job obsolescence the world over, so there will be nobody to buy the goods these massive multinational companies produce because they won't have a job to earn the money to buy the goods. '

No.

Manufacturing only employs 300k iirc, so even getting rid of those, which is very unlikely wont matter.

Then you have warehouse work, automated warehouses (I am looking at you Amazon) will be to niche. Most of these jobs are in small companies, or in small depots (think of all the tesco express shops etc.). And on-line grocery shopping will cause more, not less jobs.

Same with fast food, those jobs won't go anywhere.

Once driver-less cars are cracked, you will see droves of truck drivers and taxi drivers gone, but not delivery drivers as someone still needs to walk the package to the door.

Yes, some jobs will go and more people will be unemployed, but it won't be like judge dredd's mega city where only 10% work, it will be pretty much what we have now.

The bigger issue is that you will have 1/3 or even 1/2 of the workforce on low paid, dead end jobs, with no real chance of that changing. And they will look at the other side, with their skilled well paid jobs, and start getting antsy.

Especially as more technology advancement means more and more luxury goods they can't afford.

Add insane rent/mortgage costs on top of this (driven by investment by the other half, and not supply issues) and you will some real trouble brewing without reform.

This is why I don't bother voting because it is humoring the notion that politicians have answers to problems they can't even fathom,

No, your just an idiot that doesn't understand the political system.

 

[Dextraneous]

Time to dust off and re-read "The Ragged Trousered Philanthropist"

 

[HawkEye244]

I would favor a smaller economy but really it's going that way anyway. Automation is increasing job obsolescence the world over, so there will be nobody to buy the goods these massive multinational companies produce because they won't have a job to earn the money to buy the goods. The whole cyclical cycle of consumption slows as a result, it's inevitable. IN theory we could make much more efficient use of resources but we don't because we live in a profit-driven economy which does not take into account environmental or humanitarian impact, it's purely profit focused at any expense, and for someone to gain advantage in the market place somebody has to lose, we've been taught this is the healthy side of capitalism but in real terms it's just a way of justifying someone being shafted or dehumanised within the system for the benefit of economic 'growth', and the farcical notion that it's in the interests of everyone

This is why I don't bother voting because it is humoring the notion that politicians have answers to problems they can't even fathom, their role is to get elected, make some money for themselves and pander to economic power, if they can please the people a little along the way (which they usually don't ) then that's about as good as it gets. Sadly people are not informed enough to know that the game of politics is exactly that and that nothing can ever change within the confines of that game, as George Carlin says ''politicians are there to give you the idea you have freedom of choice,.. you don't, you have no choice, you have owners, they own you''

So what is your view for the future of democracy?
As it seems to be a political construct, in you opinion, what are it's benefits?

Localised manufacturing with the advent of 3d printing, this is a possibility never seen before. I think the business of economic stability (what there remains of it) will be left to algorithmic coding, capable of processing billions of different variables, removing the human element (human error), fluctuating market systems, etc. I yearn for a time when democracy actually exists in practice and not principle and those spearheading public initiatives are technocrats and not the spoiled descendants of plutocrat

If you are interested please research the Zeitgeist Movement. The Zeitegist defined :

The Zeitgeist Movement Defined is the official representative text of the global, non-profit sustainability advocacy organization known as The Zeitgeist Movement (TZM).

This tediously sourced and highly detailed work argues for a large-scale change in human culture, specifically in the context of economic practice. The dominant theme is that the current socioeconomic system governing the world at this time has severe structural flaws, born out of primitive economic and sociological assumptions originating in our early history, where the inherent severity of these flaws went largely unnoticed.

However, in the early 21st century, these problems have risen prominently, taking the consequential form of increasing social destabilization and ongoing environmental collapse. Yet, this text is not simply about explaining such problems and their root causality - It is also about posing concrete solutions, coupled with a new perspective on social/environmental sustainability and efficiency which, in concert with the tremendous possibility of modern technology and a phenomenon known as ephemeralization, reveals humanity's current capacity to create an abundant, post-scarcity reality.

While largely misunderstood as being "utopian" or fantasy, this text walks through, step by step, the train of thought and technical industrial reordering needed to update our global society (and its values) to enable these profound new possibilities. While this text can be read strictly from a passive perspective, it was created also to be used as an awareness or activist tool. The Zeitgeist Movement, which has hundreds of chapters across dozens of countries and is perhaps the largest activist organization of its kind, hopes those interested in this direction will join the movement in global solidarity and assist in the culmination of this new social model, for the benefit of the whole of humanity.

Note: This text is produced for sale in paperback and proprietary ebook form only at the exact cost of publishing and nothing more. It is a non-profit text which is also available for open, non-commercial distribution in whatever form, as protected by its associated Creative Commons License (Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International). One may view this text online for free as well at TZM's global website.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Zeitgeist-Movement-Defined-Realizing/dp/1495303195[/i]

 

[HawkEye244]

I would favor a smaller economy but really it's going that way anyway. Automation is increasing job obsolescence the world over, so there will be nobody to buy the goods these massive multinational companies produce because they won't have a job to earn the money to buy the goods. '

No.

Manufacturing only employs 300k iirc, so even getting rid of those, which is very unlikely wont matter.

Then you have warehouse work, automated warehouses (I am looking at you Amazon) will be to niche. Most of these jobs are in small companies, or in small depots (think of all the tesco express shops etc.). And on-line grocery shopping will cause more, not less jobs.

Same with fast food, those jobs won't go anywhere.

Once driver-less cars are cracked, you will see droves of truck drivers and taxi drivers gone, but not delivery drivers as someone still needs to walk the package to the door.

Yes, some jobs will go and more people will be unemployed, but it won't be like judge dredd's mega city where only 10% work, it will be pretty much what we have now.

The bigger issue is that you will have 1/3 or even 1/2 of the workforce on low paid, dead end jobs, with no real chance of that changing. And they will look at the other side, with their skilled well paid jobs, and start getting antsy.

Especially as more technology advancement means more and more luxury goods they can't afford.

Add insane rent/mortgage costs on top of this (driven by investment by the other half, and not supply issues) and you will some real trouble brewing without reform.

This is why I don't bother voting because it is humoring the notion that politicians have answers to problems they can't even fathom,

No, your just an idiot that doesn't understand the political system.

Shame I would have spent time discussing this had you not called me an idiot at the very end. Welcome to the block list

 

[RNReindeer]

I would favor a smaller economy but really it's going that way anyway. Automation is increasing job obsolescence the world over, so there will be nobody to buy the goods these massive multinational companies produce because they won't have a job to earn the money to buy the goods. The whole cyclical cycle of consumption slows as a result, it's inevitable. IN theory we could make much more efficient use of resources but we don't because we live in a profit-driven economy which does not take into account environmental or humanitarian impact, it's purely profit focused at any expense, and for someone to gain advantage in the market place somebody has to lose, we've been taught this is the healthy side of capitalism but in real terms it's just a way of justifying someone being shafted or dehumanised within the system for the benefit of economic 'growth', and the farcical notion that it's in the interests of everyone

This is why I don't bother voting because it is humoring the notion that politicians have answers to problems they can't even fathom, their role is to get elected, make some money for themselves and pander to economic power, if they can please the people a little along the way (which they usually don't ) then that's about as good as it gets. Sadly people are not informed enough to know that the game of politics is exactly that and that nothing can ever change within the confines of that game, as George Carlin says ''politicians are there to give you the idea you have freedom of choice,.. you don't, you have no choice, you have owners, they own you''

So what is your view for the future of democracy?
As it seems to be a political construct, in you opinion, what are it's benefits?

Localised manufacturing with the advent of 3d printing, this is a possibility never seen before. I think the business of economic stability (what there remains of it) will be left to algorithmic coding, capable of processing billions of different variables, removing the human element (human error), fluctuating market systems, etc. I yearn for a time when democracy actually exists in practice and not principle and those spearheading public initiatives are technocrats and not the spoiled descendants of plutocrat

If you are interested please research the Zeitgeist Movement. The Zeitegist defined :

The Zeitgeist Movement Defined is the official representative text of the global, non-profit sustainability advocacy organization known as The Zeitgeist Movement (TZM).

This tediously sourced and highly detailed work argues for a large-scale change in human culture, specifically in the context of economic practice. The dominant theme is that the current socioeconomic system governing the world at this time has severe structural flaws, born out of primitive economic and sociological assumptions originating in our early history, where the inherent severity of these flaws went largely unnoticed.

However, in the early 21st century, these problems have risen prominently, taking the consequential form of increasing social destabilization and ongoing environmental collapse. Yet, this text is not simply about explaining such problems and their root causality - It is also about posing concrete solutions, coupled with a new perspective on social/environmental sustainability and efficiency which, in concert with the tremendous possibility of modern technology and a phenomenon known as ephemeralization, reveals humanity's current capacity to create an abundant, post-scarcity reality.

While largely misunderstood as being "utopian" or fantasy, this text walks through, step by step, the train of thought and technical industrial reordering needed to update our global society (and its values) to enable these profound new possibilities. While this text can be read strictly from a passive perspective, it was created also to be used as an awareness or activist tool. The Zeitgeist Movement, which has hundreds of chapters across dozens of countries and is perhaps the largest activist organization of its kind, hopes those interested in this direction will join the movement in global solidarity and assist in the culmination of this new social model, for the benefit of the whole of humanity.

Note: This text is produced for sale in paperback and proprietary ebook form only at the exact cost of publishing and nothing more. It is a non-profit text which is also available for open, non-commercial distribution in whatever form, as protected by its associated Creative Commons License (Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International). One may view this text online for free as well at TZM's global website.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Zeitgeist-Movement-Defined-Realizing/dp/1495303195[/i][/QUOTE]

Humph. Well that told me.
I promise not to ask again.
Don't you dare accuse me of filibustering again, Dex.

ps sorry about the quotes, Mr Mod.