Large increase in migrant workers.

wildman · 18 Aug 2011 at 13:52

Basher said:
But would a native on min wage not get the same benefits as an immigrant on min wage?

Yes, but if the native had the job, the migrant would not have to be here to do the job that the natives currently don't want to so there would only be one benefit payment to the min waged native. I think is what the original person was trying to say.

Vonhelmet · 18 Aug 2011 at 13:53

toon_mad said:
how do you think?? he basically said most if not all of us are lazy, hence foreigners take the jobs - because apparently we wont do them, so that is a stereotypical answer.

OK... So why aren't these jobs being taken by all the natives who are stuck on benefits?

ubersonic · 18 Aug 2011 at 13:56

Vonhelmet said:
OK... So why aren't these jobs being taken by all the natives who are stuck on benefits?

In the 1990's it was estimated 99% of all Japanese sewage workers were Chinese immigrants, the Japanese just refused to work in **** for minimum wage, too proud. I have a mate whos dole is 90% of what I earn

scorza · 18 Aug 2011 at 13:58

ubersonic said:
In the 1990's it was estimated 99% of all Japanese sewage workers were Chinese immigrants, the Japanese just refused to work in **** for minimum wage.

Shouldn't be a minimum wage job then should it. If you offered £30 an hour instead of £6, more people would be prepared to tolerate. All immigration does is skew the labour market in favour of employers.

Basher · 18 Aug 2011 at 13:59

wildman said:
Yes, but if the native had the job, the migrant would not have to be here to do the job that the natives currently don't want to so there would only be one benefit payment to the min waged native. I think is what the original person was trying to say.

Ok fair enough. In my mind, the answer is to reduce the benefits of those without jobs rather than to legislate against the volume of migrant workers.

wildman · 18 Aug 2011 at 14:03

Basher said:
Yes I understand that. My point was, why do you think the stereotype has developed to be lazy British workers?

Because they actually are lazy ?

wildman · 18 Aug 2011 at 14:04

Basher said:
Ok fair enough. In my mind, the answer is to reduce the benefits of those without jobs rather than to legislate against the volume of migrant workers.

I agree, i was not saying we should 'send them all home' I was trying to make sense of what the person who originally made the statement was trying to get at.

Basher · 18 Aug 2011 at 14:06

wildman said:
Because they actually are lazy ?

Bingo.

pioneer2000 · 18 Aug 2011 at 14:08

It's even a problem in the highly skilled sectors - the amount of foreigners in the city of London is becoming ridiculous.

There's so many Kiwi's and Indians in my office I feel like the minority... :mad:

regulus · 18 Aug 2011 at 14:09

pioneer2000 said:
It's even a problem in the highly skilled sectors - the amount of foreigners in the city of London is becoming ridiculous.

There's so many Kiwi's and Indians in my office I feel like the minority...

Why are Brits not employed? Are they paying the Kiwis and Indians less?

pioneer2000 · 18 Aug 2011 at 14:20

No, pretty much the same as far as I am aware, if not more.

I can only presume to be PC companies are encouraged to do so.

hola_adios · 18 Aug 2011 at 14:20

pioneer2000 said:
It's even a problem in the highly skilled sectors - the amount of foreigners in the city of London is becoming ridiculous.

There's so many Kiwi's and Indians in my office I feel like the minority...

They performing better than you? :rolleyes:

pioneer2000 · 18 Aug 2011 at 14:23

hola_adios said:
They performing better than you?

lol - do you have a personal problem with me? Or do you just fancy me. :rolleyes:

hola_adios · 18 Aug 2011 at 14:26

pioneer2000 said:
lol - do you have a personal problem with me? Or do you just fancy me.

Hit the nail in the head, I see. And do only fancy you in a platonic way, not to worry.

D.P. · 18 Aug 2011 at 14:27

hola_adios said:
This, plus they come with less tattoos, better education and manners.

And in my experience they usually speak better English as well.

pioneer2000 · 18 Aug 2011 at 14:30

hola_adios said:
Hit the nail in the head, I see. And do only fancy you in a platonic way, not to worry.

"on" the head.

Pretty dictatorial aren't you... i'm apparently not allowed an opinion on the state of my country.

that_other_guy · 18 Aug 2011 at 14:34

scorza said:
Shouldn't be a minimum wage job then should it. If you offered £30 an hour instead of £6, more people would be prepared to tolerate. All immigration does is skew the labour market in favour of employers.

Yes. All this "... too lazy" and "... just doing jobs locals don't want to do" presume that there are immigrants willing to do the jobs already here. If there wasn't the immigration someone would be doing the job, whatever the job was. An appropriate price would be worked out between the supply of labour and the demand for the job.

It's just short-sighted businessmen wanting to make more money. Lower costs = more profit. That's until all their competitors import their workers too, a price war ensues so that the price they are charging for their product or service drops, and they end up making as much profit as they were before. So in the end they are no better off.

Basher · 18 Aug 2011 at 14:34

pioneer2000 said:
I can only presume to be PC companies are encouraged to do so.

Or they were the best candidates for the job?

scorza · 18 Aug 2011 at 14:42

that_other_guy said:
Yes. All this "... too lazy" and "... just doing jobs locals don't want to do" presume that there are immigrants willing to do the jobs already here. If there wasn't the immigration someone would be doing the job, whatever the job was. An appropriate price would be worked out between the supply of labour and the demand for the job.

It's just short-sighted businessmen wanting to make more money. Lower costs = more profit. That's until all their competitors import their workers too, a price war ensues so that the price they are charging for their product or service drops, and they end up making as much profit as they were before. So in the end they are no better off.

Yup. I would argue they actually end up worse off because they end up living in a sick society, like Britain in the 21st century

pioneer2000 · 18 Aug 2011 at 14:43

Basher said:
Or they were the best candidates for the job?

You're telling me that we don't have plenty of unemployed / non-temp job university graduates? Rather than employ these, I've seen many overseas graduates being employed. Something is clearly wrong there.