Discussion:
Someone at The Guardian "gets it", at last...
Add Reply
Algernon Goss-Custard
2021-08-30 06:54:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
<https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/aug/29/so-whats-so-wrong-with
-labour-shortages-driving-up-low-wages>
...it is perhaps unsurprising that Brexit divided the nation in the way
it did. If you were in a relatively well-paid job and not at risk of
being replaced or undercut by a worker from overseas, you were likely
to vote remain. The Polish plumber was cheaper, the Lithuanian nanny
was better educated, so what was not to like?
If, on the other hand, you were part of Britain’s casualised
workforce, needing two or more part-time jobs to get by, you were much
more likely to vote leave, on the grounds that tougher controls on
migration would lead to a tighter labour market, which in turn would
push up wages.
For those who have nothing to fear from open borders, labour shortages
are evidence Brexit is flawed. For those not so fortunate, it is doing
what it was supposed to do.
ENDQUOTE
The flaw in Elliott's argument, of course, is that we know that low-paid
workers competing for unskilled work have lower educational attainment
than high-paid remainers. So their votes were worth less than those of
well educated Remainers and should not have been counted. Only by doing
that could a People's Vote have achieved the correct result.
--
Algernon
JNugent
2021-08-30 12:36:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Algernon Goss-Custard
<https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/aug/29/so-whats-so-wrong-with
-labour-shortages-driving-up-low-wages>
...it is perhaps unsurprising that Brexit divided the nation in the
way it did. If you were in a relatively well-paid job and not at risk
of being replaced or undercut by a worker from overseas, you were
likely to vote remain. The Polish plumber was cheaper, the Lithuanian
nanny was better educated, so what was not to like?
If, on the other hand, you were part of Britain’s casualised
workforce, needing two or more part-time jobs to get by, you were much
more likely to vote leave, on the grounds that tougher controls on
migration would lead to a tighter labour market, which in turn would
push up wages.
For those who have nothing to fear from open borders, labour shortages
are evidence Brexit is flawed. For those not so fortunate, it is doing
what it was supposed to do.
ENDQUOTE
The flaw in Elliott's argument, of course, is that we know that low-paid
workers competing for unskilled work have lower educational attainment
than high-paid remainers. So their votes were worth less than those of
well educated Remainers and should not have been counted. Only by doing
that could a People's Vote have achieved the correct result.
:-)
Joe
2021-08-30 16:16:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 13:36:00 +0100
Post by Algernon Goss-Custard
<https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/aug/29/so-whats-so-wrong-with
-labour-shortages-driving-up-low-wages>
...it is perhaps unsurprising that Brexit divided the nation in
the way it did. If you were in a relatively well-paid job and not
at risk of being replaced or undercut by a worker from overseas,
you were likely to vote remain. The Polish plumber was cheaper,
the Lithuanian nanny was better educated, so what was not to like?
If, on the other hand, you were part of Britain’s casualised
workforce, needing two or more part-time jobs to get by, you were
much more likely to vote leave, on the grounds that tougher
controls on migration would lead to a tighter labour market, which
in turn would push up wages.
For those who have nothing to fear from open borders, labour
shortages are evidence Brexit is flawed. For those not so
fortunate, it is doing what it was supposed to do.
ENDQUOTE
The flaw in Elliott's argument, of course, is that we know that
low-paid workers competing for unskilled work have lower
educational attainment than high-paid remainers. So their votes
were worth less than those of well educated Remainers and should
not have been counted. Only by doing that could a People's Vote
have achieved the correct result.
:-)
Quite noticeable how eager the 'intellectual' class is to abandon
democracy in favour of oligarchy.
--
Joe
Richmond
2021-08-30 17:11:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
<https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/aug/29/so-whats-so-wrong-with-labour-shortages-driving-up-low-wages>
...it is perhaps unsurprising that Brexit divided the nation in the
way it did. If you were in a relatively well-paid job and not at risk
of being replaced or undercut by a worker from overseas, you were
likely to vote remain. The Polish plumber was cheaper, the Lithuanian
nanny was better educated, so what was not to like?
If, on the other hand, you were part of Britain’s casualised
workforce, needing two or more part-time jobs to get by, you were much
more likely to vote leave, on the grounds that tougher controls on
migration would lead to a tighter labour market, which in turn would
push up wages.
For those who have nothing to fear from open borders, labour shortages
are evidence Brexit is flawed. For those not so fortunate, it is doing
what it was supposed to do.
ENDQUOTE
But all those EU workers who have left won't be spending their money
here either, so the demand for employees will drop too over
time. Immigration was just a red herring, it wasn't the true purpose of
brexit. The true purpose of Brexit was to be free of the colossal
totalitarian EU and its "ever closer" empire.
Joe
2021-08-30 21:02:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 19:05:46 +0100
Post by Richmond
<https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/aug/29/so-whats-so-wrong-
with-labour-shortages-driving-up-low-wages>
...it is perhaps unsurprising that Brexit divided the nation in the
way it did. If you were in a relatively well-paid job and not at
risk of being replaced or undercut by a worker from overseas, you
were likely to vote remain. The Polish plumber was cheaper, the
Lithuanian nanny was better educated, so what was not to like?
If, on the other hand, you were part of Britain's casualised
workforce, needing two or more part-time jobs to get by, you were
much more likely to vote leave, on the grounds that tougher
controls on migration would lead to a tighter labour market, which
in turn would push up wages.
For those who have nothing to fear from open borders, labour
shortages are evidence Brexit is flawed. For those not so
fortunate, it is doing what it was supposed to do.
ENDQUOTE
But all those EU workers who have left won't be spending their money
here either, so the demand for employees will drop too over
time. Immigration was just a red herring, it wasn't the true purpose
of brexit. The true purpose of Brexit was to be free of the colossal
totalitarian EU and its "ever closer" empire.
At the beginning of 2016 Cameron obtained a UK opt-out from "ever
close union".
<Paisley> And if ye believe that, ye'll believe onnything</Paisley>

'Ever closer union' is the entire purpose of the EU, always has been.
Have you honestly never known any EU official to lie? I know you know
Juncker's statement on that subject as well as I do.
--
Joe
Pancho
2021-08-30 22:53:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Joe
At the beginning of 2016 Cameron obtained a UK opt-out from "ever
close union".
<Paisley> And if ye believe that, ye'll believe onnything</Paisley>
'Ever closer union' is the entire purpose of the EU, always has been.
Have you honestly never known any EU official to lie? I know you know
Juncker's statement on that subject as well as I do.
It needs closer union to work effectively. We need stronger pan national
regulation, regardless of the EU. Globalisation requires cooperation in
government.
Pamela
2021-08-31 07:47:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pancho
Post by Joe
At the beginning of 2016 Cameron obtained a UK opt-out from "ever
close union".
<Paisley> And if ye believe that, ye'll believe onnything</Paisley>
'Ever closer union' is the entire purpose of the EU, always has
been. Have you honestly never known any EU official to lie? I know
you know Juncker's statement on that subject as well as I do.
It needs closer union to work effectively. We need stronger pan
national regulation, regardless of the EU. Globalisation requires
cooperation in government.
I think (not sure) you are saying political and economic union are two
separate things, which I would agree with.
Pancho
2021-08-31 09:56:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by Pancho
Post by Joe
At the beginning of 2016 Cameron obtained a UK opt-out from "ever
close union".
<Paisley> And if ye believe that, ye'll believe onnything</Paisley>
'Ever closer union' is the entire purpose of the EU, always has
been. Have you honestly never known any EU official to lie? I know
you know Juncker's statement on that subject as well as I do.
It needs closer union to work effectively. We need stronger pan
national regulation, regardless of the EU. Globalisation requires
cooperation in government.
I think (not sure) you are saying political and economic union are two
separate things, which I would agree with.
They are separate, but sensible economic union requires common rules:
common taxes, common standards, common business subsidies, etc. Without
common rules businesses can evade rules by moving to different political
areas of the economic union.

So in order to have common rules for an economic union you need common
political oversight. Common political rules is a type of political union.

If you want political autonomy you need tariffs/import barriers to
protect your economy from the consequences of foreign regulation.

I personally think it would be good to limit free trade to protect our
society from globalisation. I just thing it would have been good to do
that within the EU. Accept the EU, but protect ourselves from the rest
of the world.
Richmond
2021-09-01 17:19:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pancho
If you want political autonomy you need tariffs/import barriers to
protect your economy from the consequences of foreign regulation.
I personally think it would be good to limit free trade to protect our
society from globalisation. I just thing it would have been good to do
that within the EU. Accept the EU, but protect ourselves from the rest
of the world.
Free trade which is limited to the EU isn't free trade, it is
protectionism.

Richmond
2021-09-01 17:16:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pancho
Post by Joe
At the beginning of 2016 Cameron obtained a UK opt-out from "ever
close union".
<Paisley> And if ye believe that, ye'll believe onnything</Paisley>
'Ever closer union' is the entire purpose of the EU, always has been.
Have you honestly never known any EU official to lie? I know you know
Juncker's statement on that subject as well as I do.
It needs closer union to work effectively. We need stronger pan
national regulation, regardless of the EU. Globalisation requires
cooperation in government.
Why do we need globalisation? We don't need globalisation.
Pamela
2021-08-31 07:44:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 19:05:46 +0100 Pamela
Post by Richmond
<https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/aug/29/so-whats-so-wro
ng- with-labour-shortages-driving-up-low-wages>
QUOTE: ...it is perhaps unsurprising that Brexit divided the
nation in the way it did. If you were in a relatively well-paid
job and not at risk of being replaced or undercut by a worker
from overseas, you were likely to vote remain. The Polish
plumber was cheaper, the Lithuanian nanny was better educated,
so what was not to like?
If, on the other hand, you were part of Britain's casualised
workforce, needing two or more part-time jobs to get by, you
were much more likely to vote leave, on the grounds that tougher
controls on migration would lead to a tighter labour market,
which in turn would push up wages.
For those who have nothing to fear from open borders, labour
shortages are evidence Brexit is flawed. For those not so
fortunate, it is doing what it was supposed to do. ENDQUOTE
But all those EU workers who have left won't be spending their
money here either, so the demand for employees will drop too over
time. Immigration was just a red herring, it wasn't the true
purpose of brexit. The true purpose of Brexit was to be free of
the colossal totalitarian EU and its "ever closer" empire.
At the beginning of 2016 Cameron obtained a UK opt-out from "ever
close union".
<Paisley> And if ye believe that, ye'll believe onnything</Paisley>
'Ever closer union' is the entire purpose of the EU, always has
been. Have you honestly never known any EU official to lie? I know
you know Juncker's statement on that subject as well as I do.
Please advise which statement by Juncker you're referring to.

Does it override the 2014 EU agreement that each country goes at its
own speed?

Does it override the written text of Cameron's agreed opt-out whicvh
says: "so as to make it clear that the references to ever closer union
do not apply to the United Kingdom".
Incubus
2021-09-01 17:07:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Richmond
<https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/aug/29/so-whats-so-wrong-with-labour-shortages-driving-up-low-wages>
...it is perhaps unsurprising that Brexit divided the nation in the
way it did. If you were in a relatively well-paid job and not at risk
of being replaced or undercut by a worker from overseas, you were
likely to vote remain. The Polish plumber was cheaper, the Lithuanian
nanny was better educated, so what was not to like?
If, on the other hand, you were part of Britain’s casualised
workforce, needing two or more part-time jobs to get by, you were much
more likely to vote leave, on the grounds that tougher controls on
migration would lead to a tighter labour market, which in turn would
push up wages.
For those who have nothing to fear from open borders, labour shortages
are evidence Brexit is flawed. For those not so fortunate, it is doing
what it was supposed to do.
ENDQUOTE
But all those EU workers who have left won't be spending their money
here either, so the demand for employees will drop too over
time. Immigration was just a red herring, it wasn't the true purpose of
brexit. The true purpose of Brexit was to be free of the colossal
totalitarian EU and its "ever closer" empire.
It was lots of things. Some were things that were occurring and were going too
far for people's liking. Some were things likely to occur that were not to
people's liking. There wasn't one true purpose.
Incubus
2021-09-01 17:08:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Richmond
<https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/aug/29/so-whats-so-wrong-
with-labour-shortages-driving-up-low-wages>
...it is perhaps unsurprising that Brexit divided the nation in the
way it did. If you were in a relatively well-paid job and not at
risk of being replaced or undercut by a worker from overseas, you
were likely to vote remain. The Polish plumber was cheaper, the
Lithuanian nanny was better educated, so what was not to like?
If, on the other hand, you were part of Britain's casualised
workforce, needing two or more part-time jobs to get by, you were
much more likely to vote leave, on the grounds that tougher
controls on migration would lead to a tighter labour market, which
in turn would push up wages.
For those who have nothing to fear from open borders, labour
shortages are evidence Brexit is flawed. For those not so
fortunate, it is doing what it was supposed to do.
ENDQUOTE
But all those EU workers who have left won't be spending their money
here either, so the demand for employees will drop too over
time. Immigration was just a red herring, it wasn't the true purpose
of brexit. The true purpose of Brexit was to be free of the colossal
totalitarian EU and its "ever closer" empire.
At the beginning of 2016 Cameron obtained a UK opt-out from "ever close
union".
But what were the chances of that opt-out being exercised? We now have a
permanent opt-out.
Incubus
2021-09-01 17:04:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
<https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/aug/29/so-whats-so-wrong-with-labour-shortages-driving-up-low-wages>
...it is perhaps unsurprising that Brexit divided the nation in the way
it did. If you were in a relatively well-paid job and not at risk of
being replaced or undercut by a worker from overseas, you were likely to
vote remain. The Polish plumber was cheaper, the Lithuanian nanny was
better educated, so what was not to like?
If, on the other hand, you were part of Britain’s casualised workforce,
needing two or more part-time jobs to get by, you were much more likely
to vote leave, on the grounds that tougher controls on migration would
lead to a tighter labour market, which in turn would push up wages.
For those who have nothing to fear from open borders, labour shortages
are evidence Brexit is flawed. For those not so fortunate, it is doing
what it was supposed to do.
ENDQUOTE
As as member of the former group, I voted to leave partly because in terms of
being replaced or undercut, I know I am next if corporations get their way.
That isn't the only reason, however. For some reason, I care about our
culture, history, language and ethnicity more than my fellow Metropolitan
professionals.
Loading...