Is that sort of like being intolerant of those who are intolerant?
It’d depend why you were opposed to immigration, wouldn’t it?
Yes, however, since many arguments many people are considered bigoted, I’m wondering, what the benchmarks are for someone who opposes immigration can adhere too.
Then why the apparent disparity in what you understand and what you said? Namely:
If you understand that even a small effect on income for low earners is significant, then you surely understand that you’re first sentence quoted above is incorrect. And in fact, Prof. Blanchflower’s statement is the evidence that you claimed didn’t exist that unrestricted immigration can in fact have a detrimental effect on lower skilled employees.
Bolding mine.
Is this a counterfactual, or are you now admitting the possibility that in fact immigration may be having a detrimental effect on some sections of society?
Thanks.
As a completely uninvolved outsider, I find it hard to understand how a politician could reach high office while handling such things as badly as Mr. Brown did. It’s like he’s never heard anything like it before.
Although I have to agree - if he is this bad at this kind of ‘press the flesh with ordinary folk’, his staff should be doing a better job at vetting the ordinary folk he meets.
Regards,
Shodan
Well, I think he handled the actual flesh-pressing encounter just fine. There’d be no story about it but for the still-open mike afterward.
and don’t forget the snide-arsed “reporters” who felt it their duty to divulge this earth-shattering information.
I guess hat he said afterwards about the woman doesn’t appall me particularly - I take it pretty much for granted that politicians have to interact with people they dislike or look down on to get them to vote for him.
It’s just that he seemed so appalled at what she said. You can certainly make a case that what she said was bigoted, but not overwhelmingly so - it’s not as if she talked about the n*ggers or something like that.
I’m not British, but it seemed like fairly universal “the newbies are talking all the jobs and sucking up welfare” that you get with any new group of immigrants. It might be factualy incorrect, it might even be bigoted, but I cannot believe Mr. Brown has never had to deal with a constituent who spouted those sentiments before.
It is rather like Bush’s “major league asshole” remark. I work with people I don’t like too. If I were recorded as much as Brown is, I am sure they would capture some remarks from me about people I was polite to, to their face.
Social hypocrisy is one of those virtues which is half a vice, or a vice that is half a virtue. You can’t get people to vote for you by calling them assholes to their face.
Regards,
Shodan
You said “if it upsets ‘the Right’ leaning folk of this country, it’s all good in my book”. Now, while I haven’t studied the manifestos closely, I think that any mainstream right-wing party would strongly oppose a policy of, say, having you suspended headfirst in a vat of goat semen. Presumably, therefore, you would be in favour of such a policy. That would show them, eh?
I suspect it was no accident that he was allowed to leave with the mic and that the recording was not turned off.
I was being sarcastic. I realise it’s a difficult thing to gauge on t’internet, so don’t feel too bad.
Although Brown described it as a ‘disaster’ up until that instant it was a pretty unremarkable encounter that probably wouldn’t have got any TV coverage at all. Brown isn’t the first politician to let off steam in private after encountering unpalatable opinions - most politicos have probably done it. His staff let him down - they should be all over this mic business. It’s not as if it’s new technology.
Unscripted encounters with ordinary voters who are liable to go off message (c.f. McCain, who recovered his poise rather better than Brown) are what politicians here dread now - which is why they increasing move around in a PR bubble which prevents them seeing or hearing anything they don’t want to see.
He’s not exactly a touchy-feely people person, he’s the living stereotype of the dour Presbyterian Scot. His media handlers have a terrible, thankless job, although he’s actually improved since he got married. I’ve never met him, but friends who have report that in small groups, when he isn’t having to pretend to be something he isn’t, he’s perfectly amiable and funny. It doesn’t help that his one working eye is failing, I think.
In an election beauty contest he’s not going to look too good next to a professional PR person like David Cameron.
Does Mrs. Duffy sound like the type of person who could hold a nuanced discussion about immigration? And yet, a good number of the population of any country is made up of Mrs. Duffys. And they get to vote, too.
So, if PM Brown thinks Duffy is a bigot, why doesn’t he explain it to her in a way she can understand as to why immigration is a good thing and why the immigrants aren’t taking away jobs from her. Mrs. Duffy is unlikely to care whether it is a good thing for the country, though. She will want to know why it is a good thing for her and her family when they see foreigners working while she and hers are unemployed (lots of assumptions here, folks).
There may not be any bigotry in her remarks at all, just frustration at their lot in life and with the government who doesn’t seem to do anything about it.
I was referring specifically to the woman in question, the one who was “insulted,” especially with my final sentence. It was her outrage that I found stupid and naive, thank you very much. As for the actual gaffe itself, I, like everyone else other than the woman it was directed to, found it hilarious.
I’m going to have one more crack at this, because I think we’re talking past each other.
I think there’s an enormous difference between saying, “Immigrants drive down wages for indigenous workers” and “There’s some evidence that some indigenous workers are exposed to small downward wage pressure as a result of A8 immigration in the past few years.” The differences are:
-
There isn’t an evidence base for the first statement; there is for the second. (However, I’m not sure Profs. Nickell and Blanchflower consider there’s enough evidence to regard the issue as completely settled).
-
There’s a considerable body of research showing that across different nations and different times, immigration’s effect on indigenous wages has been marginal at best. It may be that 21st century Eastern European immigration to the UK is a completely different phenomenon but if so then by definition it’s a poor basis for long-term immigration policy debates.
-
Speaking of policy, the generality of the first statement glosses over the important details. The fact that immigration has made life harder for the unskilled in economically depressed areas does not mean that it has been bad for the UK as a whole. Nor does it mean that solutions to the problem of being poor and unskilled in Rochdale should centre on controlling immigration. The first statement turns a limited negative into a general claim that is, on a general level, unfounded.
I think the confusion has arisen because you read “immigration has depressed wages for Brits” as meaning “for some Brits” but I read it as meaning “for Brits as a whole”. If that’s right, I don’t think we really disagree at all.
amrussell, I had also started to think we were talking past each other. I’m not an advocate of banning immigration, as I explained upthread. Rather, I stated that there needs to be a better policy towards immigration, so that large enclaves of first-generation immigrants are not all clustered in specific towns whereas even neighbouring towns are untouched. If you saw the third debate last night, you would have noted that the Liberal Democrats are proposing limiting the rights of certain immigrants to work in vulnerable areas: this is a policy that I’d like to see implemented in order to encourage a more even spread of settlement.
As mentioned, Bolton and Wigan are two examples of this aforementioned phenomenon: Bolton has a large population of Asians from the Indian subcontinent, around 16%, whereas Wigan is less than 1%, and overwhelmingly “white British”, yet, both of these towns are neighbours, with town centres within walking distance of each other. Further, these figures don’t tell the full story, as they amortize the immigrant populations across the whole town: in fact, very specific areas, usually the poorest (in the case of Bolton, the “three Ds”: Dean, Dobble and Derby), tend to attract large immigrant populations that become self-perpetuating: non-English speakers are attracted to areas where fellow country men are already settled, as the Human Rights Council report upthread states, and services break under the strain.
But the second statement is the only statement that I’ve made. A8 immigration to some extent was unprecedented: the government were predicting on the order of 10,000 new entries, when in fact around 1.5 million entered the country.
Yes, my statements were only ever meant to imply the first.
Well, IMO the wording she used - “You can’t say anything about the immigrants” and “where are they flocking from?” - didn’t give any leeway for a reasoned debate, they’re both very much “closed” phrases.
If I were Mrs Duffy’s spin doctor (har har, I know, pols have spin docs, punters don’t), I’d have suggested perhaps “What’s your party going to do about immigration Mr Brown, and what effect will it have on British jobs?”
ISTR there was a pretty reasonable immigration question during last night’s debate, but I can’t find a transcript.
I am not totally anti immigration for the simple reason that we have and are having, far to many schoolleavers who apart from numeracy and literacy problems; seem to be less motivated to work at jobs they don’t enjoy.
To a certain degree we need immigrants in the work force, but the numbers we have coming to the U.K. are excessive by any standards.
At the last census a few years ago the population of the U.K. had risen in recent years from fifty five million to sixty million which the census takers attributed mostly to immigration.
Bearing in mind that the immigrants who actually filled in the census forms were here LEGALLY.
H.M.G. has confessed that it has no idea how many illegal immigrants there are in this country.
Addressing the effects that legal E.U. migrant workers from Eastern Europe have had on pay scales I can say from first hand experience that they have significantly lowered pay scales for the average construction worker and made many home grown construction workers unemployed and virtually unemployable.
From my experience Polish Gang Masters will pay quite often at best the lowest minimum wage, and often illegally well below that .
(Charging for shared accomodation, food etc.often not even bothering to go through even those motions)
The Polish workers are more then happy to accept these pay rates because, as one informed me, that back home he received approx.one pound an hour while on British minimum wage he was receiving nearly six times that .
Because of the strength of the Pound Sterling and the much cheaper cost of living in Poland one Pound an hour or its equivalent is a quite reasonable wage.
The migrant workers are happy to cram share rented accomodation while they are here or even, also in my experience, sleep in the Portacabins on site until they finish their stint and go back to their home country.
Because of the financial gain they’re making they will also quite happily not object when asked to flout Health and Safety regulations and are "asked"to do unpaid overtime.
When a new site opens a Gang Master can phone Poland and have a full crew available for work within the U.K. within thirtysix hours.
Raising immigration as an electoral issue is an economic issue NOT racist.
Attempting to gag people who talk about it is worthy of Hitler and Stalins attitude to human rights.
What’s interesting is that if she had been a Tory voter, I think this might actually have helped him. The problem is that the UK is full of bigotted Labour voters and he just insulted them all.
She clearly is a bigot, though I find it quite odd that she singled out Eastern European migrants for her ire. IMO Eastern European immigrants have been a big net gain for this country, they tend to have a much stronger work ethic than a lot of native born Brits and have filled major gaps in our economy. For instance, it used to be very difficult to get good builders, plumbers etc. as they were vastly outnumbered by British cowboys. And they’re white with a relatively similar cultural background.
Also Eastern European girls are hot. I’d rather expell all the worthless fat British dole mongers and keep the Eastern Europeans personally.