Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Testify wrote:
That is tory bollocks. People don't turn down or ignore jobs, not in the real world. There is a real stigma out there against the unemployed.

You could have £55 a week on the dole, or £250 a week in a job. What you gonna do?

Never been called a tory before, need a shower now...

I absolutely agree there is real stigma against the unemployed, its getting worse too with constant media campaign against "scroungers." Perhaps most disgustingly hate crimes against the disabled are on the rise.

I would say that there is this odd sense of entitlement among some which makes people think themselves above some types of work, which needs to be remedied.

And yeah, I never understood about the "better off on benefits" argument, you swap 70quid JSA for 250quid pay packet, and keep Housing, Council and Child Benefit if you are on low wages.

Yet...you still think these people can't figure out that work pays better?

English people would love to have many of the jobs that immigrants take, and for the same wages too - the main issue is conditions. English people simply don't stand for gak the way that foreign workers will.

 Testify wrote:
Yet...you still think these people can't figure out that work pays better?

English people would love to have many of the jobs that immigrants take, and for the same wages too - the main issue is conditions. English people simply don't stand for gak the way that foreign workers will.

Even during an economic boom we had masses of unemployed, they could have walked into jobs with their eyes closed, but didn't. Why was that?

 dæl wrote:

 Testify wrote:
Yet...you still think these people can't figure out that work pays better?

English people would love to have many of the jobs that immigrants take, and for the same wages too - the main issue is conditions. English people simply don't stand for gak the way that foreign workers will.

Even during an economic boom we had masses of unemployed, they could have walked into jobs with their eyes closed, but didn't. Why was that?

Because employers favour foreigners? The idea that you could stick up a sign in a jobcentre saying "factory operatives wanted" and not receive hundreds of applicants is alien to me. When I applied for a shelf stacking job last year through the jobcentre, there were about 2 applicants for every place - and they were the ones that jobcentre had chosen to put forward, it wasn't open to the public.

 Avatar 720 wrote:
If simple political affiliation now decides whether or not someone is alowed to adopt,

It isn't adoption, its fostering and the difference is massive.

 Testify wrote:

 dæl wrote:

 Testify wrote:
Yet...you still think these people can't figure out that work pays better?

English people would love to have many of the jobs that immigrants take, and for the same wages too - the main issue is conditions. English people simply don't stand for gak the way that foreign workers will.

Even during an economic boom we had masses of unemployed, they could have walked into jobs with their eyes closed, but didn't. Why was that?

Because employers favour foreigners? The idea that you could stick up a sign in a jobcentre saying "factory operatives wanted" and not receive hundreds of applicants is alien to me. When I applied for a shelf stacking job last year through the jobcentre, there were about 2 applicants for every place - and they were the ones that jobcentre had chosen to put forward, it wasn't open to the public.

At the moment its a shock there were only two for every place, I've heard stories of fifty per place and such.

Kovnik Obama wrote:not that the psychology behind immigration is solely directed by cultural envy... If it attracts enough people that the culture changes radically, then you might see the economy change.

Canada as many values, for exemple, equality of right between the sexes, that have a direct impact on the economy. If enough people came from a different culture and reintroduced machism, it would have serious economical impacts, which would run counter to their point in coming here.

This, I can generally agree with, despite the extremely outlandish example.

 azazel the cat wrote:

Kovnik Obama wrote:not that the psychology behind immigration is solely directed by cultural envy... If it attracts enough people that the culture changes radically, then you might see the economy change.

Canada as many values, for exemple, equality of right between the sexes, that have a direct impact on the economy. If enough people came from a different culture and reintroduced machism, it would have serious economical impacts, which would run counter to their point in coming here.

This, I can generally agree with, despite the extremely outlandish example.

Well, yeah, it's outlandish, but there's been a few request to start Sharia-based family courts in Montreal, for exemple. Needless to say, they weren't well received (contrarily to the same request for jewish family court, which were approved).

But the important part is that defending the values that you think made your country great (which isn't equivalent to opposing immigration, anyhow) is not the same as 'fear of the other', and can be a legitimate concern.

 Testify wrote:

 dæl wrote:

 Testify wrote:
Yet...you still think these people can't figure out that work pays better?

English people would love to have many of the jobs that immigrants take, and for the same wages too - the main issue is conditions. English people simply don't stand for gak the way that foreign workers will.

Even during an economic boom we had masses of unemployed, they could have walked into jobs with their eyes closed, but didn't. Why was that?

Because employers favour foreigners? The idea that you could stick up a sign in a jobcentre saying "factory operatives wanted" and not receive hundreds of applicants is alien to me.

I rather doubt that employers favor foreigners. That's never been my experience. The only places I've seen anything like it are employers specifically looking for multilingual people.

If you replace "factory operatives wanted" with "fast food workers wanted" and "janitorial staff wanted", and the like, you're talking more accurately about the kind of jobs people on unemployment choose not to apply for or take.

 Mannahnin wrote:

 Testify wrote:

 dæl wrote:

 Testify wrote:
Yet...you still think these people can't figure out that work pays better?

English people would love to have many of the jobs that immigrants take, and for the same wages too - the main issue is conditions. English people simply don't stand for gak the way that foreign workers will.

Even during an economic boom we had masses of unemployed, they could have walked into jobs with their eyes closed, but didn't. Why was that?

Because employers favour foreigners? The idea that you could stick up a sign in a jobcentre saying "factory operatives wanted" and not receive hundreds of applicants is alien to me.

I rather doubt that employers favor foreigners. That's never been my experience. The only places I've seen anything like it are employers specifically looking for multilingual people.

So most employers are more than happy to put up with the hassle of a unionised workforce demanding higher pay, better conditions and an end to casual abuse of power by management, when thy could employ foreigners who wouldn't do such things?

 Mannahnin wrote:

If you replace "factory operatives wanted" with "fast food workers wanted" and "janitorial staff wanted", and the like, you're talking more accurately about the kind of jobs people on unemployment choose not to apply for or take.

Citation needed. Jobs like that are in high demand, around here anyway.

Workers of foreign origin are still subject to the same worker protection laws as local-born workers. You've got to be talking about illegal sweatshops in the first place to think it's a realistic practice for employers to preferentially hire foreigners because they won't know they can complain; even one worker who knows or finds out about the worker protection laws and the jig is up.

Fast food jobs are in high demand? Only in desperate economic times. Maybe things are that bad where you are, but when I was unemployed during the recession I still wasnt applying at McDonald's.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Workers of foreign origin are still subject to the same worker protection laws as local-born workers.

That is...naive. The very first day of my job I witnessed a line manager walk up to a girl on the assembly line (spreading cheese on pizzas for 8 hours a day, win), and casually grope her ass and breasts, then the deputy came up and did the same...then when I was moved somewhere else whenever I glanced back there was a manager or someone either standing behind her or groping her. And that happens all the time.

Now if they permit that to happen, what other rights do you think the (foreign) workers really have? English people simply wouldn't put up with that.

 Mannahnin wrote:

Fast food jobs are in high demand? Only in desperate economic times. Maybe things are that bad where you are, but when I was unemployed during the recession I still wasnt applying at McDonald's.

I would have killed for a job at McDonald's when i was unemployed. Hell it's better than other jobs, at least it keeps you busy and you get to work with other people.
Many others would, too. Point is, there is *no* job that is not grossly over-subscribed with applicants.

 Testify wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
Workers of foreign origin are still subject to the same worker protection laws as local-born workers.

That is...naive. The very first day of my job I witnessed a line manager walk up to a girl on the assembly line (spreading cheese on pizzas for 8 hours a day, win), and casually grope her ass and breasts, then the deputy came up and did the same...then when I was moved somewhere else whenever I glanced back there was a manager or someone either standing behind her or groping her. And that happens all the time.

Now if they permit that to happen, what other rights do you think the (foreign) workers really have? English people simply wouldn't put up with that.

Now who's being naive? Clearly you did. And if the job situation is as desperate as you describe, no doubt English women do too.

I don't even know what that means. If an English dude saw an English girl he knew being felt up he'd beat the gak out of the manager. Hence why at work they tend to leave the English girls alone.

Was talking to an old timer the other day...said he'd never let his daughter or wife work there, and one day one of those managers would get the gak beaten out of him. And do you know, I'm sure all the people around would mysteriously have a memory black out.

Mannahnin wrote:Workers of foreign origin are still subject to the same worker protection laws as local-born workers. You've got to be talking about illegal sweatshops in the first place to think it's a realistic practice for employers to preferentially hire foreigners because they won't know they can complain; even one worker who knows or finds out about the worker protection laws and the jig is up.

For what it's worth, this was actually a pretty commonplace occurance in Germany; I do not know if it is still the case.

 Testify wrote:
I don't even know what that means. If an English dude saw an English girl he knew being felt up he'd beat the gak out of the manager. Hence why at work they tend to leave the English girls alone.

I mean that you seem to be saying that you put up with it with the woman you saw get mistreated. If an English dude saw a foreign-born girl get treated that way and reacted substantially differently to how he would have reacted to an English girl being treated that way, then that's a sad statement about him as a man.

 Mannahnin wrote:

 Testify wrote:
I don't even know what that means. If an English dude saw an English girl he knew being felt up he'd beat the gak out of the manager. Hence why at work they tend to leave the English girls alone.

I mean that you seem to be saying that you put up with it with the woman you saw get mistreated. If an English dude saw a foreign-born girl get treated that way and reacted substantially differently to how he would have reacted to an English girl being treated that way, then that's a sad statement about him as a man.

That I'm not willing to be embaressed in front of 100 people and lose my job? Sure.

I'm obviously not talking about you. You didn't say you would beat up a guy who mistreated an English girl.

My point, before this digression, is that it just takes one person on the workforce willing to speak up when they see a worker mistreated for something to get investigated and potentially fixed. If you didn't speak up, that may be understandable, but that doesn't mean everyone keeps their mouth shut when they see bad things.

I happily would. I think most men would.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mannahnin wrote:

My point, before this digression, is that it just takes one person on the workforce willing to speak up when they see a worker mistreated for something to get investigated and potentially fixed. If you didn't speak up, that may be understandable, but that doesn't mean everyone keeps their mouth shut when they see bad things.

Imagine all the line managers in your workplace are from the same part of Asia, all speak the same language (with barely any English). Now imagine all *their* bosses speak that language, and are from that area.

What do you think's going to happen if you complain?

Sadly it's like this in a lot of the country. Migrants miss-treating migrants, while the English unemployed go without jobs.

 Mannahnin wrote:

 Testify wrote:

 dæl wrote:

 Testify wrote:
Yet...you still think these people can't figure out that work pays better?

English people would love to have many of the jobs that immigrants take, and for the same wages too - the main issue is conditions. English people simply don't stand for gak the way that foreign workers will.

Even during an economic boom we had masses of unemployed, they could have walked into jobs with their eyes closed, but didn't. Why was that?

Because employers favour foreigners? The idea that you could stick up a sign in a jobcentre saying "factory operatives wanted" and not receive hundreds of applicants is alien to me.

I rather doubt that employers favor foreigners. That's never been my experience. The only places I've seen anything like it are employers specifically looking for multilingual people.

If you replace "factory operatives wanted" with "fast food workers wanted" and "janitorial staff wanted", and the like, you're talking more accurately about the kind of jobs people on unemployment choose not to apply for or take.

Really? Thats not your experience? You've not known any contractors then. My neighbor is quite successful construction contractor (yes even now days). He never hires US natives. They are too lazy. The construction industry in the South and California is completely utterly dominated by non-natives.

Thats the problem with an open border. Employers can get harder workers who work in more poor conditions. This puts pressure on other unskilled labor, thus driving down wages and working conditions.

Its just like outsourcing, except the outsourcees are here, and they work harder than you. And they can make better food than you too.

 Frazzled wrote:


Its just like outsourcing, except the outsourcees are here, and they work harder than you. And they can make better food than you too.

So what you are saying is that they make perfect wives?

Edit: nothing to see here.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:


Its just like outsourcing, except the outsourcees are here, and they work harder than you. And they can make better food than you too.

So what you are saying is that they make perfect wives?

Yes actually.

 Frazzled wrote:
Really? Thats not your experience? You've not known any contractors then. My neighbor is quite successful construction contractor (yes even now days). He never hires US natives. They are too lazy. The construction industry in the South and California is completely utterly dominated by non-natives.

Thats the problem with an open border. Employers can get harder workers who work in more poor conditions. This puts pressure on other unskilled labor, thus driving down wages and working conditions.

Its just like outsourcing, except the outsourcees are here, and they work harder than you. And they can make better food than you too.

I agree with the summary, but to be perfectly honest I've never really been able to see the problem. I mean, how many protections should we put in place for people who are unskilled and don't work that hard?

 sebster wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Really? Thats not your experience? You've not known any contractors then. My neighbor is quite successful construction contractor (yes even now days). He never hires US natives. They are too lazy. The construction industry in the South and California is completely utterly dominated by non-natives.

Thats the problem with an open border. Employers can get harder workers who work in more poor conditions. This puts pressure on other unskilled labor, thus driving down wages and working conditions.

Its just like outsourcing, except the outsourcees are here, and they work harder than you. And they can make better food than you too.

I agree with the summary, but to be perfectly honest I've never really been able to see the problem. I mean, how many protections should we put in place for people who are unskilled and don't work that hard?

Thats a remarkably right wing viewpoint.

Train them, and fire them if they don't work, simples.

 Frazzled wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Really? Thats not your experience? You've not known any contractors then. My neighbor is quite successful construction contractor (yes even now days). He never hires US natives. They are too lazy. The construction industry in the South and California is completely utterly dominated by non-natives.

Thats the problem with an open border. Employers can get harder workers who work in more poor conditions. This puts pressure on other unskilled labor, thus driving down wages and working conditions.

Its just like outsourcing, except the outsourcees are here, and they work harder than you. And they can make better food than you too.

I agree with the summary, but to be perfectly honest I've never really been able to see the problem. I mean, how many protections should we put in place for people who are unskilled and don't work that hard?

Thats a remarkably right wing viewpoint.

To my recollection Seb is right wing. Although that means slightly different things in different countries.

I suppose we can put contracting on the list, although as far as I can tell (with rather limited experience), what you're describing is regional. Anyway, we've discussed before that there are jobs Americans just don't want to do. And sometimes that means they might be willing to take one, but not want to work hard and do them well.

They released a statement the gist was they're ignorant of politics and only voted them because they want out of the EU.

I agree with the summary, but to be perfectly honest I've never really been able to see the problem. I mean, how many protections should we put in place for people who are unskilled and don't work that hard?

Because they're citizens and their employment should be a concern of the state. People are only "lazy" compared to people who'll work in far worse conditions. I find the idea that westerners have spontaniously decided to stop working very difficult to believe. Despite what the media tell you, it is fething difficult if not impossible to live on state handouts. There's no way someone would turn down a paid full time job in favour of benefits. It just doesn't happen, people don't want to live in abject poverty.

Mannahnin wrote:
To my recollection Seb is right wing. Although that means slightly different things in different countries.

Some Americans may find it hard to believe that in the rest of the world, it's possible to be right-wing and remain a reasonable human being.

I thought america was right further right and extreme right?
Confused