British Jobs For Foreign Workers in 'Anti-Racist' Britain

[Infinite Chaos]

-- [/I]I never said such corporate exploitation was a product of the Left.[/I]

No, and I didn't accuse you if you read my post.

--I also said nothing about pulling out of the global markets. Perhaps you may like to re-read some of my posts before wading in with your fleckle about my supposed communist fetish.

Again - "no" as I asked what you would propose as an alternative. You just ranted without thinking through the consequences which I asked you to give an alternative for.

-- And when the likes of large supermarkets still use such methods to cut costs and rake in multi-billion Pound profits, that only adds to the already bad smell caused by British farmers going to the wall because monopoly chains pay only subsistence prices to them.

Cut to the chase: do you blame the companies for running low pay conditions and hiring low pay workers OR the customers who refuse to pay high prices?

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

The only direct alternative is Communism, something which is never the answer when all that's needed is a fairer way of going about things in the Capitalist world. That's why trade unions were set up in the first place.

And I do blame companies for leading employees a dog's life, though to an extent you take the responsibility for lumbering yourself in a dead-end job anyway. And if a sizeable company can't exist without forcing its employees to do themselves half to death then it deserves to go to the wall if it refuses to slim down.

I don't blame the customers, which would be as daft as blaming the iceberg for the sinking of the Titanic. People have fought an age-old battle against expense and the last thing to do is adopt a typical Public-bashing mentality so beloved of liberal-leftists.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

The only direct alternative is Communism, something which is never the answer when all that's needed is a fairer way of going about things in the Capitalist world. That's why trade unions were set up in the first place.

Ho hum.

And I do blame companies for leading employees a dog's life, though to an extent you take the responsibility for lumbering yourself in a dead-end job anyway. And if a sizeable company can't exist without forcing its employees to do themselves half to death then it deserves to go to the wall if it refuses to slim down.

I don't blame the customers, which would be as daft as blaming the iceberg for the sinking of the Titanic. People have fought an age-old battle against expense and the last thing to do is adopt a typical Public-bashing mentality so beloved of liberal-leftists.

What "liberal leftists" have to do with this I will leave you to explain.

The public have every right to choose whether they pay market price for goods or not - the public dictate many elements of the market and willingness to pay is a big part of that.
What I'm basically asking comes down to is whether you believe companies should exist in the low price sector or not. If you do - then you have to accept that those companies have to drive prices down - or you have to dictate to business how it operates and makes a profit.

We don't yet live in a society which dictates to the market what prices it has to charge - we do however live in a society which tries to establish basic living wages and rights for workers. Whatever price or employment conditions a private company chooses to use (within the law) is up to private business - not the left or the right or that favourite bogeyman of yours that keeps you awake all night long... :lol:

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

Your vapidity bores me, likewise your dragging things round in circles and banging on about leftist 'bogeymen'.

Obviously you couldn't expect the likes of a champagne business to operate in quite the same way as a lemonade company. But that provides no excuse to mistreat workers. I've said it before, more than once, but if you're too deliberately obtuse to comprehend that and instead choose to bait me and poke fun then I see no reason to bother with this thread any further.

You're not worth bothering with.

 

[Andalublue]

Your vapidity bores me, likewise your dragging things round in circles and banging on about leftist 'bogeymen'.

Obviously you couldn't expect the likes of a champagne business to operate in quite the same way as a lemonade company. But that provides no excuse to mistreat workers. I've said it before, more than once, but if you're too deliberately obtuse to comprehend that and instead choose to bait me and poke fun then I see no reason to bother with this thread any further.

You're not worth bothering with.

You'e the one who gets a dig in at either the labour party, liberals or lefties with every post. It's a bit late to start complaining about anyone else "banging on".

IC makes good points, to which you clearly have no answer. Either you like market capitalism and allow commerce to operate as the market dictates, or you control it to some extent. You're right, there's no excuse to mistreat workers. What would YOU do to ensure that doesn't happen?

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

I may have a dig at lefties, but not without reason and it's done concisely, without much waffle. I make a post to land the punches and leave it at that, rather than taking people round in circles, bogging them down in repetition. That's all Infinite seems able to do.

The question put seems to ask me to choose between two extremes. Then when I say there's not much wrong which can't be solved without a few extra bits of legislation to the existing system I'm told I can't answer the question. It's not as if plenty of legislation to guarantee at least some security for workers is in existence. The solution is already there, just not implemented enough.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

-- I make a post to land the punches and leave it at that

:lol:

To continue any laughable boxing comparison - there's a difference between shadow boxing with an enemy / combatant that exists only in your imagination and a real bout.

--The question put seems to ask me to choose between two extremes. Then when I say there's not much wrong which can't be solved without a few extra bits of legislation to the existing system I'm told I can't answer the question. It's not as if plenty of legislation to guarantee at least some security for workers is in existence. The solution is already there, just not implemented enough.

Do you think the current situation is one of the extremes? That some companies choose to identify market opportunity and compete in a low price sectors is an "extreme" situation?

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

To continue any laughable boxing comparison - there's a difference between shadow boxing with an enemy / combatant that exists only in your imagination and a real bout.

You mean that you are yourself an imaginary opponent? You seem so two-dimensional that you could indeed be a sketch show character off television, now you've adopted the position of ridiculing the person arguing against you.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

To continue any laughable boxing comparison - there's a difference between shadow boxing with an enemy / combatant that exists only in your imagination and a real bout.

You mean that you are yourself an imaginary opponent? You seem so two-dimensional that you could indeed be a sketch show character off television, now you've adopted the position of ridiculing the person arguing against you.

So... you misunderstand what I wrote about boxing and still have no answer to my question.

Ah well - to paraphrase something you wrote elsewhere.. "-And the more you shuffle and dodge the question, the more I'll ask. And answer it too"

-- Do you think the current situation is one of the extremes? That some companies choose to identify market opportunity and compete in a low price sectors is an "extreme" situation?

Simple question.

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

Well go on and answer it then. I know you're dying to.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Why am I not surprised to find "answer came there none..."

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

Because I long since lost interest in going round in circles when the point of the topic had long since gone.


Chalk that up as one to you if you like, even though you have no answer yourself!

 

[Infinite Chaos]

No, I actually have a position - I just don't tie myself up in circles with my own argument and then pretend to be "above answering" when challenged.

And before you ask my position - I've asked for yours. :lol:

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

I'm not interested any more. I've spoken about reforming the existing systems to fit the modern age somehow and you keep re-asking using different words.

I'm happy to keep wasting your time going round and round but there's nowt more to be said.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

I'm not interested any more. I've spoken about reforming the existing systems to fit the modern age somehow and you keep re-asking using different words.

"Somehow" isn't an answer. Normally I wouldn't be too bothered but you've been quite happy to throw out meaningless answers and posts that don't say much beyond explain your strange fear of "lefties" and "muslims" so I called you on the indefensible position you painted yourself into.

You have no answer - you've quite happily blamed the bogeyman "leftie" govt and the bogeyman companies operating within the low price market rules that operate in this country - you won't however defend your position because you know I'll call you on the price rises any legal action will enforce (leading to loss of jobs in Britain) and you know that raising wages for workers will also raise costs (leading to loss of jobs in Britain). Equally, preventing companies operating within the low price sector will also lead to loss of jobs in Britain.

You just keep pretending you answered me, it's obvious to everyone else that you haven't and can't.

I'm happy to keep wasting your time going round and round but there's nowt more to be said.

True, you ran out of excuses for not answering a while ago.

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

The answer you demand is not the point of the original topic and besides, I'm no financial expert and so can't go into the minutiae. I can only say what I see as wrong and dumping the English to safeguard higher profits looks wrong to me.

Unemployment is spiralling anyway. Bypassing the 'too lazy', too expensive British worker will only make things worse. Shop prices are only looking at things at the wrong end as far as this topic is concerned.

We keep on being told that coolie labour's the only way to keep the nation afloat, a position you yourself seem to allude to. British workers may as well all resign in protest if their jobs are that worthless that morality will destroy them.

Alright then. Should I not bother looking for another job (after I was recently made redundant as the economy went bad) and retire, letting all the immigrants pay my 'pension'?

 

[Infinite Chaos]

The answer you demand is not the point of the original topic and besides, I'm no financial expert and so can't go into the minutiae. I can only say what I see as wrong and dumping the English to safeguard higher profits looks wrong to me.

The original subject was about a company asking for Polish speaking labour. I seem to remember you made the complaint that was asking for immigrant workers only. That was addressed by myself and others - there is no real proof that the English are being dumped to safeguard profits - especially in a recession.

We're a market economy and market forces operate - if the buying public want lower prices they go to companies offering lower price. If the public decide not to buy from companies that only employ foreign labour then they can do this. We've seen market forces where child labour / unethical harvesting or policies exist - it simply takes getting the information out. Similarly, if the public decide Asda is pushing companies into policy that means UK labour is not used then the public will buy less. Time will tell.

Unemployment is spiralling anyway. Bypassing the 'too lazy', too expensive British worker will only make things worse. Shop prices are only looking at things at the wrong end as far as this topic is concerned.

Then I recommend some basic demand / supply lessons before you advocate new policy or enforcement of existing policy / regulations. Companies cannot sell if the public refuse to pay high prices or find the operations of the company to be unethical.

We keep on being told that coolie labour's the only way to keep the nation afloat, a position you yourself seem to allude to. British workers may as well all resign in protest if their jobs are that worthless that morality will destroy them.

Alright then. Should I not bother looking for another job (after I was recently made redundant as the economy went bad) and retire, letting all the immigrants pay my 'pension'?

You misunderstand my position - the market will decide, if people wanted ethical goods or found Asda suppliers to be unethical then they will shop elsewhere (which is why the same article you originally linked said that Asda were investigating and had expressed concern). If the public wanted quality British goods then places like M & S would be more successful, M & S tried for as long as possible to source from the UK and I remember the furore when they had to start sourcing from overseas.

BBC News | WALES | Clothing workers given notice

BBC News | SCOTLAND | William Baird plunges into loss

BBC News | TUC Conference | M&S in fresh row over foreign goods

It's not simply a case of M & S prices being too high, companies that later were discovered to be using child labour like "Primark" were also producing designs that more people wanted.
I'd personally like to see more high quality UK sourced products - my background is design for manufacture - however it's also up to consumer and entrepreneurs to find gaps in the market and produce what the public buyer wants.

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

You misunderstand my position - the market will decide, if people wanted ethical goods or found Asda suppliers to be unethical then they will shop elsewhere.

Oh I see. I was just making my views known that's all.

Ta very much.

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

http://www.debatepolitics.com/europ...ers-anti-racist-britain-3.html#post1058621162

Yeah, well, them's the breaks.

Perhaps you may care to contribute to the BNP's court fund to face down Trevor Phillips in court. The BNP prefer the promotion and company of their own kind in their own interests - them's the breaks.

 

[Alvin T. Grey]

http://www.debatepolitics.com/europ...ers-anti-racist-britain-3.html#post1058621162




Perhaps you may care to contribute to the BNP's court fund to face down Trevor Phillips in court. The BNP prefer the promotion and company of their own kind in their own interests - them's the breaks.

As does every racist scumsucking pack of inbred wankers.

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

Them's the breaks, apparently, in the world of favourtism! Mind, ASDA did have the grace to deal with it in their own case.


And I assume vitriol of equal strength will be aimed at the BNP's opposite number, the Communist Party of Great Britain. After all, it's nice to have balance as I'm sure each and every left winger on this board would agree.

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

...Ah, radio silence!

A typical reaction from the class of people who refuse to condemn the Communist Party in any measure of the way they criticise the BNP. On top of this, they can also rationalise Communism as well as lambaste me for referring to their beloved criminals as scum or vermin too!

No wonder I don't vote for them!

 

[Grant]

...Ah, radio silence!

A typical reaction from the class of people who refuse to condemn the Communist Party in any measure of the way they criticise the BNP. On top of this, they can also rationalise Communism as well as lambaste me for referring to their beloved criminals as scum or vermin too!

No wonder I don't vote for them!

They'll side with Communists, Fasicists, Islamic Terrorists or whoever they feel might overthrow the westerm democratic way of life.

If you've ever read the great Jean Francois Revel, and well might have done given your insights on the subjects, you really might want to give him a go.

Jean-François Revel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

'How Democracies Perish' might be especially applicable today.

 

[Republic_Of_Public]

Democracy tends to ignore, even deny, threats to its existence because it loathes doing what is necessary to counter them… What we end up with in what is conventionally called Western society is a topsy-turvy situation in which those seeking to destroy democracy appear to be fighting for legitimate aims, while its defenders are pictured as repressive reactionaries.

Yes, he does have a way with words, doesn't he!

"We, the communists, we adopted the fascist agenda of 1919, which is a program of peace, freedom and defense of workers' interests. Blackshirts unite to call you get that program. Fascists of the Old Guard and Young Fascists , we proclaim that we are ready to fight by your side for the 1919 program. "

MANIFESTO FOR THE HEALTH OF ITALY AND RECONCILIATION OF THE PEOPLE BY THE ITALIAN, written by Palmiro Togliatti, and approved by the Central Committee of Communist Party of Italy, in September 1936, published in "The Operaio Stato" nº 8..

 

[Alvin T. Grey]

Them's the breaks, apparently, in the world of favourtism! Mind, ASDA did have the grace to deal with it in their own case.


And I assume vitriol of equal strength will be aimed at the BNP's opposite number, the Communist Party of Great Britain. After all, it's nice to have balance as I'm sure each and every left winger on this board would agree.

If there were more than three people who took the Communist party seriously. Maybe then.