- 29 Jul 2019 15:17
#15022146
Ever since the Black Death there have been perverse 'market' forces acting on the price of labour, indeed, it was probably one of the first events that had a significant effect that gave the 'entitlement' class at the 'top', the awareness of market forces,simply because it increased the cost of labour, brought about by shortages of it arising from the BD.
Later, in the 1440-90 period, there was an 'Alien's(foreigners) Subsidy', in which they were taxed higher than the English were, we may have to disincentivise such people once more if the economy goes south, although, I think that they will upstakes & move out of their own accord.
No doubt, many 'English' people will also do likewise.
Ever since then, throughout the industrial revolution, the Victorian era, the two world wars, to the current period, labour has tended to concentrate within cities or towns, to where the new phenomena of factories created the demand for labour away from the countryside.
After WW2, the government introduced two policies that were nothing less than social engineering, one was late 1945-6, when Family Allowances were introduced, encouraging repopulation, the other was commonwealth migration, to supply the labour force following the war, but, in reality, it was importing cheap labour into the country, at a time when wages were already depressed & unions were becoming more organised in order to put pressure on the government to improve workers living standards.
The irony of course, is that, whilst the Labour Party have been doing the usual scam of haranguing the government to 'compensate' 'Labour's' client voters from abroad, the Carribean(Windrush)generation with 'free' taxpayers cash for no ligitimate reason, the same period in the early-mid 1950's saw many thousands of 'English' men, women,children, emigrate to Australia as £10 'Poms'.
It's funny how many thousands of English people couldn't wait to emigrate from here, willingly, with taxpayers money, because they saw no future here, yet, in 1948, the government were at the same time, encouraging migration inwards from the Carribean in particular, in order to provide labour for post-war reconstruction.
I still recall the very first Jamaican that I ever saw,he was probably better-off than most of us, he was selling silk ties, watches, etc, under his jacket & it's an aspect of migrants that I admire them for.
They,for the most, do want to work, in order to improve their lot, but I feel more strongly that, as a country, our businesses should do what they have always done, invest in the countries abroad, so that people wouldn't need to emigrate just to 'improve' their lot,sometimes, at other people's expense.
I think that people are relatively 'conservative' about migration,because, in it's proper context, it's about population levels, the increase, which,despite the rhetoric from pro-migrationist lobby, is not as 'beneficial' to the country as made out, but government will never, ever supply the proof that it is, because it doesn't have any proof.
Rich wrote:Marx and his successors have been preaching doom and gloom since the 1840s. Its amazing how such stupid ideas can go unchallenged. Its was not industrialisation that created such terrible poverty and poor quality of life for the lower classes in early nineteenth century Britain, but the massive expansion of the population. The rural population expanded not contracted during the early part of the industrial revolution.
I have no time for either BoJo's banal and idiotic optimism, or the apocalyptic ravings of so many Remainers.
Ever since the Black Death there have been perverse 'market' forces acting on the price of labour, indeed, it was probably one of the first events that had a significant effect that gave the 'entitlement' class at the 'top', the awareness of market forces,simply because it increased the cost of labour, brought about by shortages of it arising from the BD.
Later, in the 1440-90 period, there was an 'Alien's(foreigners) Subsidy', in which they were taxed higher than the English were, we may have to disincentivise such people once more if the economy goes south, although, I think that they will upstakes & move out of their own accord.
No doubt, many 'English' people will also do likewise.
Ever since then, throughout the industrial revolution, the Victorian era, the two world wars, to the current period, labour has tended to concentrate within cities or towns, to where the new phenomena of factories created the demand for labour away from the countryside.
After WW2, the government introduced two policies that were nothing less than social engineering, one was late 1945-6, when Family Allowances were introduced, encouraging repopulation, the other was commonwealth migration, to supply the labour force following the war, but, in reality, it was importing cheap labour into the country, at a time when wages were already depressed & unions were becoming more organised in order to put pressure on the government to improve workers living standards.
The irony of course, is that, whilst the Labour Party have been doing the usual scam of haranguing the government to 'compensate' 'Labour's' client voters from abroad, the Carribean(Windrush)generation with 'free' taxpayers cash for no ligitimate reason, the same period in the early-mid 1950's saw many thousands of 'English' men, women,children, emigrate to Australia as £10 'Poms'.
It's funny how many thousands of English people couldn't wait to emigrate from here, willingly, with taxpayers money, because they saw no future here, yet, in 1948, the government were at the same time, encouraging migration inwards from the Carribean in particular, in order to provide labour for post-war reconstruction.
I still recall the very first Jamaican that I ever saw,he was probably better-off than most of us, he was selling silk ties, watches, etc, under his jacket & it's an aspect of migrants that I admire them for.
They,for the most, do want to work, in order to improve their lot, but I feel more strongly that, as a country, our businesses should do what they have always done, invest in the countries abroad, so that people wouldn't need to emigrate just to 'improve' their lot,sometimes, at other people's expense.
I think that people are relatively 'conservative' about migration,because, in it's proper context, it's about population levels, the increase, which,despite the rhetoric from pro-migrationist lobby, is not as 'beneficial' to the country as made out, but government will never, ever supply the proof that it is, because it doesn't have any proof.
Andre PREVIN : "Your playing all the 'wrong' notes" .
Eric MORECOMBE ; "I'm playing all the 'right' notes,but, not necessarily in the 'right' order".
Eric MORECOMBE ; "I'm playing all the 'right' notes,but, not necessarily in the 'right' order".
- By paeng
- By Pants-of-dog
- By Godstud