Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
July 25, 2011

Immigration And Wages

Saturday June 11 - Day 41: [...] I prayed for the first time in a very long time today. I explained to God that unless he wanted the Marxist-Islamic alliance and the certain Islamic takeover of Europe to completely annihilate European Christendom within the next hundred years he must ensure that the warriors fighting for the preservation of European Christendom prevail. He must ensure that I succeed with my mission and as such; contribute to inspire thousands of other revolutionary conservatives/nationalists; anti-Communists and anti-Islamists throughout the European world.
2083 - A European Declaration Of Independence (big pdf) (page 1459)

I am pretty sure God, should that concept exist, did not understand what the terrorist Breivig "explained" to the all knowing.

That's because the numbers are all wrong. Given the immigration rates, fertility rates of immigrants, their adherence to religion and the trends of those numbers there is no chance for Muslim immigrants to become more than a 6% minority in Europe within the next decades (they are now at 4% of which only 20% are observant). As other historic migrations have show it is indeed quite likely that within one or two generations the offspring of the immigrants will be indistinguishable from the general population.

But besides to explain that the numbers are wrong we should also understand why there is increasing fear of immigration in large parts of "western" populations. It has, I believe, to do with the lack of wage growth (in the U.S. declining wages) in the past decades.

There is a legitimate argument to be made against immigration. Whenever a country's economy is in a uptrend and unemployment goes down, business interests, which want to to keep wages from growing, argue for more immigration. Workers do have a legitimate interest in increasing their wages in times of economic upturns and therefore also a legitimate interest in keeping immigration down at least until long term full employment is achieved.

But hardly any political party, at least in Europe, still makes the above argument and I wonder why. Social-democrats and other parties on the left should have this issue at their core. Instead they try to catch up with the demagogues at the right which want to fight immigration because they their follower perceive it as a cultural threat or use the "muslim threat" to further Israel's interests in keeping support from Europe and the U.S.

The left should also be more careful in embracing "multiculturism". Yes I prefer to live in a multicultural neighborhood and I am all for it. But that pro-multicultural argument can also, via the business interest as explained above, be used to further immigration to suppress wages. Pro-mulitcultural should be an argument for integration, not to further immigration.

The economic argument against immigration must be put back into the discussion. It is logical, sensible and will keep the people, who I believe instinctively understand it, out of the cloud of the demagogues.

 

Posted by b on July 25, 2011 at 01:29 PM | Permalink

Comments

from an american standpoint, peak oil will make immigrant workers superfluous.

so, according to Breivik, we should ship them back to wherever, peak oil or not... or else shoot them.

...especially the economic and political theorists who, as an article of faith, cannot acknowledge the existence of peak oil... because peak oil was the motivation for staging 9/11 to get the PNAc project underwy.

one good deal after another.

Posted by: groundresonance | Jul 25, 2011 1:59:17 PM | 1

we should just flat out admit that white people, especally nordics who have lots of oil, are superior races, and, while jews are useful, they have to be manipulated.

if jews are willing to get out in front of these projects like PNAC... well, that's a pretty good deal... they can take the heat because that's what they do, and they're stupid enough to fall for it, time after time sfter miserable time because that's what they do.

Posted by: groundresonance | Jul 25, 2011 2:24:42 PM | 2

Sorry the pun but there is no political left left in most of the western 'side' of the world. So called 'socialists' or socialdemocrats have been to the right of anything I could call even moderate left for at least a decade or two. The real left is marginal (something like what the socialist would call 'populist' left on Central and South America or the more traditional ex-communists ilk) and mostly irrelevant in Europe, the US or the westernized Asian nations

Now the fight is between some miscellaneous 'center' (old left and on full throttle to complete self-annihilation), the traditional right (losing more and more political space by the day) and the neo-fascist right (which a glue of old fascists and all the new antimuslim Tea Parties and similar clones).

The way I see it this is evolving like the 20-30s getting into the 40s of the last century (discount a decade or so) but without an 'extremist' (extremist from the point of view of the 'moderates' which in fact were quite friendly to fascism) opposition on the other side. And I don't see, again, the unwilling 'moderates' to make a stance against the neo-fascists. More and more of their discourse is getting blending into the 'moderate' vision of the world.

Sorry to sound defeatist but that's the way I see it. There is an increasing number of people who believe in something similar to what the bloody killer says he believes (I think he may be more a narcisist than a real believer, at the end anything could have worked as an excuse to their madness). Though obviously most people isn't deranged or motivated enough to express their disaffection with immigration and the current mainstream political trends (say doling the banks but not the people and using someone weaker than themselves as scape goat or the pay guy, basically projecting what the elites do on them into who they believe are weaker) with such violence.

The alternatives, though getting a bit more of traction this year with all the Arab and Northern-African revolts (or civil wars, or western backed neo-colonial meddling), have been quite weak until now.

Posted by: ThePaper | Jul 25, 2011 2:28:40 PM | 3

what it all boils down to is this: if you're so inconceivably, consistently, irretrievably evil, decent people wont be able to believe that fellow humans are capable of such evil.

it's aumann's game theory.

Posted by: groundresonance | Jul 25, 2011 2:56:09 PM | 4

oh my god (:-)9), b., there is no economic argument against immigration ...

let's take Germany.
1. lot's of companies here are faced with the choice of hiring skilled foreign workers to come here or transfer part of the company abroad.
2. German demographics mean your and my pension depend on immigration (we might not get it anyway)
3. German industry depends on exports. Immigration gets you lots of language skills free of academic costs.
4. Immigration gets you lots of any skills free of academic costs.
5. Germans are both: work force and consumers of services. So whilst skilled foreign competition might get on your nerves at work, you depend on cheap skilled cleaning and (... see demographics) cheap competent care for your old age parents, (and best care for your kids, which is something Germany is very backwards about), or cheap help with redecorating your home.
6. We also enjoy cheap international restaurants. Forget about it, when you restrict immigration.

There is a reason why the labour movement (that represents skilled labour) has always been multicultural in outlook and right wing movements have always been attractive to people afraid of losing privileges. It's a completely different outlook on life if you think you are entitled to something because of lineage or because of your skill.

There is an organized worker's technique of locking competition by closed shops (German trade unions consciously decided against it), but it is linked exclusively to negotiating more successfully, so anybody might take part in it. (Once it is locked, it is locked though. An Armenian friend of mine told me that Cologne workers cut GDR workers after the fall of the wall. When confronted why they preferred Turkish workers to Germans from the GDR they said, yes, they are our Turks.)

Last not least. Wages are relative. People feel rich comparing. It is like putting a frozen hand in cold water. The water seems hot.

The main competition for skilled work, and the main reason wages have gone down, are women. A generation ago, a man's wage or salary on average was enough to feed a family. Today
most families need both salaries. Apart from that, the risk of divorce is such, that a woman hardly has a choice.

Posted by: somebody | Jul 25, 2011 3:11:27 PM | 5

peak oil will kill all your arguments, except those the make sense.

Posted by: groundresonance | Jul 25, 2011 3:19:38 PM | 6

she got herself a degee in ciminalogy and jounralism and now she's a motel clerk in fresno
she's a good lookin' blonde an pretty smart but she is a motel clerk in fresno

but she wants a dad to take care of her
she wnats a dad to love her
she wants a dad to pay her bills
she'll find one, i know she will

whe was voted somththing by her high school class
but her kitty dont always cure the lonesomes
so once n a while she stumbles into a honky tomk
grabs a guy, throws in in the rack, and then she makes him groan some

but she wants a dad to take care of her...

she'l find one i know she will

cause she is a lovely, lord she's so lovely
she is a lovely little thing
she's maid her mind up
whe's quite decided
a princess lie herself
deserves a king

Posted by: groundresonance | Jul 25, 2011 3:47:15 PM | 7

@somebody let's take Germany.
1. lot's of companies here are faced with the choice of hiring skilled foreign workers to come here or transfer part of the company abroad.

Wrong. The choice is a bit less profits because of paying more for local workers or more profits for hiring immigrants. Transferring parts abroad is always VERY cost intensive and therefor usually avoided. It is an empty threat.

2. German demographics mean your and my pension depend on immigration (we might not get it anyway)

No. If that would be the case no person after 1945 would have got their pensions. If increases in productivity is shared fairly pensions are well insured even with a decreasing workingforce (which we btw do not have because many more women are working in paid profession than ever before.)

3. German industry depends on exports. Immigration gets you lots of language skills free of academic costs.

That the German economy depends on exports is a choice and not a smart one. We export and invest the overflow balance of money we make into U.S. real estate scams. The money then just vanishes. Is that smart? It is possible to run an internally balanced economy.

4. Immigration gets you lots of any skills free of academic costs.

I have seen those skills at Airbus with imported "well trained" Indian plane engineers. They turned out to be much more expensive than training and paying German engineers. BTW - how does it end when all countries want a free ride on other countries education system? Germany has more out-migration of skilled workers than immigration.

5. Germans are both: work force and consumers of services. So whilst skilled foreign competition might get on your nerves at work, you depend on cheap skilled cleaning and (... see demographics) cheap competent care for your old age parents, (and best care for your kids, which is something Germany is very backwards about), or cheap help with redecorating your home.

I do not depend cheap skilled cleaning because that is an oxymoron. I have always payed very well for cleaning services when not doing it myself and it was a good investment. The same goes for care of my parents and kids. You think you can get "cheap and competent" in the same package? That is nonsense.

6. We also enjoy cheap international restaurants. Forget about it, when you restrict immigration.

The Greek restaurant next to my door is not cheap but quite good. The German food restaurant next to it also. If none of same resorts to slave labor both have the same cost and deliver the same service. The argument makes thereby no sense.

Posted by: b | Jul 25, 2011 4:07:33 PM | 8

listen b. I do not know if we live in the same country. We could be self sufficient if we as consumers bought our self produced goods. I do not know how we should pay for our imports though, as there are many raw materials we do not have. and as I remember, the wall mainly fell because of bananas and oranges.
where I live part of the time the countryside is emptying - and this is not ex-GDR area - municipal administrations fund shop rents to keep inner cities alive, and the scarce work force works overtime in the tourist season. my ex-GDR cousin stopped moaning about capitalism ("yes we wanted capitalism but not Manchester capitalism") ten years ago. He has built his house and is working over time too now.
State pensions in Germany are worth as much as the work force earns at a given time as they are a transfer not accumulated wealth. When the work force shrinks, and the average age of people gets close to 100, bad luck. bad luck, too, if modern medicine makes it hard to die, as most pensions are not enough to pay for care. I do not know how you assume to be able to increase productivity with a shrinking work force and less competition.
Of course you can choose to pay more for local goods and unionized services, it means your wage is worth less though.

Posted by: somebody | Jul 25, 2011 4:54:52 PM | 9

I wrote this when there were 0 comments but for some reason it would not post. So even realizing some things have been discussed I think what is written below is different (plus I think some of the response from b actually supports this argument)

The linkage of immigration to lower wages is not a clear one. Generally immigrants are taking on jobs that are not filled by locals and these are usually low paying labor jobs (mucho trabajo poco dinaro is a common saying here in the US among hispanic immigrants). From what I have seen of Europe its economies are no longer as insular from the global economy and that is the main cause for pressure on wages. Even German companies are putting up major factories elsewhere. Even if all immigration is stopped into Europe I really doubt if the downward trend in wages will slow down.

But, and frankly I am surprised you make no mention of this issue, there is the issue of very low birth rates among many European nations. Without immigrants this will lead to a very difficult situation in a couple of decades with a aging population and much smaller work base to care for them. Japan is taking a different route on this issue (there xenophobia knows no limits) but investing heavily in robotics. Time will tell if their experiment will work. Europe is doomed without immigrants.

So to respond to what to do about this downward slide in wages. There is no easy answer there. Globalization is a reality. If one looks back at this past 50 years and realize how much wages have increased (dispropotionately in the developed world) it becomes easier to understand that this party had to come to an end and adjustments will have to be made. The old method of keeping the vast majority of the world's inhabitants poor is not going to work anymore as the information age is levelling the economic ground.

All these machinations in the Middle East and this War of Terror/Islam are just an attempt to roll back the clock. It won't work long term and we in the west need to come to grips with a fundamental shift in wages, for us generally downward.

Posted by: Khalid | Jul 25, 2011 5:41:10 PM | 10

as some french guy said once, in french, "multiculturalism is not eating couscous - multiculturalism is stoning adulteresses to death"

Posted by: mistah charley, ph.d. | Jul 25, 2011 6:29:00 PM | 11

"So the Norwegian terrorist cited the writings of Bernard Lewis, Daniel Pipes and other Zionists as his inspiration. Just this question. Imagine if a terrorist cited the writings of leftists like me as his inspiration. Can you imagine the reaction? Would not TV trucks be parked outside my home? Are there an TV trucks parked outside the home of Bernard Lewis?"
http://angryarab.net/2011/07/25/if-tables-were-turned/

Posted by: JohnH | Jul 25, 2011 7:59:29 PM | 12

the fun has begun.

it cannot be, because it should not be :-))

"Taken together, the image of Behring Breivik emerging and coalescing in the media is quite coherent, predictable, and easily assimilated to the media's general representation of the politics of Islam and terrorism in Europe and the West generally, i.e., that opposition to Islamism, jihadi terrorism, and wide-scale Muslim immigration is an extremist position.

Consequently, Behring Breivik is presented as an extremist with an irrational animosity towards Islam and its left-wing supporters who he falsely identified as 'Marxists'; that he is a Christian of a hate-filled 'fundamentalist' type; that his politics are of a far-right, indeed, 'Neo-Nazi', variety; that he is a militarist with weapons training; that he was capable of planning and executing a complex terrorist attack; and that he is a sociopath bent on massacring hundreds of innocent young people simply because they held political views that were different to his own.

If this view prevails it will represent a significant propaganda victory for the left, Islamism, jihadism, and their supporters, who have been on retreat throughout Europe over the past two years. It is unforgivable that this monstrous massacre should be exploited by these groups in this fashion to consolidate their position..."

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2810818.html

definitively must have been false flag.

Posted by: somebody | Jul 26, 2011 12:29:05 AM | 13

and of course this angle should be researched a lot more

http://www.anorak.co.uk/288046/news/anders-behring-breiviks-gay-knights-templar-2083-hunting-the-serbian-warlord-in-liberia.html/

yep mistah charley, the fight really is about the women as Sarkozy will confirm. this great image in Wikipedia contrasting Katarina Church and the minaret of Stockholm Mosque near Medborgarplatsen in Stockholm proves that it is not a clash of civilisations but a clash of patriarchies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiculturalism


Posted by: somebody | Jul 26, 2011 12:53:28 AM | 14

Immigration, when properly controlled, has been a good thing for the U.S., However, for the past two decades or so, it has been used by the mega-wealthy to drive down wages and break the unions.

As the globalist elites seek to construct a world plantation where workers rights mean nothing, immigration will be used as a tool to accomplish this goal.

Posted by: ben | Jul 26, 2011 10:07:06 AM | 15

JohnH,

I recall listening to NPR on the day of the Oklahoma City Bomb. Then, as now, Muslim terrorists were the prime suspects, and this was being discussed at length. It was a call-in show, and one of the callers gave a caution about jumping to conclusions, and that this might have been a right-wing militia or white supremacist action. He pointed out that it was Hitler’s birthday.

It was astounding to hear the regular milquetoast NPR anchors absolutely denying this and refusing to listen to the man, even mocking him in their middle of the road polite way. They were completely unwilling to consider any other theory than the Muslim terrorists being responsible for the mass killings in Oklahoma, and this was long before anybody had heard of Osama bin Laden.

If I had known then what I now know, I would have known that NPR had already transformed itself into neocon Zionist rag, no different from hate radio or Faux News. And now that I know that The New York Times (NYT) is also a Zionist rag hellbent on pushing a neoconservative agenda down our throats, I wasn't the least bit surprised when "the Gray Lady" was quick to report that in all likelihood the mass killings in Norway were done by al Qaeda or by some other radical Muslim group.

You'd think that the folks at the NYT would be concerned about losing the trust of their readership if they were so reckless and so incompetent as to publish false information. But apparently they feel that they have more to gain by peddling propaganda for their paymasters, i.e., the war profiteers and the banksters, than by disseminating accurate and reliable information to the American people.

I will give the NYT some credit for retracting their false statement. But by then, the damage was already done. And as any professional propagandists knows, once you plant a false statement in someone's mind, it's very hard to remove it.

This is why there are many Americans to this very today that still believe that Saddam Hussein masterminded the 9/11 attacks. The folks at the NYT helped plant this lie in the minds of many Americans and despite coming clean and confessing that it was a lie, they've been very successful at keeping this lie alive in the minds of many Americans. And believe me, all of their paymasters -- from the Goldmans of the World to the Blackwaters of the World -- are very pleased with them for planting pro-Wall Street, pro-war lies in the minds of the American people.

Posted by: Cynthia | Jul 26, 2011 10:54:54 AM | 16

Cynthia, As Uri Avnery, former MK says, "The NYT is, perhaps, the most “pro-Israel” paper in the whole world, including Israel itself. Anti-Semites call it The Jew York Times. Many of its editorial writers are ardent Zionists. A news story critical of Israeli policies has almost no chance of appearing there. No mention of the Israeli peace movement. No mention of the dozens of demonstrations in Israel against Lebanon War II and the Cast Lead operation. Self-censorship is supreme."
http://original.antiwar.com/avnery/2011/07/24/baksheesh-for-the-doorkeeper/

Avnery also points out that people may start to think that the Elders of Zion may have portended reality, now that the whole world acts as agents of Israel, blocking protesters from reaching Gaza or Israel.
As for NPR, I gave up on it during the invasion of Iraq, when it became obvious that their "news reporting" was nothing more cheer leading for the military.

Posted by: JohnH | Jul 26, 2011 11:45:25 AM | 17

@somebody - I do not know if we live in the same country. We could be self sufficient if we as consumers bought our self produced goods.

I do not mean a self sufficient country. Germany can not be such. But we should keep export and import in a balance. We by far export more than we import right now and that does not me more wealth but more problems. Some of these are visible in the current European financial crisis. It is impossible mathematically to sustain an export overbalance. It with always crack and the export champion will lose.

State pensions in Germany are worth as much as the work force earns at a given time as they are a transfer not accumulated wealth. When the work force shrinks, and the average age of people gets close to 100, bad luck. bad luck, too, if modern medicine makes it hard to die, as most pensions are not enough to pay for care. I do not know how you assume to be able to increase productivity with a shrinking work force and less competition.

I assume that because it is the historic truth. We went from a country where there were no pensions at all but 80 hours work weeks top a country where a third of the population gets pensions (or other benefits) and the average work week is below 40 hours. This was achieved by sharing productivity gains between capital and workers.

The problems we have with too little wage increases and with pension projections are solely because the sharing pact on productivity gains was broken by the capital side (and the politics they paid for). Bring back decent taxation of estates and capital gains and we are immediately back on the long term path where we can afford more pensioners and higher wages.

Immigration before we have achieved full employment prevents that workers have power to achieve the necessary policy changes. That is why I, from a left position, do not like free immigration.

Of course you can choose to pay more for local goods and unionized services, it means your wage is worth less though.

No - it means that I do get a higher wage and if history is the correct lesson, my wake increase will be bigger than the price increase that comes with it.

Posted by: b | Jul 26, 2011 3:28:27 PM | 18

I don't know about you, JohnH, but given that Breivik is an avid supporter of the Zionist state of Israel, it seems to me like he deliberately committed his mass killings in Norway on the 65th anniversary of the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. It appears as though, at least to me it does, that Breivik was emulating the Irgun, the infamous Zionist paramilitary group that not only bombed the King David Hotel on July 22, 1946, but terrorized and killed scores of Palestinian Arabs, from the late 1930s to the late 1940s.

And since the Irgun was a political predecessor to Israel's right-wing Herut (or "Freedom") party, which led to today's Likud party, an investigation should be conducted to determine whether or not Benjamin Netanyahu and other prominent Likuds deserve some of the blame for the mass killings in Norway. And if they do, then, by all means, they should be put back on the terrorist watch list, where they belong!

By the way, here's a snapshot for Norwegian teens waving Palestinian flags at a Labor party youth camp one day before the horrific spree killing on the island of Utøya, leaving 68 of them dead:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4134/4859983826_1145203a6e_z.jpg

Posted by: Cynthia | Jul 27, 2011 1:58:51 PM | 19

oops -- Likudniks, not Likuds.

Posted by: Cynthia | Jul 27, 2011 2:07:05 PM | 20

I think, that Breivik´s words are on 90percent truth! Of course, curtain against that chiefly
manorial children, between which I rate also hackers.

Posted by: bronie | Jul 27, 2011 3:57:10 PM | 21

"Saturday June 11 - Day 41: [...] I prayed for the first time in a very long time today. I explained to God that unless he wanted the Marxist-Islamic alliance and the certain Islamic takeover of Europe to completely annihilate European Christendom within the next hundred years he must ensure ..."

I am pretty sure God, should that concept exist, did not understand what the terrorist Breivik "explained" to the all knowing.

That's the sum total of Breivik, right there.

He's a deeply religious Christian whose idea of praying is offering an occasional threat or ultimatum to a god whose power he deems to be in some way subordinate to his own desires.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jul 28, 2011 1:08:06 AM | 22

This is really more suitable for an open thread, the only excuse for posting here being the interesting seemingly correcct use of linear extrapolation implicitly misused in the Norwegian assassin's ranting. This "back of the envelope analysis" of the limits on growth comes from the comments to one of the redoutable Craig Murray's recent posts. Very enjoyable, very elementary, and very effectively presented.

Posted by: Hannah K. O'Luthon | Jul 28, 2011 2:07:27 AM | 23

The comments to this entry are closed.