Monday, January 28, 2008

Greed, Immigration, and the Economy of Poverty

Our Czech correspondent Lugundum offers another essay about the effects of mass immigration in the West.

Greed, Immigration, and the Economy of Poverty
by Lugundum

ImmigrantsIn my previous contribution I took on the issue of mass immigration and the economic reasons behind it. But some readers doubted my message and charged me with pandering to socialism. That accusation, however, bears some merit in the whole issue and, for what is it worth, let us take a closer look at it.

When asserting that the socialism charge is relevant to the immigration debate I am talking particularly about collectivist aspect of economically driven immigration. For politicians, entrepreneurs, and various CEOs we are no longer human beings but an anonymous collective, a mass. In our ailing societies all social constructs like family, local community, or nation have been marginalized and weakened by socialists and their various off-spring. What is left is a mass of consumers and producers. Dehumanized to this extent we could be (and in fact we are) an easy target for various social experiments like mass immigration and multiculturalism. Our mainstream media won’t warn us — in fact they are taking a part in this monstrous experiment.

Wages and immigration

The fate of such a society hammered by both immigration and outsourcing is described in an essay written by Martin Hutchinson and appropriately titled “Eroding Western living standards”:
- - - - - - - - -
Since the majority of location-dependent jobs in Western countries are low-skill it therefore follows that if governments wish to protect local living standards, they need to discourage low-skill immigration. Except in Japan, they have not been doing so; both in the EU and the United States low-skill immigration, frequently illegal immigration, has got completely out of control and is immiserating the working classes. The Economist and the Wall Street Journal calling for looser immigration laws are like Reform Bill-era Whig grandees calling for the workhouse; their urgings are theoretically driven by aristocratic concern for the poor, but in practice betray a complete lack of understanding of what the poor actually want and need.

From the summary above, it is pretty clear that income levels in the West are converging with those in the more competently run emerging markets. The bad news is that in the years ahead this is likely to happen through an absolute decline in Western living standards. The populations of India and China greatly exceed those of all the rich countries put together. Further, as discussed above, the greater part of Western economies is vulnerable to low-wage competition. Thus the economic histories of a high proportion of the Western population under 30, except the very highly skilled, will involve repeated bouts of unemployment, with job changes involving not a move to higher living standards but an angry acceptance of lower ones. By 2030, it is possible that the median real income in the United States and Western Europe may be no more than 50-60% of its level today.

I would add to Martin Hutchinson’s observation that not only blue-collar workers will be affected by wage depression, but even large numbers of white-collar people. No shiny outlook for the middle class. For example, I have tried google and got the following links.

“Canada immigration needed to solve IT skills shortage”

Apparently, the outsourcing and hiring of immigrants from India, China and Eastern Europe has already pressured salaries in the field so far downwards, and the competition that caused the stress is so high, that local people are hesitant to send their children to study information technologies. Immigration yields the need for more immigration.

Here I’m supposing that the quoted source is correct and the numbers haven’t been created out of thin air in order to press for the import of more cheap labour, which is also possible. Many of these open positions created in Western countries are directly designed for a cheap foreign workers, and local people need not apply. I urge you to see this US video documenting how NOT to find a local worker and get them from abroad.

Just one quote from the video:

“Our goal is, clearly, to not find a qualified and interested US worker” — Larry Lebowitz, immigration lawyer

Even more outrageous is this link concerning the UK:

“UK immigration restrictions may be lifted for 2012 Olympics preparation”

The London Olympic games are cited as a reason to bring in even more immigrants. Please note that “unskilled workers” are demanded. Apparently decision-makers aren’t worried about the impact of their mismanagement: the UK is facing an unprecedented increase in poverty due to immigration.

Immigration has also caused many young Britons to be thrown out of the job market.

And Australia?

“Trade worker supply-shortage could encourage Australian immigration”

Where all that will lead us we can see on the example of contemporary California. Once a part of the Western world, it has ended up as an extension of Mexico, with an apocalyptic fiscal deficit of more than 14 billion dollars, rampaging criminality, and Latino gangs waging a race war against the remaining black population of Los Angeles.

There will be no miraculous cure for this situation and the economy of this state will degenerate to the status of a Latin American country with all its attributes. Needless to say, the young Mexican/Latino population will neither be in position to produce the economic output necessary to take a care of elderly American people, nor will they want to do that. Old people without their own children who could care for them will be facing a bitter end to their life.

Indeed, the biggest problem of people struggling against immigration, Islamization and the consequent demise of our civilization is that they are paying attention to bigots from the left whilst the economically driven motor of contemporary mass immigration remains unaddressed, to our own peril.

Fortunately, we could still change the course of the future, but we must accept the fact that our enemy is not only lefty liberal politicians but also the unscrupulous entrepreneur who has managed to corrupt our society.

The majority of immigration is economically driven now. Without accepting this reality we will remain one-eyed in our struggle for our rights and dignity and consequently we will lose our fight.

So returning to the charge of socialism: at the end of the day we will land in socialistic poverty as a mass of people without culture, identity, or rights. The consequence of the neo-liberal free ride is the socialist cesspool.

It is time to see through the brick wall to the naked king.


Chris Bell said...

If only the government would understand this and put an end to illegal immigration and the simpering, left wing political correctness that is destroying this great country.

Afonso Henriques said...

Now I can not contest what you're saying.
Very Good essay!
I agree with you completeley I just think you exagerated saying this:

"California. Once a part of the Western world, it has ended up as an extension of Mexico"

I think California still much more European than Mexican (and I am not refering only to ethnicity).
I also disagree with the all concept of Western Civilisation, I prefer to use European because I think Eastern Europe and Russia shall not be excluded, the Cold War is over, its time for the U.S. and Russia to get along.

I think you touched in a crucial ponint:
There is a war agains the middle class going on.


Chris, the government will only understand this when at least 50% of the people understand it and get vocally.

Ethelred said...

To the extent that people think of themselves as a member of this or that group FIRST, and not as an individual, they will be vulnerable to being "led" by socialist and statists to their ultimate death.

As an aside, here is a quote from Michelle Malkin's site from the lead article about McCain's connections to the mass immigration lobby (bolding in the original) [perhaps there is hope]:

Overcoming huge opposition, Proposition 227, the “English for the Children” initiative, won a landslide 61% victory at the polls. The measure dismantling California’s 30-year-old system of bilingual education for limited English children had consistently demonstrated widespread public appeal during its yearlong campaign, and was able to sustain that support against powerful political opposition by election day..

“We overcame enormous odds to win this victory,” declared Ron Unz, the Silicon Valley entrepreneur who chaired the 227 campaign. “Our initiative was opposed by the President of the United States. It was opposed by the Chairman of the state Republican Party and the Chairman of the state Democratic Party. It was opposed by all four candidates for Governor, Democrat and Republican alike. It was opposed by nearly all the state’s major newspapers and virtually every educational organization, large union, and establishment group. Our only strong support came from the people of California, but that was enough for victory.”

In the final weeks of the campaign, Republican billionaire A. Jerrold Perenchio, owner of the Univision Spanish-language television network, provided millions of dollars in cash and free air-time to the No on 227 campaign, which overall outspent the Yes campaign by a ratio of 20 to 1 in advertising. Despite this financial mismatch Proposition 227 passed by one of the widest margins in recent history, winning a larger percentage of the vote than any contested initiative since Proposition 13 in 1978.

Election results show that the measure carried 56 of California’s 58 counties. Campaign finance reports indicate that the Yes campaign spent about $550,000 (excluding signature-gathering costs), of which some $200,000 was spent on advertising, while the No campaign raised and spent $4.5 million, including nearly $4 million on advertising and voter contact. In addition, Mr. Perenchio’s television network provided an estimated $1 to 2 million in free air time for anti-227 editorials.

Sodra Djavul said...

Being of an entreprenuerial bent myself, I think you touched on an uncomfortable reality: that imported cheap labor has a long-term negative impact on the society at large.

This of course is at odds with the stated intent of free market enterprise: to produce goods or services at the lowest price the market will bear (with labor obviously as cheap as it can be procured) and sell those goods or services at the highest price the market will bear.

There is no question that IT services have become commoditized in the global sense. Provided a company is willing to invest in developing nations, the cost of labor will be significantly lower, and IT yields itself naturally to trans-border outsourcing.

The real specter is the Microsofts, the Oracles, etc. of the world insisting on importing IT resources at lower rates than the local market supports.

It's a fascinating discussion: the balance of open market forces and preservation of the domestic standard of living.

Great essay!

- Sodra

Ethelred said...

Being in IT, specifically programming, I can tell everyone that outsourcing is not always the panacea that managers hope for. We have outsourced some of our automated QA to Chenai, India, but need an Indian here to maintain contact.

Outsourcing actual programming has produced mixed results, since someone here has to manage the geographically distant team, taking time away from his real work. Remote teams need extremely detailed specifications or else you are in trouble. A local team can wing it more and work on the fly as conditions (inevitably) change.

Imagine if the agriculture industry could not get the pickers they needed from Mexico. The pressure MIGHT produce inventions to pick say, lettuce, with some mechanical help enabling higher productivity.

It is technology that creates wealth and a higher standard of living with more leisure time.

Theories, all theories.....

nikolai said...

Your essay touches on my belief that there are actually three enemies.

1) Global capitalists who want to import cheap labour into the west.

2) Gramsci-ite marxists who want to destroy national identity for ideological reasons.

3) Islam.

I think most of the western leftist parties are in the grip of the Gramsci-ites and their PC ideology. I think most of the centre-right parties are *partially* in the grip of the globalisers. I think the EU is an unholy alliance of these two factions.

Both factions want mass immigration into the western world for different reasons and they are both blind to the fact that using muslim immigration as a tool will eventually destroy them too.

This leads to a strange political irony imo. The people most immediately harmed by mass immigration and cultural jihad are the working class voters of the leftist parties. These are the people most likely to vote for controls on immigration and a preservation of identity.

So it seems to me the best chance of a successful political resistance to Eurabia is to work within the framework of the traditional centre-right parties *but* to campaign at the voters of the traditional left.

This contradiction will be critical I think. The leftist parties are destroying their traditional voters but the centre-right parties aren't taking advantage.

ole said...

I agree wholehartedly with logundum's wiev of the COMBINED threat from the PC-positive left AND the equaly destructive forces from the right, who have made a pseudo-religon out of their worship of "the free market forces". Anybody who dares cast any doupt on the natural holines of this economic theory will automaticly be branded a MARXIST ,just as anybody who doupts the Multicultoral dogmas will shouted out as a RACIST.
This might be especialy difficult to swallow for our american friends ,who have grown up in a culture sees the free market as a part of its heritage; but as a european I must remind them that WE greew up totally brainwashed with PC ,and for many of us it has been painfull and difficult to throw PC in the garbage dump.
I think we have to invent a new word here :

heroyalwhyness said...

Excellent essay . . .lots of food for thought.

OT, but related. . .last week I followed a link in an article about outsourcing. It provided graphic evidence of the dangers of trade with countries like China.

After reading that link, I decided to avoid buying any footwear manufactured in China or sold through Walmart. Boy, was I shocked to discover how difficult that standard would be to keep.
Out of seven shoe stores, not one pair, out of thousands of pairs of footwear was manufactured outside of China.

leadpb said...

ethelred- Thanks for that uplifting reminder of the remarkable victory of Prop. 227. Combined with last summer's pounding of "immigration reform" there seems to be yet in this country a healthy native instinct regarding the survival of traditional, baseline American culture. Yes that culture includes a diversity of peoples but their inclusion did not alter the United States as a socially and politically cohesive entity until the 1960s. Any country is more than just a universal, abstract idea-- unless its residents agree to adopt the toxic mantra of global citizenship.