Brexit: Now What? Part II

[Craig B]

Why do you bounce the question back? Your claim it's a capitalist institution, you should back it up.

Look at the list of undertakings in #3471.

But I'll try anyway. The EU is a political institution very much like a state, a "super state" if you will. The concept of state is not necessarily a capitalist one; socialists nor communists endeavour to abolish the state (anarchists do, however). So, in my view, "state", and consequently the EU, is neither a capitalist nor a socialist institution.

The concept of state exists in capitalist and in socialist societies as you say. It existed in feudal societies and in the slave empires of ancient times. Even Genghis Khan established a state. Thus, it is not true to say that it is not a socio-economic institution; because each and every state has one socio-economic character or another, it is an institution common to most or all economic systems, and each state necessarily reflects one or another such system, be it, say, feudal or capitalist. Therefore although the word state doesn't denote any specific system, it makes sense to refer to capitalist, or feudal states.

Let me put an analogous point. The word "hat" does not denote any specific colour of thing. One can have a blue hat or a green hat. But every hat possesses one colour or another. So although the word denotes no colour, no hat is without one colour or another as one of its specific attributes. Thus, your "(the state) is neither a capitalist nor a socialist institution" must be amended to read "may be either a capitalist or a socialist institution". Or indeed some other, as observed. The EU may or may not be a state, but it is unquestionably a capitalist institution.

 

[ddt]

It is also very obviously an economic institution; more so, it may be argued, than any other entity that might perhaps, or perhaps not, legitimately be called a state.

I wouldn't say more than a state; the Common Market aspect of the EU simply aims to lift all intra-state barriers and make the EU a state for economic purposes. That goes for the entrepreneur who wants to sell his goods and services abroad as well as for the worker who can move abroad and find gainful employment there.

But socialism is an international movement par excellence, from the days of the International Workingmen's Association, aka the First International. Corbyn should cherish the EU, it gives him the opportunity to turn not just the UK, but the whole EU into a worker's paradise.

 

[McHrozni]

They arent stopping brexit they are stopping the deplorablesdoing something worse than brexit by giving them brexit. Its exactly your argument in motion. I hope you are enjoying it.

Brexit is the worst thing the deplorables can accomplish at this time. Giving them the worst thing they can do doesn't seem like a good strategy to stop them from doing something worse.

You're free to disagree, but I do expect you to name a few things this could be preventing in this case. Good luck!

McHrozni

 

[ddt]

Look at the list of undertakings in #3471.

That's quite a varied list, and many of those items are not necessarily capitalist.

The concept of state exists in capitalist and in socialist societies as you say. It existed in feudal societies and in the slave empires of ancient times. Even Genghis Khan established a state. Thus, it is not true to say that it is not a socio-economic institution; because each and every state has one socio-economic character or another, it is an institution common to most or all economic systems, and each state necessarily reflects one or another such system, be it, say, feudal or capitalist. Therefore although the word state doesn't denote any specific system, it makes sense to refer to capitalist, or feudal states.

Let me put an analogous point. The word "hat" does not denote any specific colour of thing. One can have a blue hat or a green hat. But every hat possesses one colour or another. So although the word denotes no colour, no hat is without one colour or another as one of its specific attributes. Thus, your "(the state) is neither a capitalist nor a socialist institution" must be amended to read "may be either a capitalist or a socialist institution". Or indeed some other, as observed. The EU may or may not be a state, but it is unquestionably a capitalist institution.

Fair enough. Because it's a super-state devised by capitalist states, it's capitalist itself.

 

[Craig B]

That's quite a varied list, and many of those items are not necessarily capitalist.


Fair enough. Because it's a super-state devised by capitalist states, it's capitalist itself.

Yes, particularly because it evolved from an international economic cooperative body - a "common market" - before it became anything that could reasonably be called a state.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Brexit is the worst thing the deplorables can accomplish at this time. Giving them the worst thing they can do doesn't seem like a good strategy to stop them from doing something worse.

You're free to disagree, but I do expect you to name a few things this could be preventing in this case. Good luck!

McHrozni

I believe you mentioned gas chambers?

 

[McHrozni]

I believe you mentioned gas chambers?

Near as I can tell the Deplorables want to make immigrants go to their home countries, which is achievable only if they leave EU first. Please explain how Brexit hinders that. Good luck.

McHrozni

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Near as I can tell the Deplorables want to make immigrants go to their home countries, which is achievable only if they leave EU first. Please explain how Brexit hinders that. Good luck.

McHrozni

Hey its your argument. Why am I forced to try to make it coherent?

Remember its you who tells us about the small price to pay.

 

[imodium]

Near as I can tell the Deplorables want to make immigrants go to their home countries, which is achievable only if they leave EU first. Please explain how Brexit hinders that. Good luck.

McHrozni

Refugees aren't economic migrants, sending the polish home isn't gonna send Syrians back to Syria, which is what brexiteers mainly want.
The last poster before the referendum showed Syrians in Greece much like goebbels portrayed Jews.
Also, wanting to send blacks back to Africa is hardly achievable by sending Romanians home.
One of the promises farage, boris and gove gave was, along with £350 million extra a week to the NHS they rescinded about ten seconds after winning the brexit vote, was free movement for commonwealth countries which, is being scuppered by India, clearly they arnt German or French looking enough for brexiteers.

pre referendum a major claim was UK courts could make UK laws, which they could anyway but, brexiters clearly didn't want, so when they figure out the middle east and Africa isn't in Europe, those deplorables will question where the Italians have gone, why they still have to share buses with blacks and why pot noodles are so expensive.

Bananas are an important question however, boris johnson invented a lie perpetuating that the EU enforced a law allowing only straight bananas, forcing this ladies vote.

 

[McHrozni]

Refugees aren't economic migrants, sending the polish home isn't gonna send Syrians back to Syria, which is what brexiteers mainly want.

Why yes, thank you for pointing this out. The worst result of Brexit is, well, Brexit. How is giving Brexitards the worst thing they want preventing them from doing something worse still is something for Archie to explain. As always I wish him good luck with that.

McHrozni

 

[Lothian]

It was the SUN uneducated wot won it.





The data confirms previous indications that local results were strongly associated with the educational attainment of voters - populations with lower qualifications were significantly more likely to vote Leave.

 

[ceptimus]

People who've not had a significant pay increase in the last ten years were more likely to vote leave. Manual workers are the ones that have been hardest hit and manual workers tend to have fewer (academic) qualifications.

 

[Lothian]

People who've not had a significant pay increase in the last ten years were more likely to vote leave. Manual workers are the ones that have been hardest hit and manual workers tend to have fewer (academic) qualifications.

Gosh, when you put it like that it is almost as if those voting to leave were not voting for the best future status of the United Kingdom rather it was a protest against the previous Government's austerity policy.

So how do we remove the protest votes of the disillusioned to get a concensus of those who took a considered view of the benefits and downsides of EU membership?

 

[ceptimus]

From the point of view of a British manual worker, one of the downsides of EU membership is that cheap unskilled labour is available to fill vacancies for manual workers. This helps keep manual workers' wages low, so British manual workers were sensible to vote to leave the EU.

 

[CapelDodger]

From the point of view of a British manual worker, one of the downsides of EU membership is that cheap unskilled labour is available to fill vacancies for manual workers. This helps keep manual workers' wages low, so British manual workers were sensible to vote to leave the EU.

All research indicates that EU labour does not depress UK wages.

 

[CapelDodger]

From the point of view of a British manual worker, one of the downsides of EU membership is that cheap unskilled labour is available to fill vacancies for manual workers. This helps keep manual workers' wages low, so British manual workers were sensible to vote to leave the EU.

All research I've heard tell of indicates that EU labour does not depress UK wages.

 

[ceptimus]

How convenient for whoever funded the research!

It goes against the fundamental economic rules of supply and demand, but I suppose if the elite wish to propagate their myth they'll find researchers who will give them the results they want when paid.

It's the same technique that tobacco magnates and leaded petrol advocates used to allow them to continue to spread their poison long after most enlightened thinkers knew that it was bunk.

 

[Aepervius]

https://www.ft.com/content/0deacb52-178b-11e6-9d98-00386a18e39d

financial time : "There is little evidence that more migrants push wages down or unemployment up. Economists from the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics say that when they look at the areas with the largest increase in EU immigration, these have not seen the sharpest falls in employment or wages since 2008. "

"Do low-skilled UK citizens bear the brunt of EU migration?

A number of studies have found there is a small negative effect of migration on the wages of low-skilled workers — those with whom migrants compete most directly.

Research published last year by Sir Stephen Nickell of the Office for Budget Responsibility suggested there was a small negative effect of migration on the wages of locals in the semi-skilled and unskilled service sector — such as care workers, shop assistants, restaurant and bar workers.

Mr Portes of the NIESR thinks Sir Stephen’s research results are nevertheless small. “The impact of migration on the wages of the UK-born in this sector since 2004 has been about 1 per cent, over a period of eight years,” he says. "

Article abstract :
"A reduction in immigration from the European Union (EU) following a vote for Brexit would not lead to any improvement in living standards for those born in the UK. Cuts in EU immigration would not offset the big fall in UK living standards caused by the reduction in trade and investment that would result from Brexit. These are among the conclusions of new research published in the series of #CEPBrexit reports."

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/brexit/abstract.asp?index=5053


But hey it is expert so you can ignore all of them.

 

[Aepervius]

How convenient for whoever funded the research!

How convenient you chose to ignore research which does not go your way.

You know who does that too ?

Climate change denialism for example.

It goes against the fundamental economic rules of supply and demand, but I suppose if the elite wish to propagate their myth they'll find researchers who will give them the results they want when paid.

The things is, the number of people coming for low wage job from EU, is *small*. My understanding is that it is mostly educated or shop owner which comes to UK, not low wage people, maybe seasonnal fruit or vegetable picker , and those job are not taken by britton.

It's the same technique that tobacco magnates and leaded petrol advocates used to allow them to continue to spread their poison long after most enlightened thinkers knew that it was bunk.

And your denialism can be compared to climate change denialism. See how one can poison the well ?

If you have no proper counter study top provide then you are just rejecting the study because it does not go your way.

And frankly some other effect could counter balance wage depression : more people from EU asking for stuff to buy => wage do not get depressed.

 

[Lothian]

From the point of view of a British manual worker, one of the downsides of EU membership is that cheap unskilled labour is available to fill vacancies for manual workers. This helps keep manual workers' wages low, so British manual workers were sensible to vote to leave the EU.

Of course those voters did not have the benefit of May's desperate plan to do new deals with the likes of India and China. Without the protectionist tarrifs those manual labour jobs will be off abroad before you can say "even cheaper unskilled labour outsde the EU"