Lord Rose, businessman who supports lower wages for workers, to lead pro-EU campaign

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingJesus

“I’m a free-market economist; we operate in a free market,” he told Sky News. “If these people want to come here, and work the hours they are prepared to work for the wages they are prepared to work for, then so be it.”

Not saying the specific buzzwords doesn't change what he stands for, **** me you're getting more stupid by the day. And yes people can afford to work low paid jobs, what they can't do is work like that and still keep luxuries beyond what they're earning. I didn't realise you were a socialist now Dan, this is getting more hilarious with every post

---

lmaooo a 'buzzword'?? you mean the actual word of the topic you're claiming he's said which he hasn't. yeah as i said back to the padded room at ashworth. he's not talking about the minimum wage my dear he's talking about keeping wages at minimum wage levels via mass immigration do read the article okay hun.

as for Britons being able to work for any wage, erm no quite not. a British worker who is unskilled but who has a house and maybe a child or two simply cannot afford to work at the same wage that a single young man from Poland who will sleep 5 to a room can. it cannot be done. in normal market circumstances (with normal inflation), the employer would be forced gradually to increase the wages of unskilled jobs so it makes it worthwhile for Britons to go out and work these jobs... unlike the current situation where employers will simply keep those wages down by bringing in unskilled and unlimited second and third world labour.

No, he's very clearly saying that he wants wages to be set entirely by what people are willing to pay/willing to work for. And yes, it is very possible to be saying something without using the actual word - you yourself are heavily implying that I'm dangerously impaired because I can read.

And yeah of course people can't all do the same things, that's not the fault of the job or the wage structure though. I can't be a pro wrestler as per the requirements of the job, but that doesn't mean I should be campaigning for the WWE to start up a league for short unfit people. Trying to live beyond one's means is not the fault of any company; if you can't afford a house and two kids, you aren't owed it by force of law. You actually have become a socialist overnight, this is just too funny

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingJesus

No, he's very clearly saying that he wants wages to be set entirely by what people are willing to pay/willing to work for. And yes, it is very possible to be saying something without using the actual word - you yourself are heavily implying that I'm dangerously impaired because I can read.

---

No he's saying wages should be kept at minimum wage with mass immigration.

I read it as that, the Independent newspaper read it as that and just about everyone does but you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingJesus

And yeah of course people can't all do the same things, that's not the fault of the job or the wage structure though. I can't be a pro wrestler as per the requirements of the job, but that doesn't mean I should be campaigning for the WWE to start up a league for short unfit people. Trying to live beyond one's means is not the fault of any company; if you can't afford a house and two kids, you aren't owed it by force of law. You actually have become a socialist overnight, this is just too funny

---

Yes except here we're not talking about WWE wrestling (a qualified elite job and private company) we're talking about a nation and her people. Unless you take a nutty libertarian anarchist view that borders shouldn't exist, we shouldn't have a navy and hell the state shouldn't even exist, then you will understand that a government has an obligation to its people other than making as much money as possible. There is no 'world economy' there are only separate national economies, and economies of varying freedoms/stages of development which means you cannot continually import masses of unskilled labour without upsetting the British economic balance.

It's the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, not the United Kingdom Ltd.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

No he's saying wages should be kept at minimum wage with mass immigration.

I read it as that

---

But he didn't say those words!!!!!11111111111

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

the Independent newspaper read it as that and just about everyone does but you.

---

[citation needed]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Yes except here we're not talking about WWE wrestling (a qualified elite job and private company) we're talking about a nation and her people. Unless you take a nutty libertarian anarchist view that borders shouldn't exist, we shouldn't have a navy and hell the state shouldn't even exist, then you will understand that a government has an obligation to its people other than making as much money as possible. There is no 'world economy' there are only separate national economies, and economies of varying freedoms/stages of development which means you cannot continually import masses of unskilled labour without upsetting the British economic balance.

It's the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, not the United Kingdom Ltd.

---

But you're now suddenly suggesting that the government's role in this should be to intervene directly in business rather than acting as a separate body. I'd say an obligation to one's people would include keeping the economy competitive and encouraging personal growth rather than subsidised luxuries at the expense of those who've actually earned it, you however are taking a tumblr-esque approach to this all of a sudden and declaring that the government owes everyone much more than simple safeties and that private business should foot the bill... and all of this seemingly just because someone who says otherwise disagrees with you on one political matter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingJesus

But he didn't say those words!!!!!11111111111

---

What he said is what the article is about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingJesus

But you're now suddenly suggesting that the government's role in this should be to intervene directly in business rather than acting as a separate body. I'd say an obligation to one's people would include keeping the economy competitive and encouraging personal growth rather than subsidised luxuries at the expense of those who've actually earned it, you however are taking a tumblr-esque approach to this all of a sudden and declaring that the government owes everyone much more than simple safeties and that private business should foot the bill... and all of this seemingly just because someone who says otherwise disagrees with you on one political matter

---

I don't believe I have ever made anarchist demands that the state remove itself from every sphere of national life. When have I ever called for open borders? When have I ever called for the dismantling of the Royal Navy? When have I ever called for the abolition of financial regulation or basic safety regulation? I've done nothing of the sort, rather you like to imagine I have in your attempt to box me into a Ron Paul or Hayek on steroids.

As I said above, Britain should have a free-market economy as possible as most free market solutions benefit the people living here. But the importation of mass unskilled labour doesn't benefit everyone here, therefore it is a desirable part of state action that we have border controls to regulate unskilled labour outside of the UK just as it is desirable that we have a constitutional monarchy and cabinet form of government to uphold our constitutional documents or just as it is desirable that we have a Royal Navy to deter hostile states/enemies from attacking the people of this country.

You assume that because I usually back most less state solutions that I don't believe in a state. I do believe in a state with limited responsibilities.

Quote:

---

Not: Anarcho-capitalist. I don't believe in the abolition of the state.

Am: Minarchist, High Tory. I do believe in a minimal state with basic functions such as border controls, constitutional roles, courts, police and armed forces carried out with restraint but strength (strong and respectable institutions). In other words, the 'night-watchman' state.

---

Where has open borders and the Navy come into this? And where did I say that you ever thought any of those things? If anything I'm saying the exact opposite by calling you a socialist :S you are literally inventing extra arguments from thin air as usual, dear me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

No he's saying wages should be kept at minimum wage with mass immigration.

---

I really want to know how this is even possible without first scrapping the minimum wage? It is impossible. You need to scrap minimum wage first or his proposal just cannot work...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snr

I really want to know how this is even possible without first scrapping the minimum wage? It is impossible. You need to scrap minimum wage first or his proposal just cannot work...

---

"No he's saying wages should be kept at minimum wage with mass immigration."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

"No he's saying wages should be kept at minimum wage with mass immigration."

---

Yes but to have fluctuating wage, you need to first scrap minimum wage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snr

Yes but to have fluctuating wage, you need to first scrap minimum wage.

---

Indeed but what Lord Rose wants currently is the allowance of mass immigration and cheap unskilled labour into this country to keep low wages frozen at the minimum wage rate despite inflation/wage rises elsewhere in the economy. A situation which in many towns and cities locks British people out of the jobs market and forces them onto benefits as it simply isn't worth working.

He's only doing what benefits his company but the EU argument is about what benefits the British people, not Marks and Spencers.