Wednesday, December 14, 2016

Tucker Carlson versus an alleged “Socialist” on Mass Immigration

One of many comical moments we now seem to have in the wake of Trump’s victory, and, curiously, on Fox news:

Yes, mass immigration is a weapon of class warfare. Tucker Carlson is correct (although he did not put it explicitly in the way I just did). The response of this “socialist” is lame. Even if you raised the minimum wage in the US, illegal mass immigration still causes downward pressure on wages because so much of the labour that illegal migrants do is off the books or on the black market, with their pay given under the table, as it were. And it still creates massive competition for scare employment. And what about H-1B visas where migrants are imported and American citizens fired?

And this is *before* we even get to the social and cultural harm done by Third World mass immigration, which is in addition to the economic harm.

What a time we live in.


  1. This "socialist" needs to read what Cesar Chavez thought about undocumented workers. He called them "scabs" because he knew that the bosses were using them to bring down the wages of members of his United Farm Workers union. This is why so many regular working people hate the modern Left.

  2. Needs to also consider whether the extra workers provided by mass immigration will be superfluous, either now or in an increasingly automated future. If many end up unemployed, a higher minimum wage will not help them.

  3. Undocumented workers don't even have to work for minimum wage. I've heard a few Marxists claim that the only real proletariat in the US are this with no government protection, illegally here, working for peanuts. They do have to work for below minimum wage with no legal protection and if they mess up they could be deported.

  4. The clearest sign of the apocalypse is when Fox News seems like the voice of reason

  5. A minimum wage doesn't help self-employed tradesmen (skilled working class jobs that continue to exist with decent pay and conditions) They have suffered more than most by the massive influx of cheap labour into the UK.

  6. Of course.

    As long as they have money, their own rich diversity will be enough to provide fulfilling lives without work.

  7. So LK....

    I'm reading through this really cool discussion between Mike Hudson & Steve Keen on the former's blog. And I noticed the glaring omission of Immigration even being brought up as a topic. Then there's the video I shared with you recently where Hudson stated Trump will be the POTUS of the 1%, even though he may seem like for the working class at the outset.

    Can you please show me ANY major economic guru out there today - Post Keynesian, Socialist or MMT - who thinks limiting Immigration is such a major topic worth haggling over?

    Check Steve Keen in a recent piece on Brexit he authored for Forbes:

    "How can one issue divide people who are in agreement on so many others? Partly it’s because of the politically ugly fellow travellers one finds oneself with: the UKIPs and the Britain Firsts that put forward racist, anti-immigration arguments for Brexit. Better vote Remain than find yourself with such bedfellows—and there’s the concern that winning the Brexit vote might strengthen their hands in domestic politics as well.

    "These arguments support the Remain case, and I have to agree that if they were the only consequences of a Brexit vote, then I would be voting for Remain too. I was once proud of my home country Australia for have a multi-cultural immigration policy, and for recognizing refugees as such, and welcoming them in large numbers after the end of the Vietnam War and the collapse of Kampuchea. I despise its anti-“asylum seeker” rhetoric now, and abhor the measures it has taken to deter the tiny numbers who attempt to cross the Indian Ocean seeking asylum."

    If Immigration were the only issue tied up in the Brexit vote, Steve Keen himself would have voted to Remain! You tell us Limiting immigration to the degree you want us to hold to - is a legit Progressive/Leftist stance. But the big brains that you yourself look to don't seem to support your position. Unless you can point to something else they said elsewhere that I'm missing?

    Here, Hudson says exactly what I've been saying: It's all down to US wars of aggression in the Middle East causing dislocation:

    I seem to remember getting flack for that statement on this blog, though it might not have been directly from you.

    The general Progressive Gurus - the Chomskys and Naders of the world don't seem to concur, either. The best I've heard is people like Cornell West and Ajamu Baraka owning up to the "pain" felt by the White Working-Class, and of course they preach against Neoliberalism. But even they don't want Ethnic Minorities or Refugees scapegoated.

    1. There are left heterodox economists who have pointed to the dangers of mass immigration:

      (1) Ha-Joon Chang:

      (2) Bob Rowthorn:

      Rowthorn, R. 2003. “Migration Limits,” Prospect Magazine (February 20).

      Rowthorn, R. 2006. “Cherry-Picking: A Dubious Practice,” Around the Globe 3.2: 17–23. Institute for the Study of Global Movements, University of Monash.;dn=310269958414577;res=IELHSS

      Rowthorn, R. E. 2008. “The Fiscal Impact of Immigration on the Advanced Economies,” Oxford Review of Economic Policy 24.3: 560–580.

      Rowthorn, Robert. 2014. “Large-Scale Immigration: Its Economic and Demographic Consequences,” CIVITAS: Institute for the Study of Civil Society, London, August.

      Rowthorn, Robert. 2015. “The Costs and Benefits of Large-Scale Immigration: Exploring the Economic and Demographic Consequences for the UK,” Civitas, December

      (3) Naked Capitalism has also been publishing posts on the negative effects of immigrations:

      (4) You're wrong about Ralph Nader:

      (5) Neil Wilson (who supports MMT):

      As to why more don’t speak out, this is no doubt because

      (1) many are just brainwashed with multiculturalist nonsense and
      (2) even if they weren’t, they would probably be terrified to speak out because of the intense regressive left backlash they would face.

      As for Steve Keen, he’s wrong. However, just in the last few days he posted this (apparently) positive tweet about unions moving to support immigration restriction:

      Moreover, the working class is clearly more and more opposed to mass immigration, for perfectly good reasons.

    2. Thanks for reminding me of the post about Chang. I forgot he said as much as he did about the "free labor market." That also helps explain why some Social Democratic countries don't have minimum wage - if they also are restrictive of immigration.

      On your Nader post, I see in the comments you referred to Shengen, which I admit I was unaware of - or not fully, anyway.


      The end of the Nader video you posted comes to a referral to THIS video of him interviewed on Fusion:

      He makes 2 basic comments:

      1) Illegal Immigration into the US is due to American Imperial Foreign policy south of the border:

      "Any Immigration debate has got to start with - Why do we breed the conditions of countries that should be prosperous and should be democratic, but we have engaged in coup d'etats... and outright support of the oligarchs in these countries."

      2) It's not the fault of Immigrants that wages are being pulled down. It's the fact that we have a frozen minimum wage. I note at the end of the video you posted, he talks about giving them "the same fair treatment" - which I take to mean he says "pay them the same wages you would pay a citizen, according to the minimum wage." Fair enough!

      But in the video I just shared with you, he goes off on deportation and the chaos that would ensue if Trump has his way.

      So I'll take the time in the next couple of days, to read your links. Rothorn and Wilson I'm not familiar with. But I'm betting it's all going to come down to a problem with "Mass" immigration, which you and I agree with and yet to what Nader, Hudson and Keen say that I agree with and you don't: Start by looking at Imperialist policies and their effect, and let's get off the blaming and targeting of Ethnics just trying to make breakfast in this world, same as we all are.

    3. I recall Marshall Auerback recently tweeting that 'liberalised' immigration drives down wages, and Steve Keen retweeted that (which most probably means he agrees with it).

      It's clear that Keen is against mass immigration but he's also strongly against the scapegoating of migrants. In a recent podcast, he (implicitly) recognised that high immigration is causing problems for Britain, and so he's against the EU so that European countries can fix their economies so that European migrants don't have to flee to Britain.

      With regards to his home country, Australia, he's against mass immigration for what seems to be mostly population growth reasons.

  8. "Here, Hudson says exactly what I've been saying: It's all down to US wars of aggression in the Middle East causing dislocation:"

    Bullsh*t. US wars of aggression are only *one reason* for the migrant crisis. However, a lot of immigrants are also mere *economic migrants*, not genuine refugees: