arent at least 1/3rd of MPs BTL landlords anyway?

That’s contentious.

If all we did was grow cabbages and mine coal we wouldn’t get very far. You need primary industry but you ALSO need everything else. Those financiers that people love to criticise, they are the ones supplying the money for the coal mining operations. And the money created by adding value to coal and cabbages is what people then spend on cabbages and coal. Yes, it’s circular, but you need both halves of the circle.

You could just as easily argue that education is the only primary industry, because if no-one knew how to mine coal or grow cabbages there’d be nothing.

So this money that the government hands out is going straight to the pockets of landlords… I wonder what proportion of landlords are Tory voters…?

Surely, in fact, most of that money never even hits the landlords pocket, as it goes straight out of there and into the pocket of the mortgage lender, i.e. the banks, who then lend it to the government (due to budget deficit) who then hand it to landlords, who…

Makes you think, eh?

Yes, in this case it does 🙂

I’ve wondered about this whenever I stay somewhere like a Premier Inn. They seem to be staffed pretty much entirely by eastern Europeans. Presumably they get paid the same as a British employee would? So where are the Brits working in these places*, and is this one of the things that’s claimed to be driving down wages?

I know next to nothing about economics and the only time the driving down wages things makes any sense to me is in scenarios like builders quoting for jobs.

*Just to avoid any doubt, I don’t really care where they’re from – just vaguely interested in the mechanism that results in this kind of effect.

So where are the Brits working in these places*, and is this one of the things that’s claimed to be driving down wages?

The theory is that the Eastern Europeans are able to work for less because they are living in cheap digs and sending their spare cash back home to their families*. So the job can pay less, which results in lower wages.

Although it’s hard to imagine these not being minimum wages jobs whoever was doing them tbh, but I don’t know much about the lower paid end of the job market these days.

* This is a bit of a stereotype and probably isn’t true for most cases.

What would happen if they were forced to actually pay people enough to live on?

There would be less money spent on showing off to their employers how well the boss was doing………………its a british thing.

The theory is that the Eastern Europeans are able to work for less because they are living in cheap digs and sending their spare cash back home to their families*. So the job can pay less, which results in lower wages.

Although it’s hard to imagine these not being minimum wages jobs whoever was doing them tbh, but I don’t know much about the lower paid end of the job market these days.

* This is a bit of a stereotype and probably isn’t true for most cases.

I think a more accurate stereotype is that they are living in cheap digs and saving their spare cash (some may send some back to families bit not the majority) but they are also not adverse to spending their spare cash on training because where they come from people don’t expect the state to provide training or be the one to find them a job etc.

They are also not adverse to taking a second job… working long hours etc.

One of the coffee places was saying that most Brits don’t actually hold up to the long hours of high pressure work… even though (in the coffee companies words) they offer good salaries at the end…

Back in my youth (mostly before I personally was looking for work) it was far more normal to start off on a non living wage as an apprentice and do crap jobs for long and hard hours but we stuck at it because that’s what you did.

Sometime in the 80’s this started to change and instead people wanted to go straight into a well paid job that they could live on including paying rent… and pretty much at the same time when everyone was being encouraged to go to Uni…

I think the major difference especially with Eastern European’s is they expect to have to work long and hard for low money when they start out because that’s what it’s like back home.

So the job can pay less, which results in lower wages.

So when cheaper labour showed up, employers could just start paying them less than they used to pay locals? Or is the argument that wages haven’t gone down as such but might have gone up more than they have?

Genuine question!

The theory is that the Eastern Europeans are able to work for less because they are living in cheap digs and sending their spare cash back home to their families*.

The employer can pay less than minimum wage to those that live in company provided accommodation, where conditions can be epically bad!

IT workers in finance don’t tend to come over for six months a year, sleep in a caravan and then go back home to spend their cash.

Depends which area of finance. The use of ICT visas by the big outsourcing companies can end up not dissimilar although slightly better accommodation than a caravan.

The Indian outsourcers are in a completely different situation. They don’t sleep at all. They aren’t allowed to.

So when cheaper labour showed up, employers could just start paying them less than they used to pay locals?

Well – there are agencies that can now bring pepole over from wherever for the 6 week season with minimal cost. They can be young people who sleep in dorms on the farm and presumably they can be paid less. If they are paid piecemeal as most fruit and things that aren’t picked by machine are (or were when I did it) then they can reduce the price per unit as much as they like.

IMO pretty basic economics, a freely available supply of cheaper labour will always drive down wages of existing domestic labour force. I have seen it first hand with a long list of immigrants offering to do gardening, handywork, cleaning etc all much cheaper than our existing tradespeople.

Also think about this example. Tradesman comes to uk and lives very cheaply, eg sharing a room in a rented house. He gets work by undercutting wages vs UK resident who is raising a family. Immigrant’s family remain at home in their own country where the cost of living is much much cheaper. Immigrant can raise his family on lower wages.

On @molgrips point immigrant short term workers can earn as much as £10k and pay no tax whereas a UK citizen working 12 months in various jobs wants more money gross as he has taxes to pay.

IMO pretty basic economics, a freely available supply of cheaper labour will always drive down wages of existing domestic labour force.

Careful.

Supply exceeding demand will drive down wages. If the demand is there then wages won’t drop, they just won’t climb as much if the supply keeps up.

But the people who come and work generate their own economic activity as well – they buy things too. Economy grows.

Also think about this example. Tradesman comes to uk and lives very cheaply, eg sharing a room in a rented house. He gets work by undercutting wages vs UK resident who is raising a family. Immigrant’s family remain at home in their own country where the cost of living is much much cheaper. Immigrant can raise his family on lower wages.

True. But young people without families can also do this. Part of it is expectation drive. When I moved to Helsinki (yes, I was an immigrant) I was shocked at how small some of the flats I looked at were. I couldn’t believe they existed, but the locals viewed it as normal. But then, it’s probably similar in London too.

I work in an industry with very few immigrants. Employers in the events and arts seem to depress wages very well on their own. Our “subsidies” come from mainly white middle class parents supporting their off spring.

My personal theory is that we won’t see a reduction in immigration for say agricultural workers. They will simply apply for a seasons work and be given a licence. If we don’t I think that the food will just rot in the ground.

I agree. There will probably still be fruit pickers.

I am worried about the high skilled workers though – they are likely not to want to come, even if we offered them visas. Or at least fewer would want to come.

Might push wages up though. If we can afford to pay them.

One of the coffee places was saying that most Brits don’t actually hold up to the long hours of high pressure work… even though (in the coffee companies words) they offer good salaries at the end…

Back in my youth (mostly before I personally was looking for work) it was far more normal to start off on a non living wage as an apprentice and do crap jobs for long and hard hours but we stuck at it because that’s what you did.

Sometime in the 80’s this started to change and instead people wanted to go straight into a well paid job that they could live on including paying rent… and pretty much at the same time when everyone was being encouraged to go to Uni…

A interesting visit back to the town where I was a student, touring round some old haunts, revealed a very different student culture to when I was there in the early nineties – back then most of the pubs/cafe’s etc were staffed by students with ‘normal’ people as customers (I worked in Mc’D’s and in a pub over my time there, most of my cohort were doing the same) go back now and they are all staffed by Eastern Europeans with students as customers.

Having witnessed first hand the exploitation in Manchester, particularly Higher Broughton, Cheetham Hill, Crumpsall, Whalley Range, Hulme, Moss Side, parts of Trafford, Ardwick and Longsite where first generation immigrants supply rented accommodation (unsurprisingly unfit for legit rental purposes and subject to tax evasion) to men sleeping on the floor 15 to a room (in large 3/4 storey houses) working for the landlords and their mates cash businesses.

One house on Kings Road Crumpsall (not the worst I’ve been in) had men packed into rooms and on the notice board in the hall was detailed information, in multiple languages, on how to seek asylum and claim benefits. It is an organised racket, where the main suspects claim to not speak English, to be victims of spurious sub-letting unbeknownst to them, claim it’s a relatives/foreign owned property who happens to be out of the country (it’s not me it’s my brother) etc you get the picture.

I have also seen industrial units where men lived on-site packed into caravans on the car park.

It seems some are happy to turn a blind eye/ignore things especially when it’s not on their doorstep.

It seems some are happy to turn a blind eye/ignore things especially when it’s not on their doorstep.

Sorry, what?

Yup those directly and indirectly benefiting from cheap/slave labour don’t seem to have a problem with it.

Those who can’t believe it goes on because they never see it in their safe rural hamlet.

Of course cheap immigrant labour effects wages…to a degree. Near Bird HQ there are Eastern Europeans working fruit farms that live on site/get bussed in, stick around for a few months then leave for the winter. You literally couldn’t afford to live round that area with those salaries on a full time basis, so yes its keeping the salaries down in that regard, but then if the labour wasn’t cheap, you’d not buy the product. Also, they are turning previously pasture land no longer grazed into amazingly we’ll organised looking fruit fields (its pretty amazing what they are doing in a limited window of time). Thats helping our economy by reducing the amount of imported goods we need. Pay less here, pay less overseas, someone has to do it for peanuts if you want cheap prices in the supermarket. Not saying its right or wrong, just an observation on the economics.

If they suddenly had higher costs, the company wouldn’t sell as much, so they’d not pay the salaries of the execs as well. They’d not pay as much in tax and they’d not buy their veg from the local posh grocers. Its all swings and roundabouts I reckon.

I still sigh a little when I speak with alot of people in the North East (where I now live) for their anti-immigrant rhetoric (its pretty strong up there). Compared to daan saaf where I was living its practically a mono-culture. Eastern Europeans are a relative rarity, hell even I’m feeling like an immigrant up there! So in that regard I do think its blown out of proportion.

Generally though it feels like an excuse for policies that benefit the wealthy and hamper the worst off to me.

A interesting visit back to the town where I was a student, touring round some old haunts, revealed a very different student culture to when I was there in the early nineties – back then most of the pubs/cafe’s etc were staffed by students with ‘normal’ people as customers (I worked in Mc’D’s and in a pub over my time there, most of my cohort were doing the same) go back now and they are all staffed by Eastern Europeans with students as customers.

Yes this really illustrates that this is about how the UK and expectations have changed. There are probably way more coffee shops selling expensive coffee as well.

If you use some common sense in that if your source of income is making coffee for other people then it is reasonable that buying coffee made by other people on a daily basis is beyond your means.

I find the same across everything, people getting a taxi to the JS+ …. which at the end of the day means (on the whole) they consider their time more valuable than a taxi drivers time.

What that means (in general) is that people aren’t going to do the job at what they themselves are willing to pay.

I say “on the whole” and “in general” because there are of course exceptions… but the real point is the price of a coffee or taxi ride ultimately determines what the job can pay… so when a service (such as posh coffee or taxi) is being used by low paid workers it has to pay less

Those jobs are just being taken by people who will take a job that they don’t expect pays enough to buy coffee or get taxi’s on a regular basis etc.

Where they come from is not really relevant except when it illustrates that people want/expect certain services but are unwilling to pay what it would cost …

So when cheaper labour showed up, employers could just start paying them less than they used to pay locals?
Well – there are agencies that can now bring pepole over from wherever for the 6 week season with minimal cost. They can be young people who sleep in dorms on the farm and presumably they can be paid less. If they are paid piecemeal as most fruit and things that aren’t picked by machine are (or were when I did it) then they can reduce the price per unit as much as they like.

I see this for fruit picking and stuff like that. But I would naively have assumed that if a company (like the big hotel or coffee shop chains) is paying their staff £££ in, say 2010, they then can’t say “there’s a lot of Lithuanians around here, let’s get them in instead and only pay them ££” in 2011.

Or am I in cloud cuckoo land and they can and do do this?

Those making the supply and demand, more cheap labour availability drives down wages and similar arguments are correct if demand is constant.
But given we know that one effect of immigration has been to grow the economy, we know demand isn’t constant.
So the simple more labour supply equals lower wages argument doesn’t work.
Now that doesn’t disprove immigration lowering wages but it does mean that argument can’t be used.

But given we know that one effect of immigration has been to grow the economy, we know demand isn’t constant.

That’s what I’m saying.

Those who can’t believe it goes on because they never see it in their safe rural hamlet.

Hoold on a minute. Easy with the massive generalisations.

People abuse all sorts of systems. There will always be people exploiting the vulnerable and taking the piss. This is NOT a symptom of immigration.

And I am in no way endorsing the exploitation of anyone, immigrant or otherwise. Nor am I in denial about it.