- The American Conservative - https://www.theamericanconservative.com -

When Trump Disappoints

Reader CStrom writes:

Trump’s apparent switch on the H1b issue during the debate hit me the wrong way as well, and I don’t know how I can support any candidate who will not address that issue. I went back to school in my 30’s to get a degree in engineering. I paid for it with everything I had at a very expensive school. Tuition and living expenses cost me over 125,000, with the promise that I could make it up with a good skill that was to be in high demand according to the BLS for years to come. I even had to take a small loan at the undergraduate level which I paid off after graduation and was working. I was able to gain about 4 years’ experience in the workplace before losing a position – all related to the economy and budget cuts and furloughs at a state entity. I haven’t been able to find a position in my field since that time. This has been just over 5 years. All I find are temporary and seasonal jobs at a low hourly rates. I’ve lost a home. I have nothing toward retirement now. I have tried to stay in the game by taking master’s level courses during this time, but all that is doing is putting me deeper in debt. Like the other commenter, I am at a loss and have begun to lose hope. There will come a point where people will tell me I’m too old or something. This is not how I envisioned my life.

The government was and is in essence encouraging American citizens to get degrees the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) disciplines. They encourage citizens to accept Pell Grants and Student loans all guaranteed by the taxpayer. At the same time, they have been encouraging business to use H1b green cards and visas to import foreigners who have degrees in the STEM disciplines. Who is benefitting? The banks, business, the American citizen with the STEM degree?

One of the reasons I have kept Trump on my list of possibilities is because of business expertise. Unless there is just something about him that is unknown, I have believed that he knows how to budget, manage and make things happen. And I have known how the infrastructure of the country is so far below par (ASCE rates most facilities at D+ or D-), that it is imperative that something be done. I viewed him as someone who could set that in motion and get our economy rolling in the very least. But I have waited to hear some unequivocal positions and plans. Because he said when he announced that “the system works, and I know how to work it.” He also said, “I was the Establishment – I knew who to pay to get what I wanted.” Those are troubling statements. And I’ve waited for clarification and definiteness from him.

But with his apparent flop on the H1b visas (and none of the others seem to want to address it), I just don’t know if he is sincere about any change, or if he understands the depth of despair to which many people have sunk. And if he is not for real, does anyone have the experience or ability to shape things up. I don’t know who is going to be able to do anything to help those of us who need it now. I fear we are on the verge of something much worse than the 1930s.

There is a definite widening gap in this country between a group of haves and a group of have nots. And I can’t necessarily attribute that gap to simply an increasing manifestation of greed by some. If anything, it would be, I think, due to the actions of a government gone amok. Though the consequences of this crazy federal government may well extend to how people act as human beings. There doesn’t seem to be anywhere to turn any more – and deep down nobody wants to turn to some paternalistic government. The big business schools teach a lot of good things, but increasingly whatever they are teaching is producing a lot of folks that aren’t necessarily engaged in capitalism as much as they are engaged in speculations and manipulating digits and derivatives and things. Something has got to change somewhere.

Trump has identified something real, something raw, something powerful. If he is elected, he will fail the people who have hoped in him. He will do so because he either doesn’t know what he’s talking about, or because he has no fixed principles and will change them as soon as he runs up against pressure (as in the H1B visa issue), or because he will discover the plain reality that no leader in a democracy has the power to command, “Jump!” and expect everyone else to say, “Sir, how high?”

What happens after Trump?

What happens in this economy to men and women like CStrom, whose backs are against the wall?

Whether or not Trump wins the GOP nomination, or the presidential campaign, I have a feeling that there will be no going back to normal, not now. Certainly not with the Republican Party (and that’s no bad thing), but not even with the country. Something has been stirred up. Don’t you think?

Advertisement
129 Comments (Open | Close)

129 Comments To "When Trump Disappoints"

#1 Comment By VikingLS On March 7, 2016 @ 11:56 am

“That’s why the social conservatives don’t have any credibility, either. They’ve been conspicuously silent about all the damage Free Trade and globalization does to a community, claiming that All Will Be Solved if people were just more religious and we got rid of those nasty abortions and gays getting married.”

Who are you defining as social conservative? That’s been a central argument of this magazine since it was founded.

#2 Comment By panda On March 7, 2016 @ 11:57 am

“I still have not pulled the trigger for Trump, but where is the Democrat politician who will say, and stick by, on the stump, what you just said?

I’m pretty sure that both HRC and Bernie will gladly repeat what I said on the stump: after all, the “give migrant labor more power” is the logic behind liberal support for legalization. My problem would be with the “sticking to their guns” part of it..

#3 Comment By KD On March 7, 2016 @ 11:57 am

Neoliberalism can’t work because it is primarily being used as a weapon of class warfare against the native working classes in the developed nations of the world. It is being pushed by oligarchs and multi-national corporations who are motivated by maximizing short-term profit.

The few of this class who have long-term vision (for example, Soros) have expressed concerns about better management of globalization, but for all that they are not going to be able to realign the machinery. Our current form of capitalism is driven by short-term corporate earnings, and there is a huge collective action problem in getting multi-nationals to make the changes necessary to have a sane process of globalization. No company is going to harm short-term earnings to pursue something that makes sense long-term for the health of the system. You find the very same coordination problems facing nations attempting to address environmental issues when you look at multinationals trying to address national economic problems.

The only effective means of control comes at the national level, and that can only happen if the national government is independent of multinational influence (which will be exerted in favor of short-term earnings for multinationals, not the long-term national interest). I don’t see any way to get a handle on things short of a re-nationalization capital and border controls under an independent leadership group.

You can see the failure of national governments to come together to take action on the environment, and cheating by nations like China on international climate change agreements to realize coordinated international action is a pipe dream.

Yes, globalization could work in some world, and that world is Disney World, where everyone played nice, and no one was greedy or power hungry or envious or proud, and where there were international bodies with significant power over national governments and corporations. But that isn’t the real world, and won’t ever be the real world.

Instead, my suspicion is that you will have ineffectual action from “democratic” governments (whether Trump gets elected or not) over which money and oligarchical interests have almost total control and will kill anything that threatens short-term profits. Most of the effort will be devoted to hiding the problem and denying the problem, diversity is good, a lack of social cohesion is good, inequality is good, etc.. Meanwhile, inequality, anomie, extremism and terrorism, organized crime and the rest of it will build to toxic levels until there is either a military coup or a civil war.

#4 Comment By panda On March 7, 2016 @ 12:02 pm

“I was down in Florida on a work trip last summer, and had dinner with one of the postdocs there with whom I’m collaborating on this project. He actually has several more years work experience than me, as well as (like me) a doctorate, and probably has more of the highly coveted molecular skills (though I’ve been building up my skill base since then). He makes 35k, and he can’t really leave and go anywhere else since he is, as JonF says, indentured to an employer. I’m lucky enough not to live in Florida, and I make 10k more than he does with less experience, and I’m not complaining: most Americans make less money than me. Still, though, I have to wonder what salary scales for scientific researchers would look like if we weren’t, you know, skimming off some of the top PhDs of India, China, Latin America and Eastern Europe. (I’m also quite sure those countries would be a lot better off as well).”

I think postdocs are a separate issue from immigration, though. There are few top researches anywhere who didn’t do a postdoc either in the US or Western Europe- and doing that is good for science and for their countries… I also think there is a logic in saying “you have come to work in laboratory x with professor y, so we are going to bind you to that” a logic that doesn’t apply to the job market.

#5 Comment By KD On March 7, 2016 @ 12:10 pm

Globalization is all about multinational corporations exploiting the anarchy of the international system, by making capital borderless, by making labor pools fungible, capital can put into place a race to the bottom on wages, environmental protection, safe workplace regulations, and the rest of the progress made in the 20th Century.

There is no effective system of international control over capital, and capital has great influence on governments from the highest levels to the lowest level.

I don’t know what the Left is smoking (maybe I do), but globalization is turning the planet into a system that matches the worst aspects of 19th Century robber baron capitalism, and will replicate the worst kinds of political instability that European and American countries previously encountered in the early 20th Century.

#6 Comment By Fran Macadam On March 7, 2016 @ 12:17 pm

What happens in a nation when the elites’ economic system declares Romney’s infamous 47% of the population to be unneeded surplus?

What humankind has always done, wage wars that consume excess lives? Interesting that a country that would be completely safe from invasion even without a military, has built the biggest ever known across the globe and is engaged in at least half a dozen military conflicts.

War, what is it good for? Population control.

#7 Comment By KD On March 7, 2016 @ 12:20 pm

Globalization utilizes an ideology of multiculturalism and liberal universalism in order to break down regional and national particularity to homogenization into a rules-based international system, rules written by and for oligarchs. So gay rights are really integral to destroying that form of particularity that manifests as traditional religion, as most of the major religious traditions of the world see homosexual conduct as immoral. Gay rights is as important as mass immigration and expanded international trade integration toward realizing the neoliberal planetary order. Traditional Christianity is not compatible with Neoliberalism, and neither is traditional socialism.

#8 Comment By KD On March 7, 2016 @ 12:26 pm

All things are born, grow, and die, and it will be the same for neoliberalism. Although there are strategies for resisting neoliberalism (insisting on all forms of regional and national and religious particularity), I can’t say that these strategies will work. On the other hand, you have a system of power which really came into its own 20 years ago, and has very rapidly transformed the planet, and just as rapidly de-stablized America and Europe. So I expect a fall, and when the fall comes, it will be equally rapid and planetary in scope.

#9 Comment By Fran Macadam On March 7, 2016 @ 12:33 pm

” But I think that problems for a family are much more likely when Daddy loses his job and can’t find a replacement as opposed to Adam and Steve down the block getting married.”

This is true; so why is so much political capital, effort and attention squandered on trying to fight against the imaginary persecution of yet another 1% (Wahh! I wanna marry another man!) instead of confronting desperately malignant policies affecting the economic destruction of many millions of Americans?

This is the tabloid triviality of distraction politics.

#10 Comment By Hyperion On March 7, 2016 @ 1:04 pm

If you are waiting for “clarification and definiteness” from Trump, I think you do not understand the Donald.

#11 Comment By Calvin On March 7, 2016 @ 1:17 pm

@TR: my own personal experience with getting hired out of college with an engineering degree was pretty good actually. I was offered a job a full 8 months before I actually finished school, and had an internship every summer that I wanted one.

My honest experience has been that mechanical and aerospace engineering degrees open a lot of doors, provided that you’re open to going somewhere else to take a job. None of the people I went to school with had much issue with getting hired either.

#12 Comment By Anne On March 7, 2016 @ 1:33 pm

@Sam M,
Democrats know who signed off on Nafta, as well as de-regulation of the broadcast industry, and of course welare reform;why else do you think Bernie Sanders, not exactly a mainstream candidate, has done as well as he has in the primaries? I keep seeing Sanders/Warren stickers on car bumpers, and there are a lot more of them than you’d think. A new progressive movement may be evolving. The last one started among Republicans, but that seems virtuly impossible today, given the way most leading Republicans think. Labor and small business (vs. corporate monopolies) are badly in need of collective power, and organizing for political action is the only way that will ever come to pass. Relying on the good intentions of a billionaire who likes to fire people is exactly the way to guarantee it won’t.

#13 Comment By Anne On March 7, 2016 @ 1:37 pm

Would you believe “virtuly” came to you via Autocorrect? What the….? That was “virtually,” in case you didn’t simply autocorrect on your own.

#14 Comment By Thomas Riddle On March 7, 2016 @ 3:40 pm

I don’t think it’s that something has been stirred up so much as something has come to light. I think there’s an ugly truth at the core of the country and of the Republican Party. Charles Murray has meticulously detailed the decline of work, marriage, church attendance and civic participation among blue-collar and lower-middle-class white Americans–Reagan Democrats, in essence–that tracks a rise in outrage, anxiety, xenophobia and racism. The heart of the Republican Party is comprised of people who are ill-educated, poorly informed, driven by prejudice, suspicious of evidence and science, ill-versed in reasoning and culturally illiterate. They’re pitiable, but, at the end of the day, they’re just really, really stupid and lacking in self-awareness. I’d say they deserve their plight, but they have long been the victims of an upper echelon that took their support for granted while pursuing policies markedly contrary to their interests. They’ve been exploited, and now they’re starting to realize that. But instead of concluding that their interests lie with labor unions or greater workplace safety protections or subsidized health care, they’ve fallen for another abuser. How can factory workers or fast-food employees or the kinds of people who run yard services think that Donald trump has anything but contempt for them? Of course he does. His view of society is no doubt even uglier than Mitt Romney’s infamous divide between makers and takers. For Trump, it’s winners and losers, people who hire and people who get fired. But he is slick enough to realize that talking to these people in terms that prop up their failing self-respect and catering to their unhappiness and frustration is how to win votes. It’s P.T. Barnum all over again: There’s a sucker born every minute, and two to take him. Trump’s taking them, and their votes, left and right. What will be the upshot when he eventually betrays his supporters, as he will? Sadly, they’ll follow the trend Anne Case and Angus Deaton have identified: more suicide, more alcoholism, more unhealthy life habits leading to stroke/diabetes/heart attacks. That’s if we’re lucky. If we’re less fortunate, we’ll see more extremist activity and more of the kind of idiocy seen at the Malheur refuge in Oregon–and maybe, just maybe, another Oklahoma City. These are the human costs of the Trump campaign. If some unstable soul takes it out on him, personally, it will obviously be terrible–but I’ll have a hard time summoning up much compassion for someone whose ego and ambition have done such great harm.

#15 Comment By Polichinello On March 7, 2016 @ 4:38 pm

Actually, outsourcing does involve importing social problems– resulting from mass layoffs and unemployment. and exactly what problem are there with immigrants that are not the problems of unemployment and layoffs of domestic workers?

Really? You want to play this game? Fine.

Obviously, the cultural and racial friction that comes with diversity. Go ahead, scream “Racist”. We’ll wait while you get it out, Jon.

Done breathing into your paper bag? Good.

You don’t just get neat restaurants when you bring in the Third World. You get yet more people using government services, including education, health care and infrastructure. Then there’s the crime and fraud that go hand-in-hand with immigration, particularly the unselective mass immigration we suffer from today. To this you can also add quaint customs from abroad, like cousin-marriage, female genital mutilation, sex-trafficking, abuse and a number of other horrors that sheltered SWPL’s never really like to think too much about.

#16 Comment By KD On March 7, 2016 @ 5:21 pm

When I am talking about a re-nationalization of capital, it should be clear that there are a number of means of accomplishing this goal, running from a Marxist nationalization of the domestic means of production (which I do not support) to something as simple as a tariff, meaning you are either an American company and you are treated one way, or you are a foreign company, and you will be treated differently.

Certainly the Left, if they were for real, ought to be insisting on a surcharge for goods coming out of countries with weaker environmental laws, labor laws, and lower wages, so “comparative advantage” is not just based on environmental and labor arbitrage.

Protecting the borders cannot be limited to only control of labor and persons, there has to be true national borders for capital as well.

#17 Comment By KD On March 7, 2016 @ 5:24 pm

I don’t see any way for a regulatory “race-to-the-top” taking place unless countries with high wages, good environmental protections, and labor protections, make their trading partners adopt and implement similar laws or face a surcharge if they try to sell goods in domestic markets.

#18 Comment By Ken Zaretzke On March 7, 2016 @ 5:50 pm

Fran McAdam: “On the H1B issue, Trump immediately issued a clarification that he opposes the H1B program, no ifs, ands, or buts. I read the quotation and it’s definitive in his opposition to the H1B program, under which my own field has been disenfranchised by in our employment. I loathe it, it’s typical “scab” style pitting of employees against each other, updated for the “white collar” demographic. The entrenched greed of the elites has no limit. Sure is a kinder and gentler America without that pesky Christian conscience, isn’t it.”

I’m thinking that H1B’s are sort of the domestic variant of outsourcing. I believe outsourcing is the far bigger problem, though I would not minimize the damage caused by H1B and the other work-visa programs. And it interests me that with the Democrats, Bernie Sanders is far more worried about outsourcing than Hillary Clinton is. But who knows whether the labor unions will pull their heads out of the sand about Hillary–they might decide to do for her what Obama did for Wall Street, giving freebies right and left. Sanders has next to no chance to get the nomination, so that leaves Republicans as the only hope for pro-American worker policies. What a bizarre situation.

I thought I was well-informed, but I have no idea what Ted Cruz thinks, and what he has said about outsourcing since he became a U.S. senator. Cruz might have a problem because the Senate is arguably is the main culprit in the loss of American jobs.

Senator Cruz must know that the Senate can tie the hands of a globalization-infatuated president if it chooses to do so. (Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama are more blameworthy than Reagan in this regard, because until Kevin Phillips published his book The Politics of Rich And Poor, in 1992, it was not clear to everyone with half a brain that globalization was decimating the middle class.) Cruz surely knows that the Senate is much more likely than the House of Representatives to heed pro-globalization lobbyists and block needed reform. Does being against the Senate establishment, as Cruz is, mean he has also been against outsourcing and the free trade pacts that encourage it?

#19 Comment By Polichinello On March 7, 2016 @ 6:21 pm

My honest experience has been that mechanical and aerospace engineering degrees open a lot of doors, provided that you’re open to going somewhere else to take a job. None of the people I went to school with had much issue with getting hired either.

This has been my experience as well. However, this CAN change. That the rot is still working its way through the software world does not exempt you forever. You’ll see it first with your draftsmen and designers, but it’ll get to you soon enough.

#20 Comment By Randal On March 8, 2016 @ 4:57 am

JonF:

Actually, outsourcing does involve importing social problems– resulting from mass layoffs and unemployment. and exactly what problem are there with immigrants that are not the problems of unemployment and layoffs of domestic workers?

So you get the mass layoffs and unemployment either way, but with mass immigration you also get increased cultural and sometimes racial division (which is sometimes manageable and sometimes disastrous), and increased demand on and competition for public goods, and you make it even less likely that those at the bottom can ever improve their status by virtue of the increased competition they face.

Not only do you push the less competitive members of your society out of work, you also import people to sit above them in the social hierarchy. A case of spitting on them as well as kicking them while they are down.

Has there ever been a more brutally regressive policy than mass immigration, or a greater betrayal than the adoption of policies favouring mass immigration for ideological reasons by the supposed representatives of the labouring and lower social class elements of western societies? I doubt it.

But hey, I’m sure you genuinely believe that in the end the societal benefits in growth and competitiveness from importing cheaper workers to replace the weakest ones in your society will “trickle down” to the latter. And in the meantime they have all that cultural diversity to watch other people with money enjoying.

#21 Comment By Kurt Gayle On March 8, 2016 @ 9:52 am

@ KD: You’re on a seriously-inspired roll! Post after post is just filled with terrific, dead-on insight! Good stuff!

Don’t stop!

#22 Comment By JonF On March 8, 2016 @ 1:47 pm

Re: So you get the mass layoffs and unemployment either way, but with mass immigration you also get increased cultural and sometimes racial division (which is sometimes manageable and sometimes disastrous), and increased demand on and competition for public goods, and you make it even less likely that those at the bottom can ever improve their status by virtue of the increased competition they face.

Um, if demand is increasing shouldn’t that be putting more people to work? Some things, you know, really are not zero sum. As for the cultural stuff, it’s hard for me to give a flying fig. As I have said before here, if polka, pierogis and Our Lady of Czestochowa did not ruin our country, it’s hard to see how salsa music, tacos and Our Lady of Guadalupe will. And as I have also said, I will listen with an open mind to economic arguments about immigration, but the cultural arguments reduce nothing more than “people who do not look like me and talk funny”.

And, Polichinello, I live in the same world you do– and no, not in some whiteburbia where nary a darker face is seen. All men (OK, and women too) are the children of One God, and all partake of the same human nature– neither virtue nor vice have a race. I’m sorry people like you cannot grasp that simple truth, even though it should be bright as the noonday sun in today’s world. You’d have an easy time convincing me to put an end to our republic and import one of Queen Liz’s brood to rule over us than to indulge in the great sin of hating people because of where their ancestors were born.

#23 Comment By EiteCommInc. On March 8, 2016 @ 6:52 pm

The Visa the question is second to the matter of importing workers. The issue of the Florida coast is whether US citizens qualified to do those jobs were denied them in favor of foreign imports.

That has yet to be addressed.

#24 Comment By Randal On March 9, 2016 @ 5:01 am

JonF:

Um, if demand is increasing shouldn’t that be putting more people to work? Some things, you know, really are not zero sum.

The argument that increased (tax funded) public service employment creates a net benefit from increased demand on public services is just the broken window fallacy.

As for the cultural stuff, it’s hard for me to give a flying fig.

Obviously, but that reflects (depending on one’s level of charitability towards those like you on the political left) either your failure of imagination and ignorance, or the basic partisan hypocrisy of your claims to be motivated by caring for the disadvantaged and the unjustly treated.

The fact is that abrupt cultural changes, especially when they are imposed by mass immigration and population displacement, and concentrated in particular areas, cause huge suffering to some of the weakest in our societies. That you do not care about this is not something you ought to be boasting about.

And, Polichinello, I live in the same world you do– and no, not in some whiteburbia where nary a darker face is seen. All men (OK, and women too) are the children of One God, and all partake of the same human nature– neither virtue nor vice have a race. I’m sorry people like you cannot grasp that simple truth, even though it should be bright as the noonday sun in today’s world.

It’s characteristic again of the left that you transform any argument based upon reality and the real and really significant differences that exist therein (racial and cultural), and any argument based on preferences, into one based upon inherent virtue versus vice, and one based upon hatred, respectively. This is basically a kind of straw man approach on your part, since you find it easy to argue against people claiming some kind of inherent racial or cultural “superiority”, as opposed to arguing against people merely pointing out the consequences of real racial and cultural differences, and to argue against people basing their opinions on racial or cultural “hatred”, as opposed to preferences.

There’s no evidence in Polichinello’s comments to which you are replying that he is either one of the (vanishingly rare) believers in inherent white supremacy, or someone who “hates” foreigners or people of other races. But it would be so much easier for you if he were, so you just assume i and go ahead anyway.

#25 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On March 9, 2016 @ 12:59 pm

I don’t know if JonF identifies as either left or liberal, but those of us who’ve been around a while know that he is a devout Orthodox Christian who works for a living.

It is characteristic of dwelling upon empirical or fantasized “differences” that this line of thinking devolves into hatred and attributions of virtue vs. vice. Human beings cover a wide range of differences, and different skill sets, and there may even be some statistical aggregate differences between demographic categories, but once you start judging any given individual as “one of them” you have lost it.

You get yet more people using government services, including education, health care and infrastructure.

Yeah, and they pay taxes, and the demand for new housing provides new demand for several industrial sectors. People trying to make a point love to offer one side of the balance sheet, and completely overlook the other.

#26 Comment By JonF On March 9, 2016 @ 2:34 pm

How exactly are “Games of Thrones”, Thai, Indian and Ethiopian food, the use of “because” as a preposition, man buns and faux lumberjack beards, Lady Gaga singing the Star Spangled Banner at the Superbowl, Caitlyn Jenner on the cover of “People”, Millennials not buying as many cars as the rest of us, telenovellas, iPhone browsing in supermarket lines, etc, etc. imposing a burden on anyone? I grant you readily some cultural trends are not to my liking (man buns– most execrable hair don’t since the mullet!), but at the end of day no one suffers mightily because of changes in fashion, food, drink, language details, music, film and TV, of anything else like that. And what’s more: culture always changes– only a moribund culture is static. If you want a world without change I suggest calling up the dark king of the underworld where stasis can truly be found. Here in the world of life change is the only constant, and you cannot escape.

Again, if you want to talk about stuff like unemployment, low-wage McJobs, big banks behaving badly, high crime rates, family failure and all that, then I’m there for that discussion– as I have been HERE for years. But I’ve long been of the belief that whining about “culture” is ultimately no more than a whine that “The world isn’t what it was when I was young”, which is usually just a way of saying “I’m not young any more”. Nope, we’re not. Deal with it.

#27 Comment By Randal On March 9, 2016 @ 2:56 pm

I don’t know if JonF identifies as either left or liberal, but those of us who’ve been around a while know that he is a devout Orthodox Christian who works for a living.

The latter is irrelevant to the points under discussion. As for the former, what relevance is it that you don’t know if JonF is left or liberal?

Presumably you mean to question my implication that he is leftist, but in truth it’s rather a side issue. If he is not leftist then he is making leftist points using arguments characteristic of the left on this occasion.

It is characteristic of dwelling upon empirical or fantasized “differences” that this line of thinking devolves into hatred and attributions of virtue vs. vice.

No it isn’t. This might be a convenient assertion for you, but there is no plausible basis for it, as a general rule.

Do all the philosophers throughout history who have reflected upon on the nature and consequences of the evident differences between men and women somehow grow to hate women?

And even if it were the case on some occasions, it’s rather a ridiculous argument against recognising real differences to insist that it’s just too dangerous to do so. It’s an inherently infantilising position to adopt.

but once you start judging any given individual as “one of them” you have lost it

This is a slightly different assertion.

Prejudice (using the term in a morally neutral sense) based upon surface differences as indicators of likely differences in behaviour or abilities is a rational shortcut to use when information is short. It’s not in itself inherently morally significant. What matters is how you act on the judgement, as always.

Yeah, and they pay taxes

But less tax, by definition, since they’ve undercut an existing worker’s wages.

and the demand for new housing provides new demand for several industrial sectors.

Any increased demand is likely outweighed by the costs to society of the aforementioned unemployment and cultural/racial division introduced. But yes, I’m sure there must be some “trickle down” effects from mass immigration, just as there probably are from cutting taxes for the rich. They just take a while to manifest and don’t necessarily end up where they are needed.

#28 Comment By Lee On March 10, 2016 @ 12:10 am

We’re on our way to the next dark age…

Eventually the sun and the moon, will be the only pretty lights left in the sky.

#29 Comment By Randal On March 10, 2016 @ 6:41 am

JonF:

You seek to trivialise what is a serious matter. The kind of cultural shifts that mass immigration brings is when someone who grows up poor but cushioned from the worst effects of it by a coherent and cohesive community finds, after ten years or so, that he is now an excluded member of a cultural and/or racial minority in what was formerly his own home neighbourhood, with all the informal support mechanisms he and his parents relied upon gone, and subject to all the miseries that a poor member of a minority faces. This through no fault of his own, but because his country’s rulers found it convenient for ideological or profiteering reasons to betray the people they supposedly represent and import massive numbers of foreigners, and those foreigners had to live somewhere.

There are areas in cities in England I could take you to where the youths of the immigrant (now local majority) muslim community routinely harass those who do not comply with their islamic cultural requirements, beating up men and sexually harassing and abusing women.

That’s cultural change, in the real world rather than your cosy cosmopolitan elite world where cultural change is just ““Games of Thrones”, Thai, Indian and Ethiopian food, the use of “because” as a preposition, man buns and faux lumberjack beards, Lady Gaga singing the Star Spangled Banner at the Superbowl, Caitlyn Jenner on the cover of “People”, Millennials not buying as many cars as the rest of us, telenovellas, iPhone browsing in supermarket lines, etc, etc.