TRUMP IS A See you next Tuesday

Forums New posts
Bossie said:
Unskilled workers are needed in a booming US economy. The government must regulate to protect them from being exploited. Stopping migrant workers will undercut the lifestyles of US citizens, given the jobs they do and the huge positive financial contribution they make to the US economy. Migrant workers are a gift, not a burden.

Workplace diversity needs to be looked at more broadly and not as described by the Daily Mail. Again, employers are not getting the employees they need. Diversity policies look at the wider employee pool and think about how they can make it more welcoming to that pool. For example, working mums cannot efficiently work after three if they need to pick up the brats from school, so you allow flexible working, shared jobs, minimise important activities after 3 etc. As you build a diverse workforce, a more diverse management team will emerge, and the behaviours of previously entitled groups will need to change.

These developments will open up opportunities for your daughters and grand-daughters and will see job opportunities open up to lower-income families. So it's all good, right?
Click to expand...
How many unskilled workers do they need then? Should the borders be just opened up then?

Who is suggesting stopping migrant workers? As far as I can see it is undocumented migrants that they are trying to halt. Legal migrants are welcomed.

Flexible working I can go with that. Lassies or geezers with bairns who need to work around the school or nursery.

I don't get this diversity at all. Skill and merit are more important than box ticking.

Not every job has a management team Bossie. Particular types of jobs do but many millions of jobs require skill more than diversity.

The more people chasing jobs in no way helps lower income family's.

And yes the workforce needs unionised.

I think we both want the same outcome it's just different ways of achieving it.
 
egb_hibs said:
Where did you get that from and when did you become Gordon Gecko?!

1. Labour force elasticity erodes collective bargaining power, reduces wages and t&c. Agree?
2. Offshoring jobs eliminates quality jobs and reduces wages and t&c for those that remain? Agree?
3. Open ended supply of low skilled labour is particularly harmful to the working poor and in the case of the US, very particularly ethnic minorities. Agree?
4. Demand from big capital for the above is partially through greed and partially through the need to be price competitive with overseas rivals. Agree?
5. Overall price competitiveness depends on other key variables alongside labour rates. Most obviously the cost of energy. Agree?
6. Sociology finds that large scale migration into communities reduces social trust both across and within ethnic or social groups, leads to erosion of community centred participation, increased atomisation and social isolation. Agree?
7. Diversity and inclusion schemes have in fact proven to be a complete dud; there is no evidence of benefit while there is evidence of racial discrimination produced by such approaches. Agree?
8. Your list contains a number of false or illogical assertions to check readers are paying attention. Agree?
9. Uncritical defences of the most venal practices of global capitalism, once the preserve of far right demon figures, are now industriously practiced by men of the left. And this is a little queer. Agree?
Click to expand...
No.
 
Findlayhibby said:
The working poor aren't poor because of immagration,but because people like Musk hate organised Labour.The immagrents are doing service jobs and working in health and are not well paid.
Click to expand...
And guns don't kill people, people do.

Findlay, what mechanisms do you think fat cats use to erode the collective and individual bargaining power of labour?

What is their metaphorical gun, do you think?
 
Findlayhibby said:
The problem we have is that improved medical knowledge saves lives.We now have a growing population especially in old age.People are no longer dieying in their 70's they are living into their 90's and 100's.Pensioners can't be expected to look after the earderly therefore we need immagration.
Click to expand...
No we need to train OUR youngsters mate.

Right me and you both have roughly the same views regarding workers, wages and workers rights.

How does us taking skilled folk from another nation help THEIR workers? Their health care system is losing workers because we are taking them.

It seems to me that sometimes it's an I'm alright jack attitude as long as WE do alright.

Do you agree it's wrong to plunder trained staff from other nations who's folk have payed to train the staff up?
 
Findlayhibby said:
Younsters aren't training to be nurses or midwives because of horrendous conditions and underpay.
Click to expand...
You missed out the costs they have to pay to become nurses. Far easier to poach a trained nurse from a poor nation than train one of our own.

It's all about the cash.
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
No we need to train OUR youngsters mate.

Right me and you both have roughly the same views regarding workers, wages and workers rights.

How does us taking skilled folk from another nation help THEIR workers? Their health care system is losing workers because we are taking them.

It seems to me that sometimes it's an I'm alright jack attitude as long as WE do alright.

Do you agree it's wrong to plunder trained staff from other nations who's folk have payed to train the staff up?
Click to expand...
Findlay is right here, though you are also right we should be training british youngsters.

But there aren't nearly enough of them. Failure to reproduce makes immigration required or services collapse.

This means that we effectively outsource baby making to cheap offshore locations like we do so much else.

We let them bear the cost of raising our labour force, and then collect our harvest of new labour.

We strip them of the skills they need to advance their own societies while undercutting domestic labour. And that stripping is essential as we need them to stay poor in order to keep producing those cheap workers for us!

This makes us virtuous and progressive Jimmy. Don't listen to those right wingers and their seditious talk of workers rights, and exploitative liberals.
 
And that's basically what I was trying to say eegie.

We let other pay to train folk then poach them and pay under the going rate.

What's not to like?
 
I already put up a post about what Elon Musk does.Why do I have to constantly have to repeat myself.This post is supposed to be about what Trump is doing.I'm sitting watching the Beeb.It's all about Scotland sooking right up with Trump because our economy demands we sook up to any ruler of the biggest economy in the world be him Trump,Hitler or Vlad the fucking impailer.Now imagine a world which wasen't about 'Saving the Scottish Economy' first thing we could do is ditch whisky,shortbread,and tweed and we could begin to live a life we always wanted.
 
What economy would we then have though?

And I'm thinking that an awfy lot of Scots don't mind the whisky, shortbread and tweed mate.

Sometimes reality gets in the way of idealism.
 
Findlayhibby said:
I already put up a post about what Elon Musk does.Why do I have to constantly have to repeat myself.This post is supposed to be about what Trump is doing.I'm sitting watching the Beeb.It's all about Scotland sooking right up with Trump because our economy demands we sook up to any ruler of the biggest economy in the world be him Trump,Hitler or Vlad the fucking impailer.Now imagine a world which wasen't about 'Saving the Scottish Economy' first thing we could do is ditch whisky,shortbread,and tweed and we could begin to live a life we always wanted.
Click to expand...
What life is that? What kind of economy?
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
How many unskilled workers do they need then? Should the borders be just opened up then?

Who is suggesting stopping migrant workers? As far as I can see it is undocumented migrants that they are trying to halt. Legal migrants are welcomed.

Flexible working I can go with that. Lassies or geezers with bairns who need to work around the school or nursery.

I don't get this diversity at all. Skill and merit are more important than box ticking.

Not every job has a management team Bossie. Particular types of jobs do but many millions of jobs require skill more than diversity.

The more people chasing jobs in no way helps lower income family's.

And yes the workforce needs unionised.

I think we both want the same outcome it's just different ways of achieving it.
Click to expand...
I think the issue that some people have with 'diversity' is that it has been weaponised to be about race or transgender. All underpinned by the sneering 'DEI hire' jibe. But it's about much more than that. Some of it is about providing opportunity for capable people who would otherwise be denied. Examples of this abound on disability. Why wouldn't you want to make workplaces wheelchair accessible? Why wouldn't you want to make adjustments so that dyslexic people can operate in the workplace? Or autistic people? No doubt you'd be against efforts to get women into engineering?

I just think that these issues are presented in such a cartoonish way to stoke anger, yet there is a whole raft of people that simply ending DEI will exclude. I have a family member who is super bright but needed scribes and readers to get their degree. They're in a really good job now that takes steps to support them. And they have a really responsible job. All under DEI strategies. I think the best person should get the job, but some people face barriers that make it harder for that best person to come through. Why shut that down? Why celebrate shutting that down?
 
Why would I be against any of the points you make Archie?

Who is saying the disabled cannot do decent jobs?

Who claims that new builds should not be wheelchair friendly?

If someone is capable or willing to learn then there should be no barriers to that.

And why on earth would I think women can't work in engineering? What a bizarre thing to say.

But by that measure someone who can do the job should not be overlooked to box ticking either should they?
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
Why would I be against any of the points you make Archie?

Who is saying the disabled cannot do decent jobs?

Who claims that new builds should not be wheelchair friendly?

If someone is capable or willing to learn then there should be no barriers to that.

And why on earth would I think women can't work in engineering? What a bizarre thing to say.

But by that measure someone who can do the job should not be overlooked to box ticking either should they?
Click to expand...
So you support diversity and inclusion in the workplace after all. Brilliant!
 
Not how I see it. It smacks of affirmative action which was also wrong.

And if the best person for the job is the way forward then what is DEI all about then?

Apart from giving heads of DEI a big wedge of money that isn't really needed.
 
Archie said:
I think the issue that some people have with 'diversity' is that it has been weaponised to be about race or transgender. All underpinned by the sneering 'DEI hire' jibe. But it's about much more than that. Some of it is about providing opportunity for capable people who would otherwise be denied. Examples of this abound on disability. Why wouldn't you want to make workplaces wheelchair accessible? Why wouldn't you want to make adjustments so that dyslexic people can operate in the workplace? Or autistic people? No doubt you'd be against efforts to get women into engineering?

I just think that these issues are presented in such a cartoonish way to stoke anger, yet there is a whole raft of people that simply ending DEI will exclude. I have a family member who is super bright but needed scribes and readers to get their degree. They're in a really good job now that takes steps to support them. And they have a really responsible job. All under DEI strategies. I think the best person should get the job, but some people face barriers that make it harder for that best person to come through. Why shut that down? Why celebrate shutting that down?
Click to expand...
How does the end of DEI shut that down Archie? It simply doesn’t. Once more I am not sure if you have no experience in the area, or if you are deliberately trying to mislead people who don’t.

All DEI achieved in the round is negative discrimination in hiring and in university admissions. In the latter case it not only denied deserving students, but led to degradation of academic standards which still failed to prevent unqualified applicants bombing out by the barrel load with nothing but huge debt to show for it.

On top of that is spawned a coterie of tinpot commissars inhabiting every institution and spreading the divisive bile of the day.

And then there are the edge cases like the Kamala Harris shebang which you are clearly still smarting from despite some senior democrats seeming quite relieved tbh and virtually all their coterie admitting after the fact she was a disaster of a candidate, only in play because of this corrupt mindset (as well as failed conspiracies against the American people which are a scandal of their own).

Maybe you don’t think women or minorities can succeed on their merits, or that institutions are incapable of making hires that compensate for disadvantage without some heel clicking bureaucrat overseeing things. But it ain’t so.

You also know that all these measures to compensate for disability in the workplace have been around for decades and don’t depend on this bs one iota. Either that or you’ve never been in one.
 
Last edited:
Bossie said:
So you support diversity and inclusion in the workplace after all. Brilliant!
Click to expand...
What a mindset.

Virtually no one is against inclusion, and pretty much the only people with influence who hate diversity are the left - who work their arses off to ensure diversity of thought is excluded all over the shop.

No one wants illegal migrants to drown either. No one wants black people killed by the police, and no one wants little girls abused by rape gangs.

But most people don’t selectively care about some concerns and not others because of the identity of those involved. Nor do they fail to recognise complexities in situations that mean doing what we’d like often has evil consequences of its own. And nor do they confuse any of these things with authoritarian and discriminatory bureaucratic diktats or the spreading of divisive ideology.

Take the jackboots off, put the clip board down. Engage with people, not abstract categories.
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
Not how I see it. It smacks of affirmative action which was also wrong.

And if the best person for the job is the way forward then what is DEI all about then?

Apart from giving heads of DEI a big wedge of money that isn't really needed.
Click to expand...
Because that's the prism that Trump wants you to see it through. I'm not saying that all DEI strategies are good or effective. But when everything gets weaponised like this then everything gets thrown out at the same time. I know there are posters on here who hate DEI with a passion. The BBC, which many also hate, has a scheme for disabled people. You've maybe seen the weather woman who doesn't have a hand. She was recruited as part of a special programme that a) was focussed on the disabled community and b) put steps in place so that they could learn and then do the job. Is that 'affirmative action'? Maybe. But given the gross under representation of disabled people in the media, surely that was a good thing.

But I guess the only sort of affirmative action Trump really favours is for billionaires kids. I mean they'll always be the best people for the job.
 
Archie in the private sector profit is the aim so they tend to go for folk who will make them money and not tick boxes.

In the public sector though there are more oppertunitys as far as I can see. No profit needs to be made.

I worked in the building trade all my days. And it's just a fact of life that folk with severe disabilitys are not hired through health and safety reasons.

The lassie at the BBC was put through training and then was capable of doing the job of work.

The BBC can afford to run schemes Archie they get free money from folk by taxing them to watch a TV.

If the BBC had to earn money as a private company do you think they would have special programmes?

It's like women only short lists in politics. Why? Why not the best person for the job rather than a quota?
 
Findlayhibby said:
I already put up a post about what Elon Musk does.Why do I have to constantly have to repeat myself.This post is supposed to be about what Trump is doing.I'm sitting watching the Beeb.It's all about Scotland sooking right up with Trump because our economy demands we sook up to any ruler of the biggest economy in the world be him Trump,Hitler or Vlad the fucking impailer.Now imagine a world which wasen't about 'Saving the Scottish Economy' first thing we could do is ditch whisky,shortbread,and tweed and we could begin to live a life we always wanted.
Click to expand...
Ah fuckin love short bread
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
What economy would we then have though?

And I'm thinking that an awfy lot of Scots don't mind the whisky, shortbread and tweed mate.

Sometimes reality gets in the way of idealism.
Click to expand...
Grand theft Auto was designed in Dundee.We now have a world class movie studio and terrific film locations.We still build ships,and until recently wind turbines.We used to produce steel and had a car industry. We could once again produce electronics.Every time I make the trip through to the Weedge I look out onto firms like Honeywell Bull.
 
As I've stated many times Findlay not just Scotland but the UK needs to get back to building and making things.

The farce with the new ferries sort of puts a damper on the shipbuilding the now though.
 
Last edited:
EH17 Jimmy said:
As I've stated many times Findlay not just Scotland but the UK needs to get back to building and making things.

The farce with the new ferries sort of outs a damper on the shipbuilding the now though.
Click to expand...
There is shipbuilding on the Clyde with BAE.

https://www.Rag/news/politics/bae-systems-struggling-fill-jobs-32564843
 
Archie said:
I think the issue that some people have with 'diversity' is that it has been weaponised to be about race or transgender. All underpinned by the sneering 'DEI hire' jibe.
Click to expand...

And sometimes, often times the criticism is valid. In extreme cases you get people like Sam Brinton or Rachel Levine appointed to top government positions due to DEI. And when eyebrows are raised and questions asked these people are dismissed as bigots. The same goes for the two lesbians in charge of the Los Angeles fire department. Were they the two best candidates for the job or were they just the two best lesbians? Are women really appropriate firefighters when faced with an 18 hour shift in hell? Is it fair to men to lower the bar for fitness to allow petite women into such demanding jobs? And so it goes on.

Archie said:
But it's about much more than that. Some of it is about providing opportunity for capable people who would otherwise be denied. Examples of this abound on disability. Why wouldn't you want to make workplaces wheelchair accessible? Why wouldn't you want to make adjustments so that dyslexic people can operate in the workplace? Or autistic people? No doubt you'd be against efforts to get women into engineering?
Click to expand...

This is such a silly retort because I don't think anybody has even come close to saying that, particularly the last sentence. And you have the nerve to complain about people weaponising the subject?
 
Well all that is needed are many contracts then and folk will get decent paying jobs Archie.
 
Haven't looked closely at the ferry debacle.But I'm sure the problems it has had; could be ironed out pretty swiftly.
 
Findlayhibby said:
Haven't looked closely at the ferry debacle.But I'm sure the problems it has had; could be ironed out pretty swiftly.
Click to expand...
Glen Sannox is the second largest and the most complex vessel ever built for ferry operator Caledonian MacBrayne. But the project has been hugely controversial, with the vessel finally being completed nearly seven years late and four times over budget.
 
BurbankHibee said:
And sometimes, often times the criticism is valid. In extreme cases you get people like Sam Brinton or Rachel Levine appointed to top government positions due to DEI. And when eyebrows are raised and questions asked these people are dismissed as bigots. The same goes for the two lesbians in charge of the Los Angeles fire department. Were they the two best candidates for the job or were they just the two best lesbians? Are women really appropriate firefighters when faced with an 18 hour shift in hell? Is it fair to men to lower the bar for fitness to allow petite women into such demanding jobs? And so it goes on.



This is such a silly retort because I don't think anybody has even come close to saying that, particularly the last sentence. And you have the nerve to complain about people weaponising the subject?
Click to expand...
I've acknowledged that sometimes things don't work. But currently there seems to be glee that it all of it appears to be thrown out. I don't think it's a 'nerve' to question this. To me it's one of those issues that if you drill into it you'll find most people can find aspects of the policy to agree with, for example disability. But I haven't seen anything that suggests these aspects are protected with the suspension of DEI staff.
 
And what's been seen that suggests folk won't still get jobs now DEI has been booted out?
 
Archie said:
I've acknowledged that sometimes things don't work. But currently there seems to be glee that it all of it appears to be thrown out.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you are picking up that there is glee that "all of it" is being thrown out.


Archie said:
I don't think it's a 'nerve' to question this. To me it's one of those issues that if you drill into it you'll find most people can find aspects of the policy to agree with, for example disability. But I haven't seen anything that suggests these aspects are protected with the suspension of DEI staff.
Click to expand...

You are not questioning it, you are libeling someone when you say "No doubt you'd be against efforts to get women into engineering?" Where do you even get that from?
 
Archie said:
I've acknowledged that sometimes things don't work. But currently there seems to be glee that it all of it appears to be thrown out. I don't think it's a 'nerve' to question this. To me it's one of those issues that if you drill into it you'll find most people can find aspects of the policy to agree with, for example disability. But I haven't seen anything that suggests these aspects are protected with the suspension of DEI staff.
Click to expand...
If things end up as bad as your various straw men, then you can blame the progressive wingnuts for poisoning the waters once again, and corrupting and weaponising what is a fine, and pre existing principle.

Don’t reply as you’d like, and keep trying to misdirect Jimmy who worked in a different kind of environment. From what I can see, it ain’t working.

I’ve worked in corporates all over the UK, Europe and North America and spent time in ones in Asia. I’ve - HR aside - topped the DEI charts in some places, and I’ve also been forced to make grossly inappropriate hires which resulted in…consequences. I also, as I’m sure is pretty clear, am no fan of global capitalism and not one to booster for it.

However, you are spinning an absolute yarn here. Unless you are a public sector man and it’s particularly backward in this area, I can’t understand some of your assertions. They don’t reflect reality.
 
Back to him being a *&*^ or not; It would appear that he signed exec order yesterday, revoking Executive Order 14087 from oct 22 which was responsible for lowering prescription drug costs for americans. A tick in the hes a *&*^ box imo
 
Last edited:
BurbankHibee said:
I don't know where you are picking up that there is glee that "all of it" is being thrown out.




You are not questioning it, you are libeling someone when you say "No doubt you'd be against efforts to get women into engineering?" Where do you even get that from?
Click to expand...
It's pretty gleeful here. As for libeling - really? Jimmy can defend himself. But when people have a blanket opposition to 'DEI' it's legitimate to point out what the implications of that could be.
 
BurbankHibee said:
Not really.



Yes, really. Jimmy said no such thing as to what you accuse him of.



What you did was not legitimate.
Click to expand...
We'll have to agree to disagree. But I'm always happy to be corrected where I make mistakes. I just don't think I have here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
  • Menu
  • Home
  • Hibs Chat
  • New Posts
  • Just Back
  • Chatroom