The London Olympics are already achieving the number one aim of the politicians who brought them here, which is making our politicians feel very important indeed.
The media is quite frenetic in its efforts to make us all believe we should be terrifically proud of the fact we are hosting the Olympics, as though there were something unique in this achievement. If we can’t competently do something that Greece, Spain and China have done in recent years, that would be remarkable. Of course the Games will be on the whole well delivered, sufficient for the media and politicians to declare it an ecstatic success. Some of the sporting moments will be sublime, as ever.
But did it have to be in London? We won’t know the total cost of the Games for months, but it will cost the taxpayer at least £9 billion and I suspect a lot more. I also suspect the GDP figures will, in the event, show that the massive net fall in visitor numbers has hurt the already shrinking economy further.
But to take the most optimistic figure, holding the Olympics in London has cost every person in the country an average of £150 per head in extra taxes. That is £600 for a family of four. Actually it is in the end going to be well over £2,000, as of course the money has been borrowed on the never never, and taxpayers are going to be paying it off their whole lives, along with the sum ten times higher they are already paying direct into the pockets of the bankers through their taxes.
The very rich, of course, don’t pay much tax, so they are not worried.
But to take just the figure of £600 extra taxes for a family of four, the lowest possible amount, and not including the interest. Is having the Olympics here really worth paying out £600 for? If Tony Blair had approached the head of the family and said “We are going to have the Olympics in London, but it’s going to cost you £600, would the answer have been from most ordinary people: “Yes, great idea, this is that important to us”?
People are not disconcerted because they don’t see that they have to pay. There is no special Olympics tax, and they pay their taxes in a variety of ways, and individuals are not the sole source of taxation. But this is nonetheless real money taken from the people in pursuit of the hubris of politicians.
I love sport. I hate the corruption of the International Olympic Committee, Fifa and the rest; I hate the vicious corporatism and militarisation of our capital and absurd elitism of the transport lanes; the sport itself I love. But with the economy contracting, and the NHS being farmed out for profit, is it really worth £600 for a family – and many families are really struggling in a heartbreaking way – is it worth the money to have the Olympics here rather than in Paris?
Of course it isn’t. I think many of us will feel an extra pleasure watching the Opening ceremony because it is British. Patriotic pride will surge. It is not wrong to enjoy the spectacle tonight on TV. The corporate well connected and ruling classes will enjoy it in the stadium.
But after you have watched it on TV, ask yourself this question. How much more did you enjoy it than enjoy watching the Beijing ceremony, and was that margin of extra enjoyment something that everybody in the room would have paid out £150 for?
Because they just did.
Well, re. the provision of evidence, Komodo, I did post lots of links early on in this which demonstrate that immigration has either zero impact on wages or actually contributes to a small rise in wages. Even Migration Watch seems to find it difficult to be so dishonest as to refute this, so that the conclusions they reach on their website do not reflect the evidence they present on the same site.
.
Yet it seems that some people find it difficult to analyse why there is such a disconnect b/w their assertion that ‘immigration lowers wages’ and the results of extensive research (and also wrt the other slogans and stereotypes repeated so often in the media and by opportunistic politicians, some of which have been rolled out yet gain here). Perhaps this is because if that, and associated, tropes are removed from the equation, nothing other than cultural, and possibly ‘race’, issues are left. And to explore those would be to unravel an exegesis of the real subtext of this discourse.
.
Enoch Powell Redux.
If you call someone a dickhead, which is common enough. do we then say that it’s misandrist to do so?
.
I think not.
.
If you ask why that’s so, you’ll learn a lot more about what’s really going on than you will from censoring what people say.
.
Censorship is always praccticed for “goodie” reasons, just like bombing the shit out of people.
If you call someone a dickhead, which is common enough. do we then say that it’s misandrist to do so?
.
I think not.
.
If you ask why that’s so, you’ll learn a lot more about what’s really going on than you will from censoring what people say.
.
Censorship is always practiced for “goodie” reasons, just like bombing the shit out of people.
Now, Komodo, have you given consideration to my other six questions? I appreciate you answering one of the original seven. I have answered, as best I can, all the questions which Chris and Herbie put to me. To save you having to look back, here they are again:
.
1)Who are “the Real Locals”, Komodo? Or are those brands of ale? What is your definition of ‘a Real Local’? [Komodo, you’ve already answered this one – thanks]
.
2) And what precisely do you mean by “our traditional legal base”? And since when has this “traditional legal base” not changed?
.
3) What is your definition of “social engineering”? Are the media/politicial organs to which I referred – in this schema, the purveyors and instrumentalisers of propaganda against various minority groups – not engaging in constant “social engineering”? And is our financial system – fundamentalist ideological capitalism, deregulation, privatisation, etc. – not also a great, ideologically-driven machine of “social engineering”?
.
4) And what, in your opinion, Komodo, did Enoch Powell intend by giving that speech [The ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech]?
.
5) And what do you think he meant wrt the ‘rivers of blood’ reference vis a vis contemporary Britain?
.
6) And what did his subsequent political activism suggest was his primary concern?
.
7) And finally, Komodo, did/do you agree with Enoch Powell?
.
Thanks.
Komodo:
.
“I thought that would get you going. I just linked to it. Who said it was in good faith?”
.
Seriously… this ‘style’ is getting really tedious. You have been constantly shifting from serious to baiting and back again. You have been using language you expect to be misunderstood, and then call people simple for not recognising your ‘obvious’ sarcasm in a 3 sentence post.
For the record and anyone else:
“Did the reliable and unbiased source you cite on student numbers -the NUS, lol – actually take that weighted average?”
It did not. Though the figures are publicly available…”
Then why not publish them? Any comment on the demonstration that the survey itself was biased? No?
Now we know that amongst the hysterical figures on ‘immigration’ are 250,000 students, the picture from the ONS (itself an estimate) looks slightly different:
Total what is called long-term immigration: 598,000
Students: 250,000
Total what is called ‘long-term’ immigration (the ONS appear to have overlooked the usual definition of a permanent move, but I am sure most people think it is): 339,000
Emigration: 338,000
So a disparity of 1000. MigrationWatch should be proud. But of course it has to keep insisting that it has a role, hence “63,000 *potentially* bogus students in just one year…Of those who were *potential* refusals” (my emphasis)
The ONS are not saying whether students are included in the emigration figures, but, just in case, 22,000 British students study abroad
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/expateducation/8333579/Surprising-amount-of-British-students-studying-overseas.html
So, even if you add those in, the total net long-term migration into a country of 60 million plus is 23,000. Feel safer yet?
And ‘long-term’ migration appears to be defined as a stay of over a year, judging by this piece in the Telegraph:
“Last year, 207,000 British citizens – one every three minutes – left the country while 510,000 foreigners arrived to stay for a year or more.”
I’d say that ‘one Briton every three minutes’ is hemorraghing; but jolly good luck to them. At least they won’t have to read the Daily Mail headlines.
“Remind me how the Olympics, er, “demonstrated” the benefits of encouraging immigration?”: The atmosphere in London and across the world after the multi-cultural opening ceremony.
“tell me whether the Mail is spreading propaganda or simply reflecting the views of its readership”. I, and not only I, would tell you that the Mail is both spreading propaganda and influencing the views of its readership as a deliberate result. That is the point. It makes readers scared. Fear sells. People get hooked on hate.
“Still waiting for The Truth to set against all those lies you think I am posting”: see the Daily Mail piece you linked to, with an uncritical comment afterwards.
“I’ll just add something before I pack up for the weekend. Your interjections (and my resulting visits to the web) have done much to shift me from a “could barely care less, but I’ll pretend I do and see what the blog thinks” mode, to one of considerable concern about mass immigration.”.
Do you know, I very much doubt that. The person who kicked this issue off with a term like ‘aborigines’ to describe “real” British people, who sneered at ‘multi-culti’ and who used terms like ‘horrendous’ to describe the immigration figures, and ‘overwhelmed’ to describe the country had, I think, made up their mind long before.
But have a good weekend. Give yourself a hug. It’s not bad out there, you know.
“If you call someone a dickhead …”
.
I don’t. Ever.
.
“Censorship is always practiced for “goodie” reasons, just like bombing the shit out of people.”
.
I think if you go back and read it again, you’ll see I agreed with Vronsky – who was arguing *against* censorship.
”
“Last year, 207,000 British citizens – one every three minutes – left the country while 510,000 foreigners arrived to stay for a year or more.”
.
I’d say that ‘one Briton every three minutes’ is hemorraghing; but jolly good luck to them.”
”
.
– Thats an estimate of 300,000 newcomers (net) 500,000 (gross) to the land some year or other.
I found another estimate of the recent annual birthrate to be around 400,000 pa.
Depending on the estimations and formulations ,from a detatched, quite hopeful point of view i do not find all reasonable looking measures of the situation to be without challenge.
I dont have absolute trust in such government figures either.
.
I dont think anyone should react too negatively to casual references to ‘indigenous’ ‘aboriginal’ or ‘native’ , or put terms like ‘british’ in scare quotes often IF they want to be convincing. There are better ways to expand on the meaning of perhaps misused but traditional terminologies.
.
Nuid iirc Clark did get a rough ride for his putting his feelings on language situations, and he was advised even by myself in someway to learn/be interested in other languages.
.
I think the plight of the very worthwhile, stimulating and helpful and ultimately loveable and celebrateable people; asylum needers and rich and poor newcomers to these islands, has not been improved much, by much of the outraged and certain yet incomplete and evolving assurances and denials put heatedly here.
.
Sometimes / places it reads better than others – GlennUK can be a great tough read on tough subjects, but it is hard to pull off the “havent a leg to stand on” position TRUELY effectively (beyond impressing existing agree-ers), there is almost always some poor twisted sod who may have.
I dont think there should be a mass media commentry on that poor girls murder case now that her body has been found, but that guy does seem suspicious as hell. I really expect the police will do their best to do justice and the national news should have more principals than to theatricalise the process.
Thatcrab: “Thats an estimate of 300,000 newcomers (net) 500,000 (gross) to the land some year or other”
Repeat dissection, which the Telegraph did not bother with:
Now we know that amongst the hysterical figures on ‘immigration’ are 250,000 students, the picture from the ONS (itself an estimate) looks slightly different:
Total what is called long-term immigration: 598,000
Students: 250,000
Total what is called ‘long-term’ immigration (the ONS appear to have overlooked the usual definition of a permanent move, but I am sure most people think it is): 339,000
Emigration: 338,000
So a disparity of 1000. MigrationWatch should be proud. But of course it has to keep insisting that it has a role, hence “63,000 *potentially* bogus students in just one year…Of those who were *potential* refusals” (my emphasis)
The ONS are not saying whether students are included in the emigration figures, but, just in case, 22,000 British students study abroad
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/expateducation/8333579/Surprising-amount-of-British-students-studying-overseas.html
So, even if you add those in, the total net long-term migration into a country of 60 million plus is 23,000. Feel safer yet?
Nuid.
Fanny flaps
Nuid,
.
I am also against censorship because it is frequently abused and most times negates the truth or strengthens deception. Personal abuse or belittling a fellow contributor to invalidate their argument I believe is self perpetuating and ultimately destroys the essence of the argument for observers and should be deleted.
“I dont think anyone should react too negatively to casual references to ‘indigenous’ ‘aboriginal’ or ‘native’”. In fact, the term I queried was ‘aborigine’; which is used by people who like to believe that the British are composed, and have always been composed, of one shiny white race in the face of all the social, historical and DNA evidence.
‘Indigenous’ (which wasn’t raised) has similar connotations. In Australia, by contrast, the terms are used to describe a clear section of the population who were never given the chance to mix and grow, because they were brutalised and tortured and murdered from day 1. Irish people have a similar case, as do West Papuans. But people who like to use it in Britain often also claim similar victim status (‘genocide in Leicester!’) which given the role of the UK in world events and the actual facts on the ground is both ludicrous and disturbing.
‘Native’ of course just means ‘born there’.
“So, even if you add those in, the total net long-term migration into a country of 60 million plus is 23,000. Feel safer yet?”
No thats Net income, Gross is more relevant to cultural issues. You discard the students but some will stay. And its 1 year out of many, and an estimate backed by unreliable government figures. And 400,000 babies a year does not dwarf these amounts, and yes you can even question, what is the cultural make up of those babies, if you want to know? Its a lot more complex situation than you keep eagerly insisting Tech.
Doug Scorgie: you might pull a lass with ‘fanny flaps’: it sounds quite funny. A nice bloke from Essex explained to me once that ‘cunt’ can be a affectionate term (I think ‘dickhead’ can be too, myself). But b*** c*******, referring as it does to dead meat, is just repulsive, and designed to be so, and suggests a deepseated problem with physicality eg denying its attractive vivacity, which I feel it would be helpful for the user to address, whatever their sexual preference.
No charge, btw.
“Vronksy, I am personally not in favour of people editing their own posts after they’ve published. ”
.
Ni moi non plus. I’m talking about mods giving people an opportunity to reconsider a post which they feel to be intemperate or inappropriate *before* publication.
“But people who like to use it in Britain often also claim similar victim status ”
Or you might be twisting peoples meaning and even misplacing victims/guilts. In my experience almost everyone currently has plenty of guilt in some way to be meek about, without dredging up history. And the ones who dont dont.
“Gross is more relevant to cultural issues.”
?
“You discard the students but some will stay”.
yes?
“And its 1 year out of many”
?
“and an estimate backed by unreliable government figures”.
doesn’t stop everyone who wants to see immigrants targeted quoting them
“And 400,000 babies a year does not dwarf these amounts”
? We need more babies!
“and yes you can even question, what is the cultural make up of those babies, if you want to know”
well, they will be native Britons.
“Its a lot more complex situation than you keep eagerly insisting Tech.”.
I’m addressing the links.
“Or you might be twisting peoples meaning and even misplacing victims/guilts.”
I’m not sure what this means. I don’t think it’s ‘misplacing’ anything to say that the British actions in Australia created a brutalised, tortured, murdered and dispossessed people of the indigenous inhabitants. I don’t think it’s ‘twisting’ anything to say that this is not, despite the terrible mutterings of various people, happening here. I think it is perfectly fair to object to a correlation.
“In my experience almost everyone currently has plenty of guilt in some way to be meek about”
Er, not that much, no.
“without dredging up history”
which is precisely why we need to move on from this ‘discussion’, as Passerby recently said.
And the ones who dont dont.
don’t think there’s any way of resolving this down a keyboard, though thank heavens I know that in person there is…
Right well thanks for blasting all those little wots and nots out there Tech for the record. It reads like embarrassing nonsense to me but im sure from what you have written that you need never judge yourself harshly.
It reads like embarrassing nonsense to me
I’m so sorry that you’re embarrassed.
Shame on Dow Chemical who have no conscience about Bhopal and who show no restraint.
.
Olympics 2012: BBC was forced to move cameras to avoid sponsor’s ad
Giant banner for Dow Chemical was visible during opening ceremony buildup, giving it exposure valued at more than £1m
.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/aug/10/olympics-2012-bbc-sponsor
.
Shame on these directors especially Liveris, the Australian who presides overall.
.
Andrew N. Liveris President, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
Arnold A. Allemang
Jacqueline K. Barton
James A. Bell
Jeff M. Fettig
John B. Hess
Paul Polman
Dennis H. Reilley
James M. Ringler
Ruth G. Shaw
.
Turnover $59 billion !!
{http://www.dow.com/investors/corpgov/leader/board.htm}
Technicolour’s right – it’s fine out there wrt people getting on with one another and so on. The problems are primarily economic and affect the 99% (i.e. us). Much of the fearful posting here that has repeatedly raised the language of fear wrt foreigners in this country seems to me to have been largely curmudgeonly.
“I’m so sorry that you’re embarrassed.”
Cant you even read ‘english’ you moral supremecist?
-there can be no aboriginal ‘english’ because they were all so bad to the ‘irish’ in history. Oh you english be careful how you talk its you who are ALL historicaly guilting. English culture is just all imperialism anyway, you imperial workhouse slaves you, imperialist oliver twists. All the enlightemedHoly knights of multiculturalism! Speak ye not of your natives place without guilt!
Thatcrab – is your post about reading English, and then adding spelling, case, apostrophe and grammar errors to the following post, a sophisticated joke? 😉
No, i am not a supreme being!
.
“which is precisely why we need to move on from this ‘discussion’”
You move on ,you are the main person who keeps blasting out your records and admonishments at every single ending. I think you have been sloppy and self elevating. Just like a dialy mailer, only self righteously thrusting the opposite argument.
I looked at one post this afternoon, which was Jon’s reply to Vronsky, and I just read about ten, up to Thatcrab 10:01 PM, and I saw another about editing comments after submission. I think there was a ten minute edit feature when we had IntenseDebate. It was only for registered users who could also delete their own comments, and before that, Moveable Type had a Preview feature. That seemed OK to me, Vronsky. It wouldn’t stop this lot here, though.
.
Technicolour, I fucked off thinking that arguing with me was keeping you from doing your marking.
Dear Crab
There aren’t any ‘aboriginal’ English. They/we are made up of Goths, Visigoths, Huns, Danes, Dutch, Germans, French, Italians, Spanish, Israelis, Irish, Scots, Welsh, Africans, Romanis, Pakistanis, Indians, Tamils – the list goes on, and beautifully on.
I think, despite the history, that this is why I am quite fond of the place today, myself. As well as its culture, from Hamlet to Attack the Block.
‘Sloppy and self-elevating’? ‘Just like a Daily Mailer’; except that I am showing the reasons not to fear, instead of the reasons to buy into my legion of hate? Well, fuck you too.
Best wishes,
T
That was a sophisticated joke to make about it though…
No love from me tonight, slap it all up ye!
Im sure tech and co will set this heresy straight to the sinners AGAIN