|
Top-level
 There is this myth that if borders are opened, suddenly a deluge of people will come and somehow flood the local community. Iceland is tiny, 350k people. It's in the EEA. Everyone in the EU can just move here and start a new life, no work visa required — including from countries that rightwingers used to love scaring people in the North and West with: Poland, Bulgaria, Romania. Guess what? No deluge. No flood of economic migrants. People don't want to uproot their lives willy-nilly! 🧵 4 comments
Simple: labor force with access to a strong social safety net (including good welfare system) is expensive to the moneyed classes. It's cheaper to hire people who have no labor protections, no access to welfare, and ideally also no local support network. It's not about making refugees not come. It's about making sure they never get the protections the local labor force already has. Why? Because then they become super cheap labor. And a way to dismantle labor protections for everyone! How? 🧵 "Look at those refugees! Businesses are hiring them because they are cheap, they are cheap because they don't have labor protections, ergo labor protections hurt your ability to get hired, my working class friend!" 👀 That's the narrative. The problem isn't refugees "stealing jobs", the problem is capitalists being able to skirt labor protections. The solution is not to block refugees from coming, it's to afford them the same labor protections, and access to welfare and healthcare! 🧵 |
Gregory's Server
And then there's this other myth, of a "Schrödinger's migrant": a person who moves in to a country, and at the same time "steals jobs" and "abuses the welfare system."
Which one is it? Are the refugees coming in and hanging on on state welfare? Or are they "stealing jobs"?
It's neither. Because it's not a zero-sum game. More people means more economic activity, means more jobs. Yes, on some basic level it's that simple.
So what's the deal with the "Schrödinger's migrant", then?
🧵