Comments by "harvey young" (@harveyyoung3423) on "Liz Truss Believes Immigration is a Social Good. Immigration not the Economy is Tories' Big Problem." video.

  1. Good morning everyone. Immigration through the context of the mini budget: The mini Budget was always going to be a challenge to interpret in time to make any sort of timely and effective comment. Added to this i have had my bad back demon revisit me, and now its all change and unpredictability again. Most of the Criticisms came from the direction of "bad market reaction", a sense of disorder and unpredictability, and as if, the Response of the Bank of England in accordance with its antecedent duty to apply its policy, was not a priori but "unpredictable"?. So we got al the usual suspects criticising it from behind the accusative mask of "risk" and "instability", but the policy was also criticised in the same way by the unusual suspects of traditional friends. That is, both Tory MPs and Labour MP's attacked it on the basis of incompetence with respect tot he market: that they call a market realism. So many Tory MPs were able to say their constituents didn't like it, so its was rejected by the parliamentary party, and Labour MPs didn't like t because it displays a lack of competence and so loss of trust, for investors to take a risk. So tactically this allowed Labour to claim to be the party of economic competence a reverence for the markets and to claim the Tories as incompetent. And so following this two fronted political critique they can amass positive data on the pound, on costs of borrowing, on pensions etc. They all could claim to criticise the Tax cuts refereeing to the 45% to 40%, but few have stressed that the poor have had tax cuts and energy cost protections. My question is, are the above politically hegemonic Critics' really the problem they all have with the budget? I believe the real explanation for the attack by all sides is that all sides reflect more the interests of the middle classes they both represent and are a member of. these interests primarily lie in this context, in the massive mortgage debts of the middle class London and south. Debts that on composition will prove to be unserviceable given the inevitable fall in production and wages. they were always massively over leveraged, but now in the new climate they are on a precipice, that under normal circumstances would mean a fall in the house prices and so negative equity. But we are not living in normal times and so, we must ask why haven't the house prices fallen in the economic decline since 2008, especially since there is a massive gap between supply and demand, why no new house building. Its a paradox! Well there must be some artificial or several feed back structures embedded in the system to protect themselves. They include immediately the openness of the London Housing market to the rest of the worlds rich as expanded top end consumer demand base, and the mass immigration also as expanding low end consumer demand. but also we can add planning regulation particularly on green filed sites prevent new house building. So to under stand immigration we might do better by seeing just in the context of maintenance of artificial high house prices though expanded demand base. Perhaps all the talk of necessary workers and diversity is really a mask the middle class use to keep their house prices high. they feel they can separate themselves form any negative double effects as well, and can be silent on it effect to erode natural communication due to language and cultural difference i.e. the break up of the glue of civil society that back in the day would have had the cultural linguistic shared back ground to critique this kind of thing. So yes the Tory middle class and the Labour middle class share a common economic imperative to stop this sort of thing, they just have to do it using other metrics and terminologies. They don't say of course "Stop the budget because my and my friends my network friends risk loosing our unearned nest eggs" they say anything except this an all are on the same page media, international organisations etc. The Mini Budget protected the most vulnerable in many complex ways, but for once the middleclass were gong to have to take a risk hit for the first time its not a win win situation and they don't like it. we see these parties are controlled by the middle class who disguise their real interests for being "in the care of the minorities" or "being productive for employment. i mean this already seems a stretch of context for immigration debate, but to go further, the middle class for the most part are shielded form war. they are represented very low in standard military populations. indeed the tradition of just war looks like a series of principles whereby the poor can legitimacy kill each other, but if the war reaches them "civilians" then it is classed as unjust? And why all the mass middle class movement against the atomic bomb. Because it would impact them. they banned the gas because they realised it could be used against them in cities. To get really dark, maybe the European Immigration is not just because the source country has paid to educate and train them to adulthood , but also because they might be seen as the new fodder for new European Wars. Because the indigenous male population are beginning to see that its a ridged game by the middle classes. And perhaps they don't think the New Rights turn to Stoicism and Heroism is going to work as 21st Century" white feather any more. Thanks for reading . Looking Forward tot he discussion.
    4
  2. ​ @mrror8933  ​ I have a long answer to your question here. the second half i accidentally deleted before saving and i have tried to rewrite it but i'm tiered now. I'm not happy with it but i will post what i have done cos if i don't i probably will never finish it anyway. i will try and redo it if i can later. Mr Ror i am trying to think about this "class" not in terms of a definition e.g. a set of necessary and sufficient properties, and/or a determinant that will include and exclude those in and those out (either/or, a disjunctive) or that is given by some substantial like wealth that would be vague and is really now dissolved into networks Rather it is first a position of a "representor" that is also the middle terms in the old syllogistic term logic (Kant). Thus anyone is always both represented and representor. Rather it is belter tot think of it in terms of station responsibility and duty. this is what is really prior to any definition or extension. so it is not sociological in the first instance, as would be used in either pre compiling of metric data or of an radical empiricist type like Michel Seers on Algorithms,. i want the notion of duty and responsibility (but not transcendent cost or debt free). Rather it is to be linked to their scope of collective action and power (the who they represent and how they act on). from there we enter the vocabulary of metaphysics of formal structures and action (adverbial the who and the how.) its is about who can do what. like the Ancient human Semi-Gods who action though institutions have like a God like power of scope and effect compared to an image of individual Aristotelian action. i raise my arm to answer a question in a military meeting, or to signal the army to move forward, or to get a bar tender my attention. with this metaphysical view it brings in notions of force coercion though concepts in contracts as immediate.. here the notion of a voluntary and involuntary contact can come into view i a way it does so only medially though definitions and empirical extensions. i mean you have to add the idea of force surreptitiously to the wealth differences etc. lie a Deux Machina in a story. this makes the power and coercion look accidental. to talk of power here though is not Foucault because i want t retain the quasi logical epistemological image of a whole of the community which is not available for Foucault's relations of micro power. the field of representation does not contain the dimension of force and power in itself. to retain something of the social contract tradition we must look at the metaphysical level of forces: freedom and determinism as the old division has i want to retain in a demythologised way beyond he Natural necessity verses Aristotelian sue generic acts.) To draw this out i have to recognise that in our ordinary lives we recognize a reflex with only habit and its space of movement not authorship is the issue. its space of movement is one dimension no freedom in the situation. on the other hand is the also abstract idea of a completely free costless debtless act that does not even have to care for itself. an extreme but illusory absolute freedom. as we move inwards then to be in a state of poverty has a metaphyseal and normative aspect not given in data of wealth or even differences in wealth. wealth and status (duty responsibility) give also only apparent complete freedom. Because they are bound to act though apparatus they are dependent on and must act on an object not a brute force but care (from working in a pottery factory production line with robots not too good at handling delicate un-fired Clay. thus the relations of middle to lower class is here not in the data which is a symptom of it from the positions of transcendental philosophy but of course the numbers and money do make a difference and a difference to the content but not before the metaphysics of force reciprocity agent patent . cause effect. a Disenchanted world view in thinking only of epistemology takes the metaphysics of human nature and action as given by behavioural psychology. this science of man is the par dime of the modern world framing economic law and politics and is the substantial to their claims to have a perfect image of ourselves for us to live up to ie the poor are the "is" they are the "ought". as in Hobbes the old virtue and vice possibilities of the one body are split along the syllogism into the poor as abstract vice and the middle class as abstracted virtue.(substitute rights claims here and as the modern world as made vice the human out of duty, ie self interest, and placed virtue as the human in duty as the management of the self interst level though law rights unity etc by causes. here then we can see a point of intersection of the vocabularies of vice and virtue with there separated abstract versions in science as subjects and objects of self interest verses, you know, the scientists as and custodian of our "better natures" as they would have it. eg when a contract is made and we say necessarily, we mean they had virtually no degrees of freedom in the world, but this would manifest at he scientific level as the best example and the standard for a causal law of a action subject to causes not thought not thought cos no degree of freedom for thoughts action. so there in the real world a point here where it i close to the behavioural scientific image of man. the middle class are then the managers and users relation where their action are though duties and so are a one many relation a nomological scope of the structure of action. which makes them the dolphin trainer not the dolphin. my notion of the middle class then must incorporate immediately all these scientific metaphysical and law like aspects as well as the position on a virtue and vice separation. all pollical policy and action though institutions and so on take the behavioural sciences and the political model for granted they never question it. its hidden by the myth of data. the middle class use forms and contracts as if forcing objects akin to physics. the distinction is one then of science metaphysics and access to it in its power duty and scope. political policy must work on this level of metaphysics and science and the numbers and data will follow. We make the how and the who key. how they work at a distance and the who who is responsible, as the science is an excuse and exculpation for them at the moment. let alone the complexity of passing the buck, and anonymity of double effect , what they call unintended consequences that they ca even strategize in. Representations and definition then hide mask the syllogistic form of the state and the metaphysical image of man that goes with it now. the Term "middle class" then is thought of as a sociological term that requires a definition for such sociological analysis and conceptual clearness for data organisation. It would be a term in representation that misses that they are the representors and hold power cause and meaning though the above mythologies. In the real world it is intrinsic to duties and certain virtues, that would appear if at all in representation as just some contingent property by some other definition. Even our rights meant as a limit to the middle classes are held by the middle class and as positive rights can be used against us even, I am after placing these terms out of there scientific use alone. that is to de formulise them. but neither does this mean to drop the image of the social contract. i mean the world is not made up of random disconnected parts organs and people just in buildings there is logical normative structure with metaphysical connections and determination here not just simple human relations like in a soap opera. Husserl talks of abandoning the natural attitude that would just describe people in buildings as empirical. neither is the world like things in a living room, but there is an aesthetic to the whole neither formal or natural excepts at its limits where humans are near absolute freedom :impossible, or absolute necessity impossible here the science representations meet at the real world of forced choice and complete causal power with immunity. the normative image of man as science law economic has it lives only in the extremes of the real world. but the supply demand curve necessities this as aggregated price means everybody is either in degrees of freedom or degrees of necessity. the science seems to demand we approach this closer and closer because of te need for causal stability and order and prediction. we will have to become the free and the necessity for the sake of sciences for sake of right and/or sake of utility. degrees of freedom in duty verses frames of necessity, power and scope of action verses being a subject of force. .
    1