@AH, see my reply to David with a range of reasonable assumptions to see what they do to the CBA, and I have done a few calculations on the back of an envelope. What you call ‘known numbers’, then get applied to an assumption and you are left with a remainder. Assume 30k immigrants, of which, assume 25k working age (of which 5114 s/t permits [known]; assume 1500 w/o permits in ag./const….) work, leaves assumed 2k school children. Assume natural rate of unemployment 4.1%. Assume 2k work in informal… That’s a lot of assumptions with very few known numbers. One then looks at a taxonomy of benefits and costs built on those assumptions. As I said to David, feel free to play with the assumptions and see if you get the same conclusions. I don’t.

I have not shared with you my comments to Mascoll so I am not sure how you know what I wrote.

I’m also at a loss how you know my friends’ propensity when you don’t know them or me. I hope that profiling is not a Bostonian thing.

@David
“The little we know of Lindsay Holder suggests he will do his bidding in hs own time.
Unlike George Brathwaite who has demonstrated reluctance to enter BU and face what is always a robust inquisition, Holder has done so.” [Isn’t the article that precedes LH’s on BU on August 1 one presented by GB? Each author has been equally silent in the face of quite extensive comments–neither has said even “I will deal with these during…” as a holding reply. Now I’m getting a bit confused about what you say about the little you know of the two authors.]

@AH

“Did LH intended for his article to be “Scholarly” or is this likely to be LIB speaking on LH behalf????”[It gives that impression with its layout, which is standard for formal submissions. ‘Background’, etc. The use of the nosism ‘we’ is also consistent with formal presenation of work, and I asked if that was a slip or an artifice.

LH’s starting point is not what others have written, though he gets to Mascoll’s analysis. But, he does not argue with Mascoll on the terms he/LH himself posed, but on a different basis.]

“You are simply one sided, and a fastidious “shiftless” black Jamaican” [Hardly one sided, just not on your side perhaps.]
“Fastidious”? [All the definitions I know (eg, having high standards, meticulous) have this as a positive attritbute. I would not wish to say that I always personally strive for excellence, but I am exacting).]
“Shiftless”? [Here you will need to help us all. My understanding of that word from Webster’s as ‘lacking in resourcefulness’; ‘inefficient’; and/or ‘lacking in ambition or incentive’. Can I be fastiduous and shiftless? Sorry to be so meticulous. Would that I were just shiftless and could just kick off my shoes and rock back.]
“Black Jamaican”? [Spot on. Full marks.]

For those who think the issues are about immigration policy and nothing else, as I have said there is a major issue about how government works and does things. I am following a report now of how Pres. Obama’s stimulus plans and moves to reduce home foreclosures are faltering/failing because the policy is ‘coming out in dribs and drabs’, ‘banks are being informed of changes in measures at the same time the measures are announced by the president…and they do not have systems in place to make the measures works…because they had laid off staff and cannot ramp up quickly…leading to confusion among the public and continuing problems for homeowners…’. See http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a7kYntqozaKo. Now the measures are at risk of failing because policy makers did not think through the implementation of measures ahead of their being made public. BTW, has anyone seen the comprehensive immigration policy yet? (Obama went public to say that he would not meet his own August deadline for health reform. Is such a notion alien?) Is the matter of delayed tax refunds all part of a pattern? Why is there a long backlog in dealing with applications for [name it, and it includes residency]? Etc.

fastidious/shiftless lol!

It is a testament to how I perceive your chameleon like behavior and pronouncements. Your on and off blackness. Is it common for persons to use Shiftless and Black as compliments?

@AH,
“It is a testament to how I perceive your chameleon like behavior and pronouncements. Your on and off blackness. Is it common for persons to use Shiftless and Black as compliments?” [It really saddens me, as with Bimbro, that you wish to demean what a person may be if it is his/her race or his/her colour. My skin colour is something I cannot change nor would I wish to; nor would I deny the place of my birth. As I said recently I would stand up to anyone ridiculing either or both. People who confused what they hear and what they read and what they see will always struggle to really understand people–hence my encouraging Bimbro to read Anthony Winkler.

Pride needs that, not the comfort of applause and approval. My children have to realise that blackness is their lot and a great lot it is. If someone wishes to demean them then they can go on. You cannot take away a person’s dignity unless he/she gives it up. You also have to learn what others would place on a platter as a negative for all the positives that it can offer. That, mon frere, is how many black or oppressed people survived for centuries.

My blackness has never been off, it’s just not the same as yours and is not better or worse for that. Black Americans tried to grade the president’s blackness and will always be confused because that’s a futile exercise. It’s almost ridiculous that a man who can truly claim to be an African-American can have his credentials questioned by Americans who have little clue what they are.]

@livinginbarbados

Quite frankly I do not comprehend your comment. I am not here to defend any thesis nor am I here to gain attention (positive or negative). I simply found it unreasonable for David and the BU family to suggest unwillingness on my part to engage with Holder or anyone else. One would learn that while it may be chauvinistic to enter every battle, it is often much more strategic and successful to choose your battles wisely. Then again, my personal dispositions indicate that I do thrive on challenge. Obviously I do not see Holder’s comments as serious challenges to anything that I have advanced on the ‘immigration issue’. Hopefully you do better than I did and you see my point on the matter. As a passing comment, you may simply ask David and the ‘BU family’ to respect the wishes of persons who do not want to be embroiled in malicious content. I have even very read comments that suggested that I am a political jackass. That I have no problem with in principle since it is an opinion. I am more disturbed by the educated ones who present myths and hunches as facts. There are always lessons for us to learn my friend. Keep doing what you do in the best ways that you can, I will attempt to do the same.

@LIB
I have asked a simple question. Is it to your knowledge, a common thing for someone to use the words shiftless and black in the same sentence, as a compliment?

@GCB pre-PHD
Welcome to a real blog. I see that you have attempted to “man-up and venture beyond the confines of the socialist club that is NormanGirvan.info. Free speech is fuh real here and therefore something you not are not accustom to.

@AH,
“Is it to your knowledge, a common thing for someone to use the words shiftless and black in the same sentence, as a compliment?”[I do, but whether I know the use of shiftless and black to be used together as compliments is irrelevant; English allows a lot of combinations and their interpretations can be complex. We have a whole lexicon of oxymoronic phrases (here’s a nice list for ready reference, http://www.oxymoronlist.net/). It is also a matter of perspective. As is the case with some new urban slang, where bad = good, wicked = cool, bitch = ???, nigger = ??? but positive, etc., meaning can be contextual and very particular also dependent on the deliverer. As you live in the USA I have no idea how your exposure to English there has modified how you use the language.

In England, it’s often hard for newcomers to understand that ‘f—ing b—-ard’ is not necessarily an insult, as it can depend on the relationship and the tone (Prince Harry tried to defend his ‘little Paki’ remark with the same logic.) It’s subtle.

If you meant it not as a compliment and it was taken as flattering (even a complement) is that my problem or yours–insult wasted or compliment taken? I personally don’t feel I have a problem: it’s now added to my list of possible attributes.]

Adrian, why do I get the impression that you do not understand clearly my eagerness to be immersed in debate. Only restraint is that I prefer it to be constructive despite my being able to cripple with courtesy and kill with kindness. Hence, my ability to “man-up and venture beyond the confines of the socialist club” is not predicated upon your invitation or callous counters. I await any serious probe from you because more than likely my answers will provide insights even if not answers to some of the vexing problems we face such as issues on immigration policies and practices. On another point of interest, the pursuance of a PhD does not make me aloof neither do I expect to be privileged by you. If you knew of me or you by chance know persons that know me well, you shall also come to understand that I can be as virulent as you are on most occasions. Nevertheless, there is a time and place for everything under the sun. Just thought I would set you straight less you meet unfavourable comments from my over anxiety to be punitive in your case. I guess today that I am more available to go head-to-head with you. Please, do not be insulting when it comes to the blackness of a man. I am one of those whose pride is etched in that blackness — it makes me persevere and become even more resilient. LIB is capable of defending himself on that point.

I am not stuck with it, I used them exactly as an intended discription of you.

“shiftless” : I was quoting Koki Blackson Ocansey.

GCB indeed I know nothing of you, and so shall it remain.

I wasn’t intending on being insulting to LIB’s blackness, however I wanted to get a sense of his response to the use of “shiftless” and black when directed at him and juxtapose his response to the use of the same by another person to him of others. I must say that his initial response to me was some what consistent with the other response he gave to the other person using the same words.

Anyway GCB I have not change since July 13th

http://www.normangirvan.info/a-caricom-executive-mechanism-pj-patterson/#comment-4777

GCB also said:
[ Just thought I would set you straight less you meet unfavourable comments from my over anxiety to be punitive in your case.]

Set me straight. ha ha ha did you??? Something to look forward to. Not in the least intimidated by your “unfavourable comments” not even if they were made in person.

Your presence here today does not inspire me to take much note or to hastly gather questions to put to you. I am quite fond of walking past Ministers of Government as if they didn’t exist.

David could you visit Living in Barbados and borrow LIB piece he has titled “On The Trail Of Snark” It has the potential to be interesting thread. In the least I think it will further our understanding of The Jamaican LIB. lol!

@AH, you offer a quote but do you know Koki (sic)?

@AH, I repeat “the words shiftless and black have meaning and can be used very precisely”. They are often used to describe a class of person and are not disparaging, but a good description. The alley that you are in is that you made a contradictory statement. I never objected to any of the adjectives, but could not reconcile fastidious with shiftless. I could perhaps be fastidiously shiftless, or shiftlessly fastidious at a push; but fastidious shiftless don’t work. I certainly have been shiftless, and can be in certain situations.

Funny that you say you do not know Koki (sic) and would like to call the person “cookie” but know that the person in black.

Japanese attitudes to black people are not much different to anyone whom they see as outsiders. White people who are fluent in Japanese and have lived there for decades, even married Japanese are not treated as are nationals, ie face discrimination. On first meeting blacks can get better treatment from the Japanese merely because we too have black hair and dark eyes, while Europeans do not. Funny thing. Helps you think about racism and xenophobia differently.

Anyway, it’s a good day to be waiting, with most of the world is on holiday.

@David
“It calls for extraordinary patience and understanding but the end result is constructive.” [Amen!]
“BU has seen commenters who have stepped out of line and then sometimes with gentle persuasion felt the need to apologize.”[You know my view. I think the persuasion should sometimes not be gentle.]
“What BU would like to see is the day when opposing views can exist without the need to go ad hominem.”[Another ‘Amen!’]
“We are not quite there but we will not get there by avoidance or censorship.”[Again, you know my view. No problem on ‘avoidance’, but I think there is place for censorship, or if people prefer a ‘code of conduct’.]

I think some general life rules cannot be avoided. Attack as hard as you like on substance. But, once the line is crossed to attacks that are personal AND/OR unsubstantiated, then it’s ‘gloves off’, with or without an able and willing referee.

This may also be more proof that you are the one who often speaks on others behalf. Please tell us what is the likely opinion of the persons in the link below, of Kofi’s comment about their activity as captured in the picture? Complimentary or Not complimentary?

….and where you in agreement with him? lol!

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/photo.php?pid=2052617&id=500044021

@AH,
“What can we expect with “gloves off” from a retired graying old man? chuspe. “[No idea. Pray tell. Again, overloaded with adjectives that don’t work for me (not retired, shaved head, and not old–least ways in my eyes). ‘Bare knuckled’ not Queensbury rules, in the metaphorically appropriate sense for written interchange. Though I draw the line at profanity.]

“Liberals don’t know anything much about “gloves off” in any sense or application of the term. Are you a Liberal LIB?”[That’s not been my experience. Liberals (small and capital L) fight in different ways from other groups. With a capital L, never voted for them in my life, even when they got ‘muscalar’ and tagged up with the Labour Party in more recent times, and became LIB-LAB. (You may want to look at that coupling at various times during the past 110+ years. Sorry, if you don’t know that bit of British political history.)]

Anyway, we have happily (in my case) kept the audience amused (I hope) while the main event tunes up. It feels like being in “Waiting for Godot”. Dare I quip that we have been Holding the fort.

I really need to think about eating and stewed peas and rice is on the menu.

@AH, had I been you I would have acted with a bit more caution and at least sent the material by email, and you know my address. However, you have opened a door.

If you wish the discuss the comments with Kofi then I can certainly put the two of you in touch. On this blog if you would prefer. He is better versed that I in the niceties of English.

As Adrian is getting all too good at doing when the topic at hand dries up he invents a plot or searches for some plotters. As my blog has no spam filter I get all comments by email. So let’s do the blind test. Everyone who posts a comment can also copy to David’s email (if he would take that burden) and he and I can compare. Even Anonymous comments pass if they are not profane (and I have not attributed some to Sargeant as I did not get confirmation that the two cooments were his-that can be fixed). I hope all can read with Hinds ‘notes’ as guidance. I much prefer freedom of thought. If Adrian has a better blind test idea then let’s hear it. Now, will the author give us a few replies in this thread?

There you have it folks. Even an assumed lawyer friend of his cannot escape the Jamaican LIB’s willingness to put down people on this island.

Wuh I can no longer find Dennis Jones on Face book. ha ha ha ha has he restrict his profile from being search? is his account now only accessible to friends as it should have been in the first place? Did he perchance took the advise of a plebe like me? no way could this be the case. He is way to smart to be caught out like this. I am of the opinion that Kofi does not know the two ladies in the picture and of whom he referred to as “shiftless” blacks neither are they aware of what he wrote and more importantly to them what their “good” friend did not defend them on.

But LIB what if a snap shot of the page exist somewhere? then what? ha ha ha

I intend to find the persons in that picture and to ensure that they are aware of what was said of them by Kofi and you. I feel it a sense of duty to so do. lol!

Here is what the Council for Hemispheric Affairs had to say,although I think the topic header showcases what side of the ideology they are leaning towards even though the body of the article appears to be trying a balancing act on both sides of the immigration debate.

http://www.coha.org/2009/08/barbadian-first-policy-flogs-guyanese-in-barbados/

” “Barbadian first” policy flogs Guyanese in Barbados

The unraveling of political ties between the Caribbean nations of Guyana and Barbados has created heated dialogue after the compulsory deportation of Guyanese nationals from Barbados following the implementation of the “Barbadian First” amnesty law announced by the island’s Prime Minister David Thompson May 5. This amnesty measure resulted in the deportation of Guyanese to resolve the professed rising crime rates and poverty epidemic in Barbados. The 30th Conference of Heads of Government of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), which took place in Guyana’s capital of Georgetown at the beginning of the month, was originally slated to be the arena for finding a reasonable solution to Barbados’ steadily worsening social problems. For a number of years, a struggling economy and persisting racial tensions in Guyana has led to extensive job loss, a decreased standard of living, and continuous uncertainty in the minds of the Guyanese population.

When it comes to uncertainty, there should be none regarding the long time lack of good governance in Guyana ever since the Jagans were replaced by Bharrat Jagdeo after the regrettable passing of that great husband-and-wife team from the scene. Speaking about bad government, Barbados now finds that there is so much of it in Guyana that the consequences of it are transferred by Jagdeo to Thompson in Barbados, with every desperate Guyanan trying to make it to Bridgetown.

Its restlessness which has driven thousands of Guyanese to flee the country and head for CARICOM member Barbados, an island nation that has many more employment opportunities than Guyana and has experienced strong economic growth, creating what has been seen as an oasis of opportunity for fleeing migrants.

Terms of Amnesty in Barbados
Barbados formally enacted its amnesty provision on June 1. This provision dictated that all illegal CARICOM aliens who had been residing in Barbados prior to December 31, 1998 must normalize their status of residency within 6 months (starting June 1) or face deportation; any arriving after the 1998 date would be subject to immediate expulsion. This new law was the product of the Cabinet Subcommittee on Immigration that met in 2008 in Barbados. It decided that the flood of illegal immigrants was harmful to Barbadian society. The parameters of the legislation were broken down into a series of requirements. First, the individual needs to have been a resident of Barbados prior to December 31, 1998 and has to have lived in the country since December 31, 2005. Secondly, the individual needs to have proof of employment in Barbados and must have gone through a thorough background and security check. Lastly, the legislation stipulates that if an individual has three or more dependents, they will not qualify for automatic status. Failure to meet the criteria will result in immediate removal from Barbados.

Testy Guyanese-Barbadian Relations
The controversy between the local Guyanese population and Barbadian officials surrounds the large number of Guyanese immigrants facing deportation from Barbados due to the new amnesty law. Stabroek News reported that since the law was put into effect, 53 Guyanese immigrants have been removed from the country. As there are an estimated 34,000 Guyanese living on the island, the alarmingly high number of deportees has aroused concerns that the law specifically discriminates against Guyanese residents in Barbados.

The amnesty law raises serious questions pertaining to the place of origin, as the law only applies to alleged illegal immigrants from CARICOM countries. The newly enacted legislation also fails to regulate European residents who prolong their stay after supposedly entering the island for brief beach vacations. In the case of the Guyanese dwelling in Barbados, many do not meet the amnesty requirements and will be forced to leave, according to Guyana’s Honorary Consul to Barbados.

Soon after the amnesty law was first implemented, Guyanese sources charged that violations of privacy were committed as Barbadian immigration officials, in pre-dawn raids, entered the homes of suspected aliens between 3am and 6am. Guyanese residents accused the Barbadian officials’ that their unruly actions were motivated by racial factors singling out the growing Guyanese population on the island. Other offensive actions have included the looting of possessions of deported Guyanese, as well as bounties placed on the heads of Guyanese aliens turned over to the Barbadian immigration authorities. In addition, Barbadian officials were charged with the poor treatment of foreign nationals, which included designation of specific benches for Guyanese in the Barbados airport in an effort to single out illegal Guyanese refugees.

The clash between Guyana and Barbados has been ongoing for the past decade. At the time of the establishment of CARICOM in 1973, Guyana was expected to be at the forefront of the organization, as it was labeled the breadbasket of the Caribbean. However, poor economic management and failure to reap the advantages of the country’s numerous resources have prevented Guyana from achieving its lofty expectations. Presently, Barbados has become a leader in the CARICOM community, yet many countries in the Caribbean such as St. Lucia, St. Vincent, The Grenadines and Guyana have become frustrated over the issue of Barbadian leadership creating a rift in the multi-lateral relations of CARICOM.

CARICOM Conference Letdown
The building tensions which led up to the conference seemed to indicate that serious actions would result from the four day conference, but in fact, the meeting failed to yield any immediate positive results on the immigration hullabaloo. The lone accomplishment of the conference was that Prime Minister David Thompson agreed to investigate the weighty claims made by Guyana’s President Bharrat Jagdeo.

Barbadian Mentality
Thompson responded to critics by stating that the amnesty law has in no way been deliberately directed against Guyanese but that Guyanese are affected the most as they make up the majority of illegal aliens in the country. The Barbadian Prime Minister also reacted to local reports stating that only 4 Guyanese had been forcibly removed from the country and of those who had been removed, none have received the required deportation stamp on their passport. Since the enactment of Thompson’s “Barbadian First” policy, the island has received criticism from abroad alleging that the amnesty law is the continuation of his alleged homogeneity strategy.

Most Barbadians are in complete support of the new legislation as they feel that much of the reported crime and poverty plaguing the country is caused by illegal immigrants. However, they are in disagreement over the proper handling of the situation in reference to the pre-dawn raids. The general consensus among Barbadians appear to be that “Barbados is getting over-populated with Guyanese and if we allow them to keep coming into our country like this, we’re going to have problems in the next three years.” The Barbadian population has stated unequivocally that the law does not violate the aim of integration within CARICOM but rather that it is the right of their sovereign nation to make their own immigration laws.

Importance of the Guyanese in Barbados
Critics charge that Bajans (native Barbadians) have failed to recognize the importance of the Guyanese to the Barbadian economy in providing inexpensive labor. In a 2006 BBC interview, with then-Barbadian Prime Minister Owen Arthur, he stated the magnitude of Guyanese labor in the country resulted in the successful hosting of the World Cricket Cup in 2007. Their defenders say it should be noted that these unwanted immigrants are tackling the jobs that the Bajans feel are beneath themselves, doing necessary labor-intensive tasks which allow the Bajan economy to function to its fullest capacity.

Underlying hatred of Barbados?
Along with Barbados, Canada and Antigua have also conducted mass deportation of Guyanese. This fact has given rise to countless observations as to why there has been an enormous amount of Guyanese criticism of the amnesty law in Barbados and less resentment against other countries. The Guyanese anger is specifically directed against Prime Minister David Thompson and has not been targeted against any other Caribbean leader. The unbalanced image this portrays could prove to be very detrimental to the Guyanese abroad.

The crackdown on immigration has been seen as an act of concern for Bajan sovereignty, yet the repercussions from these immigration offenses could eventually damage the structure of governance in Barbados and its relations within CARICOM. The actions by the governments of Barbados and Guyana have done little to alleviate the social problems of each. Some outside observers maintain that the immigration measures taken by Barbados are debatable and a compulsory reevaluation needs to be taken to review the merit of the controversial legislation.”

The former Governor of the Central Bank,Sir Courtney Blackman,believes Barbados should enforce its immigration laws.

http://www.vob929.com/index.pl/latest?id=330602

“Former Central Bank Governor, Sir Courtney Blackman says Barbados is too small to allow unchecked illegal immigration.

According to Sir Courtney, the island should enforce its immigration laws while keeping the door open to illegal immigrants.

He says that island’s government is among the most humane in the world as it relates to migration.

Sir Courtney Blackman also called on the former Commonwealth Secretary General, Sir Sridath Ramphal to withdraw his comments that ethnic cleansing was being practiced in Barbados when it comes to the island’s new immigration policy. “

who wrotethat garbagr above.

Seems like it was taken straight from the starbroek and nation newspapers.