Careless Tories!

[Andy_Faber]

The difference of course being that pensioners, such as yourself, have "paid into the system" for 50 odd years before becoming GDP per capita negative in later life - so they have credit in the bank so to speak.

Imported labour or refugees don't come with this enhanced economic tag. Indeed much of the earnings of imported labour is often remitted back to country of origin (nothing wrong with that) and so doesn't enter into the earnings multiplier computations.

On a purely economic level therefore migrant labour (permanent or transient) is not all it's cracked up to be. It also often comes with baggage - eg economically inactive family members. The positives of getting jobs done that our own entitled domestic workforce prefer not to do does offset this downside, but is it enough in the round?

I am deliberately only talking economics here. The soft humanitarian aspects cannot be measured on a logical scale. Some may value humanitarian decisions over economic ones. Personally I don't, you'll be surprised to learn 😀. So each to their own - there is no right answer.

Agreeing totally. The ‘economic benefit of immigration’ is, overall, a fallacy, pushed by those who don’t understand the economics or chose to ignore them

[Trickytreesreds]

Good God…I have never felt so insulted in my life!

go out more, it'll even out

[ramAnag]

go out more, it'll even out

Lol…tap in…but you took it well.

[Trickytreesreds]

I do take your point, although I’d query the ‘50 odd years’, but, imo, the migrant issue isn’t going to go away. It is only going to increase as a result of war, famine, poverty and, one imagines, increasing numbers related to climate change.
There but for the accident of birth go you and I…we were both fortunate enough to be born to good and caring parents in a (relatively) stable society. Not everyone is and it requires some joined up thought from the ‘wealthy world’ to deal with the problem not more and more division.
I’m sure I’m guilty of being idealistic, in the same way as your economic stance may appear callous and Tricky’s thoughtless…but the UK is not alone in having a problem with immigration, indeed others in Europe take far more and, as ever, the better off and wealthier countries need to work together to solve the problem rather than demonise the poorest.

I really don’t know what the acceptable alternative is and it doesn’t seem to have worked out too badly for Australia and the USA.

Yes and others in Europe have realised their error and are slamming the door shut fast. Germany/Denmark/Sweden. Even the EU is now muttering a Rwanda plan. Half of what we get now, is because Europe is saying no and they look for the next sucker.
Our quality of life is falling through the floor fast, like other places in europe has
I know its convinient to just blame the Tories, but the reality is the West is failing at this. Amazing how they steer clear of the rich middle east countries.

The USA? I think you need to educate yourself chap. It is seriously falling apart there. The left allowed it, the south rebelled and passed them on to the left areas.
NEW YORK ALONE- The 2024-25 Executive Budget Financial Plan indicates the State plans to spend $4.3 billion between State Fiscal Year (SFY) 2022-23 through SFY 2025-26 for emergency spending related to people seeking asylum in the United States. Emergency spending for asylum seekers totaled $713.0 million through March 31, 2024.
Who is suffering in New York? Yep, it;'s the legal poor migrant communities, who have seen their shelters/ food banks/ housing disappear over night. You may not like my videos, but you really should do some digging yourself.

One for Maddy, seeing as he seems to not mind the migration. Seeing as Gert has risen through the power bands in Holland , is everything ok there?
The Morrocan drug gangs are now said to be bigger than the Italian mafia and Antwerp the drug base of Europe.

Immigration comes with positives and negatives.
As it stands the negatives by far out weigh the positives. Both economically and socially. Crime/ freedom of speech/ housing/ health / services are imploding.

The draw bridge needs raing fast, some breathing time gained and a re think.

[Geoff Parkstone]

I really don’t know what the acceptable alternative is and it doesn’t seem to have worked out too badly for Australia and the USA.

I'm not sure the Abos or Redskins, as indigenous populace, respectively, would agree....

[ramAnag]

I'm not sure the Abos or Redskins, as indigenous populace, respectively, would agree....

It was a tongue in cheek comment and - although I might have worded it differently - I entirely agree, but the point was that two of the wealthiest and most successful nations on earth have been built virtually entirely on immigrants.

[swaledale]

Rubbish. We have an obligation to our own, as does every other country in the world.
Exactly where is the sense in flooding more and more people in for negative benefit, which ultimately makes everyone poorer?
This is a downward spiral, because as a country , we have failed to invest in our people with education and training.
It was made easier for industry to import labour and now we are paying the price.
The fact remains, not everyone that comes into the UK contributes for the better of the nation
Import so much cheap labour, they arrive with dependents and give next to nothing back, campared to what they take out.
It isn't tocket science

Mm so all the research which shows that immigrants make a net gain to the countries finances are wrong then? I mean they only use evidence rather than your bigoted, simplistic take on things!

The findings of research done by University College London show that immigrants to the UK who arrived since 2000, and for have made consistently positive fiscal contributions regardless of their area of origin. Between 2001 and 2011 recent immigrants from the A10 countries contributed to the fiscal system about 12% more than they took out, with a net fiscal contribution of about £5 billion. At the same time the net fiscal contributions of recent European immigrants from the rest of the EU totalled £15bn, with fiscal payments about 64% higher than transfers received. Immigrants from outside the EU countries made a net fiscal contribution of about £5.2 billion, thus paying into the system about 3% more than they took out. In contrast, over the same period, natives made an overall negative fiscal contribution of £616.5 billion. The net fiscal balance of overall immigration to the UK between 2001 and 2011 amounts therefore to a positive net contribution of about £25 billion, over a period over which the UK has run an overall budget deficit.

[Trickytreesreds]

It was a tongue in cheek comment and - although I might have worded it differently - I entirely agree, but the point was that two of the wealthiest and most successful nations on earth have been built virtually entirely on immigrants.

mmmmmmmmmm, morally wrong for the natives, but both areas were virtually empty and colonisation ensued.
I don't think Europe and the UK is exactly a comparison, seeing as 745 million live here
So how many is enough? When the economy collapses or fighting breaks out?

[swaledale]

Agreeing totally. The ‘economic benefit of immigration’ is, overall, a fallacy, pushed by those who don’t understand the economics or chose to ignore them

Mm I do think that making such a simplistic statement about a complicated matter which you clearly don't fully understand is just making yourself look foolish. There are many benefits and admittedly some downsides to immigration, but taking simple demographics into account, by and large immigration is compensating for the low birth rate which under the current economic model, which you and GP seem to subscribe to, is rather important for it to work.

GP's polemic is wrong on many counts, for a start research shows and I quote from that done by University College London

The net fiscal balance of overall immigration to the UK between 2001 and 2011 amounts to a positive net contribution of about £25 billion, over a period over which the UK has run an overall budget deficit.

[swaledale]

Agreeing totally. The ‘economic benefit of immigration’ is, overall, a fallacy, pushed by those who don’t understand the economics or chose to ignore them

Mm I do think that making such a simplistic statement about a complicated matter which you clearly don't fully understand is just making yourself look foolish. There are many benefits and admittedly some downsides to immigration, but taking simple demographics into account, by and large immigration is compensating for the low birth rate which under the current economic model, which you and GP seem to subscribe to, is rather important for it to work.

Immigration has also made a net positive fiscal contribution to the UK, i.e. immigrants contribute more than they remove.


On the question of Asylum seekers, they represent a tiny proportion of all immigration, if your proud of lacking empathy and expressing bigoted and inhumane views, then in my eyes your a ****!