[Closed] Recent immigrants make net contribution

I hope you explained that having put in all that effort civilizing the world and taming the savages, it's now right and proper that we take a bit of a rest and let the colonials pay back some of their debt.

+1

We didn't beat the fuzzy wuzzies just so we'd have to work for a living!

None of us really 'native' to the UK; go back far enough, and we're all immigrants - in the late 19th century my something*great-granddad was an Irish immigrant and married an Italian immigrant.

My ancestors can apparently be traced back to a luscious garden somewhere.

bails - Member

me and my gf have been there plenty of times without being groomed

that's what you think... 😯

Well quite. But that's immigration over the last 14 years. What about all the immigrants that arrived in the wake of the Second World War? You know, that little period of 54 years prior to 1999?

Yes, a large amount of them are hard workers and undoubtedly do contribute; but where I live, there's an awful lot who don't work and are quite happy to sit on their arses claiming all the benefits that they can, whilst at the same time running criminal rackets such as drug dealing, extortion, fraud, prostitution and child exploitation.

And another thing (and I know that they aren't your words), what exactly constitutes a "UK Native?" please?

This is an ongoing arguement for those that live amongst it versus those that live away from where these problems occurr.

In my view being in the midst of it it is correct that there are problems and anyone arguing against that is somewhat naive.

First generation Indian subcontinent immigrants were vital and have worked damn hard for what they have, the offspring were lucky in that the times they were born into were generally speaking good times economically (look at pensioners now as a whole, those who worked are reaping the rewards now in that their property has risen massively in value, availability to make good from investment and had high interest rates to top up savings)however this in my eyes has led to a split where a large percentage have carried on working hard while a fai amount have done little to contribute. However the third generation seem to expect everything on a plate and want it without working, hence the higher than average levels of drug, extortion, financial crime surrounding these areas. It does exist and its is a problem.

However we also need to look at home too and it works the same for uk citizens who are also massively happy to sit at home and bleed the system.

Integration hasnt worked in the whole in the NW for example, and i imagine its only a matter of time before the riots as seen in the likes of Oldham are repeated. There is very little love for immigrants in these areas, and that is from a mixed demographic too.

But while its hidden out of the way in NW towns it doesnt matter, so long as the cotswolds, oxfordhire and berkshire folk are releived of the problem then it doesnt matter.

For me, im adding to the problem as we are moving well out of it as its not somewhere i want to bring up kids and i cant even afford to insure a sensible car due to the effects of the above (£2600 for a diesel estate is crazy) and its just going to get worse and more segregated.

That said though, i wholly agree that the new wave of immigrants is a positive and we would struggle without them, though we need to be careful not to allow a repeat of the above with this era and also do something to change our own blood into hard working folk, factories running at break even, pits reopened, anything to bring back a sense of value and community which has been lost here

However the third generation seem to expect everything on a plate and want it without working, hence the higher than average levels of drug, extortion, financial crime surrounding these areas. It does exist and its is a problem.

Are they still immigrants by the third generation? Surely this is an issue with poverty, rather than immigration?

[i]However the third generation seem to expect everything on a plate and want it without working[/i]

how can the third generation still be immigrants? Surely at that point it just becomes 'they're not the same race as me'?

from what I've you've described the 'third generation' have assimilated all of the 'British' culture that they can and are behaving in the same way as their anglo-saxon peers?

Integration hasnt worked in the whole in the NW for example

There is very little love for immigrants in these areas, and that is from a mixed demographic too.

A mixed demographic of racists?

http://www.livescience.com/18132-intelligence-social-conservatism-racism.html

dont argue with stupid people guys, they will just bring you down to their level and beat you through experience.
third generation immigrants ffs, that is the stupidest thing ive ever read on here

[quote> http://www.livescience.com/18132-intelligence-social-conservatism-racism.html

dont argue with stupid people guys, they will just bring you down to their level and beat you through experience.

That article explains a lot about the comments on my local newspaper's website.

third generation immigrants ffs, that is the stupidest thing ive ever read on here

Indeed. My parents are Oirish, the came here in the late 60's, but my great grandmother (my mum's mum) is English, what does that make me?

Indeed. My parents are Oirish, the came here in the late 60's, but my great grandmother (my mum's mum) is English, what does that make me?

Bloody immigrants! Go back to, erm...

In England, you're a second generation Irish immigrant so are just lucky to be here but reasonably hard working. In Ireland, you're a third generation English immigrant and therefore a layabout drug dealer. Hope this helps.

The comments on the BBC article say it all really. A new report appears demonstrating the net financial contribution immigrants make and the comments section is full of "Ahh but..."

Ahh but...

All those immigrants paying tax are putting a British person on the dole

Ahh but...

The NHS is bursting and our hospitals are full(this comment seemingly ignores the absolutely massive contribution immigrant workers make to the NHS)

Ahh but...

What about the increase in population Britain is full (conveniently ignoring the fact that population growth is generally strongly linked with economic growth

Immigrants are effectively subsidising the "native" population but the main concern appears to be that the queue at the doctor's surgery is a bit longer

Given our demographic profile, we will continue to need to attract immigrants into the UK. Immigration has been a net positive to the UK (horrible term) in the past. But that is not the same thing a saying that it has been well managed and that it cannot be improved in the future. In fact the sooner to debate moves on to how to we manage immigration rather than is it good or not, the better IMO.

Don't suppose many are against immigration completely - just that some are a net cost. I work with a lot of Indians in IT and they're here because of their talent, not sure if they're taking jobs away from Brits but probably just lowering wages, by increasing supply, rather than leaving people unemployed. IT is tougher to work in now but that's really to do with more work being done offshore than immigration.

Not sure immigration affects house prices and social housing availability though. I guess it does push up prices of expensive houses as not so many of those and a few rich Russians can have impact on those but not sure that really matters.

Anyway, certainly need immigration to deal with our aging population - though not sure if this means we need the population to keep growing in a sort of pyramid scheme way to keep us all healthy and wealthy?!

mudshark - Member

Anyway, certainly need immigration to deal with our aging population - though not sure if this means we need the population to keep growing in a sort of pyramid scheme way to keep us all healthy and wealthy?!

What we basically want is for people to come here and work while they're young, then leave the country when they're old. Which I reckon we can probably encourage by being horribly racist to them.

Some of you guys don't see to have read or understood this report properly, I'm also going to play devils advocate....just because I never like agreeing with the Singletrack massive.

[img] [/img]

Non-EEA immigrants = bad

Non professional EU immigrants = potentially bad

The net contributors from Europe have been professionals, who would probably get a work visa if they had to follow some of the older international requirements anyway.

If there hadn't been a crash in 2007/2008 I would have been interested to see whether the EEA line kept rising whilst the British and Non-EEU lines kept crashing? Perhaps employers are now increasingly able to select from an experienced crop of elite EU nationals who are able to move around within the EU, taking jobs where they see fit - maybe that would actually support the line that they are taking UK jobs.

I work with a lot of Indians in IT and they're here because of their talent, not sure if they're taking jobs away from Brits but probably just lowering wages, by increasing supply, rather than leaving people unemployed.

This is POSSIBLY a problem is academic science research as well, I have a Spanish post doc friend at a London university. Her departments head just recruits Spanish speakers, that is it. British graduates are having a hard enough time as it without junior positions (technician and assistant) being open to experienced Spanish scientists - it's all very well claiming "oh it must be because they are harder working" - it isn't it's because they're more experienced and fleeing a bad economic climate. The net effect of this is that we won't train up as many British graduates who won't leave the country to go back to Spain once the smoke has cleared.

Also don't murder me for disagree with you all - I just wanted to encourage a bit more debate instead of this thread being pages of totally passée/boring Daily Heil bashing.

ignoring the immigrant/native* angle for a moment.

isn't the very idea that people on low earnings are somehow a 'drain on society' itself disgusting?

people on low wages might be cleaners, care workers, hospital staff, volunteers, teaching assistants, etc. etc. Y'know, those little people that society actually depends on far more than we realise.

Until we develop Russel Brand's Doctrine a little more, the world / Country is dependent upon people who scrape a modest living doing the poorly paid jobs that no-one wants to do, or doing something purely for the love/sense of duty.

we owe low-earners our thanks, respect, a pay rise, and a few days off. it might be nice if we could stop picking on them for being brown aswell.

and breathe.

(*my Grandad was an immigrant, from Kashmir)

ignoring the immigrant/native* angle for a moment.

isn't the very idea that people on low earnings are somehow a 'drain on society' itself disgusting?

Yeah I agree. Being hardcore labour it smacks of a kind of corporatist attitude towards workers. "You lazy bastards don't deserve to complain about your lot, look... these new highly educated foreign workers who I don't have to pay to train are a net contributor.... you aren't....stick with you're crap blue collar job we don't want to train you to aid social mobility". It strikes me as free market arrogance.

Sadly this study will do nothing to convince ignorant racists - they're ignorant...

You can point out as many facts as you like to ignorant racists IME, they tend to stick to their dogma regardless

@Tom, falling under the 1.0 line doesn't automatically make them undesirable- since as you can see, UK residents also fall under that line. (and further under) It's normal for people in the UK, on average, to pay less in direct taxes than they receive in direct benefits. The mistake is to think that the tax you pay represents your whole contribution to the UK or to the economy.

One example, returning to a comment I made earlier- international students pay tens of thousands of pounds in fees, plus living costs... But typically their only tax contribution is VAT. Say 300000 non-EU students (according to UKCISA), 30000 each in fees (a low estimate I think) and you get something with a £ at the start and a lot of zeroes at the end

International students are great yes. I'm going for a different point which I think you missed a little.

But I would say we'd be royally ****ed if everyone was falling under the 1.0 line.... as it was.... immigrants were subsidizing British people at one point.

My real point is this....is subsidizing British workers (and I mean 2nd and 3rd generation British Indians etc) benefits with the contributions of other recent immigrants a good thing if we really want to encourage long term UK prosperity? Are these people staying in the UK or are they passing through for 5/6 years then going back home? Is it harming the social mobility of longer residing groups? I don't think this report addresses any of these issues - it's a report that will be ignored by racists but also used to justify any criticism of the immigration debate by certain leftie types with a dose of confirmation bias.

I've had little time to think about the report (just had a quick glance through the original) but it raises more questions for me than it answers.

Tom_W1987 - Member

But I would say we'd be royally **** if everyone was falling under the 1.0 line

Nah, I do not agree, again just looks at people as their value in direct taxation. Remember that every pound of corporation tax was also raised by a person, whether it be buying or producing a product. And the output of many of those workers is of more direct benefit to the country, the value of a public employee isn't the tax they pay frinstance.

Also, it's not clear from that graphic whether it's a fully inclusive representation of tax- does it include NI, VAT on purchases etc? Income tax only makes about 30% of the national revenue IIRC.

I'd like to see that graph extended further back, let's say to ww2, see what we see there. I reckon (but do not know) that we'd see the sub-1.0 trend is absolutely normal.

I'm not an economist so you're probably right but that's besides the point (though I do think if we were all net takers of benefits even if these graphs have taken vat etc into account).

Let's pick holes in this report and think about it critically instead of just calling each other names, shall we?

The students i work with in Eastern Europe are very educated, bright young people.
Any company here would be lucky to have them.

I'm certainly no economist, so this is a genuine question...

What effect on our economy, does migrant workers sending a good percentage of their wages back to eastern Europe/****stan etc, have?

The obvious one, is that it's not money being spent in this country, but does it have a big overall effect? And it does happen - a lot.

Tried to have a conversation about this with someone in work. I gave up at "I'm not racist but..."

*facepalm*

The study simply confirms the bleeding obvious, ie, people don't immigrate to the UK to live a life on benefits. They see it as an opportunity to work and in most cases to earn considerably more than in their native country, the result, unsurprisingly, is that they tend to contribute significantly more than they receive in social provisions.

What I haven't heard reported is whether the study mentions the aggregate effect of "recent immigration". Youth unemployment in the UK stands just shy of one million. Recruiting skilled adult foreign workers can only help to maintain this scandalously high figure. So whilst the skilled adult foreign worker might not represent a "drain" on public finances, their indirect effect certainly can.

And it should be remembered that there will be a disproportionate amount of second and third generation immigrant children among the one million youth unemployed, due to the social and economic disadvantages they are much more likely to suffer.

Furthermore the study doesn't appear to address the effect on wages caused by recent immigration to the UK. I don't think there is much doubt that it has contributed to wages lower than they would otherwise be, and lower wages contribute to more pressure on public finances. Maybe not to in the case of single/unmarried immigrants who can manage on slightly lower wages, but in the case of UK nationals and residents who have families to support.

No, as previously mentioned, this study won't do much to dissuade ignorant bigots and racists from their nonsensical bollox that immigrants come to the UK to scrounge and skive, but sadly it will also further encourage those enthusiastically support the disastrous EU open door/uncontrolled immigration policy, with total disregard to the effect it has on UK nationals, and residents who aren't UK-nationals, whatever their race or ethnicity.

Good points Ernie. But dont you think that (perhaps) we are seeing a different form of income re-distribution that LWers should be fine with. We are part of a bigger community (EU) now which has seen massive re-distribution of income from its richer members to (some) of its poorer ones. True (until recently and under a new government 😉 ) we have seen the opposite trends within the UK but that is to miss a much wider issue.

Lets take E Europe. Over the past decade our GDP per capita has grown at 4% pa (ie the UK). In Czech, Hungary, and Poland the growth rates have been 14% and 12% respectively. So the less well off in our new, wider community are benefitting while the richer ones are not. A socialist dream.

So once we step out of our national, domestic mindsets we can see a major re-distribution of income which will also continue over the next decade. The "poor" are benefitting and the "rich" are losing out.

To rail against this is rather like a member of the aristocracy or the urban middle classes complaining if lower income groups in the UK were benefitting from current trends or a well educated and hard working member of the working class was "stealing" their middle class jobs - its just that the terms of reference are different.

ernie_lynch - Member

Youth unemployment in the UK stands just shy of one million. Recruiting skilled adult foreign workers can only help to maintain this scandalously high figure.

Does it though? The jobs we recruit skilled adult foreign nationals into aren't the ones that school-leavers would be applying for, generally. What we seem to lack is good youth jobs, and... less good youth jobs. And anecdotally it's hard to get british kids into the rubbish first jobs.

TheArtistFormerlyKnownAsSTR - Member
I'm certainly no economist, so this is a genuine question...

What effect on our economy, does migrant workers sending a good percentage of their wages back to eastern Europe/****stan etc, have?

The obvious one, is that it's not money being spent in this country, but does it have a big overall effect? And it does happen - a lot.

It reduces the multiplier effect in the UK (and increases it wherever it is sent).

Northwind - Member
What we seem to lack is good youth jobs, and... less good youth jobs. And anecdotally it's hard to get british kids into the rubbish first jobs.

^^^ This or dreaming of becoming famous in 5 mins by being in X-factshite audition. 😯

The jobs we recruit skilled adult foreign nationals into aren't the ones that school-leavers would be applying for, generally.

Well I would have thought that was obvious. As is the the likelihood that employers will often find skilled foreign nationals, desperate for work which pays more than equivalent work in their native country, more attractive than unskilled UK school leavers. And also obvious, is the solution. Employers have a tremendous ability to adapt to the prevailing labour market conditions.

It makes sense btw to apply a similar logic to local communities. Working people after all are more than just a commodity, they are human beings with local roots, family, friends, and connections. Chasing jobs might well fulfill the needs of the market but it does not necessarily fulfill the needs of happy and content human beings.

look at the recent issues in Oxford.

i) its an 'all EU immigration' calculation of benefit - so it put the Polish shop workers together with the Swiss bankers (and I'm not sure where it puts Ireland, as although technically they're EU migrants the common travel area has a much longer history)

ii) its a 'so far' calculation rather than a prediction - so does not take into account the long term effects, such as future educational/medical/pension liabilities, all of which are obviously very dependent on whether people who moved here in the flush of youth stay here for a few years, settle and have kids or return to 'the old country'.

I'm not totally anti-immigration, but I am for selective immigration. The population of the UK currently stands at about 63 million - it's bursting at the seams, there are millions out of work, the NHS and other services are on their uppers yet still we are happy to let in criminals and asylum seekers who have no right to be here and then spend an aeon sending them back or putting them in OUR prisons.

At the current rate, estimates are that the population of the UK will be 80 million by 2020 - how is that going to help the country to function better?

+1

ever wondered why the countryside is so crowded? house prices so high? Roads so clogged? England is the most densely populated country in Europe (Ive specifically left out Scotland as whilst it is wonderfully empty its not much use to those of us squeezed into the SE, having to pretend the Surrey Hills are a great unspoiled tract of countryside etc).

Immigrants may well works their socks off but over crowding is the issue for me. No wonder so many people want to live in France / Spain / Italy / Canada / New Zealand etc - all have much lower densities than us and that has a direct bearing on quality of life.

Leaving aside the fact that the UK is not the most densely populated place in Europe, what is the point? When you flyover the UK the most striking things is the amount of sheer open space in our green and pleasant land! Are you sure of your causation links?

This is not a bad read IMO

http://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/fiscal-impact-immigration-uk

the UK is not the most densely populated place in Europe,

But England is. and all that greeness? its not really open countryside is it - find me somewhere where you are more than a mile in any direction from a road, a house, a pylon, a village? Never mind some $hite commuter town and a motorway. Not many such spots in England are there?

I accept my views on countryside are a bit extreme but with the coalition all set to allow much more house building in the countryside its just going to get worse. We need space, proper green open space. Thats all.

hh45 - Member

But England is.

The Netherlands are apparently.

But if you take the most populated parts of Belgium and just don't count the emptier bits, for some arbitrary reason, then its population goes up too.

I found it was Gibraltar and the Vatican City - read into that what you want!!

I dont think stopping immigration will transform the South into beautiful countryside with no houses, villages, roads or pylons and a massive increase in open space- do you?

........ over crowding is the issue for me.

But you have openly endorsed the comment : [i]"we are happy to let in criminals and asylum seekers who have no right to be here"[/i]

Which suggests that if they are not "criminals and asylum seekers" you wouldn't have a problem with them. And that overcrowding isn't the issue for you.

BTW I can understand why you might have a problem with criminals but what have you got against asylum seekers ?

hh45 - Member
ever wondered why the countryside is so crowded? house prices so high? Roads so clogged? England is the most densely populated country in Europe (Ive specifically left out Scotland as whilst it is wonderfully empty its not much use to those of us squeezed into the SE, having to pretend the Surrey Hills are a great unspoiled tract of countryside etc).

Why didn't you leave out London with its 4500 people/km2 versus the English average of 383 people/km2?

And why isn't Scotland's sparseness useful? You could move for that better quality of life you talk about.

The young Lithuanian woman who got the job at the hot food counter in my local butchers (largely by being the only person to apply for it) has made a net contribution to my enjoyment of lunchtime.

I found it was Gibraltar and the Vatican City - read into that what you want!!

I haven't got an issue with people coming to the UK and the free movement of people across the EU, maybe one day i'll be riding the trails of North Italy or southern France. What I DO have an issue with is this bloody Government not putting in the resources and cutting council budgets THEN blaming it on the past government as a means and vehicle to pass business onto their chums.