UK Population to grow 25%, Britain biggest country in Europe by 2050

Kohoutek

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/7916924/Britain-to-be-biggest-country-in-Europe-by-2050.html

Great for the economy and house prices. :beer:

Not so good for xenophobes and claustrophobics...:D

Why does a huge population make the economy better? In a country/planet with finite resources, a larger population makes people poorer in aggregate, not richer.

Procrastinator333

marklv wrote: »

You miss the point completely. I'm not saying immigrants are all awful people etc. Far from it, very far from it. But I don't see how mass immigration can help a country; it pushes wages down by increasing availability of labour and causes serious cultural and racial divisions when there were none before. What is the good of all this? Don't we have enough problems as it is in our country? (By the way Poles and other EU immigrants are not included in my definition of immigrants. I refer to outside EU immigration, other than perhaps Gypsies).

But let me guess, you also want lower prices and higher quality?

Increase competition drives growth, invention and a dynamic economy.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

marklv wrote: »

But I don't see how mass immigration can help a country; it pushes wages down by increasing availability of labour

False.

There is almost no evidence of negative financial impacts to the native born population from immigration. It is a fact that immigrants pay more into society than they take out, and contribute to economic growth.

In fact, regarding wages the evidence supports the opposite conclusion to what you claim, for all but the very lowest paid immigration actually helps to increase wages, and for the very lowest paid the difference is less than one pence per hour.


To put their findings into perspective,
Dustmann et al. (2007)33 look at the wage
impact of immigration within the context of
overall wage growth for different groups of
workers.

Over the period considered, the real
hourly wage grew by an average of 18 pence per
year at the first decile. Without immigration,
this figure would have been 0.7 pence higher.

Further up the wage distribution, immigration
added about 1.5 pence per year to real hourly
wage growth at the median, and 2.3 pence at the
ninth decile.

The authors conclude that the wage
effects at the low end of the wage distribution
are “very modest”. The paper also notes that the
National Minimum Wage (NMW) has played
an important role in insulating the wages of lowpaid
workers from a larger impact.

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm72/7237/7237.pdf

and causes serious cultural and racial divisions when there were none before.What is the good of all this? Don't we have enough problems as it is in our country?

Seriously?

You really think we didin't have "serious cultural divisions" until immigrants came along?

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Our entire history is full of us fighting ourselves..... And divisive tensions remain until this day within the native born population.

(By the way Poles and other EU immigrants are not included in my definition of immigrants. I refer to outside EU immigration, other than perhaps Gypsies).

How nice of you to differentiate in your racism.... Those productive Polish chappies will be delighted to know you don't consider them unwelcome.

Particularly as they subsidise so much of the native born population...

• A8 immigrants who arrived after EU enlargement in 2004, and who have at least one year of residence – and are therefore legally eligible to claim benefits – are about 60% less likely than natives to receive state benefits or tax credits, and to live in social housing.
• Comparing the net fiscal contribution of A8 immigrants with that of individuals born in the UK, in each fiscal year since enlargement in 2004, A8 immigrants made a positive contribution to public finance.
• In the latest fiscal year, 2008/09, A8 immigrants paid 37% more in direct or indirect taxes than was spent on public goods and services which they received. This is even more remarkable because the UK has been running a budget deficit over the last few years.

The study also shows that on average, A8 workers have a better educational background than UK-born workers, but receive lower wages ¬– especially in the period immediately after coming to the UK. Despite this disparity, A8 immigrants are net contributors to the public finances.

The main reason for this is that they have a higher rate of labour force participation (increasing the number of fiscal contributors), and make less use of benefits and public services.


For example, in 2008/09, A8 immigrants represented 0.91% of the total UK population, but contributed 0.96% of total tax receipts and accounted for only 0.6% of total expenditures.


Professor Christian Dustmann, director of CReAM and co-author of the study, said: “Our research contributes important facts to the debate on the costs and benefits of A8 immigration. It shows that A8 immigrants are far less likely to live in social housing or to claim benefits. We were surprised about the large net fiscal contribution made by these immigrants, given their relatively low wage position in the UK labour market.


“A8 immigrants are on average more educated than natives and figures show that they experience rapid wage growth during their stay in the UK. We should therefore expect their tax payments to increase considerably over the next few years.”

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/0907/09072302

Procrastinator333

I don't think such a constructive post will help Hamish. My guess is he won't reply in this thread, but will just continue to post his drivel in other threads.

At least this will be a nice reference to point him to.

Great post.

kabayiri

Lets be honest here.

Immigration will make some business people wealthy. This is the real reason they want it, not some utopian vision of the future.

It's pretty simple. If you are only willing to take 15 an hour for a job, and a boss can get an immigrant keen to do the work for less, the boss will take it.

The idea that the UK infrastructure is geared up to cope with the numbers being projected is complete nuts. Rail, roads, power and water infrastructure would all need serious amounts of investment to cope, and in case people hadn't noticed....we are a little bit broke at the moment.

marklv

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

But let me guess, you also want lower prices and higher quality?

Increase competition drives growth, invention and a dynamic economy.

I don't want competition if it results in the ruin of my country.

Malcolm.

sabretoothtigger wrote: »

Definitely sustainable and to Britains benefit. Spain has a problem with depopulation and is not any richer for it.
We throw away more then we require to grow, the tragedy is that no one needs to starve

Your argument relies on false premise. Current wealth and sustainability are not the same.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

My guess is he won't reply in this thread, but will just continue to post his drivel in other threads.

Racists and Xenophobes are all the same, fundamentally they are cowards.....

Pathetic incompetent losers who cannot muster the courage to accept responsibility for their own failures in life, and so desperately search for someone else to blame. Scumbags, the lot of them.

The evidence is absolutely clear, immigration is a massive benefit to this country. It increases wealth and drives up wages. It helps the economy grow and creates jobs.

We need more of it, not less.

Kohoutek

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

False.

There is almost no evidence of negative financial impacts to the native born population from immigration. It is a fact that immigrants pay more into society than they take out, and contribute to economic growth.

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm72/7237/7237.pdf

There are official reports and official reports.....

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeconaf/82/82.pdf

Immigration has become highly significant to the UK economy.....However, we have found no evidence for the argument, made by the Government, business and many others, that net immigration—immigration minus emigration— generates significant economic benefits for the existing UK population.

marklv

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

False.

There is almost no evidence of negative financial impacts to the native born population from immigration. It is a fact that immigrants pay more into society than they take out, and contribute to economic growth.

In fact, regarding wages the evidence supports the opposite conclusion to what you claim, for all but the very lowest paid immigration actually helps to increase wages, and for the very lowest paid the difference is less than one pence per hour.


To put their findings into perspective,
Dustmann et al. (2007)33 look at the wage
impact of immigration within the context of
overall wage growth for different groups of
workers.

Over the period considered, the real
hourly wage grew by an average of 18 pence per
year at the first decile. Without immigration,
this figure would have been 0.7 pence higher.

Further up the wage distribution, immigration
added about 1.5 pence per year to real hourly
wage growth at the median, and 2.3 pence at the
ninth decile.

The authors conclude that the wage
effects at the low end of the wage distribution
are “very modest”. The paper also notes that the
National Minimum Wage (NMW) has played
an important role in insulating the wages of lowpaid
workers from a larger impact.

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm72/7237/7237.pdf



Seriously?

You really think we didin't have "serious cultural divisions" until immigrants came along?

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Our entire history is full of us fighting ourselves..... And divisive tensions remain until this day within the native born population.




How nice of you to differentiate in your racism.... Those productive Polish chappies will be delighted to know you don't consider them unwelcome.

Particularly as they subsidise so much of the native born population...

• A8 immigrants who arrived after EU enlargement in 2004, and who have at least one year of residence – and are therefore legally eligible to claim benefits – are about 60% less likely than natives to receive state benefits or tax credits, and to live in social housing.
• Comparing the net fiscal contribution of A8 immigrants with that of individuals born in the UK, in each fiscal year since enlargement in 2004, A8 immigrants made a positive contribution to public finance.
• In the latest fiscal year, 2008/09, A8 immigrants paid 37% more in direct or indirect taxes than was spent on public goods and services which they received. This is even more remarkable because the UK has been running a budget deficit over the last few years.

The study also shows that on average, A8 workers have a better educational background than UK-born workers, but receive lower wages ¬– especially in the period immediately after coming to the UK. Despite this disparity, A8 immigrants are net contributors to the public finances.

The main reason for this is that they have a higher rate of labour force participation (increasing the number of fiscal contributors), and make less use of benefits and public services.


For example, in 2008/09, A8 immigrants represented 0.91% of the total UK population, but contributed 0.96% of total tax receipts and accounted for only 0.6% of total expenditures.


Professor Christian Dustmann, director of CReAM and co-author of the study, said: “Our research contributes important facts to the debate on the costs and benefits of A8 immigration. It shows that A8 immigrants are far less likely to live in social housing or to claim benefits. We were surprised about the large net fiscal contribution made by these immigrants, given their relatively low wage position in the UK labour market.


“A8 immigrants are on average more educated than natives and figures show that they experience rapid wage growth during their stay in the UK. We should therefore expect their tax payments to increase considerably over the next few years.”

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/0907/09072302

Your pseudo-economic arguments in favour of immigration cut no ice with me. You can spout all this pseudo-academic drivel all day to me but it doesn't mean anything. The fact remains that pumping more people into the country will take away jobs from the native workforce. And the majority of people in this nation do not want any further immigration - how do you answer that? This talk of yours about cultural divisions among ourselves is purely idiotic, as it's obvious to anyone with a brain cell that one thing is difference between Europeans and another one is the much deeper social, religious, cultural and ethnic differences between Europeans and non-Europeans.

See this for enlightenment and forget your pseudo-intellectual garbage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DANUGbwmgE

Also see this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnJcsQYZEGU&feature=fvw