Immigrants & Benefits

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

It would surely be difficult for NIESR to measure anyway, considering this is the only period of low growth we've had on the end of major immigration inflows. What are they comparing it against? And how do they know the massive amounts of stimulus are not part of the "indications"?

Hmm, I wonder who to believe?

Trained economists at NIESR

or....

Someone arguing against immigration on a message board.

Gosh, tough choice.:(

CLAPTON

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

And how else do you explain the mechanism for that?

Lets try breaking it down....

the interaction between migrant inflows and GDP emerges as positive,

Self explanatory

indicating that during periods of lower growth, migrant inflows are associated with ... slower [dole] claimant growth than would otherwise have occurred

So while in a recession or low growth period, unemployment will obviously rise, it would rise by more if migrants were not coming here.

In other words, migrants create more jobs than they take.

so let's get this straight

Greece and Spain can solve their unemployment problem by encouraging massive immigration asap?

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

the interaction between migrant inflows and GDP emerges as positive,

GDP is FLAWED Hamish. PLEASE stop referring to it.

How many times? Or are you just going to ignore everyone else and just keep stating the same, (proven flawed) datasets over and over again?

Seriously. Were all trying to interact with you here, but there really is no point if this is your tactic. The pigeon playing chess example from earlier is very apt here.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

CLAPTON wrote: »

so let's get this straight

Greece and Spain can solve their unemployment problem by encouraging massive immigration asap?

No idea.

You should ask NIESR.

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Hmm, I wonder who to believe?

Trained economists at NIESR

or....

Someone arguing against immigration on a message board.

Gosh, tough choice.:(

You didn't like me looking into your evidence much then? Couldn't deny what I said, so start the insults instead....bravo!

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

GDP is FLAWED Hamish. PLEASE stop referring to it.

How many times? .

Your own report stated immigration likely raised GDP per capita too.

How many times?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You didn't like me looking into your evidence much then? Couldn't deny what I said, so start the insults instead....bravo!

You haven't looked into any evidence.

And that wasn't in any way meant as an insult.

I merely noted (in a comedic manner) that the expertise and credibility of trained economists at NIESR is greater than that of an anonymous poster on an internet forum.

These are not positions I've taken without a lot of research Graham.... I've examined the evidence and concluded that as almost all the major studies on the matter have the same conclusion, it's probably correct.

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

You haven't looked into any evidence.

And that wasn't in any way meant as an insult.

I merely noted (in a comedic manner) that the expertise and credibility of trained economists at NIESR is greater than that of an anonymous poster on an internet forum.

These are not positions I've taken without a lot of research Graham.... I've examined the evidence and concluded that as almost all the major studies on the matter have the same conclusion, it's probably correct.

So what have NIESR got to compare against?

And how have they excluded the numerous amounts of stimulus all over the economy as a factor of a slower dole claimant rate?

Not that dole claimant rate has anything to do with measuring jobs, as can be seen each month in the unemployment / claimant rates, where one goes up and the other goes down.

It's a frankly bizzare position to take and then claim it means immigrants create jobs and you won't create jobs without them. That's what you said, and your evidence when called upon is vague to say the least, and certainly doesn't state what you did.

Sometimes, it's the most simple of scenarios which blow things out of the water...and clapton provided that to which you didn't seem to pleased by.

CLAPTON

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

No idea.

You should ask NIESR.

so your law that immigration is good for the economy, per capita gdp and unemployment is a racist law that only applies to the UK?

it isn't a universal law that applies to 'foreign' countries? or other races or creeds?


are you absolutely sure then it applies at all times to the UK
and will continue indefintely even though it apples no where else in the globe?

how strange

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

So what have NIESR got to compare against?

And how have they excluded the numerous amounts of stimulus all over the economy as a factor of a slower dole claimant rate?

Not that dole claimant rate has anything to do with measuring jobs, as can be seen each month in the unemployment / claimant rates, where one goes up and the other goes down.

It's a frankly bizzare position to take and then claim it means immigrants create jobs and you won't create jobs without them. That's what you said, and your evidence when called upon is vague to say the least, and certainly doesn't state what you did.

Sometimes, it's the most simple of scenarios which blow things out of the water...and clapton provided that to which you didn't seem to pleased by.

You really are twisting yourself up in knots here Graham.

Are you really so desperate to try and discredit a source which disagrees with you?

First you claim GDP is FLAWED, then you ignore your own report which shows GDP per capita likely INCREASES with immigrants.

Then you try to muddle the issue with claims of stimulus, while ignoring the probability that stimulus would create jobs regardless and migration jobs would be in addition to that.

Then you create a straw man argument to claim that the report says something it doesn't, ie, that "it means immigrants create jobs and you won't create jobs without them".

It doesn't say that at all.

You could create jobs without immigrants. You'll just create MORE jobs with them. And they create more jobs than they take.

Really, take a deep breath, and just think things through.