GDP per capita and immigration

Generali

CLAPTON wrote: »

language clearly divides us

It's probably me writing lazily, no more than that.

I am supervising a sleepover this evening which is taking up about 104% of my maximum concentration. At the best of times I am a monotasker.

Generali

the_flying_pig wrote: »

back to the OP, i very much doubt that an open door immigration policy [e.g. not a selective one like the one australia tried or whatever] will lead to any noticable increase in GDP per capita.

for the UK my sense is that the impact on GDP per capita of fairly recent immigrants is negligible tho i'm not aware that anyone's convincingly shown its impact one way or another.

my instinct might be to take a wild stab in the dark & guess it's marginally positive, mostly on the grounds of the age profile of immigrants, but marginally negative if you were to try & strip this out, the consequence of unemployment rates being consistently higher for 'minorities'.

FWIW, an earlier link shows Australia to have an immigration rate about double that of the UK.

Australia hasn't had a recession since the early 90s and has a 'trend growth rate' of almost 3%. The UK's is a little over 2%.

Whatever Australia is doing they're doing it right!

Masomnia

If I'm reading Clapton correctly he's asking whether the country that people are leaving is benefiting from immigration to the UK. So are Poles in Poland benefiting from Polish immigration to the UK?

I'd suggest at a micro level a lot are, Polish plumbers (in the stereotypical example) are probably benefiting from the skills becoming more scarce, but on aggregate probably not.

Bantex_2

Generali wrote: »

FWIW, an earlier link shows Australia to have an immigration rate about double that of the UK.

Australia hasn't had a recession since the early 90s and has a 'trend growth rate' of almost 3%. The UK's is a little over 2%.

Whatever Australia is doing they're doing it right!

Friend of mine emigrated to Oz about 6 or 7 years ago. He had to go thru all sorts of hoops even though he had a job lined up with the same company he worked for in the UK. His company had to demonstrate that there were no Australians currently free to do the job.

Also his wife had to prove she was on an approved list of professions (hairdresser).

They both had to be under 40 and take a full medical to unsure no "expensive" medical conditions.

Not exactly open immigration, more cherry picking who they need.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

UKIP is doing ever so well in shaking off it's racist reputation lately....

Ukip is facing a fresh storm of controversy as further evidence emerged of racism among its local election candidates, including a suggestion by one that the comedian Lenny Henry should emigrate to a "black country".

Candidates have taken to social media sites to rail against Islam as "organised crime under religious camouflage" while likening the religion to Nazism, and suggesting that the murder of the black teenager Stephen Lawrence has received a disproportionate level of attention.

One candidate for election in Enfield, William Henwood, responded to a recent speech by Henry, in which he suggested there was a poor representation of black and ethnic minorities on British television, by tweeting: "He should emigrate to a black country. He does not have to live with whites."

Ah well.....

I'm sure there will be yet another 'investigation' ......

Ukip, polling at 18% in the latest Observer/Opinium findings, said the party was "non-racist, non-sectarian" and that "any comments made by members that fail to uphold these values will be duly investigated and acted upon".

I wonder why the last dozen 'investigations' seemed to be so ineffectual though?

Anyway.

At least their new advertising campaign is going well.....

The latest developments will only add to Nigel Farage's woes after a disastrous week for the party in which its big advertising campaign has been picked apart.

Ukip has already been forced to suspend the "poster boy" of its European party election broadcast after it was revealed he had posted a series of racist comments on Twitter.

A builder in a Ukip poster accusing EU workers of taking UK jobs was discovered to be an Irish actor who migrated to this country, and a woman who appeared on a poster as a voter from Devon was Ukip's events manager and an assistant to the party leader.

Ooops.... Maybe not.

But at least the current dictat from Farage for his members to behave in public is working, right?

Ukip has attempted to improve its vetting of candidates in the local and European elections to be held next month, but it appears that some of their members will not be constrained on social media.

Along with his comments about Henry, the party's candidate in Enfield Town, London, has tweeted that "Islam reminds me of the 3rd Reich, strength through violence against the citizens". He said Muslims "like us to fawn to them" and "young Muslim men remind me of young Afrikaners. They are taught at an early age they have the right to abuse".

A Ukip candidate in Camden, Magnus Nielsen, used his Facebook account to post: "70% of mosques in the UK have been taken over by Wahabbi fundamentalists. Islam is organised crime under religious camouflage. Any Muslim who is not involved in organised crime is not a 'true believer', practising Islam as Muhammad commanded".

Wow.... The crazies just won't listen.

Why it's almost as if having a public school educated ex investment-banker as a leader just isn't enough to command respect these days.

Shame.

Never mind though....

If there's one thing that UKIP can be counted on, it's surely got to be in providing British jobs for British people.

The Observer has learned that Ukip MEPs are employing foreign nationals as parliamentary assistants while the party publicly takes a tough public stance against European immigrants taking British jobs.

Last week Farage was involved in an exchange with the BBC's political editor, Nick Robinson, over the employment of his German wife as his secretary.

Gerard Batten, Ukip MEP for London, has hired foreigners in both his European and UK constituency offices.

Pavel Stroilov, from Russia, works in Batten's London office, while a Polish citizen, Kamila Zarychta, is his accredited assistant in Brussels.

Ukip's East Midlands MEP Roger Helmer, has an Italian assistant, Francesca Salierno, in Brussels.

William Dartmouth, Ukip MEP for the south west of England, employs Line Sophie Munk Olsen, a Dane, as one of his four parliamentary assistants.

D'oh.....

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Having a 50 year old plumber charging exorbitantly high rates due to an artificial scarcity of labour is not a great choice for wider society.

So with all this immigration....what's reduced in price?

Bantex_2

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

UKIP is doing ever so well in shaking off it's racist reputation lately....



Ah well.....

I'm sure there will be yet another 'investigation' ......



I wonder why the last dozen 'investigations' seemed to be so ineffectual though?

Anyway.

At least their new advertising campaign is going well.....



Ooops.... Maybe not.

But at least the current dictat from Farage for his members to behave in public is working, right?



Wow.... The crazies just won't listen.

Why it's almost as if having a public school educated ex investment-banker as a leader just isn't enough to command respect these days.

Shame.

Never mind though....

If there's one thing that UKIP can be counted on, it's surely got to be in providing British jobs for British people.



D'oh.....

I believe that when left to their own thoughts, the majority of UK citizens are not nearly as bothered about racism as some would like to believe.

cells

Generali wrote: »

However, to use a technical phrase, this is @r5e donuttery of the highest order. The fact of a person moving to another country has many effects on demand for as well as supply of labour. An immigrant needs haircuts, health care, a car, housing, food, utilities etc as much as any indigenous person.

depends on the immigrant but i suspect on average they are likely net exporters of capital (ie sending money back home to help provide for remaining family members). one of the ways they do this is by consuming less themselves (eg living more dense, eating more basic foods etc)

but imo that isnt that bad a thing, the money they export comes directly back in those countries being able to import the goods they cant produce (often machine goods) and helps their nations develop a lot faster than they otherwise could do

cells

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Hmmmm....

The country with one of the highest immigration rates in the G7, is also the country with the highest GDP per capita growth in the G7.



Interesting....

the year you start that graph is important and could show a very different picture

plus the graph is also meaningless in that it most likely is using $$$ rates. what this means is they look at dollar GDP and they use that years average exchange rate which could well make things meaningless. remember how just a few years ago the pound went from $2 to $1.4 which would have shown a massive dollar GDP drop but our pound GDP drop was far more modest.

also imo the UK (esp london) is geared a lot more to globalisation than most other nations and that really began around 2000. so the uk going forward will probably outperform, immigrants or not

cells

Graham_Devon wrote: »

So with all this immigration....what's reduced in price?

there is two things at play, which would hold true if the population increase is domestic or immigration

one is that certain things will go up in price massively, eg prime london housing or art, as many more compete for a fixed amount. (kensington isnt building any more homes)

the other is that infrastrucutre can be utilised more efficently and thus the cost per person will be lower than it otherwise would be (the cost may still rise but less than the alternative). An example of this would be airports. An airport that goes from 5 million to 15 million passangers a year using the same 1 runway and buildings is surely going to cost less per person.

likewise a railway is a fixed investment and may be able to oeprate at 5 million or 10 million passangers a year. At 10 the cost per person is lower.

Then you have national fixed costs, eg you may need to or want to maintain an armed forces capable of X. spreading the cost of that over 70 million is less of a burden than spreading the cost of that over 50 million.

overall what ever your view, benifit or harm, imo its likely to be small