Economic benefits of immigration mask severl concentrated challenges

CLAPTON

wotsthat wrote: »

Google 'National Infrastructure Plan'. Money is being poured into infrastructure especially into the South-East.

Just a few visible changes I've noticed. A major M5 upgrade, same on the M1 near London, the M1 between Nottingham and Sheffield is now 4 lanes. There's a new dual carriageway being built between the M1 and Nottingham. Derby has a new super hospital. New housing estates are pooping up all over Cornwall (apparent the Nimby's in the SW are up in arms because they're getting more houses per capita than anywhere else).

This is very true, as I travel round virtually every motorway is being upgraded and there is new housing etc. starting everywhere.


However this isn't providing a better life for us but merely re-establishing the service we used to have before the large increase in population.
This isn't free either : it comes at a considerable cost which isn't reflected in the figures that claim increase in population is making us richer.
People, especially in the SE and London area aren't enjoying better housing or travel or health care than 20/30 years ago because the population expansion.

jjlandlord

Always the same fallacy.

CLAPTON wrote: »

However this isn't providing a better life for us but merely re-establishing the service we used to have before the large increase in population.

Except that we cannot build a road, a hospital, or a power plant and expect it to last forever.

CLAPTON wrote: »

This isn't free either : it comes at a considerable cost which isn't reflected in the figures that claim increase in population is making us richer.

Investments in infrastructures do not make us poorer, and in fact arguably make us richer: They create assets and the money invested creates economic activity.

CLAPTON

jjlandlord wrote: »

Always the same fallacy.



Except that we cannot build a road, a hospital, or a power plant and expect it to last forever.



Investments in infrastructures do not make us poorer, and in fact arguably make us richer: It creates an asset and the money invested creates economic activity.

It is obvious that there is a distinction between replacing an asset that has served its useful life and building a new one to meet increased demand from a larger population.


Investment in new infrastructure is a cost of an expanding population : whether we are poorer or richer will depend upon the circumstances.
I can't see how the massive increase in London and the SE houses prices benefits the nation as a whole even if it does makes some people richer.

wotsthat

CLAPTON wrote: »

However this isn't providing a better life for us but merely re-establishing the service we used to have before the large increase in population.
This isn't free either : it comes at a considerable cost which isn't reflected in the figures that claim increase in population is making us richer.
People, especially in the SE and London area aren't enjoying better housing or travel or health care than 20/30 years ago because the population expansion.

It must be nice to be so certain about things but I don't see how you can be so sure you're the spokesman for the people of the South-East in deciding the economic benefits of immigration have been outweighed by the annoyances you encounter. The SE is on the receiving end of most of the UK's economic growth and infrastructure spending.

If the population hadn't increased I don't doubt my City would still be making do with the hospital opened by Queen Victoria in 1902 rather than a nice new one.

The access between the M1 and Nottingham has been dire for decades. It needed new investment not just maintenance and that has now happened. Birmingham Airport has expanded to deal with the increased traffic - it's a better resource as a result.

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

It must be nice to be so certain about things but I don't see how you can be so sure you're the spokesman for the people of the South-East

Take a look at the BBC article today and look at the comments.

It's clear people feel the same as conrad.

Also noteworthy is how my thread earlier has changed now it's been moved to DT.

Certainly your view is in the minority (not to say it's wrong or right) and conrads is the majority view of those taking a view on the BBC, telegraph and even the Guardian.

And theres not a mention of a sandwich in sight!

CLAPTON

wotsthat wrote: »

It must be nice to be so certain about things but I don't see how you can be so sure you're the spokesman for the people of the South-East in deciding the economic benefits of immigration have been outweighed by the annoyances you encounter. The SE is on the receiving end of most of the UK's economic growth and infrastructure spending.

If the population hadn't increased I don't doubt my City would still be making do with the hospital opened by Queen Victoria in 1902 rather than a nice new one.

The access between the M1 and Nottingham has been dire for decades. It needed new investment not just maintenance and that has now happened. Birmingham Airport has expanded to deal with the increased traffic - it's a better resource as a result.

OK so you think the people of London are enjoying better housing, travel and health services due to the increase in population than was previously the case.


Whilst I disagree, this is a discussion boards and different views are welcome.

Graham_Devon

The original outline I posted in this OP is being taken forward tomorrow by Cameron himself according to the BBC.

Not only tax credits, but housing benefits etc.

Labour are apparently hot on the heels, already scrapping their tough talk from last week on limiting out of work benefits and now going for limiting in work benefits in order to keep up.

Likely to be a pledge for after the election if we vote them in though.

wotsthat

CLAPTON wrote: »

OK so you think the people of London are enjoying better housing, travel and health services due to the increase in population than was previously the case.

Whilst I disagree, this is a discussion boards and different views are welcome.

I note the people of London just can't get enough of it. It's not for me, maybe you've outgrown it too.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Take a look at the BBC article today and look at the comments.

It's clear people feel the same as conrad.

Also noteworthy is how my thread earlier has changed now it's been moved to DT.

Certainly your view is in the minority (not to say it's wrong or right) and conrads is the majority view of those taking a view on the BBC, telegraph and even the Guardian.

And theres not a mention of a sandwich in sight!

Yes. My view might be the minority in the comment making community but there's the possibility that whilst people might want less immigrants they still want a cheap meal deal or ready prepared vegetables.

Not hypocrisy but a disconnect between perception and reality? Yes, we can live with £4 meal deals or the horror of having to prepare our own broccoli and cauliflower but how did we think the £3 meal deal and packaged florets were going to be achieved in the first place?

Pretty sure the most vocal opponents of zero hours are the ones scouring the internet for the best deals. There's a circle to be squared. Some people can only see the circle.

CLAPTON

wotsthat wrote: »

I note the people of London just can't get enough of it. It's not for me, maybe you've outgrown it too.

Fair enough

you genuinely think that high house prices are a benefit to all concerned : so beit.