Even the Torygraph Likes Immigration

CLAPTON

TELLIT01 wrote: »

Generally a skills shortage in an area where people currently resident in the UK couldn't be provided with the training to do the work in the required timescale.

so basically no skills shortage at all?

OK some employers don't want to train up anyone as it costs money : so answer is to import cheap workers into the country and create a class of unemployable UK born with no opportunity for training.

CLAPTON

chiefie wrote: »

Immigration, whatever you think of it solves the issue of an ageing population. It means that there are more working people, which are needed to pay NI contributions to meet the state pensions of retirees. Without it, NI contributions and taxes would have to go up higher.

If we have a labour shortage due to the aging population then one would expect to see labour rates rising at an alarming manner;

whilst there is evidence of some pressure on wage rates due to the general improvement in the economy, there is no evidence of a general labour shortage.

If in the future there lack of workers becomes an issue then that would be the time to encourage immigration (and not now).

lisyloo

If we have a labour shortage due to the aging population then one would expect to see labour rates rising at an alarming manner;

It we didn't have immigration yes.
But we do have immigration e.g. when we had a shortage a plumber, a load of Polish plumbers came over.

If in the future there lack of workers becomes an issue then that would be the time to encourage immigration (and not now).

We have open door with Europe.
We don't need to encourage anyone. They will come if they are suitably motivated i.e. they can make more money here.

CLAPTON

lisyloo wrote: »

It we didn't have immigration yes.
But we do have immigration e.g. when we had a shortage a plumber, a load of Polish plumbers came over.



We have open door with Europe.
We don't need to encourage anyone. They will come if they are suitably motivated i.e. they can make more money here.

Whether an increasing population is good or bad depends upon how you see the pro and cons and whether that one feels the advantages and disadvantages balance out.

However just looking at the microeconomics of importing plumbers (assuming there ever was a shortage)

If we have a genuine (and non temporary ) shortage of a skill then the natural order of things is its price will rise : that increase in wages will encourage more people to enter the trade and will encourage employers (and government) to develop skills training.
It will also encourage employers to find ways of increasing productivity.

This will have the benefits
-of employing the unemployed and improving their skills
-reduction in government benefit funding
-the improved productivity can now sustain higher salaries permanently

However, if we simply import cheap labour then whilst this may fill the immediate need,
-maintains low wages
-maintains our underclass of long term unemployed
-does nothing to encourage productivity innovations.

lisyloo

I prefer the former, no question.
My empoyer who's underpressure to produce quaterly results doesn't care about the long term and would prefer the latter.

dktreesea

padington wrote: »

Get a grip everyone, immigration is what is paying to have any decent services in the first places. A large working population paying more tax than a small working population combined with new working adults of which we didn't have to pay to bring up and educate and train in the first place has given us just enough wind in our sails to pull away from an economic !!!!!! storm in the nick of time.

Celebrate our attractive cultural allure, it's a gift.

This isn't always true. In our case we have a larger working population, most paying little or no national insurance, let alone income tax, such is the love affair our private companies have with zero hour contracts, and in particular making sure their workers have few enough hours to be under the NI threshold. Well, at least for employer contributions.


A person we know has just had a nasty shock. She was working 40 hours a week, but across three employers, all gaming the system for the NI, but she has just been hit by HMRC for her share of the NI, something like 8% of her total income.


If you subtract the benefits this larger population is entitled to - an ever growing expense, from what I can see - from the tax they pay, it may well be that a significant proportion of immigrant workers are costing the taxpayer rather than filling the exchequer's coffers.

dktreesea

padington wrote: »

How does asking a million questions without ever addressing the real one ever get you anywhere ?

The pickle is our high national debt caused by the bankers. We now need more hands on deck because they royally shafted us. More an anti immigrant sentiment is created, less we can employ those extra hands. Stop doing it.

Our government does need to be more productive, that means encouraging more open competition wherever a closed shop is operating which includes changing the way our NHS operates and incentivising work as opposed to watching Jeremy Kyle, which in part includes a decent minimum wage as well as ( I would suggest ) asking everyone on the dole to take up community service.

However, immigration is a part of the solution, people as a whole make more money than they take, especially if you are clever at creating a good environment for that to happen and that is what we should be doing.

Encouraging an environment where we can't employ these extra hands on deck is only going to hamper our recovery and is a compete distraction.

We need higher productivity from the workers we already have, and potential workers who are already here, i.e. the unemployed, not a greater quantity of workers.


People may, as a whole, make more money than they take out of the system, but they are not the typical immigrants we are currently being flooded with. If a Spanish/Italian/Swedish/Indian/Pakistani/from whereever doctor chooses to move to the UK because he or she can earn more here, provided they do take up enmployment with the NHS, then sure, I welcome them. But doctors who would rather muck around drivingprivate taxis because they can't be bothered to save up the money they would need to transfer their qualifications? No thankyou.