Here's why I don't think immigration will fall following Brexit

always_sunny

Boredatwrork wrote: »

We need controlled migration

Controlled immigration is nothing but a buzz word.
What is controlled immigration for you? Why is non-EU immigration not controlled already? Or do you believe it is controlled today? What is the purpose to control this migration? To keep those with conviction out? To put a break in general? Eligibility for benefits?

Boredatwrork

always_sunny wrote: »

Controlled immigration is nothing but a buzz word.
What is controlled immigration for you? Why is non-EU immigration not controlled already? Or do you believe it is controlled today? What is the purpose to control this migration? To keep those with conviction out? To put a break in general? Eligibility for benefits?

I believe we have a mechanism in place to control non EU migration. the fact that any government over the last decade has failed to exercise it is a different matter. I also think a lot of that however is due to the climate of the country, most MP's for the last few decades until maybe the last 5 years would not even utter the word scared the mob would descend, and we only have to remember the Gordon Brown 'Bigot' episode with the taxi to see how people’s concerns where dismissed.

I don't think I need to describe what the purpose is of controlled migration if you haven’t figured it out by now or dismiss others concerns, everyone has their own views on what they consider acceptable, and whatever stats any expert may tell you, most people will judge anecdotally.

michaels

The latest stats show that immigration is already down.

It will lead to higher wages for those at the bottom of the salary scale as they will no longer have to compete with so many eu migrants for whom our unskilled wages are competitive compared to their average wages.

This will mean all those of us who earn above average and pay tax to cover the cost of NHS cleaners, care workers etc and who purchase things supploied by low paid workers like all shop workers wil be worse off.

However I contend that it is fairer. Hamish may only be interested in total GDP, I also think about GDP per head and income distribution and also quality of life and whether this is impacted by unplanned population density increases.

Conrad

michaels wrote: »

The latest stats show that immigration is already down.

It will lead to higher wages for those at the bottom of the salary scale as they will no longer have to compete with so many eu migrants for whom our unskilled wages are competitive compared to their average wages.

This will mean all those of us who earn above average and pay tax to cover the cost of NHS cleaners, care workers etc and who purchase things supploied by low paid workers like all shop workers wil be worse off.

However I contend that it is fairer. Hamish may only be interested in total GDP, I also think about GDP per head and income distribution and also quality of life and whether this is impacted by unplanned population density increases.

Well said. One thing I would perhaps question though is this idea that higher wages at the lower end makes the rest of us worse off. A counter view would be that poorer people having more to spend will benefit for example tradesmen or shop keepers, holiday firms or kebab shops.




Another benefit of reduced cheap immigrant worker supply is that UK firms will be forced to go back to on the job training of the yooof

Redknapps_Dog

Boredatwrork wrote: »

We need controlled migration

It's a clich!, mere pandering.

Redknapps_Dog

michaels wrote: »

The latest stats show that immigration is already down.

It will lead to higher wages for those at the bottom of the salary scale as they will no longer have to compete with so many eu migrants for whom our unskilled wages are competitive compared to their average wages.

This will mean all those of us who earn above average and pay tax to cover the cost of NHS cleaners, care workers etc and who purchase things supploied by low paid workers like all shop workers wil be worse off.

However I contend that it is fairer. Hamish may only be interested in total GDP, I also think about GDP per head and income distribution and also quality of life and whether this is impacted by unplanned population density increases.

It won't lead to higher wages for the low paid.

Boredatwrork

Redknapps_Dog wrote: »

It's a clich!, mere pandering.

Pandering, Isnt that what all politics is?

lisyloo

What is the purpose to control this migration? To keep those with conviction out? To put a break in general? Eligibility for benefits?

As well as keeping criminals/terrorists out (which should be done on ALL immigration), controlled immigration should be about getting in the skills we need e.g. nurses.
The fact that it is not being implemented well at the moment does not mean it isn't a good idea.

always_sunny

lisyloo wrote: »

As well as keeping criminals/terrorists out (which should be done on ALL immigration), controlled immigration should be about getting in the skills we need e.g. nurses.
The fact that it is not being implemented well at the moment does not mean it isn't a good idea.

Possibly but in reality even in countries that already have those sort of system (Canada, Australia, etc) it doesn't work that way either. The Uk is too big (population size) to scrutinise quotas to that granularity. The costs would be prohibitive.

Doshwaster

michaels wrote: »

The latest stats show that immigration is already down.

It will lead to higher wages for those at the bottom of the salary scale as they will no longer have to compete with so many eu migrants for whom our unskilled wages are competitive compared to their average wages.

Do you really believe that?

I can't see how fewer immigrants in London will lead to higher wages in places likes Sunderland where there is already high unemployment and very little "competition" from immigrants . Wages are low in those areas as employers know that they can easily replace people.