• Phil S

    you forgot to mention that they also need jobs, schools, hospitals, houses, roads etc. And also you mentioned the benefit to the uks pension pot but what happens when this new enlarged population also wants to retire? Increase the population some more? I think you can see where this leads

  • James

    Immigration is a short-term fix to a long term issue, what about the strain on our schools and the hosting shortage? If you’re gonna say ‘build more houses’ why should the British taxpayer fund a house for a new immigrant who hasn’t paid I to the system? And if you believe that Britain is 95% underdeveloped you would believe anything and everything Olly.

    Should immigrants who come here for our health care be allowed in here? they may have a disease that cold spread to British people or other immigrants for example tuberculosis?

    I may be persuaded to have open borders in return for abolishing the welfare state.

  • http://www.thebackbencher.co.uk Lee Jenkins

    Excellent piece Olly, I esp like that you mentioned that immigration drives down costs, helping everybody.
    …and thanks for the mention!

  • http://twitter.com/poorbastardmarv poorbastardmarvin

    If an area predominantly becomes a particular ethnic or religious minority then they can “ghettoise” – the state providing social housing need not be a significant factor.

    In the East End of London the areas are predominantly South Asian ancestry, and significantly Muslim. In these areas, groups youths from well off families, owners of restaurants are aggressively “Muslim”, the extreme example being Muslims on Patrol.

    This has little or nothing to do with economics and everything to do with ideology and culture. Sam implies social mobility would cure this. The evidence does not support this. In some cultures culture & ideology trumps everything.

  • Pingback:

  • Pingback:

  • Rob

    “…on average any immigrant pays more in tax than they cost in services used”

    For a start, this SHOULD be a given, not something that simply justifies more immigrants. If this wasn’t the case, then we should be looking at deportation, not just closing the borders to new immigrants. However, that aside, you don’t have to be a genius to realise that there are immigrants living on welfare, and hiding behind the fact that they’re 2nd or 3rd generation immigrants now doesn’t appease that problem in the eyes of the ‘indigenous’ population. And the economic benefit of immigrants could reach a far greater average if we were more selective over the immigrants allowed in, and implemented a system such as that of Australia that demands that people coming into our country are skilled enough to gain well paid work quickly, and have money to deposit before entry. Taking an average seems very convenient, when in reality we should only be letting in the top bracket of earners.

  • Pingback:

  • Pingback:

  • Daniel Jackson

    “Open borders are the only way we can have a welfare state. Immigrants, as net tax benefits, contribute more to the pot than they take out, without that positive net contribution the welfare state would collapse. Indeed the IFS point out that native Brits are net tax takers, we need immigrants just to keep the welfare state afloat.”

    That completely ignores the possibility that some of the native population wouldn’t be on benefits if there had been less immigration over the years.

  • Pingback: