Immigration is a hot topic in the UK currently, so it seemed like a good time to pen my thoughts on it.
My Stance
I’m the son of an immigrant who came here for better opportunities.
Broadly speaking, I see immigration as a good and necessary thing for a country. It’s a sign of a successful country that people want to join it.
The key is regulating it in such a way that it’s net benefit to the country, rather than net cost.
I notice that often the issue of immigration gets bifurcated into pro and anti immigration.
Which I see as absurd reductionism.
Especially when those expressing any concern over immigration are categorized as anti-immigration.
Let’s take an extreme example, to illustrate how there must be some immigration limits.
Take the UK, with a population of around 75 million people. If the floodgates were opened and 75 million migrants were let in, then the UK’s culture, public services, and identity would be changed entirely.
It’s fairly obvious that public services, such as healthcare, schools, roads, etc. would be inundated and cease to function correctly. Culture would also be changed.
Therefore, it’s obvious that unlimited immigration is a bad thing.
How Much Immigration is Too Much?
So then the next question becomes – how much immigration is too much?
I think this is too simple of a question because it depends on the type of immigration.
In particular:
- What skills and value do the migrants bring?
- Are they likely to integrate?
- What burden on resources will they have?
UK net immigration has been around 250,000 per year before 21/22, when it sharply rose to ~750,000.
Questions on this:
- Is it sustainable?
Then, in terms of the skills people bring:
- Is that being managed optimally?
- What about rules on partners and dependents? Is that working correctly or being manipulated? For example, sham marriages, or an inundation of older family members that are expensive in terms of healthcare costs.
- How well is cultural assimilation working, and can that be improved?
- Can we filter out extremist viewpoints? That might be hard. But brainstorming how that might be developed is worthwhile.
- What about assessing the net cost? Is this person about to need expensive medical care, and then that will be thrust onto the UK taxpayers. Is that cost acceptable versus the benefit they may bring?
Economic Costs of Immigrants
Recently, the UK Government’s “Office for Budgetary Responsibility” (OBR), came out with figures (see page 108) on the cost of low-skilled migrants:
For me personally, it’s hard to read the numbers exactly, but The Telegraph had a go and suggested:
- Low-wage migrant workers cost the taxpayer £150,000 by pension age (66) – source
- This rises to ~£500,000 by the age of 80.
This is primarily due to the healthcare costs, versus what they’ve paid into the system in taxes.
It’s good to see that they project average-wage and high-wage migrant workers as being net contributors. This appears to be due to the age at which they arrive, which they put at 25+, and therefore the early health + education costs are not borne by the UK.
I highlight this to point out that the type of immigrant is important from an economic standpoint.
A report by the Centre for Policy Studies (see p44) shows that as immigration has increased, the GDP per capita in the UK has decreased:
It also shows how the rise in net migration has surpassed the new building of dwellings (aka housing), reducing the supply of housing and driving up the costs. See page 7 for this graph.
This feels like a topic that could go on and no. However, perhaps the above is sufficient, it suggests:
- Low-wage migrants are a net drain on the economy by the time they reach retirement age
- As migration has increased, the GDP per capita has decreased.
- Migration has led to a housing shortage and a rise in housing costs.
Social and Cultural Costs
Above we looked at the economic costs. However, immigration also has social impacts on society, which may be a bit harder to measure.
One method could be to survey the population and ask them their thoughts on immigration…
In the Centre for Policy Studies study, they found the following:
(As I understand it, this data came from a YouGov study that surved 1,500 – 1,800 people at each time point, and the above graph averages 4 of the time points)
So, the above suggests that a large majority of votes surveyed feel like immigration has been too high.
🤔
Ideological compatibility?
An issue that I want to raise is around “ideological compatibility”.
Growing up I was taught to broadly assume all cultures, and by extension, ideologies are equal.
Now, older, whilst I think it makes sense to pay respect to all cultures for what they are.
I don’t think all ideologies are necessarily compatible.
For example, if someone is actively pushing for Sharia law to be adopted in the UK, I would question if that is “compatible” with British culture.
As a reminder, Sharia law incorporates:
- Hand amputation for theft
- Stoning to death for adultery, if carried out by married individuals, or, 100 lashes for unmarried
- Some interpretations of abandoning Islam (apostasy) can make it punishable by death
We can see below that recent UK immigration has been very diverse in geographic origin:
(See page 16 of the report by the Centre for Policy Studies)
Therefore I think there are questions to be asked about the types of immigration, in the context of ideological compatibility.
Global Agendas
The above raises questions about the economic and social costs of high levels of immigration.
However, part of me wonders if this is actually about “rational arguments” or if there’s something bigger at play.
Cue meme:
Why do I raise this?
- At the time of writing the UK, EU and USA are facing record levels of immigration.
- The UK successfully defended its border during WW1 and WW2, yet, for some reason, it can’t or won’t secure the border against illegal migrants crossing in dinghies.
- The EU has been fining Hungary €1m per day for not accepting its “migrant quota” (source).
Why might some entities want to flood Western countries with migrants?
I don’t know.
If I had to speculate, I’d posit it may be a combination of:
- People who think they’re doing good, people who are doing what they’re told, or people who are affected by the “woke-mind virus” (99%)
- People who actually want to divide the nations in order to control them – “divide and conquer” (1%)
At this point, we’re deep into speculation territory, so let’s stop there for now.
Roundup
To summarize my thoughts:
- I’m pro-migration in the UK.
- I believe in carefully managed immigration so it’s a net positive, both economically and socially. As opposed to a net negative.
Does this make sense to you? Let me know in the comments.