[pegase]

To be honest, I know many people from my country living from benefits. And that's sad. When you think about it, how they come not speaking English or not willing to work, living in Hyde park and then in hostels, waiting for their benefits to come... Lazy f****! Or there are those who work as cleaners and other blue-collar jobs that British people won't take.

Well, anyways I can't complain, I am an immigrant and have a full-time in one place and part time receptionist job in another. And there are both immigrant and British people working there.

I think only lazy British people can complain about immigrants stealing jobs. There are many jobs around that Brits wouldn't take. Or those Brits aren't qualified enough for jobs that they would like to have. Immigrants come here and they buy stuff/services so as a result there are more jobs created for their needs.

[TheIronist]

(Original post by Joinedup)
yeah fascinating research about migration overall... Unfortunately we're having a discussion specifically about low and unskilled migration. If letting in a particular mixture of brain surgeons and bogcleaners has had no net effect it doesn't follow that there is no difference between the effect of letting in a brain surgeon and letting in a bog cleaner or that we wouldn't be better off letting brain surgeons in and trying to keep bog cleaners out.

The harm done by an unskilled immigrant taking a job while we have people on the dole capable of doing it is that a job has been filled but the number of benefit claimants is unchanged. His miniwage can not be recycled with 100% efficiency into creating the equivalent of another miniwage job.

If the job was taken by a benefit claimant then the number of benefit claimants is reduced...

You're right I am sorry. Still you haven't provided any data whatever for your claims. You only assert things and assume that they must be right. I am waiting for the data or don't bother to respond at all.

With respect to low skilled immigration. The youth (less than 18) is basically one demographic which is comprised almost wholly of unskilled labour. If anyone would be impacted by unskilled immigration, it's the youth. However:
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpo...-unemployment/

"the correlation between youth unemployment and the migration rate is basically zero. There is no compelling evidence of a strong causal impact of higher migration on youth unemployment."

[Maker]

(Original post by Joinedup)
yeah fascinating research about migration overall... Unfortunately we're having a discussion specifically about low and unskilled migration. If letting in a particular mixture of brain surgeons and bogcleaners has had no net effect it doesn't follow that there is no difference between the effect of letting in a brain surgeon and letting in a bog cleaner or that we wouldn't be better off letting brain surgeons in and trying to keep bog cleaners out.

The harm done by an unskilled immigrant taking a job while we have people on the dole capable of doing it is that a job has been filled but the number of benefit claimants is unchanged. His miniwage can not be recycled with 100% efficiency into creating the equivalent of another miniwage job.

If the job was taken by a benefit claimant then the number of benefit claimants is reduced...

As the thread starter, I did not specify the skills of the immigrants, if you want to do so, please start your own thread.

[Joinedup]

Quite possibly young people have other problems in addition to increased competition...

There is some doubt whether immigrants are taking nearer to 80% or 90% of new jobs
http://fullfact.org/factchecks/frank...s_welfare-2782

either way it 's a lof of jobs, dunno what more I can say without producing CCTV footage of an immigrant being hired while someone born in Britain signs on.

[Joinedup]

As the thread starter, I did not specify the skills of the immigrants, if you want to do so, please start your own thread.

I think you'll find you did...

(Original post by Maker)
I often heard and read that Britain should stop immigration of low skilled workers because the country has high unemployment.

The arguement goes that immigrants takes the jobs that should go to the unemployed British people but to be honest, a fair percentage of umemployed people don't want to work.

Employers are not in the business of social engineering trying to get the workshy into work, they are there to make money which means getting the best workers.

If you got rid of all the foreign workers, it would make very little difference to the numbers of workshy people who are happy to claim benefits until they die.

All it will do is penalise employers who will loose workers and shrink the economy as the businesses shrink and less money goes into the economy which means the workshy becomes a bigger burden to the people who are left.

[dgeorge]

(Original post by Joinedup)
yeah fascinating research about migration overall... Unfortunately we're having a discussion specifically about low and unskilled migration. If letting in a particular mixture of brain surgeons and bogcleaners has had no net effect it doesn't follow that there is no difference between the effect of letting in a brain surgeon and letting in a bog cleaner or that we wouldn't be better off letting brain surgeons in and trying to keep bog cleaners out.

The harm done by an unskilled immigrant taking a job while we have people on the dole capable of doing it is that a job has been filled but the number of benefit claimants is unchanged. His miniwage can not be recycled with 100% efficiency into creating the equivalent of another miniwage job.

If the job was taken by a benefit claimant then the number of benefit claimants is reduced...

What a cop out. So clear, empirical evidence is given and you're argument is to try to insinuate that the data given mainly consists of skilled workers? Then try to come up with another reason (unsupported)

Truth is, there ARE negative and positive effects on the economy with regards to employment. However, simply trying to boil it down to "less immigrants means less jobs" is extremely simplistic and bordering on delusional.

[Joinedup]

(Original post by dgeorge)
What a cop out. So clear, empirical evidence is given and you're argument is to try to insinuate that the data given mainly consists of skilled workers? Then try to come up with another reason (unsupported)

Truth is, there ARE negative and positive effects on the economy with regards to employment. However, simply trying to boil it down to "less immigrants means less jobs" is extremely simplistic and bordering on delusional.

Calm down... and remember we're still specifically talking about unskilled immigrants (as specified by OP in post #1)

if you're convinced mass unskilled immigration is such a fantastic idea explain it to the USA, Australia etc. - our economy should be roaring ahead of countries that practised more selective immigration by now

I've not advocated kicking anyone out, 'repatriation' or any of that... but IMO there's a bit too much of a cosy rose tinted consensus that we can handflap the problems away by constantly referring back to 'all immigrants' instead of wondering what the benefit is of letting in the ones that are not filling any skills gap.

[Maker]

(Original post by Joinedup)
I think you'll find you did...

I then went on to say immigrants, skilled or not. You need to read all of it, instead of taking things out of context to prove something that isn't there.

[lonelyknight]

(Original post by Mbob)
Again, you're equating 'immigrant' with 'ethnic minority'. Many ethnic minorities are not immigrants, they were born here. So the rate of unemployment among ethnic minorities does not tell you a whole lot about the rate of unemployment among immigrants.

Any ethnic minority is an immigrant IMO.

[dgeorge]

(Original post by Joinedup)
Calm down... and remember we're still specifically talking about unskilled immigrants (as specified by OP in post #1)

if you're convinced mass unskilled immigration is such a fantastic idea explain it to the USA, Australia etc. - our economy should be roaring ahead of countries that practised more selective immigration by now

I've not advocated kicking anyone out, 'repatriation' or any of that... but IMO there's a bit too much of a cosy rose tinted consensus that we can handflap the problems away by constantly referring back to 'all immigrants' instead of wondering what the benefit is of letting in the ones that are not filling any skills gap.

1. I'm quite calm. Again, I'm not saying that there AREN'T negatives from unskilled migration - I'm just saying that you're taking an extremely simplistic view.

2. Correlation does not equal causation. Just because one country is doing better than another does not mean it is/isn't due to migration policies. again, extremely simplistic and biased assumptions

3. The US has a higher number of immigrants, as well as a higher PROPORTION of immigrants, than the UK.

[Mbob]

(Original post by lonelyknight)
Any ethnic minority is an immigrant IMO.

But your opinion doesn't change the definition of a word:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/immigrant

You're obviously free to make up your own definitions if you like, but it tends to make communication more difficult.

[Joinedup]

(Original post by dgeorge)
1. I'm quite calm. Again, I'm not saying that there AREN'T negatives from unskilled migration - I'm just saying that you're taking an extremely simplistic view.

2. Correlation does not equal causation. Just because one country is doing better than another does not mean it is/isn't due to migration policies. again, extremely simplistic and biased assumptions

3. The US has a higher number of immigrants, as well as a higher PROPORTION of immigrants, than the UK.

I think my view is sufficiently sophisticated... you appear to agree that negatives as well as positives result from immigration - in this we are in agreement. My argument is that some immigrants are more valuable to the economy than others... do you disagree? I hasten to add I'm talking about skills and not skin colour.
Some skills are in shortage within this country, immigrants capable of filling the skills gaps are IMO going to be more use to our economy than immigrants duplicating the skill sets of british citizens already without employment.
it's not that immigrants are bad people.


Can't see why this seems to be so controvertial tbh

[dgeorge]

(Original post by Joinedup)
I think my view is sufficiently sophisticated... you appear to agree that negatives as well as positives result from immigration - in this we are in agreement. My argument is that some immigrants are more valuable to the economy than others... do you disagree? I hasten to add I'm talking about skills and not skin colour.
Some skills are in shortage within this country, immigrants capable of filling the skills gaps are IMO going to be more use to our economy than immigrants duplicating the skill sets of british citizens already without employment.
it's not that immigrants are bad people.


Can't see why this seems to be so controvertial tbh

It's controversial because it uses the INCORRECT theory that for every immigrant that there is one less job for a native. That is wrong. As I said/alluded to earlier, its not that simple. While I understand your point, truth is that the low skilled immigrant sector is VERY important to the functioning of economies.

On a personal note, I've worked for several jobs for the university in Wales where I studied. All were minimum wage. One was a telethon fundraiser, where out of two dozen or so people, I was the only one who was not a UK citizen.

On the other hand, I worked another job as a cleaner at a caravan park (in North Wales, if that helps). Out of the 50 people I worked with, there were a TOTAL of 3 that come to mind who were UK citizens - none of whom were actually BORN in the UK. The caravan park had GREAT difficulty securing workers after the non-national students left after summer - because locals simple were not interested in cleaning jobs, and the few that did left almost immediately, despite there being a relatively high rate of unemployment in the area.

Of course, this is just an example, and it doesn't necessarily mean that it can be generalised to the entire UK. My point is, AGAIN, that it is simplistic, and incorrect to think that for every low skilled migrant that a low skilled local/native is automatically losing their job

[Bonged.]

(Original post by dgeorge)
It's controversial because it uses the INCORRECT theory that for every immigrant that there is one less job for a native. That is wrong. As I said/alluded to earlier, its not that simple. While I understand your point, truth is that the low skilled immigrant sector is VERY important to the functioning of economies.

On a personal note, I've worked for several jobs for the university in Wales where I studied. All were minimum wage. One was a telethon fundraiser, where out of two dozen or so people, I was the only one who was not a UK citizen.

On the other hand, I worked another job as a cleaner at a caravan park (in North Wales, if that helps). Out of the 50 people I worked with, there were a TOTAL of 3 that come to mind who were UK citizens - none of whom were actually BORN in the UK. The caravan park had GREAT difficulty securing workers after the non-national students left after summer - because locals simple were not interested in cleaning jobs, and the few that did left almost immediately, despite there being a relatively high rate of unemployment in the area.

Of course, this is just an example, and it doesn't necessarily mean that it can be generalised to the entire UK. My point is, AGAIN, that it is simplistic, and incorrect to think that for every low skilled migrant that a low skilled local/native is automatically losing their job

http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehou...-workers.thtml

Immigration affects the number of jobs available for those already here.

That's a problem, isn't it? Something we should do something about? Rather than just importing a new working class.

[Miraclefish]

Here's the thing... We live in a free market economy which tends towards capitalism.

Immigrants aren't stealing British people's jobs... they're being employed because they're better than the British people who could also have had them.

I don't give a rat's ass what country you're from, how many generations your family have been in Britain for or whether you feel a sense of superiority for being born in the UK - if somebody is harder working, smarter, more patient or more willing than you, they get that job. Not you.

[Bonged.]

(Original post by Miraclefish)
Here's the thing... We live in a free market economy which tends towards capitalism.

Immigrants aren't stealing British people's jobs... they're being employed because they're better than the British people who could also have had them.

I don't give a rat's ass what country you're from, how many generations your family have been in Britain for or whether you feel a sense of superiority for being born in the UK - if somebody is harder working, smarter, more patient or more willing than you, they get that job. Not you.

Racist.

Actually there's plenty of jobs in the UK where non-indigenous brits are specifically preferred. Policing, teaching, social work etc. Also there's plenty of educational programs that indigenous brits are excluded from.

What's so wrong with equality?

[Miraclefish]

Ha, interesting point. It all comes down to what you consider equality to be.

Is it putting programmes in place to make it easier for minorities to get into jobs and roles they're under represented in, to ensure they mirror the population?

Or is it to give them zero special treatment, the same as to indiginous people, allowing them to make it or fail on their own merit, as anyone else might do?

[dgeorge]

(Original post by Bonged.)
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehou...-workers.thtml

Immigration affects the number of jobs available for those already here.

That's a problem, isn't it? Something we should do something about? Rather than just importing a new working class.

No it doesn't. You produced a very misleading graph showing that there is an increase in british born workers as opposed to foreign born workers. There are several demographical issues that which could account for that. AGAIN, correlation does not equal causation. The issue of immigration and employment goes far beyond that of "one more immigrant means one less job" Again, its a simplistic and INCORRECT view.

[dgeorge]

(Original post by Bonged.)
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehou...-workers.thtml

Immigration affects the number of jobs available for those already here.

That's a problem, isn't it? Something we should do something about? Rather than just importing a new working class.

To the part that you bolded, local populations will always be wary of taking menial/manual jobs. This isn't something "new" or "unique" to Britain, and can be seen in almost every country around the world.

[Bonged.]

(Original post by dgeorge)
No it doesn't. You produced a very misleading graph showing that there is an increase in british born workers as opposed to foreign born workers. There are several demographical issues that which could account for that. AGAIN, correlation does not equal causation. The issue of immigration and employment goes far beyond that of "one more immigrant means one less job" Again, its a simplistic and INCORRECT view.

uhh.. cool. no-one is arguing that though.

explain what is wrong with this data.