Stop quoting net immigration benefits and only admit contributors!

i get so fed up of hearing the same thing every time:

"there was a study proving immigration provides a net contribution"

Well firstly, if you read the study carefully it:

-Doesn't even consider the impact of immigrants on housing, schools, healthcare, transport (and pretty much every other ****ing important thing)

-Secondly, the actual "benefit" was something like £20bn over 15 years. So we increased the population by 3% to gain £1.3bn a year..... great!

Now engage your brain and consider this:

Only admit immigrants who are either high earners (and will commit to pay tax here) or highly-skilled (including NHS workers).........

It will reduce the numbers of immigration significantly and any increased usage on public services is funded by their taxes and this skilled person is also assisting our economy (and I don't mean by pouring cups of coffee in Starbucks).

How could anybody economically disagree with this?

But aren't those high skilled immigrants taking jobs from more deserving Brits? Why can't firms in Britain be forced to employ natives? They do in lots of other places.

So you need heart surgery and you'd rather a Brit perform it because the best cardiovascular surgeon in the world wasn't allowed to move here?

i agree with what OP is trying to say, but i have a question and a couple of points to make.
How do we determine if someone is a contributor or is highly skilled prior to them coming here? What passes for highly skilled in one place may not in another, an opinion may vary from person to person.
And we should not let people in based on the amount of money they have. Having lots of money does not mean that they are more or less likely to pay their taxes than any other person, so as a criterion for immigration it is insufficient.

i agree with what OP is trying to say, but i have a question and a couple of points to make.
How do we determine if someone is a contributor or is highly skilled prior to them coming here? What passes for highly skilled in one place may not in another, an opinion may vary from person to person.
And we should not let people in based on the amount of money they have. Having lots of money does not mean that they are more or less likely to pay their taxes than any other person, so as a criterion for immigration it is insufficient.

I'll take the risk to keep out immigrants. Farage said he would rather have less prosperity and keep out foreigners.

No Farage did not say that! Farage was implying, like I did, its not worth admitting 5 million Romanians to simply increase GDP by £1bn a year.

I'm sure Farage is right.

i get so fed up of hearing the same thing every time:

"there was a study proving immigration provides a net contribution"

Well firstly, if you read the study carefully it:

-Doesn't even consider the impact of immigrants on housing, schools, healthcare, transport (and pretty much every other ****ing important thing)

-Secondly, the actual "benefit" was something like £20bn over 15 years. So we increased the population by 3% to gain £1.3bn a year..... great!

Now engage your brain and consider this:

Only admit immigrants who are either high earners (and will commit to pay tax here) or highly-skilled (including NHS workers).........

It will reduce the numbers of immigration significantly and any increased usage on public services is funded by their taxes and this skilled person is also assisting our economy (and I don't mean by pouring cups of coffee in Starbucks).

How could anybody economically disagree with this?

So you need heart surgery and you'd rather a Brit perform it because the best cardiovascular surgeon in the world wasn't allowed to move here?

I'm sure Farage is right.

It's all very well you talking about NHS workers but their salaries and benefits are protected by unions. People like me who work in the private sector have no such protection and are at the mercy of market forces. The last thing I want is hundreds of qualified competitors driving down my hourly rate.

I don't disagree- my point is we should only be admitting AMAZING individuals, like mentioned earlier- best cardiovascular surgeons, amazing scientists/researchers etc.

I'm not saying admit anybody with a degree who will earn £30,000. The numbers of the people I am referring to would be extremely small.

Repeal the racist Commonwealth Immigrants Act 1962 and basically set a yearly cap on the number of immigrants, say 100,00 a year or so, 50,000 from commonwealth countries and 50,000 from EU countries. That way you open immigration to countries with British institutions without walling the country off from the EU altogether.

I can't say I care whether they come from the commonwealth or not.

(I can say there is one particular culture I would rather see less of)

I'll take the risk to keep out immigrants. Farage said he would rather have less prosperity and keep out foreigners.

Well then he, like you, is an idiot


Posted from TSR Mobile