high immigration from poor countries = lower proportion of rich/skilled to poor/unskilled = higher tax burden on the wealthier/less money into public services. or: high immigration from any country = overcrowding the country = a beijing effect
in my opinion we should aim to have as much emigration as we do immigration and balance the numbers, and if that means having virtually no immigration - so be it. our goal shouldn't be to increase our population - if anything, it should be to decrease it. the number of people that have entered this country in the last decade is staggering. it's causing unemployment of the people who were here first and were born here; this isn't an ethnic argument, this is me saying that our people don't have a duty to sacrifice their job market for people wanting to live here. if they want to live here, they're going to need to prove that they're going to be a good contribution, not someone who is going to do the jobs that our youths should be doing for work experience. we should only be providing means for immigration if there is a sector that specifically is under-supplied and that should only go on a work-permit/temporary basis, because under supply isn't permanent. also, we should be using a strict skill point system based on how likely it is that a person is going to bring benefit to the country economically, e.g. not poor people, mostly. our nation state democracy should be based on serving our own people and voters, not people from other countries, and frankly, if you think I'm racist for saying this on the grounds that uncontrolled immigration is a strain on our welfare system, jobs and living space, then you're not worth anybody's time on here. it's a ridiculous notion to cry "racist" when there are logical reasons for things like borders and border control. if this is the case, then principally, we should be opening our doors to all countries and not have any limits - yeah, see how that turns out.