Forcing down annual levels of immigration to the tens of thousands, as promised in the Conservative manifesto, would inflict a significant cost on the economy and the public finances
Any news headline connecting the cutting of immigration numbers to damaging the economy that is published in the context of today’s disastrous and failed Western immigration policies is a fallacy, and an example of the socialist left’s attempt to confuse the discourse.
While immigration is necessary for economic sustainability, the calls to cut immigration are eminently reasonable, precisely because of the track record of the Muslim migrants who have been let into the UK and other Western nations. It is not because Westerners are broadly rejecting of immigrants. To spell it out: Muslims who escalate crime rates, create no-go zones and Sharia enclaves, and erect mosques that are funded by Saudi Arabia are the drags on the economy. Their mission is jihad by immigration. In a “bombshell” report by the Express, “non-European” mass immigration (aka Muslim migrants) is costing taxpayers 17 billion dollars annually.
Cutting harmful immigration is necessary for the survival of the West, survival as much as is bringing in a controlled number of immigrants who integrate and contribute economically.
“Cutting immigration to tens of thousands would inflict £115bn of damage on the economy says think tank”, by Ben Chu, Independent, May 24, 2017:
Forcing down annual levels of immigration to the tens of thousands, as promised in the Conservative manifesto, would inflict a significant cost on the economy and the public finances, according to a new report.
The Centre for Economics and Business Research estimates that reducing net immigration to below 100,000, from its current level of around 270,000, would reduce the level of UK GDP by between 1.5 per cent and 3 per cent by 2025 relative to otherwise and damage the tax take by around £15bn.
And by 2030 the economy could between 4.1 per cent and 5.7 per cent smaller, equivalent to roughly £115bn in today’s money.
The CEBR argues immigration does not simply make the economy bigger due to a higher population, but boosts productivity growth by filling gaps in the workforce and enhancing creativity in key high-growth sectors such as IT and consultancy.
It estimates that the GDP damage by 2030 could translate into a hit to GDP per capita (so adjusting for a smaller projected population) of between 1.9 per cent and 2.7 per cent.
“The numbers here are quite shocking – they display the extent to which the UK economic model has become based on migration and show the scale of the potential negative consequences if migration slows to a very small amount compared with the current pace,” said the CEBR.
The CEBR estimates echo the scenarios presented by Jonathan Portes and Giuseppe Forte for the National Institute of Economic and Social Research last year, which found that UK GDP could be up to 8.2 per cent smaller by 2030 relative to otherwise and GDP per capita 5.3 per cent smaller if immigration rates were significantly cut.
Portes and Forte also only projected a very modest boost to low-skilled wages as a result of the fall in immigration, in keeping with empirical studies showing very minor downward pressure on the wages of such workers from higher immigration over the past decade.
Net immigration to the UK in the year to September is estimated to have been 273,000 by the Office for National Statistics, down from a peak rate of 336,000 seen a year earlier.
The Conservative manifesto published last week included the pledge, first made by David Cameron before the 2010 election, to reduce immigration to the “tens of thousands”……
The Independent have launched a petition to rally public support for ditching the target and to highlight the positive contribution made by immigrants, often vilified in populist politics
Savvy Kafir says
If Muslims are allowed to pour into Europe and wage Demographic Jihad until they rule the continent, the economies of Europe will tank eventually anyway — just as they have in every Muslim-majority nation that’s not sitting on oil.
John F. says
Immigration mist be controlled to protect your citizens and culture. Allowing Muslims in your country is destructive to both.
Dawn says
Economy or saving human lives ! Saving our people is more important
Bill W. says
Who knew the British economy ran up fellas have 4 wives 13 kid all on the dole, creating mayhem for kaffar and pushing Sharia law everywhere they go. Look at the economy of every Islamic middle eastern country except S.A. (which is swimming in oil) .What economy models like Borsian ,Albania, have Islamic rule with the Sharia laws are the broken toys of economic plate forms. You would be better off calling up the USSR, China and Cuba and say we will take everyone in your prisoners and let them immigrate to England, you would get a more sane better class of people.
David M says
Brits should start booing every Tory & Labor politician that makes a public speech, it would at least be a start to let them know enough is enough. Their policies are broken & failed, we need to let them know this openly, booing them would be start.
Mickey says
So these crazy “think tank” political elite think it is better for Islamists to kill their citizens in lieu of getting rid of them because of the economy? What bat shit crazy people. This is just why they are getting so many terrorists. Maybe start arming your citizens so they can defend themselves. UK is nuts!
Berengaria says
Most News From the British Government laments the loss of Muslim Immigration more than the deaths of their own British Subjects by the Same Muslim Immigrants.
I guess the Royal Poofs benefit more from the Muslim Invasion than the loss of their own Citizens.
A Sick Country that needs to get some guts & Kick the Terrorists out, before it’s too late.
utis says
What is this “think tank?” Who funds them? Oil money? Where are their data proving their statements? How does immigration improve or support the economy? By funding research foundations and agencies that get employed to service the immigrants, like the welfare system, for example?
If these guys don’t have reliable data, their pronouncements are as worthwhile as the Oracle of Delphi’s.
davej says
Governments and their policies are sponsored by Corporate money. Corporations are afraid that slowing population growth will result in fewer consumers of the products they market – from cars to ketchup and diapers to digital devices.
They want more consumers and it doesn’t matter to them if they are employed or on the dole, actually the’d prefer them to be on the dole so they don’t have to create jobs or pay them.
Corporations fund studies like this to justify ever more immigration and they are not worried about the social stress because the Corporate owners are already rich and live in gated and guarded enclaves. They also own the Media that tells us that this is a great idea and we will just have to put up with the increasing number of terror attacks.
Ed Lee says
Davej, I agree completely. And I extend a big “thank you” to Christine Williams for this article. Everyone needs to start reading the business/financial press to understand
that corporations view the jihad problem as trivial.
Halal Bacon says
and policing all the jihadis is cost free?
Jim says
An enormous cost, and not even mentioned, except by you. Proper policing , since it isn’t being done, likely costs more money than U.K. Has. Failure to properly police has enormous human cost, as we saw in Rotherham, and again at concert in Manchester (as well as countless other less spectacular examples over the years). And all the private security necessitated by the failure of policing is an enormous drag on the economy.
Kurt Vogel says
Robots and automation will fix the need for immigrants I hope. Maybe in 100 years people will be saying hmmm maybe we should have kept the Islamists instead of these Terminator robots 🙂 I kid but thought just popped in there.
roger woodhouse says
50 years ago the ‘experts ‘forcast that robots would be doing all the ‘manual ‘work and we would all be either out there enjoying leisure pursuits to occupy our time or just sitting around.What happened?
billybob says
They are coming. Just be patient a bit longer. Already robots run industry. General purpose “houseboats” are more complicated than industrial robots.
billybob says
I meant to say “House bots”. – autocorrected
Kiki says
I would think an increase of terrorist attacks would hurt the economy a lot more than cutting immigration….if these attacks continue, that’d be enough to turn away tourists.
Besides……saving lives is more important than the economy. England has every right to slow immigration so they can better protect themselves.
Matthieu Baudin says
“… While immigration is necessary for economic sustainability, the calls to cut immigration are eminently reasonable, precisely because of the track record of the Muslim migrants who have been let into the UK and other Western nations…”
The U.K. is an awfully overcrowded place these days, all the cities now have people living on top of each other. Sometimes population growth is a good thing but in some places and times it isn’t. Population levels in France, by way of comparison, are nowhere as critical as in the U.K. – the population density across the channel is less than half. Of course the quality of life issue, via overcrowding, is made all the worst by taking in loads of people who bring along heavy cultural baggage, tolerance of violence and little respect for the host community or it’s laws.
Michael Copeland says
We need to be suspicious of “think tanks”.
They seem to exist as a source of ostensibly independent quotes for politicians and media.
Until the funding source is known their independence must be mistrusted.
Keith Parsels says
I’m really beginning to think the European communities at trying to commit suicide!
David, Thailand says
Turkeys celebrating Christmas!
Leon Jensen says
Not credible. Most of these immigrants have no marketable skills. But they must be given welfare (Jizra) so they don’t go crazy and burn the place down. A net drain on the economy.
Eur says
Controlled immigration is positive. Muslim immigration, controlled or uncontrolled … is a demographic, cultural and physical suicide.
Peacemaker says
Yes, UK need immigration, but not Muslim immigration.
Atheist Kaffur says
This is all a plot by the new world order cabal who are in collusion with Islamist to destroy free speech and nationhood. This so weird, multinational capitalists, left wingers and Islamist all together holding hands and singing kumbaiya. What do they have in common? One world religion to oppress everyone, one world economy and currency to control every nation and the leftards will be the sacrificial lambs, useful idiots just like in Iran. What? The armed struggle to impose socialism and eventually communism lead by feminists who want desperately to be put in their place or to cuckold men. Delusion is so amazing.
Tom says
They must mean that all those workers in the social services industry in the UK will become unemployed if they stop the freeloaders with huge families from getting in and living off the taxpayer.
Just think of the money that will be saved in medical, welfare, housing subsidies, unemployment insurance, child benefit payments, the list goes on and on. Hell they may even be able to afford to look after those Brits who are impoverished now and unable to get help.
Ben Kennedy says
Thinking that reducing (certainly eliminating moslem elements) immigration will harm the economy is a perverted twisting of reality. If they factored in the cost savings by eliminating personal and property damage, as well as the staggering increase in enhanced security the moslem immigration has caused, it would likely show a surplus in the GDP.
Clearly they have not ask the insurance companies what the moslems have cost that society. Perhaps the economic damage spoken of is the reduced necessity for emergency services and the people who earn their living in that field of work.
Embracing the Mohammedans expecting reciprocal love from them is as close to sleeping in a nest of toxic vipers as is imaginable.
Ben Kennedy says
Creating employment for your citizens, in repairing the destruction done by your moslem immigrants is not an economic positive. Such reasoning is as obscene as trying to say Hitler was a force for good in the British Economy, because he created jobs in salvage, construction and medical services there when he was in power.
UNCLE VLADDI says
Then I guess “the success” of “THE ECONOMY” is directly and inversely proportional to “THE UNEMPLOYMENT,” right?!
Rob says
The economic contribution of (at least first generation) immigrants to any country is usually offset by the increased government expenses (goods and services) that those immigrants require. Why don’t European countries (and the U.S. too, if needs be) just pay that money to their native people for their own people to have more babies? Result: more workers and consumers and reduced (or no) immigration.
billybob says
If they want immigrants, who says they have to be Muslims? There is an Indian subcontinent there bursting at the seams with Hindus and other religions. They would make good citizens. Then there are all the Europeans who will be fleeing Sweden, France, Germany, and other European countries soon. If Britain was smart, once they have completed Brexit and passed legislation banning Muslim immigration, they could market themselves as the place to be for those fleeing the Muslim invasion in Europe. These European immigrants would of course bring their high skills along and make the British economy bloom.
Zé says
Don’t you realize that the limits to immigration you defend are different than the limits most British want?
Most of you are talking about muslim migration and most British have no problem with that. They want to limit European migration.
Most British are lazy. Very lazy. Muslim migration do not endanger their jobs since most muslims are even more lazy. European migration endangers British jobs. Because they have at least a high school education, work hard, work overtime and are very motivated.
I work in a factory where the shop-floor boss is Slovenian, there are Portuguese and Polish team leaders, several maintenance engineers are eastern Europeans. One Portuguese went from general operative to junior supervisor in a year.
This is what the British do not want, lose the better paid jobs because companies will offer them to the best workers, which rarely are British.
Obviously the economy will suffer with cuting migration because the productive migrants are the ones being cut.
Peterson says
If you say immigration is is a must bring Indians, Chinese or Japanies who can contribute to your economies. Why are you bringing in parasites that hates you and dreaming of conquering you?