British Expats

British Expats (https://britishexpats.com/forum/)
-   Take it Outside! (https://britishexpats.com/forum/take-outside-67/)
-   -   Post EU Referendum (https://britishexpats.com/forum/take-outside-67/post-eu-referendum-879308/)

TGA Aug 6th 2016 5:46 am

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by amideislas (Post 12020873)
It used to be the lefties that had all the idealistic delusions. What happened?

They still do. Obviously

Editha Aug 6th 2016 6:48 am

re: Post EU Referendum
 
Immigration and jobs is not a zero sum game. There isn't a pot of jobs to be shared out, meaning that with fewer migrants there will be more job opportunities for the resident population.

Immigrants create jobs as well as taking them, and all the evidence is that if you reduce immigration you create unemployment.

amideislas Aug 6th 2016 6:55 am

re: Post EU Referendum
 
In other news, aside from the declining economy stuff, I notice a deafening silence from Downing street as of late. Not much newsworthy from Boris or the other musketeers (which is rather unusual).

mfesharne Aug 6th 2016 7:01 am

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by amideislas (Post 12021004)
In other news, aside from the declining economy stuff, I notice a deafening silence from Downing street as of late. Not much newsworthy from Boris or the other musketeers (which is rather unusual).

P'raps that might be something to do with them being in recess for the summer?

House of Commons recess dates - UK Parliament

morpeth Aug 6th 2016 7:21 am

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Editha (Post 12021001)
Immigration and jobs is not a zero sum game. There isn't a pot of jobs to be shared out, meaning that with fewer migrants there will be more job opportunities for the resident population.

Immigrants create jobs as well as taking them, and all the evidence is that if you reduce immigration you create unemployment.

Interesting the continued argument that reducing immigration creates unemployment, as opposed to common sense that there are times when increasing the supply of labor in periods of slower economic growth means more unemployment. Also why would increasing the supply of labor that is less skilled or educated in an era of the "knowledge economy" be a long term benefit.

Editha Aug 6th 2016 7:30 am

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by morpeth (Post 12021010)
Interesting the continued argument that reducing immigration creates unemployment, as opposed to common sense that there are times when increasing the supply of labor in periods of slower economic growth means more unemployment. Also why would increasing the supply of labor that is less skilled or educated in an era of the "knowledge economy" be a long term benefit.

This is because research has shown that the 'common sense' view is wrong:
The Labour Market Effects of Immigration | The Migration Observatory.

amideislas Aug 6th 2016 7:45 am

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by mfesharne (Post 12021007)
P'raps that might be something to do with them being in recess for the summer?

House of Commons recess dates - UK Parliament

Ahh yes. Off to Barbados. No doubt working on yet another big "trade deal".

Bipat Aug 6th 2016 7:50 am

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Editha (Post 12021013)
This is because research has shown that the 'common sense' view is wrong:
The Labour Market Effects of Immigration | The Migration Observatory.

The point of Brexit is that immigration will be according to need and from around the world, EU migrants will still come.
At the moment with free movement of EU migrants there is a restriction on non-EU migrants in order to keep overall numbers at a manageable level.

Editha Aug 6th 2016 8:08 am

re: Post EU Referendum
 
Bipat, I feel rather sorry for you. Your belief that restrictions on non-EU migrants will be lifted after Brexit is wrong and you are going to be sadly disappointed.

Immigration has been running at 300,000 p.a, only half of which is from the EU. The government has an immigration target of 100,000 p.a. So, even if all EU immigration was stopped (actually impossible) then the government would still be looking to reduce non-EU migration by more than 50,000 p.a.

Bipat Aug 6th 2016 8:42 am

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Editha (Post 12021027)
Bipat, I feel rather sorry for you. Your belief that restrictions on non-EU migrants will be lifted after Brexit is wrong and you are going to be sadly disappointed.

Immigration has been running at 300,000 p.a, only half of which is from the EU. The government has an immigration target of 100,000 p.a. So, even if all EU immigration was stopped (actually impossible) then the government would still be looking to reduce non-EU migration by more than 50,000 p.a.

Why would "you feel rather sorry"? --I was merely giving an opinion about control of immigration. I did not say that restrictions on non-EU immigrants would be lifted.
I repeated the Brexit aim that the rules of entry would be the same for all immigrants. The proprtion of EU/non-EU would obviously vary year to year.

jimenato Aug 6th 2016 9:04 am

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Bipat (Post 12021035)
Why would "you feel rather sorry"? --I was merely giving an opinion about control of immigration. I did not say that restrictions on non-EU immigrants would be lifted.
I repeated the Brexit aim that the rules of entry would be the same for all immigrants. The proprtion of EU/non-EU would obviously vary year to year.

That's the Brexit aim is it?

amideislas Aug 6th 2016 9:17 am

re: Post EU Referendum
 
Moving target. But that's the very "freedom" we were shooting for. Freedom from silly stuff like "plans" and "rules". Freedom to make it up as you go along. That's what brexit is all about. Even the freedom to change the very definition of the word. Or its history. Now that's freedom. Feels good , huh?

Anyway, this is an interesting viewpoint:

Biggest risk is a Brexit boom, not a Brexit bust

Bipat Aug 6th 2016 9:39 am

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by amideislas (Post 12021048)
Moving target. But that's the very "freedom" we were shooting for. Freedom from silly stuff like "plans" and "rules". Freedom to make it up as you go along. That's what brexit is all about. Even the freedom to change the very definition of the word. Or its history. Now that's freedom. Feels good , huh?

Anyway, this is an interesting viewpoint:

Biggest risk is a Brexit boom, not a Brexit bust

Nobody was suggesting anarchy. The ability of a nation state to make its own laws/rules/decisions was the aim. Freedom to leave a particular trade organisation.
There was a difference of opinion as to the latter and a referendum held to ascertain the majority view.

Wol Aug 6th 2016 11:10 am

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Editha (Post 12021027)
Bipat, I feel rather sorry for you. Your belief that restrictions on non-EU migrants will be lifted after Brexit is wrong and you are going to be sadly disappointed.

Immigration has been running at 300,000 p.a, only half of which is from the EU. The government has an immigration target of 100,000 p.a. So, even if all EU immigration was stopped (actually impossible) then the government would still be looking to reduce non-EU migration by more than 50,000 p.a.

I believe the figure is over that, and is for NET immigration.

morpeth Aug 6th 2016 11:45 am

re: Post EU Referendum
 

Originally Posted by Editha (Post 12021013)
This is because research has shown that the 'common sense' view is wrong:
The Labour Market Effects of Immigration | The Migration Observatory.

Thanks for the link to an excellent article. The section called "Evidence Gaps and Limitations" clearly outlines the challenges of the subject. I am more familiar with US and Switzerland, but the article covering the UK does point out :

1. There is a difference in type of immigration , whether EU or non EU- the article points out that in studies from 1975 to 1994, and again from 1995-2010 non EU immigration associated with reduction of employment of UK workers. Le Pen in a recent interview cited such studies showing the same in France.
2. The second issue is type of skills and education of the immigrants, that the higher skills and education of immigrants can have a positive effect on economy and hence unemployment.
3. My own opinion is that such studies need to take into account issues such as real wages and the effect of overall labor supply and the potential multiplier effect of higher real wages to more properly look effects of immigration on employment rate and wages for the native born, Most studies I have seen do not properly in my opinion consider this factor enough.

Still think common sense wins, the greater increase in the labor supply in an economy not growing fast enough to absorb the increase ij the labor supply, this can effect real wages and unemployment rates in a negative fashion especially for lower income or lower skilled workers.

I am more familiar with US market, I have seen first-hand examples of effects of immigration. For example in an area I lived small contractors gradually being pushed out of market as contractors using Mexican labor under bid them, resulting in more unemployment among native born workers. So therefore I am supposed to believe putting native born workers earning higher wages out of work by immigrants with lower wages and often not paying taxes, is a net benefit, don't think so. At least this explains resentment of those who see the competition.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:20 am.

Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.