Immigration cap threatens £100m wind turbine project

Grizzly Mouse · Post by **Grizzly Mouse** » 22 Sep 2010, 03:54

Japan seems to be doing OK despite having an aging population and almost no immigration.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 22 Sep 2010, 09:58

RogueMale wrote:immigration: yes it's been too high, and should be cut back drastically.

This means the natives would have to do all the low-paid jobs.

Silas · Post by **Silas** » 22 Sep 2010, 10:01

emordnilap wrote:
Totally_Baffled wrote:2,000,000 extra people over 10 years, excluding illegal immigrants and dependants is an issue, it needs to be managed!
Visiting the UK reminds me of all the reasons not to visit.

It would seem nearly 200,000 people a year would disagree with you

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 22 Sep 2010, 10:37

emordnilap wrote:
RogueMale wrote:immigration: yes it's been too high, and should be cut back drastically.
This means the natives would have to do all the low-paid jobs.

Its ironic you post that – this thread is about them taking high skilled jobs!!! 

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 22 Sep 2010, 11:45

Totally_Baffled wrote:
emordnilap wrote:
RogueMale wrote:immigration: yes it's been too high, and should be cut back drastically.
This means the natives would have to do all the low-paid jobs.
Its ironic you post that – this thread is about them taking high skilled jobs!!! 

It's a problem many western countries are going to have to face sooner or later...immigrants do the menial, lowest-paid jobs, serving, hotel jobs, what have you.

If we don't accept them - and those that are here earn enough to return home - then our 'unemployment' problems will be solved! We'll have the pick of sandwich-making jobs.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 22 Sep 2010, 13:30

Britain must be a wonderful place - so many people want to come here.

(Factoid of the day: There were no border controls before 1905. No immigration restrictions.)

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 22 Sep 2010, 13:59

biffvernon wrote:Britain must be a wonderful place - so many people want to come here.

(Factoid of the day: There were no border controls before 1905. No immigration restrictions.)

Another Factoid of the day:- That was probably because the population was a fraction of what it is today and we had as many people leaving for the US as we had coming in from Europe and the Empire.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 22 Sep 2010, 14:13

emordnilap wrote:
Totally_Baffled wrote:
emordnilap wrote: This means the natives would have to do all the low-paid jobs.
Its ironic you post that – this thread is about them taking high skilled jobs!!! 
It's a problem many western countries are going to have to face sooner or later...immigrants do the menial, lowest-paid jobs, serving, hotel jobs, what have you.

If we don't accept them - and those that are here earn enough to return home - then our 'unemployment' problems will be solved! We'll have the pick of sandwich-making jobs.

With less unemployment, the low paid jobs would have to pay slightly more as there would be competition for employees. Also there is more pressure from the government on the long term unemployed, who are largely unskilled which is why they are unemployed now, to get jobs, so there would be a huge reduction in unemployment. That employment would be at slightly better pay rates.

So, what's the problem?

I do accept that in a recession there are skilled people and school leavers on the unemployment register which is why I referred to the long term unemployed.

The Labour Party has used immigrants taking low paid jobs to keep wage inflation rates low over the past 13 years by keeping unemployment high. Fancy that, a socialist government screwing the workers!

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 22 Sep 2010, 14:18

The Labour Party has used immigrants taking low paid jobs to keep wage inflation rates low over the past 13 years by keeping unemployment high. Fancy that, a socialist government screwing the workers!

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 22 Sep 2010, 14:30

kenneal wrote:That employment would be at slightly better pay rates.

So, what's the problem?

None at all if things work out the way you say and those people are happy doing crappy jobs for a little more than is currently paid.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 22 Sep 2010, 14:31

Silas wrote:
emordnilap wrote:
Totally_Baffled wrote:2,000,000 extra people over 10 years, excluding illegal immigrants and dependants is an issue, it needs to be managed!
Visiting the UK reminds me of all the reasons not to visit.
It would seem nearly 200,000 people a year would disagree with you

That could easily be just one of the reasons.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 22 Sep 2010, 14:40

Grizzly Mouse wrote:Japan seems to be doing OK despite having an aging population and almost no immigration.

Japan was up the creek for ages trying to get out of recession from about twenty years ago. They are suffering from an ageing population and shortages of labour.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2193853.stm

In the 1990s, the flow reversed, as Japan liberalised its immigration laws to encourage Brazilians of Japanese descent to come to the country to help solve the labour shortage. Now there are 200,000 Japanese-Brazilians living in Japan,

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-p ... 097929.stm

But in 1990, facing a labour shortage, the government came up with a compromise.

"The country is ageing and so the government has to think about introducing unskilled workers,"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009 ... on-exports

Experts warned, however, that the recovery could quickly fizzle out without improvements in demand at home, where falling wages and job fears have hit household spending.

http://www.ipinglobal.com/ipin-live/new ... -recession

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 22 Sep 2010, 20:25

kenneal wrote:
biffvernon wrote:Britain must be a wonderful place - so many people want to come here.

(Factoid of the day: There were no border controls before 1905. No immigration restrictions.)
Another Factoid of the day:- That was probably because the population was a fraction of what it is today and we had as many people leaving for the US as we had coming in from Europe and the Empire.

No, there was just no such thing as an idea that people should not be free to move around the world and settle in new places. The real change started with the British Nationality and Status Aliens Act of 1914 when the main concern was with Germans.

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 22 Sep 2010, 21:39

No, there was just no such thing as an idea that people should not be free to move around the world and settle in new places. The real change started with the British Nationality and Status Aliens Act of 1914 when the main concern was with Germans.

Yes, because of the reasons Kenneal just stated!

Britain had half the population (38 million) and the globe had under 2 billion people.

Large parts of the world were sparsly populated. Countries like the US had under 70,000,000 people in - a number the UK is expeceted to acheive sometime in the 2020's!

No wonder no one gave the implications much thought...

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 22 Sep 2010, 22:17

kenneal wrote:
That employment would be at slightly better pay rates.

So, what's the problem?

None at all if things work out the way you say and those people are happy doing crappy jobs for a little more than is currently paid.

If you massively shrunk the welfare state for the able bodied and forced the millions of people under the dole into work and at the same time introduced tight immigration controls, you would solve 2 problems at once - our long-term unemployment would go down and we would need less immigrants.

At least in theory...