Migrant workers help UK economy

Migrant workers have boosted the UK economy, with their influx not having a negative effect on employment or wage levels, the TUC has argued.

Foreign workers made a positive net economic contribution, it said, with their share of tax paid exceeding the cost of supplying public services.....


....."Migrant workers are making a substantial contribution to Britain's economy," said Brendan Barber, the TUC's general secretary.
"They haven't caused mass unemployment or held down wages as some would have us believe."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6766003.stm

Something the Daily Mail and others should take on board. Instead they choose to run

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770

[Osem]

Of course there are alternative views:

http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/brie...t+of+migration

The problem is the the facts are unclear and whilst there is no doubt that a proportion of migrants directly contribute a great deal financially to the economy, there are many who do not. These may be asylum seekers who (through no fault of their own) are unable to work and therefore pay no tax and migrants whose earnings are so low they pay little or no tax.

There is no mention in the articles you quote of how these conclusions were arrived at by the TUC and until HMG gets to grips with the situation and produces credible migration figures there will always be serious doubt as to what the real situation is.

Migration Watch is a anti-Immigration group, their whole goal is to fight Immigration. While the TUC does not have a ideological motive to issue such a report so I am inclined to belive them over a anti-immigration group.

[Asghar]

They must be different to the ones who have been living near my area, all they do is drink and urinate on the pavement.

Don't they have toilets in Poland.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Damien

Migration Watch is a anti-Immigration group, their whole goal is to fight Immigration. While the TUC does not have a ideological motive to issue such a report so I am inclined to belive them over a anti-immigration group.

The point is Damien that they have at least backed up their claims with figures - from what I can see, all the TUC have done is issued a statement - what is it based on? Where are the facts/figures?

What Migration Watch are/aren't is a matter of opinion but since when does being anti something preclude anyone from being right? Are the groups set up with an anti Iraq war agenda wrong? Do you discount them just because they have an agenda?

The TUC's ideological motives for issuing such a report might be that it fits in entirely with the reason for their existence - namely to protect the rights of working people. Having a motive doesn't necessarily make them wrong either by the way - they just haven't backed up their claim. If/when they do we'll all be able to compare their methodology with that of Migration Watch and make our own decisions on whose stack up although from what you've said that won't matter to you because you've already formed your opinion.

---------- Post added at 10:27 ---------- Previous post was at 10:24 ----------

Originally Posted by Asghar

They must be different to the ones who have been living near my area, all they do is drink and urinate on the pavement.

Don't they have toilets in Poland.

Well to be fair there are plenty of indigenous yobs who do that too sadly

[Derek]

Originally Posted by Asghar

They must be different to the ones who have been living near my area, all they do is drink and urinate on the pavement.

Can't say we have that problem here. Most of the Poles I deal with are decent folk (with an unhealthy disregard for UK traffic laws but aside from that law-abiding) and unlike most of the homegrown 'customers' actually have jobs.

Of course there are people from countries who have recently come to the UK (Not Poland) who aren't as friendly and useful as the Poles but I won't comment on them just yet. It might be the initial culture shock that will hopefully wear off.

[vbnmu]

What was good about the whole 'immigration affair' was that report stating that immigrants should be given leaflets about the way of living in the UK. Big up for that, especially the spitting, queuing, apologising and the handshake bit! But they should distribute leaflets to schools as well, so that some silly youngster doesn't think its alright to dump his chiken&chips takeaway on the pavement!
Too much of anything is not good. Same goes to immigration!

The point is Damien that they have at least backed up their claims with figures - from what I can see, all the TUC have done is issued a statement - what is it based on? Where are the facts/figures?

http://www.tuc.org.uk/law/tuc-13413-f0.cfm

[sherer]

for every report saying they are usefull there will be reports saying they aren't.. whatever view you have you can always put spin on these and if you want the anti immigration people can just choose to ignore these pro reports anyway

i was saying to someone the other day that if they all went "back to where they came from" as alot want I don't think I would be able to get into work. I know my office wouldn't be clean as we would have no cleaners.. plus alot of other jobs.. alot of nurses as from other countries as they would be missed plus the hundreds of other useful jobs they do too..

i've met more work shy, chavs, jobs from the UK than I have immigrants

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Damien

http://www.tuc.org.uk/law/tuc-13413-f0.cfm

Well after a brief scan all I've found there is a few HMG fiscal statistics from 1999, the validity of which Migration Watch are challenging if you care to read their article and what it says about the assumptioms made in the Govt's calculations.

So, what's happened since 1999/2000? Mass economic migration from Eastern Europe. The long term fiscal effects of this won't be able to be determined until it is known how many of these people decide to settle here and what happens to the economy thereafter.

---------- Post added at 11:21 ---------- Previous post was at 11:19 ----------

Originally Posted by sherer

i've met more work shy, chavs, jobs from the UK than I have immigrants

Well that's a fair point but you'd expect that since the indigenous population far exceeds the migrant one.

[JackB]

Councils ordered to carry out charm offensive for migrants and travellers

Ruth Kelly is ordering councils to take part in a huge charm offensive on behalf of migrants and travellers.

The Communities Secretary wants town halls to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money 'combating misinformation'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770

Are these BBC and TUC reports inspired by Ruth Kelly by any chance?

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Osem

Well after a brief scan all I've found there is a few HMG fiscal statistics from 1999, the validity of which Migration Watch are challenging if you care to read their article and what it says about the assumptioms made in the Govt's calculations.

So, what's happened since 1999/2000? Mass economic migration from Eastern Europe. The long term fiscal effects of this won't be able to be determined until it is known how many of these people decide to settle here and what happens to the economy thereafter.

I've had a cursory glance as well, but what they are actually saying is that population growth in general tends to help the economy by creating more demand (page 10; the baby boom example is quite interesting). It also says that, because migrants tend to be young adults, they are less likely to use public services (i.e. they have already been educated), which plays a large part in them being net contributors). (page 19). Page 18 also gives data on net contributions during 2003/2004 (when on average more was taken out than was paid in, but this was particularly true of the natives)

Edit: figured out how to copy from that article

5.2 In 2005 the IPPR updated this work to cover the five-year period from
1999/00 to 2003/4.44 The study presented similar findings in a different way:
immigrants consistently made a higher net annual fiscal contribution than
British born people. During periods when the budget was in surplus,
immigrants made a higher net contribution; when the budget was in deficit
immigrants’ net negative contribution was lower:
• In 1999/00, immigrants net annual fiscal contribution index (NAFI = the
ratio of contributions to consumption of public services) was 1.06, five
points higher than the 1.01 NAFI for those born in the UK.
• In 2003/4, the gap had grown to 11 points as immigrants’ NAFI stood at
0.99, while that for the UK-born was 0.88.

Originally Posted by JackB

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770

Are these BBC and TUC reports inspired by Ruth Kelly by any chance?

The BBC are reporting on the TUC report, and a report takes time to make so I doubt it was inspired by Ruth Kelly.

Also, The Daily mail are a horrible, sorry excusive for a 'news'paper. That report is full of emotive words, when actually she is just asking councils provide pro-migrant information to stop, places like the Mail, printing lies in order in inflame tensions.

[JackB]

The Mail seem to be more in touch than Ruth Kelly in my opinion.

Originally Posted by JackB

The Mail seem to be more in touch than Ruth Kelly in my opinion.

But who reads Ruth Kelly to get their news? News sources should not 'be in touch' with anyone in that kind of sense. Its not a club, or the Reactionist Xenophopic Weekly. Its a newspaper that uses emotion, selective use (or lack of use) of facts, misleading headlines, and use of images to suit their own agenda.

I.E The recent Scandel over the BAE contract, although Blair was one of the lesser people that could be blamed, they featured a big picture of him looking smug. A murder happened a few years ago which the Mail blamed on the game Manhunt, when it was pointed out by the police that the game was found in the victims bedroom, the mail ignored it and continued to attack this game that 'inspired a kid to murder' etc etc. Lets not forget the Winterval lies as well.

Anti-Immgration, Anti-Liberal, Anti-Muslim, Anti-BBC, Anti-Gaming, Anti-Truth. I Dont mind if people want to read something that agrees with them and is 'in touch' with people but I do mind it pretending to be a good source of news.