Can't get the staff

[ReganAndCarter]

How's many times do some people need reminding that immigrants tend to contribute more to the state than they take?

The Eastern European ones - definitely. Ones on lilos in The Channel - never. Will eventually just swell the numbers in the crime-ridden problem ghetto areas of our big cities.

European immigrants contribute £5bn to UK economy but non-EU migrants 'cost £118bn'​

European immigrants contribute £5bn to UK economy but non-EU migrants

A report found that overall immigration was positive for Britain's finances

www.independent.co.uk

Migrants from outside the EU have taken £120billion more from the state than they paid in taxes over 17 years​

Non-EU migrants take more from State than they put in

The report by University College London found that immigrants had cost the country more in public services and State handouts than they had paid in taxes in every year between 1995 and 2011.

www.dailymail.co.uk

We voted to keep out hard working Poles, etc who are an asset to UK PLC. Yet we're still letting the world's undesirables sneak into the country in increasing numbers. Another Brexit benefit!

 

[Deleted member 174758]

And which ones did we stop from coming here with Brexit? Would that be the Eastern Europeans?

 

[JohnD]

the world's undesirables

It's great to see an 8-year old daily Wail article rolled out

Which doesn't actually say what the anti-foreigner campaigners would like it to say

Though it does say "Over the 17 fiscal years considered, the amount of public expenditures received by natives [Britons] exceeds the amount of government revenues they contributed in 12 instances."

Better boot out the sponging, idle, undesirable Brits, then.

 

[JohnD]

And what did the actual authors of the research (not the daily wail) say?

They said:

"Professor Christian Dustmann

The research provides an in-depth analysis of the net fiscal contribution of UK immigrants, drawing a distinction between immigrants from the 10 Central and East European EU member states that joined since 2004 (the A10), other European Economic Area (EEA) immigrants and non-EEA immigrants. Its main findings are:

The positive net fiscal contribution of recent immigrant cohorts (those arriving since 2000) from the A10 countries amounted to almost £5bn, while the net fiscal contributions of recent European immigrants from the rest of the EU totalled £15bn. Recent non-European immigrants' net contribution was likewise positive, at about £5bn. Over the same period, the net fiscal contribution of native UK born was negative, amounting to almost £617bn.

Immigrants who arrived since 2000 were 43% less likely than natives to receive state benefits or tax credits. They were also 7% less likely to live in social housing.

European immigrants who arrived since 2000 are on average better educated than natives (in 2011, 25% of immigrants from A10 countries and 62% of those from EU-15 countries had a university degree, while the comparable share is 24% among natives) and have higher employment rates (81% for A10, 70% for EU-15 and 70% for UK natives in 2011).

The value of the education of immigrants in the UK labour market who arrived since 2000 and that has been paid for in the immigrants' origin countries amounts to £6.8bn over the period between 2000 and 2011. By contributing to 'pure' public goods (such as defence or basic research), immigrants arriving since 2000 have saved the UK taxpayer an additional £8.5bn over the same period.

Considering all immigrants who were living in the UK over the years between 1995 and 2011, a period over which the net fiscal contribution of natives was negative (and accumulated to about £591bn), EEA immigrants contributed 10% more than natives (in relative terms), while non-EEA immigrants' contributions were almost 9% lower.

Over the same period from 1995 to 2011, immigrants who lived in the UK endowed the UK labour market with human capital that would have cost about £49bn if it were produced through the UK education system, and contributed about £82bn to fixed or 'pure' public goods.

Professor Christian Dustmann, Director of CReAM and co-author of the study, said:

"A key concern in the public debate on migration is whether immigrants contribute their fair share to the tax and welfare systems. Our new analysis draws a positive picture of the overall fiscal contribution made by recent immigrant cohorts, particularly of immigrants arriving from the EU.

"Responding to comments on our earlier report on this topic published last year, we performed extensive sensitivity analysis, which does not alter our main conclusions: immigration to the UK since 2000 has been of substantial net fiscal benefit, with immigrants contributing more than they have received in benefits and transfers. This is true for immigrants from Central and Eastern Europe as well as the rest of the EU.

"When we additionally consider that immigrants bring their own educational qualifications whose costs are borne by other countries and that they contribute to financing fixed public services such as defence, these contributions are even larger.

"European immigrants, particularly, both from the new accession countries and the rest of the European Union, make the most substantial contributions. This is mainly down to their higher average labour market participation compared with natives and their lower receipt of welfare benefits."

 

[Justin Passing]

The answer is probably yes - because they don't have so many private sector parasites feeding off them

But they're all private sector!. It may well be that people are wasteful with "government" money. The Govt just print some more.

 

[Deleted member 18243]

immigrants tend to contribute more to the state than they take?

Not where I live, they don't. How can a family of mother, father and 3 children with another one on the way be giving more than they take, when only the father works - the mother refusing to work because her culture doesn't allow it?

 

[noseall]

- the mother refusing to work

She's go three kids. I'd rather be at work it's easier.

 

[Mottie]

why hasn't mottie gone back to picking hops?

I’ll pick 'em, you can run them back to Greenock twice a week.

 

[Mottie]

They might hurt themselves.

Best way to learn.

 

[Notch7]

Well in 2017 Germany spent 52% more per head.

Have we increased, or do we intend to increase, spending on the NHS by half, or a similar figure?
??

Edit:
View attachment 275372
No, and the German expenditure will have gone up as well.

Edit2
theirs has gone up about 25% 2017 - 22 so theirs is still about as much higher than ours as it was.


Whereas Health spending as a % of GDP more healthy:

View attachment 275373

That is certainly similar to European countries. It begs the question, do different countries deliver better value for money?

Yes I thought Jeremy Hunt was lying.


Perhaps the other countries don’t use their health service as a way for politicians to get rich by giving out contracts to all their mates.

PFI repayments are quite expensive

 

[JP_]

Not where I live, they don't. How can a family of mother, father and 3 children with another one on the way be giving more than they take, when only the father works - the mother refusing to work because her culture doesn't allow it?

All about averages

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Schools should go back to the old days and have craft blocks in them. Carpentry, metalwork, plumbing, bricklaying and general building/painting/tiling/decorating skills. Get kids interested and give them a taste of that type of work before leaving school.

I agree, but....

Wasn't that stopped on H&S grounds?

 

[Mottie]

I agree, but....

Wasn't that stopped on H&S grounds?

I don’t think so. I think it was stopped on the grounds of the push for more academic qualifications.

 

[ajohn]

A lot of the costs of migrants - refugee types is handling them. The leave or stay aspects,

At the end of March 2022, 85,007 people seeking asylum were being supported by the Government.
Of these, 26,859 individuals were in receipt of support under Section 98, up from 10,294 the previous year. A further 52,715 were in receipt of Section 95 support and 5,433 people were in receipt of Section 4 support.
People seeking asylum are banned from working and are provided with under £6 per day

Note not all get support. The numbers stack up as processing isn't terribly quick. It can take years. They wont all be illegals. R

There were 55,146 asylum applications (main applicants only) in the UK in the year ending March 2022, an 56% increase from the previous year. The increase in applications is likely to be due to the continued global increase in the number of people displaced due to war and conflict.
In the year ending March 2022, the top five countries of origin of people seeking asylum were Iran, Iraq, Eritrea, Albania, and Syria.
In terms of the number of asylum applications per head of population, the UK ranks 18th highest in Europe.

It's worse for others.

From what I can gather Rwanda has no intention to take that many. Removing significant numbers wont be cheap.

 

[Justin Passing]

I don’t think so. I think it was stopped on the grounds of the push for more academic qualifications.

At the school I know most about they don't have the facility to drill a hole. . I spose it's a whole workshop just for a few kids.