So explain to me how you & I benefit from the rise in immigration

[contentiouscat]

Please explain to me who except the already rich employers (and translators) are benefitting - im not trying to be contentious I would just like to understand.

They are cheap labour therefore why should a british employer pay a decent wage i.e enough for you and I to pay our mortgage when they can get an immigrant willing to live 20 to a house in substandard conditions. So wages will go down.

They dont pay much tax because they are on minimum wage plus are sending a lot of their wages out of the country.

They are entitled to healthcare and as this report says are costing the police money.
news.uk.msn.com/Article.aspx?cp-documentid=6167846

I also read yesterday that european immigrants are entitled to tax credits for their children who still live abroad (wtf), hospitals, police, school have to employ translators - of course this is all coming out of the piggy bank you and I have paid into for years and will continue to.

I just dont get it - SORRY!

It does vary where you live as well- I mean 2shoes you live in an area where there are a particualarly high number of migrant workers, the area I come from hasn't so much, and certainly MIL woudln't have her job now without those as they ahd been totally unable to recruit in that sector. Now I know some sectors are transfereed abroad as Blu says- but that's just not true of all sectors, MIL workss in a factory atatched to a produce farm growing a aprticualr product for a particular, hugely domestic product, not a product that would fare well in the developing economies (also a small operator that woudlnt be able to transfer).

Ob viously in my field (world religiosn) I ahve a particualr interest in a multi cultural Britain anyhow.

I'm not as 'let's take everyone' as I once was, I'm totally 100& supportive of genuine asylumm seekers and I believe how we treat them is a measuer of our own humanity. Migrant workers from other economies are often subject to poor conditions and terrible pay which is unfair yet difficult to monitor, so I think its important measures are in place for there to be some form of limit if necessary. bt aove all I enjoy the multicultural society I live in, its one of thereasons we haven't moved away from this area and gone back home, I love it when the boys ask why X is wearingt hat Turban, or what language is Y speaking- that didn't really happen back home and I think its much better for my boys.

East Anglia seems to survive on the labour of migrant workers, doing work that was always backbreaking and never well-paid, and which rural flight, rural deprivation and increased wealth / expectation have now driven non-migrant labour away from.

And anyone who pays £1-89 BOGOF for strawberries in Sainsbury's is a benefiary / cause of all that. I was talking to someone who runs a big tourist attraction in Gt Yarmouth, and he was saying how much he likes the new portuguese cafes and dellis.

And look at our love affair with the Indian Restaurant, the kebab shop.....you benefit from (original) immigration if you ever eat at any.

The world is just too small, to travelable, too globalised and too inter-twangled for us to see countries as the sacred patches of one set of people or another. The world is for everyone. Emigrants from the UK to Australia, canada, NZ, Costa del Sol, France etc certainly seem to think so!

Peachy it worries me because if dh goes out of work again. chances are it will be for ages. due to the influx of low paid building trade workers. he struggled last time as he would ask if there was work and half the time they didn't speak english. so that is why I worry.

I like the fact that we have young and willing workers in this country.

I don't like the fact that our population is now apparently rising again, having levelled off. As a green-minded person it distresses me to see our remaining open spaces in the south of England under threat of being concreted over for new homes (not for the immigrants directly but as a result of the demand for more homes which a larger population requires).

My solution is to make a list of people to be deported from Britain to be replaced with hard-working, socially-responsible immigrants. So far I've got:

Jonathan Ross
Ken Livingston
The CEO of the train company that gives my husband a hellish commute each morning
A couple of unpleasant youths who drop litter in our lane every time they drive through.

Well of course that's fair enough, and I imagine that in your area lots of people feel the same. It does vary geographically though- there are areas of this country with relatively few migrant workers, and it does happen MIl lives in one.

I agree with what has been said but the tax credit, for children who are not in this country, thing flummoxed me.

My family were immigrants from France in the 18th C

My parents were Irish immigrants. Never claimed benefits for anything.

This is a huge concern actually, people don't realise the huge burden that immigrants are placing on public services.

It takes alot longer to deal with people who don't speak english and a translator can cost the council £45 per hour in London.

Whilst I welcome some immigration, I don't welcome all immigration. I have mentioned before on other threads that assylum seekers given leave to stay access council housing and are a huge burden on local councils but some of you just don't accept this as being true, when it is true, I think the government has really turned a blind eye to local councils requesting more resources and promote the culture of "You are a racist" if you say anything like this so that big business can use cheap illegal migrants to boost the economy.

From my own experience, my service saw a 25% increase in referrals in the 2004-5 period solely due to migration. All the money that Labour put into services swallowing up by extra people needing services.

In my experience when migrants arrive, services for the disabled and elderly are cut as these areas can be squeezed without too much publicity.

People should be welcome in this country but they should speak english after a period of time. They should come and work legally. They should not be able to access social housing, healthcare and social services until they have made a contribution.

"The world is just too small, to travelable, too globalised and too inter-twangled for us to see countries as the sacred patches of one set of people or another. The world is for everyone." I had been thinking abouyt adding something along these lines, but Blu beat me to it .

I don't have a problem at all with immigrants who are here working and contributing to the economy of the UK as a whole.
When we moved from Scotland down to England, the move was arranged, as alwyas through the MOD. They have a list of removal firms who have their contracts.
On the move down a van turned up with 7 British (well they all had accents from different parts of the UK) men to pack us up. They arrived at 8am, and it took them until 4pm to get the wagon loaded. The reason being they stopped for endless "fag breaks" and cups of tea.
When we got down here, the wagon was waiting with 2 Polish workers in it. They had the whole van unloaded by 2pm. They never stopped, and I did offer them cups of tea,juice etc,a dn tehy did have breaks but not as many. on the way down every time the men put something in the van they stopped for a smoke.
That's the difference with a lot of the immigrant workers, they work hard. One of these Poles was here because his grandfather had been here during the war, he sent money home to his parents and younger sister every month. He shared a flat with 5 other Poles, and he told me they pooled their money togehter to pay the rent and buy food, pay the bills. he proudly told me that all his friends he shared with had jobs.

To Difers
much of the "burden" that asymlum seekers place on services here would be lessened if they were allowed to seek legal employment. imo it is not immigration that is the problem but the strategies the state uses to deal with it

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7001768.stm

Becasue that's NOT always true

Firstly asylum seekers (I mean genuine ones) are in danger of their lives, their safety- so we owe them a Country, just as we would be owed one if we were unfortunate to need the same thing.

I can't answer for everywhere, but in my former area people given asylum (as opposed to seeking asylum- ie the successful ones) were actually house by a private corporation in non-council housing. We ahd huge issues with a 'gentleman' (I use the term loosely) protestingc laiming he should have priority for a council house as he was a father, yet people given asylum were taking 'his' house. In actuality, he was someone recently released from prison for armed offences after 10 years, who was not permitted any contact with his daughter at all.

I live in a privately reneted hosue that keps us strapped for cash and I wuld adore the security that my aprents have through a council let- bt in no way would I wish someone who had already been tortured, whatever to go without. Not that that would happen at home but anyway.

An ageing population means more young workers are needed, therefore immigration is a Good Thing. And even if you don't benefit directly from immigration, immigrants (whether refugees fleeing in fear of their lives or people seeking to make better lives for themselves and their families in an economy that is working better than the one they are leaving) are not (bad people.

But Peachy, the council still PAYS for the rented accomodation. You as a taxpayer PAY.

I agree that the system promotes people to have benefits when the system shoould enable people to work.

NB/;I think most families on London mortgages would be envious of the security of council tenure and rental rates.

a question
And it is a genuine question
why is it that asylum seekers get to france. which I might be wrong is not a country at war or one that tortures people. do they then risk all to get here?

Obviously it is right that people who are being tortured in their own countries should be given refuge here. We are not talking about these people though but rather economic migrants. On balance, the economy does benefit from immigration and that in theory benefits us all. What is a concern, however, is that immigration does put a strain on public services, particularly in those areas where population has increased quickly in the last few years. And as there is only so much public money to go round, if the councils, police, etc., are having to find money to deal with extra people, they may not have enough money to look after the rest of the people who are already here. This is not a myth, nor is it prejudice. The government obviously recognises it is a problem. That is why a government spokesman was on the news today talking about it and why they are going to introduce a points system like they have in Australia. Immigration is a subject for debate at the moment because a debate is needed.

Fio, that's not the point. It's not about a philosophical argument as to whether we have the right to roam around the world or work in whatever country we choose to. For one thing, all that air travel is not good for the environment. For another, many countries have much stricter immigration rules. Most of all, it's just irrelevant. This is about practicality. The point is that we are a small country with a lack of decent housing and other finite resources and our infrastructure cannot support a huge indiscriminate influx of people. There is nothing wrong with immigration. It benefits us all. But it needs to be managed properly.

Yes, but as far as I understoofd it, the point is twas that the council houses were being given to asylum seekers- that was the point I was making.

I am perfectly happy for my taxes to go to support people in genuine need, and a person given asylum is one. Anyhow- what's the assumption that someone given asylum isn't working? And of course, then paying txes- which may well go to help you or I.

(I addressed the immigration bit also earlier- for those who said what about.....)- that we need some immigrants for some industries to survive, but at some point there needs to be a level of managemnt- which there is starting to be iirc, with recent additions to the EU being given limited rights?

DH works in haulage, as a manager. Without migrants, there's be a severe shortage of drivers 9there was for a while, still not enough)- a shortage of drivers means costs for transportations are pushed up and those costs will be apssed on to the consumer. The basics we all depend on- DH transports newspapers, but food stuff- whatever.

there was w onderful biased letter on teletext (like the DM, only free) today- if all these migrants come here to work, then how come she sees them in the town centre?

Erm, becasue often they take the crap shifts that nobody else works?

It ahs to be at least part f the point- my BIl roams freely, working for a major company as a trouble shooter, to many countries we do not accept migrants from. Why is he allowed to do that (he could move there at any time)- because he is British? I don't know- but plenty of our citizens have a sense of a right to roam, plenty of students on gap years picking grapes or whatever.