If Immigration is good for jobs and GDP only safe vote is LIB DEM
HillmanImp
Posts: 2,874 Forum Member
✭✭✭
I think that is the message from the current situation. Experts say immigration is vital for jobs and growth.
This being said the only safe vote for our country is a vote for Lib Dem. Any other vote will cause mass unemployment and poverty on a national perhaps global scale (the UK is a key pillar of the EU).
Why risk voting for any other party - fingers might point at you - it was your vote that destroyed the world.
Vote Lib Dem to let babies sleep safely at night.
This being said the only safe vote for our country is a vote for Lib Dem. Any other vote will cause mass unemployment and poverty on a national perhaps global scale (the UK is a key pillar of the EU).
Why risk voting for any other party - fingers might point at you - it was your vote that destroyed the world.
Vote Lib Dem to let babies sleep safely at night.
0
Comments
Both parties draw their support from middle class graduates, who feel the negative effects of mass immigration the least.
If the Lib Dem's main argument is economic like you say, then they should be much more selective in who they allow in, as some immigrants are carrying others.
Immigration is not good for jobs.
Generally speaking if you bring in immigrants for a job you are increasing the pool of labour for that job and so bring down wages. GDP goes up because it is now cheaper to create goods, productivity goes up because it costs less. Profits go up because it is cheaper to produce the goods. The taxman does well because companies make greater profits and hence pay greater taxes.
But you have done nothing for the person supplanted by that immigrant, nor for the wage he or she gets (should they still have a job) - since these two decline. The other problem is that you do nothing to help your local workforce enter a career because it is being filled by the immigrant (who may not have the same cost base and is so can afford a lower wage).
The 'Experts' are usually those who look at the situation from a very narrow view - that of GDP, Productivity and tax receipts.
.
Run out of tablets.
If the last election proved anything - it's the Lib Dems will sell their souls and grandmothers in exchange for a tiny taste of power. They'd get into bed with Nigel if it kept Cleggs job.
Not all big corporations pay a lot of tax in this country if they are based abroad.
This is the "lump of labour" fallacy and is not true.
The UK has had waves of Immigration over the years. It clearly is not the case that these arrivals caused everyone else's standard of living to plummet - rather standards of living have increased for people over the decades be they "recent" immigrant or descendants of immigrants who arrived over with the Romans centuries ago.
The Romans were not immigrants they were invaders. They also only replaced the elite and they went home. None of those things are true about modern mass immigration and permanent settlement.
The waves were 1948 to 1962 and 1997 - 2010 more or less. Before that there were about 50,000 Jews and Huguenots over several hundred years which is about a months immigration today.
And with the invaders also come settlers such as traders, retiring soldiers etc. They didn't all go home after being here for a few months of celibacy. English Heritage, for instance, highlighted a three century connection between Dacia (in Romania) and the Carlisle area when the Romans were here.
So no Vikings, Normans etc settled in Britian...
Again, English Heritage claim that the population of London alone was over 5% Irish in the 1850's - so it was hardly a minor amount of immigration.
You are not going to suggest our standard of living is lower today than it was then as a result of that immigration, are you?
I think its called utter hypocrisy - fine for you plebs but not for the likes of me!
If they really believed it they would live and run for office in West Ham - not Westmoreland - and Ilford not Inverness!
The City is packed with graduates and offers highly paid jobs yet it is most vocal in the benefits of immigration. Ditto the health system (GPs , Harley Street practises etc)
So what you say is simply not true.
Nope - Immigration has increased the number of low paid jobs to such an extent that the UK is once again a viable base for manufacturing...
What we really need is more HIGH PAID jobs for 50% of the UK who now go to university. What do we do when 70% of the UK is highly educated... This is where we are heading. It is only the liberals that have a viable answer - import LOW SKILLED people.
There is no other viable option to voting Lib Dem.
It must be very lonely on your planet ;-):D
Come May, millions of people will prove you wrong, perhaps you will then quietly retire hurt.
It's amazing how much you right wingers play the class warfare card, when it suits you....
The DNA research I have read about says that most pre WWII Britons can trace their ancestors back to the original settlers from the Basque country in Spain/France.
Eastern England has the highest level of foreign DNA i.e. Viking but it's only about 5% I seem to remember.
Vikings were invaders too, not immigrants. If Vikings are the same as modern immigrants then I believe the usual response by the government was to send in the army to drive them out of the country. As they have not done that I assume they see a big difference too.
1850?
Wasn't Ireland part of a single nation called the United Kingdom at the time?
I'm not sure immigration is the sole reason for any increase in the standard of living. Education, social mobility policies and moving manufacturing to countries with huge populations of workers but little money probably helps.
Migrants usually cost as much as they contribute, the UCL study has been criticised for how it arrives at it's figures.
However some migrants individually or as a group pay in far more than they take out and some take out far more than they pay in. The key is therefore less immigration , but much more selection.
That last bit is rather unlikely, but minor parties need to do deals if they want to have some influence on government. It means dropping some of their policies but being able to get others through.