4 ms·

I assume it's economically catastrophic to cut off the supply of young, low-wage labour and that's why no responsible government will ever do it.

blfr 8mo ago
This would be a good explanation but most of these immigrants, especially from outside the EU, are not net contributors. vide https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/images/print-edition/20211218_EUC232.png https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/images/print-e... from https://www.economist.com/europe/2021/12/18/why-have-danes-turned-against-immigration https://www.economist.com/europe/2021/12/18/why-have-danes-t... And I highly doubt other governments don't have similar calculations or aren't aware of them.
- ForHackernews 8mo ago
  ...but Brits voted against EU immigrants.
  - blfr 8mo ago
    Yeah, what I am saying is that these votes, regardless of their formal content, are usually an expression of general anti-immigrant sentiment. Like voting for AfD. I doubt many people look at this organization and its leaders to conclude that "ah, here is the talent I would love to have running my country." They're merely the only available option against. Same with brexit.
    - breakyerself 8mo ago
      Similar to voting for brexit if they ever get what they're voting for they'll come to regret it.
    - kjksf 8mo ago
      UK pays for free housing of 110 thousand immigrants. And that's just one of the many well fare benefits. But when they face deficit, they raise taxes instead of, crazy idea, not spending billions of money taken from UK citizens to provide free housing and food for foreigners. UK citizens are rightfully pissed off that their life is getting worse. That's not the social contract and being pissed off about that is not racism. It's self preservation. The same happens in Spain, Germany, France, Italy. That's your big mystery of why AfD or Reform UK are popular: because the parties currently in power are flat out refusing to implement clear desires of their voters. That's how democracy is supposed to work: AfD and Reform UK and Le Pen are gaining because they are promising to implement the desires of citizens of German, UK or France.
      - ForHackernews 8mo ago
        > The same happens in Spain, Germany, France, Italy. Spain is a bad example to reach for here, they are on track to regularize a huge chunk of unauthorized migrants: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62n6gw1dp9o https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62n6gw1dp9o
  - netsharc 8mo ago
    Because Poles and Romanians are "other" enough to be hated... Ironically Britain had then to "import" people from Asia, Africa to e.g. work in the hospitals. The foreigner-hate is so short-sighted. Your underpaid hospital worker, house cleaner, fruit picker, taxi driver, UberEats delivery is usually foreign, they don't mind working the exploitative conditions because for them the money is much better than home, providing you with affordable fruits, taxis and delivery (until the rent-seeking corporations want even more than 30%...). Get rid of them, and you'll have to pay living wages for your fruits and delivery. Heh, Westerners, still wanting to enjoy the fruits of colonization. (Yeah the solution shouldn't be to continue allowing the exploitation, probably a better wealth distribution, but hey, why are you looking at my wallet, look at Elon's wallet!)
    - kjksf 8mo ago
      First, they didn't have to. Crazy idea: educate more people, lower barriers to entry, hire people from poorer western countries and not Africa. Poland has hospitals staffed 100% by Polish people. What prevents UK from doing the same? Second, if immigration was only for skilled workers to plug shortages of certain skills, it would not be a problem. It's a problem because in 2025 estimated 41 thousand unskilled people, mostly young men, landed in UK just via small boats. Those are not doctors or nurses or engineers or even fruit pickers. They are unemployed and therefore a massive drain on British resources. UK gov for some unexplained reason decided that they are responsible for housing and feeding them. The money comes from taxing UK citizens. The housing is zero sum game so it also comes from depriving some UK citizens, driving up the prices. And those people get sick too so they also take away hospital resources from UK citizens. And they don't work so you now have mostly young males loitering in neighborhoods.
      - bryanlarsen 8mo ago
        I'm sure the UK has way more than 41 thousand shitty jobs with shitty pay that no native really wants. I doubt they're not working because they don't want to. In Canada the standard complaint is that "immigrants take the jobs" not that "immigrants aren't working". It seems like it's a lot easier to get a job at a Tim Hortons if you speak Hindi like the owners and managers. A job at a restaurant if you speak Levantine Arabic. And those are just the public tip of the iceberg. Construction crews are mostly foreign. Our roofers were Indian. Our landscapers were Lebanese / Syrian. The people we interacted with spoke great English, but their workers didn't. The big difference is that Canada had constant immigration. They came over 40 years ago and since they had trouble finding employment became entrepreneurs and restaurants and construction and other blue collar services are the most fertile areas for entrepreneurs. Now they have a huge advantage in hiring low cost labor.
- breakyerself 8mo ago
  https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6938108633c7ace9c4a41e42/The_Fiscal_Impact_of_Immigration_Final__1_.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6938108633c7a... https://www.ft.com/content/10daa0e9-d57b-4ccd-9bdc-87d321283398 https://www.ft.com/content/10daa0e9-d57b-4ccd-9bdc-87d321283...
- jorvi 8mo ago
  That Economist stat often gets misunderstood. It is "net contribution to public finances" (= how much taxes do they pay), not "net contribution to the economy". This is because they are overly represented in low wage jobs, or indeed on longterm welfare. People in the lowest tax brackets pay very little of it. I do agree that there needs to be a honest conversation about what (economic) immigrants offer vs. what they cost, but it needs to be done properly. We will need immigrants because we are below 2.1 in Total Fertility Rate. But, the EU doesn't need to be the comfy life raft of the world as it has been for the past 2-3 decades.
breakyerself 8mo ago
Bingo. Just like wanting to leave the EU was self destructive cutting off immigration is as well. The US is in the process of trying to hobble its own economy right now.
- anonymars 8mo ago
  The image I have in both cases is the working class shooting itself in the stomach to hit the elites standing behind them
- kjksf 8mo ago
  Poland has almost zero immigration and is one of the fastest European economies. Do explain the miracle of Poland. What kind of economics work for Poland but couldn't possibly work for England. Do explain how 41 thousand unskilled young man landing in UK shores via small boats are good for economy. Majority of them do no work, not even the low skill jobs. They cost UK citizens a lot of money because UK gov took upon themselves to pay for their housing and food. The same stats are in every country that allowed massive immigration: the immigrants are a massive drain on resources of the country. And those resources are 100% come from taxing labor of citizens. Currently UK pays for housing 100 thousand immigrants. It's pretty obvious that if they stopped paying for housing them, they would save a lot of money. Properly managed immigration could, in theory, be a net positive for countries. But as it stands now if you combine immigration with well fare, you get a net drain.
  - breakyerself 8mo ago
    There's a lot of ukrainians in Poland
    - subscribed 8mo ago
      They started arriving well into the trend, and they didn't make such a big difference.
      - breakyerself 8mo ago
canadiantim 8mo ago
That’s funny in light of one of our Canadian governments (Alberta) recently calling for a referendum on immigration levels, with the government claiming immigration levels are too high to support the housing, economic and social needs of the sheer quantity of people coming in. Seems like the government is trying to be responsible by making sure the social welfare system can still support people as it was designed
tirant 8mo ago
If that’s indeed the case, how do you explain the lack of catastrophe in Japans economy ? Japans big catastrophe happened in 1990 with the bubble bursting, but that was years before the peak in working age population. Since then, the economy has not improved much but also has remained somehow stable.
- Larrikin 8mo ago
  All the jobs in Japan are hard work and low wage. If you're relatively poor and moving from south east Asia, it may make sense to immigrate to Japan. If you're a developer you typically will make half or less than half the salary, for longer hours on some old stack. When discussing where to live my wife realized that she would potentially triple her salary as a nurse with 10+ years of experience. Tourists like Japan because it is clean, safe and relatively cheap, but given the option it really does not make sense to work there.
jgb1984 8mo ago
Numbers from Denmark and the Netherlands (the only two European countries where it's allowed to gather such statistics) show that non-EU immigration is a net cost to the society (and economy). In the Netherlands a non-western asylumseeker comes to about 800.000 € to 1.300.000 € net cost to the state over the persons lifetime, depending on what you take into account. And that's purely the financial part, we're not even talking about the increase in crime and the ghettoisation of most western European cities. It's a tragedy, for everyone involved (because most 2nd and 3rd generation non-western immigrants still live a life of poverty in Belgium/Netherlands).

blfr 8mo ago

This would be a good explanation but most of these immigrants, especially from outside the EU, are not net contributors. vide https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/images/print-edition/20211218_EUC232.png https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/images/print-e... from https://www.economist.com/europe/2021/12/18/why-have-danes-turned-against-immigration https://www.economist.com/europe/2021/12/18/why-have-danes-t... And I highly doubt other governments don't have similar calculations or aren't aware of them.

ForHackernews 8mo ago
...but Brits voted against EU immigrants.
- blfr 8mo ago
  Yeah, what I am saying is that these votes, regardless of their formal content, are usually an expression of general anti-immigrant sentiment. Like voting for AfD. I doubt many people look at this organization and its leaders to conclude that "ah, here is the talent I would love to have running my country." They're merely the only available option against. Same with brexit.
  - breakyerself 8mo ago
    Similar to voting for brexit if they ever get what they're voting for they'll come to regret it.
  - kjksf 8mo ago
    UK pays for free housing of 110 thousand immigrants. And that's just one of the many well fare benefits. But when they face deficit, they raise taxes instead of, crazy idea, not spending billions of money taken from UK citizens to provide free housing and food for foreigners. UK citizens are rightfully pissed off that their life is getting worse. That's not the social contract and being pissed off about that is not racism. It's self preservation. The same happens in Spain, Germany, France, Italy. That's your big mystery of why AfD or Reform UK are popular: because the parties currently in power are flat out refusing to implement clear desires of their voters. That's how democracy is supposed to work: AfD and Reform UK and Le Pen are gaining because they are promising to implement the desires of citizens of German, UK or France.
    - ForHackernews 8mo ago
      > The same happens in Spain, Germany, France, Italy. Spain is a bad example to reach for here, they are on track to regularize a huge chunk of unauthorized migrants: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62n6gw1dp9o https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62n6gw1dp9o
- netsharc 8mo ago
  Because Poles and Romanians are "other" enough to be hated... Ironically Britain had then to "import" people from Asia, Africa to e.g. work in the hospitals. The foreigner-hate is so short-sighted. Your underpaid hospital worker, house cleaner, fruit picker, taxi driver, UberEats delivery is usually foreign, they don't mind working the exploitative conditions because for them the money is much better than home, providing you with affordable fruits, taxis and delivery (until the rent-seeking corporations want even more than 30%...). Get rid of them, and you'll have to pay living wages for your fruits and delivery. Heh, Westerners, still wanting to enjoy the fruits of colonization. (Yeah the solution shouldn't be to continue allowing the exploitation, probably a better wealth distribution, but hey, why are you looking at my wallet, look at Elon's wallet!)
  - kjksf 8mo ago
    First, they didn't have to. Crazy idea: educate more people, lower barriers to entry, hire people from poorer western countries and not Africa. Poland has hospitals staffed 100% by Polish people. What prevents UK from doing the same? Second, if immigration was only for skilled workers to plug shortages of certain skills, it would not be a problem. It's a problem because in 2025 estimated 41 thousand unskilled people, mostly young men, landed in UK just via small boats. Those are not doctors or nurses or engineers or even fruit pickers. They are unemployed and therefore a massive drain on British resources. UK gov for some unexplained reason decided that they are responsible for housing and feeding them. The money comes from taxing UK citizens. The housing is zero sum game so it also comes from depriving some UK citizens, driving up the prices. And those people get sick too so they also take away hospital resources from UK citizens. And they don't work so you now have mostly young males loitering in neighborhoods.
    - bryanlarsen 8mo ago
      I'm sure the UK has way more than 41 thousand shitty jobs with shitty pay that no native really wants. I doubt they're not working because they don't want to. In Canada the standard complaint is that "immigrants take the jobs" not that "immigrants aren't working". It seems like it's a lot easier to get a job at a Tim Hortons if you speak Hindi like the owners and managers. A job at a restaurant if you speak Levantine Arabic. And those are just the public tip of the iceberg. Construction crews are mostly foreign. Our roofers were Indian. Our landscapers were Lebanese / Syrian. The people we interacted with spoke great English, but their workers didn't. The big difference is that Canada had constant immigration. They came over 40 years ago and since they had trouble finding employment became entrepreneurs and restaurants and construction and other blue collar services are the most fertile areas for entrepreneurs. Now they have a huge advantage in hiring low cost labor.
breakyerself 8mo ago
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6938108633c7ace9c4a41e42/The_Fiscal_Impact_of_Immigration_Final__1_.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6938108633c7a... https://www.ft.com/content/10daa0e9-d57b-4ccd-9bdc-87d321283398 https://www.ft.com/content/10daa0e9-d57b-4ccd-9bdc-87d321283...
jorvi 8mo ago
That Economist stat often gets misunderstood. It is "net contribution to public finances" (= how much taxes do they pay), not "net contribution to the economy". This is because they are overly represented in low wage jobs, or indeed on longterm welfare. People in the lowest tax brackets pay very little of it. I do agree that there needs to be a honest conversation about what (economic) immigrants offer vs. what they cost, but it needs to be done properly. We will need immigrants because we are below 2.1 in Total Fertility Rate. But, the EU doesn't need to be the comfy life raft of the world as it has been for the past 2-3 decades.

breakyerself 8mo ago

Bingo. Just like wanting to leave the EU was self destructive cutting off immigration is as well. The US is in the process of trying to hobble its own economy right now.

anonymars 8mo ago
The image I have in both cases is the working class shooting itself in the stomach to hit the elites standing behind them
kjksf 8mo ago
Poland has almost zero immigration and is one of the fastest European economies. Do explain the miracle of Poland. What kind of economics work for Poland but couldn't possibly work for England. Do explain how 41 thousand unskilled young man landing in UK shores via small boats are good for economy. Majority of them do no work, not even the low skill jobs. They cost UK citizens a lot of money because UK gov took upon themselves to pay for their housing and food. The same stats are in every country that allowed massive immigration: the immigrants are a massive drain on resources of the country. And those resources are 100% come from taxing labor of citizens. Currently UK pays for housing 100 thousand immigrants. It's pretty obvious that if they stopped paying for housing them, they would save a lot of money. Properly managed immigration could, in theory, be a net positive for countries. But as it stands now if you combine immigration with well fare, you get a net drain.
- breakyerself 8mo ago
  There's a lot of ukrainians in Poland
  - subscribed 8mo ago
    They started arriving well into the trend, and they didn't make such a big difference.
    - breakyerself 8mo ago

canadiantim 8mo ago

That’s funny in light of one of our Canadian governments (Alberta) recently calling for a referendum on immigration levels, with the government claiming immigration levels are too high to support the housing, economic and social needs of the sheer quantity of people coming in. Seems like the government is trying to be responsible by making sure the social welfare system can still support people as it was designed

tirant 8mo ago

If that’s indeed the case, how do you explain the lack of catastrophe in Japans economy ? Japans big catastrophe happened in 1990 with the bubble bursting, but that was years before the peak in working age population. Since then, the economy has not improved much but also has remained somehow stable.

Larrikin 8mo ago
All the jobs in Japan are hard work and low wage. If you're relatively poor and moving from south east Asia, it may make sense to immigrate to Japan. If you're a developer you typically will make half or less than half the salary, for longer hours on some old stack. When discussing where to live my wife realized that she would potentially triple her salary as a nurse with 10+ years of experience. Tourists like Japan because it is clean, safe and relatively cheap, but given the option it really does not make sense to work there.

jgb1984 8mo ago

Numbers from Denmark and the Netherlands (the only two European countries where it's allowed to gather such statistics) show that non-EU immigration is a net cost to the society (and economy). In the Netherlands a non-western asylumseeker comes to about 800.000 € to 1.300.000 € net cost to the state over the persons lifetime, depending on what you take into account. And that's purely the financial part, we're not even talking about the increase in crime and the ghettoisation of most western European cities. It's a tragedy, for everyone involved (because most 2nd and 3rd generation non-western immigrants still live a life of poverty in Belgium/Netherlands).