Sunday, April 23, 2006

This Tory House believes in Immigration - The proposer is?

Why do so many on the Tory right, see today's example,,1759484,00.html , insist on statist controls on people, whilst advocating minimal government intervention elsewhere.

Can you think of a major UK politician, of any hue, who has recently shouted the benefits of letting more foreigners into the UK? The BNP's poll ratings increase for the simple reason that no-one is making a convincing case for immigration. Yet many of the public want that argument to be made -ask any educated bird under 40 why she didn't even think of voting Tory last year - immigration is normally the 1st thing mentioned.

As the ITEM club shows today,,,8209-2147467,00.html immigration brings economic benefits to the UK. Anyone prepared to leave their own country and come to a new land is far more likely to be an entrepreneurial, risk-taking type that achieve than the stay-at-home merchants. Skills are imported that fill the gap caused by the leftist education policies that all UK governments have followed since the 60s. The cultural benefits are harder to measure but substantial, just look how cuisines distant 40 years ago are now firm favourites. And please cut the crap about immigrants being scroungers - many do jobs the natives consider themselves above.

In the US, George W Bush, former governor of a border-state, often makes the case for immigration. Note, Dubya wins elections.


At 10:39 AM, Blogger AntiCitizenOne said...

"insist on statist controls on people, whilst advocating minimal government intervention elsewhere."

Because we have a "welfare" state, which incentises the least useful people on the planet to come to the U.K.

Because there is a fixed amount of common land in the country.

The right to immigrate should be auctioned. The money raised to go towards a citizens dividend.

At 12:33 PM, Blogger redmayne said...

Immiogration is probably good for the economy, ie UK consumers, because it lowers inflation and interest rates.

however, in the long run and when economic activity fluctuates, there will be a need to either encourage integration or enforce repatriation to avoid social strife.

Just as long as the immigrants are paid less, dfo not receive any socuial benefits (which they seem to particualrly healthcare) and as long as they are less visible (ie of european sotk ) then I have no problem because i am made better off.

as soon as they committ a crime , reproduce or demand higher wages then their economic rationale will dissappear and the state must be on hand to ensure that they do not constituate a negative externality.


Post a Comment

<< Home