Comments by "Michael RCH" (@michaelrch) on "The Real Brexit Debate" video.

Jake Wrightson EU immigration has no measurable effect on wages. A lot of research has gone into this. You might think that anecdotally it does push down wages but it doesn't. EU immigrants pay a lot more in tax than they cost in benefits and public services. That provides funds for public services like housing and healthcare that will be much missed by the treasury and local government. Not forgetting that much of the public sector is staffed by EU citizens and they are simply not replaceable by U.K. workers. The U.K. is running desperately short of nurses and social care already.
14
To Err is Huma Ok, why then even bring up the cost of non-EU immigration ? It's clearly irrelevant to a discussion about freedom of movement. As for citing the study that you mentioned, I did so because you used it as part of your argument that EU immigration was bad for the U.K. it only makes the argument that it isn't. As for wages, as I stated in another comment to waterybint, it's not true that EU immigration depresses wages overall. https://amp.ft.com/content/797f7b42-bb44-11e8-94b2-17176fbf93f5 It does have a small effect on the lowest wages but this is overwhelmed by other factors. For all other demographics it contributes to an increase in wages, and the overall contribution across all wages is positive. So EU immigrants contribute in tax more than they cost the taxpayer, they are more likely to be in work than native Brits and they don't depress wages. And yet you will go on believing that they are a scourge and the country will be better off without them. It's insulting to very decent and hard working people and if it's not a dishonest position then, at best, it's deeply mistaken.
2
To Err is Huma Your own reference says this about immigration from 1995 to 2011. "Our findings indicate that, when considering the resident immigrant population in each year from 1995 to 2011, *immigrants from the European Economic Area (EEA) have made a positive fiscal contribution, even during periods when the UK was running budget deficits*, while Non‐EEA immigrants, not dissimilar to natives, have made a negative contribution. " Having free movement for EU citizens does not imply any obligation to allow non-EU immigration as freedom of movement is for EU citizens. Conflating the two is dishonest.
1
To Err is Huma So you are still citing costs of non-EU immigrants for some reason in a discussion about migration of *EU citizens*. I still don't understand why. Perhaps you can enlighten me. Re wages, I said that EU migration does not negatively affect wages. I nowhere said that is has no effect on any individual. Taken as a whole, it has no effect on wages overall. Even for the lowest paid 5% where an effect is detectable, it's overwhelmed by other factors that increase their wages. And yes, I do care about low wages - I am the son of an immigrant who grew up with a mother on low pay and drawing benefits - but I don't see stopping immigration as the most effect way to remedy low pay. I see setting an appropriate minimum wage and proper investment in skills training. This would actually address the underlying problem of low pay in the UK which is actually chronic low productivity. Employers that must pay higher minimum wages and have ready access to skills training will use it. Shutting off immigration simply starves the economy of the workers it needs, not least in the public sector its worth adding. Generally, there is nothing elitist or scummy about considering the plight of all people in the economy. Yes, the lowest paid need proper consideration but I have spelled out how they will most effectively be helped onto higher incomes. Sacrificing the prosperity of the middle class on the altar of claiming to be helping the lowest earners is irrational and a false choice, especially when economic disruption from Brexit will hurt the least well off the most - both in employment prospects and the capacity of the state to care for them with lower revenues. Also, why even bring up the self employed when you have no data? Is there a reason to presume that they have been hurt by EU immigration or is that just speculation? The problem is that I am not the one making up or misrepresenting data to make my point. The data is on my side. Yes, you can raise other issues related to immigration - for example the picture on crime is pretty mixed - but when it comes to economic impact, EU workers are a net benefit or at worse neutral by every measure. If you don't like the country allowing in EU citizens to settle and work in the U.K. then find another reason to oppose it. I can't help thinking your ire is misplaced in any case. It's non-EU immigrants that actually cost the country money, and they are the source of the most cultural friction in British communities. I have every sympathy with concerns about that. But EU free movement has no impact on non-EU immigration. The U.K. can set policy on that exactly as it pleases as a member of the EU.
1
To Err is Huma So where you repeatedly go on about costs from non-EU migration "dwarfing" the value that EU citizens contribute in your second last comment, that is NOT an argument against free movement of EU citizens and EU citizens being allowed to live and work in the UK. Agreed?
1