Next time someone claims that immigrants are destroying Britain, show them this

Spoken word poet Hollie McNish spells out what's wrong with most of the arguments used against immigration. She cites as her inspiration a book by economist Philippe Legrain called Immigrants: Your Country Needs Them.

Spoken word poet Hollie McNish spells out what’s wrong with most of the arguments used against immigration. She cites as her inspiration a book by economist Philippe Legrain called Immigrants: Your Country Needs Them. (Hat tip: Adam Mordecai)

Like this article? Left Foot Forward relies on support from readers to sustain our progressive journalism. Can you become a supporter for £5 a month?

85 Responses to “Next time someone claims that immigrants are destroying Britain, show them this”

  1. LB

    So Abu Qatada. Is he or isn’t he benefit to the UK.

    The left still misses the point.

    Some migrants are beneficial. Some migrants aren’t.

    The problem is that we have lots who aren’t. The are consuming resources from health care, to housing, to jobs and not paying enough tax. That means others are subsidising them, or losing out because they can’t or won’t compete on the jobs front.

    Hence we need to identify the ones we want, and the ones we don’t. The first we encourage, the second we don’t allow in and remove.

  2. VDLA

    Not paying enough tax? I think you should be looking at the right’s response to that. Oh- and on the job front- I think you’ll find immigrants have similar and higher employment figures than ‘indigenous’ Britons.
    The left needs to comment on religious fundamentalism and ‘sink’ estates, which has been caused by failed policy from successive neoliberal governments- not the overall impact of immigration, which has been positive. The right loves a scapegoat. There are plenty of non-beneficial ‘Brits’ as well, and plenty of tax avoiders and corporate chiefs that have done 100x more damage than every immigrant in the UK- but we don’t hit them because we’ve been taught to envy and admire the rich.

  3. Eso-Policier

    Multikulti must be stopped. And Wales must be independent. Read more
    http://www.esopolice.wordpress.com

  4. David McKendrick

    There aren’t “lots who are not beneficial”. There are a few who
    aren’t but the vast majority of immigrants benefit the UK by working
    hard; paying their taxes (Income Tax, Vat, National Insurance etc); not
    requiring NHS treatment, Welfare or Social housing; and going home
    before we need to pay them a pension. The money they send home is spent
    in buying goods which again boost UK exports and those little shops that
    expedite the movement of funds. The NHS is not stretched by immigrants
    requiring treatment – it is largely staffed by immigrants. 30% of NHS
    doctors and dentists are foreign born and over 60% of nurses.

    Immigrants set up shops and other businesses employing not only their countrymen but also UK Citizens.

    Since
    employment levels are higher among the immigrant population it is them
    that are subsidising the lazy UK scroungers who would rather live on
    Benefits than do a decent days work. The Department of Work and Pensions
    figures show that immigrants are far less likely than UK born people to
    access any kind of benefits and, in fact, non-EU immigrants are barred
    any access to Public Funds for the first five years that they are in the
    UK although they can work and pay taxes – just not get anything back.

    Illegal
    immigrants have no access to our Welfare system and risk deportation by
    even coming into contact with any authorities let alone signing on
    illegally. Asylum seekers are prohibited from working but are expected
    to survive on less than jobseekers allowance and given housing that
    nobody else will stay in.
    You can hardly blame the immigrants
    for taking poorly paid jobs that nobody else will take. Why not blame
    the employers who are exploiting them by offerring only the minimum
    wage? or the government that thinks a minimum wage is acceptable rather
    than a living wage. And why has nobody been prosecuted for underpaying
    their staff?

  5. LB

    Doesn’t matter. The state is spending 11.5K per person per year.

    We do not need migrants who earn less than 40K per person per year, dependents included.

    However, if you want you could always sponsor a migrant. You agree to guarantee to pay any short fall in tax.

    ========

    There are plenty of non-beneficial ‘Brits’ as well

    ========

    Yes, and we don’t need to add to them.

  6. LB

    I’ve no doubt there are some who do pay their way. I’ve no doubt there are lots who don’t.

    However when you say

    ===========

    Since
    employment levels are higher among the immigrant population it is them
    that are subsidising the lazy UK scroungers who would rather live on

    ===========

    You are wrong. The problem is that in order to subsides others, they need to be paying more tax than they consume in state resources. You are extrapolating from some who do pay their way and saying that must mean all are good. That is not the case.

    That’s why we need a threshold. A non racist threshold unlike your immigrants good, brits scroungers argument. Hence a threshold of having to pay more tax than the government per head spend is clear. It means that migrants are paying their way.

    Then you rather shoot your own argument down, by pointing out that lots of migrants are working for min wage or less. Rather makes the point. If they are earning so little, they aren’t even paying enough to cover the 2,000 per person, a year the NHS costs.

    Asylum is something different from economic migration. Asylum is a must for those that need it. Those that came via a safe third country, or those that don’t qualify, have to leave.

    On blame,. I don’t blame the migrants at all. There is a lot to admire about their enterprise. However migration is optional. We need to choose which we accept. If you want to accept low skilled migrants there should be a means where you agree to sponsor one. That means you guarantee to make up the short fall in taxation for as long as they are here. Are you prepared to do that? I doubt it.

  7. Paul Oliver

    I bet Hollie McNish makes damned sure she doesn’t live anywhere near an area where there are large numbers of immigrants (or their dessendants).

  8. David McKendrick

    Even MigrationWatch’s figures show that there is a net contribution from each migrant of around £1000 a year after government contributions such as NHS, Welfare, hospitals, schools, roads etc are taken into account. There is no shortfall in taxation according to FullFact.org’s researches. But don’t let the facts distort your opinions…

    I at no point said that Migrants are working for less than minimum wage. This would be illegal and is obviously not the case since no employers have been prosecuted for paying less than minimum wage. I just said that UK Citizens seem unwilling to work in some jobs that pay minimum wage while migrants are willing to work hard in these jobs.

    As to having a threshold; in Scotland the population is roughly the same as in 1953 when the Queen came to the throne. Not because there are few immigrants but because there is a tradition of high emigration. If we set a threshold for immigrants how soon will other countries retaliate by refusing to have Brits emigrate to their countries? There are already moves by Spain to stop Brits from retiring there and using their health services.

    Last year over 50 million people landed in UK. Most were either UK tourists returning or foreign tourists coming for short visits. UKBA issued over 500,000 visas to visitors and immigrants. EU migrants and visitors don’t generally need a visa and neither do visitors from USA, Canada, Mexico, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa etc. What would happen to the UK economy if you were to curtail these flights, apart from the obvious reduction in pollution?

  9. LB

    Post the numbers then. It’s so easy to show that the vast majority of migrants do not pay their way.

    Let me start you off.

    Total spending in the UK is 722 bn a year.

    http://tinyurl.com/lvx8gpr

    Total population in the UK is 62.74 million

    http://tinyurl.com/n3ntvvk

    Spend per head, is then 772 bn / 62.74 million or 11,508 pounds per person per year.

    All links you can go and check.

    Now how much do you have to earn to pay 11,508 pounds a year?

    http://listentotaxman.com/index.php is a tax calculator

    Plug in 36,000 and you are talking about 11.5K in taxes. [If you include employer’s NI]. If you exclude employer’s NI, then its 44,000

    So you’re claim, and I’m asking you to justify it, its that each migrant is earning more than 36,000 a year. That’s per migrant, dependents included. If its a family of 4, you need to scale it up by 4 times if just one is working.

    That’s your claim isn’t it? That all migrants are beneficial.

    The argument above excludes one major item. That is pensions debts. Those are rising at 734 bn a year. Not factored in. Even when they leave the UK, they still get UK pensions. Weren’t you arguing the state shouldn’t pay those?

    So come on, should be easy for you to find out what the average migrant pays in tax. Hard number. How many thousands do they pay?

    I’m not for curtailing freedom of movement of people. I’m just for curtailing the rights of visitors to the UK to consume public money unless they pay more tax than they consume. Its’ a simple test.

  10. David McKendrick

    You are assuming that all tax is income tax and ignoring the fact that even buying petrol the majority of the cost is actually tax. Anything you buy including services includes VAT. Have to factored in the fact that not only do you pay tax when you earn but probably pay even more tax when you spend? You cannot even buy insurance without paying tax. I pay a big chunk of Council Tax every month and even my pension that I paid into is still taxed when I get it back.

    On the basis of your figures to generate £11,508 in income tax per capita the average income would have to be £36,000 which simply is not true. It is closer to £25,000 and that is not for 62.74 million – it is only the percentage who are actually in work so it excludes the young, the old, those looking for work, the disabled and those not employed but not looking for work such as stay at home mums or housewives and students.

    Apart from taxes paid by individuals, most of tax revenue raised in the UK is paid by businesses. And even in the case of the taxes paid by individuals the top 10% of high earners pay almost 90% of the total income tax paid in the UK. Some of these people are in fact foreign born – people like Al Fahed who owns Harrods but is not “employed” in the UK so he doesn’t have a salary but does have access to the profits earned by his company.

    And to get a full pension if they were not living in the UK but were living in the EU they would have to have paid NI contributions for 30 years. If they moved outside the EU the pension would be frozen and would not rise year on year.

    http://fullfact.org/factchecks

  11. LB

    So you don’t have a figure for the average income per migrant do you? Neither does full facts. Without that number you cannot make the decision, and nether can full facts.

    Full pension? They still get a partial pension if they have worked less than 30 years. It’s still money going out.

    Even for the young, lets take that person working in Starbucks. 2K a year in costs for health care. It’s the average spend. If they have a child, then you need to add on top 6K for education. Then there is a share of the common goods used by all, police, defense etc

    So take their wages. Take off the tax. Now, what do they spend the rest of their money on? Food – VAT free. Rent – VAT free. It turns out that for the low paid, very little extra tax is paid. They aren’t owning companies, so they won’t be paying corporation tax. Might be if they are contracting, but then they would be high paid and the sort of migrants we want to welcome.

    The breakdown of taxes is here

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_United_Kingdom

    Corporation tax is 9%. Where did you get the idea that most tax is paid by companies. Even that 9% is paid on behalf of the shareholders. Its just another tax on people.

    =============

    On the basis of your figures to generate £11,508 in income tax per capita the average income would have to be £36,000 which simply is not true. It is closer to £25,000 and that is not for 62.74 million – it is only the percentage who are actually in work so it excludes the young, the old, those looking for work, the disabled and those not employed but not looking for work such as stay at home mums or housewives and students.

    =============

    In which case its far worse. You’ve just argued against yourself. There are 30 million tax payers. That means the average spend per tax payer isn’t 722 / 63 million, but 722 / 30. Each tax payer needs to fund the rest.

    So that just pushes the barrier even higher.

    That’s why the figure of 11.5K in tax to be a benefit, appliers per person. If they come, without dependents, the figure is 11.5K. If they bring dependents, then the barrier needs to be higher.

    Why should the UK taxpayer have to pay a migrant to be in the UK? You’re avoiding that.

  12. Jimmy

    ‘Dessendants’? Don’t you speak English?

  13. LB

    Still doesn’t tell me how many pounds in tax the average migrant pays, dependents included. I had read it the first time round.

    Neither does fullfact checks.

    Until you have that figure, its all waffle. You can’t show that they are a benefit.

    Now some are, and lots aren’t. The question is how to make sure we only get those that are a benefit.

    Let me turn in wrong. Abu Qatada I think you agreed wasn’t. Abramovitz probably is (Al Fayed has gone to Switzerland).

    At what level of tax would you say each migrant has to pay to be a benefit, and to not be taking money from others?

  14. David McKendrick

    Why do you keep up the pretence that all migrants cost the NHS £2,000 per year? If they never visit a doctor, dentist, health centre or hospital then surely they cost the NHS nothing. It is not workers from the age of 20 to 50 that cost the NHS it is children and elderly. 90% of NHS beds are occupied by people over 60 years old. I think that Starbucks would be surprised to hear that their employees are using so much healthcare yet taking so little time off sick.

    Migrants from outside the EU on a settlement visa are not allowed access to any public funds for at least the first 5 years they are in the UK. So if they lose their job they don’t get sickness benefit or disability or housing benefit or tax credits or jobseekers or anything else they paid into. So how can they be a drain on the Welfare system?

    The average spend per taxpayer may well be £11,500 but this is not spent evenly across the whole population. It is concentrated on the young, the old and the disabled. These groups are not groups where migrants are concentrated.

    I have no idea what the average spend is on those that are out of work but since I was only out of work for 4 weeks in my whole working life I don’t think that I got a great deal spent on me. And I now live off a privately funded pension – not the State Pension. Similarly if migrants are not accessing public funds then you cannot attribute government spending to them. It is like the government’s latest rant that immigrants are causing A&E departments to overflow whithout actally asking whether anyone in the A&E queue is an immigrant.

    If you do stop immigration then how do you fill the NHS jobs that these skilled doctors, dentists and nurses from overseas are doing? 30% of doctors and dentists and 60% of nurses. Most of them trained overseas before coming to work here.

    And if you stop the 500,000 immigrants then do you also stop the 350,000 emigrants too?

  15. lafayettesennacherib

    I know a Polish poet who’ll do that for half the price.

  16. LB

    The average cost of insuring someone in the NHS is close to 2,000 a year.

    Do the maths. Spending divided by the population.

    Why are migrants from outside the UK just the test case. All migrants are to be included. They are all optional. Even from the EU. We know now that the freedom of movement is optional. See Cyprus. Same law applies to capital.

    Migrants bring dependents, and from the Indian sub continent its the major form of migration bar temporary people studying.

    Why not 25 years for no recourse to public funds?

    You’re not putting a number on how much each migrant needs to earn to make sure that they aren’t a burden on others. An average number will do.

  17. LB

    Similarly if migrants are not accessing public funds then you cannot attribute government spending to them.

    ===============

    Of course you can.

    They are insured for the NHS. Its insurance. It costs 2K per year, whether or not they claim. That’s the nature of insurance.

    They get free defense, that costs.

    They get free policing, that costs.

    Dependents – its free schooling, and in lots of places they are in short supply, plus their share of the common costs.

    They are building up entitlements to pensions. If they are paying in more NI than the cost of paying out in the future – fine, if not its wrong.

    Now the increase in the pensions bill, 2005-2010 went up by 734 bn a year. Total tax take now is 600 a year. There is no way migrants can pay for other people’s pensions as it is claimed

    =========
    If you do stop immigration then how do you fill the NHS jobs that these skilled doctors, dentists

    =========

    Salaries for Doctors and Dentists put them in the welcome list. Haven’t you been reading? If they pay more tax than they cost, they are allowed in and to stay. Doctors and dentists make the grade.

    Nurses? Nope. We have to train up brits for nursing careers. There is a simple solution

    Please give us a source for your figure of 60% of nurses are migrants.

  18. David McKendrick

    I don’t understand the concept of insuring someone in the NHS. I can get travel insurance which includes health insurance up to £2,000,000 for just under £200 for 6 months with Go-Travel.com. So that would be £400 for one year.

    Migrants from outside the EU cannot bring dependents, apart from their children, unless the dependent is too ill to be treated in their own country. – This obviously means that they are too ill to travel. So migrants from outside EU cannot bring dependents. Only one person has been admitted as a dependent parent from outside the EU in the last year. http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/visas-immigration/partners-families/citizens-settled/elderly-dependent/

    The reason that 25 years with no recourse to public funds is that migrants would refuse to pay tax if there was no possibility of getting anything back. Isn’t that why the American colonists broke away from UK and had the War of Independence. They were being asked to pay increasing taxes but got nothing back.

    The UK Border Agency reckons that a household with an income of £18,600 for a couple is unable to claim any benefits and therefore they judge that at that income threshold they cannot be a burden on the UK Taxpayer. This is on top of the no recourse to Public Funds for the immigrant member of the family. The level is increased by about £2,000 for each non UK citizen child in the household. http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/policyandlaw/immigrationlaw/immigrationrules/appendix-fmse/

    I have never claimed any Benefits in my working life. When I was unemployed I was barred from claiming for 6 weeks by which time I had another job. Then I was way above the income level for tax credits etc.

  19. thesabbath

    keep trying to rewrite history, Marxists, you can’t change the facts. The more State interference and social engineering you put in place to override human nature and tell people what’s good for them, the harsher the right-wing medicine will have to be in the end, to fix the problems your “good intentions, blind to consequences” hyper morality has caused. I for one cannot wait to see this whole rotten regime unwound and the interests of British people put first once again.

  20. Paul Oliver

    I meant ‘descendants’. It’s good to know that you tolerate the occasional typo. Yes, I do speak English. i’ve been speaking it for the last 40-odd years.

  21. BlessPapaBenny

    No amount of sugar coating is going to hide the facts.

    The policy of mass immigration and FORCED assimilation we are seeing in the UK and all White countries is a state sponsored policy of racial GENOCIDE.

    Might be worth watching this video of Nicolae Ceaușescu if you want to see what happens when the people wake up and realise it. Enjoy anti-Whites!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DD-XNTVgDW0

  22. LB

    So what you are saying is that the NHS is 500% more expensive that in should be.

    If you can get the health care for 400, why are we being charged nearly 2,000.

    It’s a rip off. On top, they are killing 40,000 a year plus in avoidable deaths.

    Why do you keep pushing the Non EU?

    Of course non EU can bring dependents. I sit next to lots of such migrants who have bought their children with them. And before you jump to the wrong conclusion, I know what they are paid, and they are net contributors.

    Why push the dependent parents bit? Lots come in from India and Bangladesh for example. Lots bring kids. They are dependents. They are expense.

    ======

    The reason that 25 years with no recourse to public funds is that migrants would refuse to pay tax if there was no possibility of getting anything back.

    =====

    No. They would get defense, the police, their insurance as part of the NHS albeit overcharged 5 fold. That’s half the deficit solved. We cut the spend on the NHS to zero, and go to your insurer and buy 63 million insurance policies. It’s cheaper.

    On the tax and nothing back, what about the rich and the middle class? Ah yes, the rich have already decided, all the tax and a fu attitude from politicians particulary on the left, and they have moved their assets.

    =====

    The UK Border Agency reckons that a household with an income of £18,600 for a couple is unable to claim any benefits and therefore they judge that at that income threshold they cannot be a burden on the UK Taxpayer.

    ======

    Except that is not a valid test. The state provides way more than benefits. Even on 18,600 you can get tax credits as a benefit. Add in a couple of kids, and that 6,000 each for schooling, 8,000 for the family of 4 for health care. Oh dear, we are already above their pre tax income. That’s before we get onto the other costs. They are net consumers rather than net contributers.

  23. Pippi de Kok

    This woman is seriously retarded.

  24. plaintruthforidiots

    For David McKendrick:

    Immigrants `not working` figures by country of origin
    Institute for Public Policy Research 2007

    Somalia 81% (muslims)
    Turkey 59% (muslims – EU membership endorsed by Labour)
    Bangladesh 56% (muslims)
    Pakistan 55% (muslims)
    Iran 48% (muslims)
    Cyprus 32% (EU)
    Jamaica 31%
    China 31%
    Portugal 30% (EU)
    India 29%
    Poland 15% (EU)
    Austrailia 11%

    Council/social housing taken by immigrants

    Somalia 80%
    Turkey 49%
    Bangladesh 41%
    Portugal 40%
    Jamaica 35%
    Iran 33%
    Zimbabwe 20%
    Cyprus 16%
    Pakistan 15%
    China 9%
    Poland 8%
    Australia 5%

  25. plaintruthforidiots

    Hilarious. So you believe that white people don’t have the right to have their own countries, is that correct?
    And you believe that nobody has the right to decide who they live with, correct? So 60 million white people have to live with millions of third world people, because big business, the banks, and the so-called ‘government’ say so, is that correct?
    So you’re advocating totalitarianism, correct?
    You don’t believe in free speech, and you don’t believe in freedom of association, and freedom of NON-association, correct?
    Aren’t you just a saint then.

    Why don’t you want to live in Haiti? Care to explain?

    If these immigrants are so wonderful, and ‘hard working’ (LOL), surely they are needed in their OWN countries, which quite obviously are WORSE places than the white countries they are so desperate to move into – otherwise, why are they coming here? Because they want to make their own lives WORSE?

    Why do they regard white countries as better than their own? Is it because of the LAND MASS, or the PEOPLE who live there? I just can’t imagine…

  26. plaintruthforidiots

    Hear, hear. This is EXACTLY what is going to happen to all the quislings, grasses, and other left wing SCUM who live among us, and have FORCED the destruction of our countries on us – and that includes David McKendrick. You’re all going to be executed, once the civil war breaks out. Where are you going to run to, you arrogant pricks? BOTH sides are going to be trying to kill you. White people are becoming more and more united against the third world INVASION of OUR countries, I hear white people every day saying things about the INVASION, about how there are too many of ‘them’ living here now, and how ‘this area used to be a nice place’, etc.etc. Do you insane Left wing tyrants think you will just walk away scot free when your insane social engineering collapses?

    Every year, hundreds of thousands of white people MOVE HOUSE to get away from the third world invaders, which is why we have hundreds of areas in the U.K. alone which are more than 20% non-white – which I believe is the current proportion of non-whites in our population. How did those areas become 50% non-white, or 80% non-white, or 95% non-white? They became like that because ALMOST ALL of the white people MOVED OUT, and virtually NO white people are moving IN.

    But hang on, our resident Leftwing genius ‘McKendrick’ keeps telling us how ‘wonderful’ immigrants are, and how they are ‘improving’ our country, so why are 99% of white people NOT desperately moving INTO those ‘enriched’ areas, McKendrick? They aren’t moving in because they DON’T WANT what you are selling us, McKendrick…

    What you will see in the future is that white people are going to ‘retreat’ more and more into all white ‘enclaves’, and any non-whites who try to move into them, are going to meet more and more resistance, because the whites who live there will know that if they don’t fight back, they will NEVER keep their area safe – i.e. WHITE. And this is all because an arrogant bunch of idiots in power, and their ‘useful idiots’ on the ground, like ‘McKendrick’, think that THEY should decide how everybody else lives.

    Tell us, ‘McKendrick’, what would be wrong with an ALL WHITE Britain? Why does that scare you so much? Why don’t YOU move to Haiti tomorrow, if you think that being a white minority in a third country is so wonderful, why are you waiting? You arrogant prick.

  27. plaintruthforidiots

    James Bloodworth, how does this video show us that immigrants are NOT destroying Britain? It doesn’t. Why don’t you and Hollie McNish move to Liberia TOMORROW, since you think that being a white minority in a third world country is so wonderful? Isn’t it strange how arrogant left wing nation wreckers always think that THEY should be able to decide how everybody else lives – i.e. the 99% of us who DON’T want to live in a ‘multi-cultural’ society. Who the hell do you arrogant nutcases think you are?

    But thanks for showing us who you are, Hollie McNish, when the civil war breaks out, you will be thrown out of the white enclaves, the only safe places for whites in the country, and your third world ‘friends’ will hack you to pieces, simply for being white. Idiot.

  28. plaintruthforidiots

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2337158/Cashpoint-card-snatches-treble-Romanian-crime-gangs-responsible-92-thefts-cash-machines-police-believe.html#ixzz2VWDcXQMB

    Any answers, Lefties?http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/10468219.VIDEO__Roumelia_Lane_shooting__four_men_found_guilty_of_manslaughter_of_Reece_James/

    The tactics of the Left are to SILENCE DISSENT. This is the ONLY response you have when people prove you wrong with FACTS. Which means you are all evil little totalitarians. You would rather watch millions of people be killed, than admit you are wrong. I have debated Leftwing idiots for over a decade, and they ALWAYS try to silence me, rather than debate me, because they KNOW they are wrong. Which is why they are all insane. Unfortunately, they are in power – at the moment – and their policies are clearly designed to destroy every white country on Earth.

    Why aren’t the Left demanding that Africa becomes ‘diverse’ by taking in twenty million Indians, and twenty million Chinese, every year, and vice versa? Because Leftwingers are jealouse, hate-filled nation wreckers, that’s why – and they hate normal, happy white families more than anything. Lefties are freaks on the outskirts of society, trying to destroy it from within – thanks for that, what lovely people you are…

    You’ve got another ten years tops, maybe five, and then we are taking our country back, and you are ALL going to suffer for what you’ve done to us. And the best thing is that we all know who you are – because you’re so arrogant and stupid, you did all this in the open, proclaiming from the rooftops how ‘wonderful’ and ‘righteous’ you were, and how YOU should decide who WE have to live with.

  29. Pillbox

    then show them some of the music of great white classical composers and think about which way the general intelligence of the population is going under the darkening tides.

  30. Grace Smith

    Immigrants are probably employed at minimum wage or illegally. Illegals take jobs that Brits would do if they were offered the opportunity and pay tax on the earnings. Also there is affirmative action for the legal migrants because companies need certain quotas of non-indigenous, women and the like so indigenous white men bear the brunt of the very unfair affirmative action. Why should they try when everything and everyone is against them? The problems we see increasing in the white male population is as a result of the policies of leftists that do not seek equality but favouritism of non-indigenous, non-white and female populations. Ban immigration and affirmative action and you may just start seeing an improvement in the British population. Do you know, I missed out on a job and a paid-for Masters degree because I had the misfortune to be born white in Britain? I could have been a lot more successful in my career than I currently am had I been a BME.

  31. Grace Smith

    You are wrong. Two girls from Tanzania come to the UK 5 years ago because they are partially-sighted and need their mother to look after them and because the treatment they require is not available in Tanzania. They get Exceptional Leave to Remain after 6 months, get a council flat each (jumping the queue over those who have been on the waiting list for 2 years) and claim full benefits because their medical condition means they cannot work. They are treated for their degenerative condition on the NHS and are still here in the UK after 5 years and still on benefits. WTF? I know lots of non-EU immigrants who are given priority housing and benefits after only living here for a few months. Either that, or cousin Mo gets them a job in his restaurant (illegally), a job that could go to a Brit otherwise. As regards asylum seekers. Yes, they get 70% of JSA but if they are successful in their claims (have regard here to the backlog of cases) they get backpay of the other 30% over however long they have been here.

  32. Oliver Ehmann

    Another neck that wants a noose. There is NO accountancy for race.

    Judus Shekel grabbing bitches will be subject to a traitors treatment.

  33. j08

    It doesn’t matter if racial aliens come here with 2 PhD’s and pockets full of gold.

    The British peoples are being replaced. On present trends we will be a minority in our own land in 2 generations.

    If we completely halted immigration tomorrow, (as we could and should), we would still be a minority in our own land by the end of the century.

    We are being killed off.

    If we are to survive as a people, we must have a programme for national survival – full compulsory repatriation.

  34. Kilburnaut Mat

    Well, regardless of the fact that the comments seem to have been inundated with brown shirts (certainly with a lot of people with something brown for brains) this is excellent.

    Bit worrying the amount of fascism in the comments eh. Guys if you like the 1930s so much why don’t you go live there?

  35. Kilburnaut Mat

    Unless 70 million people immigrate here in a relatively short amount of time, the majority of people on these islands will be British.

    Why anyone would want to move to a country filled with petty-minded, ignorant thick as pigshit fascists I don’t know, but the world is a wonderful place full of wonderful people… (present company excepted)

  36. Kilburnaut Mat

    We don’t use shekels in the UK

  37. Kilburnaut Mat

    I live in an area with one of the highest immigrant populations in Britain, and she’s still right

  38. ghost whistler

    What point? Are you a benefit to the UK? Qatada is one person with silly opinions. That’s all he is. He’s a convenient bogeyman that Theresa May likes to have around. He should get a cat and you should get a life.

  39. Robe D

    How can you expect anyone to seriously have a conversation with you when your posts a filled with so much hate?

  40. Robe D

    Whoops sorry, are not a!

  41. Robe D

    Fantastic post, Spot on.

  42. LB

    Am I a benefit? Yes. According to the latest calculator in the telegraph, I’m paying for quite a few people to sit at home and do nothing.

    Qatata from some reports I’ve seen has cost the UK millions, both in benefits and legal aid.

    I picked on him, because he’s high profile, its not been working, and he’s been consuming lots of money.

    If you didn’t notice, I also put Abramovitz on the other side. OK, if you’re a gooner, you’re going to say he’s no good …

    Comes back to the point. Somewhere between the two there is a line. Those below the line are a burden on other people. Those above the line, well one view is that the state is ripping them off. We’re extracting lots of cash from them, for very little in the way of services. Isn’t that what you want?

  43. ghost whistler

    You aren’t paying for quite a few people at all. Not anywhere close.

    I don’t really care how much Qatada has cost, I don’t spend my time worrying about one stupid old priest. That’s what the daily mail want.

    There isn’t a line. THere are just people.

  44. LB

    Quite. I do agree, there are just people. I don’t doubt the motivation of the vast majority of migrants. Not at all. Lots do work harder than, say, a lot of those on welfare.

    However, it still remains. The vast majority are not paying their way. Government spends 722 bn on 63 million people. That is 11,500 per person per year. The vast majority of migrants do not pay their way. The vast majority of Brits don’t pay their way either. The difference is that migrants are an option. We can have them, or we can decide not. We can pick and choose. That’s my preferred option. If you are a migrant and you pay more than 11,500 per person, please come and stay for as long as that is the case. If not, we shouldn’t allow you to be in the UK.

    Its a very easy test to understand. Its an easy test to administer via the tax system, and an annual bond. It’s non racist. It deals with the BNP and others of their ilk. After all if you are paying 11.5K a year in tax, you aren’t going to be on benefits.

  45. gavinrider

    What a trite monologue from Hollie McNish. Here are some simple numbers for her to chew on:

    total employment Jul-Sep 1997: 26,707,000
    total employment Jul-Sep 2009: 28,972,000

    Increase in total employment under New Labour: 2,265,000

    Increase in employment of UK-born workers: 557,000
    Increase in employment of non-UK-born workers: 1,698,000

    total unemployed Apr-Jun 1998: 1,741,000
    total unemployed Jul-Sep 2009: 2,514,000
    Increase in unemployment: 772,000

    So, we gained more jobs under New Labour, but the majority of those jobs went to foreigners and more people were unemployed at the end of their catastrophic stint in power than were unemployed at the start.

    Go and make up a rap to that, Ms McNish – I would love to see it.

  46. gavinrider

    Go and check out the Labour Market Statistics for April 2012 on the ONS website:

    http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-market-statistics/april-2012/statistical-bulletin.html#tab-Employment-by-country-of-birth-and-nationality–not-seasonally-adjusted-

    Then look at the year on year change in employment by country of birth:

    UK born: -208,000
    Non-UK born: +212,000

    Aha, there were 4,000 more jobs than in Apr 2011, so that’s great for UK plc…

    BUT 208,000 fewer UK-born people were in employment and 212,000 more foreign-born people were employed here.

    How is that considered to be good for the people of the UK, even if it makes the national economy look more buoyant than a year earlier?

  47. gavinrider

    Mat – j08 has a valid point, even though you don’t particularly care for it. Our resources in this country are being severely stretched. We are constantly being told that there is a housing shortage because of the increasing population and we are having masses of new housing built on Green Belt to address this “problem”, when in fact the problem is being imported on a daily basis.

    The vast majority of new housing being built at present is needed purely to accommodate the number of immigrants who are moving here. That does not mean that immigrants all move into brand new houses of course, it means that the indigenous British population is displaced from certain locations and it moves to the new housing leaving behind areas of our major towns and cities that are turned into migrant enclaves, transformed beyond recognition. These areas are no longer an integrated part of Great Britain, they are “a little bit of home” to the foreigners, who often don’t even bother to speak and write in English because they can survive just fine in their own little twilight zone.

    These zones are getting bigger year on year and more of them are being established in more of our towns. This is not enhancing British culture and society, it is replacing it with alien culture and communities who share very little in common with the British except geographical location.

    Why do they come here? It certainly isn’t to help us, it is to help themselves gain a better life than they could have back “home”. Any benefit they might bring to us or our economy as a result of them living here is an accidental side effect, it is not their purpose in being here to enrich the British nation, it is to enrich themselves and to give their children (of which there are usually very many) a better chance in life.

    What they gain for themselves is partly gained at the expense of lost opportunities for British people. This is inevitable.

    So, I suggest you stop being a “petty minded ignorant thick as pigshit” commentator and recognise that the concerns being expressed are valid and understandable, and they certainly won’t be reduced by ignorant and offensive comment such as your own.

  48. gavinrider

    Robe D – then come and have a serious conversation with me, then.

    I don’t hate immigrants, I just don’t want so many of them coming here and ruining what our British forefathers created for us, simply in order to enrich themselves.

    The institutional destruction of the cohesion of the British nation through the mass immigration of cheap labour, which began decades ago after the Second World War but which was shifted into a higher gear under New Labour, was based on short-sighted economic policies and a complete disdain for the concept of “Britishness”.

    The excuse for this was to tell us that our culture is “enriched” by the alien influences that are brought in with the immigrants. Certainly there are some positive aspects, but the ability of a society to adapt and change is limited – it takes time – and if the change is too fast or too big, there will be a backlash.

    Enoch Powell among others warned that there would be negative consequences as a result of large-scale immigration and he was vilified for his views, but many of his warnings have been proven to be spot on. The fact that so many migrants and their descendants who live here have a high degree of social dependency is not down to the fact that they are immigrants, otherwise all immigrants would show the same characteristics, but they don’t.

    It is because very many of the migrants who are living here are not contributing adequately to our society, and those who are tend to be seen as succeeding at the expense of a lost opportunity for a British person, that there will never be acceptance of the huge changes that are happening in the UK as a result of immigration.

    Those who do accept the situation, like Ms McNish for example, are guilty of ignoring the negative aspects just as much as it can be argued that those who are against immigration are ignoring the positive aspects of it. But the point is, gaining an economic benefit for the nation’s GDP or “enriching our culture” will never be seen as a positive outcome by British people if, as a result of immigration, large numbers of our own children find their work opportunities reduced and if they become demotivated to the point of becoming consigned to the scrap-heap before they have even had the opportunity to realise their own potential.

  49. gavinrider

    David – you make one very big mistake in your “accounting” principles. You say that “if migrants are not accessing public funds they you cannot attribute government spending to them”. That is nonsense. The entire historical expenditure of money and work that has been built upon over decades to establish the UK and to give it the foundation that we all rely upon today is being exploited by immigrants who come here and benefit from it from day one. It is why they come here rather than going to Gambia or Kenya or anywhere else, for God’s sake.

    But, if the foundation is not strong enough to support millions more people living here in just a decade, then things will start to fail. We end up with the perception that there is a massive housing shortage which forces the government to throw planning policy out of the window and turn construction into a free-for-all. That is the beginning of the end, when the planning policies of half a century that have allowed our built infrastructure to develop in a controlled, sensible way are discarded for short term economic expediency. A few developers and land owners will get rich quick and retire overseas on the proceeds, leaving behind the mayhem and destroyed natural environment that they will have created.

    The immigrants won’t care because they won’t see the destroyed British countryside from within their enclaves, and anyway it will probably still be better here than wherever they came from. But the British people will have lost a lot and they will never be able to get it back – it is a one-way ticket to the deterioration of the British Isles.

Leave a Reply