Did you know that Nigel Farage has a German wife? I thought he was against all these Europeans coming in. He’s even put her on the EU payroll (paid by we taxpayers of course).

Silly argument. Nearly all objective research shows that immigration helps the economy. And there’s plenty of evidence from many countries that immigrants tend to be entrepreneurial. People like you and the Daily Mail have been whining for at least 100 years about Jews, Italians, Asians, Poles etc coming to Britain and ruining the place. If we’d listened to the likes of you there would never have been a M&S or Tesco, but I guess you don’t care.

Some do, some don’t.

For every Cohen (asylum, rather than economic migrant), there are plenty working in Starbucks paying little tax, consuming resources. Starbucks aren’t paying are they?

So the left resort to trying to distort as you have just done. Use the BNP logic. It goes like this.

Because one migrant is good all must be good. – your argument

Because one muslim’s a paedophile, all must be paedophiles – the BNP.

Notice the logic? migrant/muslim and good/paedophile

Doesn’t work as logic for the obvious reasons. You’re generalising and the BNP are generalising too to come up with a distorted view, for the same reasons.

So you can argue on two grounds. Individual or general.

On the general ground, or averages, the average spend per person per year is 11.5K, and you need another 5K a year if they are earning pension rights for the state pension. Lots more if they work in the civil service. Way more.

Given that migrants are no different than Brits, they don’t pay enough tax to cover the costs. The average Brit doesn’t either, but that’s another problem.

So on average, they don’t pay their way. Now the bonkers argument is then to say no migrant should come.

Instead the correct approach is to pick and choose the migrants who do.

Those that pay a lot of tax, which means they are skilled. Those that aren’t paying a lot of tax, cost others money, and so we shouldn’t accept them.

However, a get out for you is on offer. You could always sponsor a migrant, where you guarantee to make up any shortfall in tax. Not an issue that you can see is there? However, unless you are very rich, you’re going to be impoverished by that.

So I guess those immigrants who founded M&S, Tesco, Shell, Harland and Wolff, Burtons, Moss Bros etc etc didn’t contribute to the economy. And funny that London, the city with most immigrants, is the motor of our economy.

===========

Ah yes, we know why. There is no economic upside for a migration free fall all. Lets change the subject because we’ve lost the argument

That’s right 11.5K a year per migrant in taxes is a complete fantasy. The average migrant is no better or no worse than the average Brit. Since the average Brit can’t cover the cost of the state, an average migrant isn’t going to either.

Be it barristas in Starbucks to fruit pickers in Kent, they don’t cover the cost that the state pays out.

It’s only the highly paid that cover the cost, the rest are a drain on the economy.

=======

But the state costs have gone up 10%.

Yep lets spend 10 quid, get 3-4 quid back, its a great deal isn’t it.

More lies on more lies

Ah yes, that a worker in Starbucks is paying enough tax to cover the 11.5K spending and the 5K pension costs each and every year.

Politicians have been rumbled by the public and just ploughing on telling the same lies isn’t working.

But also the mainstream liberal-left really does need to start shedding the shrill, antagonistic rhetoric that makes out anyone who is concerned about immigration is an evil racist who knows nothing about ‘the facts’.

http://afreeleftblog.blogspot.co.uk/