L’immigrazione netta zero richiederebbe importanti aumenti delle tasse per colmare il buco nero da 37 miliardi di sterline, avvertono gli esperti
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/net-migration-reform-immigration-niesr-tax-rises-b2913033.html
di BestButtons
35 commenti
Some highlights:
> Slashing net migration to zero would shrink the economy and require a swathe of tax rises or an increase in borrowing in order to plug a £37bn funding shortfall, a leading economic think tank has warned, in what is a major blow to Reform UK’s immigration plans.
> Meanwhile, after a number of government measures to clamp down on legal migration, the **latest official figures showed that net migration dropped to 204,000 in the year to June, down 69 per cent year-on-year**, and raising the possibility of Britain reaching net zero before the end of the decade, according to some forecasters.
> While the think tank predicted that GDP growth per capita would be higher under a net zero migration scenario, they predicted that overall GDP growth would be lower, reflecting slower employment growth and a smaller workforce.
> Cumulatively, NIESR predicts that net zero migration would leave the economy 3.6 per cent smaller by 2040, equivalent to reducing the UK’s trend GDP growth rate by around 0.2 percentage points.
I think UK population should shrink a bit. 70+ millions for this island is too many.
Improve and enhance nature, plant trees, halt wildlife decline, improve infrastructure and services, stop the savage destruction of green belts with never ending ugly new builds – sure raise more taxes as long as it is transparent where money goes and improvements are tangible.
I am confused. Why would we want net zero migratiion?
I think the plan is to shrink illegal immigration and deal with the wave of asylum applications rather than stop legal manageable immigration that benefits both the person and the nation.
Immigrants grow old and retire, too. Mass immigration will not solve the ‘pensions time bomb’, only delay it, while making it much worse when it finally does hit. Unless, that is, we switch to a system where immigrants are brought in to work, with no path to ILR or citizenship, and kicked out the day they retire. That’s not a very pleasant idea though!
If we want to solve the problem, we need to be more creative and shift our focus to productivity. Preferably starting by banning government ministers from ever saying ‘GDP’ without following it with ‘per capita.’
Cumulatively, NIESR predicts that net zero migration would leave the economy 3.6 per cent smaller by 2040, equivalent to reducing the UK’s trend GDP growth rate by around 0.2 percentage points.
Stephen Millard, NIESR’s deputy director for macroeconomics, said: “Our analysis clearly shows that net zero migration would put pressure on the public finances and worsen the public debt outlook.
“Unlike Japan, the United Kingdom lacks the institutional and financial conditions to support a substantially higher debt ratio.”
It would be a disaster.
High immigration can’t be used to mask structural problems with our economic system forever.
The choice is essentially:
1) control migration but then there’s not enough young workers to prop up the retirement ponzi scheme of people taking more in retirement than they paid in
2) flood the country with uneducated 3rd worlders and destroy it, but pensioners get their retirement paid for and businesses can pay lower wages
Not exactly a glowing endorsement of the structure of the country is it.
Seems either way we’re inevitably heading towards oblivion/a major shakeup of how the state pension works in 20ish years.
At least you feel like you’re getting the piss taken out of you slightly less with option 1
Is Reform actually looking for net zero migration? I perhaps naively assumed they’d be focused on getting rid of the low quality migrants abusing asylum pathways and Boriswave type initiatives but high earners or highly skilled professionals would still be welcome
Classic independent. “If we don’t import 1m immigrants then the NHS will fail!!!”
We need to close all the tax loopholes and stop the wealthy’s money leaving our country
Bruh i read the headline n thought they meant migrating to net zero for energy/co2 emissions lmao i was so confused by the comments 😂
Do we want net zero or do we want migrants who will integrate, contribute and be of value to the country?
As opposed to what we have now
Net Zero migration is such a stupid idea in a neoliberal economy that’s doesn’t baby make enough and has put off immigrants with specialist expertise to come and contribute. We need the high and low immigration unless we want to cut workers protections for regular domestic workforce significantly
So the only options are unlimited migration, or unlimited tax increases.
Something has to give first.
The longer it goes on the higher that bill becomes, that’s what they’re not saying. Get it over with now.
I’d rather live in a smaller, more homogenous, quieter Britain with less bloated institutions than a fractured, divided, tribalistic, sectarian crowded Britain with ballooning institutions that aren’t fit for purpose anyway.
I find this doubtful, we’ll see higher investment and GDP per capita as a result which will more likely make balancing the books easier. We’ll still be letting in the highest value immigrants as well.
It could work but the country will have to have some difficult conversations like needing to heavily reduce the price of energy, heavily reduce the price of housing both buying and renting. Companies will also have to have a long hard think at themselves because productivity is a measure of how productive they allow their employees to be not to mention we still have a lot of people unemployed and companies would still rather go to the state and say “we cant find anyone can we have some visas” instead of employing someone then training them. Even outside of that we have a lot of graduates and entry level roles have just collapsed because companies want senior level of experience for graduate level of wages.
Love that the article is about ‘experts’ but they use an image of someone who is as far from an expert as you can possibly be.
We could just make immigration dependent on not being net recipients of tax money. I was reading on the BBC about a Somali who’d been unemployed living in a council flat in London for twenty years. The story was about the mould and how unfair it was for him, but I’m wondering how we benefit from him being here.
What about the migrants who contribute nothing? Like the ones in the hotels? They are only a net loss on our society so getting rid of them would benefit the economy surely.
Keep the ones that actually work and contribute as they are needed.
2050 we will have two workers supporting one pensioner. And we know pensioners will never support getting rid of the triple lock or winter fuel allowance.
Think of the boomers! They might have to be taxed on their millions! You wouldn’t want them to not be able to afford their fourth cruise of the year?
> Slashing net migration to zero would shrink the economy and require a swathe of tax rises or an increase in borrowing in order to plug a £37bn funding shortfall
The governments own statistics show that only 1 group in the UK pay more in tax than they take out which is white people.
> While the think tank predicted that GDP growth per capita would be higher under a net zero migration scenario, they predicted that overall GDP growth would be lower, reflecting slower employment growth and a smaller workforce
Even the OBR admit now mass migration wont magically fix the pension and aging population issues.
> The fiscal impacts of migration are likely to become less beneficial over time, reflecting that after a minimum of 5-years, migrants can apply for indefinite leave to remain and therefore become eligible for welfare benefits. If migrants stay in the UK into older age, there would also be greater pressures on pensions and health spending and lower tax revenues as they retire.
“Experts warn” with an image of Farage is a joke, right?
It seems the dumbest thing in the world not to take the energy we can get from wind and solar and make use of it. Oil for fuel is single use. Sunlight and wind are not.
When the immigrants grow old and retire, who is paying for them? More immigrants?
Net zero migration usually just means the country is a shithole tbh.
Throughout history people have always left areas that were bad and moved to areas that were good. There are the examples of the Flemish and the Huguenots back in like the 1500s.
We should control who can come in (which means ending the current asylum system) but net zero doesn’t even seem desirable let alone achievable.
Could always get Google, amazon, Costa and all the other pirates to pay their taxes too. Don’t you think?
It should lead to higher wages for UK workers , less benefits , and less overseas remittance outflows.
Oh, experts reckon this, experts reckon that. Why don’t they shut up and we can put a bunch of self serving turd polishers in government to cock things up a bit more. Bloody wokeism gone mad I tell ya!
It’s clear we need to focus on boosting productivity and fixing the underlying economic structure, not just using immigration as a temporary plug.
I think our immigration policies are fine and working, our asylum seekers system is not..
Immigration is not a solution. Educate your people, invest into bleeding edge, create work places.
No one is asking for 0 immigration. People are asking for no *illegal* immigration. Two very different things
So, surely this points to a much bigger problem: the £37bn black hole. Rather than use it as an excuse to maintain another problem, shouldn’t all of the parties be focused on how to solve the actual problem? You, know, like reducing the excessive waste across the public sector and applying proper financial oversight to government contracts, or maybe even reducing the scope of some of the regulations to enable faster development in key industries and sectors? Really, just anything proactive and productive?