London will be overrun by 29 million Romanians and Bulgarians

[Gandalf]

I don't think there is anything wrong with what Brockton is saying. I don't dispute that immigration has had a positive effect on the economy either, but I do disagree with that growth being positive for the general population of the UK. It is growth in the pockets of medium businesses who want to hire on the cheap and granted it works for them....at a cost to a significant sector of the population. The truth is that low educated, relatively unskilled workers are the vast bulk of workers in any country, so to have them competing with millions of legal and millions more illegal migrants, is a rather heavy pill to swallow. It isn't a fair game. Romania for the English with a minimum wage of 88p an hour and Romanian a language spoken by few or England for Romanians where the minimum wage is over 6 pounds and in a world where everyone can speak some English. How does that equation ever amount to being game in an open labour market?

Liberalism sometimes wants its cake and to eat it too, and in this instance the liberals are usually people who are very comfortable and with the least to lose. The typical broadsheet reader has nothing to fear and thus liberalism at all costs is the majority view. Sometimes you have to say no to unchecked liberalism and this is just one of those issues.

[ryanman]

I don't think there is anything wrong with what Brockton is saying. I don't dispute that immigration has had a positive effect on the economy either, but I do disagree with that growth being positive for the general population of the UK. It is growth in the pockets of medium businesses who want to hire on the cheap and granted it works for them....at a cost to a significant sector of the population. The truth is that low educated, relatively unskilled workers are the vast bulk of workers in any country, so to have them competing with millions of legal and millions more illegal migrants, is a rather heavy pill to swallow. It isn't a fair game. Romania for the English with a minimum wage of 88p an hour and Romanian a language spoken by few or England for Romanians where the minimum wage is over 6 pounds and in a world where everyone can speak some English. How does that equation ever amount to being game in an open labour market?

Liberalism sometimes wants its cake and to eat it too, and in this instance the liberals are usually people who are very comfortable and with the least to lose. The typical broadsheet reader has nothing to fear and thus liberalism at all costs is the majority view. Sometimes you have to say no to unchecked liberalism and this is just one of those issues.

You make some interesting points there Miles and I'll have a think about them.
Certainly the issue of the educated, or 'broadsheet readers' being detached and thus scewing the view is one I have pondered but not really thought too deeply about. But I have wondered whether my current position may be akin to being in an ivory tower in regards to the impact that immigration can have. I've always felt immune from the ivory tower syndrome due to my upbringing but it's possible that I am just as susceptable as other liberal broadsheet types.
Not all growth being good is also an interesting point, but I'll have to look into that as I've always being a growth is good for all thinker.

Having said this, I just want to make it clear that I still vehemently disagree with some of the generalisations, stereotypes and fear mongering that surrounds this issue (not from you). I also do not consider anecdotes as proof of anything.

[Gandalf]

I don't think there is anything wrong with what Brockton is saying. I don't dispute that immigration has had a positive effect on the economy either, but I do disagree with that growth being positive for the general population of the UK. It is growth in the pockets of medium businesses who want to hire on the cheap and granted it works for them....at a cost to a significant sector of the population. The truth is that low educated, relatively unskilled workers are the vast bulk of workers in any country, so to have them competing with millions of legal and millions more illegal migrants, is a rather heavy pill to swallow. It isn't a fair game. Romania for the English with a minimum wage of 88p an hour and Romanian a language spoken by few or England for Romanians where the minimum wage is over 6 pounds and in a world where everyone can speak some English. How does that equation ever amount to being game in an open labour market?

Liberalism sometimes wants its cake and to eat it too, and in this instance the liberals are usually people who are very comfortable and with the least to lose. The typical broadsheet reader has nothing to fear and thus liberalism at all costs is the majority view. Sometimes you have to say no to unchecked liberalism and this is just one of those issues.

You make some interesting points there Miles and I'll have a think about them.
Certainly the issue of the educated, or 'broadsheet readers' being detached and thus scewing the view is one I have pondered but not really thought too deeply about. But I have wondered whether my current position may be akin to being in an ivory tower in regards to the impact that immigration can have. I've always felt immune from the ivory tower syndrome due to my upbringing but it's possible that I am just as susceptable as other liberal broadsheet types.
Not all growth being good is also an interesting point, but I'll have to look into that as I've always being a growth is good for all thinker.

Having said this, I just want to make it clear that I still vehemently disagree with some of the generalisations, stereotypes and fear mongering that surrounds this issue (not from you). I also do not consider anecdotes as proof of anything.

In terms of your final paragraph, me too. I'm a migrant myself and would be a complete hypocrite to be against immigration completely, which obviously I am not. I think the reason I think the way I do is largely because I AM a migrant and can see just how strange England has become whenever I come home. Of course I do compare and contrast here and there all the time, which is something I am always being told off for doing. My argument is always that if you have nothing to contrast with, then how can you have perspective?

I largely read broadsheets myself, though I do read the 'other' newpapers too. What I always do too is to skim the reader responses to articles. Despite rumours to the contrary, I do take a keen interest in what others are saying, and that to me is often the most revealing aspect. Articles in broadsheets are so pro immigration that it is sometimes quite strange reading them. On the whole responses are supportive, but there are voices akin to the criticisms of immigration here. They tend to get drowned out. The trashy papers have their agenda, but the voices in the responses are typically those with less ability to articulate and they are the vast majority.

Speaking from my own perspective, the media and academia (at least in terms of social sciences) are largely systems of propaganda. I can honestly say that all these years later, that I disagree with how terms like globalisation and multiculturalism were taught to me. They even caught onto the word multiculturalism here as an attempt to deal with a low birth rate. It meant allowing poor unmarried farmers the purchase of wives overseas from poor south east Asian countries. It isn't going to end well. This is a country that teaches people a pure blood ideology in schools, has images of Dokdo whilst you wait in line in a bank, and these kids are going to be raised and given a terrible time. I suppose my point is that there are ways and means to do things. Purchasing wives in order to breed is weak and allowing uncontrolled immigration is weak too.

My other point is that buzz words are abused by the powerful with questionable aims. Milton Friedman is an obvious case in point. Take anything he says and do the intermediate version of it (same with Marx) as that is how the real world functions. Thus limited immigration for useful jobs, check the credibility of Korean farmers and wives for compatibility etc.

My view on UK immigration is siding with unskilled, lesser educated English people over those from different countries. For me, it is left wing politics with a national bias. I just don't see how reducing the quality of life for ordinary English people helps Britain in the long run. It's a curious experiment, but I don't see how a claim of growth can be judged as success. In Britain a housing bubble and more people in low paid work is being deemed as growth. Is that really growth? I call that systemic abuse.