Peter, did you read the article? I just did.
It says “migrants”, not “illegals“. The equivalence of “migrants” and “illegals” here is your personal conflation.
The article says that all this puts pressure to crack down on illegal migrants, a subset of migrants, but the article does not say, in any way, what you are ranting about.
Pay attention, and do better.
If you're unemployed it's hard to be legally in the UK as a non-citizen unless you qualify for some sort of refugee status (and thus aren't a migrant).
Anyway, my point is equally valid regardless of the exact legal situation. It's completely insane to spend enormous sums of money on foreigners who are on average, less productive and more violent than the people already in your country.
are you clubbing high skilled immigrant with others and painting with broad brush saying that immigrants are less productive..
Productive foreigners don't get called "migrants" or "illegals"
How do you call productive foreigners?
Pete approved or Pete disapproved
In a place like Canada they get called immigrants. At least they used too, when legal immigration had high standards.
Alternatively, Canadians. 😂
I've been a productive foreigner most of my adult professional life and I've been a migrant every minute of it.
😂
Hardly anyone uses that term in that sense.
Legal immigration with high standards is fine, at least for the country allowing immigrants in. Arguably it's a bad thing for the world as it tends to lead to brain drains, depriving poorer countries of their talented people.
Obviously letting in millions of poor people with few skills, low intelligence, and violent cultures is a terrible idea.
Oddbean new post about login | logout