Impact Of Econy By Migration Essay Research

Impact Of Econy By Migration Essay, Research Paper

Migration is one of the most important issues facing international politics today and is becoming

more prevalent an issue every year. In 1980 the estimated number of refugees was 8.2m, 1990 -

15m, 1992 – 20m (Castles and Miller, 1993, p 84). In our society there are a lot of preconceptions

and prejudices about immigration and its effect: “they are stealing our jobs!” “They are all

scroungers” and “we are to generous to them”. It can be argued that these all arise from institutions

such as the tabloid media and right wing political groups, but also from past Government policy

which took a hard line on immigration and old colonial ideologies of mistrust and suspicion

towards foreigners which have been passed down through the ages. So what is the true economic

impact of immigration on a receiving country. Where does it have effect. Is it substantial or

minimal. Is it positive or negative. As immigration affects different countries in different ways, and

as there are so many different forms of immigration e.g. asylum seekers, refugees, temporary

settlers, permanent settlers, illegal immigration and immigration from one part of a country to

another, it is impossible to give universal answers to these questions. However I will examine the

arguments for and against immigration to try establish a picture of whether the economic impact on

the whole is positive or negative for a receiving country. I will focus primarily on the UK and USA

for case studies but will also look at the effects of immigration on third world countries. One of the

most common arguments against immigration is that it puts a strain on government expenditure.

Some economists argue that “social capital expenditure on housing and social services for

immigrants reduced the capital available for productive investment” (Castles and Miller, 1993, p

76). In Britain, the current media scare is “bogus asylum seekers” and how they are a huge drain

on the social services. A quote from the BBC web page sums up the anti immigration feeling in

this country: “We are too soft. I’m happy for the government allowing genuine asylum seekers into

this country. However something has to be done about the scroungers who think they could make

a better life here. There’s nothing for them – our classrooms are over-crowded, our hospitals can

barely cope and our social services are on the brink of collapse such is the demand for pensions

and benefits. It’s hard enough making a life for yourself when you live here by right. Simon

Skelton, UK” (http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/talking_point). The British National party

claim: “The procedure of investigation of ‘refugee’ claims, together with the job of attempting

(mostly in vain) to track down the bogus claimants is, needless to say, a big drain on the public

purse” (The British National Party – http://www.BNP.net/manif11.html). Also in the USA, There is

widespread opinion among Americans that “most immigrants wind up on welfare” (47 percent,

according to a 1986 poll; New York Times, July 14, 1986, 1)”

(http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/pr-imopi.html). White extremist groups, such as Combat

18 claim “Allowing illegal aliens to stay within our borders while using technicalities and legal

resources paid for by our tax dollars is bad enough, we allow them to move here, but we give them

tax-free loans, jobs, free housing and welfare!” (http://www.whitepride.com/views/#immigration)

So, just how valid is the argument that immigration puts pressure on a receiving country to look

after them. When migration occurs on a major scale it creates major problems. Almost every

conflict or war creates huge numbers of refugees. This was the case in the Kosovo conflict when

Albania and Macedonia were overwhelmed with the number of refugees, and during the Rwandan

civil war, hundreds of thousands of refugees fled to neighbouring Zaire causing major

humanitarian catastrophes. In these circumstances immigration has a considerable effect upon a

countries budget. However, in both these examples and in many other conflicts the countries that

bore the brunt of the refugee flow were neighbours. Refugees do require a certain degree of

spending from the state, but the levels of refugees in Western Europe and America are slight when

compared to the number of native persons who are dependant on welfare. However, how much an

impact does immigration on the whole make on government spending. In a 1994 study entitled,

Immigration and Immigrants – Setting the Record Straight, by Michael Fix. Jeffrey S. Passel, it is

argued that, “when all levels of government are considered together, immigrants generate

significantly more in taxes paid than they cost in services received. This surplus is unevenly

distributed among different levels of government, with immigrants (and natives) generating a net

surplus to the federal government, but a net cost to some states and most localities” (Fi

Внимание, отключите Adblock

Вы посетили наш сайт со включенным блокировщиком рекламы!
Ссылка для скачивания станет доступной сразу после отключения Adblock!

Скачать