The same immigration rule for all

Boris Johnson and Michael Gove have jointly declared that migrants will be barred from entering Britain unless they have skills that the country needs and can speak English. Despite the intensive, and repeated, fear campaign of the last two months, no doubt orchestrated by the Brussels bureaucrats and emanating from one official body after another as well as politicians, the opinion polls have now turned in favour of the Leave EU lobby.

Whether the Johnson-Gove statement was taking advantage of the poll change is difficult to say — probably — but at least, the main issue, immigration, is no longer being buried by both the Leave and Remain lobbies. It was hidden away so far because the leaders of both lobbies were, and are, members of governments, Labour and Tory, that encourage mass immigration.

We’re now into entirely new territory (!) — that of the instinctive antipathy of one group, region, culture or nation to the entry of large numbers of others. Johnson and Gove are now allowing the mass of the public to express their feelings. If the Leave EU lobby wins in the Referendum on 23 June then the general public can share what the social elite already does in penny numbers for foreign professional and business individuals wanting to join them.

Intensive competition between advanced countries

The mass immigration of 60 years ago of relatively unskilled people ago into England — and the acceleration in the last 20 years — has had two effects, one obvious, the other far less so.

The obvious one is that immigrants displaced poorly educated indigenous young people from jobs and also swelled the proportion of low-skill businesses and services in the country. Most of the latter are of the non-added- value sort — merely circulating money and services among themselves within an expanding population. The result of this is that most of the population are importing more goods and services than they are exporting and are largely the cause of the negative balance of payments of the last 20 years..

The much lass obvious effect is that among the millions of low skill immigrants there are, as always within any population, a small proportion of children born with very high intelligence. These are already beginning to dominate indigenous children at school and will soon start to do so at university. These graduates, particularly those in the sciences, will be welcomed by the upper middle classes.

The latter — already prospering wih a positive balance of payments from their international trading — have already realised that their future depends on being at the leading edge of science-dependent advanced services in order to be able trade with China for physical goods. And because China is already approaching the limit of producing as many consumer goods as the rest of the world can afford, then competition between advanced countries is going to be more intensive than it has ever been for 200 years past

Trump is wrong about Europe

Donald Trump was correct yesterday when he says that Angela Merkel made a tragic mistake when she welcomed a million immigrants into Germany– and 200,000 a year for several years thereafter.  Immediately after her statement, middle-class Germans interviewed by middle-class media journalists pronounced themselves happy with what Merkel had said.  But a week or two after then, working-class street demonstrations organised by a growing extreme right-wing party showed the feelings of many in the population who erceive that their jpbs might be in danger from immigrants.

Trump was wrong, however, when he predicts a “revolution” in Europe.  As mentioned above, reaction has already started and, according to rumours, the Brussels bureaucracy are already having to think of draconian methods of keeping immigrants out — both the ‘deserving’ and the ‘undeserving’ — which they’ll have to employ within weeks from now before the number of would=be immigrants swell with oncoming better weather.

Considering that most of the Middle East is at a high point of tension — or actually war-torn already  — and that war-torn Africa with 1 billion inhabitants is almost certainly going to grow to 2 to 3 billion within the next 30 years, then the EU faces a potentially massive invasion greatly disproportionate to its indigenous people and cultures.  Whether America faces immigration of comparable intensity from Central and South America is something that that only Americans can judge.  But it’s obviously of enough concern  already in giving Trump such a big vote in the New Hampshire primary.

The real reason for mass immigration

According to David Frum in the Mail on Sunday today, the German government has lost track of 600,000 migrants of the 1,100,000 ‘asylum seekers’ admitted into the country in the past few months. This is rather like the 3,000,000 illegal immigrants in England according to the Daily Express some two months.

In both cases you can be sure that the immigrants have been issued with sufficient official paperwork to allow them to find work.  It’s less politically dangerous for both governments to admit to ineptitude rather than confessing that they had tempted immigrants into both countries in order to make up tax-paying workers to pay for the increasing welfare bill of the old native populations in the coming years.

Just one glimpse of truth from a senior politician

Of the four leading contenders for the leadership of the Tory Party MPs when Cameron makes up his mind to retire — and thus automatically becoming Prime Minister — only one has said something that is totally truthful. This is Theresa May and what she said was that all the vast immigration of the past 20 years or so is doing the economy no good at all.

That a senior politicians should speak from her heart and by doing so totally oppose what politicians have been saying for the last 20 years in justification for high immigration is astonishing in itself. That no-one has criticised her by repeating the usual mantra that immigration is good for us is just as astonishing. It can only mean that she is now considered demented or she is speaking the truth.

Yes, large-scale immigration increases the total personal taxation that the Treasury collects but the increase happens to be coming from more low skill jobs — that is, of those coming rom Paiikstan, Bangladesh and Africa (and also more recently from new EU countries such as Rumania). The overall effect, though, is to reduce the skill level of the country as a whole — and thus our foreign earnings.

When the economic history books are written it will be appreciated just how powerful employers of low-skill jobs have been in bending the ears of senior politicians over the past few decades. It will also be appreciated how much the income gap between the adequately educated and the inadequately educated in this country, which has been growing for the last century has been accelerating in the past 20 years.

How to multiply terrorism in Europe

How to multiply the number of terrorists in Europe?  Firstly, you announce an “open door” policy, as Angela Merkel did three weeks ago.  Secondly, you entirely ignore the fact that the majority of migrants seeking entry are not fleeing persecution or civil war but are ‘pure’ economic migrants — young single men looking for jobs.  Thirdly, you subsequently state that all new immigrants in Germany will be assessed and those judged to be economic migrants only will be repatriated.

The result, according to the Sunday Timee this morning is that 50% of those in reception camps in Germany are refusing to register.  If, subsequently, officialdom insists, is it not likely that many young men will  not only disappear into networks of already established immigrants — and be very angry to boot?  That’s how Merkel’s repatriation policy, if attempted to be carried out rigorously, is highly likely to multiply the number of terrorists in Europe.

Yet another instalment

As I write a terrible tragedy is taking place in Paris in which many people have already been killed, many more likely to be and the fate of many hostages is yet unknown before it’s over.

Accounts are sporadic and disjointed so far and there’s no narrative that makes sense yet.  But it’s almost certainly the work of extreme Muslim terrorists.  At least 1 billion and probably 2 billion in the Middle East and Africa have daily access to mobile phones and television and clearly see the gulf between their way of life in unstable and corrupt countries with no hope of imminent remedy and what they see of us in the West.

The terrorism that is now happening cannot be condoned, of course, but the huge wall of resentment, anger and frustration that is now building up outside the First World countries is at least understandable. It’s either immigration into Europe or America or yet another instalment of the total World War I mentioned in my posting of yesterday. I am not so sure that we will have the wisdom to deal with this.

How many more months will the EU need to decide?

The Europe-Africa anti=immigration meeting in Malta is a mockery.  Besides 36 hours of agenda preparation beforehand for 40 diverse Leaders meeting today, all that the EU have been able to offer as a bribe to the African countries is $1.5 billion.  African countries are not going to be bought with pigeon feed. Immigrants in Europe already are probably sending a sizeable part of that every year to their families back home.

The EU countries are totally dazed by what to do with the growing column of immigrants from Africa and Asia.  How many illegals has the EU been able to repatriate already?  Almost none.  And do they know where to send them?  And how many jihadists are also entering Europe?

The whole affair is a total mess until the EU sets up rigorous reception centres along all its boundary.  How many more months will it take to make this decision?

Are we due for a total, not a partial, World War this time?

If any country lists all its exportable products and then concentrates on the one that is the most efficiently made then it will always be able to export it and, in return, import some quite sophisticated goods it couldn’t have made itself from a more developed country .  Some of its population at least will thus be able to enjoy new products and a higher standard of living than otherwise. This observation is otherwise known as the Law of Comparative Advantage (LCA) and owes itself to a string of economists until, in its most succinct form of words, David Ricardo. in the middle of the 19th century.

However, the LCA was enunciated at a time when the number of staple goods available for export — either manufactured goods or natural resources — was very low and when the total world import-export trade touched only a few countries in the world. Today, when trade affects every country — or at least the very rich in every country — and when there are many sources of some staple goods, competition can be very fierce.  It can be so fierce that it’s inoperative for most countries for any one product at any one time.

In short the LCA fails today.  The over-massive populations of about 180 Third World countries have little to no chance of ever developing in the same way as the lucky half-dozen of northern Europe plus America did in the 19th century. Unless their populations are magically reduced to much lower numbers very rapidly then they have only two alternatives.  One is for some of them to find a niche in scientific research that no developed country has not already started.  It is only in this way any of them could develop sophisticated innovations of their own and thus be able to trade with the First World.

The other is for the populations of the Third World to migrate to the First World.  Here we are not talking of the migration of one or two ethnic groups temporarily affected by drought or civil war but of massive migration in their millions in order to enjoy the jobs and prosperity of the First world. There are probably 1.5 billion such people in South America and 3 billion in Africa and Western Asia combined.

What about massive migration into China, Japan, Taiwan — counrries that are either at or close to First world standards of living?  Not a chance. They will be denied entry. What about North America or Europe?  Well, they will have to be just as intransigent — even if it means warfare — or they will be over-run.

Donald Trump is absolutely correct about one issue

Whatever may be thought about his other raves, Donald Trump is correct about the need to build a wall across North America. Like Europeans until 18 months ago, the American public don’t see the need yet.  There are millions of South Americans poised to move — just as we  Europeans have at least two millions already moving in our direction.

We, in Europe, are now experiencing a wave of immigration from the Middle East and Africa that will be unstoppable from very shortly now onwards unless EU foreign ministers take some extraordinary decisions very soon.  As it happens, they are meeting some African Leaders today in Malta to try — pathetically — to buy African countries off if they can be persuading to stop the immigrants starting out in the first place.

European immigration has reached such a pass that only one thing can stop it now.  This is to set up rigorous reception centres on all our border crossings — and to be totally draconian in letting none of them further inwards because the authorities won’t have a chance of sifting the ‘deserving’ from the ‘undeserving’ quickly enough. Even Germany hasn’t begun to deal with the problem of repatriating illegals from among nearly one million who’ve already arrived.

Europe has very little chance of a solution without decisions that will directly contradict EU ideology.  America has a chance by building a wall.

Refugees don’t (necessarily) make economic sense

My New Scientist this week has an article “Refugees welcome: the numbers add up” with a subheading that includes the phrase, ” . .  it makes economic sense.”

Refugees have made huge economic sense many times in history. In this country we have had Italian (Jewish) financiers in Renaissance times and highly skilled Huguenots in the 17th century among many others, but relatively unskilled refugees from Eritrea, Nigeria, Syria, Afghanistan and other war torn countries don’t make economic sense.

Yes, they make economic sense in the medium term to the government and the civil service — they generally work well and pay their taxes, thus helping to pay for the growing number of old people in the country — but they will pull the average skill level downwards, even allowing for the facts that there will be some qualified doctors, pharmacists, mathematicians among them.

The vast immigration we have had in the last 20 years — something like 3 million at least, mainly from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Africa. Some estimates put the number as high as 8 million altogether. All these have pulled the average wage down by at least 1% and more like 3% for low skill jobs. And this is why the population generally have been strongly against immigration even though both Labour and Conservative governments have been allowing large numbers of immigrants in surreptitiously.

In this increasingly competitive age in which skills need to become very much higher than they ever used to be for reasonably well-paid interesting jobs, this country on the whole has become increasingly lowly skilled in the last 20 years.  Yes, there’ll be many brilliant and/or enterprising people among refugees and immigrants — but we could have so many more new ones of our own if we had a relevant education system.

By far the most people in the country feel deeply sympathetic to the plight of most people, particularly women, in the Muslim countries or in backward countries in Africa and Asia but, at the end of the day, the livelihood+territory instinct is stronger because that’s a daily fact of life.

The failure of the Brussels bureaucrats

The highly intelligent and supremely rational EU bureaucrats of Brussels are now as much in a total mess over the immigration issue as they are over the monetary system.  They are now having to fall back on the politicians — those whom they normally manipulate when everything goes swimmingly.

The politicians, being more instinctive than cerebral, know that underneath them are electorates that, once stirred, can be dangerous.  This is why, whatever weasel words they’ll use to pacify the ‘politically correct’ in the coming weeks and months, they’ll have to decide to stop immigration into Europe altogether, whether humanitarian or economic.

The Middle East will be in a state of civil war for a generation yet.  Africa’s population is enormous and still growing enormously.

The flood into a confused Europe will intensify

Keith Hudson

The EU has fluffed it.  The meeting of 27 Foreign Ministers two days ago solved exactly nothing.  Yes, they’re going to help Italy in patrolling the Mediterranean and save lives by plucking migrants off floundering rubber dinghies. No, they’re not going to closely patrol the coastlines of North Africa and Syria to prevent the boats setting out in the first place.  Everybody on-shore would then realise that the EU really means business and word would diffuse back into the source countries.

Instead, the problem will be sent to the United Nations for a decision.  And would the Security Councul approve the only possible sensible solution?  It’s doubtful.  But whether it will be a Yes or a No, how long will the decision take?  The procrastination will only intensify the migration.  The EU, already flummoxed by its financial problems will be more confused than ever.

The craziness of unlimited Free Trade

Keith Hudson

The powerful migration into Europe is fast becoming both a human tragedy and a political farce. As I suggested a few days ago, European Union Foreign Ministers (meeting today) are now being forced to consider patrolling the coastline of northern Africa in order to prevent boatloads of migrants setting out in the first place. The phrase “limited military action” is also now being seriously suggested!

Continue reading