6 ms·
UK needs immigrants to increase stagnating productivity. this has been the case for decades and it's why no government has done, or will do anything serious to
by 12ian34 1y ago
UK needs immigrants to increase stagnating productivity. this has been the case for decades and it's why no government has done, or will do anything serious to curb it.
- gadders 1y agoYes, but only total GDP goes up. GDP per person goes down.
- arrowsmith 1y agoGDP per capita in the UK is still lower than it was in 2008. Gen Z have never experienced economic growth. They don't know what it means to get richer.
- gadders 1y agoI remember when Gordon Brown promised "An end to boom and bust economics." I didn't that meant realise no more booms. In the 90s in the UK, skilled working class tradesmen making huge amounts of money was such a stereotype that there was even a comedy character about it. I can't imagine seeing that happen again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loadsamoney https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loadsamoney
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- 12ian34 1y agoNot true in isolation. It depends on the productivity difference between the existing average and those being added.
- gadders 1y agoSo if you add more people, and gdp per capita goes down, you think it isn't due to the people being added?
- Taurenking 1y ago[dead]
- arrowsmith 1y agoThen why has productivity never been more stagnant even though immigration has never been higher?
- cess11 1y agoHere are some pointers: https://niesr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/JC760-NIESR-Outlook-Autumn-2023-UK-Box-B.pdf?ver=50yPiKCH1FE9LZ1R08Zt https://niesr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/JC760-NIESR-O...
- modo_mario 1y agoI don't think that should be the be-all and end-all overriding the natives qualms but regardless.....Is it increasing productivity? In nearby mainland European countries that doesn't appear the case.
- rubyAce 1y agoWe've had the highest levels of immigration ever in the last five years and productivity hasn't increased proportionally or much at all.
- 12ian34 1y agomaybe it's not working, also maybe it is working but there are other confounding factors.
- spacebanana7 1y agoOnly a small minority of immigrants to the UK come through the skilled visa pathway, even if the health & social care visa numbers were added. See figure 1.3a - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/migration-advisory-committee-report-on-net-migration/net-migration-report-accessible https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/migration-advisor... Note that to the best of my knowledge, these numbers don't include the Afghan resettlement scheme which would further lower the proportion of employment driven visas.
- 12ian34 1y agowhat about nurses and cleaners
- dmix 1y agoCanada has legal immigration pathways for nurses, I don't see why any other country couldn't if there was strong demand. Gambling on illegal (and dangerous) border crossings to fill those sort of roles seems deeply irresponsible.
- spauldo 1y agoThe US doesn't really have any interest in fixing the problem. Both parties benefit from the mess we have now. That's what pisses me off about the whole thing. People buy the crap the politicians are feeding them and the immigrants are the ones that pay for it. You'd think people would have realized after decades of this crap that neither party is going to do a damn thing.
- OptionX 1y agoI always find funny how the new, supposedly progressive, arguments in favor of mass immigration run so close to the ones given against when slavery was abolished, that society can only exist with cheap,exploitative, labor. Who indeed will pick the cotton.
- arrowsmith 1y ago
- bendigedig 1y agoWelcome to the sticking plaster economy. This may be the economic orthodoxy, but it completely ignores the root causes of poor productivity - and ultimately leads to the state of xenophobia you're seeing today in Britain.
- 12ian34 1y agoI don't disagree
- mitthrowaway2 1y agoHow does immigration boost productivity? It's labor-saving automation and machinery investments that boost productivity. I would expect these to be driven mainly by labour scarcity. Growing the labour pool seems like it would drive exactly the opposite. As two examples, Japan has low immigration and an aging population and despite that its productivity has never been higher. By contrast Canada has had extremely high immigration and rapid population growth, and its productivity has flatlined since 2019.
- datadrivenangel 1y agoIncreasing the input labor results in more production.
- mitthrowaway2 1y agoYes, but we're discussing productivity not production. Production is the numerator, but productivity also puts labour hours worked in the denominator.
- dang 1y agoTotally offtopic but could you please email us at hn@ycombinator.com? I want to send you a repost invite for something unrelated.
- arrowsmith 1y agoYou're aware of the concept of "diminishing returns", right?
- lenerdenator 1y agoAt the end of the day, you still have to have humans to both carry out certain labor tasks and consume the outputs of that labor. For example, having the ability to manufacture a car with minimal human intervention doesn't mean that you can ship steel to the stamping plant without human intervention, and it doesn't mean that the robot used to weld the car will buy one after it's built. And since "real" Americans/Canadians/Brits/etc. haven't made the babies to do the labor and consumption demanded by capital for almost 60 years now, the labor and consumption must be brought in some other way. Ultimately you have to balance the incoming immigration with the demands that produces, and that's where a lot of countries fall short. For being as similar as they are, Americans and Canadians have radically different experiences and opinions on immigration from India, for example. Why? Americans mainly think of them as either business owners providing needed services (even if it's just as the stereotypical convenience store owner) or people working in cutting-edge and important industries, because that's who American immigration policy allows in from India. Canadians have far less charitable views, because over the last decade or so, Canadian immigration policy has been far less discriminatory. Whether it should or not, this produces social friction with people who have roots in the society that receives the immigration.
- password54321 1y agoThis is the trojan horse as nothing has improved.
- mhh__ 1y agoWe have had more immigration every year since 97 than almost anyone could imagine prior to that, peaking at a million a year, productivity remains shit. It's not about productivity, it's about the gross GDP numbers (and initially new labour were 100% OK with a demographic transformation project at the same time)
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- primax 1y agoI'd rather live through a financial crisis than fascism, thanks.
- remarkEon 1y agoThe former can lead to the latter, 50/50 chance though.