[ad_1]
London. The decline in immigration since Bracie was voted already costs Britain more than 1 billion pounds a year, according to a new badysis by independent think tank Global Future, 19459005 British Independent . ]
The Trust, which promotes the benefits of open borders, estimates that losses in public finances are equivalent to more than 23,000 nurses or 18,000 physicians
He also claims that reaching the tens of thousands of government immigration targets will also cost Britain £ 12 billion a year by 2023 – or 60% of the total. money promised to the national health system by British Prime Minister Teresa Can be part of so-called "Brekits dividends".
Figures are based on "Fiscal Responsibility Office" estimates of net borrowing effects of high and low alternative migration scenarios
These estimates represent a trade surplus of £ 16.9 billion if migration increases from a peak of 336,000 a year at the end of June 2016 to 185,000 in 2021, compared to a surplus of £ 5.2 billion if it falls to 105,000 in 2021.
"Global Future" uses these estimates to develop what they call an "availability calculator" at a cost of £ 150 million for every 10,000 people on the move
The latest migration statistics will be released on Monday, but migration has already fallen to 224,000 by the end of September 2017.
"The decline of immigration is bad for public finances," said Peter Starkings, director of the think tank.
"The British may have decided to pay a little more tax or to accept smaller investments in our NHS and other public services in exchange for a reduction in the number of dollars. 39, but it's a debate we had not had up to here. "He explained.
"What we do know is that the public thinks that immigration is good for our economy and our culture and when we offer them a choice, they systematically choose economic stability to reduce immigration." . "
"As long as the government sets out its plans for immigration policy after Breckit, they have to talk about business at the heart of this debate.This badysis showed that lower immigration means less public investment. , higher borrowings, or higher taxes – and achieve the government's goal of reducing tens of thousands of dollars a year swells the giant hole of billions of pounds and public finance
"At a time when key sectors like our health care industry are reporting shortages, the government needs to think very seriously about what a restrictive immigration system would do for our country," M said. Starkings. Yonislav Dochev
He also claims that reaching the tens of thousands of government immigration targets will also cost Britain £ 12 billion a year by 2023 – or 60% of the total. money promised to the national health system by British Prime Minister Teresa Can be part of so-called "Brekits dividends".
Figures are based on "Fiscal Responsibility Office" estimates of net borrowing effects of high and low alternative migration scenarios
These estimates represent a trade surplus of £ 16.9 billion if migration increases from a peak of 336,000 a year at the end of June 2016 to 185,000 in 2021, compared to a surplus of £ 5.2 billion if it falls to 105,000 in 2021.
"Global Future" uses these estimates to develop what they call an "availability calculator" at a cost of £ 150 million for every 10,000 people on the move
The latest migration statistics will be released on Monday, but migration has already fallen to 224,000 by the end of September 2017.
"The decline of immigration is bad for public finances," said Peter Starkings, director of the think tank.
"The British may have decided to pay a little more tax or to accept smaller investments in our NHS and other public services in exchange for a reduction in the number of dollars. 39, but it's a debate we had not had up to here. "He explained.
"What we do know is that the public thinks that immigration is good for our economy and our culture and when we offer them a choice, they systematically choose economic stability to reduce immigration." . "
"As long as the government sets out its plans for immigration policy after Breckit, they have to talk about business at the heart of this debate.This badysis showed that lower immigration means less public investment. , higher borrowings, or higher taxes – and achieve the government's goal of reducing tens of thousands of dollars a year swells the giant hole of billions of pounds and public finance
"At a time when key sectors like our health care industry are reporting shortages, the government needs to think very seriously about what a restrictive immigration system would do for our country," M said. Starkings. Yonislav Dochev
[ad_2]
Source link
