Something I would question is reliance on official migration statistics. I've no doubt that these deliberately understate migration and in particular nonEU migration and that the concept of EU migration being economically positive overall is more likely to be proEU propaganda than real.
Also, net migration is the sum of 'people in' minus 'people out'. Where do those leaving stand in the wealth generation spectrum? I suspect that they are mostly positive while those coming in are mostly negative.
In summary I suspect that the truth of the matter is that almost all migration is significantly negative economically in the medium to long term.
As someone personally not inclined towards the Tories, I still very much enjoyed the article and thought there were are lot of valid points made, well proven with underlying data. However, I think there was one major effect missed, and that's probably the biggest of all: The effect of migration on age distribution and the way it alleviates fiscal pressure. Migrants to the UK, especially those coming down the graduate route, are mostly young adults. That means they spent a much higher proportion of their time in the UK in the workforce compared to the average native (who also spends his childhood here). Obviously, if one would cut off migration at some point, that would mean earlier migrants get old and at some point become net recipients, nullifying the effect. This is probably what the studies on the net fiscal effect of migration find. But as long as there is continued migration, it boosts the share of people in the workforce and that means it gets a lot easier to pay for state services and caring for pensioners and kids. Overall still a very good analysis, though!
Seems sensible and moderate overall.
Something I would question is reliance on official migration statistics. I've no doubt that these deliberately understate migration and in particular nonEU migration and that the concept of EU migration being economically positive overall is more likely to be proEU propaganda than real.
Also, net migration is the sum of 'people in' minus 'people out'. Where do those leaving stand in the wealth generation spectrum? I suspect that they are mostly positive while those coming in are mostly negative.
In summary I suspect that the truth of the matter is that almost all migration is significantly negative economically in the medium to long term.
As someone personally not inclined towards the Tories, I still very much enjoyed the article and thought there were are lot of valid points made, well proven with underlying data. However, I think there was one major effect missed, and that's probably the biggest of all: The effect of migration on age distribution and the way it alleviates fiscal pressure. Migrants to the UK, especially those coming down the graduate route, are mostly young adults. That means they spent a much higher proportion of their time in the UK in the workforce compared to the average native (who also spends his childhood here). Obviously, if one would cut off migration at some point, that would mean earlier migrants get old and at some point become net recipients, nullifying the effect. This is probably what the studies on the net fiscal effect of migration find. But as long as there is continued migration, it boosts the share of people in the workforce and that means it gets a lot easier to pay for state services and caring for pensioners and kids. Overall still a very good analysis, though!