Slimebeast said:
SamuelRSmith said:
Slimebeast said:
SamuelRSmith said:
The only problem I see with that statement is that, actually, immigrants bring more money into this country proportionally than people born here.
Immigrants make up 8-9% of the population, yet they attribute to 10-11% of the total GDP.
|
That's bullshit. Socialists using some twisted statistics for the purpose of defending mass immigration.
For Sweden, immigrants are a very heavy burden, costing between $20-40 billion every year (net cost) for a lil country with a pop of just 9 million people (but you can still hear liberals claim that immigration enriches our culture because it brings Kebabs and stuff). I'm sure it ain't that much different in the UK when it comes to the economical effects of immigration.
|
...
|
...
|
Can we have some academic sources for both of those claims?
Actually, both could be correct if the second isn't taking into account indirect taxation of immigrants via corporation tax. Suppose immigrants cost the government 100 units, pay 80 units in income/sales taxes and 40 units indirectly via corporation tax. Slmebeast would probably claim immigrants cost the government 20 units net, while SRS would claim immigrants net benefit the economy.