So basically wages for low paid workers are SO low that each low paid worker, whether a migrant or not, is a burden on the taxpayer, but it’s migrants that are the problem. It’s got jack shit all to do with the fact that companies are getting away with paying a minimum wage that is significantly too low.
stuloch on
So who’s going to fill the roles that nobody wants, like nursing home attendants.
denyer-no1-fan on
The headline says “low-skilled”, but the paper says “low-wage”, meaning half the average wage. They are related but not at all the same thing. This reported cost of £150,000 is over 40 years, which means it assumes that the worker earns half the average wage _for their entire working life_. The same chart also shows that the _average-wage_ migrant worker brings in £250,000 more than the UK resident equivalent until state pension age.
Even in the scenario where half the migrants are “low-wage” and the other half gets paid the average wage, on average, each migrant still brings in £190,000 to the Treasury over their working life.
elementarywebdesign on
From the article
>While low-paid migrants are a drain on public finances, the OBR found that the average migrant worker pays more in tax than they receive in public services throughout their lives compared to British-born workers. This is mainly because they are not educated in the UK.
u/LazarusOwenhart has already explained it beautifully
>So basically wages for low paid workers are SO low that each low paid worker, whether a migrant or not, is a burden on the taxpayer, but it’s migrants that are the problem. It’s got jack shit all to do with the fact that companies are getting away with paying a minimum wage that is significantly too low.
reni-chan on
> The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) said the average low-earner who came to Britain aged 25 cost the Government more overall than they paid in from the moment they arrived.
Ok, and what is the figure for an average low-skilled British citizen from the moment they were born?
> By contrast, the average British-born worker boosts the public finances by £280,000 by the time they reach 66, even adjusting for education and health spending before they start work.
OK, and the equivalent migrant with the same education arriving here at 25 please?
PositiveLibrary7032 on
And bankers and off shore accounts cost the tax payer how much?
going_down_leg on
No no no! Without migrants the country would be on its knees!! We would all be fuelling our housing using our own shit because of the levels of poverty that the country would experience. Migrants are high skilled net contributors and without them being a pensioner would be like being in the hunger games and anyone saying anything different is a right wing Tommy Robinson loving nazi.
BarrieTheShagger on
This is such a bizarre article, it almost seems ai written but is obviously not, perhaps simply been edited to seem more human?
Obviously the headline is ragebait but the way the article is written is just full of qoutes that imply contradictions to the anti migrant rhetoric of the headline.
Here are some examples
“This is because low-paid migrants – who the OBR assumes earn half the average wage – put more demand on public services such as the NHS compared to their relatively low-tax payments”
Why do they only make the assumptions that they do? The statistics are available.
“While low-paid migrants are a drain on public finances, the OBR found that the average migrant worker pays more in tax than they receive in public services throughout their lives compared to British-born workers. This is mainly because they are not educated in the UK.”
And why does this contradict the previous point? Isn’t this more an article about how UK wages are so low that unless you’re above the average wage by a LOT that you’re literally a financial drain?
So ultimately the point about migrants in the headline is irrelevant and could’ve easily been titled that anyone in the bottom half of the tax bracket is a financial drain on the UK, and that bizarrely a migrant is less of a burden simply because they got some or all of their education abroad?
I’m not really here for the politics of the article and more about the pointless ragebait headline in complete contrast to the contents of the report.
shaftydude on
It’s fine, we will work till 70 and then 75 then die.
dontpostdonotpost on
It’s weird to quantify someone’s contribution to society in terms of whether they pay more tax or not
If someone works as a hospital cleaner or health care assistant, their work has value beyond their tax contributions
Meanwhile there are high earning individuals who’s jobs are parasitic or a detriment to society
unclear_warfare on
This is bollocks and a completely misleading headline
bluecheese2040 on
Since Blair governments have told us that migrants are a huge boost for us. They told us that we were all better off. In reality cut throat capitalists have used low skilled labour as an excuse to keep wages low, avoid investment in productivity boosting tools etc.
That Blair and the rest have the cheek to still parrot their lies is amazing.
Ultimately, this isn’t about blaming legal migrants. They come and work and I can’t blame them. I blame those that lie about them and have allowed wages to be suppressed.
Ready_Maybe on
Either Szu Ping Chan or Tim Wallace need to be fired. This is so poorly written. Who chose that headline?
TokyoBaguette on
a: We control immigration 100%.
b: We control immigration 100%.
mumwifealcoholic on
The UK has one of the highest minimum wages in Europe. Labour isn’t cheap.
But blaming migrants is a beloved past time of this /r.
You need us, more than we need you.
Mba1956 on
What a misleading title, typical disgusting Telegraph story headline trying to stir up hatred.
It isn’t the fact that they are migrants that they cost more to support than they contribute, but the fact that they are low paid. If you a low paid British person you are more of a drain on the economy than a migrant because you were supported during your childhood.
The OBR found that the average migrant worker pays more in tax than they receive in public services throughout their lives compared to British-born workers.
chronicnerv on
No wonder so many get over when there is 150k profit per asylum seeker. Stopping making it profitable situation for the contractor services would be the starting point.
askmereddit1111 on
Less worried about the economic cost and more the social cost. We’re bringing losers, rapists and violent animals into the country.
doitnowinaminute on
Low skilled (aka workers ononimim wahe and Les than full time) are about as a big a drain as a Brit on c25k.
The average mograbt adds more money than the average Brit.
We ain’t spending *our* tax money on foreigners, we are spending foreigners tax on working class Brits (and probably even more on criminalmcñass Brits)
19 Comments
So basically wages for low paid workers are SO low that each low paid worker, whether a migrant or not, is a burden on the taxpayer, but it’s migrants that are the problem. It’s got jack shit all to do with the fact that companies are getting away with paying a minimum wage that is significantly too low.
So who’s going to fill the roles that nobody wants, like nursing home attendants.
The headline says “low-skilled”, but the paper says “low-wage”, meaning half the average wage. They are related but not at all the same thing. This reported cost of £150,000 is over 40 years, which means it assumes that the worker earns half the average wage _for their entire working life_. The same chart also shows that the _average-wage_ migrant worker brings in £250,000 more than the UK resident equivalent until state pension age.
Even in the scenario where half the migrants are “low-wage” and the other half gets paid the average wage, on average, each migrant still brings in £190,000 to the Treasury over their working life.
From the article
>While low-paid migrants are a drain on public finances, the OBR found that the average migrant worker pays more in tax than they receive in public services throughout their lives compared to British-born workers. This is mainly because they are not educated in the UK.
u/LazarusOwenhart has already explained it beautifully
>So basically wages for low paid workers are SO low that each low paid worker, whether a migrant or not, is a burden on the taxpayer, but it’s migrants that are the problem. It’s got jack shit all to do with the fact that companies are getting away with paying a minimum wage that is significantly too low.
> The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) said the average low-earner who came to Britain aged 25 cost the Government more overall than they paid in from the moment they arrived.
Ok, and what is the figure for an average low-skilled British citizen from the moment they were born?
> By contrast, the average British-born worker boosts the public finances by £280,000 by the time they reach 66, even adjusting for education and health spending before they start work.
OK, and the equivalent migrant with the same education arriving here at 25 please?
And bankers and off shore accounts cost the tax payer how much?
No no no! Without migrants the country would be on its knees!! We would all be fuelling our housing using our own shit because of the levels of poverty that the country would experience. Migrants are high skilled net contributors and without them being a pensioner would be like being in the hunger games and anyone saying anything different is a right wing Tommy Robinson loving nazi.
This is such a bizarre article, it almost seems ai written but is obviously not, perhaps simply been edited to seem more human?
Obviously the headline is ragebait but the way the article is written is just full of qoutes that imply contradictions to the anti migrant rhetoric of the headline.
Here are some examples
“This is because low-paid migrants – who the OBR assumes earn half the average wage – put more demand on public services such as the NHS compared to their relatively low-tax payments”
Why do they only make the assumptions that they do? The statistics are available.
“While low-paid migrants are a drain on public finances, the OBR found that the average migrant worker pays more in tax than they receive in public services throughout their lives compared to British-born workers. This is mainly because they are not educated in the UK.”
And why does this contradict the previous point? Isn’t this more an article about how UK wages are so low that unless you’re above the average wage by a LOT that you’re literally a financial drain?
So ultimately the point about migrants in the headline is irrelevant and could’ve easily been titled that anyone in the bottom half of the tax bracket is a financial drain on the UK, and that bizarrely a migrant is less of a burden simply because they got some or all of their education abroad?
I’m not really here for the politics of the article and more about the pointless ragebait headline in complete contrast to the contents of the report.
It’s fine, we will work till 70 and then 75 then die.
It’s weird to quantify someone’s contribution to society in terms of whether they pay more tax or not
If someone works as a hospital cleaner or health care assistant, their work has value beyond their tax contributions
Meanwhile there are high earning individuals who’s jobs are parasitic or a detriment to society
This is bollocks and a completely misleading headline
Since Blair governments have told us that migrants are a huge boost for us. They told us that we were all better off. In reality cut throat capitalists have used low skilled labour as an excuse to keep wages low, avoid investment in productivity boosting tools etc.
That Blair and the rest have the cheek to still parrot their lies is amazing.
Ultimately, this isn’t about blaming legal migrants. They come and work and I can’t blame them. I blame those that lie about them and have allowed wages to be suppressed.
Either Szu Ping Chan or Tim Wallace need to be fired. This is so poorly written. Who chose that headline?
a: We control immigration 100%.
b: We control immigration 100%.
The UK has one of the highest minimum wages in Europe. Labour isn’t cheap.
But blaming migrants is a beloved past time of this /r.
You need us, more than we need you.
What a misleading title, typical disgusting Telegraph story headline trying to stir up hatred.
It isn’t the fact that they are migrants that they cost more to support than they contribute, but the fact that they are low paid. If you a low paid British person you are more of a drain on the economy than a migrant because you were supported during your childhood.
The OBR found that the average migrant worker pays more in tax than they receive in public services throughout their lives compared to British-born workers.
No wonder so many get over when there is 150k profit per asylum seeker. Stopping making it profitable situation for the contractor services would be the starting point.
Less worried about the economic cost and more the social cost. We’re bringing losers, rapists and violent animals into the country.
Low skilled (aka workers ononimim wahe and Les than full time) are about as a big a drain as a Brit on c25k.
The average mograbt adds more money than the average Brit.
We ain’t spending *our* tax money on foreigners, we are spending foreigners tax on working class Brits (and probably even more on criminalmcñass Brits)