So in part one I covered the basic issues. Why are the questions asked about immigration never the ones that actually count. In this section I move to my next point: skills.
The other arguement that people often discuss when considering immigration is the lack of skills in our country. 'Oh, how will business survive if we can't draw from those skilled, young, hardworking migrants?'. Somehow business is unable to survive without relying on importing people to do the work. Do I agree with this argument? Well actually once again I think to bother answering the question misses the real issue in the first place: we are a developed western nation, we have a mature education system (one of the best higher education systems in the whole world) and we spend a huge amount of money on educating our children, universally, I might add. Yet we're dependent on developing countries that have far more stretched resources and non-universal education systems in order to get enough skilled workers... how does that make sense?
If business cannot find the skilled workers it needs in this country surely the obvious question that needs answering is: why? Our country pours money into the education system, everyone has the opportunity to learn, almost everyone can read and write, why can't our people do the work?
If it is an issue with the type of education we receive (people studying [insert pointless qualification here] instead of training to become a plumber or software engineer) then don't we need to inform students about the jobs available and the demands that exist in order to ensure they have the best chance of getting employed in a job they will enjoy?
In the alternative if it is because our own citizens don't work as hard as immigrants, perhaps we need to ask questions about why they work so hard and we don't. I don't know what the answer will be, but if we don't look into it, you're not going to get the answer.
Finally there is another ethical issue at hand. Is it really fair for developing nations to spend their money on educating doctors and engineers and whatever else, just for a much richer nation to come along once they have finished their training and poach them? Training is expensive, and the host country no doubt needs doctors and engineers for its own companies and hospitals, is it fair to promote a immigration policy that allows poorer nations to pay for our doctors' training, when their own country's health standard is much lower than ours? Don't get me wrong, it is certainly cheaper for us, but I'm not sure whether that is justification.
Either way whenever I heard a discussion regarding immigration I wonder where the question of family and education comes in. Sadly, I find it usually (if not always) just doesn't come up at all... perhaps if we start asking the right questions we can start to get the right answers and we can finally let the issue of immigration take a back seat to other matters.
Tuesday, 9 July 2013
Saturday, 6 July 2013
The obsession with immigration
Immigration is always news. I don't know what day you'll be reading this but if you check a few online papers it wouldn't be unlikely that at least one of them is running a story or report on something related to UK immigration. This is because of an age old debate that I'll just go over quickly so we're all on the same page:
People argue for immigration because we have an ageing population and a lack of certain skills. They say that if we bring in young hard working people from outside the country, they will help prop up our economy, earn tax pounds, pay for our NHS (particularly for those in old age) and balance out the demographic problem of an ageing population. Subtly, but usually not mentioned explicitly, it is also suggested that they work for less, so they keep prices down in certain industries too. This arguement is usually made by lefty liberal types. They are often well educated and have highly paid jobs, that is jobs that aren't going to be under threat from cheap immigrant labour.
On the other hand you have the opposition, this is split into two camps:
Working class: these guys are just annoyed that 'their' jobs are being filled by immigrants and that they are will to work for less.
Non-working class: these guys are more concerned about what will happen socially if you invite large number of people who may not share your countries common values, and let them settle without the need to integrate into the local culture.
You maybe wondering which side I'm about to come down on... give a guess. Go on....
Nope. Unless you said, none of the above, I'm afraid you didn't get it. While the discussion on immigration brings up these arguements on a regular basis, the thing that I want to highlight right now, are the questions that are never actually asked in these debates. The questions that some how seem to get ignored, despite the fact that they seem to be the most important fundamental questions under pinning the whole issue.
If we have a demographic problem, where our population is ageing, surely the question that needs to be asked is... why isn't anyone having children any more? Does that not make sense? The reason why we have an ageing population is because people are not having at least two children. Why? What has our society done to destroy the value in having children? What has happened to our concept of the family and what is important in life to make it so that we as a society don't bother having one anymore? We could bring immigrants in if we wanted, but eventually if they integrate into society they will become more like us and stop having children. So it is just a temporary solution. Once again it is just resolving the symptom rather than looking at the deeper problem.
It maybe we need to look deeper at our society and ask why we value someone who works, but we treat people who stay at home to look after a family as a bit of a drop out. Why is it that a family that has two working adults with no children is seen as a success and an asset to society even though our society has plenty of workers but not enough parents? In contrast the image of a person who stays at home to look after their children while the other works is generally portrayed as unintelligent? Some say raising children is expensive, and I think it certainly is. But I don't think that is what stops people. BMWs are expensive but we see plenty of them. In fact a few years ago BMW 3 Series' started out selling Ford Mondeos. People are willing to pay for expensive things if they are seen as valuable in society. My concern is that in our society family, is no longer seen as valuable, it isn't something that we invest in. Some do, but less so now than in years past. Why is it no one asks how to solve this question?
There is another issue too, the work ethic of our own people... maybe that'll be part II.
People argue for immigration because we have an ageing population and a lack of certain skills. They say that if we bring in young hard working people from outside the country, they will help prop up our economy, earn tax pounds, pay for our NHS (particularly for those in old age) and balance out the demographic problem of an ageing population. Subtly, but usually not mentioned explicitly, it is also suggested that they work for less, so they keep prices down in certain industries too. This arguement is usually made by lefty liberal types. They are often well educated and have highly paid jobs, that is jobs that aren't going to be under threat from cheap immigrant labour.
On the other hand you have the opposition, this is split into two camps:
Working class: these guys are just annoyed that 'their' jobs are being filled by immigrants and that they are will to work for less.
Non-working class: these guys are more concerned about what will happen socially if you invite large number of people who may not share your countries common values, and let them settle without the need to integrate into the local culture.
You maybe wondering which side I'm about to come down on... give a guess. Go on....
Nope. Unless you said, none of the above, I'm afraid you didn't get it. While the discussion on immigration brings up these arguements on a regular basis, the thing that I want to highlight right now, are the questions that are never actually asked in these debates. The questions that some how seem to get ignored, despite the fact that they seem to be the most important fundamental questions under pinning the whole issue.
If we have a demographic problem, where our population is ageing, surely the question that needs to be asked is... why isn't anyone having children any more? Does that not make sense? The reason why we have an ageing population is because people are not having at least two children. Why? What has our society done to destroy the value in having children? What has happened to our concept of the family and what is important in life to make it so that we as a society don't bother having one anymore? We could bring immigrants in if we wanted, but eventually if they integrate into society they will become more like us and stop having children. So it is just a temporary solution. Once again it is just resolving the symptom rather than looking at the deeper problem.
It maybe we need to look deeper at our society and ask why we value someone who works, but we treat people who stay at home to look after a family as a bit of a drop out. Why is it that a family that has two working adults with no children is seen as a success and an asset to society even though our society has plenty of workers but not enough parents? In contrast the image of a person who stays at home to look after their children while the other works is generally portrayed as unintelligent? Some say raising children is expensive, and I think it certainly is. But I don't think that is what stops people. BMWs are expensive but we see plenty of them. In fact a few years ago BMW 3 Series' started out selling Ford Mondeos. People are willing to pay for expensive things if they are seen as valuable in society. My concern is that in our society family, is no longer seen as valuable, it isn't something that we invest in. Some do, but less so now than in years past. Why is it no one asks how to solve this question?
There is another issue too, the work ethic of our own people... maybe that'll be part II.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
