Migration is one of the most important issues facing international politics today and is becoming more prevalent an issue every year. In 1980 the estimated number of refugees was 8.2m, 1990 - 15m, 1992 - 20m (Castles and Miller, 1993, p 84). In our society there are a lot of preconceptions and prejudices about immigration and its effect: "they are stealing our jobs!" "They are all scroungers" and "we are to generous to them". It can be argued that these all arise from institutions such as the tabloid media and right wing political groups, but also from past Government policy which took a hard line on immigration and old colonial ideologies of mistrust and suspicion towards foreigners which have been passed down through the ages. So what is the true economic impact of immigration on a receiving country? Where does it have effect? Is it substantial or minimal? Is it positive or negative? As immigration affects different countries in different ways, and as there are so many different forms of immigration e.g. asylum seekers, refugees, temporary settlers, permanent settlers, illegal immigration and immigration from one part of a country to another, it is impossible to give universal answers to these questions. However I will examine the arguments for and against immigration to try establish a picture of whether the economic impact on the whole is positive or negative for a receiving country. I will focus primarily on the UK and USA for case studies but will also look at the effects of immigration on third world countries. One of the most common arguments against immigration is that it puts a strain on government expenditure. Some economists argue that "social capital expenditure on housing and social services for immigrants reduced the capital available for productive investment" (Castles and Miller, 1993, p 76). In Britain, the current media scare is "bogus asylum seekers" and how they are a huge drain on the social services. A quote from the BBC web page sums up the anti immigration feeling in this country: "We are too soft. I'm happy for the government allowing genuine asylum seekers into this country. However something has to be done about the scroungers who think they could make a better life here. There's nothing for them - our classrooms are over-crowded, our hospitals can barely cope and our social services are on the brink of collapse such is the demand for pensions and benefits. It's hard enough making a life for yourself when you live here by right. Simon Skelton, UK" (http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/talking_point). The British National party claim: "The procedure of investigation of 'refugee' claims, together with the job of attempting (mostly in vain) to track down the bogus claimants is, needless to say, a big drain on the public purse" (The British National Party - http://www.BNP.net/manif11.html).
To link to this page, copy the following code to your site:
All Papers Are For Research And Reference Purposes Only!
You may not turn these papers in as your own! You must cite our web site as your source!
