Migrant Blunder

Here is a letter published in my local paper, Nottingham's Evening Post

I was saddened to read (Evening Post, August 6th) of the Pakistani worker deported by immigration authorities on July 27. In this country we are rightly concerned about immigrants who come here to get a free ride or abuse our welfare state.

However, in this case, we have a person who has come here and made an effort, not to go on welfare, but to support himself by benefiting others through his work – after all, somebody must have thought his work was worth paying for, voluntarily, with their own property.

Immigrants who come here to join our work force benefit us, and this aggressive clamp own on peaceful economic migrants makes us poorer.

RICHARD GARNER Libertarian Party (East Midlands), Sneinton

The letter is reproduced on the paper's website, and if you follow the link, you'll see I got some responses. They generally all seem to be of the type expressed by "William, WB," who wrote

More immigrant workers =

more competition for jobs and wage cuts for British workers if they want to keep their jobs. Great for big business! This is fact and is why the mainstream media are always telling us that immigration is such a good thing. Talk to workers in construction and many other industries and you'll find out what's really happening. And the Labour traitors promote this policy and say there'll be no end to immigration! The left-wing union leaders are no better.

That's why the mass media and Labour are so hostile to the BNP. They know the BNP are the only party who will put an end to mass immigration and cut off the endless supply of cheap labour that holds down the wages of British workers. That's if they are left with jobs at all.

My own response to these comments was

There is a nutty fallacy around that there is only a fixed amount of work, so that if one person gets a job, that means that there are fewer jobs left for everybody else. This is competely false. Competition for jobs will increase, sure, perhaps reducing wages again, so sure again. And these reduced wages will entice new employers, driving competition for work up again. Meanwhile money that employers save by hiring cheaper workers is money that they must either spend on products of others, increasing demand for those products, and so for demand for workers to supply them; or that they must invest in their own business, thereby increasing output relative to demand, so causing prices to fall, and also increasing employment oppottunities in that business; or they must invest it in somebody else's business, with the same results there. Meanwhile, the increased immigrants mean increased demand for goods and services, and so increased demand for workers to provide them. Just as obliging British workers to compete with cheap machines hasn't caused mass unemployment or falling wages for British workers, neither does obliging them to compete with cheap foreign workers.

Sure, this person was here illegally... But he harmed nobody, violated the rights of nobody, his immigration had no victims, and he benefitted others. Actions that do not violate rights or harm others should not be illegal, and people should not be arrested or punished for them.

Debate ended there, so I must have won!