Quote Originally Posted by henners88 View Post
Countries like Canada, Australia and America have stricter rules on immigration and I think the UK needs to take note of this. If a person offers absolutely no value to the UK, then what is the incentive to support them for free?
It isn't possible to prospectively determine which immigrants will end up being productive and useful and which ones less so.

The countries you picked have all had very liberal immigration policies in the past, the USA more so than the other two. Much of their success is due to migration. Many American entrepeneurs, scientists and engineers were either first or second generation migrants with little to distinguish them from the rest. The ones who weren't so talented ended up providing cheap labour which helped America's industrial revolution that enabled it to first catch then surpass Europe. Even now legal and illegal migration from Latin America provides American industry at all levels with cheap labour that gives them an advantage, even if they are currently undercut by the Chinese.

Alternatively look at Japan, stagnating after decades, centuries of highly restricted migration. Even they are now looking at relaxing migration regulations to boost the economy.

Yes the British benefit system has loopholes. The amount 'wasted' on foreigners however pales into insignificance compared to that spent wrongly on UK citizens. The benefit system needs to be reformed, not the migration system.

I also find it amusing that British immigration figures include British citizens returning home after living for years overseas, finding that the drop in value of the Sterling since 2007 doesn't allow them to live in as much luxury as they are used to in France and Spain. Keep them out and the British migration problem is solved overnight