Hacker News Reader

Comment by KaiserPro | Hacker News Reader

> why they have allowed sustained high immigration rates for decades

recently its because we need skilled and cheap labour to fill the holes in our health and buisness system.

Housing shortages is not a direct immigration issue[1], its a policy issue. People of a certain type do not want high rise buildings near them. people of another different type are really happy because they can now build less and sell for more. Yet another class of people go apoplectic when its suggested that social housing should be built (my taxes! why do they get something for nothing.)

In short, we are our own worst enemies.

[1] net migration at 1 million was utterly insane, and I'm still not sure how a government that lead brexit with "we'll control our borders" managed to be so divorced from what it was doing. Thats rhetorical by the way its short-termism and utter utter incompetence.

View on HN

Isn't it a pyramid scheme where we import younger people to pay for older people's pensions and benefits... unlikely to end well, like all pyramid schemes.

Population has naturally been a pyramid, historically [0], and works well that way. The current problem is that it isn’t a pyramid anymore [1]. Not having an inverse pyramid (or kite) would already be helpful.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_pyramid

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_pyramid#Demographic...

I'd say no. A pyramid has a wide base. The problem is the population shape is more of one of a christmas tree. The top is narrow, and it widens at the middle, then you have a trunk that is more narrow.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_K...

The UK doesn't even have that terrible of shape compared to many western countries, but a lot of that is because of immigration.

Countries like Japan, S. Korea, and Italy are going to have far worse problems.

The replies to this made me think harder about pyramid schemes vs population pyramids.

I concluded it is in fact OK to bring in young working people from elsewhere to fund the retirement and social services of those already here and ageing. I was thinking there would be a problem as those immigrants in turn aged and switched from net contributors to net claimants, but I hadn't taken into account that they like all of us die off as they age: indeed, what makes the pyramid a pyramid.

Not necessarily in this case. You have those who pay in, but die before they fully collect. Then the collectors do die off, they aren’t expected to get returns in perpetuity or crazy large returns. Then you have a constant supply of new payees into the system.

Only a devastating collapse of the population would cause it to go tits up

And in your comment lies a possible solution. Support people into their mid-70s, and then the only medical care they get is palliative, so they don't suffer from whatever takes them out. Half of their estate is allocated to the social welfare fund.

Another solution is to increase the sources of funding. For example, in the United States, your Social Security contributions are capped once your income exceeds approximately $160,000. Eliminate that cap, and include income from other sources (i.e., taxes on estates, capital gains, and buy-borrow-die) in the Social Security tax calculation.

Any "solution" will have to work within the realm of political possibility. Elderly people also get to vote and I doubt they will support cutting off their own access to healthcare, or drastic increases in estate taxes.

No doubt we can probably do things better, my main thrust was to show how if you can force participation, you can kind of get away with it.

It's not a pyramid (far more balance between those entering and leaving to call it a "pyramid").

Unless you are Norway or the UAE and sitting on a massive sovereign wealth fund how else can a national welfare system possible function?

Britain has a very generous welfare system it cannot afford and appears to be unable to even reverse its expansion. According to the Center for Migration Control, there are 1.15 million foreign born individuals claiming some form of in-work benefit.

Irrespective of one's views on the migrant question, this is unsustainable. For instance, the National Health System (NHS) has recently been sending patients to Poland and Lithuania to try to relieve pressure on the waiting lists.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-system-...

>Irrespective of one's views on the migrant question, this is unsustainable.

That's neither true nor irrespective of your views on "the migrant question", which are evidently informed by an explicitly anti-immigration interest group.

A million immigrant workers claiming "some form of in-work benefit" is not significant. See e.g. £23B unclaimed benefits last year.

Your fact about NHS waiting times doesn't support any claim you've made.

It's like you're trolling, but perhaps the best interpretation is you're a GBNews victim?

> According to the Center for Migration Control, there are 1.15 million foreign born individuals claiming some form of in-work benefit.

Isn't the relevant statistic more just how much tax income foreign born individuals give the government vs how much they take out?

I don't have a source on hand, but I thought immigration was a net positive in terms of tax revenue minus social assistance, at least in the US.

In-work benefits should have been presented as a short term measure to cushion the impact of the introduction of the minimum wage. The minimum wage should then have been steadily increased to eleminate the benefit.

Alternatively, use the computer system that manages the in-work benefits to find out which companies are exploiting the current system and tax them to fund their own workforce.

> Britain has a very generous welfare system

Its more generous than the USA. but its not generous. You try living on benefits

> 1.15 million foreign born individuals claiming some form of in-work benefit.

Indeed, but working age foreigners are way cheaper than boomer pensioners. The problem is, a large proportion of those foreigner are working to wipe the arses of said pensioners.

Moreover those benefits are a a state subsidy for cheap workers.

> Irrespective of one's views on the migrant question, this is unsustainable. For instance, the National Health System (NHS) has recently been sending patients to Poland and Lithuania to try to relieve pressure on the waiting lists.

Which is ironically unrelated to foreigners.

firsly, if your stuck on a waiting list not being able to work, you're not claiming in work benefits.

second the NHS has been chronically mismanaged for about 14 years, and needs staffing reforms to stop it bleeding staff (and driving up immigration)

thirdly sending people abroad to get treated is cheaper, and should return them to the workforce quicker, so reducing load on the benefits system

Lastly, immigrants are overwhelmingly young and free of chronic diseases. Its super hard to work an emigrate, find and keep a casual job if you need dialysis every week. Moreover, you don't get access to benefits instantly, and you run the risk of going undocumented which means no bank account, no public services and no legitimate housing. Its not like the states where you can carry on as normal. You're basically reduced to living on the streets or at the hands of organised crime.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com