-
The other is purely logistical - pressure on services, need for housing etc.
Net immigration accounts for like 0.2% population growth year on year, it's basically a rounding error. It's clearly not the cause of those issues.
The issue with housing is we haven't been building any houses. Population is bigger than ever but in the last decade housebuilding reached its lowest level for 100 years or something (ignoring WWII). That's insane.
The issue with services is lack of funding. Increasing the number of users from 1000 to 1002 isn't going to be the straw that breaks the GP's back.
Edit: recognise that I'm shooting the messenger slightly
frankenbike-
I do agree - as I said in my first post, I don't agree with the anto immigration argument.
Difficulty is persuading people who "feel" the impact of immigration (which I completely agree is to a great extent a story of underfunding of services) that they're wrong.
-
Net immigration accounts for like 0.2% population growth year on year, it's basically a rounding error. It's clearly not the cause of those issues.
0.2 population growth maybe but 56% of population growth.
{ edit: I think 0.2 is wrong anyway, more like 0.4% }
andyfallsoff
miro_o
Maybe, although that's solely the cultural argument.
The other is purely logistical - pressure on services, need for housing etc.
They then have to acknowledge that we either can't or won't build the services needed to make this go smoothly (assuming they accept the fact that immigrants are net higher contributors to public funds).
Actually makes most sense in a nimby perspective - we could deal with more people but we don't want to build more and change things.