Population growth in Switzerland is currently at 0.6%, so immigration can help supplement this.
Basically there's no good reason to limit immigration.
Specifically the immigration of people that are hostile to the local culture, and act out that hostility through various forms of aggression.
Citing immigrant population statistics is tried and proven way to cloud the issue. In the Netherlands for instance, the largest groups of immigrants are Germans. You don't really believe the immigration debate is about them, do you?
I'm guessing a fairly large part of the UK immigrant population is Western European. Those, plus migrant workers in science, technology and finance, kind of skew the stats.
Calling everybody who points out that there's also another group of immigrants who's net contribution isn't exactly positive "neo-fascists" is extremely counterproductive.
Amusingly, if the internet is to be believed, immigrant Germans have been somewhat of a cause for debate in Switzerland lately, e.g. http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/the-changing-face-of-german-immi...
It doesnt say anything about the real cost of immigration.All I know is that the british people are getting less and less benefits per people,their healthcare system is being privatized and education is getting more and more expensive,without the "neo-fascists" in power. The ruling elite is doing everything so that more and more people want to vote for what you call "neo-fascists".
And frankly there is no "neo-fascists".It's the bogeyman the elite uses in order to scare off people and make sure they vote "the right way".Fortunatly less and less people are falling for that scam.
Huhwhat? The recent damage to the benefit and healthcare system and the huge increase in university fees both happened under the current Conservative government, not because of immigration but because of policy. Turns out the left-right axis is real, and the far right really is further to the right (e.g. UKIP's deputy leader recently said that he couldn't see the NHS surviving in its current form because it didn't have any free-market competition).
Seems the opposite for me. Nigel Farage did pretty well last election.
It's not this clean cut.
They used some interesting methodologies to come up with a figure of 5 billion net contribution from the immigrant population.
Taken alone this does not mean "more immigrants good" as it doesn't break down that group. What does it look like if we look specifically at skilled migration from outside of the EU on Tier 2 visas etc, compared to the figures for migration from within the EU (which requires nothing more than moving)? What about the refugee populations? Their economic impact is of very little concern - we take them because they are in need - but it might at least be interesting for the sake of comparison to know how it all works out.
There are also concerns in the UK that this didn't take into account the strains on infrastructure and transport. And that wage suppression is another effect of importing vast numbers of people. This in itself may be good for business but bad for people, and may have knock-on economic effects as those who already have the least spending power find it gets even smaller.
Just saying 'immigration contributed 5 billion quid last year' doesn't actually say a lot.