FT商学院

The truth about immigration

Ageing societies seeking to preserve living standards will continue to rely on new arrivals — but governments can be clearer about the trade-offs

Across the rich world, almost every state faces a version of the same problem: their people are living longer and having fewer children. Every year, tens of thousands of citizens will hit state pension age or retire, and fewer of us are having enough children to maintain our care-dependency ratio (the number of working people supporting those who are too young, too old or too sick to work themselves) at a point that provides the standard of public services and the levels of tax that modern electorates have grown accustomed to. 

Immigration is how states have filled the gap. In the UK, overseas students have allowed universities to stay open even as domestic fees have been subjected to a long period of sharp, real-terms cuts. Immigration has filled vacancies in the country’s care and construction sectors, both of which cranked up under Boris Johnson’s premiership, alongside the expansion of one-off humanitarian routes for people from Hong Kong and Ukraine. Although being “foreign-born” — a category that includes, for instance, Johnson, a Brit born in the US — is an imperfect proxy for immigration, it is a fairly useful one. Most wealthy states now have more immigrants than ever before. David Bull, the chair of the rightwing populist party Reform UK, has himself described immigration as the “lifeblood” of the country. 

But politicians have a problem: immigration is the subject of fierce political opposition. Alongside inflation, anger at the Democrats’ failure to control the southern border with Mexico was a major reason for Donald Trump’s return to power in the US. Trump, who has promised to deport more than 15mn people, is the leader haunting many European policymakers.

您已阅读14%(1696字),剩余86%(10243字)包含更多重要信息,订阅以继续探索完整内容,并享受更多专属服务。
版权声明:本文版权归manbetx20客户端下载 所有,未经允许任何单位或个人不得转载,复制或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵权必究。
设置字号×
最小
较小
默认
较大
最大
分享×