Connect with us

Islamic Jihad News

A Nest of Ninnies: UK Office of Budget Responsibility Declares More Migrants Help Spur Economic Growth



The nest of ninnies in the U.K. government keeps trying to convince an increasingly skeptical public that the steady stream of migrants – most of them Muslim and many of them illegal – now entering the U.K. – are a positive benefit to the economy, and hence the British, far from trying to limit immigration, should encourage it. This bizarre twist on the truth can be found here: “Cutting immigration means higher taxes,” by James Kirkup, The Spectator, 

Is it true that this largely Muslim immigration is a boon to the U.K.? We know that in the year ending (YE) in June 2022, the net international migration, which is the difference calculated between immigration and emigration within the same period, was estimated at 504,000, an increase of 331,000 compared with the YE June 2021 figure of 173,000. This is a colossal increase. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) seems to think that is a Good Thing.

‘Only the higher-than-expected numbers of migrants coming to the UK under the post-Brexit migration regime adds materially to prospects for potential output growth over the coming five years relative to the assumptions that we made in March.’

That’s from the Office for Budget Responsibility’s (OBR) assessment accompanying the Autumn Statement. It’s a pretty striking line: the state’s official analyst of the public finances says that the only good thing to happen to the UK economy since March is higher immigration.

Here, I can only say something rather childish: I told you so. No doubt this immigration outlook will make some people unhappy. Justifiably, too. It isn’t what they were promised, at least by the current Home Secretary. Suella Braverman said she wants net migration to fall below 100,000 – though to be fair, she said that as part of the Truss government in October.

James Kirkup belongs to that small group of Conservatives who have convinced themselves that migration has been an economic boon for the U.K. Fortunately, the majority of Conservatives take a much less sanguine view of the migrant invasion.

We need to ask a few questions of these British enthusiasts of migration. Are they aware that more than three-quarters of the migrants now flooding into the U.K. are Muslims? Are they aware that many Muslim migrants in the U.K. are not true asylum seekers, as they claim to be, but rather, economic migrants, determined to take advantage of all the generous benefits that the British government — that is, the British taxpayer – offers? Among those benefits are subsidized or free housing, free medical care available from the National Health Service, free education, family allowances that increase with each child (Muslim families are much larger than those of the indigenous British, and derive the greatest benefit from this support), and unemployment benefits even without ever having been employed. The amount the National Health spends on Muslims is unusually high, it needs to. be pointed out, because of the prevalence of congenital ailments among Muslims. This is the result of inbreeding, with marriages between cousins being encouraged. In a low-trust culture, it makes sense to keep marriages, and hence property, within the extended family.

Muslims who feel the need to supplement those benefits sometimes turn to crimes of property – robbery and burglary. Muslims exhibit an unusually high rate of criminality; they make up 4% of the U.K. population, but 20% of the prison population. To the costs of all those benefits that Muslim economic migrants take full advantage of, we must add the cost of their high rates of criminality. This criminal activity requires that more government money be spent on police, detectives, prosecutors, court-appointed lawyers, prosecutors, judges, prison guards, and prisons. This all adds up to a very great sum, though, as far as I can tell, no one has actually calculated the precise cost to the British government of the economic benefits that Muslim migrants lay claim to, being content to simply note that annually, it runs into the billions of dollars. The average cost to the British government of incarcerating a single prisoner is $75,000, with rapists, murderers, and terrorists requiring the highest security, which makes them the most expensive to incarcerate. Muslims constitute close to one-quarter of the rapists and murderers in British prisons, and nearly all of those convicted of terrorism in the last twenty years (there are still a handful of aging IRA men in UK prisons).

Adding the cost of all the government benefits Muslim migrants take full advantage of to the cost of arresting, putting on trial, and then incarcerating Muslim criminals, gives us an annual figure of tens of billions of dollars. And this is only the economic cost. There are other great costs to society, not susceptible of measurement. What kind of dollar or pound figure do we assign to the damage done to many thousands of English girls, the victims of Muslim grooming gangs in two dozen English cities, who were seduced, given drink and drugs, and then passed around to be shared as sexual objects? We cannot put a dollar figure on the despair and human ruin that the Muslim grooming gangs in the U.K have caused, but that does not mean that despair and ruin aren’t real.

How do we put an economic value on the increased sense of insecurity felt by British women in some neighborhoods where they used to think nothing of going out at night alone? Muslims have been known to prey on Infidel women, whose dress suggests to Muslims that they “are just asking for it”? What about the anxiety felt by Jews who know that if they wear identifiable Jewish dress – kippahs and Star-of-David pendants, not to mention shtreimels and tallit worn by hasidim going to the shul — they can expect at some point to be attacked by Muslims, not only in London, Manchester, and Birmingham, but also in Paris, Rome, and even New York? And what is the negative value we assign to the appearance of No-Go neighborhoods, where a dominant population of Muslim migrants makes outsiders – the indigenous non-Muslims whose country these migrants have invaded – distinctly unwelcome, and even the police and firemen do not enter without protection?

So let’s go back to that report by the OBR that prompted this piece, the report titled : “The U.K. Office of Budget Responsibility declares that more migrants help spur economic growth.”

Just one question. What are those people at the U.K. Office of Budget Responsibility smoking?