By Maid of Kent-Further evidence has emerged of the willingness of mainstream media newspapers to blatantly distort the truth in order to promote the Marxist and Globalist propaganda of their owners following an article in The Independent which reports that Britain needs higher levels of immigration to solve its financial problems.
In the wake of the publication of the 2012 Fiscal Sustainability Report by the Office for Budget Responsibility, the differing accounts of its financial predictions given in various mainstream media publications all display their own politically biased agenda but none more so than the 'liberal' Independent newspaper which has dishonestly managed to condense the entire findings of a fairly complex 154 page report into the staggering claim that Britain needs more immigrants to cut £billions from its deficit .
Although the 2012 report from the OBR, which was formed in 2010 with the purpose of providing independent economic forecasts to the government, briefly mentions a presumed financial benefit to Britain from temporary migrants, The Independent has turned that brief mention of migrants into an entire article claiming the report concludes that more mass immigration will cut £billions from the deficit, help the economy grow faster and ease the pressure to cut spending by the government.
The actual report from the OBR contains no such argument.
Completely ignoring the fact that the OBR based their findings on the presumption that migrants will be of working age "so we avoid the cost of educating them and some will leave before we have to finance them in old age" and their conclusion that if migrants choose to remain in Britain into old age their presence here merely postpones fiscal pressures rather than avoiding them (as the BNP has argued for decades), The Independent has translated that brief mention of a theoretical benefit of temporary migrants to falsely claim that the report calls for more mass immigration as our only hope of financial survival.
Making no mention of what they obviously deem to be insignificant facts associated with the mass immigration experiment foisted on the British people by the Lib/Lab/Cons, The Independent and other newspapers appear to believe that their readers have short memories, lack the intellect to think logically or can be brainwashed by the continual repetition of propaganda. It was Lenin who said that a lie told often enough becomes the truth.
The article in The Independent, written by its Economics Editor Ben Chu, seeks to persuade its readers of the theoretical benefits of mass immigration by ending with a 'case study' of one immigrant who, with the help of his family, built up a successful business which now employs more than 350 people - however the article would have been more balanced if it had included the example of the 100,000+ Somalis resident in Britain of whom it is estimated 80% have never worked here - so using the case study of one untypical immigrant is hardly unbiased and honest reporting.
The Independent ignores the logical argument that if mass immigration was the key to economic success, having had more immigrants to our country in the last 60 years than in the entire history of Britain we should be experiencing a period of unprecedented wealth and prosperity, yet we find ourselves in a financial black hole which gets deeper with every passing day and every newly arrived immigrant.
It ignores the logics of how more immigration will somehow bring greater benefits to a country which already has 3 million unemployed and 7 million underemployed and doesn't attempt to explain where these immigrants will find jobs so that they can financially benefit Britain.
It ignores the fact that many immigrants to Britain have been low or non-skilled and either work in low-paid jobs or don't work at all and therefore present a greater drain on welfare and public services than their taxes make up for.
It ignores the fact that the Lib/Lab/Con policies of mass immigration as an answer to the problems of an ageing population and their demands for perpetual growth are nothing more than a giant Ponzi scheme, which like all such schemes, is doomed to eventual collapse. Immigrants grow old themselves and to sustain a constantly growing population of pensioners by such methods means importing ever more, and larger, waves of immigrants.
The Independent fails to mention a figure that it suggests our population should reach using mass immigration as a cure for our financial woes - will we be financially secure when our population reaches 100 million? Perhaps 200 million? Or even 1 billion? When that population of 1 billion grows old, will we need another 1 or 2 billion immigrants to support their pensions?
Unsurprisingly, Economics Editor Chu doesn't address that question.
Supporters of the failed mass immigration experiment argue that without Third World immigrants our public services like the NHS would collapse but they ignore the fact that the indigenous population capably supported those services themselves before the days of mass immigration, just as they conveniently ignore the additional burden that these immigrants and their families place on those same services.
Every immigrant worker in the NHS - nurses, cleaners, porters, security guards - has not only replaced a British worker but has come to Britain with their family which, assuming that the immigrant has a spouse and 2 children, means that for every NHS immigrant worker the service acquires 4 extra 'customers'.
Not only does the NHS acquire 4 extra users by the importation of one immigrant worker but many other public services suffer from additional demand from the imported family.
The low tax paid by low wage immigrant workers does not come close to paying for the public services that they use, education for their children being just one, and the fact remains that more public money is spent on services and benefits for immigrants and welfare payments for the displaced indigenous workers than most immigrants ever contribute in a lifetime of paying taxes.
With conservative estimates indicating that each immigrant to Britain is responsible for the importation of an extra 17 people (with high estimates giving the number as 22), it doesn't take a financial genius to understand why our public services are overstretched to the point of collapse and are now unaffordable.
The NHS alone must cut £20 billion from its budget by 2015 - yet irresponsible newspapers like The Independent are using blatant lies to convince its readers that the country needs to import more people who will only increase demand and the cost of the service.
Newspapers like The Independent may wish to convince the British people that more of what poisons them is likely to present a cure, but unfortunately for them the British people are beginning to wake up to the truth and are unlikely to believe this latest Marxist propaganda.