It's a shame that we can't have a reasonable debate about migration without resorting to accusations of 'racism' and name-calling.
I personally would sympathise with anyone who wants to vote 'out' based upon a direct experience of their employment or wages being affected by immigration. To have a proper debate however we must look at the evidence, and the most recent available evidence tells us that that neither employment or wages are affected by immigration. Moreover, immigration is shown to have helped pay for public services, the idea that immigrants are a drain is a myth. Until any new studies come to light to support the contrary then I will continue in my view that immigration is not the problem that the right-wing media would have you believe it is.
Housing on the other hand is a very real problem and I can understand the concerns of people who worry about the impact of a growing population as a result of growing net migration. This is a very real issue, however it is a domestic one to be sorted out by our governments. Suddenly restricting or even closing our borders will not result in a surge in the number of social houses being built, certainly not with this government because it is not in their interests to do so. They want to pursue a policy of private ownership, which is where their voters are. Unfortunately applying increased border controls will just drain us of the labour supply that contributes to the economy and tax receipts, tax receipts which should be going into housebuilding.
So whilst it might make people more comfortable to vote 'out' in order to try and solve a housing problem, think of who an out vote actually benefits. It's not the left, who would pursue investment in social housing and support services. The beneficiaries would be the right, the property owners and investors who will scoop up property and charge the earth for the lower classes to rent them.
