Please, read this article by Philippe Legrain in Thursday’s International New York Times:

‘But most people don’t want to leave home at all, much less forever, and many people can’t. Those who do move don’t all want to go to the same place. And far from being a burden on society, let alone an invading army, newcomers have much to contribute.
Consider the evidence. In 2004 and 2007, the European Union admitted 10 much poorer, ex-Communist countries. Since European Union citizens have the right to move freely across the union, all 100 million people in those Central and Eastern Europe states could have migrated to the richer countries.
One might have anticipated many people doing this, since average incomes in Sweden were more than eight times higher than those in Romania. (By comparison, gross domestic product per person in the United States is about five times that in Mexico.) Yet only about four million Eastern Europeans have migrated since 2004, while many come and go.’

(…)

‘Until the 1950s, when the United States scarcely controlled its border with Mexico, Mexicans crossed to do seasonal work, but few settled. Most people prefer not to uproot themselves. Moreover, wages that migrants earn in a rich country stretch further in a poor one. And someone who works abroad has higher status back home, whereas immigrants start at the bottom of the social heap in a rich country.
Perversely, American efforts to close the border led to a surge in permanent settlement: People rushed to move before controls tightened, then stayed for good. Europe’s experience is similar. Spain did not introduce immigration controls for North Africans until 1991. Before then, they may have come to pick the harvest, but they didn’t pile on fragile boats to move to Europe. Fears that Europe would be “swamped” if it opened up are misconceived.’

(…)

‘The sudden arrival in Israel in the early ’90s of many Russian-speaking Jews after the collapse of the Soviet Union provides an extreme example. These migrants mostly didn’t speak Hebrew, had no experience of capitalism and moved for political reasons rather than because their labor was in demand.
The newcomers raised Israel’s working-age population by 8 percent over just two years, and by 15 percent over seven. This would be equivalent to 50 million foreigners of working age arriving in the European Union. Did unemployment soar and wages collapse? No; after seven years, the unemployment rate was lower and wages were at their previous levels. This is because there isn’t a fixed number of jobs to go around, and new arrivals create additional demand for others’ work. The labor influx also stimulated an investment boom that soon restored wages.
A recent European Commission study likewise confirms that Eastern European migrants have not harmed local workers in Western Europe. To make the most of newcomers’ talents, it helps if the labor market is adaptable and temporary work easy to obtain.’

Read the article here.

Probably we should conclude that most objections against immigrants are merely fig leafs for xenophobia. And we should not be surprised, less than a century ago a many people believed in scientific anti-Semitism.

We should invite the xenophobes to come out of the closet, in order to get a more rational debate. We should tell them: “We can understand your irrational dislikes, we will listen to your fears and you are entitled to let off steam, for example in role-playing classes.”