The following is an article from Angel Marroquin posted and shared on his site. Visit the site via this link: angelmarroquin.wordpress.com
Often the contribution that migrants make to the economies of host countries is paradoxical: it is visible and invisible. Visible to the one who gives it but invisible to the one who receives it.
This happens because an ideology has been imposed. Migrants are seen as an annoying necessity and a means to maintain and increase the well-being of the general population at a low cost, even more so if migrants work in invisible but essential places in industries such as kitchens, hotels, care, farms in rural towns and retail warehouses. Nurses, construction workers or dairy workers. They all share one characteristic: they are migrants from poorer countries who work to improve the lives of people in rich countries and maintain their welfare systems by spending a large part of their income in those same rich countries in which they work -and pay tax.
While they make this gigantic contribution, they must swim against the current and endure racism, indifference, inequality, high rental costs, insurance costs, etc. They even have to pay expensive visa fees and face additional barriers because their qualifications are often only recognised if undergoing bureaucratic and costly paperwork. No, no government that receives migrant workers is looking for bosses.
This instrumental ideological vision treats migrants as an invisible but lucrative business: starting from an unavoidable demographic exchange, the idea that the nationals will benefit is promoted. One more case of “realpolitik” in which pragmatism prevails over values.
A paradigmatic case of this approach is expressed in the situation of students (University and English Schools) who come to study in the first world. With the tightening of immigration regulations, English schools and universities have been gaining preponderance as visa agents for students who want to learn the English language. Those who apply for these visas must have a study contract (which often includes room rentals and health insurance) with an English school recognised by the State. This visa allows them to work 20 hours per week, which, in turn, will enable them to pay for food and rent.
Today in England, one in every five pounds received by UK universities last year came from international students. In neighbouring Ireland in 2019 alone, 44,000 international students studying in Ireland, either undergraduates or postgraduates, provided substantial financial injections to universities and colleges. The gross income from international students, from fees and spending in the economy, amounted to almost €2.5 billion.
The economic importance of international students is not commensurate with the quality of services they receive: they live in overcrowded conditions, paying costly rent while having permits to work in low-paying jobs (serving restaurants, babysitting, hotels, and restaurant kitchens) with limited or no conditions to practice the language. It must be added that many of their teachers are not natives but other immigrants like them who have learned English and are now teaching other immigrants while living in similar conditions to their students.
This is how students subsidise the economy by paying English Schools and Universities and working low-paying jobs that help keep critical services in the tourism and hospitality industry running at low cost. The expectations of the students are inconsistent with the reality they find in the country they arrive in, and the country that receives them does not accept them as students but as customers and cheap workers. Shouldn’t the contribution of international students be more visible? Shouldn’t their treatment improve because of their importance to the economy?
Finally, this situation should make us all reflect on the complexity of the migration phenomenon: people who migrate do so because they are looking for a place to develop their human talent and not as exploitable labour. The latter used to be called slavery.
