Why wages fell and profits surged in the EU

The relative amounts residents contribute and take out is a governmental issue. There are rumblings already about removing state pensions and making everyone take out a private pension.
The faults of the government planning and spending is not the fault of the migrant. If the model of 20 years ago doesnt fit the future, change rhe model. Macron is trying to do just that. And he is right to do so.

The job of the government is to make it attractive for businesses etc to invest, employ and reward its citizens. The rest follows as night follows day if capitalism is allowed to operate honestly and freely.
But this government has not made the right choices, squandered buge amounts of money and is now blaming those who might otherwise die or be tortured.
If the government had the money to buy up billions of pounds of land, it had the money to entice private enterprise to move north. Improve roads and small airports.
HS2 isnt just track. Trains have to be built and manned and THEN industry enticwd to invest.

It is just the biggest carbuncle in a series of ridicilous decisions made for the glory of the Tory and has NOTHING to do with dealing seriously with the migration issue. If industry had been allowed to grow in the north, the UK would be delighted to welcome those who could turn it into productive development.

LOL - simply repeating yourself does not make it true..

The fact is that we are for various reasons not building enough housing - so the logic of importing a million extra souls every 4 years and thus increasing competition for what existing housing there is certainly does not benefit the average working man in the UK.

Then post the contrary.
Look up wages par capita Uk.

And stop repeating governmental lies because you like to hear them.
It was you who casually throws in terms like "the average Brit"
Who is that??

The pattern of who is a homeowner has changed, not l3ast becausre old people are living in their homes for years longer than 20 years ago.
They are the post war generation which bought their homes at affordable prices and moved up the ladder, buying and selling until they stay for a lot longer because they live longer.

And lets not forget the boom in people buying up portfolios of properties to rent out so they are not available to buy and enjoy the growing asset. It removes the availability of home ownership and the possibility of buying one because the rents are so high.

Just to make sure you don't continue to live your life in ignorance, Indian restaurants in the 60s were started by people  from Bangladesh who arrived here under a scheme that effectively gave them Britsh citizenship. In the very early seventies a Labour charlatan, schemer and criminal MP set up the Bangladesh Trust Bank that funded Bangladeshi migrants to come to Britain to set up businesses. To do this he had to recruit people who gave references that would allow Britain to accept them under the scheme, notably a police chief who became friends with the MP, a certain John Stonehouse. Once the police chief had installed enough Indian restauranteurs he move to England and set up a company that provided seafood to just about every Indian restaurant in mainland UK. When Stonehouse was under investigation, the now ex-police chief vanished abroad until it was safe to return.

The early Chinese restaurants were not owned and run by Chinese people, they were people from Hong Kong who sold Americanised versions and very little genuine Chinese food. Even modern day Chinese run restaurants still offer Americaised dishes whilst many Indian restaurants serve Anglicised food.

I was simply replying to the (mistaken) assertion that immigration improved productivity.

Productivity could be improved by restricting immigration - perhaps we should give that a go?