Are They Really Going To Come Flooding Over?

[Kromovaracun]

We're often told by the tabloids that Romania is a deeply impoverished country, and so hordes of them are naturally going to come to the UK to take advantage of our economy.

However....

" Unemployment there is relatively low (and lower than in Britain). Its budget deficit puts Britain to shame. ... Economic growth is at 4.1%. Wages are rising fast. Adjusting for prices, Bucharest’s GDP per capita is above the EU average. Indeed, the average Bucharest resident is comfortably better off than the average resident of Manchester."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-14/romania-s-economy-grows-at-fastest-pace-in-two-years-on-harvest.html

Furthermore...

"Between 2010 and 2013 British firms did an average €6.3 billion of business annually there, double the level of 2007, when it joined the EU. Since its accession, Romania—considered one of Europe’s few “tiger” economies—has been worth some €27-30 billion in turnover and €3.7 billion in profit to companies based in Britain. "

This also comes after Nigel Farage visited Bulgaria earlier this year, and was told by all but one of the people he spoke to (including an extremely impoverished farmer) that they did not want to move to Britain:

http://www.channel4.com/news/nigel-farage-ukip-immigration-bulgaria-romania-video

Should we really believe that the country will be swamped?

[boxtops]

Hard to say, it's not the same as it was when Poland joined, and many are now going back. I hope it's scaremongering.

[emmie]

one Romanian chap said on the news that he could earn a max of 300 euros a month, equivalent wage in UK ten times that, and sorry i cannot remember what type of job but it wasn't cleaning the streets, he looked more a professional type, if you get my drift. I didn't catch the whole piece.

[sandyRoe]

Even in as remote and unattractive city as Belfast there are already quite a number of Romanians on the streets selling the Big Issue. They've been treated abysmally in their own country. People like them will leave their homeland but probably won't all come to the UK.

[emmie]

its still pretty poor,

http://www.nineoclock.ro/romania-the-country-with-the-highest-poverty-levels-in-the-eu/

[Kromovaracun]

I suppose the article is focusing on Bucharest, whereas there is a whole country outside of there. (A bit like people often do with the UK and London).

I still think it's worth knowing that the situation is more complicated than the cartoon images generated by journalists in the UK.

[ummmm]

Earning 300 euros a month is not bad if your overheads are 100 euros.

We really can't compare unless we know the cost of things.

[emmie]

sandyr, those selling the big issue, and quite frankly most who do in the capital seem to be East Europeans, isn't there some debate over their legitimacy - passing money back to their homeland, related to gangs,
i see so much begging on the streets, Ragged women with their hands out, sorry if it's harsh but come and see for yourself. The people who are stacked up in Hyde Park are East Europeans i believe, some went back home, then decided to come back because what they had in Romania wouldn't keep a dog alive. Can we blame them, no, but we can't have more and more, its just not sustainable.

[trt]

They may have 2nd thoughts if the gov keeps to its word about having no unemployment benefits being paid for 3 months if they dont look for work, or something like that.
Its supposed to be starting in January according to the news today!

Nothing has been said about other benefits though and whats going to happen when they get sick? hospitals are under pressure already?

[emmie]

ummm that particular chap was well dressed, more an office worker or professional type, he wasn't a Roma, who by and large look pretty poor, then again i have never been there, only going on articles in paper and the news reports of recent days. The guy said that money in Romania is not enough to live on, the article i linked to seems to bear out its a very poor country.

[emmie]

i will never understand how anyone can get benefits as they walk into a country, anywhere. I watched some of the politics show earlier, with one woman Tory MP and Chris Bryant, Labour, he said he would be quite happy for them to get benefits after 6 months in the country, she said it's now three months, why is it anything at all. No one should get money off Britain until they have worked for it. The British taxpayer should not be subsiding anyone. its decidedly unfair.

[Zeuhl]

The live-in caretaker for our office block has recently come over from Romania.

He seems a nice enough, reliable chap.

However, his circumstances and living conditions here seem pretty miserable which suggests life in Romania (for him at least) must be really impoverished.

[emmie]

that just over 252 pounds, 300 euros a month. not a lot is it. Sure that their standard of living may not be like ours, but even so.

[emmie]

is this the same sort of data, it's hard to get accurate picture

http://countryeconomy.com/unemployment/romania

[Kromovaracun]

emmie

your link states that the UK has 7.5% unemployment, while Romania has 7.3%, so the economist is being a little misleading in saying that one is lower. Based on official figures, they're about the same. The UK's unemployment figure is almost certainly an underestimate though, as we measure unemployment (unlike most countries, if I remember right) exclusively as people who are taking specific unemployment benefits.

Plus I notice that the figures on Romania's growth (which far outstrips the UK) have drawn no comment - nor has the money that our links with Romania has brought to the UK economy.

[New Judge]

“Adjusting for prices, Bucharest’s GDP per capita is above the EU average.”

“Earning 300 euros a month is not bad if your overheads are 100 euros. “

I’m afraid these two statements adequately display a staggering misunderstanding of what the fundamental flaw is with the EU. Just to take Romania and the UK as examples (for they are the nations discussed here):

The UK has a per capita GDP of about $36,500. Romania’s is about one quarter of that. What the EU does is to allow people whose labour is worth, at home, a quarter of what it is here. Their low expenses at home are an even greater attraction for the breadwinners to come here because they can live here quite cheaply and send a large chunk of their income home. They are prepared to work for lower wages and often under worse conditions (though often immeasurably better than they enjoy at home). Couple this with generous benefits (especially for those in work) and superior healthcare and it is no wonder the UK is such an attraction.

As far as growth goes even with a 4% growth rate (compared to, say, 1.5% for the UK) it would take over half a century for the two GDPs to converge (all other things being equal, that is). Incidentally, I don’t know of any great sums of money the UK’s links with Romania have brought.

The EU is a system designed to skew economies that are disparate. People of nations with low per capita GDPs will be naturally attracted to those with higher incomes. It does the recipient nations no good (especially those like the UK with huge social, employment, education and healthcare difficulties). Neither does it do the donor nations any good as their young people desert their homelands for richer pickings abroad , leaving their nations to regress.

[emmie]

which is exactly what i have been saying, they lose their good people, we get more - we are not remotely in a position to keep on accepting peoples from around the globe, especially from outside the EU>