| Arguments for the migration potential use: |
Arguments against the migration potential use: |
| 1. The government is interested in the immigrants’ labour force use, as in the long run this brings profit to the economy (for example, in large infrastructure facilities construction). |
1. Growth of the informal sector activity parallel to the local unemployment rise (due to the fact, that migrants as a cheaper labor force crowd out local residents, depriving them of their earnings). |
| 2. Private companies pay more taxes to the state and wages to workers. The state receives tax revenues. As a result, it should develop and implement social programs. |
2. Different forms of labour immigrants’ discrimination (especially, social services absence, such as medicine, education, housing etc.). |
| 3. The informal sector enterprises can be transformed into legal form and pay official taxes to the state. |
3. Young immigrants’ unemployment, many of whom are NEETS (according to OECD: no education, employment, training, skills), negatively affects the state of society as a whole, leading, in particular, to the increase in the level of youth crime. |
| 4. Migrants’ employment allows them to transfer earned money to their homeland, which supports their families and at the same time replenishes budget revenues. |
4. The negative attitude of many African governments towards immigrants (both illegal and legalized migrants). |
