The British Isles wouldn’t need to let in an enormous number of people, but they could if they wanted to. The roughly 300,000 BN(O) and 63,000 BOTC passport holders could easily be accommodated.
The UK grew by 14 million people between 1950 and today, that’s net growth of 200,000 per year for 70 years. The idea that Britain is now full is just nonsense. Now that the birth rate is below replacement levels, mass immigration is required just to sustain the current population size anyway.
That being the case, most people are understandably reluctant to leave their homes unless absolutely forced to by war.
In short: all British citizens should be free to migrate around British territories any way they please, but they probably wouldn’t exercise that right anyway.
> How would you like if we force a small African country to potentially let in every European citizen on moral grounds?
Most of them are pretty relaxed about Western immigration, or have a reciprocation policy where the rules are a mirror of the rules of your Western country of origin.
In short, what caused the increased food and housing prices was government spending leading to inflation; immigration was only one of the causes of this spending (the financial crisis in the southern European countries was another.) The expected outcome on Germany is a net-positive one.
Fact is however, Britain is small and cannot possibly let in an enormous number of people. How many are we talking about?
Germany let in over a million in 2015 and the effects on rents are already devastating.
How would you like if we force a small African country to potentially let in every European citizen on moral grounds?