This argument is going a bit bizarre.
Migration isn't necessarily about who's coming here. But how many. When the EU free movement first opened up, you have to say that the numbers coming here were a sign of a strong economy and they've helped that.
But year after year having net migration close to and over 300,000 is an unsustainable figure. That's an extra 300,000 that need access to the NHS, dentists, School places, housing, Jobs.
To say you are worried about that, doesn't make you a racist.
You could also argue, that if migration was at a more sensible level for those years. Lets say < 100,000. That would in the long run give this country more scope to take in people that really need help. Like Syrian Refugees mabee???
But, with housing, NHS and schools all struggling to keep up with the pace of the current required increase. That doesn't give you alot of wiggle room to help those that really need it.
But the biggest thing with all of this is, it's not people we elect making these decisions for us about who can come here and how many. The decisions are being made by those appointed to office in the EU commission.
I also, don't understand why it's more difficult for Australians, New Zealanders, Pakistanis, and Indians to move here. When they've already got family ties and links to the UK. Than it is for those from Europe that don't.
Why would people be against a points based system, taking in people from all over the world, but favoring those with family here and/or from the commonwealth. To having having an open door to the EU, which is going to continue to open itself up to more countries?
It should also be pointed out, that any vote to leave. Would not involve retrospective action. So if we do vote to leave, there could well be by the time we do leave be around 4 million people here from the EU, that will continue work here after we leave the EU.