The Population Of The Uk Is Ageing

[Ash4781]

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=949

The population of the UK is ageing. Over the last 25 years the percentage of the population aged 65 and over increased from 15 per cent in 1984 to 16 per cent in 2009, an increase of 1.7 million people. Over the same period, the percentage of the population aged under 16 decreased from 21 per cent to 19 per cent. This trend is projected to continue. By 2034, 23 per cent of the population is projected to be aged 65 and over compared to 18 per cent aged under 16

ONS quite clear in opening census.

It's not looking good for productivity. Not sure about house prices..Early morning thinking is that velocity will fall with very few sales.

[Ruffneck]

shouldn't they change it to 67 and over? i thought that was the new retirement age

[goldbug9999]

The solution is obviously more immigration, since immigrants never grow old ...

[Frank Hovis]

Keep moving the state pension to an older age, less pension pay-outs and a big increase in the working population. Easy.

[Snugglybear]

The trouble is, as I know only too well, when you only earn a modest wage raising children is very difficult. Housing is expensive, utility bills keep going up, food inflation is currently rising and unlikely to fall, if you work childcare is patchy and costly. There is already talk of people putting off having children because they don't have stable housing.

On top of that, you're supposed to find the money to save for your old age.

If you're a woman, you'll be doing by far the larger share of the housework and childrearing work, even if you have a job as well, or worse, the child/children's father may vanish and not even contribute financially.

I'll certainly be advising my daughter not to bother.

Having children is only worth it for the poor and the rich.

[Gone baby gone]

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=949

ONS quite clear in opening census.

It's not looking good for productivity. Not sure about house prices..Early morning thinking is that velocity will fall with very few sales.

If the increase is 1%, how can that equate to 1.7 million people, when even now the UK population is only around 62 million?

[aa3]

The trouble is, as I know only too well, when you only earn a modest wage raising children is very difficult. Housing is expensive, utility bills keep going up, food inflation is currently rising and unlikely to fall, if you work childcare is patchy and costly. There is already talk of people putting off having children because they don't have stable housing.

On top of that, you're supposed to find the money to save for your old age.

If you're a woman, you'll be doing by far the larger share of the housework and childrearing work, even if you have a job as well, or worse, the child/children's father may vanish and not even contribute financially.

I'll certainly be advising my daughter not to bother.

Having children is only worth it for the poor and the rich.

10/10 post. The middle is being squeezed out of child bearing. The poor who are willing to live on welfare can have lots, and the rich can afford lots.

Sad thing is I get the feeling this is what the elites want. Get rid of the middle who are the ones who threaten their position in society.

Its not realistic to expect women to work a full time job, and do all the child bearing and child rearing, housekeeping and so on. Women's liberation has epicly failed in this regard. Freedom to get a job if they want, has transformed into forced into full time work for corporations or government.

[Krackersdave]

The trouble is, as I know only too well, when you only earn a modest wage raising children is very difficult. Housing is expensive, utility bills keep going up, food inflation is currently rising and unlikely to fall, if you work childcare is patchy and costly. There is already talk of people putting off having children because they don't have stable housing.

On top of that, you're supposed to find the money to save for your old age.

If you're a woman, you'll be doing by far the larger share of the housework and childrearing work, even if you have a job as well, or worse, the child/children's father may vanish and not even contribute financially.

I'll certainly be advising my daughter not to bother.

Having children is only worth it for the poor and the rich.

+11 - already the subject of a movie

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0yQunhOaU0

[singlemalt]

......... Freedom to get a job if they want, has transformed into forced into full time work for corporations or government.

Weird isn't it. Women are now doubly enslaved. They do the lioness's share in the home and are now enslaved to "The Man" at work. I bet Pankhurst and the like never thought it'd end up like this.

[scepticus]

The trouble is, as I know only too well, when you only earn a modest wage raising children is very difficult. Housing is expensive, utility bills keep going up, food inflation is currently rising and unlikely to fall, if you work childcare is patchy and costly. There is already talk of people putting off having children because they don't have stable housing.

...

Having children is only worth it for the poor and the rich.

a depression should take care of that - plenty of free time and falling inflation. If you don't have any income to lose it can only get easier as deflation sets in.

[Snugglybear]

10/10 post. The middle is being squeezed out of child bearing. The poor who are willing to live on welfare can have lots, and the rich can afford lots.

Sad thing is I get the feeling this is what the elites want. Get rid of the middle who are the ones who threaten their position in society.

Its not realistic to expect women to work a full time job, and do all the child bearing and child rearing, housekeeping and so on. Women's liberation has epicly failed in this regard. Freedom to get a job if they want, has transformed into forced into full time work for corporations or government.

It isn't women's lib that has failed, it's men. The vast majority of them want a woman who brings in money and a housewife and nanny so they can carry on watching the footy, playing golf, going to the pub, tinkering with the car, playing with their train sets, etc.

As to how my daughter will feel, I'll tell her to live her own life. Unless she can find herself a man who is a real partner, willing to share everything 50/50, including the work - though not the childbirth as that's obviously impossible, so he can make up for it in other ways, like being 100% responsible for cleaning the toilet forever.

[campervanman]

The solution is obviously more immigration, since immigrants never grow old ...

Immigrants = instant work units with zero education cost.

[ccc]

It isn't women's lib that has failed, it's men. The vast majority of them want a woman who brings in money and a housewife and nanny so they can carry on watching the footy, playing golf, going to the pub, tinkering with the car, playing with their train sets, etc.

As to how my daughter will feel, I'll tell her to live her own life. Unless she can find herself a man who is a real partner, willing to share everything 50/50, including the work - though not the childbirth as that's obviously impossible, so he can make up for it in other ways, like being 100% responsible for cleaning the toilet forever.

I think most men would be perfectly happy for their other half to be a housewife - IF they could afford it.

[Snugglybear]

I think most men would be perfectly happy for their other half to be a housewife - IF they could afford it.

Would they pay her pension and give her the money to have her own leisure pursuits? Or would she just be a skivvy with no life outside the house until she died?

[Gone baby gone]

The solution is obviously more immigration, since immigrants never grow old ...

You're thinking of replicants. Which would be a good idea...

[Oliver Sutton]

The trouble is, as I know only too well, when you only earn a modest wage raising children is very difficult. Housing is expensive, utility bills keep going up, food inflation is currently rising and unlikely to fall, if you work childcare is patchy and costly. There is already talk of people putting off having children because they don't have stable housing.

On top of that, you're supposed to find the money to save for your old age.

If you're a woman, you'll be doing by far the larger share of the housework and childrearing work, even if you have a job as well, or worse, the child/children's father may vanish and not even contribute financially.

I'll certainly be advising my daughter not to bother.

Having children is only worth it for the poor and the rich.

Too true, a disgrace, and an awful indictment of the idiots who've been in charge. Know several working parents who struggle and would be better off on the dole.

Geting rid of all means-testing would be a good start.

Can't see that happening though.

e.g. Just heard on the radio that the Libcons are not going to extend free meals for school kids. They should be free to everybody IMHO.

[Executive Sadman]

The solution is obviously more immigration, since immigrants never grow old ...

I concur. Let the next generation face an even bigger problem as an even larger workforce retires. Or, OTOH, as Gordon Brown has proven, it doesnt matter how many immigrants willing to work for peanuts you import, if you spend like a nutter you'll still run out of money.

I can understand (though dont agree) with the first wave of immigration in the 1950s/60s, given that millions of our most productive members (at least then) members of society, ie young men, died in the war effort (although given the de-industrialisation of the 1970s/80s and oversupply of labour ever since i think that first wave was a mistake) What i dont understand is the second big wave. How could liebour justify such mass immigration given millions of able working age people are paid to sit at home.

Get the 10-12 million of unemployed and underemployed of the working age population back to work, then we'll talk immigration.

[ccc]

Would they pay her pension and give her the money to have her own leisure pursuits? Or would she just be a skivvy with no life outside the house until she died?

What are you talking about ? Most of the housewives I see lead rather pleasant lives...

[Snugglybear]

What are you talking about ? Most of the housewives I see lead rather pleasant lives...

Where are they getting the money for their rather pleasant lives? I.e. what are their husbands'/partners' incomes?

[Heading South]

There are plenty of unemployed older people who would be delighted to take on a job, some of who have a wealth of experience and who have kept their skills updated, and who are prepared to work for a very modest wage (especially if their kids have left home and their mortgage is small/nil)

But despite legislation in 2006, age discrimination is still rife in this country. Sure there are some enlightened employers, but the majority are just not interested if you are over 45. The most blinkered in my view are the young spivs in the recruitment industry who treat older applicants with utter contempt.

Edited June 25, 2010 by Heading South

[ccc]

Where are they getting the money for their rather pleasant lives? I.e. what are their husbands'/partners' incomes?

You have lost me. What point are you trying to make ? These housewives lead very cushdy lives and it is paid for by their husband going out to work every day. Are you trying to say these women are somehow victims in this situation ?

[Snugglybear]

You have lost me. What point are you trying to make ? These housewives lead very cushdy lives and it is paid for by their husband going out to work every day. Are you trying to say these women are somehow victims in this situation ?

No, I was just asking about how much the husband earns. If he gets enough to pay all the bills and take care of a pension for his wife/partner and give her enough money to have at least some life outside the home, he must be earning a pretty good wage.

It really depends what you, and they, consider cushy.

[DeepLurker]

There are plenty of unemployed older people who would be delighted to take on a job, some of who have a wealth of experience and who have kept their skills updated, and who are prepared to work for a very modest wage (especially if their kids have left home and their mortgage is small/nil)

But despite legislation in 2006, age discrimination is still rife in this country. Sure there are some enlightened employers, but the majority are just not interested if you are over 45. The most blinkered in my view are the young spivs in the recruitment industry who treat older applicants with utter contempt.

Absolutely logical behaviour, IMO.

Experience will have quickly taught them that UK-born over-45s do not have the same wage expectations as a 20 year old. Let alone a 20 year old freshly arrived on the plane from Poland...

Edited June 25, 2010 by DeepLurker

[winkie]

Absolutely logical behaviour, IMO.

Experience will have quickly taught them that UK-born over-45s do not have the same wage expectations as a 20 year old. Let alone a 20 year old freshly arrived on the plane from Poland...

If an older person has worked all their lives bringing up their family and repaying their debts and mortgages working hard and long hours....they would then have lower fixed living costs so therefore would be in the fortunate position to be able do a job they wanted to do say part time, not only would they give their new employer the benefit of life experience they could work for a smaller wage whilst doing something they enjoy and gives job satisfaction......win, win.

[Lucifer]

10/10 post. The middle is being squeezed out of child bearing. The poor who are willing to live on welfare can have lots, and the rich can afford lots.

Sad thing is I get the feeling this is what the elites want. Get rid of the middle who are the ones who threaten their position in society.

Its not realistic to expect women to work a full time job, and do all the child bearing and child rearing, housekeeping and so on. Women's liberation has epicly failed in this regard. Freedom to get a job if they want, has transformed into forced into full time work for corporations or government.

Absolutely...you got it, its called pulling up the ladder.