UK population expected to pass 70 million by 2031

[Riedquat]

2 minutes ago, onlooker said:

Indigenous Europeans may be choosing to limit their population, but their Govts are allowing, in effect, unlimited immigration from those areas of Africa, Asia and South America where the people have chosen not to limit their populations. What do we do then?

We're starting to see quite a backlash against unlimited immigration, trying to demonise those against it as racists is getting less and less effective. As for the rest of the world it may well be that the only thing to do will be to leave them to their own devices - which unfortunately includes leaving them to suffer when their shortsightedness catches up with them. Although they could say the same to us, hence my earlier part about the UK being badly overpopulated, when they've not got anywhere near the same population density as we have.

[scottbeard]

1 hour ago, onlooker said:

Indigenous Europeans may be choosing to limit their population, but their Govts are allowing, in effect, unlimited immigration from those areas of Africa, Asia and South America where the people have chosen not to limit their populations. What do we do then?

Those poorer areas will I suspect also see Falling birth rates over the coming decades if the pattern of the richer countries plays out there.

My only comment is falling birth rates in Europe is good news - I don’t Suggest that I have any solutions to anything, just observations

 

 

[scottbeard]

1 hour ago, Riedquat said:

The only reason it could be seen as bad is because we're caught in a bit of a population arms race. Be sensible, level off your population growth, even start declining it gently (thus giving a view of an ever-brighter future, which sure as hell doesn't exist now) and in the short term you'll get tramped by the less responsible who just keep careering off.

Also remember that most of the rest of the world has much lower population densities than the UK and already the world as a whole is overpopulated, especially if you think a higher standard of living should be available to most of it (which it should be). Even if you took onboard everything the most extreme greeny nutcase wants I seriously doubt standard of living half as good as the West has could be universal.

How I see the next 100 years playing out is;

standards of living in poorer places rise a bit

standards of living in richer countries fall a lot (this has already started)

people stop wanting to come to Europe because it’s no better than where they’re coming from

long term equilibrium has to be fairly equal living standards the world over, surely, or people will just keep taking steps like migrate or trade  wars  until it is equal?

[iamnumerate]

4 hours ago, onlooker said:

Indigenous Europeans may be choosing to limit their population, but their Govts are allowing, in effect, unlimited immigration from those areas of Africa, Asia and South America where the people have chosen not to limit their populations. What do we do then?

Vote for different Govts - people should have voted UKIP in 2015.

[iamnumerate]

7 hours ago, Riedquat said:

We're starting to see quite a backlash against unlimited immigration, trying to demonise those against it as racists is getting less and less effective. As for the rest of the world it may well be that the only thing to do will be to leave them to their own devices - which unfortunately includes leaving them to suffer when their shortsightedness catches up with them. Although they could say the same to us, hence my earlier part about the UK being badly overpopulated, when they've not got anywhere near the same population density as we have.

Are we really though?  All three parties want large scale immigration and people still vote for them.

[simvastatin]

On 31/10/2019 at 21:29, PeanutButter said:

ok boomer ;D 

I just googled that, i am supposed to be in shock and having a breakdown after that insult,  means nothing.

PS i was born in 1964

[Riedquat]

2 hours ago, iamnumerate said:

Are we really though?  All three parties want large scale immigration and people still vote for them.

They've got enough inertia that people still vote for them despite that IMO. There's the usual issue with other parties not having enough credibility on other issues, or being seen as a wasted vote, to keep them going, for now. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Conservatives' claim that they intended to get the levels down to tens of thousands (still too many, but significantly less bad) helped them. Demonstrating no intention whatsoever to actually implement that on the other hand, probably wouldn't have had Brexit if that wasn't the case.

Quite frankly wanting more immigration is criminally irresponsible. The current population levels have caused massive damage already.

[iamnumerate]

11 hours ago, Riedquat said:

They've got enough inertia that people still vote for them despite that IMO. There's the usual issue with other parties not having enough credibility on other issues, or being seen as a wasted vote, to keep them going, for now. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Conservatives' claim that they intended to get the levels down to tens of thousands (still too many, but significantly less bad) helped them. Demonstrating no intention whatsoever to actually implement that on the other hand, probably wouldn't have had Brexit if that wasn't the case.

Quite frankly wanting more immigration is criminally irresponsible. The current population levels have caused massive damage already.

The Tories were lying about tens of thousands according to George Osborne.

 

I agree with you about more being criminally irresponsible.

[winkie]

20 hours ago, scottbeard said:

How I see the next 100 years playing out is;

standards of living in poorer places rise a bit

standards of living in richer countries fall a lot (this has already started)

people stop wanting to come to Europe because it’s no better than where they’re coming from

long term equilibrium has to be fairly equal living standards the world over, surely, or people will just keep taking steps like migrate or trade  wars  until it is equal?

People will always want to move not always for safety or economic reasons....they will pick the places that make them feel welcome and at home....we need to mix else will become inbred...fresh blood and ideas is a good thing, brings with it prosperity to all.

Agree that globalization will help equalise the way we live, eat, communicate and learn about each other....?

[scottbeard]

1 hour ago, winkie said:

People will always want to move not always for safety or economic reasons....they will pick the places that make them feel welcome and at home....we need to mix else will become inbred...fresh blood and ideas is a good thing, brings with it prosperity to all.

Agree that globalization will help equalise the way we live, eat, communicate and learn about each other....?

Oh sure the odd few people have always moved countries because they prefer the culture, or marry someone from overseas, and a handful always will. And that’s fine, and all positive as you say.

But surely that’s a whole different ball game from the million upon million people who have come from Eastern Europe to the UK and Germany for 100% economic reasons. This leaves the UK and Germany floundering as to how to accommodate them whilst their countries of origin are floundering due to missing a whole generation of young workers. That’s problematic, but will go away as wealth equalises over the world.

 

[iamnumerate]

43 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

Oh sure the odd few people have always moved countries because they prefer the culture, or marry someone from overseas, and a handful always will. And that’s fine, and all positive as you say.

But surely that’s a whole different ball game from the million upon million people who have come from Eastern Europe to the UK and Germany for 100% economic reasons. This leaves the UK and Germany floundering as to how to accommodate them whilst their countries of origin are floundering due to missing a whole generation of young workers. That’s problematic, but will go away as wealth equalises over the world.

 

It is not a problem if you already have a house and a job in a sector not affected by this.  Which is politicians don't care as most have houses and work as lawyers etc

[winkie]

People have come to both work and live here from all over the world, more have arrived from outside Europe...they come because they feel welcomed, they come because we have encouraged people to move here, they come because they have established communities here...if they are made to feel unwanted they for the most part would not come....there are other tolerant, welcoming and safe places in the world.?

 

[scottbeard]

18 minutes ago, winkie said:

People have come to both work and live here from all over the world, more have arrived from outside Europe...they come because they feel welcomed, they come because we have encouraged people to move here, they come because they have established communities here...if they are made to feel unwanted they for the most part would not come....there are other tolerant, welcoming and safe places in the world.?

All of that is factually correct but I'm not sure what point you are actually trying to make?

My view is:

- Movement of the right people to the right places is potentially fantastic, with benefits all round. 

- Free movement of people with no checks and balances is disasterous, and has what has led to all the bad feeling and indeed frankly the Brexit Leave vote.

Immigration was never an issue until free movement was allowed from countries in very different economic circumstances from the UK.  That's when it went wrong.

[iamnumerate]

1 hour ago, scottbeard said:

All of that is factually correct but I'm not sure what point you are actually trying to make?

My view is:

- Movement of the right people to the right places is potentially fantastic, with benefits all round. 

- Free movement of people with no checks and balances is disasterous, and has what has led to all the bad feeling and indeed frankly the Brexit Leave vote.

Immigration was never an issue until free movement was allowed from countries in very different economic circumstances from the UK.  That's when it went wrong.

The problem with free movement is that we give EU immigrants housing benefit from day one - that is not a good idea.

[scottbeard]

6 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

The problem with free movement is that we give EU immigrants housing benefit from day one - that is not a good idea.

That’s far from the only problem - how do you (for example) plan for primary school places sensibly when we might get 1 million Romanian immigrants with kids, or 2 million, or they might all decide to go home? It’s madness and unworkable in my view to allow millions of people the unfettered right to live wherever they want and then expect countries to have to bend and shape around it. 

[iamnumerate]

5 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

That’s far from the only problem - how do you (for example) plan for primary school places sensibly when we might get 1 million Romanian immigrants with kids, or 2 million, or they might all decide to go home? It’s madness and unworkable in my view to allow millions of people the unfettered right to live wherever they want and then expect countries to have to bend and shape around it. 

True true.

[Riedquat]

1 hour ago, scottbeard said:

Immigration was never an issue until free movement was allowed from countries in very different economic circumstances from the UK.  That's when it went wrong.

Couldn't agree more. Created the opportunities to move around, let people move to where specialist skills were needed (non-specialist skills, any country should be capable of supplying them itself) and had no real net population shift and the only cultural impact was to add some variety without any underlying change. Hard to see any downside there. That said people from Mediterranean coastal villages might take a different view as those villages got turned in to expat concrete towns.

[simvastatin]

2 hours ago, winkie said:

People have come to both work and live here from all over the world, more have arrived from outside Europe...they come because they feel welcomed, they come because we have encouraged people to move here, they come because they have established communities here...if they are made to feel unwanted they for the most part would not come....there are other tolerant, welcoming and safe places in the world.?

 

I remember from memory something about the Blair Witch Project 

Part 1. Bring in 5M Eastern European’s 

Part 2. Get the existing Asians and Black people to leave

by getting the media to call them paedophiles and rapists and acid attackers and stabbers.

i guess no one looked at where house prices would end up with such an influx and it would end up breaking the European Union 

[MarkG]

16 hours ago, scottbeard said:

Immigration was never an issue until free movement was allowed from countries in very different economic circumstances from the UK.  That's when it went wrong.

Immigration was always an issue whenever the level was a significant fraction of the population. Britain's history for much of the last two thousand years is a history of conflict caused by mass immigration, usually at sword-point.

Many of the country's problems come from being an empire rather than a nation; there are multiple different nations in the same islands, largely due to invasions over the last few thousand years, and the people running the place tend to come from different nations to the majority of the population. The Normans took over a thousand years ago, and many of their descendants are still in positions of power today.

Free movement just makes it much, much worse.

[scottbeard]

4 hours ago, MarkG said:

Immigration was always an issue whenever the level was a significant fraction of the population. Britain's history for much of the last two thousand years is a history of conflict caused by mass immigration, usually at sword-point.

Hmm - well maybe the first 1,000 of those 2,000.

Immigration didn't seem to be an issue on a national scale from 1066 until about 2004!

[Riedquat]

2 hours ago, scottbeard said:

Hmm - well maybe the first 1,000 of those 2,000.

Immigration didn't seem to be an issue on a national scale from 1066 until about 2004!

It was, but for other places we kept barging in to.

[zugzwang]

Ehrlich's masterpiece from 1968.

Ignored, demeaned, spat upon: Yet it's still going off in our faces.

[PeanutButter]

Good to see overpopulation getting some headlines.

200,000 extra people every day - and let’s see how that impacts house prices...

 

 

[PeanutButter]

On 05/11/2019 at 14:01, zugzwang said:

Ehrlich's masterpiece from 1968.

Ignored, demeaned, spat upon: Yet it's still going off in our faces.

The most maligned and falsely accused scientist I can think of - which is what happens when you undermine prevailing religious ideology as well as capitalism.

[zugzwang]

3 hours ago, PeanutButter said:

The most maligned and falsely accused scientist I can think of - which is what happens when you undermine prevailing religious ideology as well as capitalism.

I believe Paul Erhlich's reputation has been somewhat repaired in recent years. And rightfully so. For all its flaws and forecast errors, The Population Bomb is still arguably the most important book to have been published in the last half century.

He gets a sympathetic hearing in this recent Guardian interview:

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/mar/22/collapse-civilisation-near-certain-decades-population-bomb-paul-ehrlich

But you're absolutely bang on about the consequences you'll face if your ideas dare to challenge the cornucopian tenets of international capitalism. Rachel Carson became a target after Silent Spring was published; Donella Meadows after Limits to Growth; James Hanson after his climate change testimony in 1988. The extraordinary torrents of abuse and vilification aimed at Greta Thunberg are similarly motivated.