Net immigration 'will settle at 245,000 a year': OBR upgrades estimates by 40,000 since November, pointing to big inflows from Ukraine, Hong Kong, student boom and post-Brexit points-based system

[70PC]

5 minutes ago, PropertyMania said:

hmmm.. this doesn't really chime with the 1.6ish fertility rate, unless there are many more women of fertile age than old (which we know not to be true). not denying the stats, just feel like we're missing something

I have pleaded mea culpa on this but I still don't understand how the 1.6 number stacks up. 

[gp_]

26 minutes ago, 70PC said:

I have pleaded mea culpa on this but I still don't understand how the 1.6 number stacks up. 

the shape of the population pyramid explians it

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/articles/ukpopulationpyramidinteractive/2020-01-08

 

right now there is a bulge in women of child bearing age.

[gp_]

also, i fertility rate is over lifetime, so it means the avergae woman has 1.6 kids, but a lot are having them now

[70PC]

1 minute ago, gp_ said:

also, i fertility rate is over lifetime, so it means the avergae woman has 1.6 kids, but a lot are having them now

Good one and thanks.

[bartelbe]

So we are only adding a town roughly the size of Reading to our population each year? That on a small, very densely populated island, which already doesn't have enough land to feed itself and can only find enough water by destroying its eco-system.

It is utter madness and yet it is impossible to have a rational debate with those who favour open borders about this. They pretend we have infinite resources and then shutdown the debate with cries of racist.

[Cocha]

12 minutes ago, bartelbe said:

So we are only adding a town roughly the size of Reading to our population each year? That on a small, very densely populated island, which already doesn't have enough land to feed itself and can only find enough water by destroying its eco-system.

It is utter madness and yet it is impossible to have a rational debate with those who favour open borders about this. They pretend we have infinite resources and then shutdown the debate with cries of racist.

Yep, they signal their virtue and enjoy a good old circle jerk together, then shout waaaaycist over and over when questioned about the unsustainability of their virtue signaling ponzi scheme.

[petetong]

4 hours ago, btd1981 said:

The loss of wildlife and habitat pains me the most, but others have said, how sustainable is this? We can increase developed area by x%, decrease wild spaces and farmland by y%< but what really gets hammered is the rate of productivity required from the agricultural land that remains.

Attenborough and Packham both want population growth control, nationally and internationally to stop environmental damage and loss of biodiversity. I am surprised they haven't been cancelled. The greens, left and liberals are so full of sh*t on this topic it's utterly laughable. The Greens used to be for localism and very low migration until the 90's, then they turned into a version of labour party, so how they can lecture anyone on environmental protection is beyond me, and the same goes for labour and liberals. The tories are just as bad in different ways.

Edited March 16, 2023 by petetong

[Insane]

1 hour ago, bartelbe said:

It is utter madness and yet it is impossible to have a rational debate with those who favour open borders about this. They pretend we have infinite resources and then shutdown the debate with cries of racist.

Correct. 

We have increased our population by over 10 Million in the last 20 years and things are not working. If they don't work with 70 Million why will they work with 72,74 or any other number of Million. 

I was watching a vid recently on youtube. It was a pro Asylum Seeker protest. A guy was walking up to the protesters with a clip board and asking them to join an adopt an Asylum Seeker initiative, where by they took an Asylum Seeker into their own home. 

Every single one of them said they would if they could but couldn't and gave the reasons for answering no as lack of space in their home. One guy in his mid to late 20's said he had no room and was living in a shared house which had been turned from a 4 bed into a 9 bed by the landlord. It was a pity the guy with the clip board did not ask him if he saw a connection between more and more people and the over crowing he was experiencing in his shared house. 

[TheResponsibleHouseBuyer]

 

38 minutes ago, petetong said:

Attenborough and Packham both want population growth control, nationally and internationally to stop environmental damage and loss of biodiversity. I am surprised they haven't been cancelled. The greens, left and liberals are so full of sh*t on this topic it's utterly laughable. The Greens used to be for localism and very low migration until the 90's, then they turned into a version of labour party, so how they can lecture anyone on environmental protection is beyond me, and the same goes for labour and liberals. The tories are just as bad in different ways.

careful we dont end up like japan.... might be none of us left lol.

[Insane]

Just now, TheResponsibleHouseBuyer said:

careful we dont end up like japan.... might be none of us left lol.

Our birth rate currently out paces our death rate how would we end up with no one left? 

[TheResponsibleHouseBuyer]

2 minutes ago, Insane said:

Our birth rate currently out paces our death rate how would we end up with no one left? 

I was meaning if we do the reverse that is. Not as status quo / current trends are dictating.

I've been a pro advocate of lowering birth rates, but saying that in the UK (probably the same in the world) is worse than being called a racist. Given up on that before i get cancelled, or put in jail.

Everyone loves having babies.... Can stick that on the human rights list.

[Insane]

9 minutes ago, TheResponsibleHouseBuyer said:

I've been a pro advocate of lowering birth rates, but saying that in the UK (probably the same in the world) is worse than being called a racist. Given up on that before i get cancelled, or put in jail.

Correct, many a true word spoken in jest but we are moving towards a state where people will be jailed for making a reasonable statement. 

[iamnumerate]

42 minutes ago, Insane said:

Correct. 

We have increased our population by over 10 Million in the last 20 years and things are not working. If they don't work with 70 Million why will they work with 72,74 or any other number of Million. 

I was watching a vid recently on youtube. It was a pro Asylum Seeker protest. A guy was walking up to the protesters with a clip board and asking them to join an adopt an Asylum Seeker initiative, where by they took an Asylum Seeker into their own home. 

Every single one of them said they would if they could but couldn't and gave the reasons for answering no as lack of space in their home. One guy in his mid to late 20's said he had no room and was living in a shared house which had been turned from a 4 bed into a 9 bed by the landlord. It was a pity the guy with the clip board did not ask him if he saw a connection between more and more people and the over crowing he was experiencing in his shared house. 

 

+1

[Young Turk]

5 hours ago, Insane said:

They keep saying we have an ageing population and we need more immigration to sustain our ageing population. 

But by the looks of things at the rate people are dying compared to being born the population is increasing by 1 Million every five years just from the birth rate being bigger than the death rate.

According to Stephen J Shaw, in the documentary below, this is going to be a major global problem. 

The only other person I can recall saying that population collapse is a serious concern is Elon Musk. If populations are likely to decline rapidly, why aren't more people talking about it? Has anyone else heard about it?

[Insane]

2 minutes ago, Young Turk said:

According to Stephen J Shaw, in the documentary below, this is going to be a major global problem. 

 What we do know without watching it is the population of the UK and other countries in Europe has been and still is increasing. There is massive migration from Africa and South Asia to Europe right now, so maybe that is why many are not that interested in Stephen J Shaw.

6 minutes ago, Young Turk said:

The only other person I can recall saying that population collapse is a serious concern is Elon Musk. If populations are likely to decline rapidly, why aren't more people talking about it? Has anyone else heard about it?

Because they don't agree with it when they have been told for decades that the population explosion is the big problem which is all part of Global Warming , the polluting of the Oceans and have recently been told the World population reached 8 Billion. 

Many people have said things over the years they people did not take much notice off why would they suddenly take notice of just 2 people who are saying the opposite of what they have been told for a long time.  

I did hear recently that 10% of all the people who have ever lived are alive here on the planet today. 

 

[Young Turk]

21 minutes ago, Insane said:

What we do know without watching it is the population of the UK and other countries in Europe has been and still is increasing.

Shaw isn't claiming that the population is falling now. He is claiming the birth rate is falling everywhere, and that this will lead to falling populations.

It is quite interesting. He says that he initially thought people were having smaller families, but he found out that on average families are the same size as in previous generations, but there has been a big increase in the number of adults who have no children. He thinks this will exacerbate social problems. It won't just be a question of fewer working age people for each elderly person, but a much higher proportion of elderly people without younger relatives, leaving them open to abuse.

21 minutes ago, Insane said:

Because they don't agree with it when they have been told for decades that the population explosion is the big problem which is all part of Global Warming , the polluting of the Oceans and have recently been told the World population reached 8 Billion.

I hadn't heard that recently (at the beginning of the documentary he shows a clip of Richard Nixon warning that America was becoming overpopulated, but I can't think of any politicians saying this in the last few decades). I thought the consensus was that populations would peak around 10 billion later this century.

[PeanutButter]

7 hours ago, btd1981 said:

The loss of wildlife and habitat pains me the most, but others have said, how sustainable is this? We can increase developed area by x%, decrease wild spaces and farmland by y%< but what really gets hammered is the rate of productivity required from the agricultural land that remains.

It’s not sustainable. We’re in a mass extinction event right now. 

 

[Insane]

39 minutes ago, Young Turk said:

Shaw isn't claiming that the population is falling now. He is claiming the birth rate is falling everywhere, and that this will lead to falling populations.

Well he is wrong on that our birth rate is nearly 200,000 higher than our death rate, we are not the only country where this is happening. So why did he write that? 

41 minutes ago, Young Turk said:

It is quite interesting. He says that he initially thought people were having smaller families, but he found out that on average families are the same size as in previous generations, but there has been a big increase in the number of adults who have no children.

Again he is completely wrong there. Just from my generation to the next we saw three and four kids as normal I had a girl in my class who was one of 10 and another girl in my year who was the middle child of 13. I only knew 1 kid who was an only child. The next generation saw people having just 2 children a 3 child household is as rare as hens teeth. So where he has got his information from is beyond me.

There has also been a big increase in single mothers ( something that was very rare before the 80's) there are many men who have multiple children with different women, which knocks out those having no children.

Also where is the number for how many families there are compared to before? 

48 minutes ago, Young Turk said:

It won't just be a question of fewer working age people for each elderly person, but a much higher proportion of elderly people without younger relatives, leaving them open to abuse.

As I have already said our birth rate is nearly 200,000 higher than our death rate. 

49 minutes ago, Young Turk said:

I hadn't heard that recently (at the beginning of the documentary he shows a clip of Richard Nixon warning that America was becoming overpopulated, but I can't think of any politicians saying this in the last few decades). I thought the consensus was that populations would peak around 10 billion later this century.

You thought ..... the consensus was......

China woke up to their ballooning population 50 years ago and started their one child per couple programme, which now a few generations later is causing problems as yes they do now have a problem with a population decline. India is the country with the projected increase being the largest. They currently have a population of 1.3 Billion which is expected to rise to 1.7 Billion by 2050. Nigeria currently has 220 Million projected to rise to 300 Million in the next 30 years. Their biggest worry is will they be able to feed their own people. 

So if as you say the population is still going to increase by another 25% some time later this century why would people be worrying about a decline now? 

Anyway a bit of topic here as thread is about the increasing immigration to the UK which is currently still in full flow.  

 

[petetong]

.

Edited March 17, 2023 by petetong

[Young Turk]

10 minutes ago, Insane said:

Well he is wrong on that our birth rate is nearly 200,000 higher than our death rate, we are not the only country where this is happening. So why did he write that?

As I said, his isn't claiming the population is falling now.

From a quick google search:

"How is it possible for a population to grow while birth rates decrease?

 

At times when an increasing share of women enter the reproductive age bracket the population can keep growing even if the fertility rate is falling. This is what demographers refer to as 'population momentum' and it explains why the number of children in the world will not decline as rapidly as the fertility rate"

 

He isn't claiming that populations are falling now. He claims that populations are going to fall.

The UK birth rate is 1.64 births per women. This is higher than many European countries (Germany 1.53, Italy 1.24, Spain 1.23). If birth rates remain at these levels, aren't populations bound to fall eventually, unless life expectancy continues to increase rapidly?

 

19 minutes ago, Insane said:

Again he is completely wrong there. Just from my generation to the next we saw three and four kids as normal I had a girl in my class who was one of 10 and another girl in my year who was the middle child of 13. I only knew 1 kid who was an only child. The next generation saw people having just 2 children a 3 child household is as rare as hens teeth. So where he has got his information from is beyond me.

Britain is nearly top for women not having children | Daily Mail Online

"the rate of childlessness among UK women is increasing sharply; up by almost 50 per cent since the mid-1990s."

47 minutes ago, Insane said:

So if as you say the population is still going to increase by another 25% some time later this century why would people be worrying about a decline now? 

The population decline doesn't occur at the same point as the decline in birth rates, as explained above. 

Similarly, people in their 20s on low incomes who make very small pension contributions today aren't going to be poor pensioners until the 2060s/70s, but we can already see that most of them will be poor pensioners. 

1 hour ago, Insane said:

China woke up to their ballooning population 50 years ago and started their one child per couple programme, which now a few generations later is causing problems as yes they do now have a problem with a population decline. India is the country with the projected increase being the largest. They currently have a population of 1.3 Billion which is expected to rise to 1.7 Billion by 2050. Nigeria currently has 220 Million projected to rise to 300 Million in the next 30 years. Their biggest worry is will they be able to feed their own people. 

China's population is expected to fall below 800m by 2100.

Key facts about China's declining population | Pew Research Center

India's birth rate is also falling and was down to 2.05 per woman in 2020. 

1 hour ago, Insane said:

You thought ..... the consensus was......

Do you have any examples?

[Insane]

12 minutes ago, Young Turk said:

As I said, his isn't claiming the population is falling now.

From a quick google search:

"How is it possible for a population to grow while birth rates decrease?

Again I will say this is not the topic on this thread. The topic is the increase in the UK population. So why are you talking about something a few people have said might happen later this century after the world population has increased by 25% above what it is now? 

The birth rates per person might fall but if there are more people giving birth then the population will grow not shrink. 

15 minutes ago, Young Turk said:

At times when an increasing share of women enter the reproductive age bracket the population can keep growing even if the fertility rate is falling. This is what demographers refer to as 'population momentum' and it explains why the number of children in the world will not decline as rapidly as the fertility rate"

So no issue 10 women have 2 children = 20 Births. Then the women only have 1 child but there are now 25 women so the next generation increases, ever so simple you, answer what I have been stating all along. 

18 minutes ago, Young Turk said:

He isn't claiming that populations are falling now. He claims that populations are going to fall.

The UK birth rate is 1.64 births per women. This is higher than many European countries (Germany 1.53, Italy 1.24, Spain 1.23). If birth rates remain at these levels, aren't populations bound to fall eventually, unless life expectancy continues to increase rapidly?

But those are the figures today and today the world population and the population of those countries you have stated are all still seeing a rise in their population. 

19 minutes ago, Young Turk said:

Britain is nearly top for women not having children | Daily Mail Online

"the rate of childlessness among UK women is increasing sharply; up by almost 50 per cent since the mid-1990s."

Yet our population still increases, our live births outstrip our deaths by 200,000. On top of this we also have increases in our population due to immigration. 

21 minutes ago, Young Turk said:

The population decline doesn't occur at the same point as the decline in birth rates, as explained above. 

Similarly, people in their 20s on low incomes who make very small pension contributions today aren't going to be poor pensioners until the 2060s/70s, but we can already see that most of them will be poor pensioners. 

What is your point here? 

21 minutes ago, Young Turk said:

China's population is expected to fall below 800m by 2100.

Yes as I stated due to their one child policy which was running for a few generations.

22 minutes ago, Young Turk said:

India's birth rate is also falling and was down to 2.05 per woman in 2020. 

LOL. They have more woman than they had before therefore their population is set to increase from 1.3 Billion to 1.7 Billion by 2050. Why do I need to repeat myself? Go and look it up. 

23 minutes ago, Young Turk said:

Do you have any examples?

Those were your words which I was pointing back to you. 

Now would you like to post something on Topic which was the increasing UK population and not about what a few people have said might happen some time this century but not before the world population increases by another 25% 2 Billion higher than it currently is? 

[Confusion of VIs]

4 hours ago, Young Turk said:

According to Stephen J Shaw, in the documentary below, this is going to be a major global problem. 

The only other person I can recall saying that population collapse is a serious concern is Elon Musk. If populations are likely to decline rapidly, why aren't more people talking about it? Has anyone else heard about it?

They are talking about if you look, although HPC is probably not the best starting point.  "population collapse or overpopulation" on Youtube will give you a start with both sides of the argument 

[petetong]

duplicate

Edited March 17, 2023 by petetong

[petetong]

6 hours ago, TheResponsibleHouseBuyer said:

 

careful we dont end up like japan.... might be none of us left lol.

I wouldn't worry, the Tories and Labour will ensure we don't ..

[Gbob]

Factor in the natural population growth and its around an extra Million people every 3 years. How they hell is that sustainable?

They're going to have to build a lot more 15 minute cities

Edited March 17, 2023 by Glenn