Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
observer

Is Britain overcrowded?

Recommended Posts

Interesting prog on ITV last night, asking this question -  seems the UK population is due to increase by around 10million over the next decade. Reasons:- 1) Increased birth rates (nowt on TV these days!). 2) Folk are living longer. and 3) Migration.  Giving rise to all the problems we often discuss on this board - increased housing demand with consequent pressures on green belt; increased traffic and congestion; increased pressure on our education system (there's even one Council contemplating a shift system for primary schools or using empty industrial units for classrooms!); increased strain on the NHS and Social Services. All this in a period of austerity, where cuts in provision are the order of the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is about time that the Government used the UK's immigration problem to solve its energy crisis.
By installing Turnstiles instead of Windfarms we could light up Britain, and the rest of Europe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's full. I'm happy with the present population but can't accept a rise in numbers. But I welcome foreigners, as lomg as they speak only english and pay tax. Really id like to get rid of the work shy scum and replace them with hard working polish for example. But keep the numbers the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So where do we send the "work shy scum" - Australia won't have 'em anymore!  As for the "foreigners", the idea is to bring in much needed skills to assist the economy; not bring the rest of their family with the consequent drain on education, health and housing services. :|

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the problem is just about numbers but it's more the way in which we choose to run the place. If it were just about numbers we could theoretically disappear half the population and we'd still end up with fortnightly bin collections. 

 

The way I see the country is a bit like a business that's lost it's identity in a competitive market place and with a workforce that's just too big and not very motivated. Bringing in more trained staff wont solve the problem if you still have to pay for the none productive ones. 

 

Bill :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your right Bill, it's not just about "numbers"; it's about demographics and the balance of age (working) groupings (tax contributors) to non-working (tax consumers) - with increasing longevity and a higher birth rate, plus unemployment; the proportion of tax-consumers is higher.  Longevity is fine - providing - one is in good health;  but an increasing proportion of our elderly population are care dependent (dementia is on the increase for example). There is also the myth, that all immigrants are hard working tax-payers; assylum seekers arn't allowed to work and dependents of migrants will be service dependent, with added complications (and costs) of not being able to speak our language.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes well in my workplace analogy that’s like having the job for life literally. 

 

When I worked and lived in the States, they'd only allow you a work permit if you had special skills and the company couldn’t find an American to do the job. Here it’s more the case that we actually encourage foreign workers into the country to do the jobs the British workers don’t want to do. The fact that they pay taxes is all well and good but the amount of tax each these people pay (if any) wouldn’t anywhere near cover the unemployment benefits of the person who could be doing that job.

 

Bill :)

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw the program Obs, and it dis say immigration was good because the legal immigrants contribute, And I know you don't like it Obs but the illegal immigrants are very small proportion of the total immigrants.. The cost of looking after our ageing population is only going to go up, as people live longer, we need more tax payers to pay for the old. With the increased birth rate, we can only hope any future governments learn the lessons of not planning for population booms and the problems that comes with a boom generation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn’t see any program about this but I have to say that I totally disagree with the theory that importing workers is good for the country because they contribute to the tax system. The vast majority of foreign workers take lower paid jobs and so pay little or no tax while our people who don’t want to do these jobs work receive more in benefits. As long as we have a system that pays people to sit on their bums until a job comes up that they fancy doing then we’re never going to get anywhere.

 

Change the bloody rules radically I say and get these people back working and if we could do that, then the jobs that are so attractive to the immigrants wouldn’t exist. We might be neighbours but we don’t need to be so soft as to damage our own economy just to keep them and a few politicians happy.

 

Bill :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"It did say" Kije?  No it didn't, one liberal luvvie from a think tank said it; which makes it his opinion - not fact.  Bill's right; the majority of immigrants are in low wage (non taxable)  occupations. their dependents (family) however, are tax consumers - family allowance, education etc etc. Not sure Gov can "plan" not to have a baby boom; but it can organise it's immigration policies to limit net immigration to zero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes! to overflowing!. doesn't need analysing or discussion just close the borders and deport non-national undesirables, and if I could get away with it I would also deport national undesirables as well. :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The theory behind controlled immigration, or as Labour called it "managed immigration";  is to allow those with specifically required skills into the UK to bolster our economic output and competivness.  However, this could be done with the use of time limited work visas as in the US. Problem is, by being in the EU, we're signed up to the principle of the "free movement of labour" throughout the EU, compounded by Labour opening the doors early to the Poles, and soon open to the Romanians and Bulgarians - so no control at all.  Only answer = leave the EU.  The non-EU invasion consists of visa entrants (mainly students) who dissappear prior to their visa expiry - and little Bo Peep (the UKBF) doesn't know where to find them. Together with illegal entrants (under lorries etc), if caught, these economic refugees will plead for assylum, engage the Army of HR lawyers on protracted legal cases, presumably paid for by legal aid (the tax payer); all the way to the ECHR if necessary, in order to stay here. Answer = leave the ECHR Treaty, and operate a policy of automatic repatriation at the point of apprenhension. As any night club doorman could tell you (assuming legal compliance) you count them in and you count them out, in order to ensure the club isn't overcrowded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obs, why do you right of everyone who does not agree with you as a liberal lovey. The Tv program tried to be objective, as many people on it said immigration was good for the Country as did not, you wrote a lot of people off in the tv program.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"as many people said immigration was good for the Country" - oh no they didn't. Just the guy from the think tank, giving HIS opinion. The rest of the prog set the scene and revealed the consequences of high net immigration, so in that respect the prog was objective, but not that particular guy. :|  Interesting report on the news tonight, about the S/African who played RU for Sale Sharks. Seems now he's retired from rugby, he is to be deported back to S/Africa as the purpose of his work visa has now expired. Fair enough - that's the law. But no, now we've got a petition going to keep him here - one of the arguements being, that he played for England - excuse me, but what's a S/African doing playing for England ? :|

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who?  The Council officer who told us about the need to run a shift system for the primary schools and open up industrial units to cope with increased demand?  The traffic officer who told us that increased traffic was directly related to increasing population densities? It's not rocket science Kije, to predict the inevitable consequences of increased population levels and densities; it's just that, like you, politicians are in denial as these predicted consequences don't match their miopic dogmas. :x

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...