Jump to content

ONS - population to increase -


observer
 Share

Recommended Posts

It would seem that the EU project is to de-nationalize the Nation State, by homogenization, using immigration as the vehicle. Then when all the EU States are suitably mixed up, they can go ahead with the creation of one single super State, called the United States of Europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then the western,more prosperous states of the leviathan can continue to try & absorb the ever expanding fringes of the EU .The only answer to the EU inter state economic migration is to equalise prosperity & living standards throughout the EU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry Dave, but that's what the EU project is all about: the equalization of living standards throughout the new super-State. Now that's a fine socialist sentiment, although it doesn't deal with the wealth divide within societies; but as a richer nation the UK tax-payer has to pay for this transition. Now if your prepared to take the hit on your living standards that's fine, and an altruistic sentiment; but my guess is that most folk aren't that altruistic when it comes to hard cash in their pockets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only answer is to increase the prosperity of the poorer economies to approaching the standards of the better off by means of investment & development. We have too many poorer countries in the club who are draining the wealth generators. That is the only way to give the EU a chance & slow economic migration & of course, scrap the Euro to revitalise tourist dependent members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the line the Tories tend to use, of a "hand up, rather than a hand out" may be appropriate. Aid should be about building self reliance in individuals and countries throughout the world, and of exercising fair trade, so that the EU and our s/markets don't exploit producers. So - targeted aid, fully audited and accountable; so that we're not funding corrupt politicians, rather than ordinary people. If living standards rise throughout the third world and wealth gaps are closed generally; the incentive for migration may diminish. But that requires a global concensus, through the UN; not a new continental sized nationalism as with the EU.  The UK is one of the few nations that is maintaining the recommended % of GDP on overseas aid; and additional funding has been fed into the Syrian Refugee Camps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, i think a lot of the ineptitude of various UK governments is being swept under the mantle of the EU. Much of our old industry has disappeared having in many cases been bought by overseas investors only to be shut down. The buying in cheaper from abroad card has also been used to justify actions of companies & governments. Skills that were needed for these industries have died out & it has been deemed better ,over many years, to leave people on benefits than get them back in comparable jobs or retrain people.The benefits culture has thrived for over 30 years & governments have given up on industrial training to get people back into full time jobs ,preferring instead to offer menial part time work topped up by benefits.It is easier now to cherry pick migrants to do jobs than to get our own people back into work. Migrants,people who will work for less than the minimum wages & without legal protection is very  attractive to many employers,both large & small . I doubt any British government has the will to change what is happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an inevitable consequence of the capitalist system, that employers will continue to search for and exploit cheaper labour markets and resources; and in one sense, that can uplift the living standards of third world populations; especially when they unionise their workforce. But they too, can price themselves out of the labour market eventually. With new technology, industries are becoming less labour intensive; and we've seen shifts to service industries. But it's been argued that their is less productive work out there nowadays; so in theory working hours could be cut and jobs shared, with no loss of earnings. No loss of earnings, because industries still require customers; so the dispersal of buying power (money), is a pre-requisite to maintaining demand. This can only be achieved by Government intervention through progressive tax systems, keeping the cash dispersed, so that the whole economic merry go round keeps turning.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually in some parts of the country, tempory migrant labour has always been used for menial seasonal labour; but tended to return after the picking was done; alas with even menial labour paying more than their homelands; their stay tends to be longer if not permanent. Despite the minimum wage (who checks?), low wages will still be higher than home, add to this a free NHS, free school places, and council housing; and the attraction is clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually in some parts of the country, tempory migrant labour has always been used for menial seasonal labour; but tended to return after the picking was done; alas with even menial labour paying more than their homelands; their stay tends to be longer if not permanent. Despite the minimum wage (who checks?), low wages will still be higher than home, add to this a free NHS, free school places, and council housing; and the attraction is clear.

 

It still does occur.  Lots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course you can't believe statistics punted out by anybody, especially the ONS. Generally speaking, around 79.2% of statistics are made up.

Logically, indigenous populations decrease where education and prosperity increase. For instance, and I am relying on general knowledge here and not finely tuned data that one would expect from political giants such as David Blunkett or George Osborne: in the late 1900s families often comprised six or even eight children, as some would die and the rest were needed to earn income for the household. As the twentieth century trundled on and education became available to all, housing improved along with health care, so family-size dropped progressively. The welfare state was created not long after the war and that begat the option of not working and the need for migrant labour. Fast forward to now: the average number of children born to indigenous families has fallen below two, which is not enough to sustain a population or its workforce. Therefore, as more people live longer and more people choose not to work, migrant labour is required to broaden the base of the tax-paying pyramid. Most migrant groups import their own cultures, some of which are dozens of years behind our own standard of living, so still have large families, especially as the women are not allowed to work. Given the advances made in freely available education, Northern European countries can't even rely on indigenous Catholics to maintain birth-rates. All in all, in a capitalist society, however Socialist the undercurrent, the population is likely to increase due to demands made on tax-paying workforce size. I believe that recently the number of people working legally in the country rose to a record high. Don't quote me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maintaining a sustainable demographic is difficult for any Government; even a totalitarian one like China, where, with the single child policy, male children were the preferred option. However, tax and benefit levers have been used in the past to encourage a balanced population, although with greater longevity, even this option is difficult. But the importation of people, whilst providing a base workforce, also brings increased demands on services, despite the myth that imported workers are all paying lots of tax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I've heard anyone say there shouldn't be any migration; just controlled migration; in order to enable planned public services and housing and at the same time recruit the skills the economy requires. However, what we have at the moment is the right for 500million citizens of the EU to move wherever they wish and without necessarily having a job to go to. Add to this an invasion of non-EU migrants, and it's no wonder we have a problem.

Link to comment
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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...