Reform UK - A symptom of all that is wrong?

[Olivera]

Harry Flashman said:

He makes my point for me - doubly.

Firstly, by snidely sniping at my post: it's just Project Fear all over again, right? Those smart historians and economists aren't to be trusted. They're educated. C'mon lads. We're better off on our own. We always have been.

Let's ban the foreigners. House prices are all their fault. And absolutely not the result of cheap credit, sale of council houses, NIMBY politics and selling everyone the dream of home ownership as an investment theory.

Secondly by the nail bar/Deliveroo comment. Who else is going to deliver his takeaways?

Capitalism is a pyramid. It's not a system whereby you get to admit a load of doctors, but can't have basic services performed because you haven't got the unskilled workforce.

Like I said, your post was a reworded but content facsimile of the condescending 'brexiteers are all uneducated thickos' slogan. No need to be rude in response, but that's what it was.

I do concede that we still need significant, but vastly reduced, net immigration. However PHers that refuse to acknowledge *any* significant problems caused by extremely high net immigration are either ignorant, or more likely privileged (as noted by the posters) and hence completely oblivious to working class concerns.

[Nomme de Plum]

Vanden Saab said:

Nomme de Plum said:

Vanden Saab said:

Nomme de Plum said:

Of course immigration can go on indefinitely. How else would you maintain a viable working economy?

Lack of housing and adequate services was a chosen Tory policy. We needed 3 years of Austerity post 2010 then we should have invested in our country and got stuff like the now defunct rail project, new hospitals, Nuclear power alongside the other renewables.

Not to build affordable homes was a choice and now we reap the rewards of inflated private rents and expensive property.

I’m currently at my Daughters in the states and their economy is flying and yes both the Government and the individual States do subsidise industries through various mechanisms.

Of course... good grief.

It’s easy to criticise but how about you come up with a viable plan? What will you do when that ratio reaches 2:1?

It won't, we have been steadily increasing life expectancy over the last 50 years but now it has stalled at least. We are also better at keeping people from needing so much care as they get older. The time between needing help and dying, say the last 10 years as an example has not really changed. The post war child boom is starting to come to an end.
If we continue to increase our population indefinitely as you seem to be suggesting it will just continue until you run out of people to add to the population. Reducing the population slowly as the boomers die off will allow this to happen organically and is the only way.
The world population increase is already slowing and will soon start falling so your scheme will eventually run out of willing participants anyway. Better to start now rather than leave the mess for your offspring to have to deal with.

I see this very differently. In 1970 our population was 55M and if our fertility rate had just increased the population by 1% annually we would now have 95M in the U.K. and that’s without any immigration at all. No one would be suggesting culling people or enforced contraception we would have just dealt with the growing population.

You misinterpreted what I said I said we needed absolutely to continue with immigration. We have a fertility rate so low that our population would be completely unsustainable without it. I fail to understand how people cannot grasp this. The burden falls on the working population to support the non working and that balance is critical.

The global population will top out at 10. Something billion. Isn’t it amazing that Hans Rosling predicted a number of 11Bn quite a few years ago before the population debate really took off.

You still have not come up with how we get the ratio back to sustainable levels.

However Reform try to wrap it up they don’t like foreigners diluting the U.K as they see it.

Edited by Nomme de Plum on Tuesday 2nd July 22:59

[Nomme de Plum]

Olivera said:

[snipped]

I do concede that we still need significant, but vastly reduced, net immigration. However PHers that refuse to acknowledge *any* significant problems caused by extremely high net immigration are either ignorant, or more likely privileged (as noted by the posters) and hence completely oblivious to working class concerns.

Maybe common ground.



The problem is politics though and the electorate not immigration in itself.

[Olivera]

Like I said previously to Kermit on here that banged the birth ratio drum, those on a 20 year waiting list for social housing, or paying £1200 in rent on minimum wage, or saving 50k for 10 years to get a housing deposit, don't give a single fk about demographic challenges a generation hence. They just want affordable housing costs now, which precludes out of control net immigration that greatly exacerbates these issues.

[Nomme de Plum]

Olivera said:

Like I said previously to Kermit on here that banged the birth ratio drum, those on a 20 year waiting list for social housing, or paying £1200 in rent on minimum wage, or saving 50k for 10 years to get a housing deposit, don't give a single fk about demographic challenges a generation hence. They just want affordable housing costs now, which precludes out of control net immigration that greatly exacerbates these issues.

Except it is controlled by this Goverment. You happen not to like what they have approved.

The housing issue is at the Governments door we could have built hundreds of thousands more houses. I would add thee previous Labour government should have reversed right to buy which triggered the problem in the first place. Now LAs don’t have the funds to build rental houses.

That’s what voting Tory has done.

[Olivera]

Nomme de Plum said:

Except it is controlled by this Goverment. You happen not to like what they have approved.

The housing issue is at the Governments door we could have built hundreds of thousands more houses. I would add thee previous Labour government should have reversed right to buy which triggered the problem in the first place. Now LAs don’t have the funds to build rental houses.

That’s what voting Tory has done.

I mostly concur, the Tories have been abject in many respects, hence the Reform backlash. However housing is a problem of both supply and demand - yes we need more house building and planning reform, but a ballooning population needs dampened to address the latter.

[Nomme de Plum]

Olivera said:

Nomme de Plum said:

Except it is controlled by this Goverment. You happen not to like what they have approved.

The housing issue is at the Governments door we could have built hundreds of thousands more houses. I would add thee previous Labour government should have reversed right to buy which triggered the problem in the first place. Now LAs don’t have the funds to build rental houses.

That’s what voting Tory has done.

I mostly concur, the Tories have been abject in many respects, hence the Reform backlash. However housing is a problem of both supply and demand - yes we need more house building and planning reform, but a ballooning population needs dampened to address the latter.

Our population isn’t ballooning as I evidenced earlier. It happens to have been managed badly. We could easily have been at 95M naturally.

What will happen to the many high tech and many industries that require staff .if we choke off expertise entering he country. They will either stop growing, fail or move overseas.

[Vanden Saab]

Nomme de Plum said:

Vanden Saab said:

Nomme de Plum said:

Vanden Saab said:

Nomme de Plum said:

Of course immigration can go on indefinitely. How else would you maintain a viable working economy?

Lack of housing and adequate services was a chosen Tory policy. We needed 3 years of Austerity post 2010 then we should have invested in our country and got stuff like the now defunct rail project, new hospitals, Nuclear power alongside the other renewables.

Not to build affordable homes was a choice and now we reap the rewards of inflated private rents and expensive property.

I’m currently at my Daughters in the states and their economy is flying and yes both the Government and the individual States do subsidise industries through various mechanisms.

Of course... good grief.

It’s easy to criticise but how about you come up with a viable plan? What will you do when that ratio reaches 2:1?

It won't, we have been steadily increasing life expectancy over the last 50 years but now it has stalled at least. We are also better at keeping people from needing so much care as they get older. The time between needing help and dying, say the last 10 years as an example has not really changed. The post war child boom is starting to come to an end.
If we continue to increase our population indefinitely as you seem to be suggesting it will just continue until you run out of people to add to the population. Reducing the population slowly as the boomers die off will allow this to happen organically and is the only way.
The world population increase is already slowing and will soon start falling so your scheme will eventually run out of willing participants anyway. Better to start now rather than leave the mess for your offspring to have to deal with.

I see this very differently. In 1970 our population was 55M and if our fertility rate had just increased the population by 1% annually we would now have 95M in the U.K. and that’s without any immigration at all. No one would be suggesting culling people or enforced contraception we would have just dealt with the growing population.

You misinterpreted what I said I said we needed absolutely to continue with immigration. We have a fertility rate so low that our population would be completely unsustainable without it. I fail to understand how people cannot grasp this. The burden falls on the working population to support the non working and that balance is critical.

The global population will top out at 10. Something billion. Isn’t it amazing that Hans Rosling predicted a number of 11Bn quite a few years ago before the population debate really took off.

You still have not come up with how we get the ratio back to sustainable levels.

However Reform try to wrap it up they don’t like foreigners diluting the U.K as they see it.

Edited by Nomme de Plum on Tuesday 2nd July 22:59

There is practically no difference between births and deaths in the UK. In fact over the last few years (covid) there have been more deaths than births. This will continue as the boomers generation continue to die off and the young /old ratio balances out. It is ridiculous to artificially increase the population at a time when more are dying than being born. It is just making it worse for those who follow us.

[skwdenyer]

Olivera said:

Like I said previously to Kermit on here that banged the birth ratio drum, those on a 20 year waiting list for social housing, or paying £1200 in rent on minimum wage, or saving 50k for 10 years to get a housing deposit, don't give a single fk about demographic challenges a generation hence. They just want affordable housing costs now, which precludes out of control net immigration that greatly exacerbates these issues.

"Out of control net migration" didn't create a housing crisis. Lack of house-building over many, many years did. This crisis has been brewing for a very, very long time.

The 20 year waiting list for social housing is down to the lack of building of social housing, and the flogging-off of that which we did have. It is a crisis decades in the making.

The crisis in affordability is because private house-building is a failure; there's no benefit in building at scale when it depresses prices. Lack of proper mortgage controls was a failure, too. The failure of planning to reflect the increased density required (why do our town look like Trumpton, not sensible European towns) has been a failure. And so on.

Yes, I'd love to turn the clock back to the 1980s and stop the destruction of so much. But we can't. We now have a rapidly-ageing population. What are we going to do? How do *you* propose to fix the demographic time bomb? Or are *you* willing to give up your pension, the NHS, and so on to deal with that demographic problem?

It isn't a generation hence. It is now.

[Nomme de Plum]

Vanden Saab said:

There is practically no difference between births and deaths in the UK. In fact over the last few years (covid) there have been more deaths than births. This will continue as the boomers generation continue to die off and the young /old ratio balances out. It is ridiculous to artificially increase the population at a time when more are dying than being born. It is just making it worse for those who follow us.

Our birth rate has collapsed and is unsustainable without immigration.

I have not artificially fixed anything. I’ve done a more accurate assessment based on actual fertility in 1969 50 years ago when our population was as 55.4M.

Today it would be 82M with zero immigration with that fertility rate

Current fertility is 1.57 (2023) and 2.1 is the break even rate.

Anyway it is possibly you, definitely your children and grandchildren that will need to pick up the tab to support the health service, retired etc with a decreasing working age population.

Instead of guessing why not model it accurately.


https://www.statista.com/statistics/612074/fertili...

Edited by Nomme de Plum on Wednesday 3rd July 02:43

Edited by Nomme de Plum on Wednesday 3rd July 02:47

Edited by Nomme de Plum on Wednesday 3rd July 02:53

[Vanden Saab]

Nomme de Plum said:

Our birth rate has collapsed and is unsustainable without immigration.

I have not artificially fixed anything. I’ve done a more accurate assessment based on actual fertility in 1969 50 years ago when our population was as 55.4M.

Today it would be 82M with zero immigration with that fertility rate

Current fertility is 1.57 (2023) and 2.1 is the break even rate.

Anyway it is possibly you, definitely your children and grandchildren that will need to pick up the tab to support the health service, retired etc with a decreasing working age population.

Instead of guessing why not model it accurately.


https://www.statista.com/statistics/612074/fertili...

Edited by Nomme de Plum on Wednesday 3rd July 02:43

Edited by Nomme de Plum on Wednesday 3rd July 02:47

Edited by Nomme de Plum on Wednesday 3rd July 02:53

Fine, throw all the statistics at it that you like. Just explain what you are going to do in 50 years time when the supply of immigrants runs out, my argument is to do something about it now while yours is to leave it for today's immigrants to realise there is no one to provide the goods and services they need or look after them in their old age.
Much better to do something now than continue to make the situation worse for the next 30 years. Why build more and more infrastructure that will be redundant in 50 years anyway as the world population reduces?

[768]

Vanden Saab said:

Why build more and more infrastructure that will be redundant in 50 years anyway as the world population reduces?

Worse than that, we can't afford to build and maintain the infrastructure required anyway.

[Castrol for a knave]

Immigrants don't rock up and buy a 3 bed Persimmon home.

They end up in a HMO, flat above a kebab shop or crammed into a stty old terrace in a fading post industrial town.

The pressure on housing is driven by house price inflation, forcing people into rented because they cant afford to save a deposit and then probably just about pay the rent.

It is a problem 40 years in the making.

[Elysium]

Nomme de Plum said:

Vanden Saab said:

There is practically no difference between births and deaths in the UK. In fact over the last few years (covid) there have been more deaths than births. This will continue as the boomers generation continue to die off and the young /old ratio balances out. It is ridiculous to artificially increase the population at a time when more are dying than being born. It is just making it worse for those who follow us.

Our birth rate has collapsed and is unsustainable without immigration.

I have not artificially fixed anything. I’ve done a more accurate assessment based on actual fertility in 1969 50 years ago when our population was as 55.4M.

Today it would be 82M with zero immigration with that fertility rate

Current fertility is 1.57 (2023) and 2.1 is the break even rate.

Anyway it is possibly you, definitely your children and grandchildren that will need to pick up the tab to support the health service, retired etc with a decreasing working age population.

Instead of guessing why not model it accurately.


https://www.statista.com/statistics/612074/fertili...

No Vanden Saab is right

ONS prediction for the 25 years from 2021 to 2036 is that 10.8 million people will be born and 10.3 million people will die.

But they also predict net migration of 6.2million, which is the equivalent of adding 2.5 cities the size of Birmingham:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68139947

The Conservatives and Labour both have manifesto commitments on immigration. It is a major issue for this election.

[JagLover]

Olivera said:

I mostly concur, the Tories have been abject in many respects, hence the Reform backlash. However housing is a problem of both supply and demand - yes we need more house building and planning reform, but a ballooning population needs dampened to address the latter.

The UK housing stock actually increased by around 4 million between 2002 and 2022 (number of dwellings). The reason why there is a shortage of housing is on the demand side of the equation, particularly in areas like the South-East.

It is also amusing to hear the current massive net migration numbers justified by reference to a few highly skilled professions. As if the Tories made any attempt to even restrict immigration to those who were going to be in work, let alone tried to ensure they had needed skills.

They will face their justly deserved reckoning tomorrow.

[272BHP]

We could well look back on the Conservatives time in government as halcyon days of relatively controlled immigration

With a far right government pushing for power in France and a Labour government with a more relaxed policy towards illegal migrants we have the makings of a perfect storm I think.

I guess we are going to find out.

[Mrr T]

Elysium said:

Nomme de Plum said:

Vanden Saab said:

There is practically no difference between births and deaths in the UK. In fact over the last few years (covid) there have been more deaths than births. This will continue as the boomers generation continue to die off and the young /old ratio balances out. It is ridiculous to artificially increase the population at a time when more are dying than being born. It is just making it worse for those who follow us.

Our birth rate has collapsed and is unsustainable without immigration.

I have not artificially fixed anything. I’ve done a more accurate assessment based on actual fertility in 1969 50 years ago when our population was as 55.4M.

Today it would be 82M with zero immigration with that fertility rate

Current fertility is 1.57 (2023) and 2.1 is the break even rate.

Anyway it is possibly you, definitely your children and grandchildren that will need to pick up the tab to support the health service, retired etc with a decreasing working age population.

Instead of guessing why not model it accurately.


https://www.statista.com/statistics/612074/fertili...

No Vanden Saab is right

ONS prediction for the 25 years from 2021 to 2036 is that 10.8 million people will be born and 10.3 million people will die.

But they also predict net migration of 6.2million, which is the equivalent of adding 2.5 cities the size of Birmingham:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68139947

The Conservatives and Labour both have manifesto commitments on immigration. It is a major issue for this election.

Not really.

1. The level of births is directly related to immigration since immigrants are younger. With out them the number of births falls.

2. The level of deaths is lower because medical science is keeping us all alive longer.

It's not about numbers it's about demographics. Without immigration the working age population will fall and the retired increase. That's fine if those retirees agreed to give up their pensions and stop using the NHS.

[Mrr T]

Vanden Saab said:

Fine, throw all the statistics at it that you like. Just explain what you are going to do in 50 years time when the supply of immigrants runs out, my argument is to do something about it now while yours is to leave it for today's immigrants to realise there is no one to provide the goods and services they need or look after them in their old age.
Much better to do something now than continue to make the situation worse for the next 30 years. Why build more and more infrastructure that will be redundant in 50 years anyway as the world population reduces?

So what's your plan?

Here's a few options.
1. Reduce the state pension.
2. Increase retirement age further.
3. Ration healthcare for those over retirement age.

Best of luck getting elected on those policies.

[Elysium]

Mrr T said:

Elysium said:

Nomme de Plum said:

Vanden Saab said:

There is practically no difference between births and deaths in the UK. In fact over the last few years (covid) there have been more deaths than births. This will continue as the boomers generation continue to die off and the young /old ratio balances out. It is ridiculous to artificially increase the population at a time when more are dying than being born. It is just making it worse for those who follow us.

Our birth rate has collapsed and is unsustainable without immigration.

I have not artificially fixed anything. I’ve done a more accurate assessment based on actual fertility in 1969 50 years ago when our population was as 55.4M.

Today it would be 82M with zero immigration with that fertility rate

Current fertility is 1.57 (2023) and 2.1 is the break even rate.

Anyway it is possibly you, definitely your children and grandchildren that will need to pick up the tab to support the health service, retired etc with a decreasing working age population.

Instead of guessing why not model it accurately.


https://www.statista.com/statistics/612074/fertili...

No Vanden Saab is right

ONS prediction for the 25 years from 2021 to 2036 is that 10.8 million people will be born and 10.3 million people will die.

But they also predict net migration of 6.2million, which is the equivalent of adding 2.5 cities the size of Birmingham:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68139947

The Conservatives and Labour both have manifesto commitments on immigration. It is a major issue for this election.

Not really.

1. The level of births is directly related to immigration since immigrants are younger. With out them the number of births falls.

2. The level of deaths is lower because medical science is keeping us all alive longer.

It's not about numbers it's about demographics. Without immigration the working age population will fall and the retired increase. That's fine if those retirees agreed to give up their pensions and stop using the NHS.

There is obviously also an issue of demography with an aging population. But if our strategy is to keep bringing in young immigrants so that their children prop up our national insurance system, then that will ultimately fail.

More than half of the population take more out of the system than they put in. If the immigrants are younger and have more children, then they will be disproportionately in that group.

The entire tax system is propped up by those paying higher and additional rate taxes.

Something has to change here, otherwise we are on a never ending tax escalator.

This is one of the reasons why I actually quite like the Reform idea of a tax rebate for private healthcare. I would also support means testing of the state pension. The ‘safety net’ of the welfare state only needs to be there for those who need it.

I would rather see people fund their own retirement than have them supported by the state who then grab back the cost with inheritance tax.

[DMN]

Harry Flashman said:

This post encapsulates exactly why it isn't worth having economic arguments with the rabid anti-immigration crowd. "Importing people".

In a declining birth rate, ageing population, single economic centre, high-cost economy, these fools genuinely believe that we don't need more tax-paying citizens.

The same people moaning about the NHS denying that we need foreign workers to staff it. Or banging on about the lack of trades, and how unreliable they all are whilst wanting to send all the Poles home.

The more liberal media like to portray this as a people being lied to by the right wing. Personally, I think its beyond being credulous - it's just being thick.

But sure. Nigel and his merry band of populists have the answer. Stop the boats. This rot was epitomised by the Tory Brexit negotiations: things like the ludicrous focus on fishing rights whilst completely ignoring financial services, the engine of the British economy today.

Japan is an abject lesson. And one that no one wishes to learn.

This anti-intellectual, pro-scapegoat move in politics is as dangerous as it is depressing. One of the pro-Reform folk on here got half of it right: Tribalism. I'll go further. We don't discuss policy and it's consequences. We discuss belief. Close the borders, save our culture. Make America Great Again. Le Pen winning France. All these factions have great taglines, and policies designed to appeal to people who don't think very far down the line, but can be easily scared. And that's OK, that's democracy after all. We go with the majority.

The trouble is that, as France shows, the majority are just apathetic and don't vote. That's how the crazies get in. We have successfully neutered centrist politics by addicting our populations to things and easy credit, and blame, rather than political responsibility or a thirst for knowledge. Education is tailored to the lowest achieving, and we would rather furlough people in lockdown and give contracts to our cronies than fix our school system or health service.

The Spitfires over cricket fields Johnny-Foreigner-took-my-job bunch have a long, hard retirement coming. Their champions have identified their lowbrow whimsy, isolated them, cut them off from their neighbouring economies, sowed hate and distrust and emasculated Britain's economy. And the worst of these champions are now the kernel of Reform; a party captained by the cynical, with the bigoted as their footsoldiers.

Yeah, stop the bloody boats. That's going to fix it all.

Edited by Harry Flashman on Tuesday 2nd July 21:35