A Virus with Shoes
Discussion
Fully agree with Chris Packham, bring incentives in for having fewer children or adopting kids instead.
Exactly what Bill Hicks was saying almost 10 years ago.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Chris-Pac...
Exactly what Bill Hicks was saying almost 10 years ago.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Chris-Pac...
chrisispringles said:
Does this moron not realise that Britain's population is in natural decrease as birth rates are lower than death rates already, as is the case with most developed countries? Anyway, without young people there will be no support for older people in the future.

Think it's aimed more at the world, i.e. '- namely the ever-increasing size of the world's population.'
But also are you saying that the UK population is in decline and thus will not reach 70 million in 2020?
Zaxxon said:
Think it's aimed more at the world, i.e. '- namely the ever-increasing size of the world's population.'
But also are you saying that the UK population is in decline and thus will not reach 70 million in 2020?
There is a fair chance that the U.K. population will reach 70m, but that is down to migration. Natural decrease means that the birth rate is lower than the death rate, it does not account for migration.But also are you saying that the UK population is in decline and thus will not reach 70 million in 2020?
Zaxxon said:
chrisispringles said:
Does this moron not realise that Britain's population is in natural decrease as birth rates are lower than death rates already, as is the case with most developed countries? Anyway, without young people there will be no support for older people in the future.

Think it's aimed more at the world, i.e. '- namely the ever-increasing size of the world's population.'
But also are you saying that the UK population is in decline and thus will not reach 70 million in 2020?
How the feck are you going to regulate the Asian, African and South American population growth?
How about we help these countries -with a lot of fertile land- to produce food in an efficient manner rather than sending food supplied and handovers? Here's a novel idea.
As short sighted post and stories go yours take the biscuit OP.
chrisispringles said:
There is a fair chance that the U.K. population will reach 70m, but that is down to migration. Natural decrease means that the birth rate is lower than the death rate, it does not account for migration.
Ah ok, but we can't stop or reverse migration can we, we'd be branded as racists by the Guardian and thats naughty.J B L said:
He talks about both.
How the feck are you going to regulate the Asian, African and South American population growth?
How about we help these countries -with a lot of fertile land- to produce food in an efficient manner rather than sending food supplied and handovers? Here's a novel idea.
As short sighted post and stories go yours take the biscuit OP.
So following your ideas the world population just explodes way beyond the current trend?How the feck are you going to regulate the Asian, African and South American population growth?
How about we help these countries -with a lot of fertile land- to produce food in an efficient manner rather than sending food supplied and handovers? Here's a novel idea.
As short sighted post and stories go yours take the biscuit OP.
And you call me shortsighted?
Uhura fighter said:
We could just put birth control in the aid we give out.

That's happening to a certain degree, along with things like family planning. Trouble is that there are still religious and moral issues around contraception in developing countries. But, the fact that developing countties have high - but starting to decline - infant mortality rates means that people still need a lot of children for their own security.
Most real thinkers now agree that our biggest issue is overpopulation. The arguments against are spurious based on non-essential reasoning like religious and racial beliefs.
As for the population needs to keep growing to support the elderly, what a facetious argument that is. Not really worth arguing about if you think it through, it's a non starter.
Oh well until the elephant in the room is visible to the politicians and they are prepared to start dealing wiht it, I guess we'll get more 'global warming' and 'let's all live together without our luxuries' crap.
And more wars.
As for the population needs to keep growing to support the elderly, what a facetious argument that is. Not really worth arguing about if you think it through, it's a non starter.
Oh well until the elephant in the room is visible to the politicians and they are prepared to start dealing wiht it, I guess we'll get more 'global warming' and 'let's all live together without our luxuries' crap.
And more wars.
Zaxxon said:
J B L said:
He talks about both.
How the feck are you going to regulate the Asian, African and South American population growth?
How about we help these countries -with a lot of fertile land- to produce food in an efficient manner rather than sending food supplied and handovers? Here's a novel idea.
As short sighted post and stories go yours take the biscuit OP.
So following your ideas the world population just explodes way beyond the current trend?How the feck are you going to regulate the Asian, African and South American population growth?
How about we help these countries -with a lot of fertile land- to produce food in an efficient manner rather than sending food supplied and handovers? Here's a novel idea.
As short sighted post and stories go yours take the biscuit OP.
And you call me shortsighted?
Add to that the fact that when a nation starts to develop its birth rate fall then it may be a long time before you reach critical food prod capacity.
But you are right. Let's dig up trenches and shoot the b
ds. A far more durable and intelligent solution.Yes, there is an environmental angle, but in the UK the elephant in the room seems to be that (to me at any rate, based on casual observation) there is a major discrepancy in birth rates between socio-economic groups with lower socio-economic groups producing vastly more offspring than those in higher groups. If this is indeed the case, does it support the argument that population growth will support the elderly... or does it in fact create a situation where the growing population itself needs more support?
...I sincerely hope to be proven wrong.
...I sincerely hope to be proven wrong.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff


