It looks like the UK's structural response is to cover any reduction in EU immigration with immigration from elsewhere, especially South Asia. This suggests two things. One is that leaving the EU will not resolve the problem (as you see it) of immigration-led population growth. The other is that, perhaps, immigrants are more important to the UK than it seems. One important contribution is that immigrants are typically younger, and so offset the impacts of a largely ageing native UK population. Whilst I sympathise with the view that we should not always aim for economic growth, if you curbed immigration significantly, I am afraid you would get more adverse effects than just a hit on GDP. For starters, you would reverse population growth whilst having to support an increasingly ageing population. That is not sustainable. Sustainability isn't just about resources, it is also about supporting societies.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Including contraception? As that's probably the real reason for resource sustainability than any other argument a politician would make you believe.
Because anyone who is a burden on the state can be removed, the UK government simply doesn't implement it. Also in general you are not flooded with OAPs but people wanting to work.
Well, you could also say we are keeping people alive for too long too couldn’t you? More than one factor at play here clearly.
I guess the only way to grow the population without immigration would be to encourage the indigenous population to have more children. For that you would need much higher levels of social security, namely free nursery places, more and better social housing and bigger tax breaks for parents etc. Zero chance of anything like that happening under a Tory government.
What does that to do with Brexit
Christ you are painful to listen to. How anyone can come across so smug and condescending while discussing their own ignorance and irresponsibility is beyond me.
This brand of pseudo intellectual, passive aggressive debating is definitely the most annoying result of the internet.
Absolutely, which means some control at the front end is required. It's a much wider threat an immigration from a pure numbers perspective, net migration level against the UK population is at 0.39% (crude fag packet calculation) vs 0-4 year olds equating for around 6% of the population. The argument is that the latter takes more out from a services perspective than others - if the assumption for most leave votes is that all immigration doesn't actually put anything back into the services.
We are flooded with OAPs. The indigenous ones for a start.
My mother spent the last 6 years of her life in a nursing home, with end stage dementia, basically a living doll. As were the rest of the residents. This scenario repeated in homes up & down the country.
Why the feck are we doing this?
Just one of a few things I’d be looking at, before shovelling immigrant care workers in as a sticking plaster solution.
Earlier you said Germany underfunding their military was a reason we should all be worried about an EU army. Now we should all be worried about paying more taxes for military equipment?
Also, and I'm concerned that this still needs saying, Germany is not the EU.
Although the Uk has the fourth highest birth rate in the EU behind Ireland, France and Sweden but none of them are enough to grow the population alone.
People have been living longer. My own mother died last year aged 97 but lived at home and had all her faculties right up to the end.
It's a question of interpretation. Smug? Am I excessively proud about my own achievements? No. In this context, am I proud that I didn't vote in the referendum? No. Am I proud that I don't understand politics, economics or law at even a basic level? No. Am I proud that the basis of my decision not to vote was my lack of knowledge on the critical issue being discussed? No. I'm a deeply flawed human being and I'm neither proud nor ashamed of that. I do find it useful to be vaguely aware of my own ignorance, which is what I think you've mistaken as pride.
So that's how something seemingly incoherent - being smug about being ignorant - can be true. It's because of your own interpretation, which from my very limited perspective, is not the right interpretation. The sad thing is, if I was on "your side", you'd interpret my motivations and actions entirely differently. Hence why you haven't had an issue with the passive aggression, smugness and general condescension from so many people in this thread. It's worth considering how the posts might influence people that don't fall into that camp, and how it might generate the tone you find so difficult to read.
Who do you think is currently defending Europe?
As someone whose mother has dementia and battling to get her into a home, I’m wondering what you would suggest instead? Shoot them all?
Wow... Harsh.
Hungarian government are attempting something like this, and I’ve heard it’s been mooted in Italy too.
Depends what stage she’s at. In my own families’ case, yes, I would have euthanised. I signed the DNR form which is the halfway house of course. Because that is morally acceptable currently.
I think euthanasia should be an option given the aging population, yes.
We are “generally” keeping people alive for too long, often by artificial interventions. Then we wonder why we have the problems that come with an aging population?
It's a new approach for me, admitting that he has no idea what he's talking about and telling everyone they are wrong.
Depressing, first one is the most depressing
I grew up in a country where corporal punishment is normal. I was flogged like crazy as a kid.
In uni, during my economics degree, we had an entire module dedicated to the EU, it's history, treaties and how it worked. This brexit thing has shown me I didn't understand jack shit.
So the Tories can roll them out to the polling station every five years.
Most people don't, it's technical and a lot of aspects are a mixture of british, french and german legal philosophy, it's a unique structure. There is nothing crazy about it but you basically need to have an understanding of international law and have good notions in comparative law which are fairly large subjects.
Contender for worst post of the decade here.
More chance of euthanasia being an option in liberal EU than a conservative UK. Imho.
A Dutch friend of mine with terminal cancer was given an injection by his GP, in the comfort of his own home. All fully discussed with family and was his dying wish. In Holland off course.
Broke: We need immigration to help pay for our ageing population.
Woke: We need to stop keeping old people alive.
Woke: We need to stop keeping old people alive.
In fairness we could use them all to test out the newly constructed public gallows
When I go to work tomorrow I’ll pop around to each ward and tell the nurses that there’s no point in keeping anyone over 65 (or maybe 60 depending on how full the ward is) alive and we should just discontinue all management.
I would say he has a point, he's just putting it across very, very badly, and making it sound like we should take OAPs out and shoot them.
Euthanasia should be legal in every country suffering from aging populations imo. it's just cruel to keep people alive when they and their family no longer see the point.
May I respectfully suggest that before making such statements about Russia that you first acquaint your self with the facts.
Russia hasn't pushed forward. Crimea, Ukraine spring to mind.
So thats why leave voters want to bring back the death penalty, to use as population control
Quite. But it you read my comments you will see that I speak about a European Army.
I also seem to remember that when I first raised this issue I was assured that there was no such policy, simply discussion between a few EU countries.
Now I am being told it is a fantastic idea.
Forget nostalgia. Let's talk about dystopia instead.
Last edited:
For things like terminal cancer, Huntington’s etc. where the patient is suffering, I agree. He’s talking about people with dementia here. You would be hard pressed to find a family who wants to euthanize a relative with dementia, having dealt with a few of them in the past.
In such a scenario I think you'd find an increasing emphasis placed on when the family no longer see the point.
That will be NATO with assets from those European countries aligned to NATO but nominally under US command.
Question. Why is German still operating their Tornado bombers.
Answer. Because German has a NATO requirement to maintain nuclear capability and it does that by operating Tornado which can carry US supplied nuclear weapons.
I am referring to the EU mate
Yeah?
Well, can only speak from experience and observations whilst visiting & witnessing patients at that stage. I would not personally keep a patient with end stage - did you get that - END STAGE - as I said my own Mother had so we are absolutely clear on this as you seem to have missed that?
And yes, euthanasia should be an option available more widely as you acknowledge yourself.
Well I have just re-read your post and you definitely talked about Russia not pushing forward even when it was surrounded by US missiles.
I could have also reminded you about the Cuban Missile crisis.
The reason why Russia deployed nuclear missiles in Cuba was partly because NATO had stationed nuclear missiles in Turkey.
What is this obsession with Germany? I mean it's not as if the UK and France combined spend more than the bigger Russia when it comes to military expenditure or have their own nuclear weapons. And being able to defend yourself isn't solely based on nuclear weapons.