British culture - Is there any such thing?
Discussion
crankedup5 said:
Nomme de Plum said:
crankedup5 said:
Without wishing to be involved to deeply in this debate of population / worker / pensioner levels, I do find it surprising that participants are making assumptions, it seems to me, that the major changes that I have briefly mentioned will have little impact upon the issues at hand.
Have a play with thishttps://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunit...
My interest is really around what impacts upon migration AI will hold.
Kermit power said:
There is honestly no point talking to him. All you'll get is "Ponzi scheme" over and over, which he presumably heard down a rabbit hole somewhere and is going to cling to it for dear life.
Not that we have any need to, but we could grow to 120M population in the UK and still have a lower population density than the Netherlands currently has now, but according to Ashfordian, we're "full"!
He also ignores the fact that total population will plateau as increases in life expectancy do so, because that too counters his silly "Ponzi scheme" idea.
On top of that, he has yet to say if he'd be willing to work to 75 to reduce the number of immigrants needed.
It'll just go on and on and on... The basic driver seems to be "how do I stop foreigners coming here without appearing too xenophobic".
The global population is currently 8bn an if any here followed Hans Rosling decades ago he was predicting the population maxing out at 11bn. In fact latest trends and falling birth rates predict less than 10.5bn and importantly then falling. Not that we have any need to, but we could grow to 120M population in the UK and still have a lower population density than the Netherlands currently has now, but according to Ashfordian, we're "full"!
He also ignores the fact that total population will plateau as increases in life expectancy do so, because that too counters his silly "Ponzi scheme" idea.
On top of that, he has yet to say if he'd be willing to work to 75 to reduce the number of immigrants needed.
It'll just go on and on and on... The basic driver seems to be "how do I stop foreigners coming here without appearing too xenophobic".
I hope your last paragraph is an incorrect assumption but his posts seem to align with your assertion.
Nomme de Plum said:
I find an approach that stating that future generations of pensioners will never be as well of as utterly depressing and unambitious. Surely the whole purpose of our existance is to help our children have a better education and life and add to the overall wellbeing of society. When they come to retire then it seems reasonable that their life in retirement should be better than current retirees.
Fortunately i believe in this regard at least the politicians we have chosen have this common aim along with improving life for everyone from cradle to grave. Surely this is embedded in our culture.
I have seen the evolution of our culture over the 69 years of my life and on balance i still think we are in a good place despite currently some serious economic woes which are not remotely immigration based.
Well, lets look at the reality, not the comfortable bubble you currently sit in. Fortunately i believe in this regard at least the politicians we have chosen have this common aim along with improving life for everyone from cradle to grave. Surely this is embedded in our culture.
I have seen the evolution of our culture over the 69 years of my life and on balance i still think we are in a good place despite currently some serious economic woes which are not remotely immigration based.
- Pensions for the currently retired have peaked with most people now working on much lesser DC pensions.
- Someone taking their GCSE's this year is likely to face a national retirement age in the 70's. Very few will be able to afford to retire in their 50's, definitely not in the numbers that we have been seeing.
- Job security is now a term consigned to history.
- The UK is now suffocated by Government debt. which is only going to get worse. Only punitive rises in taxes are going to turn this around but I doubt the current retirees will be around to see the impact of this.
So yes, technology advances aside, the future generations are going to have an overall poorer life experience.
None of this is resolved by more immigration. In fact, it is the past couple of decades of population increases that have contributed to the worsening of living standards. Overpopulated areas of the country are now worse places to live in than at the turn of the century.
Maybe you are in denial of the link between the above and a lower birth rate but why would you expose future generations to a worsening life experience?
Ashfordian said:
Nomme de Plum said:
I find an approach that stating that future generations of pensioners will never be as well of as utterly depressing and unambitious. Surely the whole purpose of our existance is to help our children have a better education and life and add to the overall wellbeing of society. When they come to retire then it seems reasonable that their life in retirement should be better than current retirees.
Fortunately i believe in this regard at least the politicians we have chosen have this common aim along with improving life for everyone from cradle to grave. Surely this is embedded in our culture.
I have seen the evolution of our culture over the 69 years of my life and on balance i still think we are in a good place despite currently some serious economic woes which are not remotely immigration based.
Well, lets look at the reality, not the comfortable bubble you currently sit in. Fortunately i believe in this regard at least the politicians we have chosen have this common aim along with improving life for everyone from cradle to grave. Surely this is embedded in our culture.
I have seen the evolution of our culture over the 69 years of my life and on balance i still think we are in a good place despite currently some serious economic woes which are not remotely immigration based.
- Pensions for the currently retired have peaked with most people now working on much lesser DC pensions.
- Someone taking their GCSE's this year is likely to face a national retirement age in the 70's. Very few will be able to afford to retire in their 50's, definitely not in the numbers that we have been seeing.
- Job security is now a term consigned to history.
- The UK is now suffocated by Government debt. which is only going to get worse. Only punitive rises in taxes are going to turn this around but I doubt the current retirees will be around to see the impact of this.
So yes, technology advances aside, the future generations are going to have an overall poorer life experience.
None of this is resolved by more immigration. In fact, it is the past couple of decades of population increases that have contributed to the worsening of living standards. Overpopulated areas of the country are now worse places to live in than at the turn of the century.
Maybe you are in denial of the link between the above and a lower birth rate but why would you expose future generations to a worsening life experience?
Not sure why you would think that 1) People automatically had an occupational pension, 2) Those that do have an occupational pension that it is is final salary and protected. 3) That many of us retired folk have SIPPs so a finite pot.
In 2000 our population was 59M and it is now 68M. Can you make a categoric statement that should that growth have been entirely organic. ie UK families having more children that the situation would be exactly the same as you now assert.
The unemployment rate is 3.8% so effectively we have near full employment and we have 950,000 vacancies . Who would have filled the vacancies had we had no migration over the last 20 years? Our economy would have been smaller.
What impact do you think our GDP would have suffered with an insufficient workforce?
As to falling birth rate I've never said economics would not make any difference but the evidence indicates that it is the education and autonomy of women along with easy access to birth control ( the pill) which has been the main factor in driving down the birth rate. It 's been seen in the UK and other developed economy and also in developings nation. Anecdotal I know but I see a number of young people here in their early 30s who are now either on child 2 or 3 so the economy is not putting them off.
Nomme de Plum said:
crankedup5 said:
Nomme de Plum said:
crankedup5 said:
Without wishing to be involved to deeply in this debate of population / worker / pensioner levels, I do find it surprising that participants are making assumptions, it seems to me, that the major changes that I have briefly mentioned will have little impact upon the issues at hand.
Have a play with thishttps://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunit...
My interest is really around what impacts upon migration AI will hold.
crankedup5 said:
Already we have deep fake political announcements courtesy of AI . We have Governments already attempting to be in a position of just how to ‘control’ AI ensuring that=only good comes from the tech’. Bit late and fanciful for that, one MP even announced being ahead of the AI curve, naive at best. I would love to be around for the next ten years.
Deep fake announcements (AI generated) from 'politicians' isn't really going to impact employment numbers. There will need to be some very significant advances before whole sale roles currently carried out by persons disappear. Nomme de Plum said:
TonyToniTone said:
I wonder what the stats look for grooming gangs?
Feel free to do some research and post your findings.https://news.sky.com/story/grooming-gang-convictio...
TonyToniTone said:
Nomme de Plum said:
TonyToniTone said:
I wonder what the stats look for grooming gangs?
Feel free to do some research and post your findings.https://news.sky.com/story/grooming-gang-convictio...
According to the most recent figures, released in 2012 by the National Crime Agency's Child Exploitation and Online Protection Command (CEOP), 100% of child sex offenders in paedophile rings were white.
The report says CEOP, an official government body, identifies two types of group-based child sexual exploitation offenders.
Type 1 offenders were those that targeted their victims based on their vulnerability (roughly equivalent of grooming gangs), whereas Type 2 offenders target children as a result of a specific sexual interest in children (roughly equivalent of paedophile rings).
CEOP found that 75% of Type 1 offenders were of Asian ethnicity, whereas 100% of Type 2 offenders were white.
Quilliam's researchers found 264 people have been convicted for the specific crime of gang grooming since 2005, and of those offenders 222 or 84% were Asian.
There are no figures relating to Type 2 (White) offenders in this report for whatever reason.
Apart from a few responses by some realists (you know who you are, and I salute you) today has been a fantasy weasel word extravaganza.
Calls for, quotes of and links to 'facts and figures' are all nonsense. The home office, by their own admission, have no idea of the numbers of who have come and gone to these shores.
The pension paying ponzi scheme has been going for many years, it doesn't work and never will.
Since 1997, when the door was opened (and not been shut since) to uncontrolled immigration everything has got worse, including the pensions problem.
The fork tongued ponzi promoting weasel wordsmiths should look back at the last 27 years, where the population has increased by 10+ million, and ask themselves, "Why do we still have a pensions problem? Why aren't the 10+m new arrivals solving the problem?".
More of the same is not the answer.
Calls for, quotes of and links to 'facts and figures' are all nonsense. The home office, by their own admission, have no idea of the numbers of who have come and gone to these shores.
The pension paying ponzi scheme has been going for many years, it doesn't work and never will.
Since 1997, when the door was opened (and not been shut since) to uncontrolled immigration everything has got worse, including the pensions problem.
The fork tongued ponzi promoting weasel wordsmiths should look back at the last 27 years, where the population has increased by 10+ million, and ask themselves, "Why do we still have a pensions problem? Why aren't the 10+m new arrivals solving the problem?".
More of the same is not the answer.
Nomme de Plum said:
TonyToniTone said:
Nomme de Plum said:
TonyToniTone said:
I wonder what the stats look for grooming gangs?
Feel free to do some research and post your findings.https://news.sky.com/story/grooming-gang-convictio...
According to the most recent figures, released in 2012 by the National Crime Agency's Child Exploitation and Online Protection Command (CEOP), 100% of child sex offenders in paedophile rings were white.
The report says CEOP, an official government body, identifies two types of group-based child sexual exploitation offenders.
Type 1 offenders were those that targeted their victims based on their vulnerability (roughly equivalent of grooming gangs), whereas Type 2 offenders target children as a result of a specific sexual interest in children (roughly equivalent of paedophile rings).
CEOP found that 75% of Type 1 offenders were of Asian ethnicity, whereas 100% of Type 2 offenders were white.
Quilliam's researchers found 264 people have been convicted for the specific crime of gang grooming since 2005, and of those offenders 222 or 84% were Asian.
There are no figures relating to Type 2 (White) offenders in this report for whatever reason.
TonyToniTone said:
Nomme de Plum said:
TonyToniTone said:
Nomme de Plum said:
TonyToniTone said:
I wonder what the stats look for grooming gangs?
Feel free to do some research and post your findings.https://news.sky.com/story/grooming-gang-convictio...
According to the most recent figures, released in 2012 by the National Crime Agency's Child Exploitation and Online Protection Command (CEOP), 100% of child sex offenders in paedophile rings were white.
The report says CEOP, an official government body, identifies two types of group-based child sexual exploitation offenders.
Type 1 offenders were those that targeted their victims based on their vulnerability (roughly equivalent of grooming gangs), whereas Type 2 offenders target children as a result of a specific sexual interest in children (roughly equivalent of paedophile rings).
CEOP found that 75% of Type 1 offenders were of Asian ethnicity, whereas 100% of Type 2 offenders were white.
Quilliam's researchers found 264 people have been convicted for the specific crime of gang grooming since 2005, and of those offenders 222 or 84% were Asian.
There are no figures relating to Type 2 (White) offenders in this report for whatever reason.
It's a very unfortunate fact.
You see there is a very massive difference between saying 100% of the paedophilic rings are white and 84% of grooming gangs are Asian and saying 100% of white males are paedophiles or 84% of Asians are in grooming gangs. I trust you understand this.
Bad and perverted people exist.
colin_p said:
Apart from a few responses by some realists (you know who you are, and I salute you) today has been a fantasy weasel word extravaganza.
Calls for, quotes of and links to 'facts and figures' are all nonsense. The home office, by their own admission, have no idea of the numbers of who have come and gone to these shores.
The pension paying ponzi scheme has been going for many years, it doesn't work and never will.
Since 1997, when the door was opened (and not been shut since) to uncontrolled immigration everything has got worse, including the pensions problem.
The fork tongued ponzi promoting weasel wordsmiths should look back at the last 27 years, where the population has increased by 10+ million, and ask themselves, "Why do we still have a pensions problem? Why aren't the 10+m new arrivals solving the problem?".
More of the same is not the answer.
Is Ponzi your word of the day? Calls for, quotes of and links to 'facts and figures' are all nonsense. The home office, by their own admission, have no idea of the numbers of who have come and gone to these shores.
The pension paying ponzi scheme has been going for many years, it doesn't work and never will.
Since 1997, when the door was opened (and not been shut since) to uncontrolled immigration everything has got worse, including the pensions problem.
The fork tongued ponzi promoting weasel wordsmiths should look back at the last 27 years, where the population has increased by 10+ million, and ask themselves, "Why do we still have a pensions problem? Why aren't the 10+m new arrivals solving the problem?".
More of the same is not the answer.
By the way those recent immigrants are still working and possibly procreating and not pensioners yet. Don't get too stressed though because at some point it maybe one of them may be your care worker.
Nomme de Plum said:
colin_p said:
Apart from a few responses by some realists (you know who you are, and I salute you) today has been a fantasy weasel word extravaganza.
Calls for, quotes of and links to 'facts and figures' are all nonsense. The home office, by their own admission, have no idea of the numbers of who have come and gone to these shores.
The pension paying ponzi scheme has been going for many years, it doesn't work and never will.
Since 1997, when the door was opened (and not been shut since) to uncontrolled immigration everything has got worse, including the pensions problem.
The fork tongued ponzi promoting weasel wordsmiths should look back at the last 27 years, where the population has increased by 10+ million, and ask themselves, "Why do we still have a pensions problem? Why aren't the 10+m new arrivals solving the problem?".
More of the same is not the answer.
Is Ponzi your word of the day? Calls for, quotes of and links to 'facts and figures' are all nonsense. The home office, by their own admission, have no idea of the numbers of who have come and gone to these shores.
The pension paying ponzi scheme has been going for many years, it doesn't work and never will.
Since 1997, when the door was opened (and not been shut since) to uncontrolled immigration everything has got worse, including the pensions problem.
The fork tongued ponzi promoting weasel wordsmiths should look back at the last 27 years, where the population has increased by 10+ million, and ask themselves, "Why do we still have a pensions problem? Why aren't the 10+m new arrivals solving the problem?".
More of the same is not the answer.
By the way those recent immigrants are still working and possibly procreating and not pensioners yet. Don't get too stressed though because at some point it maybe one of them may be your care worker.
As to your statement above, what happens when they retire? Will we need more people to pay their pensions adding to the ponzi pyramid of stupidity? Or will the problem simple disappear? Think hard.
colin_p said:
Nomme de Plum said:
colin_p said:
Apart from a few responses by some realists (you know who you are, and I salute you) today has been a fantasy weasel word extravaganza.
Calls for, quotes of and links to 'facts and figures' are all nonsense. The home office, by their own admission, have no idea of the numbers of who have come and gone to these shores.
The pension paying ponzi scheme has been going for many years, it doesn't work and never will.
Since 1997, when the door was opened (and not been shut since) to uncontrolled immigration everything has got worse, including the pensions problem.
The fork tongued ponzi promoting weasel wordsmiths should look back at the last 27 years, where the population has increased by 10+ million, and ask themselves, "Why do we still have a pensions problem? Why aren't the 10+m new arrivals solving the problem?".
More of the same is not the answer.
Is Ponzi your word of the day? Calls for, quotes of and links to 'facts and figures' are all nonsense. The home office, by their own admission, have no idea of the numbers of who have come and gone to these shores.
The pension paying ponzi scheme has been going for many years, it doesn't work and never will.
Since 1997, when the door was opened (and not been shut since) to uncontrolled immigration everything has got worse, including the pensions problem.
The fork tongued ponzi promoting weasel wordsmiths should look back at the last 27 years, where the population has increased by 10+ million, and ask themselves, "Why do we still have a pensions problem? Why aren't the 10+m new arrivals solving the problem?".
More of the same is not the answer.
By the way those recent immigrants are still working and possibly procreating and not pensioners yet. Don't get too stressed though because at some point it maybe one of them may be your care worker.
As to your statement above, what happens when they retire? Will we need more people to pay their pensions adding to the ponzi pyramid of stupidity? Or will the problem simple disappear? Think hard.
The problem is in your head so does not exist in the first place.
Just to give you reassurance no one is saying 750K increase in population annually is sustainable in the long term but circa 200K -£300K is and will continue no matter how upset you get.
Do you see much of our country living in Derbyshire?
colin_p said:
Nomme de Plum said:
Do you see much of our country living in Derbyshire?
I'm flattered, I have a stalker.In answer, no, I've not had the want or need to travel much since moving up here about two years ago to downsize and get away from it all.
When i lived there many years ago the so called men didn't even let their wives know what they earned. Needless to say according to them the women belonged in the kitchen. I hope things have moved on.
Suggest you stay there and let the rest of the UK do its thing. We are doing fine and enjoying our culture diversifying to be inclusive of all our immigrants.
Can i ask do your children consider you an anachronism?
Nomme de Plum said:
As to falling birth rate I've never said economics would not make any difference but the evidence indicates that it is the education and autonomy of women along with easy access to birth control ( the pill) which has been the main factor in driving down the birth rate. It 's been seen in the UK and other developed economy and also in developing nations. Anecdotal I know but I see a number of young people here in their early 30s who are now either on child 2 or 3 so the economy is not putting them off.
That's one side of it. The other side is that alongside women getting that access to education, autonomy and contraception, they also got access to things like their own bank accounts and not having to stop work once they got married.That's all well and good, of course, but it was combined with loosening of restrictions on mortgages, so maximum borrowing went over time from 2x the husband's salary only to ludicrous levels of 10x combined salaries in some cases. The net result of that was that in the course of about 3 generations, women went from not being able to work once they'd married through briefly having the choice to work or not then ending up in the position now where the overwhelming majority can't afford not to work, and many have to choose between kids and buying a house.
I know very, very few people with a single child. Lots with two, and a fair few with three or more. But also huge numbers with none at all. It seems that once you do start having kids, you likely have much the same sort of family size as your parents or grandparents would've had, with the lack of babies problem coming from so many people not having them at all.
TonyToniTone said:
Nomme de Plum said:
TonyToniTone said:
I wonder what the stats look for grooming gangs?
Feel free to do some research and post your findings.https://news.sky.com/story/grooming-gang-convictio...
In the 2021 census, there were 5.5 million Asians living in England & Wales. That means that 4 out of every 100,000 Asians have been found guilty of gang grooming offences in the past 19 years.
In 2021 alone there were 6,134 convictions for child sexual abuse in England and Wales. That includes 677 convictions specifically for sexual grooming (fewer than a third of which could've been Asians, even if all the Asians convicted since 2005 were convicted in 2021!) 448 rapes and 409 sexual assaults.
Also in the 2021 census, there were 59.6 million people in total living in England and Wales. That means that in 2021 alone 10.3 people per 100,000 in the overall population were convicted of a sexual crime against children. Now admittedly that was the high water mark at the time, but even if we halve that number and say that on average 5 people per 100,000 were convicted of sexual offences against children on those 19 years, that still adds up to 95 people per 100,000 convicted over that entire period.
So, in summary, the overall probability of someone in the population of England and Wales having been convicted of a crime against a child since 2005 is almost 25 times greater than the odds of an Asian having been convicted of a gang grooming offence.
Of course some of those other offences against children will also have been committed by Asians, and we don't have the stats for that at the moment, but when the number of Asian people found guilty of gang grooming over the course of 19 years (222 people) is just 3.6% of the number of people convicted of a sexual offence against a child in just the one year of 2021 (6,134), I think that goes to show how meaningless that gang grooming statistic is when it comes to making any sort of judgement against a whole section of society.
Those gang grooming cases are absolutely abhorrent, and it's quite right that people should be jailed for it, but just because it's easy for the tabloids to zero in on it for clickbait dog whistle purposes, that doesn't actually mean that Asian men are more of a risk to British children than British men are, either in total or on a per capita basis.
colin_p said:
Nomme de Plum said:
colin_p said:
Apart from a few responses by some realists (you know who you are, and I salute you) today has been a fantasy weasel word extravaganza.
Calls for, quotes of and links to 'facts and figures' are all nonsense. The home office, by their own admission, have no idea of the numbers of who have come and gone to these shores.
The pension paying ponzi scheme has been going for many years, it doesn't work and never will.
Since 1997, when the door was opened (and not been shut since) to uncontrolled immigration everything has got worse, including the pensions problem.
The fork tongued ponzi promoting weasel wordsmiths should look back at the last 27 years, where the population has increased by 10+ million, and ask themselves, "Why do we still have a pensions problem? Why aren't the 10+m new arrivals solving the problem?".
More of the same is not the answer.
Is Ponzi your word of the day? Calls for, quotes of and links to 'facts and figures' are all nonsense. The home office, by their own admission, have no idea of the numbers of who have come and gone to these shores.
The pension paying ponzi scheme has been going for many years, it doesn't work and never will.
Since 1997, when the door was opened (and not been shut since) to uncontrolled immigration everything has got worse, including the pensions problem.
The fork tongued ponzi promoting weasel wordsmiths should look back at the last 27 years, where the population has increased by 10+ million, and ask themselves, "Why do we still have a pensions problem? Why aren't the 10+m new arrivals solving the problem?".
More of the same is not the answer.
By the way those recent immigrants are still working and possibly procreating and not pensioners yet. Don't get too stressed though because at some point it maybe one of them may be your care worker.
As to your statement above, what happens when they retire? Will we need more people to pay their pensions adding to the ponzi pyramid of stupidity? Or will the problem simple disappear? Think hard.
How many children do you have?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff