Pretty bad that Wirral, Sefton & Liverpool City are all in the top ten for population reduction. It's a shame that we can't see the stats for our other local authorities. I just hope Knowsley's been doing some audacious scheme where incomers recieve a golden handshake on top of reduced council tax, or something.
Not to sure how reliable those figures are but the answer is simple.
Open the doors to immigrants, especially in the north end which lacks diversity. The South east corner is struggling to cope with a glut of newcomers with all of the associated strain on public services so Liverpool could solve her population problem in a stroke by welcoming people here. In a generation they will be proper integrated Scousers anyway.
All those figures are rubbish, both on the wirral and Liverpool too, and heres why, they go off the concensus and those that register to vote! We here on the wirral have a housing deficit of some 25,000 and rising. many choose not to register to vote or simply did not fill in the concensus forms. If the numbers were accurate, why do builders and companies go off whats termed predicted growth? why would companies spend millions of pounds on new appartments and houses if, numbers were decreasing?
Demolition takes place for one reason to use the available foot print more efficiently and bring housing stock up to the decent homes standard a standard set down by government back in 2001. Councils, housing associations and builders all have to abide by the decent homes standard.
kat
All of a sudden the doommongers have sprung up. This is one of many recent threads about bad news, due to the 'recession'.
Isn't it time we all stopped and thought for a moment and just realise what haas been achieved in our great city since say 1990?
We have come further than any of us could ever have imagined.
The credit crunch will see a halt to new developments for a while but give it a year or 2 the city will be in pole position to move forward again.:banana:
Yeah that's right,let's celebrate the 50,000 fall in population since 1990 which is still continuing. Mainly down to the retards at LCC implementing a Government sponsered housing "renewal" policy,totally unsuited to the needs of the city.
These estimates are still based on 2001, "trends", people registering to vote, people registering with GP etc... which can be VERY misleading. Looking at it, it looks like a sneaky method of cutting costs.
The release of these figures to coincide with the half year just gone for might suggest they're accurate, but you will find that you are able to get ONS estimates for future years e.g. 2009 and 2010 if you ask (freedom of information act). They've already been calculated. For instance:-
They'd simply take the figure from their calculated estimates and adjust it according to "current trends".
WBC have this to say about the "guestimates":-
Each year, the ONS produce a mid-year estimate, based on updating the previous
year’s figures with the 3 elements set out at para 2.2 above. Without a clear validation
of these figures, they can become increasingly inaccurate, only being tested every 10 years with the decennial Census (next due in Spring 2011).
True, the estimations are based on long term historical trends. The recent increases seen in the population will not fully be accounted for until future years.
it makes you think that there is an active campaign to paint as bleak a picture of Liverpool when ever they get the chance! You can only dismiss these sorts of things as coincidence for so long, just as the accusations of paranoia wear off after the umpteenth dis... WTF is going on?
Even if there is a decrease in population in the city, does it really matter?
The economy has grown, unemployment has decreased among many other positive things.
What implications does a decreasing population have on the cities status?
Pardon my ignorance on this matter if it does has a profound effect!
The problem is one of jobs. The new immigrants, who have driven population growth in other cities, have gone to areas where jobs are readily available. Since Liverpool has above average unemployment in the first place, they have not come here. It's a pity but just points yet again at what this city needs more of.
The problem is one of jobs. The new immigrants, who have driven population growth in other cities, have gone to areas where jobs are readily available. Since Liverpool has above average unemployment in the first place, they have not come here. It's a pity but just points yet again at what this city needs more of.
200 migrant workers arrive in Merseyside each week
Mar 10 2008 by David Higgerson, Liverpool Daily Post
MERSEYSIDE has witnessed an unprecedented explosion in the number of foreign nationals moving to the region to work.
An extra 200 people from foreign countries are arriving each week in Merseyside to begin work.
Figures revealed today by the Liverpool Daily Post show that, after several years of steady growth in the number of migrants working in the region, the figure shot up 39% last year.
It means that, in March, 2007, 32,000 overseas nationals were working in the Greater Merseyside region, up from 23,000 in March, 2006. In 2003, the figure was just 15,000.
The rate of growth of foreign nationals – measured by national insurance registration – in Greater Merseyside eclipses most other areas of the country, including more traditional areas of migration such as Greater Manchester and the West Midlands.
It depends on the pedigree of any decrease in numbers too.
I'd rather lose a potential football team worth of scallies from a single mother than 1 skilled person. Hopefully some have just realised that life as a single parent mother isn't that desirable after all.
As for unskilled immigrants flooding North liverpool. There are enough unskilled indigenous already.
As far as I can see, students alone (if counted) have increased numbers - take a look around Hatton Garden, Marybone, Tithebarn St, Byrom St, Vauxhall Road, Leeds st.
A good indicator (although not foolproof) of whether migrant workers are still here or have left would be the number of Polish shops still trading. I know the student population is on the increase but do the ONS actually count them either?
Metrolink, thats the same dataset. With both Manchester & London questioning the accuracy of the estimates, it puzzles me why you think the Liverpool figures are so accurate? :dunno:
ONS loses 95,000 Londoners in latest population count
Released on 27 September 2007
The capital's councils are faced with severe financial shortfalls over the next three years due to woefully inaccurate population projections published by the Office for National Statistics this morning.
A good indicator (although not foolproof) of whether migrant workers are still here or have left would be the number of Polish shops still trading. I know the student population is on the increase but do the ONS actually count them either?
Metrolink, thats the same dataset. With both Manchester & London questioning the accuracy of the estimates, it puzzles me why you think the Liverpool figures are so accurate? :dunno:
So, if they don't count immigrants, how are some cities reported to have increased populations?
A problem that Liverpool will have for quite a while is a similar one that Ireland had for years after their economy started booming. It was still easier to leave Ireland for a good job due to uncles, friends, Community support structures etc in places like London and the US. The position for Liverpool is that even though there are jobs here now, including some good ones, there are more to be had 'away'
compounding this is the wonderlust that many a scouse still has in their blood!
See Metro... I know full well the issues concerning Liverpool are not solely down to t'regional agenda.. that just helps perpetuate a big fuckign black hole here!
They're considered transient, as they're from the new EU countries and are considered to be working here for a set length of time. Of course, we all know none of them try and stay here.
I think the other provincial cities might get a large part of their immigration boosts from their long term large asian communities, something which Liverpool is lacking. The asian communities tend to have large families outside the UK.
But why pick out single mums at all? There are plenty of families with both parents who are just as bad. Why use the stereotype?
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
SkyscraperCity Forum
139.4M posts
1.1M members
Since 2002
A truly global community dedicated to skyscrapers, cities, urban development, and the metropolitan environment. Join us to share news, views and fun about architecture, construction, transport, skylines, and much more!