daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > European Forums > UK & Ireland Architecture Forums > Projects and Construction > London Metro Area

London Metro Area London Calling...



Reply

 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 1 votes, 5.00 average.
Old December 3rd, 2012, 08:51 PM   #1
cnapan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 123

Why do we always need more houses, roads, trains, hospitals, schools?

The answer:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...1964-2011.html

Well, it's not the whole answer, as domestic lifestyle changes and a small increase in life expectancy over the period have their effect too, but there are two interesting points:

1) Immigration has always been substantial (at least since 1964) - up in the hundreds of thousands - as has emigration.

2) Unfortunately (or fortunately?) life in Britain is a net attractor of people. If you want a laissez faire migration policy, the choice is then:
a) Make life in Britain shit enough to put people off
b) keep building forever.

Isn't it time to balance the numbers? I'm *NOT* saying end immigration - just control it to match emigration.

How can that not be a good idea?
cnapan no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old December 3rd, 2012, 11:05 PM   #2
Bowater
Registered User
 
Bowater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London/Exeter
Posts: 1,241
Likes (Received): 71

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnapan View Post
The answer:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...1964-2011.html

Well, it's not the whole answer, as domestic lifestyle changes and a small increase in life expectancy over the period have their effect too, but there are two interesting points:

1) Immigration has always been substantial (at least since 1964) - up in the hundreds of thousands - as has emigration.

2) Unfortunately (or fortunately?) life in Britain is a net attractor of people. If you want a laissez faire migration policy, the choice is then:
a) Make life in Britain shit enough to put people off
b) keep building forever.

Isn't it time to balance the numbers? I'm *NOT* saying end immigration - just control it to match emigration.

How can that not be a good idea?
It's a mute point because the UK is already overpopulated by 20 million to 30 million people. Most of the northern cities are not economically viable. Many new towns are not economically viable. And neither too council estates.

Saying the UK is overpopulated is like saying Germany is not racially pure, you would have to kill 90% of the population to achieve that dubious goal, basically it's futile and pointless.
Bowater no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 11:29 AM   #3
jamiefearon
Registered User
 
jamiefearon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: London
Posts: 802
Likes (Received): 125

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnapan View Post
The answer:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...1964-2011.html

Well, it's not the whole answer, as domestic lifestyle changes and a small increase in life expectancy over the period have their effect too, but there are two interesting points:

1) Immigration has always been substantial (at least since 1964) - up in the hundreds of thousands - as has emigration.

2) Unfortunately (or fortunately?) life in Britain is a net attractor of people. If you want a laissez faire migration policy, the choice is then:
a) Make life in Britain shit enough to put people off
b) keep building forever.

Isn't it time to balance the numbers? I'm *NOT* saying end immigration - just control it to match emigration.

How can that not be a good idea?
Xenophobic rubbish cnapan. Why don't we sterilize people so they can't reproduce? Restricting immigration is pointless and counter-productive.
jamiefearon no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 11:54 AM   #4
Ebeneezer_Goode
Registered User
 
Ebeneezer_Goode's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 836
Likes (Received): 220

Quote:
Originally Posted by jamiefearon View Post
Restricting immigration is pointless and counter-productive.
I wouldn't go that far. Importing poverty en masse is hardly beneficial.
Ebeneezer_Goode no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 12:26 PM   #5
Officer Dibble
cartoon policeman
 
Officer Dibble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Londres
Posts: 3,304
Likes (Received): 247

Well restricting net immigration is one possibility. Building enough houses, roads, trains, hospitals, schools is the other, and I prefer it. Unfortunately we're not doing it, and one direct result is a massive rise in anti-immigration sentiment.
Officer Dibble no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 01:37 PM   #6
CharlieP
Registered User
 
CharlieP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Wakefield, Little Satan
Posts: 21,832
Likes (Received): 501

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bowater View Post
It's a mute point
Moot, maybe?
__________________
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
CharlieP está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 02:01 PM   #7
Octoman
Just Relax
 
Octoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London
Posts: 21,515
Likes (Received): 2424

We NEED immigration right now if the current working generation is to have any hope of retiring before they are 90. The alternative is that we all start churning out kids.
__________________
Don't bank on Salmond. Keep the UK - keep the pound.
Octoman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 02:08 PM   #8
UrbanG
Registered User
 
UrbanG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 362
Likes (Received): 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ebeneezer_Goode View Post
I wouldn't go that far. Importing poverty en masse is hardly beneficial.
really? its cheap labour. Not saying I agree with that but I wouldn't dismiss it so emphatically
UrbanG no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 02:24 PM   #9
mouldss@hotmail.co.u
moulds
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 460
Likes (Received): 20

Ideally they should have told us what they were doing and give us free and fair referendum.
mouldss@hotmail.co.u no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 02:26 PM   #10
sirstan74
Registered User
 
sirstan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 514
Likes (Received): 92

Yes, unless we start killing off people once they've had x years of retirement benefits we need immigrants to offset our low birth rate (which is below replacement level) and increasing life expectancy. Furthermore we need the global contacts the immigrants bring to aid our economy, which is one of the hidden benefits of having a large international student population.
sirstan74 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 02:29 PM   #11
cnapan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 123

Quote:
Originally Posted by jamiefearon View Post
Xenophobic rubbish cnapan.
How is it xenophobic to allow 200,000 people into the country a year? What a stupid offensive response.

Quote:
Why don't we sterilize people so they can't reproduce?
...and that's even more offensive. Are you sick?

Quote:
Restricting immigration is pointless and counter-productive.
How so?
cnapan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 02:29 PM   #12
sirstan74
Registered User
 
sirstan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 514
Likes (Received): 92

Quote:
Originally Posted by mouldss@hotmail.co.u View Post
Ideally they should have told us what they were doing and give us free and fair referendum.
How would this referendum have been worded?
sirstan74 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 02:32 PM   #13
mouldss@hotmail.co.u
moulds
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 460
Likes (Received): 20

Quote:
Originally Posted by sirstan74 View Post
How would this referendum have been worded?
in a free and fair manner
mouldss@hotmail.co.u no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 02:33 PM   #14
cnapan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 123

Quote:
Originally Posted by Octoman View Post
We NEED immigration right now if the current working generation is to have any hope of retiring before they are 90. The alternative is that we all start churning out kids.
And when they all get old? Will we need to double the immigration rate again so they don't have to retire at 90?

Naked self-interest is why the world is up shit creek in the first place. I can see it's not going to get any better!
cnapan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 02:34 PM   #15
cnapan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 123

Quote:
Originally Posted by sirstan74 View Post
Yes, unless we start killing off people once they've had x years of retirement benefits we need immigrants to offset our low birth rate (which is below replacement level)
The birth rate is not below replacement level.
cnapan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 02:45 PM   #16
sirstan74
Registered User
 
sirstan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 514
Likes (Received): 92

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnapan View Post
The birth rate is not below replacement level.
UK fertility rate last year was 1.98 children per female
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/vsob1/...b-Key-findings

Replacement level is 2.1 children per female in developed countries
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub-replacement_fertility
sirstan74 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 02:49 PM   #17
jamiefearon
Registered User
 
jamiefearon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: London
Posts: 802
Likes (Received): 125

How is it xenophobic to allow 200,000 people into the country a year? What a stupid offensive response.

It's not, that's my point



...and that's even more offensive. Are you sick?
It's just as stupid and offensive as your 'solution'


How so?
We live in a Global economy, people should be allowed to live and work wherever they please.
jamiefearon no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 03:16 PM   #18
Ebeneezer_Goode
Registered User
 
Ebeneezer_Goode's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 836
Likes (Received): 220

Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanG View Post
really? its cheap labour. Not saying I agree with that but I wouldn't dismiss it so emphatically
I would if I wanted to maintain a robust social safety net. We can't afford both.
Ebeneezer_Goode no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 08:13 PM   #19
Bowater
Registered User
 
Bowater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London/Exeter
Posts: 1,241
Likes (Received): 71

Restricting immigration does not sit easy with me. But to be fair to the OP we have not really offered many compelling reasons against it.

The present rate of technological progress infers we need a smaller population, so that our birth rate is below the replacement level is good news.

The number of people employed in the UK is at an all time high, that we still have unemployment means the working population has grown too fast versus the growth in jobs.

But the UK population is work shy and feckless I hear you cry, well immigration is a sticking plaster which detracts from this issue. Namely a miss-match of skills/qualities needed and skill/qualities on offer to employers.

Industries like Banking, Energy and Engineering do require the free movement of professionals across boarders but do we need young Asian women being married off for their passports? Do we need to import Thai brides for sad old men? Do we need to look to India to staff our Indian restaurants?
Bowater no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2012, 08:27 PM   #20
cnapan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 123

Quote:
Originally Posted by jamiefearon View Post
How is it xenophobic to allow 200,000 people into the country a year? What a stupid offensive response.

It's not, that's my point
Well if you had taken the care to read what I had written in the first message, you would have found that was precisely what I was suggesting.

Instead, you decided to call me a xenophobe, you offensive idiot.


Quote:
...and that's even more offensive. Are you sick?
It's just as stupid and offensive as your 'solution'
How can it be? My solution is to balance immigration and emigration, a solution which will allow a city's worth of immigrants into the country each year.

Can't you read simple english? Idiot.
Quote:
How so?
We live in a Global economy, people should be allowed to live and work wherever they please.
The vast majority of countries don't agree with you, including the most powerful engines of the global economy. And neither do I.

Good grief.
cnapan no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu