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

[ill tonkso]

The forum is moderated. And I fail to see what needs to be removed.

[mouldss@hotmail.co.u]

democracy

[cnapan]

Originally Posted by DarJoLe

I'm just wondering where that architecture forum called skyscrapercity has gone.

It's here, but it's not just about skyscrapers. For example, people like you post messages about cable cars and mayors and minimalist vases.

Have you come here to dictate what people are allowed to chat about?

I started this topic because quite a few people have been asking how we can continue to fit more people into places like London. It's entirely relevant to the built environment... certainly as relevant as your views on public transport or the benefits of Ken Livingstone.

There are literally thousands of discussions on this forum. If you don't want to participate in one, then don't!

[cnapan]

Originally Posted by .Adam

discourage anyone with information or industry knowledge from posting

What are you talking about?

[Bowater]

So the intellectual argument has been loss for continuing immigration at its current rate and now we're discussing closing the thread for a lack of expert opinion? Sounds a lot like the 'diplomatic' process of the UK!

[menganito]

How come building more housing, roads, hospitals, .... infrastructure ..... equates to "make life in this country horrible" is beyond me.

Building is an industry that employs millions of britons and enjoying modern infrastructures is a sign of progress. Why would anyone want to stop building? Is there any modern country in the world that has stopped building?

What a load of rubbish of a thread, anyway. It certainly does not belong in this forum.

[geogregor]

These sort of pointless discussion surfaces from time to time in new thread. I remember participating in similar one some time ago.

Does anyone here have any serious or practical comments? Because so far both sides throw only generic comments of little value.
It starts looking a bit like any online forum in mainstream newspaper, loosing any Skyscrapercity quality.

[menganito]

It is actually a very xenophobic issue, the point of the thread is that population growth should be stopped and that immigration is the cause of population growth. Well actually there are two sources for population growth: net migration and people having children. Do the people that start this arguments ever think of limiting the number of children that peole can have, or selecting who has a right to bear children as a causes for the need of new hospitals, houses and infrastructures? Of course they don't.

The figures of net immigration for the UK are around, mostly below, 300.000 people a year, are less than 0.5% of the total population (at most) which means that unless people lived up to 200 years, with immigration alone the population of this country would decimate.

[Bowater]

Originally Posted by menganito

It is actually a very xenophobic issue, the point of the thread is that population growth should be stopped and that immigration is the cause of population growth. Well actually there are two sources for population growth: net migration and people having children. Do the people that start this arguments ever think of limiting the number of children that peole can have, or selecting who has a right to bear children as a causes for the need of new hospitals, houses and infrastructures? Of course they don't.

The figures of net immigration for the UK are around, mostly below, 300.000 people a year, are less than 0.5% of the total population (at most) which means that unless people lived up to 200 years, with immigration alone the population of this country would decimate.

Interestingly the discussion of immigration is completely non xeonophobic. If there were 300,000 extra Brits leaving each year then immigration would not be a problem. It has nothing to do with race at all.

[cnapan]

Originally Posted by geogregor

Does anyone here have any serious or practical comments?

Yes. Didn't you read the first one? Limit inward migration to match outward migration - a generous figure currently roughly 300-350 thousand people a year. By doing so, we can avoid putting a huge strain on existing infrastructure, bring down house prices.

Because so far both sides throw only generic comments of little value.

Not true. One side started screaming xenophobe and throwing sexist insults, sure. But nobody has found one single problem with my solution.

It starts looking a bit like any online forum in mainstream newspaper, loosing any Skyscrapercity quality.

Not really. Sure, Skyscrapercity is devalued by baseless comments from people like you who decide not to actually read a thread before commenting on it, but it's ok. It's an internet forum and I'm sure it'll survive your pointless contribution to the debate.

[cnapan]

Originally Posted by menganito

It is actually a very xenophobic issue, the point of the thread is that population growth should be stopped
and that immigration is the cause of population growth.

Immigration isn't the cause of population growth. You could have 350,000 people immigrating into the UK this year and not push the population up.

Well actually there are two sources for population growth: net migration and people having children.

But right now, the UK is experiencing no population growth from people having children, so it's irrelevant to our problems today.

Do the people that start this arguments ever think of limiting the number of children that peole can have

Surely that's a question for parents of large families, but actually, in our country at least, it's irrelevant because as a whole, families in our country don't have more children than replacement value.

or selecting who has a right to bear children as a causes for the need of new hospitals, houses and infrastructures? Of course they don't.

So why bring it up? You're wasting your time with these irrelevant diversions.

The figures of net immigration for the UK are around, mostly below, 300.000 people a year,

The graph I posted at the top is the official statistics for migration since 1962 - as defined by the Office of National Statistics. If we're to debate migration, we may as well stick to the official statistics rather than your made up numbers.

This isn't about this number or that number. My point, precisely, is that the numbers should be made to balance by either encouraging or limiting inward migration so that it matches emigration (which, of course, should always be allowed).

are less than 0.5% of the total population (at most) which means that unless people lived up to 200 years, with immigration alone the population of this country would decimate.

Well, let's ignore your dodgy maths and just return to the statistics, which show that right now, we've got a huge imbalance, which is easily sorted - and still encourages hundreds of thousands of people to make their home in our country each year.

How can it be xenophobic to welcome 300-350 thousand people a year into our country?

Answer: it isn't.

[jamiefearon]

Can this xenophobic pointless thread please be closed. cnapan is being offensive and ignorant, this rubbish belongs in the Daily Fail not SSC.

[Bowater]

Originally Posted by jamiefearon

Can this xenophobic pointless thread please be closed. cnapan is being offensive and ignorant, this rubbish belongs in the Daily Fail not SSC.

I feel like my more eloquanet points are being ignored because it's a lot easier to bait Cnapan.

In 2011 338,000 emigrants left the UK.

In 2011 589,000 arrived in the UK.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with 338,000 foreigners coming to the UK this year, next year, every year. What is considered a potential point of discussion is 252,000 more people arriving to the UK than are leaving!

It may well be that the 338,000 persons leaving the UK are white British nationals and 338,000 of the 589,000 arriving in the UK are employees of foreign MNC's. Fine.

Similarly if 338,000 persons leaving the UK were from non white British backgrounds and the 589,000 arriving were white British nationals there would be a problem still.

Why in God's name are you bringing race into this jamiefearon? Either you are doing it to bait Cnapan or you are doing it to muddy the waters, or you are not mature enough to discuss the real issue.

It's not clear even if it is an issue but if you cannot move beyond it's 'Xenophobic' 'Stop being Xenophobic' 'You're such a Xenophone' then it's a pretty childish discussion.

I think there's a good case to increase the economic acticity of other British cities to mitigate the need for people to migrate from towards London. Does that make me a Xenophobe? Do I hate Northerners now? Do I not like Scottish people because I would like to see Glasgow and Edinburgh flourish as much London.

I question your intelligence jamiefearon and anyone else who relies on such simplistic arguments.

[jamiefearon]

I never mentioned race in any of my posts.

[ill tonkso]

That is kind of what xenophobia implies.

[Bowater]

Originally Posted by jamiefearon

I never mentioned race in any of my posts.

So what do you mean by your use of the word xenophobic?

[jamiefearon]

...

[ill tonkso]

Please google what the word xenophobe means before using it then.

[menganito]

Xenophobia does not imply race.

If I wanted to imply racism I would have used the word "racism".


Il tonkso have you googled what Xenophobia means before recommending others to do so? (it could save you some embarrassment)

[Bowater]

Originally Posted by menganito

Xenophobia does not imply race.

If I wanted to imply racism I would have used the word "racism".


Il tonkso have you googled what Xenophobia means before recommending others to do so? (it could save you some embarrassment)

Have you Googled Xenophobia? It means a fear of something foreign or strange. Typically Xenophobia is used to describe a fear or foreginers who are different from that country.

The point is an immigrant could be a white British national who is in no way thought to be strange or foreign similpy because they have lived abroad for some time and are now returning to the UK. So I don't see how the word 'Xenophobic' is any way relevant to this discussion.