Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
A shrinking population and rising GDP per capita would do wonders for the UK to alleviate the housing crisis, traffic, infrastructure stress and congestion. A shrinking population isn’t a bad thing as long as that population is working age and productive.
You are right, but now the UK has a rising population and flatlining GDP per capita. Furthermore, the proportion of productive people is falling rapidly both due to the UK boomers (born 1955-73) reaching retirement and lower workforce participation by people of working age, mainly due to ill health.
The demography of the UK may eventually get to what you describe but probably only after all of the UK boomers have died. That's at least 30 years away.
In the short term (the next 30 years) the things that are needed are rising GDP per capita and increased workforce participation by people of working age. This government at least recognises these and is trying to do something about both.
A shrinking population and rising GDP per capita would do wonders for the UK to alleviate the housing crisis, traffic, infrastructure stress and congestion. A shrinking population isn’t a bad thing as long as that population is working age and productive.
Are you suggesting we kill the elderly, or send them to Rwanda or something? We all know that a shrinking population overall could have a number of financial and environmental benefits if a greater proportion of them are working productively, but you haven't put anything on the table which can achieve that. Well, except possibly the destruction of the public services which are so important in keeping the elderly healthy and alive.
They are mostly not children. They are mostly young men coming over who will later bring their families if successful. This is actually quite handy in a way.
However this distracts from the real issue which is that we should be processing applications much quicker, and ideally offer (and prefer) applications made before travel to the UK.
Indeed, this is the problem, slow processing of applications benefits nobody. not the Taxpayer - as keeping people in accommodation is expensive, nor the claimants - as they're kept in limbo for a very long time.
The main cause of this problem is due to the Conservatives allowing the cases to pile up, and refusing to engage constructively with Europe in the name of the one true Brexit.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I’m a proponent of Hans Hermann Hoppes idea of natural order. You own the land which you pay taxes on and the more tax you pay the more land you are entitled to. Tax quantity = land owned and redistribute land that way.
That sounds thoroughly chaotic, presumably land entitlements would change every tax-year? Similarly, confiscation of all those assets would make Stalin look like a moderate.
You’d have private internment facilities and deportations carried out by a corporation without red tape and a level of government oversight anlthough the corporation would own the land (the coastline) they operate by paying taxes on it.
I am not aware of any situations where having private incarceration without oversight has gone well. What exactly would be the red tape you cut, could you give us some specifics? Maybe "you can't cut people's fingers off as punishment?" or "you have to give people food?"
I can't imagine the King would be happy at having the coastline, which is part of the Royal Estate, confiscated.
Marxist-Leninist economic theory would suggest we start by rejuvenating heavy industry, with public ownership. Perhaps that would work better than trusting our future to a market full of greedy venture capitalists that don't care about Britain, but only their fund's quarterly returns?
but the other half was detailed in an IEA (Institute of Economic Affairs) report where high energy bills and over regulation is making us internationally uncompetitive.
Could you explain, in detail, exactly which regulations are causing high energy bills? How would removing them get energy bills down, and how do we ensure that the negative consequences that those laws were put in place to protect against don't return?
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I thought I would read up a bit about this gentleman, having never heard of him. Here's a quote from his book "Democracy: The God that Failed", about the kinds of community that will exist in his world:
Seems cheery, they make the KGB and Gestapo look friendly.
It is also ironic that the same person that is advocating for serfdom, is the one arguing against parasitism. I wonder how long before the lower classes realise who the parasite really is...
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I don’t agree with everything he says and I’m not a proponent of creating a natural order fundamentalist state because look what happened when Marx’s writings were put into practice almost verbatim.
A shrinking population and rising GDP per capita would do wonders for the UK to alleviate the housing crisis, traffic, infrastructure stress and congestion. A shrinking population isn’t a bad thing as long as that population is working age and productive.
However, that isn't the population we find ourselves with. Our demography is skewed towards the elderly, as the economic conditions of late-stage capitalism are unfavourable to working people having lots of children.
I would also say that despite posturing when it comes to full council meetings, in our local authority Lib Dems, Independents, Labour and Tories can work quite well for the common good on council committees and be polite or even friendly with individual members of the opposition, but I doubt whether Reform councillors will have the maturity or the strength of character to stand up to the baying of their party leaders.
I can imagine lots of interruptions and diversions in council meetings and committees to try and talk about the agenda they want, even if totally irrelevant to the point at hand. Try and score a few soundbites too. That’s the Reform way.
Unfortunately they may find that once the election news has settled down, the media isn’t that interested in local council happenings!
Private Eye Rotten Boroughs may need 2 pages instead of one.
This week's has five pieces about Reform candidates, taking up about half the page, led by an item about the Reform candidate for Cambridgeshire and Peterborough mayor.
I thought I would read up a bit about this gentleman, having never heard of him. Here's a quote from his book "Democracy: The God that Failed", about the kinds of community that will exist in his world:
A shrinking population and rising GDP per capita would do wonders for the UK to alleviate the housing crisis, traffic, infrastructure stress and congestion. A shrinking population isn’t a bad thing as long as that population is working age and productive.
So what's your solution to the increasing population being driven by the increasing numbers of older people then, involuntary euthanasia perchance? Logan's Run come true but for pensioners?
Private Eye Rotten Boroughs may need 2 pages instead of one.
This week's has five pieces about Reform candidates, taking up about half the page, led by an item about the Reform candidate for Cambridgeshire and Peterborough mayor.
Yeah it’s going to be…interesting. Many of these would have been drawn from the formerly UKIP ilk. They had a tendency to have explosive internal disagreements and splinter across.
Considering Reform has managed to capture generally “disapproval” with the record of both centre-left Labour, centre-right (and increasingly trending right) Conservative and engage reactionary/authoritarian right-wing types, traditional working classes as well as those who might normally vote for independents, I really do think they will struggle to cohesively work together.
Fair play to them for managing to get a local branch network in place in a year - something UKIP failed to do - but when it comes to the nitty-gritty as a relatively young party there will definitely be ideological differences on how to manage council budgets (many of which are already cut to the bone).
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
So what's your solution to the increasing population being driven by the increasing numbers of older people then, involuntary euthanasia perchance? Logan's Run come true but for pensioners?
This is to be fair a major problem, and a key reason as to why costs to social care / NHS have gone up - we are in completely uncharted demographic territory in human history when it comes to the proportion of people in the over 65s in western populations.
I don’t think any party in any country has been able to look and resolve this satisfactorily. The main options are normally massively politically unpopular (more immigration or cutting benefits/pensions for retirees) so extra tax burden on working people (still unpopular!) has been preferred.
One issue is that this could have been foreseen a decade or two ago but as per usual for the UK, we are terrible at long-term planning for infrastructure so nothing was done about it so now its short-term firefighting.
It's becoming very clear that Reform needs to be fought hard, or we are in grave danger of repeating here what's happening in the USA. Farage is a conman, but he has successfully conned the country into Brexit and may con himself into No10. He will be totally incompetent in the PM role, but he will do what Trump is doing. Generate lots of soundbites and false unsupported statistics as a smokescreen to allow the right wing nutjobs to move in and dismantle the democratic state which for all its faults does try to look after all its citizens.
I expect that we will soon see Reform councillors leaving the party and either joining another party, mostly the Conservatives, or becoming independent. Some will go because they joined with the genuine intention of running a council responsibly and find that they are lined up with a bunch of nut jobs. Others will become frustrated because they can’t get their weird policies through. And others will suddenly realise that being a councillor, let alone running a council, involves a lot of work. It will be interesting to see if Reform will expel councillors who turn up only just frequently enough to maintain their ward and allowances. (No party is good at the last, but without specifically saying so, Reform suggests that all its councillors will work tirelessly for the voters. - Mem. Don’t emulate Farage in Clacton.)
I expect that we will soon see Reform councillors leaving the party and either joining another party, mostly the Conservatives, or becoming independent. Some will go because they joined with the genuine intention of running a council responsibly and find that they are lined up with a bunch of nut jobs. Others will become frustrated because they can’t get their weird policies through. And others will suddenly realise that being a councillor, let alone running a council, involves a lot of work. It will be interesting to see if Reform will expel councillors who turn up only just frequently enough to maintain their ward and allowances. (No party is good at the last, but without specifically saying so, Reform suggests that all its councillors will work tirelessly for the voters. - Mem. Don’t emulate Farage in Clacton.)
That was what I was thinking of. Will Reform deal with councillors who turn up once every six months to attend a meeting, and then disappear off the council’s, the party‘s and the public’s radar for another six months? Or will they just hang onto the numbers and not risk losing a by-election, just like the other parties normally do?
But normally new councillors come forward in a more gradual manner from other parties (even Greens). However, having a rapid influx of 600 odd councillors, a number of whom are now the majority on councils and will be in council cabinet roles and where many would have only joined in the last 6 months or so with a very broad spectrum of views -often are "anti" something rather "pro" an ideology - is bound to cause problems. And no matter how good your "vetting", it is likely with such a large number all trying to get along and run an authority for 1+ million people, there will be a disproportionate number of issues.
So what's your solution to the increasing population being driven by the increasing numbers of older people then, involuntary euthanasia perchance? Logan's Run come true but for pensioners?
That was what I was thinking of. Will Reform deal with councillors who turn up once every six months to attend a meeting, and then disappear off the council’s, the party‘s and the public’s radar for another six months? Or will they just hang onto the numbers and not risk losing a by-election, just like the other parties normally do?
This is what matters for opposition councillors, but, where Reform is the governing party, at least some councillors will have more onerous responsibilities.
These days many councils govern using a leader and cabinet model. Where Reform is the majority party it has to find the councillors to fulfil those functions, which are a big time commitment over a long period. Very few of their councillors will have any experience of this.
I suspect that lots of Reform candidates will have allowed their names onto the ballot paper with no expectation of winning. Once the euphoria of victory has died down they may wonder what they have let themselves in for. It is going to be interesting to see if those councils with a Reform majority can form a functioning cabinet to deliver the public services for which they will be responsible.
This is what matters for opposition councillors, but, where Reform is the governing party, at least some councillors will have more onerous responsibilities.
These days many councils govern using a leader and cabinet model. Where Reform is the majority party it has to find the councillors to fulfil those functions, which are a big time commitment over a long period. Very few of their councillors will have any experience of this.
I suspect that lots of Reform candidates will have allowed their names onto the ballot paper with no expectation of winning. Once the euphoria of victory has died down they may wonder what they have let themselves in for. It is going to be interesting to see if those councils with a Reform majority can form a functioning cabinet to deliver the public services for which they will be responsible.
Even with a cabinet system, they still need to have enough votes to get their measures through full council meetings. With a united opposition (possible) and a number of defections, by-election losses or non-attendees, some places may have problems. Or the cabinet may be taken over by impractical zealots who try to push through with measures that are actually illegal and cause even more problems for all.
So what's your solution to the increasing population being driven by the increasing numbers of older people then, involuntary euthanasia perchance? Logan's Run come true but for pensioners?
The solution being implemented is to periodically increase the State Pension Age. It is currently scheduled to increase from 66 to 67 phased in 2026 to 2028 and 67 to 68 phased in 2044 to 2046 but the latter could be done sooner and there could be further increases in future.
The solution being implemented is to periodically increase the State Pension Age. It is currently scheduled to increase from 66 to 67 phased in 2026 to 2028 and 67 to 68 phased in 2044 to 2046 but the latter could be done sooner and there could be further increases in future.
The impact of this is sometimes overestimated. The impact on the public finances through state pension payments is reduced, but the impact on workforce participation is only partial. People in low wage low productivity work may feel financially compelled to work for another year, but, for people in high wage high productivity work, it only has a marginal impact on when they choose to stop working. Many people in high wage high productivity work are already stopping work before they get to state pension age.
But normally new councillors come forward in a more gradual manner from other parties (even Greens). However, having a rapid influx of 600 odd councillors, a number of whom are now the majority on councils and will be in council cabinet roles and where many would have only joined in the last 6 months or so with a very broad spectrum of views -often are "anti" something rather "pro" an ideology - is bound to cause problems. And no matter how good your "vetting", it is likely with such a large number all trying to get along and run an authority for 1+ million people, there will be a disproportionate number of issues.
Or put another way - the Tories' post-brexit purity purge and unexpected landslide led to a group of MPs so bumbling and inept that they were derisively called "the 2019 intake" even within the party.
If that's how the supposedly experienced and well resourced Tories managed it, what hope does Reform have? Especially in places like Durham where they've taken control literally from nowhere, and I can't imagine they're too receptive of advice from the "woke" "do-nothing" council staff
I suspect that lots of Reform candidates will have allowed their names onto the ballot paper with no expectation of winning. Once the euphoria of victory has died down they may wonder what they have let themselves in for. It is going to be interesting to see if those councils with a Reform majority can form a functioning cabinet to deliver the public services for which they will be responsible.
True, but I do wonder how many of the newly elected Reform Councillors were, in another life, Councillors for a different party - someone somewhere is probably looking at this right now!
Flying start for Andrea Jenkyns according to the Independent. It says her plan to sack Lincolnshires diversity officers has hit a small snag - They haven’t got any.
Flying start for Andrea Jenkyns according to the Independent. It says her plan to sack Lincolnshires diversity officers has hit a small snag - They haven’t got any.
Flying start for Andrea Jenkyns according to the Independent. It says her plan to sack Lincolnshires diversity officers has hit a small snag - They haven’t got any.
Flying start for Andrea Jenkyns according to the Independent. It says her plan to sack Lincolnshires diversity officers has hit a small snag - They haven’t got any.
I expect that we will soon see Reform councillors leaving the party and either joining another party, mostly the Conservatives, or becoming independent. Some will go because they joined with the genuine intention of running a council responsibly and find that they are lined up with a bunch of nut jobs. Others will become frustrated because they can’t get their weird policies through. And others will suddenly realise that being a councillor, let alone running a council, involves a lot of work. It will be interesting to see if Reform will expel councillors who turn up only just frequently enough to maintain their ward and allowances. (No party is good at the last, but without specifically saying so, Reform suggests that all its councillors will work tirelessly for the voters. - Mem. Don’t emulate Farage in Clacton.)
Donna Edmunds had threatened to defect at some point in the future.
uk.news.yahoo.com
A Reform UK councillor has been suspended by the party just three days after being elected.
Donna Edmunds faces an investigation after it emerged she had previously vowed to defect to another right-wing party in the future.
She became one of Reform’s 677 new councillors when she was elected in Hodnet, Shropshire, on Thursday.
But in a post on X today she said: “This morning I woke up to an email from Reform UK Head Office advising me that I have been suspended from the party ‘pending an investigation’. Why? Because I urged people here on X to lend Reform their support for the short term - for Thursday’s elections - even if they felt they couldn’t for the long term.
“According to Head Office ‘this has brought the party into disrepute and damaged the interests of the party’.”
She then went on to criticise the party for kicking out Rupert Lowe MP and ditching its former deputy leader, Ben Habib.
Edmunds also shared a screengrab of a post she made on X last week in which she said: “I’m a Reform candidate. I’m waiting for Rupert and Ben to give us a real alternative and then I’ll defect. I’m far from being the only one.”
She added: “This campaign has been a difficult one. For every resident in my ward who supported Reform, I found another who wanted an alternative to the failed Tories and vindictive Labour, but couldn’t bring themselves to vote for a party who would behave so shamefully toward their own.”
A shrinking population and rising GDP per capita would do wonders for the UK to alleviate the housing crisis, traffic, infrastructure stress and congestion. A shrinking population isn’t a bad thing as long as that population is working age and productive
Did you not see the pointy I made about the falling working aged to over 65 ratio?
If we were to reduce the size of the population by means of reducing immigration we could end up in the situation where the ratio gets much closer to 1:1 much faster.
This tool from the ONS gives you some idea of what would be the outcome based on changing certain variables:
An ONS interactive tool showing UK population projections based on changes to life expectancy, fertility and migration.
www.ons.gov.uk
With net zero immigration it shows 46 people over 65 for every 100 aged 16-64.
That compares to the standard model which shows 36 people over 65 for every 100 aged 16-64.
Both of those compare with the 2022 figure of 29:100.
Also note that quite a lot of 16-21 year olds are in full time education (especially given that up to 18 year old need to be in education - the 16 year old banding is historic from when that was the school leaving age).
No, there's no sarcasm, I was agreeing with the poster as to where we could make cuts to the Civil Servants - the fact that this is counter to what they were also talking about was very much the point.
It's easy to come up with a "simple solution" to an issue, however often there's consequences to that.
As Reform councillors & councils will find over the next 6-12 months. Most of their entire being is simple & catchy soundbites (with a dollop of scapegoating) to what are deeply complex issues.
Flying start for Andrea Jenkyns according to the Independent. It says her plan to sack Lincolnshires diversity officers has hit a small snag - They haven’t got any.
The other snag with her plan is she is Mayor of the Greater Lincolnshire Combined County Authority, not Lincolnshire County Council so she cannot make decisions about Lincolnshire County Council. Does she know which job she was elected to do?
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
