I just don't think it's productive to discuss any European-wide issue from solely the point of view of a wealthy country unless you're an Euroceptic, on which case it makes perfect sense. If you're not, then whatever solution you'd propose would have to consider the interests of other countries as well, or else it would risk of meaning the end of European Union as we know it. Maintaining Schengen open for skilled workers but closed for unskilled workers isn't one of those solutions.
Question Time & This Week
- Thread starter Liam147
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Because every couple is 2 people. To merely replace those 2, you need 2 children. In terms of decreasing population, that isn't necessarily a problem by itself. The problem is that those 2 parents eventually stop working and most likely become dependent on the state in some way, whether through normal pension, benefits or healthcare. You need young people of working age being taxed to pay for that. If you don't get that replenishment of that population, you get a population that is living longer and longer, that on average is older than it was 20/30 years ago and which requires a much greater strain on the working classes, as those who are dependent on the state become more and more.
We're not saying that it will cause humanity to veer into extinction or that it will cause Europe to become an uninhabited wasteland within 100 years. The problem with the dependency ratio increasing is that either we stop looking after our old if we're going to maintain living standards for those working or they're going to have to work for longer and get taxed more to continue supporting those people. In the very long term, it isn't sustainable and either needs the natives to get producing more kids or for the borders to be more open for the economy to maintain its level. Japan is another country that is going to have to wake up to this soon, regardless of how much they want to mainatin homogeneity in that country.
We're not saying that it will cause humanity to veer into extinction or that it will cause Europe to become an uninhabited wasteland within 100 years. The problem with the dependency ratio increasing is that either we stop looking after our old if we're going to maintain living standards for those working or they're going to have to work for longer and get taxed more to continue supporting those people. In the very long term, it isn't sustainable and either needs the natives to get producing more kids or for the borders to be more open for the economy to maintain its level. Japan is another country that is going to have to wake up to this soon, regardless of how much they want to mainatin homogeneity in that country.
Aye.
A sound plan for integrating immigrants smoothly (that doesn't include their ghettization in suburbs and the like), a society open to change, and we could both ameliorate the demographic problems of over crowded countries and solve the ones of ageing countries. However this is an endeavour of such scale and international cooperation that it won't be easy at all to handle. It surprises me how little this is debated, it's not the sort of problem that will have a solution if we only notice it too late. However, in the modern world it seems that there is no one to think about long-term problems, as politicians get no personal benefit of getting involved in this. They depend on short term solutions and rewards to remain in seat.
A sound plan for integrating immigrants smoothly (that doesn't include their ghettization in suburbs and the like), a society open to change, and we could both ameliorate the demographic problems of over crowded countries and solve the ones of ageing countries. However this is an endeavour of such scale and international cooperation that it won't be easy at all to handle. It surprises me how little this is debated, it's not the sort of problem that will have a solution if we only notice it too late. However, in the modern world it seems that there is no one to think about long-term problems, as politicians get no personal benefit of getting involved in this. They depend on short term solutions and rewards to remain in seat.
I'm against any appreciable net immigration to the UK, for environmental reasons. England, especially, is one of the most densely populated countries in the world (about 400 per square km) and more people means more overcrowding and more rural land swallowed for "development". I can live with giving up the possible economic benefits to the country of immigration. Also, in terms of population, the falling birth rate among the indigenous population helps reduce the total population and hence the density (good) but immigrants tend to have more children so that also counteracts the environmental benefits of a declining population.
Only about 2.27% of England is actually built on....
And everyone in England could be fitted on to the Isle of Wight. That doesn't change the fact that expanding the population means more green belt land taken up with other things like houses, roads, infrastructure. The downsides are more traffic, noise, smog, pollution, pressure on wildlife, demands on natural resources, etc. Regardless of what other progress humanity is or is not making, the world's ever expanding population is its biggest future problem, and places like England are already among the most over-populated.
It's not sexism, it's prejudice.
I can't wait to hear what alex thinks though.
I can't wait to hear what alex thinks though.
How is it sexist or prejudiced? 
It's crass, at worst.
It's crass, at worst.
He's prejudging ugly women as being shit just because they are ugly.
I do like how the UKIP MEP retorted to Barton's ridiculous generalisation with one of her own in that "all footballer's have their brains in their feet". Obviously that wasn't going to get called out.
Yeah, also crass and arrogant. I suppose you could say she was provoked, but nonetheless she revealed her own sexism and prejudice.
I would not say she was provoked, she just came out with it. His metaphor was shit, but at least the actual point he was on about made sense.
Got some real nutters in the audience tonight.
Par for the course up here.
Were you thinking of that old guy from the Highlands who said he would defend the UK with his life in the name of Jesus? And started shouting that he was concerned for the poor with such passion it looked like he was going to get up and knock someone out?
He was pretty mental.
He was pretty mental.
Definitely puts Mel Gibson in his place there
That's the guy. They came back to him again later as well as he was such good value, he didn't disappoint.
Yeah, we're not all as mental as that thankfully. Well, some of us aren't anyway.
He was both brilliant but somehow terrible at the same time. You watch so much QT then you start to feel like you're just going in circles. What's the actual point of it? A bit like reading this place sometimes.
He made the classic QT mistake of not putting his hand down before he started speaking
He seemed to get angrier the more he went on.Some clapped due to fear.
I wonder if his temper bubbles over like that often. You can imagine his family trying to prevent the subject of Britishness coming up when guests come over.
at the Scottish guy, he'd feck shit upPut that Scottish guy in charge, I say.
Yeah saw that Scottish guy last night, he was even more nutty the 2nd time they went to him.I bet he was a fearsome warrior in his day.
Brand and Farage on tonight, popcorn time.
This gon' be good.
Brand in full flow already.
This is fecking MAD
How do people like that get in?
Idiots vote for them.
Yup.
Brand well out of his depth. Nervous as feck.
Was that conservative MP the inspiration for Nicola Murray? Talk about a wet blanket.
Was that conservative MP the inspiration for Nicola Murray? Talk about a wet blanket.
It's just painful viewing. I've gone through a cycle from thinking watching Question Time made me a political scholar to avoiding it like the plague. The questions are always tabloid style clichés that get tabloid style answers with tabloid style clapping or booing from the cherry picked audience.
Unfortunately, you're right.