Do you want to discuss boring politics? (42 Viewers)
- Thread starter mrtrench
- Start date
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
It's OK, the market is about to deliver for us at last
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Best just keep doing nothing until the perfect solution arrives.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
That 'solvability' one is shocking really. You could have two of exactly the same crime, victim doesn't press charges but police decide to investigate further where easy (easy means less resource intensive = cheaper).
This is where nonsensical 'cost' principles collide with necessary public services.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
The current government is doing nothing material, changing planning laws in the hope the market delivers. It won't, it has no interest in doing so.
rob9872
Well-Known Member
Why do we need more people to solve a declining birth rate?
It's seen as so negative, yet all I see is less people = less services etc needed so less people needed to run them, less infrastructure required and less pressure on things like housing, jobs. More availability of housing and access to services means prices don't continue to spiral. Sure a shrinking economy, but that doesn't affect most people in their day to day. Less disposable income, but everything also costs less. Personally I don't see the downside.
It's seen as so negative, yet all I see is less people = less services etc needed so less people needed to run them, less infrastructure required and less pressure on things like housing, jobs. More availability of housing and access to services means prices don't continue to spiral. Sure a shrinking economy, but that doesn't affect most people in their day to day. Less disposable income, but everything also costs less. Personally I don't see the downside.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
The people who rely more on public services are increasing as a proportion of the population, so there are not "less services" there are more and yet less people to actually provide them.
rob9872
Well-Known Member
Will that also not rectify it though or we'll never break the cycle? Only one generation of pensioners will suffer (and I don't mind taking the hit for the future). Then it will be less coming through again.
Are you trying to make Malcolm and Grendel explode?
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Are you suggesting that we let the UK become extinct?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
The market has no interest in profit is an interesting take.
When I worked in that industry the bottleneck was sites through planning not developers.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
What are you classing as taking a hit as that could cover many things?
Are you talking not drawing a pension because there's no longer enough people paying in? Are you saying you will not use any NHS services or if you fall into ill health or get dementia you are happy to be left suffering and not receiving any care?
Not sure anyone is going to be winning an election campaigning on that platform. Look at the shit storm when WFA was means tested!
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
This is really the issue. By definition the largest demographic will have the most political sway and the problem is the demographic is too large. Also old age is the one thing hopefully everyone has to look forward to and no one wants to vote away their own entitlement either. Easy to fuck over the young when you’ll never be young again.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
That is probably true for some sites in some areas e.g. non brownfield sites in more affluent places.
Mild-Mannered Janitor
Kindest Bloke on CCFC / Maker of CCFC Dreams
I think many of the accidental or smaller landlords did so because of the potential capital growth as an alternative investment to Pensions - successive governments have completely changed pensions, caps, etc and trust and risk for those individuals on a government delivering something that could be relied on as a 30+ year investment was eroded.
Whilst the government have recently taken more involvement on reducing tax relief on interest and standards for housing etc, for those individuals, I think they thought that buying a property and seeing the increases gave them some form of non interfered income freedom that was more controllable. Not sure it is now which is leading to the sales
Whilst the government have recently taken more involvement on reducing tax relief on interest and standards for housing etc, for those individuals, I think they thought that buying a property and seeing the increases gave them some form of non interfered income freedom that was more controllable. Not sure it is now which is leading to the sales
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Tbh, your attitude demonstrates exactly why Labour will get decimated at the next election.
If there was a housing crisis when net migration was 50k per year, how do you expect to keep up when net migration has consistently been 5-6 times that?
The 300k house building target is premised on net migration being 175k. So we’re not even keeping pace. A few think tanks reckon we need 500k just to keep pace which is close to double the yearly average houses being built.
Does that graph show that living standards have flatlined in line with net migration? You’ll obviously say that correlation is of course not causation, but it’s telling. GDP per capita, likewise, has stalled. Most likely driven by the increase of % people are spending on rent/mortgage repayments and an ever increasing tax burden.
It’s ironic seeing two people of the left adopt neoliberal approaches to the labour market and freedom of movement. The New Right in the 70s dreamed of open borders and a cheap labour. The traditional Labour Left believed regulating the labour market was essential to protecting living standards.
To an extent, that’s right. It’s a self inflicted problem because if you allow your population to increase 15-20% that is mostly driven by net migration (estimate vary, generally 50-60%)… you need to have a comprehensive plan to deal with this influx of people.
As it happens, the electorate has broadly been voting for lower immigration, but got more of it. It is this issue in particular where trust in our traditional parties and institutions has been completely eroded. Hence, our notoriously difficult electoral system for upstart parties may be upended by Reform in 2029. A Nigel Farage led government has gone from complete fantasy to a realistic possibility in 12 months.
Moderation is key here, ‘net zero’ or hard caps on immigration aren’t generally good ideas. Equally, neither is an open border policy.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
You mean places where people want to live?
I’m not sure what that quote is meant to prove other than developers main job and where most value is added is currently in navigating an overly complex and restrictive planning regime rather than building houses TBH. Are you supposed to be supporting my point?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
You’re the one that wanted Brexit you loon! I’ve been advocating immigration from nations of similar economic and cultural status. You IIRC called that racist.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
No I didn’t, if you look back far enough on this thread, @Grendel and I argued like cat and dog on it. I was very much a Remainer.
You recall incorrectly (happens to us all), I’ve never called you or anyone racist on this forum.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
What are you on about you clown? You are the one talking about a population explosion and I've told you there isn't one.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Ah I must be mistaking you for someone during the Brexit wars. My bad.
We need immigration. Even if birth rate was stable I want the best people here and I want brits to be able to fall in love with foreigners and make a life here.
The last few years we’ve had a massive wave but frankly reporting has been focused on a tiny percentage of people on boats when the vast majority were legal Nigerians and Indians on care and student visas. It looks like that’s being addressed and the Boriswave is pretty much over. I really think it’s too early to call on anything else.
But the fact remains that even if we stop immigration dead tomorrow we need to build all the shit (houses infra transport) we’ve neglected for those already here. Which is why constantly bringing it up as a reposte to requests to actually build stuff is so frustrating.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Also why does no one ever recommend making more Britain?
en.m.wikipedia.org
Dutch would have had that drained in no time.
Doggerland - Wikipedia
Dutch would have had that drained in no time.
10%+ in 15 years is still a pretty rapid pace. I saw the growth rate chart but as we all know a low percentage of a high number can still be a high number.
It all depends on wider context though, the main issue being the ability to build and deliver adequate housing and infrastructure to meet the higher demand and needs. Even if the political will was there I’m not convinced it’s feasible when bringing planning and other building constraints (building firms capacity, time to build, tradesmen etc) into the equation.
All this stuff needs proper longer term planning and we’ve had fuck all of that for years
Ps We do need a decent level of immigration though…Inc some builders/trades to build new houses and infrastructure for starters !
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Bang on
'Free school meal boost will put £500 in parents’ pockets and help kids achieve'
Keir Starmer writes for the Mirror that 'it’s common sense that children can’t do well at school if they’re hungry' as he unveiled a major change to free school meal ruleswww.mirror.co.uk
Good news. But I’ll await the expert judgement on here that it’s proof Starmer is in the pocket of big poor kid, or perhaps fretting a foreign child might benefit accidentally.
Ugh, some of the comments on there.
rob9872
Well-Known Member
I've got a private pension and I'm not a picture of health so I don't think I'll see old bones
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Yes and no because it becomes a Ponzi scheme. Immigrants will get old and need pensions too so you create a vicious cycle of constantly needing more people. Data coming out of the OBR is low skilled migration is a net drain on the exchequer, the welfare bill for foreign born households has doubled in the last 3 years and this is without the ‘Boriswave’ numbers.
The root cause here is that the fertility rate has tanked and governments need to rethink policies to encourage families. Hungary exempting women who have 3+ children is an interesting idea and expanding the 2 child cap is a start. This isn’t unique to the UK but wider of the “developed” world.
Overall, we have common ground that the infrastructure is so far behind, it will take years and a massive expansion of the state spending to keep up.
If immigration was properly managed, it wouldn’t dominate the conversation as much as it does. Robust policies to ensure the preservation of our culture and values, integrating new arrivals, ensuring said new arrivals are net contributors to the exchequer and finally, being able to deport “irregular” arrivals and people who arrive and violate our laws… we’d all be happy.
I listened to Dominic Cummings on the Sky podcast and if what he says is true about the Royal Navy telling him ‘stopping the boats’ was laughably easy operationally… it really is a shambles.
Putting aside my confusion as to how you would robustly enforce "our culture and values", I simply don't believe there is any level of immigration that would make everyone happy.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
I’ve not read this article fully but I’m familiar with the policies Denmark have put forward successfully.
How Denmark's left (not the far right) got tough on immigration - BBC News
Denmark has come under international attention for its tough approach. And its Social Democrat prime minister is leading the charge
www.bbc.co.uk
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Watched a documentary on this recently. Part of the plan involves moving immigrants from 'ghettos', poor area's with a large percentage of immigrants, to more wealthy area's with low levels of immigrants. This is all funded by the goverenment.I’ve not read this article fully but I’m familiar with the policies Denmark have put forward successfully.
How Denmark's left (not the far right) got tough on immigration - BBC News
Denmark has come under international attention for its tough approach. And its Social Democrat prime minister is leading the charge
I can imagine there would be absolute uproar if Starmer said the government were going to fund similar here.
Suspect people will only want to copy parts of the plan that involve encouraging immigrants to leave and restricting numbers coming in.
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
I think we can safely say making a projection into 2072 is a load of complete and utter bollocks.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Ultimately if brits don’t want to have kids then the options are quick decline or immigration.
I’d be very careful about taking anything Cummings says as gospel, like Musk he talks a good game but when given the chance cried off. The boats are a distraction, tens of thousands at most. The problems people have with immigration aren’t caused by asylum seekers, they’re just emblematic. They’re caused by the rapid demographic change they see around them caused by mass non European migration. And as non Europeans are the only fuckers fucking these days the proportion of them anywhere in the world will increase. At least until Africa and Asia become as rich as Europe and stop fucking like Europe.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
But do we really need a massive car park for people to have sex in?Also why does no one ever recommend making more Britain?
Doggerland - Wikipedia
Dutch would have had that drained in no time.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
I don't agree with your rationale, because people alive now will just be getting older and there will be almost no-one to take care of them or add to the pot to pay for it.
However, the idea of increasing the population (and the birth rate) so you have enough economically active people to help pay for everything and provide the services etc. is massively flawed too. Eventually those people will get old, so you'll need even more people to provide for them. And then more to provide for those.
You can't have perpetual population growth because you will use up the resources and basically set people against each other as there is less and less to go around. It's the simple short term fix but massively flawed. We need to think harder and smarter for a solution.
Last edited: