We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Net migration down nearly 100,000 over the year
Comments
-
Graham_Devon wrote: »You said double taxation. You didn't say 2 thirds of your income.
If income tax doubled, I could afford that.
I didn't limit it to income tax.
I meant all taxes, including NI, and the scrapping of any tax credits etc.“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
With adequate resources, an aging population is a lot easier to deal with that the same with a massively increased population.
Doesn't matter how much oil/gas/coal/minerals are in the ground if we don't have enough people to generate economic activity and pay the bills to buy/extract them.Immigrants entering the UK now will be OAP in 40-50 years and so will be adding to our aging population problems
Eh?
The problem is NOW.
And we're only trying to buy ourselves 50-60 years of time to manage the passing down of aged care costs from 3 generations ahead to ourselves.
We simply can't do it overnight. All the experts agree.
And this little Englander mentality which wants to limit immigration will see Germany and everyone else competing for immigrants steal human capital which we should be getting our fair share of.There may well be some benefits to encourage immigration in 20-30 years time depending upon how things turn out but doing it now simply adds to the aging problem.
What the....?
Seriously, do you have the foggiest idea how bad this problem is?
Even with current levels of immigration, we're losing the battle. We need more, we need a lot more, and we need them now.
Not in 30 years, when it will be far too late, and the economy will have been devastated.“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »I didn't limit it to income tax.
I meant all taxes, including NI, and the scrapping of any tax credits etc.
Seemingly adding things as you go along!
Anyway, what about the countries that lose their people Hamish? What happens to them?
Third time lucky on this questioning!0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »Seemingly adding things as you go along!
Anyway, what about the countries that lose their people Hamish? What happens to them?
Third time lucky on this questioning!
All countries have to compete for human capital.
People are the resource of the future.
We win that battle via having immigration friendly policies, a growing economy, and a business climate that attracts the best and brightest.
We don't win it by having xenophobic little englander muppets proclaiming "the country is full" when we've only built on 4% of the UK.“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »Seemingly adding things as you go along!
!
Could you afford to live if 2/3 of your income went on tax?“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »All countries have to compete for human capital.
People are the resource of the future.
We win that battle via having immigration friendly policies, a growing economy, and a business climate that attracts the best and brightest.
We don't win it by having xenophobic little englander muppets proclaiming "the country is full" when we've only built on 4% of the UK.
So....what happens to those countries in which we compete for their people and win?0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »So....what happens to those countries in which we compete for their people and win?
What happens in any competitive situation?
Are you saying Apple shouldn't be competitive, because the shareholders of Sony might lose out a bit?
Or that Britain shouldn't try to attract businesses to locate here because Poland or Ireland might lose out?
It's the same thing.
And don't cry false tears for other countries Graham, when you know full well you just don't want immigrants here because you think it'll cheapen house prices, and damn the cost to society and the economy.“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »If income tax doubled, I could afford that.
If my pension contributions doubled I could afford that.
...and I'm sure you'd be delighted about that!
Without immigration the population will fall due to low birth rates. There will be an increased number of pensioners who are less economically productive and taking out more in benefits and services too.
There will be an increased tax burden on you, me, my kids and your kids - why wouldn't we welcome people who could help us out? There will be technology advances which may help but at the end of the day everything has to be paid for - by real people.
Call it a pyramid scheme or immoral but importing economically productive people (who ideally have had a decent education at another country's expense) is likely to be part of the solution.0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »How?
How can we afford it?
Every single credible economist, think tank, research body, academic and government organisation says we simply can't.
Not without some immigration, some raising of pension age, some additional savings, some additional contributions.
A blended approach.
What if the cost to you was to double your tax contributions for life? AND to save twice what you do now in pension contributions?
Because that wouldn't be far off in reality from the real costs of doing what you propose.
How could you afford that?
How could anyone afford to pay two thirds of your gross income in tax, AND save most of the rest, AND have less in tax credits/benefits/services, AND still live day to day?
Other than a few millionaires and the top couple of percent of earners, I don't know anybody that could afford that.
So to say we could is a complete nonsense Graham.
And what about the costs to the economy of doing so? How many business would close if we removed 30% of consumer spending because it was taken in tax? How many millions made unemployed?
What you propose is economic and social suicide. It's madness.
Encouraging smoking and drinking should solve the problem and cost hardly anything.0 -
Encouraging smoking and drinking should solve the problem and cost hardly anything.
Well technically you'd have to encourage it AND not treat the resultant diseases.
Modern medicine has drastically increased survival rates.
But yes, anything that causes premature death would reduce the ratio of pensioners to workers.
For that matter, euthanasia would achieve a similar effect.
But that all seems a bit extreme just to get a slightly cheaper house and have fewer immigrants....“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.3K Spending & Discounts
- 247.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards