If Brexit needs house of commons and Lords backing ...

LHW99

As we were building up a disastrous ageing crisis because were were collectively too selfish to breed enough replacement young people.

Unfortunately human breeding is a significant issue for the world.
The Chinese chose a cruel and unpleasant way to approach the issue, but they did recognise the problem.
Immigration and population movement has gone on since the neolithic, but in those days, population rise was largely controlled by a dangerous world and lack of modern medecine.
That no longer applies in the West, and is increasingly inapplicable elsewhere. Population increase needs to be sensibly controlled everywhere, hopefully by education and encouragement. Otherwise long term, climate change may do it for us as the habitable regions of the globe fill up.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

LHW99 wrote: »

Unfortunately human breeding is a significant issue for the world.
The Chinese chose a cruel and unpleasant way to approach the issue, but they did recognise the problem.
Immigration and population movement has gone on since the neolithic, but in those days, population rise was largely controlled by a dangerous world and lack of modern medecine.
That no longer applies in the West, and is increasingly inapplicable elsewhere. Population increase needs to be sensibly controlled everywhere, hopefully by education and encouragement. Otherwise long term, climate change may do it for us as the habitable regions of the globe fill up.

I find it extraordinary that anyone can continue to be so ignorant of the facts.

Global birth rates have been plummeting for decades - most developed world countries have not managed to breed at even the 'population neutral' replacement fertility rate for decades - and the UK hasn't managed it for even a single year since 1970.

The coming population crisis is not one of too many people - it's of too few....

Masomnia

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Absolutely not....

You don't cure a broken leg by breaking the other leg to 'balance things up'.

A shortage of infrastructure can be addressed by simply building more infrastructure to meet our needs - we cannot be uniquely incompetent amongst our developed world peers of doing so - therefore it is neither advisable nor rational to restrict badly needed immigration on the basis of claiming we're just too incompetent to build some houses and roads.

It's not a case of us not being able to do it, as such, but the less you control immigration the harder it is to predict where we need the investment. It takes years to get from deciding that you need a new hospital, planning, design, consultations, and actually building it. If we don't even know what the levels of migration are going to be like in a few years time or where they will move to you can't do it. We need the population to rise at a sensible level in a controlled way.

Conrad

Just imagine if Brexit was over turned. All the problems we have with lack of democracy, inability to make important choices and rapidly rising population would still be there, and you know what, the resentment against the establishment would boil over and the nation really would become fractured.

Surely all of us ought now to be focusing our energy on making Britain a great sucess as we go forward! European citizens in the core nations will not do anything do harm thier own trade, and so all remainer fears are just a fantasy, all will be well. Even if they did decide to harm thier own trade with barriers, all will be ok as Japan and many others proove, given they export huge amounts of services to the EU

mrginge

wotsthat wrote: »

The knuckle-dragger part of the leave movement are probably going to vote UKIP and the like anyway.

There's a theme running through recent pages of this thread that whatever turn the Tories take it'll be brilliant for them. If that's the case there's an opportunity for the government to accept the ruling and debate a motion in good faith in parliament and likely win.

You'd find it would go a way towards healing the division that the referendum caused.

I can't see a single reason why they wouldn't want to do this other than for political gain.

Unlike you I am only interested in how we move forward in a positive way. Whereas your view is blinkered by your hatred of the tories, mine is about what steps the govt can take. It would make no difference to me if it was a labour or lib dem govt.

wotsthat

mrginge wrote: »

Unlike you I am only interested in how we move forward in a positive way. Whereas your view is blinkered by your hatred of the tories, mine is about what steps the govt can take. It would make no difference to me if it was a labour or lib dem govt.

I've suggested a positive way forward. The government should accept the court ruling and allow parliament to debate and vote on triggering article 50. The government will get the votes they need and as far as I'm concerned article 50 can be triggered the next day.

It would also start to heal the division the referendum has caused.

I voted Tory last time but that doesn't mean I have to blindly defend the indefensible. They trying to hijack brexit for their own political gain rather than doing, and being seen to do, the right thing.

CLAPTON

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I find it extraordinary that anyone can continue to be so ignorant of the facts.

Global birth rates have been plummeting for decades - most developed world countries have not managed to breed at even the 'population neutral' replacement fertility rate for decades - and the UK hasn't managed it for even a single year since 1970.

The coming population crisis is not one of too many people - it's of too few....

the world population is continuing to rise but it needs to fall.

I know you are a climate change denier and don't accept that water is a scarce resource in some places but the reality is that we are doing a lot of harm to our environment.

LHW99

Global birth rates have been plummeting for decades

OK Hamish I'll agree with that, but my point is that global population has nevertheless been increasing exponentially since around 1700, due to increased longevity from improvements in public health and other factors.
Have a look at:
https://ourworldindata.org/world-population-growth/

CLAPTON

wotsthat wrote: »

I've suggested a positive way forward. The government should accept the court ruling and allow parliament to debate and vote on triggering article 50. The government will get the votes they need and as far as I'm concerned article 50 can be triggered the next day.

It would also start to heal the division the referendum has caused.

I voted Tory last time but that doesn't mean I have to blindly defend the indefensible. They trying to hijack brexit for their own political gain rather than doing, and being seen to do, the right thing.

let's assume that the supreme court upholds the judgement that parliament is supreme (which it obviously is)
are you saying that parliament will vote to invoke article 50 within weeks?
I belive that there will be thousand reasons why MPs will refuse to do this, most of which you will argue are valid.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

LHW99 wrote: »

OK Hamish I'll agree with that, but my point is that global population has nevertheless been increasing exponentially since around 1700, due to increased longevity from improvements in public health and other factors.
Have a look at

I am well aware of global population trends.

My point is that global birth rates have fallen 50% in just the last few decades - western country birth rates have almost all been below the replacement rate for the last 30- 50 years - some developed nations are already reaching a crisis point of an ageing population with millions fewer working age people to support them than is required for population stability.

China has abandoned it's one child policy having seen their population of working age people is already falling, and will fall further without urgent action....

It took the USA 70 years to get from 7% of the population being of retirement age to around 20% - China will do it in the next 25 years.

The depopulation of Russia is shockingly rapid - Russian population is on track to fall from 140m today to just 100m by 2040 - very bad news for the ability of the state to raise enough taxes to manage the largest geographic nation in Europe.

Japan's working age population has been falling for 20 years straight - and in that time they've racked up the largest national debt in the World at over 200% of GDP (versus 86% of GDP today in the post bank bailout and QE UK) to pay for their ageing crisis.

Germany needs another 24 million immigrants by 2040 just to keep their population of working age people at today's levels.

If current trends in falling birth rate continue global population will peak by 2060 and then decline rapidly - but alarmingly if global birth rate decline continues to accelerate at the progression we've seen in the last decade since the globalisation of information networks - we could hit peak population much, much sooner - 2040 or so.

The coming population crisis is not one of too many people - it's of too few.

The wars of the future will not be fought over oil, or water, or land - they'll be fought over the most vital natural resource of all - young people.