Turn on thread page Beta

Is the UK full? Population to be 70 million before 2030 watch

Announcements
  • View Poll Results: Is the UK full?
    Yes
    50.00%
    No
    50.00%

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reue)
    Most people in this country are a net drain on the resources. And by your logic; our public services should be in excellent shape due to the extreme level of net migration over the past 10 years.
    That has nothing to do with what you said.

    If there are less younger working people are in the country, then there are less tax payers. Therefore, you will still have too many people overdependent on the NHS.

    That has nothing to do with my logic. That is your logic.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Most of them tend to go back to their home country when they stop working here.
    More young people who work and pay taxes.
    Err lol? So come here at 25, marry, have children, buy a home, make friends etc...... But yea then return to the country they came from 50 years before......

    I'm gonna have to ask for evidence on this one


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    Green space? 85%+ of the UK is green space...
    The central belt, midlands and east anglia are pretty dull to start with. And as for Northern Ireland its massively under used.

    Our cities still hold less people than their peaks (apart from london which this year has matched its pre war population).

    And I don't see how immigrants will result in me having a lower quality of life.
    I think we need to distinguish between agricultural land and other green spaces. Agriculture is responsible for the dullness of the areas you described, they were once far more interesting from an ecological point of view. Building more houses will eventually cause some habitats to disappear entirely. Species are being squeezed from every direction and the current growth of the population is not sustainable if we wish to preserve the unique flora and fauna of the British Isles. From the Industrial Revolution, 386 extinctions of species in the county of Surrey alone have been recorded, and that figure is purely for well studied groups. The loss of species is accelerating across the country.

    It's not a case of how many we could fit in, but of how many we should. I for one will be deeply troubled to live in a wholly concrete landscape.

    Without migration, our population was stable at around 64 million between 1980 and 2000. More people puts even more strain on our already overworked public services. We don't have enough schools as it is. How in a well developed country such as our own can we still be arguing in favour of a larger population as the global population is rising so rapidly?

    A larger population will undoubtedly lead to a lower quality of life, unless people really will be content with their square metre of concrete, which would be a tragedy for humanity.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ironandbeer2)
    I'm no communist, but it's odd how many people barely care about the countryside and nature over what are essentially plastic possessions. I mean it's not everyone by a long chalk, both young and old appreciate such things, but it's clearly not enough to stop our lovely leaders building everywhere and anywhere in the name of "growth". Yeah growth for a certain few while the rest of us are thrown some scraps to keep us quiet. It won't end well, and the true patriots will become clear. But then it'll be too late.
    Even the Green Party wants to build more houses!

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    If there are less younger working people are in the country, then there are less tax payers. Therefore, you will still have too many people overdependent on the NHS.
    A typical pyramid scheme which will eventually become completely unsustainable. Better to take the hit now.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    UK? No. London? Yes.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reue)
    A typical pyramid scheme which will eventually become completely unsustainable. Better to take the hit now.
    Except that you have failed to show that taking any hit would be beneficial at all.

    Typical fail in logic.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by i<3milkshake)
    UK population to top 70 million within 12 years;
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34666382

    These are maps of population density over time (including 2015);
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_density

    Vote and discuss.


    EDIT;
    Here is what the university of Cambridge say on the matter;

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-28003435
    I do think it is yes. All kinds of issues though. We have a top heavy population, so in a generation or two, we're going to hit massive problems with a lot of old people to look after.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Except that you have failed to show that taking any hit would be beneficial at all.

    Typical fail in logic.
    Beneficial in comparison to the alternative of continuing to grow the pyramid scheme.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Yes, well, I am not surprised that a racist thinks that reducing the tax payer base is the best way to solve the over-dependence on Public services.

    Irrationality first, logic after.
    Did you just call me a racist? :s
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by United1892)
    Almost 93% of the UK is not urban, with the percentage of woodland cover is at it's highest proportion since records begin on it in 1924. We have space.
    ...and if you remove the Highlands and Ulster?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Redwoods)
    A higher population means that more schools, hospitals, roads, and houses will need to be built. Those who do not oppose immigration, do you care about the green space we have in this country. Why do we have to reach saturation point with immigration where we all will have a lower quality of life and where everywhere is grey?
    To the left, immigration is good and makes our country great.

    Therefore the more immigration the better and the greater our country!

    Simples....

    Anyone who takes a more nuanced view should vote to leave the European Union.

    There is no way we can stop immigration at current levels (600,000 a year) without leaving. It is as simple as that. Anyone from the EU can come on in.

    The free movement of peoples is non negotiable. It is madness of course, the migrant crisis is proving that, but since when did sanity and the EU ever collide?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by United1892)
    Almost 93% of the UK is not urban, with the percentage of woodland cover is at it's highest proportion since records begin on it in 1924. We have space.
    Our woodland cover is around 12-13%, which is one of the lowest in Europe. A lot of it is young woodland planted in the last 100 years (it was around 5% in the early 1900s), so its value to wildlife is often limited by things like lack of deadwood habitats. Much of it is commercial conifer plantations of mostly non native species which are very poor wildlife habitats when compared to native woodland. Native ancient woodland is only 2% of land area, and is often threatened by housing and infrastructure developments.

    Our woodland cover isn't much to celebrate. A lot of work needs to be done.

    Where is your cut off point? If you use the "only 7% urban" (it's closer to 10% in England, and lower in Scotland and Wales) argument to justify urban expansion, very soon it will be considerably more than 7% if you're not careful. Surely we don't want to encourage endless urban growth?

    There certainly is some land available that could be built on without major environmental impacts, but it'll be a lot less than 93% when you bear in mind things like the uplands, areas with mining subsidence, national parks, AONBs, protected sites. floodplains, high grade agricultural land, etc.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    Err lol? So come here at 25, marry, have children, buy a home, make friends etc...... But yea then return to the country they came from 50 years before......

    I'm gonna have to ask for evidence on this one
    It's mostly the case for quality immigrants. Typically Americans or Australians who go back home when they're old and enjoy their capitalized pensions, or continue their career in another attractive country. Those who've lived on benefits all their lives won't move.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smashby25)
    Sure, we have space, but for how long? There has to be a time when the population needs serious consideration. If we keep on using this space, there is less of it. Then what? We can't build a bigger country.
    If pop growth continues at present rate we would reach saturation in 200+ years, and start having to look seriously at it in 100 years so settle down for now.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I saw at least 5 foreigners on my bus this morning.

    I'd say we are fit to burst!
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RFowler)
    Our woodland cover is around 12-13%, which is one of the lowest in Europe. A lot of it is young woodland planted in the last 100 years (it was around 5% in the early 1900s), so its value to wildlife is often limited by things like lack of deadwood habitats. Much of it is commercial conifer plantations of mostly non native species which are very poor wildlife habitats when compared to native woodland. Native ancient woodland is only 2% of land area, and is often threatened by housing and infrastructure developments.

    Our woodland cover isn't much to celebrate. A lot of work needs to be done.

    Where is your cut off point? If you use the "only 7% urban" (it's closer to 10% in England, and lower in Scotland and Wales) argument to justify urban expansion, very soon it will be considerably more than 7% if you're not careful. Surely we don't want to encourage endless urban growth?

    There certainly is some land available that could be built on without major environmental impacts, but it'll be a lot less than 93% when you bear in mind things like the uplands, areas with mining subsidence, national parks, AONBs, protected sites. floodplains, high grade agricultural land, etc.
    Worth noting that the urban designation here refers to any built on area and includes things like roads, train tracks and the smallest of villages. Furthermore within urban zones typically only 1/3 of the land area has a man made structure on it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reue)
    Did you just call me a racist? :s
    Yes he did.

    It is the default position for the bonkers left. When you have lost the argument (and they have lost the argument on immigration of that there is no doubt) play the race card.

    Try and stop the debate there and then. Because they know people only have to look around them to see the effects of mass immigration and they have no rational argument as to why we should put up with it any longer.

    All I would say is if you think this country is changing for the worse and becoming balkanised and ghettoised by immigrants who refuse to assimilate and live parallel lives you haven't seen anything yet.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by i<3milkshake)
    UK population to top 70 million within 12 years;
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34666382

    These are maps of population density over time (including 2015);
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_density

    Vote and discuss.


    EDIT;
    Here is what the university of Cambridge say on the matter;

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-28003435
    Yes! The UK has been full for years!! People forget we're a tiny island, and open door mass immigration from EU has severely hurt our future as a country. We wont have the facilities to cope with all the populace, for example GP's, Road congestion, Job opportunities, school placements will all be strained, and that's only a few of the problems! We need an Australian style points system to 'vet' in 'skilled workers' and put a stop to the devastation of open door mass migration.

    We have a GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY in 2017 to leave the EU and put a stop to this nonsense once and for all!
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reue)
    Did you just call me a racist? :s
    Nevertheless his point is sound. More people means more taxes which means more schools 'n' hospitals - and more jobs for that matter. Proportionally no different and it scarcely matters whether they are immigrants or not
 
 
 
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.