Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Reading National Geographic this month I was shocked to see that Europe is heading quite quickly to an aging population and that Germany for example would have to take in 3.5 million immigrants a year to offset this population dimension.

    I always knew that pensions for my generation are at risk if there arent more children being more but I failed to look at healthcare and social facilities that help the aged that will become considerably strained.

    So whats the answer to this problem? Increased government incentitives to have children? Increased immigration?
    • TSR Community Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Community Team
    Hasn't there been some plan brezzing around in the UK Government for the last year or so that could be introduced to try and give a big incentive for people to have children? I'm not sure whatt it entailed and how serious it was, but I think the Governemtn knows about the potential problems.#

    Obviously another way to try and get out of this situation (and probably the only think which has been saving us from getting to the staining point sooner) is to have people emmigrate to this country. This is an obvious solution: we have an aging population, we don't really have enough younger people to suport the whole country, so we bring in younger people from outside.

    What I don't understnad is why the Conservatives wanted to limit immigration when even now the aging population situation is getting worse, which (looking only at immigration as a solution) means we aren't taking enough in. I think it shows a completel lack of understanind by the Tories for what immigration is needed for and what immigrants do in the country.

    Now I'm not saying immigration is the only solution and not that it should be the only solution. However, it has been the single biggest solution to help with the aging population over the last decade or so and should continue to play an importnat part of the solution in the futer. But we should also look into other things, like incentives to have children, the more we can do the better we'll be and the fewer problems there will be (less-bulging health care, smaller pensions problem etc).
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    immigration is by far the only solution for a country like Germany, where economic growth is around 0.3% if not an economic decrease.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by frost105)

    I always knew that pensions for my generation are at risk if there arent more children being more but I failed to look at healthcare and social facilities that help the aged that will become considerably strained.

    So whats the answer to this problem? Increased government incentitives to have children? Increased immigration?
    Read the solution in the book by P. D. James - 'Children of Men'. It's set in the near future where children are no longer being born because of infertility of men caused by oestrogens in the water supply etc.

    The older generation - because they are a 'burden' on the younger generation are made to feel guilty and acquiesesce to taking part in the 'Quietus' where they are rowed out to the middle of the sea and sunk!

    It makes for disturbing reading and could conceivably happen - witness already the move towards euthanasia (different thread I know). It could become compulsory.

    The book is going to be made into a film and I can't wait!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Roger Kirk)
    What I don't understnad is why the Conservatives wanted to limit immigration when even now the aging population situation is getting worse, which (looking only at immigration as a solution) means we aren't taking enough in. I think it shows a completel lack of understanind by the Tories for what immigration is needed for and what immigrants do in the country.
    The Conservatives want to control immigration so we have as many immigrants as we need, all working, all legal, all willing to be part of UK society. This misrepresentation of the Conservative stance is about as effective as Labour's immigration policy.

    The demand for skilled workers will only be resolved if we legally accept immigrants and they are legally allowed to work in Britain. Labour cant even offer a figure, let alone ask them to contribute to the pensions of an ageing population.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IZZY!)
    immigration is by far the only solution for a country like Germany, where economic growth is around 0.3% if not an economic decrease.
    Germany, like most of Europe, could do with pulling out of the Euro and demanding reform on EU expenditure.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    there is no way that pulling out of Euro will happen
    • TSR Community Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Community Team
    (Original post by Vienna)
    The Conservatives want to control immigration so we have as many immigrants as we need, all working, all legal, all willing to be part of UK society. This misrepresentation of the Conservative stance is about as effective as Labour's immigration policy.
    Sorry, I forgot that the Conervatives limit was just an unlimited limit...which could be increased whenever they saw fit...not doesn't that just sound like playeing on peoples fears that there is a massive problem with immigration and that immigration is a bad thing?

    The thing is too, that we don't have enough immigrants for what we need now. Saying that you will let in as many as needed by saying you will limit it implies that you will be letting in fewer than now, that is what people interpreted it as (the ordinary man or oman on the street anyway). If that is not the case, was that not decpetion (either intentional or unintentioanl)?
    The demand for skilled workers will only be resolved if we legally accept immigrants and they are legally allowed to work in Britain. Labour cant even offer a figure, let alone ask them to contribute to the pensions of an ageing population.
    Labour understand the need for skilled workers, that is why they plan a points system, meaning those with the mos to offer in terms of skill and education are more likel o be leagally allowed into the country than those with fewer or no skills and only those with the skills will be allowed to stay in the long term.
    Of course none of this has anything to do with asylum seekers, and if they are legitimate, they will be allowed to entre the country whether skilled or not.
    And really, illegal immigration has more to do with failed asylum seekrrs than ecomonic immigration, many illegal immigrants being failed asylum seekers.
    But right now, under Labour twice as many failed assylum seekers are being removed from the country than were by the Conservative Government in the mid 90's. This is despite the present level of asylum claims being approximately equal to those faced in the mid 90s.

    As for no figure on the exact number of illegal immigrants, surely it is better to put your hands and say you son't know exactly how many there are as the figure is very hard to work out and any prediction would be a guess-timate at best. Better than starting to spout off a figure of between 200,000 and 250,000 at every opportunity which was obtianed from an approximate and rather badly executed guess by the Newnight team, who even said their estimate wasn't that good. Becasue ever sicne that nigth Newsnight made this 'guess' many Conservtives have jumped upon this figure and started using it as fact.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    There is another alternative: private pensions and a reduction in welfare spending.

    I've nothing against economic migration. As long as it is legal and we don't confuse it with asylum. In my opinion, there is no such thing as an asylum seeker in this country. I base this on the fact that the majority of "asylum seekers" arrive from France after days/weeks of travelling across the EU. Now as far as I know there is no EU country that persecutes individuals at such a level that they need to flee that country. Fair enough if an "asylum seeker" arrives by plane or boat from the country of persecution, but in my opinion as soon as an "asylum seeker" enters the EU they become an economic migrant. Also, and for some reason this is rarely mentioned, we do have over a million unemployed in this country. We could make them work.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    In regards to incentive to have babies, the gov here did something along those lines. You get some cash bonus (not a huge amount) with every kid you have.

    There were jokes along the lines of 'one for mum, one for dad, and one for the country' etc - and tacky programs focusing on families with 7 kids (so, so cringeworthy).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by John82)
    There is another alternative: private pensions and a reduction in welfare spending.

    I've nothing against economic migration. As long as it is legal and we don't confuse it with asylum. In my opinion, there is no such thing as an asylum seeker in this country. I base this on the fact that the majority of "asylum seekers" arrive from France after days/weeks of travelling across the EU. Now as far as I know there is no EU country that persecutes individuals at such a level that they need to flee that country. Fair enough if an "asylum seeker" arrives by plane or boat from the country of persecution, but in my opinion as soon as an "asylum seeker" enters the EU they become an economic migrant.
    It's exactly the same here (Australia). People would come across in boats from Indonesia, claiming they were politically persecuted in places like the middle east - miles away. They have to pass through so many countries on the way here (they ALL go through Indonesia) - why don't they seek asylum there? If they're really desperate, they would. But you're right, they're just economic migrants, wanting a better deal (social security, for instance, or education) here.
    Also, and for some reason this is rarely mentioned, we do have over a million unemployed in this country. We could make them work.
    This is true. And so easy to do.

    The unemployed should get six months, maybe a year of grace (this is for working people who may be between jobs, having just been sacked/fired/etc).

    They can even have job agencies or whatever to help them find work. After the grace period, if a gov job agency finds a job for them, they have to accept it, or their benefits/allowance/dole gets curbed. You could do the benefit decreasing in stages. But if they refuse the jobs which get offered to them, in the end their allowance should get decreased severely. It should be so low as to be an incentive to make them work. They should be living on stale bread, in a tiny two-room flat. That kind of thing.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by milady)
    In regards to incentive to have babies, the gov here did something along those lines. You get some cash bonus (not a huge amount) with every kid you have.

    There were jokes along the lines of 'one for mum, one for dad, and one for the country' etc - and tacky programs focusing on families with 7 kids (so, so cringeworthy).
    Such a program could backfire, though, if it would apply to the new immigrants, as well. Since having children generally inhibits family productivity for a couple of years initially, you could wind up with needing even more immigrants to replace the new parent-immigrants. Of course, if you stipulate that policy is only for native citizens, then someone will inevitably claim that it is racist.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by psychic_satori)
    Such a program could backfire, though, if it would apply to the new immigrants, as well. Since having children generally inhibits family productivity for a couple of years initially, you could wind up with needing even more immigrants to replace the new parent-immigrants. Of course, if you stipulate that policy is only for native citizens, then someone will inevitably claim that it is racist.
    True. But I don't think there are that many immigrants.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by milady)
    True. But I don't think there are that many immigrants.
    But the majority immigrants tend to be from cultures that have more children, so you are going to be paying them for something that they're probably going to be doing anyway. The reason why they are permitted to live in Britain is because they can fulfill certain jobs, not so they can have families. I can't help but think that many potential immigrants would see such an incentive as a way to fleece the government.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IZZY!)
    immigration is by far the only solution for a country like Germany, where economic growth is around 0.3% if not an economic decrease.
    Germany's economic problems will not be solved by flooding the place with immigrants.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    What do you think is actually causing the low birth rate?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    and there's uproar when three teenage sister's gave birth around the same time as each other...SOMEONE HAS GOT TO HAVE KIDS
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Germany's economic problems will not be solved by flooding the place with immigrants.
    Yeah; I read something about this.

    (I think) In Germany (apparently) it's very hard to fire someone if you're an employer- they have a lot of laws guaranteeing job security.

    But this has backfired, because in times of economic growth, employers are less likely to take on new employees - because they're scared that if business drops off they won't be able to get rid of these new employees and will be stuck paying them salaries.

    So they don't hire new people, and the workload gets spread across those already employed, rather than hiring new workers. So there's less employment.

    So: they need to reform their laws, and their social security (are they already doing this, though?)
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by psychic_satori)
    But the majority immigrants tend to be from cultures that have more children, so you are going to be paying them for something that they're probably going to be doing anyway. The reason why they are permitted to live in Britain is because they can fulfill certain jobs, not so they can have families. I can't help but think that many potential immigrants would see such an incentive as a way to fleece the government.
    I know, I know. I wasn't suggesting it for Britain. You're right that it wouldn't work (I'm not sure that it works here -australia- either; it's not substantial enough, although the immigration situation is a little different)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    France looked demographically dead 80 years ago. The Germans, Americans and British thought it was their mongrol mixture of Norse and Alpine blood conciously committing suicide due to its inferiority - yet they bounced back.

    Now, as for the problem facing the West, either it will go, or the people will adapt (how long is it before the Japs perfect robots? ). This whole state-funded ethnic replacement programme seems like just another Malthusian Catastrophe, and that (supposed) extra 1% of GDP it brings us probably isn't worth the kind of civil unrest it very likely may cause in the future.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

2,818

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE results day?
Useful resources

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.