Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to think if the country is already 'too full up' we should probably stop having so many children?

207 replies

IceBeing · 24/08/2015 13:00

After listening to a discussion on a bus between two women, it would seem that the country is far to stretched to take in any refugees at the moment! We are full to busting and not enough money for services for those already here.

AIBU to wonder where the concerns of these people were when they had the (apparently) six kids that were along with them?

The refugees are already alive and in need of shelter, food, medical aid etc. Our unborn need not come and add to the problem....

So, maybe a China style policy...although we could probably afford to do 2 kids per family....unless we really are full to busting as indicated.

OP posts:
Dadistired1 · 25/08/2015 17:42

Op you don't think a nation should value its own citizens above others.

IceBeing · 25/08/2015 17:47

Dad not really...why should they?

A human is a human. Why should one be treated completely differently by the accident of their birth place?

I have a job and pay tax in the UK...but I don't for a second think that is a product of who I am....

If I had been switched at birth with one of the syrian refugees currently trying to get to the UK then they would have been doing my job and I would be on a dingy in the med.

So my life is mine only because of where I was born...nothing to do with me as a person. Surely I had no more right to claim this nice life than anyone else born anywhere on the planet?

OP posts:
Andrewofgg · 25/08/2015 17:47

OP I used to think like that.

I was a foolish young man at the time.

That was my excuse then.

What's yours now?

shovetheholly · 25/08/2015 17:49

werk said "Put it this way ... in 1995, we had 5.5 million people over the age of 70 and 38 million people between 18 and 70. In 2015, we have 5.8 million people over 70, yet 43.6 million people between 18 and 70."

But as I understand it, the problem isn't supposed to hit until circa 2020, when the population pyramid stops looking like a pyramid and starts doing an impression of me in lycra (i.e. it bulges out all over the place and has a heavier top). Grin So while the percentage of people aged over 65 was just over 15% in 1985, and just over 16% in 2010, by 2035 it is supposed to leap to nearly 25%. That is a HUGE change both in terms of numbers, but (more significantly) in terms of proportion. Beside it those troughs that you mention are pretty insignificant, no?

On what grounds do you doubt the mortality predictions? They are pretty well-evidenced as far as I understand these things.

IceBeing · 25/08/2015 17:49

andrew how do you know you were foolish then...maybe you are foolish now?

Maybe I though capitalism was a good idea in my foolish youth...and have grown up since?

OP posts:
Chattymummyhere · 25/08/2015 17:54

It's foolish to believes that by stoping a counties own citizens from having more than 2 children is the right way to go about saving the world.

I know all UK citizens can only have 2 children while others entering the country can have as many as they want as we stopped to let them have what they want.

Yeah sounds like a lovely bnp poster to get support.

horsewalksintoabar · 25/08/2015 17:58

To be frank, and I live in London, I don't feel 'crowded' out of my existence. I think the day the trains turn into something out of Mumbai or Tokyo, then I'll panic... maybe. Until then, live and let live...have babies, help refugees. I actually have no problem with refugees and no problem with a woman who has 5 kids. If you're bringing no harm and you're raising your kids decently, good on ya... keep on keeping on. We overthink this stuff, to be honest.

shovetheholly · 25/08/2015 18:03

Also, werk, you have to remember that with any study of the cost/benefits to the public purse of migration two things matter desperately

  1. what timeframe you choose for your study
  2. how you define 'immigrants'

Now the study that you mention is just about illegal immigrants. By very definition, these are not going to be people working in highly-skilled jobs. They are ILLEGAL! And therefore trying to stay well under the radar. So you can't extrapolate from their case to all migrants.

When it comes to migrants who are here legally, if you choose a shorter time frame, say from the 90s onwards, you tend to find that migrants from the EU are a massive boost to the economy (£5bn), while those from outside the EU give a slightly smaller boost. But in both cases, the net figure is a plus - they are contributing. That's because most of these people are young, fit and healthy.

If you choose a longer time frame, the cost of migrants is much higher, and leads to a negative figure. However, this is simply because of ageing. As migrants who have contributed to the UK economy their whole working lives get older, they tend to use health services more. Are we really going to say that it's unfair that someone who worked here since the age of 30 and paid all their dues should be able to use the NHS in their old age, when they have cancer?

shovetheholly · 25/08/2015 18:24

Sorry, meant to say from 2000 onwards! Time for a cuppa!

Unhappyuser · 25/08/2015 19:17

So people can't have babies they can have a refugee instead? I can't see it catching on. They'd never fit in the baby grows. Can you imagine the congrats cards? Breast feeding in public would take a turn for the worse

Dadistired1 · 25/08/2015 19:26

Op do you think the electorate would like the idea?

ijustwannadance · 25/08/2015 20:19

The issue is not simply about letting people in etc. We had our baby boom after the war but since then our way of life changed. People no longer needed to have large families, women began to work and not just want to be housewives, and there began the massive decline in people choosing to be part of a religion. Hence why the uk growth has been slower.
Unfortunatly those countries in africa and ME whose populations have exploded tend to be those who keep having children for cultural/religious reasons, which would not change if they all moved here.
So in only 3 or 4 generations of this, the uk would not be able to cope. We just don't have the resources.

Dadistired1 · 25/08/2015 20:29

We had our baby boom at a lucky time, the trouble is that Africa and LEDC countries are having theirs at a time of strain in terms of resources.

I have 4 children and 2 step dc, I am fully away i have a large family. But Op does not take into account remarriage. I think the biggest concern is not to do with numbers but to do with the land for crop growing is decreasing (due to climate change), mainly in Africa at the same time Africa is booming in population.

But OP idea of implementing restrictions on the UK is bonkers.

IKnowIAmButWhatAreYou · 26/08/2015 08:23

So people can't have babies they can have a refugee instead? I can't see it catching on. They'd never fit in the baby grows. Can you imagine the congrats cards? Breast feeding in public would take a turn for the worse

Grin

I do like the idea of having a refugee around the house when the kids have moved out.

They could do all the jobs I didn't want to do myself, leaving me more time to sit on the veranda and look over my cotton fields.....

LumelaMme · 26/08/2015 10:39

But I agree with the OP - if we don't have room for immigrants, we don't have room for people to have large families either.

Well, uh, if 3 couples only have one child each and a fourth couple has 5 children, that's 8 children - 2 per couple and marginally below replacement.

IceBeing · 26/08/2015 11:30

Why do people think that as long as we don't have more than 2 kids per couple the world won't continue to become more and more overpopulated until we wipe ourselves out?

I know GB is an island...but seriously...we won't be able to ignore a meltdown in the global ecosystem caused by over population.

Also where is peoples concept of 'fair share of the damage done' when we start talking about emissions...or having a life style that vastly exceeds in damage done to the planet that being lived by people in Africa etc.?

So because we aren't the most over producing of new lives we don't have to do anything...but EVERYONE has to reduce CO2 emissions...and no we won't share our health service....

OP posts:
IKnowIAmButWhatAreYou · 26/08/2015 13:02

and no we won't share our health service....

Why the fuck should we? It's the National Health Service, you know - for nationals of the country.

We have reciprocal agreements with other European countries so we can all look after each other, but why should it be "open doors" to anyone that just tips up?

I think you need to join the real world OP.....

queenofthishouse · 26/08/2015 13:16

icebeing so what do you actively do to change things?

I have a friend on facebook who gets on her soap box from time to time but she never actually does anything about the stuff she preaches about.

IKnowIAmButWhatAreYou · 26/08/2015 13:23

but she never actually does anything about the stuff she preaches about.

None of them do queen. It's a piece of piss to rant against a society whilst taking full advantage of its benefits.....

IceBeing · 26/08/2015 14:00

hmm what AM I doing...

Well I joined the Green Party and will hopefully stand in the next local elections.

I write regularly to my MP, including about refugees, and the use of dehumanising language (wrote to the BBC about that one too).

I have refused all attempts of family to convince me to have more kids, and refused to own a meat eating pet.

Actually the most important thing I could do would probably be to stop the research I am working on. It involves addressing the antibiotic resistance issue...but maybe 100 years of bacterial infections being fatal again would a) reduce the global population
b) reduce the cost of running the health service
c) eliminate cosmetic surgery altogether...

So maybe I should stop!

OP posts:
IceBeing · 26/08/2015 14:05

iknow why the fuck should we look at two newborn babies and say this one gets access to the NHS and this one doesn't?

Neither of them have contributed taxes...in many cases neither set of parents may have contributed taxes.

What is fair about treating one and turning the other away?

We have something good! But we didn't get it by any superior effort on our own part. We just got born in the right place at the right time. We don't deserve the NHS more than people fleeing Syria.

OP posts:
Andrewofgg · 26/08/2015 14:13

IceBeing Perhaps it is a pity that Jenner persisted with vaccination against smallpox?

Your letters to your MP - they are written on tree with chemicals and carried on vehicles which burn fossil fuel.

Do you think ordinary citizens should be allowed to own a car or would you restrict us to those journeys we can make on foot or by public transport?

queenofthishouse · 26/08/2015 14:17

icebeing I'm really finding it hard to believe you.

I've just gone though all your posts and some are a bit far fetched and not really sustainable. Fine in utopia but here in the real world it wouldnt work. If you feel so undeserving why don't you leave this country?

What are you going to do with the green party that no other has managed to do ? How are you going to fix this country?

Werksallhourz · 26/08/2015 14:20

Ice I have a job and pay tax in the UK...but I don't for a second think that is a product of who I am ...

If you had been born in another country, in another culture, you would not be the person you are. You would not think the way you do, your values would be different, your world view would be different.

It always strikes me that a lot of Brits (and other Westerners) don't understand this. I think it could be a hangover from empire or the fact that Britain is an island, but Brits have a tendency to assume everyone thinks like they do, as though, underneath the skin, everyone is an Englishman.

This just is not the case. Whatsoever. People are a product of their culture, of their environment, of their climate, of their history. The structure and idioms of a first language force people to perceive the world in a certain way. Climate forces them to dress, move and behave in a certain way. History forms their community consciousness.

I come from a multi-origin family (non-commonwealth), married to a DH who also comes from a multi-origin family. The extent to which some members of our families perceive the world differently is astonishing. I will give you one example: baksheesh.

In Britain, the idea of having to bung someone fifty quid to get your driving license validated on and above the official fee, or to get your child's grades upped to an A is ludicrous. In my DH's culture, it is totally accepted and they think we are stupid for not doing it.

Who is correct? If you find yourself saying "well, it is unfair for people who can't afford it" ... then that is your culture speaking. The notion of socio-economic "fairness" is not a universal value. If you think it should be, then you are moving into the arena of cultural imperialism -- and who are we to insist people share our values? Why do we believe we are so right? And if you say to them that the practice of baksheesh is "unfair", then they turn round to you and say ... "how is interfering in other countries that have nothing to do with you 'fair'?" "How is paying for medical treatment for foreign nationals when your elderly are left lying in their own urine 'fair'?"

Because in DH's culture, you would not treat a foreign national before your own grandmother, nor would you ever invade another country. To them, the only just war is a defensive war -- yet they are a significantly militarised society on a level that Brits would never accept.

Ed Hussein once made a very telling remark in this regard. He was born in the East End to a Bangladeshi Muslim family and became an radical Islamist, fueled partly for years feeling like an outsider in an alien culture. He said that it wasn't until he went to work in Saudi Arabia that he realised how British he really was.

And it is true. You don't realise how British you are until you work and live amongst people who aren't. And this goes for any nationality.

queenofthishouse · 26/08/2015 14:25

Good post werks