We need to start talking about population decline

[user4567890754]

The first signs of it are starting to show in the UK, with primary school closures. Secondary school closures will follow.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/11158f12-0133-11ee-a364-04e704863f75?shareToken=5ef47b2b4776be376153089146c8bacf

Italy is a few years ahead of us.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/01/plunging-birthrate-threatens-italian-schools

Japan shows where every country is headed - towards a crisis where they are on the brink of being unable to maintain social functions.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/04/13/asia/japan-population-decline-record-drop-intl-hnk/index.html

And yet there are still people who think that we have a problem with overpopulation. It’s the opposite.

I know

Very hard for you

Shouldn't be like this

Population ageing is a global problem. Although the West is further ahead since our birth rate slowed earlier, it’s accelerating much faster and therefore actually going to cause far more problems in developing countries like China and India. The only place in which you are less likely to see it in the next 50 years is Africa as they still retain a high birth rate.

The UK will not be amongst the worst affected countries.

It doesn't really matter who paid into what. If there's not the young people to pay taxes and run the NHS/care then all the "entitlement" in the world means nothing.

The way we are living and consuming is not remotely sustainable. The last thing we need is more council estates!

We can bleat on all we like about reducing the population, but the people already alive need somewhere to live.

It seems unfair that the young are paying into a system allowing for someone to retire at 55 knowing they will probably never retire unless they win the lottery.

Why is it BS.

A lot of them would have and saved for private pensions as well

Ignoring the fact the system doesn't work by saving money into a pot reserved for your retirement what about the ones in social housing or the ones without private pensions.

I believe in a safety net but the idea that the majority of pensioners paid enough into the system is BS. That's the problem not the boat people 🙄

They need to stop having children unless they can afford a house! We need more responsibility taken. People shouldn’t even consider having children unless they can support them properly.

if as suggested "build more council homes" and have child spaces where is this going to happen? You cannot build and have green spaces. If we keep building and the heavy rain/snow comes there will be floods as no trees to soak up the water. Then people will blame global warming.

They need to stop having children unless they can afford a house!

That is one of the reasons people aren't having dc, housing costs....

Covering the country with council homes to provide carers to service the needs of baby boomers enjoying their 30th year of retirement expecting everything done for them completely free of charge, whilst the young struggle to even pay their bills is quite frankly grotesque.

I believe in a safety net but the idea that the majority of pensioners paid enough into the system is BS. That's the problem not the boat people

I agree in part. The majority of pensioners paid enough into the system to support the ratio of pensioners that we had in this country 30 odd years ago. They don’t pay into today’s system (via NICs), and they haven’t had enough children to maintain the ratio.

Of those who paid into private pensions, most will have received more in tax relief from the govt than they will pay in tax on their pension income because relief was provided at the marginal rate, and the income they take in retirement will typically be taxed at the basic rate (as long as it exceeds the personal allowance, under which it isn’t taxed at all). Oh, and they also had SERPS…

So yes, I’d say it’s largely correct that the majority of pensioners have not paid enough into the system to cover the cost of govt support through later life (mostly State Pension, and healthcare costs).

They’ll also find that the majority of the value of their estate will never have been taxed at all because it will have been accrued through property price appreciation in their primary residence.

People not having enough children is the reason we can’t afford to support the older population

We should really start using existing housing more efficiently. Redistributing social housing based on actual need. But of course that wouldn't be popular.
It's funny how is rarely the older people who've already had their families that need to be making sacrifices...

The older population have benefited hugely from massive price appreciation on their properties and gold plated triple locked pensions and many retired mid fifties, most by mid sixties. To expect young people to support the older people by churning out children they can’t afford is not the answer!

Especially given young people may never even retire, and won’t have a functioning nhs or social care system by then it’s a bit much to expect them also to take the strain of producing more children. As it stands it’s completely unfair and I am amazed we haven’t seen a violent backlash.

You cannot physically enforce birth control and there are certain demographics who will bypass the lesson for cultural and religious reasons. You can set up a penalty structure but it will not make a jot of difference because of their human rights and the fact that once the children whom they cannot afford are born then somebody will still have to pick up the tab.

One in seven households over 70 owns a second home. (see IFS research widely quoted in press).

That means one in seven households over 70 owning property they don’t need, disproportionately benefiting from rising house prices, and in many cases, charging rent to working age people.

Whilst I can’t see a situation in which we could restrict property ownership by anything other than nationality, I think this does show how grossly distorted the population is when it comes to wealth concentration by age cohort. I’m not suggesting how this could be addressed, just that it’s another example of how intergenerational wealth inequality underpins so much of our society, and how we can’t keep justifying tax increases on shrinking working age groups.

Agreed and it needs to change. We need to address the blatant imbalances rather than simply producing more and more children.

We need people to be supported in having children, no country has really got this right yet but there are plenty of countries (especially in Eastern Europe) who are implementing pronatalist policies for this very reason. Otherwise we continue to compound the problem and threaten future economic growth

I'm sure that a sizeable chunk of the elderly population is piss poor.

As sizeable chunk of every age group is piss poor. The elderly, as a demographic, are the wealthiest.

I would agree if the children were born and and raised to be net contributors but the largest slow down seems to be at the upper end of the economic scale. Poland etc are trying to win back the young because they lost generations of young and fit contributors relocating to the UK. Their issues were caused by mass emigration to richer countries not a lack of babies.

A number of them have/will return home.

The Hungarian policy (and I'm guessing some of the neighbouring countries) incentive reproduction for their native population only, not immigrants.

Poverty rate among older people is around 14%, comparable to overall population. Around half of all pensioner households have income that is equal to or higher than the average across the population. But… that excludes wealth, which is where you’ll find the biggest differences.

78% of all housing wealth in the UK is owned by the over 50s.