Falling birth rate v immigration UK

[TripBalzac]

I’m missing something obvious, probably, but why isn’t immigration the solution to the falling birth rate?

I struggle to understand what people mean in here when they talk about “ethnic Brits” or “indigenous Brits”.

Was there a magic date where all the various arrivals over centuries became “indigenous” or is it simply shorthand for “white people” ?

This is so baiting but I'll answer in good faith.

If you've lived/travelled around the UK you can notice differences in how the majority of people look. Eg there are many more red heads in the NE of Scotland, more olive skin in the south of England. More freckles in NW Scotland, longer faces and noses in the south.

Even height noticeably varies across the country.

So 'ethnicity' isn't just some shorthand for 'white' as you insinuate.

Personally having done genealogy the surnames of my great grandparents are traceable in the UK going back hundreds of years, some 1000.

Epigenetics is a new and interesting field that is showing that we carry the experiences of our ancestors down through the generations.

I feel a personal connection to physical events that have happened in the UK even before I was born eg the 2 world wars. I have a shared history, culture and values that aren't shared by most immigrants.

I welcome newcomers into my community but I believe that integration is crucial. Ghettos need to be discouraged. Why shouldn't we expect people to learn English and adhere to our laws such as not doing FGM?

I worry especially for women's rights that people who don't have the shared cultural history of the suffragettes and second wave feminism don't feel the need to follow our laws regarding women's safety. See Rochdale & Rotherham & other gang rape culture that starts with young men from other cultures seeing girls as objects.

I don't think people who have committed these crimes should be allowed to remain in the uk.

Was there a magic date where all the various arrivals over centuries became “indigenous” or is it simply shorthand for “white people” ?

Are only certain cultures and countries allowed to have indigenous people then?
Because if you go back far enough, no-one is unless you're from equatorial Africa.

Dear God - on this one point - epigenetics does not mean you 'carry the experiences of your ancestors'. This is my field and this is pet peeve. You might have some influenced physiological responses, such as stress reactivity. You cannot inherit experiences or memories and these influences are reset at some point - they don't persist indefinitely through generations.

All those many differences between how people look in different parts of the country demonstrate exactly that the people of the UK are a mix of different influences caused by migration over centuries. There is no one definable indigenous identity or race.

“Indigenous” usually refers to a population which pre-dates colonisation, which has different traditions and cultures to the majority of the mainstream post-colonial population, self-identify as a distinct singular cultural identity, are not the dominant group in society and have been marginalised during colonisation and post-colonisation, and have distinct cultural practices which pre-date modern society and modern societal norms.

That just does not apply to the people both posters who replied to me mentioned.

And in terms of integrating - the British migrants & colonisers never did. Anywhere, including today.

The thing is, we don't 'need' a larger population in the same way we need oxygen and water.
It's only because our economic system is a pyramid scheme. Needing an increasing amount of young, working age people to fund old people. And older people are also getting more and more expensive in terms of healthcare costs.
At some point this isn't going to be sustainable. Where will it stop?
Also, the key here is working. Close to a quarter of the working age population can't or don't work!

I don't know what the answer yet but some more thinking needs to be done around this instead of 'more people'

@perfumasour Agree that our entire 'working culture' will have to change and it will - eventually. The transition is going to be painful though - worries me for our kids especially when they themselves get old.

So many interesting points to reflect on, and one outrageous suggestion that a wave of migrants will massacre the current UK population and cut off the food supply in the same way as the colonial Americans slaughtering the buffalo, the Trail of Tears, the residential schools, the missing and murdered indigenous women of today. It’s simply not comparable.

I thought the only indigenous people Europe are the Sami and Inuit people.

there's a religiously agnostic/ambivalent population in the UK. What concerns me, as a non religious person, is that with increased immigration we're also increasing the population with followers of authoritarian faiths. This worries me, as a non religious person.

Immigrants are more likely to have more DC often 4 or 5 and so the majority become net takers not net contributors. How does that benefit the economy?

@caringcarer those 4 or 5 children are only net takers until they reach adulthood, at which time they become net contributors - tax payers.

You do realise that not all 'immigrants' are from a lower socioeconomic background with lots of kids?
Many are professionals. Working in IT, the NHS, etc

When those children enter the workforce, their parents have contributed 4-5 taxpayers / NI payers. Children are an investment in the future not an instant revenue stream.

You can’t solve it just with immigration because:

1. birth rates are falling everywhere except sub-Saharan Africa (which presumably will follow eventually)
2. it’s not ethical to poach workers from elsewhere
3. it doesn’t work in the long term because immigrants end up matching the birth-rate of the native population.
4. the native population doesn’t like it. The whole point of being a nation is a shared history and culture. That can very much include welcoming migrants but if migration happens too quickly, obviously your shared culture disappears and then you are not pulling together as a country. Your way of life and values become threatened.
5. its often done badly, ie immigration policy that leads to a cheap-labour based economy and drain on public infrastructure

Some immigrants return to their home country ro retire. My relative had a lovely Romanian employee who wokred for several years in the UK, and built up some savings that she used to build a house in her village. Brexit sped up her plans to return to Romania, otherwise she would have stayed for longer.

But, yes, with Brexit that is less likely to happen.

How does choking the replacement rate help the economy?

Because the system needs new workers to support those that can't contribute, like pensioners.

Because there are limits to how many people can integrate at a given time. Because it's not a long term solution for many reasons. Because it places a strain on infrastructure short term, and infrastructure is already in trouble for other economic reasons (this is not just a UK thing but a more global problem) because it's basically harvesting the best and brightest from countries that need them, because it allows local business and government to ignore their duty to train their own citizens, and because it tends to depress wages and benefits for those at the bottom of the economic ladder.

It can help with certain gaps but it doesn't really plug the hole without addressing the underlying issues.

But also - people in most countries value their shared history and culture, and their community ties, the character of place, and they don't think the fundamental purpose of the nation is just economic productivity. And the country exists for those people to live their lives, not to make a lot of money for CEOs.

This is how most people everywhere in the world feel. Western and especially British people are somewhat unique in really valuing a certain amount of real cultural diversity from outside. But even that represents a value they want to maintain, rather than lose.

When I said native population I was meaning population currently in situ - I wouldn't even say you had to be born or raised here just here long enough to consider it your country. Even amongst relatively new immigrants they aren't always in favour of mass immigration.

I've notice even BBC reporting shift on this it's less driven by racism and more concerns about scare resources - housing, GP appointments, school places - they often accepted we need workers but worry about the extra population burden.

Some people even have that attitude to children as well - they have the perception there are too many children despite low birth rate overall. There do seem to be clusters of families as in my area the school are all full because it's a pocket of cheaper housing in area of high housing costs and work - why we ended here but it has driven house prices up.

The problem with saying improve services is more money - thus more taxes on dwindling tax base of workers - and qualified people - hence why large chunk of population accept some amount of immigration is needed.

I thought you were American? The British are not the Americans on this subject and we are not the French, it looks likely we are voting in a centre left party on Thursday so kind of blows this theory of Westerners’ thinking on this out the window!

The more I think about it the more the concept of national identity has in common with gender ideology. It’s not an immutable biological fact, but it matters very much to those who believe in it.

I totally agree

It's not fair on people already here waiting for social housing.

I think we need to think about who is already here and see if training can be offered to get them into the job market rather than constantly saying we have a skills shortage.

It does suppress wages

I don't think it's racist to not want your culture or area to change dramatically. Most people in most countries around the world are resistant to large demographic changes. I was in West Africa and one man was very unhappy with my DB's GF who was south-east Asian - we had to tell him she's not Japanese or Chinese and we're here to visit family.

Anyway, I'm in favour of natural decrease and I think encouraging people to have more children than they can cope with emotionally and financially is a bad idea.

I wasn't talking about individuals just majority.