In 4 years, 2029, UK deaths will exceed births!

[TheMintCritic]

Just came across this and thought it was wild… according to the ONS, by 2029 the number of deaths in the UK is expected to outnumber the number of births for the first time in decades.

• Our fertility rate is only about 1.5 kids per woman, well below replacement.
• Meanwhile, the population is ageing — all those baby boomers are moving into their 70s and 80s.
• The result? The natural population growth turns negative, meaning any population increase will rely entirely on immigration.

It’s crazy to think that in just 4 years, births won’t even keep up with deaths. Makes you wonder what that’ll mean for schools, NHS, pensions, and housing.

Yes that’s exactly what we need. How we do that, without putting people under pretty serious financial pressure, I don’t know. Like, how to differentiate between those who really really cannot work and those who just find it easier not to.

We need quality not quantity. We need the "right" kind of immigrants - those who are here to work and being a net contributor rather than minimum wage taking benefits top ups. For births, we need the "right" kind of people breeding - those whose children will be net contributors and not the feckless breeders where there are 3 or more generations of non workers.

It’s potentially disastrous for us and for our children if deaths outweigh births UNLESS most people coming in from overseas are working and contributing. It’s not a good thing at all. When I see ‘stop being selfish- having more children’ it’s just 🙈. No you are being selfish by NOT having more. Too many elderly and not enough workers will be a huge huge problem in decades to come unless something changes.

100% right. But not a popular thing to say!

We need a bottom heavy population. It is a fundamental of a healthy economy

And for progression. Ageing populations just die out.

Too many elderly and not enough workers will be a huge huge problem in decades to come unless something changes.

It's already a problem hence why people & the economy are struggling now.

In the 60s there was 1 pensioners to 5 workers, now it's 3 to 1 & will likely hit 2:1 in the next few decades.

All well and good, but the "right kind of immigrants" don't wipe nanas bum when Brits don't want to. If we only want high earners coming in, we need to start plugging the low paid gaps ourselves. Or accept that elderly and disabled people can't be cared for in their own homes. We can't have it all ways.

The one positive in a sea of negatives is that young people will be in high demand. Countries will provide incentives to attract them and encourage them to have children. A child born now will probably have their pick of countries to live in once they're adults, with a job and accommodation waiting for them. Of course the generations after them will whinge and moan that they didn't get the same advantages and so the wheel will turn, around and around.

New mums do have it better now. With my I was offered three months maternity leave on statutory pay - there were very few nurseries. By the time my youngest was born I got twelve months leave with reasonable pay for much of it and funding from three. Different employer.
My grandchildren are getting funding from nine months and there are lots of nurseries.

I actually thought that deaths outnumbered births already.

Anyway, a shrinking and ageing population is clearly a problem. The only thing I find mildly amusing is the way that rightwing politicians and their ilk have simultaneously told people not to have children they can’t afford, and opposed attempts to make it easier to work and have children (‘you chose to have children!’ yada yada), while simultaneously complaining about immigration.

Countries will provide incentives to attract them and encourage them to have children.

Already happening, Portugal is trying to attract young people from overseas & stop theirs emigrating by reducing tax rates.

I don't think any country has successfully increased birth rates though.

www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm2yrx8yny2o.amp

The only thing I find mildly amusing is the way that rightwing politicians and their ilk have simultaneously told people not to have children they can’t afford, and opposed attempts to make it easier to work and have children (‘you chose to have children!’ yada yada), while simultaneously complaining about immigration.

True 😆

I don’t want to derail the thread but I’m not sure nursery from 9 months is a step in the right direction.

It's very hard to increase the birth rate in a world that has somehow convinced people that having children is a lifestyle choice rather than necessary to prevent the species from becoming extinct.

This is true - and this in turn should push wages up. If this coincides with the die off of the boomers, there may be more houses available (so prices go down) and this could be a good thing for young people. There are so many factors though, it’s hard to accurately predict.

If we only want high earners coming in, we need to start plugging the low paid gaps ourselves. Or accept that elderly and disabled people can't be cared for in their own homes. We can't have it all ways.

People want it all ways though don't they. Don't want to spend money on care for themselves & want cheap labour but they want high care.

I genuinely think that older people will have to use their capital to fund their care.
Although this then prevents the mass transfer of wealth to the next generation. But I think I’m correct that we haven’t really had that in previous generations (apart from the very wealthy), so maybe that’s ok.

We need to take away the "Brits" option not to take low paid unpopular work and live on benefits instead. If the unemployed suddenly found their benefits stopped then they'd have to do the "unpopular" work that immigrants have to do. I don't suppose the immigrants enjoy wiping Aunt Edna's bum either, but they have to do it.

I know it's politically unacceptable at the moment, but I think there should be tax relief for private healthcare and private social care to encourage those with funds to use their funds for their care rather than rely on state provision. Yes, giving tax relief will cost, but the overall cost will be less than the state having to provide the services.

We need to start thinking outside the box rather than the constant tinkering around the edges of our tax and public services rules etc.

Yes, I think the govt (or a govt, I can’t imagine Labour managing this) needs to start tapering benefits down until it’s either a safety net to get people back to work, or a benefit for the most seriously disadvantaged (disabled).

We need to take away the "Brits" option not to take low paid unpopular work and live on benefits instead. If the unemployed suddenly found their benefits stopped then they'd have to do the "unpopular" work that immigrants have to do. I don't suppose the immigrants enjoy wiping Aunt Edna's bum either, but they have to do it.

But there is nuance here, an immigrant may be here for a few years & sending that money home where it affords a much better standard of living.

Why should anyone have to work in a job like care for peanuts though?

Yes, I think the govt (or a govt, I can’t imagine Labour managing this) needs to start tapering benefits down until it’s either a safety net to get people back to work, or a benefit for the most seriously disadvantaged (disabled).

They could means test DLA, PIP & AA but there would be outrage.

Nobody would "have to". It would still be a choice, only the alternative would no longer be benefits.

The youngest baby boomers are 61 this year, so not entering their 70s and probably still working as they have another 6 years until state pension age.

Sounds good to me. Climate change is real. Ideally we need boomers to die faster, to clear NHS waiting lists and beds. I’m glad birth rates are falling, large families are a cost to the tax payer. School class sizes are insane, 31 per reception class in London, with a huge proportion of SEN managed in mainstream schools, which is a massive drain on teacher time.