Reform are getting a shitload of voters

[HeBeaverandSheBeaver]

I have not voted
Reform and live in a safe tory seat But I voted
Lib dem tactical vote

I said ages Ago on here the reform would do really well and was shouted down.

Same as brexit, no one will admit voting for reform but
They still do it in droves it seems.

I'm Willing to bet they
Might win an election in four years at this rate!!

Scary
Times

Surely calling a whole section of the population stupid and racist is a way to get them to vote as you’d prefer.

Neither Japan nor China is without problems

Of course they have problems. Immigration won’t fix them and will likely make life worse for the average person.

Both need immigration as does this country

They do not need immigration. If Japanese won’t have children (and they generally love children ime) then there is a structural reason for that. Bringing in foreigners who will ‘have children in less than ideal circumstances’ (which is really what we are talking about when we speak of this issue). Tinkering with the demographics of a place like Japan (or any ethnostate) will change it forever, it will not be reversed as I do not think people are interchangeable widgets. There is a certain character and temperament to a people that is not explicitly taught

Both do have problems with racism I assure you those problems will get worse with careless immigration.

Interested that you voted LibDem because you want to rejoin the EU. This is the party that said, post 2016 that they would hold another referendum on the EU and if the result was the same they would ignore the result. This is hardly democratic, so I do not see why they dare call themselves the LibDems.
That aside (and I would never vote reform as I would never vote LibDem) globalisation is not the honeypot and wonderful thing it appears to many who like the EU. The EU has become what Tony Benn feared: a capitalist cartel intent on removing agency from working people in favour of big business. Globalisation is globalisation of capital and does local cultures very little good. Many of those voting Reform want to maintain their culture of liberalism, secularism, rights for women, rights for workers, all of which are endangered by thoughtless immigration and the inclusion in our society of people who don't just disagree with those views, but actively fight against them. For myself, I am tired of the anti-European stance of liberal elites and those who often support the EU - Europe is the only part of the planet that has worked out humanitarian values that cover all members of the population, ended slavery, invented various forms of democracy, treated women as people, not things. If we object to those things as being 'colonial' we are mad and deserve all we get - which is the destruction of our values, our history and our culture.

Lots of countries have tried various tactics including financial to encourage women to have children. It hasn't worked. We can train our workforce but there are still likely to be gaps.

I thought Japan had an aging population and a falling birth rate. They are trying to encourage people to have more babies. China also have an aging population and after years of a one child policy they also are trying to persuade women to have more children. Both need immigration to bridge the gap.

Not once did I suggest careless immigration.

I suspect the people who know Reform voters understand their motivations.

I thought Japan had an aging population and a falling birth rate. They are trying to encourage people to have more babies. China also have an aging population and after years of a one child policy they also are trying to persuade women to have more children. Both need immigration to bridge the gap

They are ageing populations but will make do without large-scale immigration. If I saw what was happening in Europe, I’d be cautious as well.

No economic growth is worth what they are going through (and they aren’t even growing much anyway, aren’t both the UK and Germany officially experiencing recessions despite mass immigration???)

£6.43 a day.

Do they? You don’t.

Please don’t call out this posters misplaced feeling of moral superiority! It’s prob her main topic of conversation over a bottle of Pinot with her Mummy friends- how stupid all these Reform voters are. She can’t understand racism when her Nigerian cleaner is so nice.

I do sometimes wonder how these people square the circle of feeling superior by calling a whole group of people who they don’t know bigots. It’s hard to understand how they don’t even have a whiff of the hypocrisy. I’m guessing because it’s not a diversity box handed to them they can’t think critically about what they’re saying.

I suspect these people are the same ones who think they’re doing the environment a favour when they pack their three kids in the SUV to drive to the recycling centre with 6 yoghurt pots.

In terms of the economy, immigration is like a giant Ponzi scheme. And whilst GDP may go up, it only does so because the population increases and it actually comes at a cost, not a benefit, to the original population.

When filling the gaps we must bear in mind that immigrants will stay and will have children. They are not a no cost option.

Surely that's a good thing, our birth rate is below replacement level and we need people who are willing to have children.
Children are an asset to society, not a liability.

How do you envisage this long term? Does the population always increase?

Could you elaborate please, I'm not sure what you're getting at.

I mean do you think the population needs to keep increasing?

What would you ideally like the U.K. population to be in say 20 years?

Thank you.
I don't think the population needs to keep increasing but it is a problem that we don't have enough young people to support the economically inactive older generation.

I am aware that children are an asset which is why I wonder at government money going only to working parents and not all parents. But the point I was making is that we need to factor in the extra infrastructure for families e.g. schools, transport, GPs, hospitals etc. We are not just getting workers. Also, we have to factor in culture change and how much the indigenous population will accept.

It is a hard one to resolve as we either keep increasing or have that skew which is difficult

The problem is we just keep kicking the can down the road as we don’t want to be the levelling off / reduction years

Maybe AI will help by supplementing workers and in fact we need to avoid high unemployment when the dc born today reach adulthood.

I imagine some working will be different by then

@Biggleslefae

"Surely that's a good thing, our birth rate is below replacement level and we need people who are willing to have children.
Children are an asset to society, not a liability."

Perhaps to society and economy yes but to the environment then no.

By far the most effective and cost effective means of stopping global warming, maritime pollution, deforestation and pretty much every other environmental impact is contraception and women's education in order to reduce the global population.

We economically inactive older people are often paying taxes, and spending money, without any means tested benefits. As we boomers start to die off in higher numbers, properties will be freed up across all tenures, which will ease the housing shortage (as long as our population stabilises). Also the families of those who were homeowners will stand to inherit, so there will be more money trickling into the economy.

I’m in my 70s, I know lots of people of a similar age who don’t need care, we are physically and mentally active, volunteering and helping out with childcare. I think perhaps more effort is needed to get more working age people earning. Support, training, changing mindsets, whatever is needed.

Two points here. You are using Malthusian economics (climate change advocates often do) but Malthus was wrong, the food won't run out, humanity will adapt. Second point is that yes, we need children but we need children who are going to be brought up in the indigenous culture, unless we want total culture loss in Europe, for example, which is the only continent expected to open its doors and let its culture be diluted. And no, I would not vote Reform (nor LibDem, not democrats, and not Green, some support Hamas) as I am a clause 4 Bennite socialist - that is I believe in nationalization of utilities and public transport to the benefit of the entire country not to private profit (kettles are a commodity, but globalization has now commodified water, which cannot be the subject of market forces as none of us can do without it - I can do without a kettle, I can't survive without the water to fill it). It is European civilization that has promoted human rights, the ending of slavery, women's rights, workers' rights, democracy, the rule of law not of men, enforceable contract law, freedom from arbitrary arrest and distraint of property (that's Magna Carta), freedom of speech and thought, corruption-free public service, freedom of conscience as to religion etc. If European civilization is destroyed those rights and advantages will disappear with it.

I 100% agree with you about protecting the cultures of Europe., I guess the question is, how do we go about this?

We undoubtably need to limit immigration, esp non European. But what do we do about the people already here.

We undoubtedly need to rethink inclusivity around language and events and representation in the media etc.

We need to concentrate on British history. We should be learning hymns in school (not necessarily for religious reasons but to encourage communal singing). We need to be addressing the misogyny in certain religions.

This. Though I'd like to have any songs in school that are not current pop songs! I do not know how we go about it, though.

@Grammarnut

Sorry you lost me on the kettle...