2024 Election thread
Comments
-
It flirts with that, and then says actually, 1.1 is lower than 1.5 and there's nothing to see here.
0 -
I'd suggest the problems for a large cohort who were born in the almost literal ashes of WW2, rationing for their childhood, etc, in the middle of the greatest ever wealth accumulation seen in history (only since surpassed by China) were different to the cohort now in a post-capitalist, shrinking population world.
0 -
As we suspected then. They're just better at moaning than any other generation 🙂
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
The population of the world is not shrinking.
0 -
I'd humbly suggest having a fertility rate well below the level to sustain existing levels of population creates a totally different set of challenges. That is the same for most of the West and declining fertility is a pattern across the world.
0 -
Yes but the population of the world is growing, which is literally the opposite of what you've said. So is the population of the UK.
If you are going to bang on about stuff, at least get the basicis of your rant correct.
0 -
This definitely needs a graph
Wilier Izoard XP0 -
The declining birth rate is masked by immigration.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
What I find fascinating is when AI takes over, what direct of physical form it will take? Will the designed/evolved intelligent matter go in the direction of mechanical or biological? I'm thinking on the lines of "The Borg" but genetically engineered for maximum productivity/efficiency (less hyped for the TV). How many limbs/regrowth (akin to frogs), eyesight, armour, size... fascinating.
0 -
Replacement rate of fertility is 2.1 children per woman. It's currently at 1.6 in the UK.
2/3rds of the world population live in areas with fertility rates below 2.1 children per woman. On current fertility projections, Europe is expected to have a population *decline*by 7% by 2050, if net immigration is zero.
Like I said, there are very different issues at play here.
0 -
The world fertility rate is 2.3, so I think the First.Aspect's comment stands.
0 -
That's not what you said. You asserted that the world population is falling. This is simply incorrect. It is also simply incorrect in the case of the UK.
0 -
Net immigration won't be zero. It isn't zero now, either.
0 -
I didn't tbf. If you want to reverse engineer so you're right that's fine, but I was obviously referring to the UK in the context of boomers.
0 -
Which is the same as saying the declining birthrate is masked by a high birthrate somewhere else.
0 -
Trouble is, the Tories have overseen record high taxes while letting public services rot, and everyone can see the result. Might be why their 'promises' (or aspirations) aren't believed, and they are stuck on 20% ono.
0 -
Stolen from a post in the economics thread "The current plans are to cut real terms spending on everything by 2.3% per year, for the three years from 2025-26"
Can't see that working. Not at all, even with the exceptions of NHS, defense and core school spending. What are they going to do with the bankrupt local authorities for example.
0 -
Outside the protected budgets are roads, transport, courts, universities, environmental protection, social care, police, prisons. All having budgets cut by 2.3% PER YEAR for three years starting next year. That's the plan that allows the "headroom" for any tax cut.
I said in the other thread they should be forced to campaign on that. Things aren't exactly going great at the moment for any of those.
0 -
They are salting the earth as much as possible, without the courage to say what the cuts will mean in practical terms. They know they have no prospect of actually having to enact any of them. The "2.3%" is just a figure plucked out of the air, I suspect, with no basis in fact or practicality.
0 -
Just as well or we'd be really in trouble.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
-
The tax cuts will also probably be based on the increase in fuel duty not being "temporarily" held next year and thereafter, even though it was last year, certainly will be tomorrow and has been every year for the past decade. We have fiscal "rules" that can depend on a future unfolding that is pure fantasy.
0 -
For once I don't think the tax cut bribe is there to persuade voters, as they know they are going to lose big time. It's just more wrecking before they pop the keys back in through the letterbox and do a runner, prior to an almost baked-in public sector catastrophe and Labour doing 'austerity lite' out of necessity.
0 -
-
It's the bribe that everyone is aware of.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I mean, we’re all going to notice a couple petrol tanks worth of tax breaks over a year aren’t we?
0 -
It is more than that but no. It gives good looking headlines and something to brag about. Won't even work.
It is a setup for when Labour raise taxes. "See, told you so."
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I think it's trying to hold onto seats like Surrey South West by reminding voters who will prioritise pretending to cut personal tax over everything else.
0 -
I’m starting to take your view of Boomers after just seeing one vox pop on Breakfast with a coffin dodger telling the reporter there’s enough money in the system if it is managed properly.
0 -
Talk of a May General Election. Presumably today is going to be a massive give away and then if that polls well they’ll call a snap election. The video of Mr and Mrs Sunak telling us about their love of household chores will no doubt help get him favour with the normal people 😂
0
