Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Blah...blah...blah...
By the way - if lots of them are having children here - thats brilliant news - we need to keep the birth rate up. That is the best way to fund the future PONZI scheme for us. Excellent news.

More blah...blah..blah...

What happens when the UK is full?

Do we all just hold hands so no-one falls into the sea?

Originally Posted by All_I_Want

Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Blah...blah...blah...
By the way - if lots of them are having children here - thats brilliant news - we need to keep the birth rate up. That is the best way to fund the future PONZI scheme for us. Excellent news.

More blah...blah..blah...

What happens when the UK is full?

Do we all just hold hands so no-one falls into the sea?

What do you mean - when? It was full ages ago.

We can not produce enough to support ourselves on this island given the numbers of inhabitants. That was part of the reason MT drove us towards a service culture instead of a manufacturing culre (but only part).

We have a simple choice. We retain the ageing and failing population of "non-immigrants" or we hope like buggery that we starting rutting to produce economically productive units.

Or, we try to entice the good, the bright and the hardworking and control immigration positively, rather than negatively.

So - do we set quotas of "most people allowed in" or do we set quotas of "at least this many people with X skills, this many with Y skills"?

Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Originally Posted by All_I_Want

Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Blah...blah...blah...
By the way - if lots of them are having children here - thats brilliant news - we need to keep the birth rate up. That is the best way to fund the future PONZI scheme for us. Excellent news.

More blah...blah..blah...

What happens when the UK is full?

Do we all just hold hands so no-one falls into the sea?

What do you mean - when? It was full ages ago.

We can not produce enough to support ourselves on this island given the numbers of inhabitants. That was part of the reason MT drove us towards a service culture instead of a manufacturing culre (but only part).

We have a simple choice. We retain the ageing and failing population of "non-immigrants" or we hope like buggery that we starting rutting to produce economically productive units.

Or, we try to entice the good, the bright and the hardworking and control immigration positively, rather than negatively.

So - do we set quotas of "most people allowed in" or do we set quotas of "at least this many people with X skills, this many with Y skills"?

No.

You stated above "we need to keep the birth rate up".

Now you are simply ignoring/going back on that, You see that's it with your type of processes, they don't stack up.

As you state this country is already full up, we need to limit the birth rate not keep it up.

Control immigration?????

How many entered this country illegally, and are unaccounted for? An estimated 1 million, and as we can see from the latest performance from our ministers, even they cannot spot an illegal who wants to work.

Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Originally Posted by All_I_Want

Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Blah...blah...blah...
By the way - if lots of them are having children here - thats brilliant news - we need to keep the birth rate up. That is the best way to fund the future PONZI scheme for us. Excellent news.

More blah...blah..blah...

What happens when the UK is full?

Do we all just hold hands so no-one falls into the sea?

What do you mean - when? It was full ages ago.

We can not produce enough to support ourselves on this island given the numbers of inhabitants. That was part of the reason MT drove us towards a service culture instead of a manufacturing culre (but only part).

We have a simple choice. We retain the ageing and failing population of "non-immigrants" or we hope like buggery that we starting rutting to produce economically productive units.

Or, we try to entice the good, the bright and the hardworking and control immigration positively, rather than negatively.

So - do we set quotas of "most people allowed in" or do we set quotas of "at least this many people with X skills, this many with Y skills"?

Also, what we need to do is get the lazy MF in this country to work not import more. Of course we need to import some, but this should be VERY closely monitored, not the free for all it is now.

Originally Posted by bobthedog

Control immigration?????

How many entered this country illegally, and are unaccounted for? An estimated 1 million, and as we can see from the latest performance from our ministers, even they cannot spot an illegal who wants to work.

I million? Do keep up!


Even the Government admits it has over 7 million more active NI numbers on it's books that it can account for. Interestingly, that rise occured between 1997 and 2007 when they finally closed the loophole that allowed any foreigner to walk into a jobcentre and get an NI number on demand.

Originally Posted by All_I_Want

Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Originally Posted by All_I_Want

Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Blah...blah...blah...
By the way - if lots of them are having children here - thats brilliant news - we need to keep the birth rate up. That is the best way to fund the future PONZI scheme for us. Excellent news.

More blah...blah..blah...

What happens when the UK is full?

Do we all just hold hands so no-one falls into the sea?

What do you mean - when? It was full ages ago.

We can not produce enough to support ourselves on this island given the numbers of inhabitants. That was part of the reason MT drove us towards a service culture instead of a manufacturing culre (but only part).

We have a simple choice. We retain the ageing and failing population of "non-immigrants" or we hope like buggery that we starting rutting to produce economically productive units.

Or, we try to entice the good, the bright and the hardworking and control immigration positively, rather than negatively.

So - do we set quotas of "most people allowed in" or do we set quotas of "at least this many people with X skills, this many with Y skills"?

No.

You stated above "we need to keep the birth rate up".

Now you are simply ignoring/going back on that, You see that's it with your type of processes, they don't stack up.

As you state this country is already full up, we need to limit the birth rate not keep it up.

No, we need to keep the birth rate up so that we can both support the old people in the country and at the same time buy goods in to support us from other countries. Whilst hoping that at some point we get a government that doesn't royally screw us over and spend all of our money on something else.

There are other more direct ways to alter the balance, but even I only joke about euthanising those over the age of 70 just to balance the books.

Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Originally Posted by All_I_Want

Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Originally Posted by All_I_Want

Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Blah...blah...blah...
By the way - if lots of them are having children here - thats brilliant news - we need to keep the birth rate up. That is the best way to fund the future PONZI scheme for us. Excellent news.

More blah...blah..blah...

What happens when the UK is full?

Do we all just hold hands so no-one falls into the sea?

What do you mean - when? It was full ages ago.

We can not produce enough to support ourselves on this island given the numbers of inhabitants. That was part of the reason MT drove us towards a service culture instead of a manufacturing culre (but only part).

We have a simple choice. We retain the ageing and failing population of "non-immigrants" or we hope like buggery that we starting rutting to produce economically productive units.

Or, we try to entice the good, the bright and the hardworking and control immigration positively, rather than negatively.

So - do we set quotas of "most people allowed in" or do we set quotas of "at least this many people with X skills, this many with Y skills"?

No.

You stated above "we need to keep the birth rate up".

Now you are simply ignoring/going back on that, You see that's it with your type of processes, they don't stack up.

As you state this country is already full up, we need to limit the birth rate not keep it up.

No, we need to keep the birth rate up so that we can both support the old people in the country and at the same time buy goods in to support us from other countries. Whilst hoping that at some point we get a government that doesn't royally screw us over and spend all of our money on something else.

There are other more direct ways to alter the balance, but even I only joke about euthanising those over the age of 70 just to balance the books.

Ok then, answer my question, what do we do when its full (to bursting)?

Originally Posted by All_I_Want

Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Originally Posted by All_I_Want

Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Originally Posted by All_I_Want

Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Blah...blah...blah...
By the way - if lots of them are having children here - thats brilliant news - we need to keep the birth rate up. That is the best way to fund the future PONZI scheme for us. Excellent news.

More blah...blah..blah...

What happens when the UK is full?

Do we all just hold hands so no-one falls into the sea?

What do you mean - when? It was full ages ago.

We can not produce enough to support ourselves on this island given the numbers of inhabitants. That was part of the reason MT drove us towards a service culture instead of a manufacturing culre (but only part).

We have a simple choice. We retain the ageing and failing population of "non-immigrants" or we hope like buggery that we starting rutting to produce economically productive units.

Or, we try to entice the good, the bright and the hardworking and control immigration positively, rather than negatively.

So - do we set quotas of "most people allowed in" or do we set quotas of "at least this many people with X skills, this many with Y skills"?

No.

You stated above "we need to keep the birth rate up".

Now you are simply ignoring/going back on that, You see that's it with your type of processes, they don't stack up.

As you state this country is already full up, we need to limit the birth rate not keep it up.

No, we need to keep the birth rate up so that we can both support the old people in the country and at the same time buy goods in to support us from other countries. Whilst hoping that at some point we get a government that doesn't royally screw us over and spend all of our money on something else.

There are other more direct ways to alter the balance, but even I only joke about euthanising those over the age of 70 just to balance the books.

Ok then, answer my question, what do we do when its full (to bursting)?

What you mean physically bursting? well, let's see when that will happen.

I would say about the most crowded place in the cuontry is London - and that is pretty much physically bursting, I suppose (as an estimation). That has a population density of 8,980 per sq km.

The UK has an area of 242, 514 sq km. So we will be literally full to bursting when the population hits 2,177,775,720 The current population estimate is 60,000,000.

Our popluation is growing by about 400,000 a year (recently). Lets say it will grow on average by a million a year because of some impact of exponential growth. That means that in 2,000 years time + we will hit physically bursting.

Mate - we will all be under the fcuking water by then anyway apparently. So, I really wouldn't worry.

Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Blah..... I really wouldn't worry.

No you wouldn't would you.