Nigel Farage

[cronus]

All these thing are within the sphere of political influence - yet we're being repeatedly told that a supposed immigration tsunami is the greatest existential threat to our way of life in a generation. Go figure.

Some think there'll be 50% of Muslims in the UK by 2050 and some put the number as low as 10% on current trends. One thing is certain, the more there are here the more the eternal Shia/Shiat civil war is gonna encroach, the more eggshells we'll have to walk on to enjoy our normal way of life. Trump is right, we are a a nation in denial about our Muslim problem - at least in the upper tiers, right now.

[Brian Peacock]

Again, this is in the realm of political influence - but first of all you need a society that's committed to secularism. Politicians of the last 20 years have done much to undermine the secular principle merely for short term political advantage.

[cronus]

Again, this is in the realm of political influence - but first of all you need a society that's committed to secularism. Politicians of the last 20 years have done much to undermine the secular principle merely for short term political advantage.

I don't see the present situation changing without some sort of social upheaval. The sort of political system we want for a secular long thinking society is not the sort we have. Let's hope everyone stays in the country if a national pub brawl erupts sometime?

[Rum]

[pErvinalia]

Immigrants grow old and require support themselves, the logic impasse of the immigration boosts economy flock is well known. It might fool the simple folk to claim a perpetual motion machine actually works....

I wish I knew whether you were serious or not when presenting utterly ridiculous arguments. Immigration isn't any more a "perpetual motion machine" than fecundity.

[cronus]

Immigrants grow old and require support themselves, the logic impasse of the immigration boosts economy flock is well known. It might fool the simple folk to claim a perpetual motion machine actually works....

I wish I knew whether you were serious or not when presenting utterly ridiculous arguments. Immigration isn't any more a "perpetual motion machine" than fecundity.

No, but it would have to be for the economic argument to make sense overtime. That's the point I was making. Easily missed with a closed off idealogical driven mind....set like yours. But the future really does happen. And is often a consequence of decisions made in the past.

[pErvinalia]

Huh? Again, whether population replenishment comes from immigration or native birth, both require it to continue into the future - aka what you called a "perpetual motion machine".

Just tell me this, are you being serious in this argument or are you taking the piss?

[Brian Peacock]

Immigrants grow old and require support themselves, the logic impasse of the immigration boosts economy flock is well known. It might fool the simple folk to claim a perpetual motion machine actually works....

I wish I knew whether you were serious or not when presenting utterly ridiculous arguments. Immigration isn't any more a "perpetual motion machine" than fecundity.

No, but it would have to be for the economic argument to make sense overtime. That's the point I was making. Easily missed with a closed off idealogical driven mind....set like yours. But the future really does happen. And is often a consequence of decisions made in the past.

True. But at the moment the concept of 'the future' only extends as far as the next election.

The UK government are relying on maintaining present levels of immigration to fulfil the conditions of their economic program. The problems re both the EU and the UK lie with the current global economic structure; predicated on perpetual growth, it now amounts to systematically shifting the resource wealth of the entire planet into the hands of a diminishing number of increasingly wealthy institutions and individuals. The apparent 'concerns' over immigration levels generally come from those parties who think an increase in non-native citizens will automatically reduce the proportion of wealth they feel should be made available to them just for being born here. This is a bogus assumption, but a common one, and it's been fed into the Zeitgeist by the merry band of asset-strippers who currently monopolise the deckchairs along the right-bank of the political river.

[cronus]

I'm with the Bilderburgers...long term sustainable human population on Earth is around 500 million. It's weaning out all the bad stock on the way down, and keeping the good both culturally and genetically, that's a bit of a sensitive issue given that eugenics history thing. If done right there is no reason population reduction with social improvement can't happen. Can start by removing the third world ignorances, like honour culture and religious intolerants and so forth, on import here in the UK today. Cruel to be kind in the right measure. If some didn't invite too many into a party the party wouldn't need breaking up....but that is how it goes. And robots can look after the old if technological advances continue....no need for more people.

[Brian Peacock]

Popycock. Pay attention to the numbers.

[cronus]

No mention of the technical developments such as the green revolution that made the population spurt in recent decades possible, pure numbers man a statistician. The crash is coming like on reindeer island, it is inevitable for a host of technical reasons not least the depletion of cheap easily accessible oil - we live in a lull of pricing for that commodity which cannot last and there is disaster written on the other side of the curve. It is how we handle the crash. If there is massive ethnic conflict on the way down a population is vulnerable to evaporation. It is easy to see how countless civilizations really did collapse overnight by their intact ruins. I'm not planning to avoid it. Maximising the potential for something afterwards means some unpalatable choices. We might only get one second chance as a species.

[Brian Peacock]

You haven't watched the video. Save your comments on it for when you have.

The 'population spurt' of the last 50 years is fully accounted for by the increased longevity of adults while the number of children born remains steady, and is set to remain steady for the foreseeable future.

[cronus]

You haven't watched the video. Save your comments on it for when you have.

The 'population spurt' of the last 50 years is fully accounted for by the increased longevity of adults while the number of children born remains steady, and is set to remain steady for the foreseeable future.

As it said most of the increase has occurred in Asian countries. I've seen a similar documentary. And have no reason to fault the logic of following the line of best fit. In nature populations are dynamic and non-linear, surges and crashes are the norm. If it wasn't for my education in non-linear dynamics I'd buy the statistical argument. It is all a little 'just-so' regarding future developments though when you reflect on the massive changes that preceded into the past....being better educated might reduce the birth rate, certainly, but that is not the direction of educational standards in the West, and presumably else where as time goes on and the economic system continues to crumble....

[Rum]

Why do people bother responding to this doom laden word salad nonsense..and I'm not referring to Mr Peacock.

[cronus]

Why do people bother responding to this doom laden word salad nonsense..and I'm not referring to Mr Peacock.

Because the choice is me or no hope at all.