4 ms·

UK's birth rate is 1.44. Someone is going to have to pay for your upkeep in old age. Most political problems of today stem from the fact that politicians are u

UK's birth rate is 1.44. Someone is going to have to pay for your upkeep in old age. Most political problems of today stem from the fact that politicians are unwilling to explain this basic fact to their none-too-bright constituents. Reality is reality. This is why the fascist-lite Italian PM actually increased immigration from Africa after assuming office and taking one look at the numbers.

cbeach 2y ago
Lucky then, that immigrants don't age. Otherwise you'd be turning your country into one hell of a demographic Ponzi Scheme...
- close04 2y ago
  The are a few more things in the equation. Median age in the UK is ~40 while most immigration is from countries with medians in their 20s. Those families are more likely to have more children especially if they reach a stable and comfortable living situation. So it can be a Ponzi scheme but it can also be an investment.
  - mytailorisrich 2y ago
    It is a Ponzi scheme. The Ponzi scheme is that population has to grow forever, which is not sutainable and not possible, and coming to an end globally. So high immigration now is just kicking the ball down the road while destroying your local culture and people in the process.
    - hermitcrab 2y ago
      "local culture and people" are still very much still alive in the South West of England, where I live.
    - close04 2y ago
      If this is the reference for the definition of a Ponzi scheme then the pension system in general is a Ponzi scheme by design and immigration is not "turning" it into one like OP said. But I don't really agree this is the appropriate equivalent at least for the "spirit" of a Ponzi scheme. A pyramid scheme exists only when a pyramid is disguised as something else. When it's designed and presented as an actual pyramid it's not a scheme. In the design of the pension system there's no intention of fraud involved (only lack of education maybe), and the system is constantly and very transparently adjusted to widen the pyramid base and narrow the top (increase retirement age, contributor base, or individual contribution).
      - mytailorisrich 2y ago
        You are being unduly pedantic and argumentive. You should understand that the term was clearly used to mean that population must keep growing forever because the next generation must always be larger than the previous one. And yes, the whole economy and benefit systems, including pensions, assume this. This is why it is difficult to face the fact that population cannot keep growing, and in fact it s forecast that will stop growing at global scale by the end of the century. It is even more unsustainable combined with the objective of solving the climate and environmental crisis. There is a dishonest incoherency with our governments, and just incoherency with large sections of the public.
- awkward 2y ago
  By the definition of Ponzi Scheme being used here, is there any capitalist country that is not running a Ponzi?
gadders 2y ago
Someone is going to have to, but currently as much as immigration is raising the UK population, GDP per person is declining.
- optimalsolver 2y ago
  Declined relative to its peak in the 2010s. It's climbing again. Ironically the decline set in after Brexit. It's also way higher than it ever was back when Britain was monoracial.
  - nickdothutton 2y ago
    GDP per capita growth [1] has been more or less flat since 2008. The time of the GFC. I think people are starting to forget what productivity growth even feels like it has been so long. Subsequent governments set immigration to infinity to make GDP go up, but this has further exposed the fact that per-capita it is flat. [1] https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/gbr/united-kingdom/gdp-per-capita https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/gbr/uni...
    - gadders 2y ago
      I remember when Tony Blair was elected and Gordon Brown proudly proclaimed "An end to boom and bust economics". I don't think many people realised this would be continuous bust with no boom ever.
    - optimalsolver 2y ago
      So the graph there shows a huge jump in GDP per capita after Labour took power and opened up the UK to mass immigration in 1997. Am I reading this info right?
    - FredPret 2y ago
      Check out these numbers: GDP per capita for the US, EU, and some others: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?end=2023&locations=EU-US-CN-IN-CA&start=1969 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?end=2023... The US was & is ahead per capita but you can see the EU and Canada taking a big hit in 2008 and going sideways after that. Here's full GDP. It tells a different story due to the EU's larger population. There have been several occasions where it actually had a larger economy than the US; but every time it seems to hit a roadblock and go sideways for a decade (1980, 1995, 2008): https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?end=2023&locations=EU-US-CN-IN-CA&start=1969 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?end=2023...

cbeach 2y ago

Lucky then, that immigrants don't age. Otherwise you'd be turning your country into one hell of a demographic Ponzi Scheme...

close04 2y ago
The are a few more things in the equation. Median age in the UK is ~40 while most immigration is from countries with medians in their 20s. Those families are more likely to have more children especially if they reach a stable and comfortable living situation. So it can be a Ponzi scheme but it can also be an investment.
- mytailorisrich 2y ago
  It is a Ponzi scheme. The Ponzi scheme is that population has to grow forever, which is not sutainable and not possible, and coming to an end globally. So high immigration now is just kicking the ball down the road while destroying your local culture and people in the process.
  - hermitcrab 2y ago
    "local culture and people" are still very much still alive in the South West of England, where I live.
  - close04 2y ago
    If this is the reference for the definition of a Ponzi scheme then the pension system in general is a Ponzi scheme by design and immigration is not "turning" it into one like OP said. But I don't really agree this is the appropriate equivalent at least for the "spirit" of a Ponzi scheme. A pyramid scheme exists only when a pyramid is disguised as something else. When it's designed and presented as an actual pyramid it's not a scheme. In the design of the pension system there's no intention of fraud involved (only lack of education maybe), and the system is constantly and very transparently adjusted to widen the pyramid base and narrow the top (increase retirement age, contributor base, or individual contribution).
    - mytailorisrich 2y ago
      You are being unduly pedantic and argumentive. You should understand that the term was clearly used to mean that population must keep growing forever because the next generation must always be larger than the previous one. And yes, the whole economy and benefit systems, including pensions, assume this. This is why it is difficult to face the fact that population cannot keep growing, and in fact it s forecast that will stop growing at global scale by the end of the century. It is even more unsustainable combined with the objective of solving the climate and environmental crisis. There is a dishonest incoherency with our governments, and just incoherency with large sections of the public.
awkward 2y ago
By the definition of Ponzi Scheme being used here, is there any capitalist country that is not running a Ponzi?

gadders 2y ago

Someone is going to have to, but currently as much as immigration is raising the UK population, GDP per person is declining.

optimalsolver 2y ago
Declined relative to its peak in the 2010s. It's climbing again. Ironically the decline set in after Brexit. It's also way higher than it ever was back when Britain was monoracial.
- nickdothutton 2y ago
  GDP per capita growth [1] has been more or less flat since 2008. The time of the GFC. I think people are starting to forget what productivity growth even feels like it has been so long. Subsequent governments set immigration to infinity to make GDP go up, but this has further exposed the fact that per-capita it is flat. [1] https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/gbr/united-kingdom/gdp-per-capita https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/gbr/uni...
  - gadders 2y ago
    I remember when Tony Blair was elected and Gordon Brown proudly proclaimed "An end to boom and bust economics". I don't think many people realised this would be continuous bust with no boom ever.
  - optimalsolver 2y ago
    So the graph there shows a huge jump in GDP per capita after Labour took power and opened up the UK to mass immigration in 1997. Am I reading this info right?
  - FredPret 2y ago
    Check out these numbers: GDP per capita for the US, EU, and some others: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?end=2023&locations=EU-US-CN-IN-CA&start=1969 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?end=2023... The US was & is ahead per capita but you can see the EU and Canada taking a big hit in 2008 and going sideways after that. Here's full GDP. It tells a different story due to the EU's larger population. There have been several occasions where it actually had a larger economy than the US; but every time it seems to hit a roadblock and go sideways for a decade (1980, 1995, 2008): https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?end=2023&locations=EU-US-CN-IN-CA&start=1969 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?end=2023...