4 ms·

This is a good, thoughtful analysis. I think many people outside the Mediterranean region are simply unaware of water issues there. As for the UK, I can't under

by nradov 1y ago

This is a good, thoughtful analysis. I think many people outside the Mediterranean region are simply unaware of water issues there. As for the UK, I can't understand why they have allowed sustained high immigration rates for decades despite food insecurity and a housing shortage.

KaiserPro 1y ago
> why they have allowed sustained high immigration rates for decades recently its because we need skilled and cheap labour to fill the holes in our health and buisness system. Housing shortages is not a direct immigration issue[1], its a policy issue. People of a certain type do not want high rise buildings near them. people of another different type are really happy because they can now build less and sell for more. Yet another class of people go apoplectic when its suggested that social housing should be built (my taxes! why do they get something for nothing.) In short, we are our own worst enemies. [1] net migration at 1 million was utterly insane, and I'm still not sure how a government that lead brexit with "we'll control our borders" managed to be so divorced from what it was doing. Thats rhetorical by the way its short-termism and utter utter incompetence.
- pmg101 1y ago
  Isn't it a pyramid scheme where we import younger people to pay for older people's pensions and benefits... unlikely to end well, like all pyramid schemes.
  - bena 1y ago
    Not necessarily in this case. You have those who pay in, but die before they fully collect. Then the collectors do die off, they aren’t expected to get returns in perpetuity or crazy large returns. Then you have a constant supply of new payees into the system. Only a devastating collapse of the population would cause it to go tits up
    - rickydroll 1y ago
      And in your comment lies a possible solution. Support people into their mid-70s, and then the only medical care they get is palliative, so they don't suffer from whatever takes them out. Half of their estate is allocated to the social welfare fund. Another solution is to increase the sources of funding. For example, in the United States, your Social Security contributions are capped once your income exceeds approximately $160,000. Eliminate that cap, and include income from other sources (i.e., taxes on estates, capital gains, and buy-borrow-die) in the Social Security tax calculation.
      - nradov 1y ago
        Any "solution" will have to work within the realm of political possibility. Elderly people also get to vote and I doubt they will support cutting off their own access to healthcare, or drastic increases in estate taxes.
      - bena 1y ago
        No doubt we can probably do things better, my main thrust was to show how if you can force participation, you can kind of get away with it.
  - pixl97 1y ago
    I'd say no. A pyramid has a wide base. The problem is the population shape is more of one of a christmas tree. The top is narrow, and it widens at the middle, then you have a trunk that is more narrow. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_Kingdom https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_K... The UK doesn't even have that terrible of shape compared to many western countries, but a lot of that is because of immigration. Countries like Japan, S. Korea, and Italy are going to have far worse problems.
  - layer8 1y ago
    Population has naturally been a pyramid, historically [0], and works well that way. The current problem is that it isn’t a pyramid anymore [1]. Not having an inverse pyramid (or kite) would already be helpful. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_pyramid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_pyramid [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_pyramid#Demographic_transition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_pyramid#Demographic...
  - phatfish 1y ago
    It's not a pyramid (far more balance between those entering and leaving to call it a "pyramid"). Unless you are Norway or the UAE and sitting on a massive sovereign wealth fund how else can a national welfare system possible function?
  - pmg101 1y ago
    The replies to this made me think harder about pyramid schemes vs population pyramids. I concluded it is in fact OK to bring in young working people from elsewhere to fund the retirement and social services of those already here and ageing. I was thinking there would be a problem as those immigrants in turn aged and switched from net contributors to net claimants, but I hadn't taken into account that they like all of us die off as they age: indeed, what makes the pyramid a pyramid.
- vixen99 1y ago
  Britain has a very generous welfare system it cannot afford and appears to be unable to even reverse its expansion. According to the Center for Migration Control, there are 1.15 million foreign born individuals claiming some form of in-work benefit. Irrespective of one's views on the migrant question, this is unsustainable. For instance, the National Health System (NHS) has recently been sending patients to Poland and Lithuania to try to relieve pressure on the waiting lists. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-system-statistics-year-ending-march-2025/summary-of-latest-statistics https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-system-...
  - rjsw 1y ago
    In-work benefits should have been presented as a short term measure to cushion the impact of the introduction of the minimum wage. The minimum wage should then have been steadily increased to eleminate the benefit. Alternatively, use the computer system that manages the in-work benefits to find out which companies are exploiting the current system and tax them to fund their own workforce.
  - wasabi991011 1y ago
    > According to the Center for Migration Control, there are 1.15 million foreign born individuals claiming some form of in-work benefit. Isn't the relevant statistic more just how much tax income foreign born individuals give the government vs how much they take out? I don't have a source on hand, but I thought immigration was a net positive in terms of tax revenue minus social assistance, at least in the US.
  - goopypoop 1y ago
    >Irrespective of one's views on the migrant question, this is unsustainable. That's neither true nor irrespective of your views on "the migrant question", which are evidently informed by an explicitly anti-immigration interest group. A million immigrant workers claiming "some form of in-work benefit" is not significant. See e.g. £23B unclaimed benefits last year. Your fact about NHS waiting times doesn't support any claim you've made. It's like you're trolling, but perhaps the best interpretation is you're a GBNews victim?
  - 1y ago
octo888 1y ago
What food insecurity? We joined a successful agricultural union (the EEC, in 1973) and remained a member of its successor for decades and had fantastic access to produce, and some of the cheapest food in the EU (also thanks to a highly competitive grocery sector) Even since leaving, the food supply issues have been very minor. We may have food insecurity in the future but I'm confused if you're implying we've had any serious food insecurity the last few decades
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- nradov 1y ago
  If a country depends on foreign imports just to satisfy basic needs then they are food insecure, by definition. Membership in alliances and trading blocs is temporary, and if other countries have the power to cut you off then that's an existential threat. You would think that the UK would have learned something from the food shortages during WWII when a blockade was in effect. The country might have starved if not for military and logistical support from Canada and the USA.
  - octo888 1y ago
    We obviously have a very different definition of food insecurity. I don't agree with your definition. I think you're talking about import dependence. The World Food Programme define it as "Food security exists when people have access to enough safe and nutritious food for normal growth and development, and an active and healthy life". They also link to the IPC (Integrated Food Security Phase Classification), which hasn't even ranked much of Europe, I imagine for quite obvious reasons. The FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) defines it as "the generally accepted definition of food security is "a situation in which all people at all times have access to adequate quantities of safe and nutritious food to lead a healthy and active life". Importing food can strengthen food security. Complete self-sufficiency can be a weakness too - we have one bad year of weather and oops sorry people starve because we did away with our all produce import systems? Systemic resilience to me seems more important that the exact origin of the food. We are a country adept at international trade and I don't see why we should stop over some odd notion that imports are bad. Many, many other countries import a lot of their food. We are not weird outliers. Which countries do you think we should model ourselves over, out of curiosity? Who excels at self sufficiency (except the US - we aren't all blessed at having the power, geography and climate of the US. Nor frankly do we think their agricultural system is an example to copy) Later Regarding WWII, of course the entire continent learnt a lot of hard lessons - particularly about agricultural policy. I already mentioned the EEC. Desire for peace was a big reason for agricultural co-operation, if I recall my history correctly. The continent with many countries that loved wars would have no problem going to war over food

by nradov 1y ago

KaiserPro 1y ago

> why they have allowed sustained high immigration rates for decades recently its because we need skilled and cheap labour to fill the holes in our health and buisness system. Housing shortages is not a direct immigration issue[1], its a policy issue. People of a certain type do not want high rise buildings near them. people of another different type are really happy because they can now build less and sell for more. Yet another class of people go apoplectic when its suggested that social housing should be built (my taxes! why do they get something for nothing.) In short, we are our own worst enemies. [1] net migration at 1 million was utterly insane, and I'm still not sure how a government that lead brexit with "we'll control our borders" managed to be so divorced from what it was doing. Thats rhetorical by the way its short-termism and utter utter incompetence.

pmg101 1y ago
Isn't it a pyramid scheme where we import younger people to pay for older people's pensions and benefits... unlikely to end well, like all pyramid schemes.
- bena 1y ago
  Not necessarily in this case. You have those who pay in, but die before they fully collect. Then the collectors do die off, they aren’t expected to get returns in perpetuity or crazy large returns. Then you have a constant supply of new payees into the system. Only a devastating collapse of the population would cause it to go tits up
  - rickydroll 1y ago
    And in your comment lies a possible solution. Support people into their mid-70s, and then the only medical care they get is palliative, so they don't suffer from whatever takes them out. Half of their estate is allocated to the social welfare fund. Another solution is to increase the sources of funding. For example, in the United States, your Social Security contributions are capped once your income exceeds approximately $160,000. Eliminate that cap, and include income from other sources (i.e., taxes on estates, capital gains, and buy-borrow-die) in the Social Security tax calculation.
    - nradov 1y ago
      Any "solution" will have to work within the realm of political possibility. Elderly people also get to vote and I doubt they will support cutting off their own access to healthcare, or drastic increases in estate taxes.
    - bena 1y ago
      No doubt we can probably do things better, my main thrust was to show how if you can force participation, you can kind of get away with it.
- pixl97 1y ago
  I'd say no. A pyramid has a wide base. The problem is the population shape is more of one of a christmas tree. The top is narrow, and it widens at the middle, then you have a trunk that is more narrow. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_Kingdom https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_K... The UK doesn't even have that terrible of shape compared to many western countries, but a lot of that is because of immigration. Countries like Japan, S. Korea, and Italy are going to have far worse problems.
- layer8 1y ago
  Population has naturally been a pyramid, historically [0], and works well that way. The current problem is that it isn’t a pyramid anymore [1]. Not having an inverse pyramid (or kite) would already be helpful. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_pyramid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_pyramid [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_pyramid#Demographic_transition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_pyramid#Demographic...
- phatfish 1y ago
  It's not a pyramid (far more balance between those entering and leaving to call it a "pyramid"). Unless you are Norway or the UAE and sitting on a massive sovereign wealth fund how else can a national welfare system possible function?
- pmg101 1y ago
  The replies to this made me think harder about pyramid schemes vs population pyramids. I concluded it is in fact OK to bring in young working people from elsewhere to fund the retirement and social services of those already here and ageing. I was thinking there would be a problem as those immigrants in turn aged and switched from net contributors to net claimants, but I hadn't taken into account that they like all of us die off as they age: indeed, what makes the pyramid a pyramid.
vixen99 1y ago
Britain has a very generous welfare system it cannot afford and appears to be unable to even reverse its expansion. According to the Center for Migration Control, there are 1.15 million foreign born individuals claiming some form of in-work benefit. Irrespective of one's views on the migrant question, this is unsustainable. For instance, the National Health System (NHS) has recently been sending patients to Poland and Lithuania to try to relieve pressure on the waiting lists. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-system-statistics-year-ending-march-2025/summary-of-latest-statistics https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-system-...
- rjsw 1y ago
  In-work benefits should have been presented as a short term measure to cushion the impact of the introduction of the minimum wage. The minimum wage should then have been steadily increased to eleminate the benefit. Alternatively, use the computer system that manages the in-work benefits to find out which companies are exploiting the current system and tax them to fund their own workforce.
- wasabi991011 1y ago
  > According to the Center for Migration Control, there are 1.15 million foreign born individuals claiming some form of in-work benefit. Isn't the relevant statistic more just how much tax income foreign born individuals give the government vs how much they take out? I don't have a source on hand, but I thought immigration was a net positive in terms of tax revenue minus social assistance, at least in the US.
- goopypoop 1y ago
  >Irrespective of one's views on the migrant question, this is unsustainable. That's neither true nor irrespective of your views on "the migrant question", which are evidently informed by an explicitly anti-immigration interest group. A million immigrant workers claiming "some form of in-work benefit" is not significant. See e.g. £23B unclaimed benefits last year. Your fact about NHS waiting times doesn't support any claim you've made. It's like you're trolling, but perhaps the best interpretation is you're a GBNews victim?
- 1y ago

octo888 1y ago

What food insecurity? We joined a successful agricultural union (the EEC, in 1973) and remained a member of its successor for decades and had fantastic access to produce, and some of the cheapest food in the EU (also thanks to a highly competitive grocery sector) Even since leaving, the food supply issues have been very minor. We may have food insecurity in the future but I'm confused if you're implying we've had any serious food insecurity the last few decades

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
nradov 1y ago
If a country depends on foreign imports just to satisfy basic needs then they are food insecure, by definition. Membership in alliances and trading blocs is temporary, and if other countries have the power to cut you off then that's an existential threat. You would think that the UK would have learned something from the food shortages during WWII when a blockade was in effect. The country might have starved if not for military and logistical support from Canada and the USA.
- octo888 1y ago
  We obviously have a very different definition of food insecurity. I don't agree with your definition. I think you're talking about import dependence. The World Food Programme define it as "Food security exists when people have access to enough safe and nutritious food for normal growth and development, and an active and healthy life". They also link to the IPC (Integrated Food Security Phase Classification), which hasn't even ranked much of Europe, I imagine for quite obvious reasons. The FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) defines it as "the generally accepted definition of food security is "a situation in which all people at all times have access to adequate quantities of safe and nutritious food to lead a healthy and active life". Importing food can strengthen food security. Complete self-sufficiency can be a weakness too - we have one bad year of weather and oops sorry people starve because we did away with our all produce import systems? Systemic resilience to me seems more important that the exact origin of the food. We are a country adept at international trade and I don't see why we should stop over some odd notion that imports are bad. Many, many other countries import a lot of their food. We are not weird outliers. Which countries do you think we should model ourselves over, out of curiosity? Who excels at self sufficiency (except the US - we aren't all blessed at having the power, geography and climate of the US. Nor frankly do we think their agricultural system is an example to copy) Later Regarding WWII, of course the entire continent learnt a lot of hard lessons - particularly about agricultural policy. I already mentioned the EEC. Desire for peace was a big reason for agricultural co-operation, if I recall my history correctly. The continent with many countries that loved wars would have no problem going to war over food