UK's population growth highest in EU

[LeMaquis]

But seriously, as the population expends, demands on things like water (not helped by dry summers), power (expect more brownouts) and land (both for living on and for waste disposal) will increase.

 

They are good questions. Water is a worry but apart from this year we haven't had many dry summers recently.

[milquetoast1]

But we're not skint.

 

The UK went bust in 1976 and is now "skint" to the tune of £1.1 trillion. Happily that's a problem for the 800m born last year and not me or you. Unhappily they will need to build more infrastructure for themselves, so the debt will rise, so they'll need to have more people, etc.

 

Which brings us back to Ponzi schemes ...

[ghost rider]

If you're going to troll and use these as well as ridiculous arguments then be a prat. If wealth is distributed relatively equally then people will be wealthier. China are realising the massive wealth they are creating has to be distributed more fairly and provide better social services.

 

You are not suggesting we turn to communism surely.It is doomed to failure and encourages a dictatorship like North Korea.Russia and China have done the right thing by back heeling it.Freedom to live your life like you want to do is what i would always fight for.I would not fight for money,religion but freedom i would always take up arms.

[LeMaquis]

People stopped spending because they could no longer borrow money to spend; the crisis happened because people had too much debt, the bankers were complicit in lending money that shouldn't have been lent but the economy tanked because the population stopped spending.

 

And as you admit people stopped spending because banks no longer lent them the money. And banks no longer lent it because some of them went out of business and couldn't pay their own debts. And that was the fault of the bankers because they had lent too much money to too many people who couldn't repay it. The banks failed first. The economy spiralled down because banks were in crisis. Fred Goodwin had his knighthood taken away for screwing up RBS. No consumer had his knighthood taken away for stopping spending.

[tinfoilhat]

More taxpayers to fund my pension.

 

But seriously, as the population expends, demands on things like water (not helped by dry summers), power (expect more brownouts) and land (both for living on and for waste disposal) will increase.

 

Apparently a population can grow indefinitely even with finite resources. Who knew?

 

Correctamundo. There have been several reports warning about power issues, and this is the first time in a long time our smaller rivers haven't started the summer already low. It's going to happen again though - climate change and all that.

[LeMaquis]

The UK went bust in 1976 and is now "skint" to the tune of £1.1 trillion. Happily that's a problem for the 800m born last year and not me or you. Unhappily they will need to build more infrastructure for themselves, so the debt will rise, so they'll need to have more people, etc.

 

Which brings us back to Ponzi schemes ...

 

The UK did not go bust in 76. The UK borrowed some money from the IMF to tidy things over.

[angos]

If you're going to troll and use these as well as ridiculous arguments then be a prat. If wealth is distributed relatively equally then people will be wealthier. China are realising the massive wealth they are creating has to be distributed more fairly and provide better social services.

1,000,000,000 people each spending £1,000, GDP will be £1,000,000,000,000

1,000,000 people each spending £1,000,000, GDP will be £1,000,000,000,000

 

So two countries both with the same GDP, which country would you prefere to live in, I would go for the one with the smallest popuation because the people are wealthier.

 

You can see that GDP is not a very good measure for the wealth of the population.

[Eccentric]

No consumer had his knighthood taken away for stopping spending.

 

Ergo: conversely, if I started spending, I should entitled to a knighthood? Now, there is something to which to aspire.

[LeMaquis]

You are not suggesting we turn to communism surely.It is doomed to failure and encourages a dictatorship like North Korea.Russia and China have done the right thing by back heeling it.Freedom to live your life like you want to do is what i would always fight for.I would not fight for money,religion but freedom i would always take up arms.

 

Eh? I quoted China's expansion and need to redistribute. You point out yourself that China is doing the right thing and then warn about North Korea which is a dying economy. If you have read this thread you'll have seen I'm the one arguing in favour of open borders, freedom of movement and economic growth and you ask if I support North Korea which is known for none of those.

[angos]

And as you admit people stopped spending because banks no longer lent them the money. And banks no longer lent it because some of them went out of business and couldn't pay their own debts. And that was the fault of the bankers because they had lent too much money to too many people who couldn't repay it. The banks failed first. The economy spiralled down because banks were in crisis. Fred Goodwin had his knighthood taken away for screwing up RBS. No consumer had his knighthood taken away for stopping spending.

 

If the banks hadn't lent money that shouldn't have been lent, there wouldn't have been a growing economy to crash. The economy grew because of the unsustainable spending of the population, the crash was an inevitable consequence of that unsustainable spending.