Anyone spot the problem with this article?

[patman post]

Evidence please. (Not newspaper references, or comments by right wing pundits, or the ravings of right wing politicians.)

Take the trouble to compare those aged 16 to 24 "Not in Employmment, Education or Training" with the number of workers from overseas in care and support jobs. Do so and you'll see both totals could be noticeably reduced if NEETs, say aged 18 to 24, would do time in the care sector in return for benefits...

[Scott777]

Yup, that's it, automation/AI is going to necessitate UBI and then immigration will be the relatively smaller problem when there are no jobs almost at all, unless you're ridiculously skilled at programming such... And we'll "own nothing and be happy"..

I agree on all that, except the problem with immigration will be overpopulation.

[Borg Refinery]

But with a rising population due to mass immigration, the demand for elderly care and NHS will only increase.  Your short-term solution is a bigger problem in the long-term.  Therefore, it is not a solution, and there must be a better idea.  And what are the other jobs that cannot be automated?

Yup, that's it, automation/AI is going to necessitate UBI and then immigration will be the relatively smaller problem when there are no jobs almost at all, unless you're ridiculously skilled at programming such... And we'll "own nothing and be happy"..

[papasmurf]

Gosh, you say that as if immigration doesn't even exist.  How could that be a stable population with 0.75M immigrants every year?

It is 10 million in just a few years.

[Barry]

Baby boomers did  their bit to boost the population, which should have continued. We had three kids.
Our three kids have had an average of two kids. The average has risen from an all time low of 1.63 to about 1.9 in recent years.
Muhammed or variants are the top name choice for newborn boys.
https://www.newarab.com/news/muhammad-uks-favourite-boy-name-second-year-row

Now babyboomers are being blamed for impoverishing the country, which is a bit unfair, to say the least. We've been good workers, often working for the same employers for decades.

[Scott777]

Our elderly. Population is mushrooming because of the babyboomers and increased life expectancy.

Babyboomers increased the population between 1946 to 1964.  It does not account for any increase since 1964.

Life expectancy increased by 10 years between 1960 and 2010, from a mean average of 71 to 81.  The population over 71 is about 8.7M.  If we exclude immigrants, we could round that down to 8M. That's 8M over 50 years.  Immigration accounts for somewhere between half a million to a million every year.  That will be 37M over 50 years.  Life expectancy will not keep going up.  So we are comparing 37M for immigration with 8M for increased life expectancy.

And if you add life expectancy to the equation, you need to apply that also to immigrants.  But for some reason you ignore immigration, which we could reduce.  But we can't really reduce life expectancy, can we?  So why ignore one and blame the other?

Ideally we would have kept our fertility rate at about 2.1 which would lead to a stable population.

Gosh, you say that as if immigration doesn't even exist.  How could that be a stable population with 0.75M immigrants every year?

[BeElBeeBub]

But with a rising population due to mass immigration, the demand for elderly care and NHS will only increase.  Your short-term solution is a bigger problem in the long-term.  Therefore, it is not a solution, and there must be a better idea.  And what are the other jobs that cannot be automated?

Our elderly. Population is mushrooming because of the babyboomers and increased life expectancy.  That bit is baked in.

The important bit when it comes to supporting your elderly (actually your pre working age as well, but we'll put them. Aside for now) population is the ratio of workers to pensioners. 

Ideally we would have kept our fertility rate at about 2.1 which would lead to a stable population. 

But we didn't 

So now we need to a) suffer the effects of wotker/pensioner ratio falling B) boost productivity massively to compensate c) find workers from somewhere. 

Now I don't want to experience a). I do want B) for a variety of reasons but it isn't totally possible in all areas. So we also need do do C) 

[Scott777]

Sure, we can increace our productivity with automation - we have to. But we still need people. There are huge numbers of jobs that just cannot be automated. Elderly care being one.

Without migrants the NHS would have collapsed already.

But with a rising population due to mass immigration, the demand for elderly care and NHS will only increase.  Your short-term solution is a bigger problem in the long-term.  Therefore, it is not a solution, and there must be a better idea.  And what are the other jobs that cannot be automated?

[Nick]

If only we didn't make it harder to move food across our borders eh.

Sure, we can increace our productivity with automation - we have to. But we still need people. There are huge numbers of jobs that just cannot be automated. Elderly care being one.

The two biggest reasons for a (non visitor) UK visa by far are work and study. Each of those is bigger than all the other reasons (family, asylum etc) put together.  And half of work visas were for healthcare, half of them (so 1/4) were for social and home care roles.

Without migrants the NHS would have collapsed already.

Long term, because our birthrate is so low the migrants who.do.stay are going to essentially take the place of those lost births so the load on food and healthcare won't be much different from of we had zerocmkgrarion but more births..

And we do need those extra people. Whilst shrinking thr population down a bit is no bad thing it needs to be managed properly. Crashing a population, like we would do with zero immigration, is terrible for the economy. You end up in a decline.

Have you seen any empty shelves in Tesco? NO, you haven't. Now look at where the food is coming from, Vietnam, Costa Rica, Brasil. All fresh and lovely, we don't need to import food from the EU. just cause you keep shouting the same mantra doesn't make it correct. 

[BeElBeeBub]

For now, in the case of food supply, we could just buy from abroad.  In future, we won't need people to do this work, as machines will do it all.  In the long term, mass immigration only increases the population, and therefore the demand on food and healthcare, etc.

If only we didn't make it harder to move food across our borders eh.

Sure, we can increace our productivity with automation - we have to. But we still need people. There are huge numbers of jobs that just cannot be automated. Elderly care being one. 

The two biggest reasons for a (non visitor) UK visa by far are work and study. Each of those is bigger than all the other reasons (family, asylum etc) put together.  And half of work visas were for healthcare, half of them (so 1/4) were for social and home care roles. 

Without migrants the NHS would have collapsed already.

Long term, because our birthrate is so low the migrants who.do.stay are going to essentially take the place of those lost births so the load on food and healthcare won't be much different from of we had zerocmkgrarion but more births.. 

And we do need those extra people. Whilst shrinking thr population down a bit is no bad thing it needs to be managed properly. Crashing a population, like we would do with zero immigration, is terrible for the economy. You end up in a decline. 

[Scott777]

If they didn't come, who would have done the jobs they did?

For now, in the case of food supply, we could just buy from abroad.  In future, we won't need people to do this work, as machines will do it all.  In the long term, mass immigration only increases the population, and therefore the demand on food and healthcare, etc.

[BeElBeeBub]

7 year old data, really?
Also the orange are just says Benefits, what does that mean exactly?  Not the best set of data is it.

I had it to hand in a nice graphical format. 

The latest figures for welfare spent on pensioners is £167bn including state pension. Abiut 55% of a welfare spending and 2x that of all disability spending. 

The spending on unemployment benefits is £1bn.

Full state pension is over 11k, maximum. job seeker allowance is under 5k.

There.are under 1m JSA claimants, over 12m pension claimants. 

The reason our welfare budget has ballooned isn't unemployed people. It's pensioners. (also why the NHS budget is being hammered) 

[BeElBeeBub]

I happen to agree with Nick and Cromwell.

The young 'uns are simply unwilling to work. Whereas previous generations got up early and were not afraid to get their hands dirty, we now have millions and millions of people on benefits.
Shows like Benefits Street and Benefits Britain have proven this twentyfold. Meanwhile, Labour are emptying the coffers of the treasury.

That's your problem there. You're basing your thinking on reality TV shows made for entertainment. Like deciding that Donald Trump must be a business genius because you watched "the apprentice"

Personally, I have, during hard times, rented out the house and simply slept in a van.

So you were well enough off to own a van and your own property? Many today would like that option. 

In the late 90's house prices were around 3.5x average earnings.  They are now 8x. They peaked at over 9x

[papasmurf]

The young 'uns are simply unwilling to work. 

Evidence please. (Not newspaper references, or comments by right wing pundits, or the ravings of right wing politicians.)

[HallowedBrexit]

I happen to agree with Nick and Cromwell. 

The young 'uns are simply unwilling to work. Whereas previous generations got up early and were not afraid to get their hands dirty, we now have millions and millions of people on benefits.
Shows like Benefits Street and Benefits Britain have proven this twentyfold. Meanwhile, Labour are emptying the coffers of the treasury.

How can we rebuild our empire with people like that?

Personally, I have, during hard times, rented out the house and simply slept in a van.