To re-invigorate UK business

And this 👆 right there, what you wrote, is EXACTLY why Socialism fails every time it is tried!
I agree current Socialism is just a bundle of impractical dreams etc. Starmer is apparently trying to update the whole sorry mess but the Union bosses won't let him. If the workers ever " cotton on " to the excesses of these same bosses they would be thrown out of their rent free mansions. John Prescott was caught playing croquet at his rent free mansion. The hypocracy of it.
About time the politicians put the country first and their own greed last.
 
And this 👆 right there, what you wrote, is EXACTLY why Socialism fails every time it is tried!
Tsk Tsk NT! You're always pointing the finger :) You could always say what you really mean with this one 🖕
 
I agree current Socialism is just a bundle of impractical dreams etc. Starmer is apparently trying to update the whole sorry mess but the Union bosses won't let him. If the workers ever " cotton on " to the excesses of these same bosses they would be thrown out of their rent free mansions. John Prescott was caught playing croquet at his rent free mansion. The hypocracy of it.
About time the politicians put the country first and their own greed last.

You don't agree by adding the word "current" to Socialism. You stated that "Do-gooding can easily pull down a whole country to 3rd world levels." You didn't say "current" Do-gooding...
 
You don't agree by adding the word "current" to Socialism. You stated that "Do-gooding can easily pull down a whole country to 3rd world levels." You didn't say "current" Do-gooding...
Do-gooding has been going on for decades. Goodness knows how many billions has been given away. Did any say thank you ?
Partly responsible for the surge in population growth in Africa and Asia too. Our useless politicians seem more concerned with overseas welfare than the poverty/homelessness here.
 
There is a conservative estimate of 100 million that would love to come to Europe from just India to escape the shithole they are forced to live in.
Your motives might be admirable but completely impractical I regret to say. Europe would quickly run out of resources that generations have built up and India would hardly notice an appreciable drop in numbers. They haven't the political will of the Chinese leadership to even address the problem. Two children per couple would be ideal.
Do-gooding can easily pull down a whole country to 3rd world levels.
When I talk of reducing the world population I mean we should use drastic numbers. When we can get a grip on the problem, we should lower the birth rate below the death rate until the population for the whole world settles between 1.5 to 2 billion only. Then we can talk about allowing people to be able to move freely from country to country.

It's not a problem that can be solved in the short run. We have to take a long term approach.
 
open borders might work in a utopian world, it will never work in this world. For it to work, the living standards need to be the same globally, and even if this were the case, Beautiful parts of the world would have a greater number of people and this would put undesirable presure on public services, who wouldn't have the means to increase capacity to meet growing demand.

Governments need to plan capacity and they can't do this if they have no grip on the flow of people coming into residence.
 
Do-gooding has been going on for decades. Goodness knows how many billions has been given away. Did any say thank you ?
Partly responsible for the surge in population growth in Africa and Asia too. Our useless politicians seem more concerned with overseas welfare than the poverty/homelessness here.

Correct. But you still demand that do-gooding Governments who cause problems also be the ones who fix them! Look at the solutions being proposed in this thread ...they begin with "The Government" or "Governments"...when will people learn? :rolleyes:
 
Correct. But you still demand that do-gooding Governments who cause problems also be the ones who fix them! Look at the solutions being proposed in this thread ...they begin with "The Government" or "Governments"...when will people learn? :rolleyes:
Agree to a certain extent.... but how then is the up-coming overpopulation catastrophe to be avoided if the Do-Gooding government cannot be persuaded to legislate for and then enforce robust immigration* management? I'd genuinely be interested in any proposals that would obviate government action.

*I'm including all forms of immigration, whether legal or illegal.
 
Correct. But you still demand that do-gooding Governments who cause problems also be the ones who fix them! Look at the solutions being proposed in this thread ...they begin with "The Government" or "Governments"...when will people learn? :rolleyes:
How on earth can one individual do much about major problems like immigration ? One man waving a broomstick on the beach won't be much good.
The only option I can see is for the GOVT. to pack them back to where they came from. It is better they try and do something about their conditions back home and stop coming.
The only problem with that solution is that the politicians are too wet to do it.
 
Last edited:
Agree to a certain extent.... but how then is the up-coming overpopulation catastrophe to be avoided if the Do-Gooding government cannot be persuaded to legislate for and then enforce robust immigration* management? I'd genuinely be interested in any proposals that would obviate government action.

*I'm including all forms of immigration, whether legal or illegal.

How about all the single mothers living off Government? You don't think that Government welfare policies influence behaviour?

Every single problem mentioned in this thread has Government policy at its root.
 
How about all the single mothers living off Government? You don't think that Government welfare policies influence behaviour?

Every single problem mentioned in this thread has Government policy at its root.
I don't follow you - you originally said;

".... you still demand that do-gooding Governments who cause problems also be the ones who fix them! Look at the solutions being proposed in this thread ...they begin with "The Government" or "Governments"...when will people learn?"

...I took that to mean that you see government as creating the problems that it is being required to solve and so I replied, essentially looking for possible solutions that might not rely on government ( which I thought was your point) as below;
Agree to a certain extent.... but how then is the up-coming overpopulation catastrophe to be avoided if the Do-Gooding government cannot be persuaded to legislate for and then enforce robust immigration* management? I'd genuinely be interested in any proposals that would obviate government action.

...but yes, I absolutely do agree that:

" .... Government welfare policies influence behaviour..." and that "Every single problem mentioned in this thread has Government policy at its root.".

...
which was precisely why I made my previous post - obviously I have misunderstood what you meant so I'd be grateful if you'd clarify.
 
We seem to have got a bit off topic.
There must be great opportunities arising from the USA V. China trade war.
 
It should never be the role of Government to pick and choose industries it wishes to save. If you want to understand the root cause of the problem then look at the monetary system in place. Look at what the Central Banks are doing, who they bail out and who they leave behind. People like you always think the solution is more Government intervention, when the real solution is less.
Sorry I am a bit late to the 'thread party'.
Mostly agree with the comment above with a few rare exceptions such as issues around food security for any one nation or defence contractor capacity for example.
In bygone years a nation would want to keep it's steel making capacity just in case they got blockaded and needed to make tanks, battleships in a war. So keeping a home grown steel business even if it made a small loss might offer some defence advantage - how that plays out theseday when defence is so much about technology I am not sure.
Overall though picking winners and loosers never works as governments dont really understand what people want - Adam Smith comes to mind.

I am sure a U.S patriot will give me the correct definition but, is it the case in the USA context that the first job of the government is to protect the Liberties of the people, not exactly protect the people? e.g. you can't sue the cops if you happen to get shot and the cops were not around to protect you etc? The Liberties being the constitution and bill of rights as ammended.
Forgive me if I could have used a better example.
 
How on earth can one individual do much about major problems like immigration ? One man waving a broomstick on the beach won't be much good.
The only option I can see is for the GOVT. to pack them back to where they came from. It is better they try and do something about their conditions back home and stop coming.
The only problem with that solution is that the politicians are too wet to do it.
Overall governments do most things badly but you are right here. Borders and foreign policy, I would scratch my head wondering how the free market could deal with that one.
"It is better they try and do something about their conditions back home and stop coming." Well actually in terms of value for money it is true you can help people $ for $ much better where they reside (or close by) better than making them jump through a real world obstacle course half way across the planet, as illistrated with gumballs and glass jars here:
 
Last edited:
open borders might work in a utopian world, it will never work in this world. For it to work, the living standards need to be the same globally, and even if this were the case, Beautiful parts of the world would have a greater number of people and this would put undesirable presure on public services, who wouldn't have the means to increase capacity to meet growing demand.

Governments need to plan capacity and they can't do this if they have no grip on the flow of people coming into residence.
Never is a long time. The time frame I am thinking of is perhaps 200 to 300 years from now. Nobody today can possibly predict the world economy that far ahead nor can they guess at whether population reduction will be working by then.

A number of months ago in another thread we had discussions about robots taking over the workforce so once again we have no idea how wealthy a much smaller world population may or may not be in the distant future with robot workers.

Just as people in the past took actions which improved life for us people living today, we too should think of the generations of the future.
 
Never is a long time. The time frame I am thinking of is perhaps 200 to 300 years from now. Nobody today can possibly predict the world economy that far ahead nor can they guess at whether population reduction will be working by then.

A number of months ago in another thread we had discussions about robots taking over the workforce so once again we have no idea how wealthy a much smaller world population may or may not be in the distant future with robot workers.

Just as people in the past took actions which improved life for us people living today, we too should think of the generations of the future.
in 200 to 300 years, the earth won't be able to support our species. we would have removed all forests, depleted rare earth minerals, have to deal with extreme weather conditions, greater percentage of the earth will be desert displacing millions, and rising oceans will displace millions.
 
in 200 to 300 years, the earth won't be able to support our species. we would have removed all forests, depleted rare earth minerals, have to deal with extreme weather conditions, greater percentage of the earth will be desert displacing millions, and rising oceans will displace millions.
Alarmists have been saying for centuries that we will run out of natural resources. We always manage to find more or use the current ones we have much more efficiently including recycling.

It is too early to say we are in the space age but hundreds of years from now we could mine the asteroids beyond Mars’s orbit that are extremely rich in materials that will prove useful. This includes countless metals, including precious metals.

As far as removing all the trees, some nations including China are planting two trees for every one cut down. It’s the nations like Brazil that are the problem.

In the United States there had been talk of building factories which do nothing but clean the air (funded by the government), but do you know who has used the political process to block it? Yes, it was the environmentalists. They are also against nuclear power to generate electricity like France is so reliant on. Nuclear energy emits no climate warming gases.

The problem is not the far future. The problem is now and the near future. If all climate changing emissions were stopped cold the atmosphere would clear itself within two hundred years.
 
Alarmists have been saying for centuries that we will run out of natural resources. We always manage to find more or use the current ones we have much more efficiently including recycling.

It is too early to say we are in the space age but hundreds of years from now we could mine the asteroids beyond Mars’s orbit that are extremely rich in materials that will prove useful. This includes countless metals, including precious metals.

As far as removing all the trees, some nations including China are planting two trees for every one cut down. It’s the nations like Brazil that are the problem.

In the United States there had been talk of building factories which do nothing but clean the air (funded by the government), but do you know who has used the political process to block it? Yes, it was the environmentalists. They are also against nuclear power to generate electricity like France is so reliant on. Nuclear energy emits no climate warming gases.

The problem is not the far future. The problem is now and the near future. If all climate changing emissions were stopped cold the atmosphere would clear itself within two hundred years.
trees take decades to grow to the point climate is affected, and its not just about planting trees, it needs to be a a variety of trees. A rainforest can have 700 different species of tree and I doubt countries like China are doing that, they are likely just planting trees they want to harvest again. David Attenborough'Netflix "a life on our planet" really shows the extent of damage humans have done. Yes people have been saying this for decades but that doesn't mean its not happening. in his lifetime the population went from under 2 billion to nearly 8. In his lifetime he has witnessed forests go from 60 percent to 31 percent.

only an ignorant person believes things can continue without consequence. In the next 300 years our population will result in the next mass extinction. forests will be largely gone, diversity in wildlife obliterated, bees will be gone and mass starvation and war inevitable.

the earth is barely supporting 7.5 billion people, how can it possibly support 10+ billion.

moving onto our oceans. Scientists estimate by 2048 there will be so few fish left that fishing boats won't be able to fish. 70 percent of our oxygen comes from oceans. destroying the oceans ecosystems means disaster for the world.

scientists drilled 3 million years ice cores from Antarctica. They found it has melted and frozen 60 times in that period. While this shows a luch longer earth cycle, mankind have accelerated it by thousands of years. The oceans around the world rose by 23 feet when it happened and this will displace all civilization at coastal regions.

so to sum it up, we don't have hundreds of years. If left unchecked, in 300 years time the 6th mass extinction will be well underway.
 
Last edited:
I see Prince William is dreaming up a competition to award prize money to anyone who can show they have greatly contributed to saving the planet from the barbarians.
Great idea.
I am too old but an idea that would stand a good chance is the greening of the world's major cities. This is essentially covering the outside of concrete buildings with mosses. They will be very effective in cleaning up the city's toxic fumes. There is a company who has done all the spadework in finding the right mosses etc. So it would entail say 4 fit people to get the cities to cooperate and do the work. Have to have a head for heights I guess. Like window cleaners maybe.
The work has been done by Barcelona Uni. I think he is offering 4 * £1 million per year for some years to come/
 
Inmho it is absolutely essential for countries to do well in the upcoming trade war.
Once the virus is gone the competition in trade around the globe will be intense.
The rotten old systems will collapse under the intense pressure and have to hide behind tariff walls.
 
Top