Len Rum
Well-Known Member
But 'scaremongering' for the future as opposed to the now?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Italian referendum
- Thread starter Prestwich_Blue
- Start date
But 'scaremongering' for the future as opposed to the now?
I've no idea what you mean by that but they've been scaremongering since June with little idea.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 88,229
Len was one of the worst for doing it as well.Does this sound familiar?
Something similar happen in June in Britain by any chance?
Quite funny he wrote that.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
One fact that cannot be denied, and cannot be described as scaremongering, is the demographic make-up of Western Europe, most especially in Italy. Ageing population; low birth rate - amongst indigenous people.
Has anyone devised a workable alternative to solve this conundrum, other than an aspiration that robotics can take up the slack?
Has anyone devised a workable alternative to solve this conundrum, other than an aspiration that robotics can take up the slack?
KnaresboroughBlue
Well-Known Member
Capiche?
I assume you mean, capisce?
andyhinch
Well-Known Member
Is the world on the verge of destruction ?
Is the world on the verge of destruction ?
Yes and it's all brexits fault, either that or no chips in the family stand
One fact that cannot be denied, and cannot be described as scaremongering, is the demographic make-up of Western Europe, most especially in Italy. Ageing population; low birth rate - amongst indigenous people.
Has anyone devised a workable alternative to solve this conundrum, other than an aspiration that robotics can take up the slack?
I favour giving incentives to increase birth rate as well as allowing a family on the median wage to function without both parents working. Problem is that those both require long term politics that nobody (at least in this country) seems keen to engage in. Perhaps that could be solved by having an election each year for 1/10 of seats and have 10 year terms rather than 5, so there's a rolling parliament (maybe coupled with it being easier for the public to trigger a by-election).
Immigration only delays the problem and infrastructure should really be built before they arrive, rather than retrospectively.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
I'll take each of those points in turn:I favour giving incentives to increase birth rate as well as allowing a family on the median wage to function without both parents working. Problem is that those both require long term politics that nobody (at least in this country) seems keen to engage in. Perhaps that could be solved by having an election each year for 1/10 of seats and have 10 year terms rather than 5, so there's a rolling parliament (maybe coupled with it being easier for the public to trigger a by-election).
Immigration only delays the problem and infrastructure should really be built before they arrive, rather than retrospectively.
Having kids isn't simply a function of economics, especially for the professional middle classes who would be the most likely to financially support having more kids. The system of incentives you suggest would accentuate dependency culture in this land, ditto the median wage suggestion.
The election each year suggestion, whilst interesting, would further calcify, not liberate our politics imo.
Agree with you about the infrastructure part; easier said than done though!
I'll take each of those points in turn:
Having kids isn't simply a function of economics, especially for the professional middle classes who would be the most likely to financially support having more kids. The system of incentives you suggest would accentuate dependency culture in this land, ditto the median wage suggestion.
The election each year suggestion, whilst interesting, would further calcify, not liberate our politics imo.
Agree with you about the infrastructure part; easier said than done though!
I agree that it isn't simple economics - my point is that it's currently very difficult for people to have kids, because it's expensive and the career interruption can financially harm too, and that efforts should be made to lessen those concerns. I doubt I have the life experience to suggest the best idea, but the past family unit of one parent working and one looking after children seems far better and simpler than both working and struggling to pay for childcare. I completely get the point on dependency culture too (believe I sit further right on the political spectrum than you), but I believe a system that alleviates that could be introduced. For example, I agree with the recent policy of limiting child benefit to the first two children; we just need more people to have up to two children than current (prospective) parents having more than two kids.
The election idea was off the top of my head, but I certainly think government needs to think beyond their 5 year terms. Obviously, they need incentives to do that though as there's no benefit to them laying the groundwork for another party to either stop development or claim all of the credit. Maybe the American founding fathers were correct and political parties should be abolished!