Better pay and reduced working hours (these are shown to increase productivity) and all the positives that would bring towards reducing stress and increasing leisure time; welfare that is better spent on communities and not given to individual households (this doesn’t do anything for the wider society, it actually holds back those who don’t qualify for welfare but are struggling - low paid single men, for example); better and more wide ranging public services (including things like WiFi to all homes, just like we have gas and electricity); education on how to cook healthily and how to shop economically well; education on how to run a home well that creates better health and more spare cash; among many other things...
...would allow people to have more money free’d up to spend on themselves and give them the opportunity to have children or more children.
This would increase the population so that we wouldn’t have to rely on immigration for this to happen.
I don’t want the population increasing neither to be honest mate. I added this to my previous post:I don’t want an increase in population thank you very much:-) I find the education argument very lazy in almost all scenarios. Shopping, cooking, racism supporting the scousers. People know they are doing wrong they have all the info they need. They just can’t be arsed. If you could educate people out of apathy that would be worth listening to.
Another point worth noting is that although compared to most countries there are more towns and cities in England closer together, the actual population density of towns and cities isn't particularly high. As I said earlier there isn't a single UK city that would appear anywhere near the top of a world league table. If our cities seem congested it's more likely to be due to lack of investment in the appropriate infrastructure than due to too many buildings and people.
I don’t want the population increasing neither to be honest mate. I added this to my previous post:
The thing is though, our cities are overpopulated. All the jobs are in and around the cities. So while we are no overpopulated per sq mile of our island, you only have to go down Princess Parkway or on the Met at 08:15 (in normal times) and see how we are overpopulated. Because this is part of what overpopulation means. Overpopulation isn’t just about having houses available, it is far more wide reaching than that.
I was just trying to show a way of doing it if it is really needed instead of relying on immigration.
I know you’ve replied to me earlier, but just trying to catch up and combine here. I wouldn’t dispute that the building density within our urban areas isn’t the greatest - do we really want a Le Courbusier-like future of us living in Hong Kong style high density buildings? Investment in infrastructure would help for sure, but whether you’re for example travelling by public or private transport, numbers are an issue, and the point about how close together our urban areas are, be it West Didsbury or anywhere else is a valid issue.Another point worth noting is that although compared to most countries there are more towns and cities in England closer together, the actual population density of towns and cities isn't particularly high. As I said earlier there isn't a single UK city that would appear anywhere near the top of a world league table. If our cities seem congested it's more likely to be due to lack of investment in the appropriate infrastructure than due to too many buildings and people.
Better public transport mostly. There's only London in this country that's really had the appropriate investment in its infrastructure.Would infrastructure mean concreting over things per chance? Anyhow I rejected your first point - the fields in the highlands argument and your second one is just as silly. Other places are worse so all is good. We aren’t Mumbai so crack on:-)
Excuse me sir you seem to have broken your leg best get yourself to hospital.
The guy across the road has broke both of his so I’m doing fine thanks.
Better pay and reduced working hours (these are shown to increase productivity) and all the positives that would bring towards reducing stress and increasing leisure time; welfare that is better spent on communities and not given to individual households (this doesn’t do anything for the wider society, it actually holds back those who don’t qualify for welfare but are struggling - low paid single men, for example); better and more wide ranging public services (including things like WiFi to all homes, just like we have gas and electricity); education on how to cook healthily and how to shop economically well; education on how to run a home well that creates better health and more spare cash; among many other things...
...would allow people to have more money free’d up to spend on themselves, less stress, better health in both body and mind, and give them the opportunity to have children if they have none because they can’t afford to have them, or more children if they already have some, and to create a better home environment and therefore a better population as a result.
This would increase the population so that we wouldn’t have to rely on immigration for this to happen.
Better public transport mostly. There's only London in this country that's really had the appropriate investment in its infrastructure.
I'm all cut up about you rejecting my points but I'm sure I'll get over it.
There's plenty of examples of densely populated cities where the quality of life is good. Singapore, Paris, Madrid, Zurich, Berlin are all more densely populated than most English cities. You don't have to start looking at places like Mumbai for comparison.
Good point.No, you are assuming that women want children as some sort of life goal, they don’t. Once you start improving social conditions, health, education and give women choices then children slip down the list.
This is why religion, authoritarian regimes limit opportunities for women and restrict access to contraception and abortion. It’s sold as ‘morality’, whereas it’s really about control and to keep women tied to the home and children.
No idea what you're on about.Aye no congestion or pollution etc. In Paris. Can you lend me your time machine and tell me what year you set it for when you visited. I’m also presuming you are including the outer areas where the poor folk are housed in your experience of cities that don’t exist.