Build, build, build.

[motorbiking]

And when you have no argument, you present only the arguments and options that support your position.

While "more people" does not guarantee growth, neither does it preclude it.
Similarly, it neither guarantees nor precludes greater productivity, levels of service, or quality of life.

Your NHS paragraph is interesting, and I agree (albeit with caveat).
Net contribution and beneficiary can be purely in headcount, in skills, in graft, and any combination of the three.

And wanting to be a great place to live AND being worldwide-competitively can't be achieved - realistically, anyway - by pulling up the drawbridge.
If for no other reason than you can't train anyone in anything worthwhile, overnight.

You seem to be making statements of fact that are opinion at best.

Of course it possible to provide a great place to live and also be competitive in the world. I can think of dozens of countries that make it work.

But lets get back to your first point.

Do you think increasing competition for low paid workers is better for them or worse for them?
What benefit for the citizen exists by a country increasing economic growth, while at the same time increasing demands on services?

I would encourage you to visit India and see first hand, how "more people" driving "more economic growth" is really not benefiting the avg. citizen.

 

[securespark]

The trouble is, there's a lot of things wrong with the country. So things like the sewage system being outdated is an issue that has been getting worse and worse for many decades. Instead of investing in the network, the shareholders get their fat cheque.

Gas and electricity networks, similar. They have concentrated on profit first

There needs to be more investment in sustainable electricity, including wind, wave and PV.

Roads? There has been a massive underinvestment in the road network over decades.

Think of the smart motorways shambles. Yeah, let's not expand our motorway network that is in parts 65, 66 years old. Instead, we can get extra capacity by scrapping the safety lane.

Nuts.

So, there are many things that need investment, that's for sure.

But one thing is undeniable. We need to build more houses and they need to be affordable.

We need to lose this "Not in my back yard, our country's full!" mentality. The irony of some people moaning about the fact that our lovely green spaces are being built on, when the land on which their houses were built was most certainly green space, countryside, fields, farms etc.....

In other words, I'm alright Jack, but nobody else can do that.
Hypocritical.

At the end of our road is a T junction, beyond which are some fields. I would have no objection to a developer extending our road into a new estate built on the fields.

If you're still not convinced, look up the percentage of land there is in the UK that is able to be built on.

 

[Brigadier]

Do you think increasing competition for low paid workers is better for them or worse for them?

You are presuming that any inward migration is to fill the low-end of the labour market: that is demonstrably inaccurate.

What benefit for the citizen exists by a country increasing economic growth, while at the same time increasing demands on services?

You are presuming that any economic growth is outpaced by the increased demand on services: this ain't necessarily so and, with a well-thought out and managed process, would even be the opposite of reality. The Mottie Model, if you like.

I would encourage you to visit India and see first hand, how "more people" driving "more economic growth" is really not benefiting the avg. citizen.

Apart from comparing apples and oranges, you just can't get away from resorting to absolute headcount, when your other posits are dismantled.

 

[gas112]

Gas networks, similar. They have concentrated on profit first

So what do you think is up with the gas network ?

 

[securespark]

Gas and electricity networks, similar. They have concentrated on profit first.

 

[gas112]

none answer what do you think is up with the gas network ?

 

[Murdochcat]

You're just scatter gunning lazy, racist tropes, to justify your ultra-capitalist outlook.
.

Is your real name Richard Head?

 

[Murdochcat]

There's been talk for ages of thousands being built near my daughters in Dunsfold, on the old Top Gear track.

That's now just when they start as the new access road is finished BUT adding thousands of cars to the already over crowded A281 seems a little short sighted given the huge issues in and out of Guildford already

They are also building thousands just off the A3, one of the reasons for the upgrade at the junction of the M25.

On the old Wisley airfield. Currently planned at 1730 homes with only 1 access road from the A3 / Ripley north roundabout and no schools, doctors, etc etc - forcing even more car movements though Ripley High Street if you want to go south.

Both of these near me

 

[Brigadier]

Is your real name Richard Head?

Do you have anything of value to add? Anywhere?

That's a rhetorical question, in case you're wondering

 

[ajohn]

Do you think economic growth cannot be achieved without more people?

in an ideal world you make people more productive. Growth needs more gdp per person or you just finish up with more people to support. Not that there is no mileage in more people doing the same job but clearly it would be better for each to produce more.

There is a near simple example. Supermarket checkout. Lidl shove stuff through as fast as possible. Aim to get stuff back in the trolley so packing time doesn't figure. Some stores take their time. More staff may be needed.

The other one in this area is self checkout. Putting them in doesn't increase market size and they have to be paid for. Usually in many different areas via less not more people. Tata is an example.

 

[motorbiking]

you just can't get away from resorting to absolute headcount, when your other posits are dismantled.

I must have missed the bit where you did that... oh wait you didn't

 

[motorbiking]

That's now just when they start as the new access road is finished BUT adding thousands of cars to the already over crowded A281 seems a little short sighted given the huge issues in and out of Guildford already



On the old Wisley airfield. Currently planned at 1730 homes with only 1 access road from the A3 / Ripley north roundabout and no schools, doctors, etc etc - forcing even more car movements though Ripley High Street if you want to go south.

Both of these near me

They'll make it a 20mph speed limit to help with all the congestion.

 

[motorbiking]

in an ideal world you make people more productive. Growth needs more gdp per person or you just finish up with more people to support. Not that there is no mileage in more people doing the same job but clearly it would be better for each to produce more.

There is a near simple example. Supermarket checkout. Lidl shove stuff through as fast as possible. Aim to get stuff back in the trolley so packing time doesn't figure. Some stores take their time. More staff may be needed.

The other one in this area is self checkout. Putting them in doesn't increase market size and they have to be paid for. Usually in many different areas via less not more people. Tata is an example.

exactly.

Invest in getting people further up the ladder without making the ladder longer.

 

[securespark]

none answer what do you think is up with the gas network ?

I have told you twice.

 

[motorbiking]

You are presuming that any inward migration is to fill the low-end of the labour market: that is demonstrably inaccurate.

So lets think this one through together shall we.. it actually doesn't matter which end they fill.

Scenario 1: inward migrants fill the low end of the labour market
= more competition for lower paid jobs, more supply than demand = current low paid workers are worse off. Increased unemployment

Scenario 2: inward migrants fill the high end of the labour market
= more competition for resources, higher paid immigrants willing to pay more for houses, services etc, = current low paid workers are worse off.

You are presuming that any economic growth is outpaced by the increased demand on services: this ain't necessarily so and, with a well-thought out and managed process, would even be the opposite of reality. The Mottie Model, if you like.

You only have to look at the what the expansion of the EU did when coupled with freedom of movement. Rapid migration of labour from poor country to rich country. What happened:

- Public services couldn't cope with the massive increase in demand
- House prices went up because lots of hard working immigrants wanted to live somewhere.

Then look at queuing theory (Littles Law) - the faster you accelerate the queue the more queue handlers you need to process the load.