BF2S Forums U.K.; how to reduce your population?

Fuck reducing your population for the sake of the Earth and fairness of the third worlders.

Immigration is slowing so i hear.

Or we could just take over lots of the world again i guess.

We have an ageing population problem, so a china style 'one-child policy' is out of the question.  We'd become a nation of geriatrics.

Hasn't reproduction been on the decline over there? .. or so I've heard.

Kmarion wrote:

Hasn't reproduction been on the decline over there? .. or so I've heard.

Population growth rate:
    0.279% (2009 est.)
Birth rate:
    10.65 births/1,000 population (2008 est.)
Death rate:
    10.05 deaths/1,000 population (2008 est.)
https://www.cia.gov/library/publication … nt/uk.html
Now to find the birth rate for 2007...

Macbeth wrote:

Fuck reducing your population for the sake of the Earth and fairness of the third worlders.

The reality is there is only a finite amount of resources and the First World nations waste a ridiculously disproportionate amount.  If the Earth's population were to stagnate and all people currently living tried to maintain a First World standard of living we'd be doomed shortly.  We (First World nations) don't deserve our standard of living any more than a malnourished Starvin' Marvin deserves his distended belly.  We First Worlders won the birth lottery in being born into a society that looks up to people who live in Dionysian excess as success stories while at the same time deriding those less fortunate losers of the birth lottery as uncivilized and backwards.  Eventually all us winners are going to have to make sacrifices in our standard of living to give those less fortunate losers the same opportunity.  The alternative is to continue wasting and consuming until the mega-rich are the only ones who can afford to live the way we do now and everyone else struggles to live like Masai tribesmen.

FatherTed wrote:

Switch wrote:

Move half of the Southerners to Scotland.  Theres plenty of land up there and only about 5 million people to occupy it.

Or just kill most of the southerners.

population growth (birth + immigration) is necessary in a capitalist market. Capitalism requires constant growth or it will collapse. Since invasion and conquest are no longer options, population growth is about the only thing left.

So I wonder what the greenies propose to replace the market with? This?

Macbeth wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Since invasion and conquest are no longer options

When was that taken off the options list?

I think the last country able to expand its territory and settle an area was Israel. First world populations don't have the stones to engage in conquest and now there is international law against it. We get the expense of invading without the pay off of conquest. BTW where is all the cheap Iraqi oil that should be flooding the market right now .

Macbeth wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

When was that taken off the options list?

I think the last country able to expand its territory and settle an area was Israel. First world populations don't have the stones to engage in conquest and now there is international law against it. We get the expense of invading without the pay off of conquest. BTW where is all the cheap Iraqi oil that should be flooding the market right now .

First world populations sure as hell have the stones for conquest. You just have to give them a reason for it. Fake an attack on the people of the nation and they'll let you do anything. (I'm not calling 9/11 a conspiracy, I don't think it was) Keep making people more and more paranoid and eventually you can do anything to or with them.
When you get control of a huge resource like oil you don't flood the market with it. That would defeat the purpose, you slowly sell it and control the price and make long term profit rather then flooding the market and making it valueless.

Nice synopsis of the last eight years.

Macbeth wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

When was that taken off the options list?

I think the last country able to expand its territory and settle an area was Israel. First world populations don't have the stones to engage in conquest and now there is international law against it. We get the expense of invading without the pay off of conquest. BTW where is all the cheap Iraqi oil that should be flooding the market right now .

First world populations sure as hell have the stones for conquest. You just have to give them a reason for it. Fake an attack on the people of the nation and they'll let you do anything. (I'm not calling 9/11 a conspiracy, I don't think it was) Keep making people more and more paranoid and eventually you can do anything to or with them.
When you get control of a huge resource like oil you don't flood the market with it. That would defeat the purpose, you slowly sell it and control the price and make long term profit rather then flooding the market and making it valueless.

Well, if Iraqi oil had been released, instead of letting oil go to $145, we might have avoided the economiic collapse that was caused by the run up on commodities. Point is we're not staying there so its not a conquest. The last country to stay and occupy land for conquest was Israel. So I would say conquest is off the table. And the thread is getting off topic unless we are talking about invading the UK in order to help them reduce their population.

When the greenies have the UK population planting fields with a stick, they will very soon thereafter have no population problem at all.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

I think the last country able to expand its territory and settle an area was Israel. First world populations don't have the stones to engage in conquest and now there is international law against it. We get the expense of invading without the pay off of conquest. BTW where is all the cheap Iraqi oil that should be flooding the market right now .

First world populations sure as hell have the stones for conquest. You just have to give them a reason for it. Fake an attack on the people of the nation and they'll let you do anything. (I'm not calling 9/11 a conspiracy, I don't think it was) Keep making people more and more paranoid and eventually you can do anything to or with them.
When you get control of a huge resource like oil you don't flood the market with it. That would defeat the purpose, you slowly sell it and control the price and make long term profit rather then flooding the market and making it valueless.

Well, if Iraqi oil had been released, instead of letting oil go to $145, we might have avoided the economiic collapse that was caused by the run up on commodities. Point is we're not staying there so its not a conquest. The last country to stay and occupy land for conquest was Israel. So I would say conquest is off the table. And the thread is getting off topic unless we are talking about invading the UK in order to help them reduce their population.

When the greenies have the UK population planting fields with a stick, they will very soon thereafter have no population problem at all.

Um this economic problem was caused mainly by people who couldn't afford the homes they bought. If you had taken the home issue off the table the high cost of oil wouldn't have been more then a daily bother to most people. You could conquer an area and hold onto to it. You would just have to deal with everyone extremely harshly. I give credit to Israel for not going down that road. What was suggested was that the U.K. should just start reconquering everyone to maintain themselves again.