Thursday, June 07, 2007

Why isn't it government policy to support a replacement birth rate ?

The state is happy to lecture us on our beliefs, life style, recycling, how much wine Boris Johnston is allowed to drink etc. So why is there no government policy to encourage a replacement birth rate ?

Too often you hear the immigration will make up the difference line.

Does anyone really want this policy ? Why can't we have a policy of encouraging a higher birth rate that will give a stable population ?

I some times fear that the left is really racist and hates the inhabitants of this country and would rather see them all die out. I'm going to call this passive racism - why should the left get to make all the Newspeak anyway ? ( Yes - I can think of why, but soon they'll rearrange the dictionary to make that impossible.)

( Context: The BBC reports birth rate up to 1.87 from 1.8 - both below replacement levels. But argues it won't continue for long as this is mostly female graduates from the 80's having kids, who's education delayed there choice to have a family. )

Update: What the BBC doesn't tells us is that one fifth of the increase is from mothers born abroad. See the Daily Telegraph here. They go on to remind us that Mohammed is about to become the most popular boys name in the UK.

Now why would the BBC omit that fact, but go on to emphasise older female graduates being mothers later ? Do they think we live in some strage reality where the truth becomes whatever they tell us ?

IMHO: The BBC only tells us what they think we should hear and know so as to agree with them.


Rachel Joyce said...

And why can't we sign up to a decreasing population for the planet? We would sort out global warming, much poverty etc fairly rapidly. The Gaia guy, Lovelock, reckons the planet can only sustain about 1-2 billion people long term.
But that means also that we have to accept that the population will be slightly older than it was before, and the consequences of that.
Encouraging immigration to replenish youth is just a short-sighted stop-gap to dealing with the real issues facing the world.

Man in a shed said...

I suspect the planet can take a much larger population. But the population is only growing in areas of poverty. End poverty and you should end population growth - the problem becomes the reverse.

So perhaps we should say make poverty history without making us history !

Rachel Joyce said...

Absolutely agree about the poverty link - which is why we need to sort out democracy, free trade and economic must-do's such as ownership rights in these countries.
G8 never fails to miss an opportunity however!

Man in a shed said...

Mexicano - a little editing on the lines of comment moderation policy.


I'm a big fan and have been since I first started reading your blog about 6 months ago. The only thing I don't get is your reluctance to accept the obvious cause of all our grief - the fact that the 'left' really does hate us and really does want to see us extinct. That, I'm sorry to tell you, is exactly the case and they're getting closer to their goal all the time. The sooner we all recognise this the better.