Well that escalated quickly – politicalbetting.com

moonshine said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

I wish more had been of this 10 -15 years ago, I might’ve got cracking earlier and aimed for higher than replacement rate

kjh said:

Malmesbury said:

WildernessPt2 said:

Malmesbury said:

WildernessPt2 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

turbotubbs said:

TimS said:

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

turbotubbs said:

Mexicanpete said:

TOPPING said:

RochdalePioneers said:

The Trump rally - why is anyone surprised? Trump has shifted himself firmly into the fascist arena and like any good demagogue is doing a fine job of fanning the flames.

What surprises me are the people insisting that 4-star General Kelly et al are wrong in their detailed and experience-based description of Trump as fascist.

So of course the rally, the abuse, the insults, the othering. That is literally the campaign - fight for the American People against this existential threat from within.

I remain convinced that Harris will win: because the shift in voting intent to elect Trump after the 2020 election in this circumstance doesn't feel tangible, and because polls suggest a very determined deep dive for voters for Harris and a self-hyping "landslide, because everyone I know thinks like me" for Trump.

He's not a fascist and every time* someone calls him a fascist it hardens and motivates his support.

*perhaps less so someone posting on a UK politics website.

If it walks like a fascist, quacks like a fascist...

The issue with this is its the same as right wing people describing anyone left wing as communists. Might make you feel good, but is it an accurate representation? Is Meloni a fascist in Italy (the true home of fascists)?

Meloni seems to be committed to parliamentary democracy. Has she or her party done anything to undermine democracy in Italy? Genuine question.

As opposed to a long running campaign by the MAGA types to take control of the federal vote count and massively distort the process. See Nov 6, where literally setting aside the election result was attempted?

Re Meloni I am thinking back to the hysteria around her coming to power.

When Trump was elected last time one of my colleagues (admittedly someone who is rather Eeyorish about a lot of things) was convinced we were heading for all our war and the use of nukes. Didn't happen of course.

In the UK we see just how much of what is said and written in manifestos and campaign speeches comes to pass.

I suspect that for all the talk, a new Trump presidency will be much like the last.

[/arch one-liner rhetorical question] The last that started with the president withholding military aid from Ukraine unless it dug up dirt on a political opponent and ended with the president refusing to accept defeat in the election and inciting an attempted coup? That one? [/arch one-liner rhetorical question]

ETA: I also don't remember much hysteria when Meloni came to power.

I think there was a fair bit, but it might just have been a certain flint knapper with the hots for her.

Rre Trump - accept that, but the system worked, Biden took over as president. Why do people believe that the US system is so fragile?

Small margins etc.
What do you think the Trump-encouraged mob, sorry, peaceful sightseers, would have done if they'd caught Pence or Pelosi?

Probably not very much.

You mean the armed mob with people waving nooses, shouting “hang them”?

armed? the only person shot was an unarmed woman by a police officer pointing his gun through a hole and randomly shooting into the crowd.

Mark Mazza was ​​convicted of carrying two loaded guns on Capitol grounds and assaulting law enforcement officers. Mazza brought a Taurus revolver, loaded with three shotgun shells and two hollow point bullets to the Capitol. He admitted to law enforcement that he was also armed with a second firearm, a loaded .40 caliber semi-automatic pistol.

Guy Wesley Reffitt was found guilty by a jury in 2022 of five charges including entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a firearm.

Christopher Michael Alberts was convicted of nine charges, including six felonies. He was found in possession of a firearm. Alberts arrived at the Capitol with a pocketknife and carried with him, in a holster, a 9-millimeter pistol loaded with 12 rounds of ammunition and an additional bullet in the chamber. Alberts also wore a separate holster containing an additional 12 rounds of ammunition.

Jerod Thomas Bargar pleaded guilty to one felony count of entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon. Bargar entered onto the restricted Capitol grounds while illegally carrying a loaded, 9-millimeter semi-automatic pistol.

Etc etc

Facts eh?

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The fertility rate (as expressed by the number of births per woman) is still above replacement in over 90 countries including a significant part of sub-Saharan Africa - below replacement fertility is Europe, North and South America, India, China, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand and some other places.

Niger, Chad, Somalia and DR Congo all have above 6 births per woman so we can postulate in 15-20 years we could be facing a surge of immigration from those parts of the world unless we see the kind of economic investment and growth which creates the conditions encouraging people to stay.

I've long thought the future of capitalism lies in Africa if you continue to want a source of cheap labour (all other issues notwithstanding) or want to develop a part of the world hitherto largely neglected (China). Africa as the world's economic powerhouse by 2050 - who knows?

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

Renegade_pollster said:

Scott_xP said:

@lxeagle17
One of the "funnier" signals we have of a Kamala Harris victory is that I have *never* seen DC and corporate conventional wisdom more convinced of Trump running away with it than they are now.

It's really an election with no clear leader, but the GOP confidence is *astounding*.

These people have the worst vibes on earth (me included) and if they "feel" something, be skeptical. Insider vibes are the worst way to guess how the average American voter is going to react to anything.

The Republicans are projecting an image of a landslide and are hyped on early voting numbers in a way I have never seen before.

You can credibly construct an argument for Trump as a favorite, but we can do that for Harris too. The way people are buying it is incredible.

https://x.com/lxeagle17/status/1850703883460653313

As one of those who has been saying Trump will probably win for a long time, I can see a path to a Harris victory which is 2020 redux but with a much narrower gap in vote share and maybe even smaller majorities in swing states, particularly PA and MI. However, I think it depends on a lot of things going her way.

Re the "vibes" argument, again there can be a delusional element where people kid themselves but, usually, campaigns have an idea of what they see on the street. The key thing - for me - is that the underlying metrics on how consumers feel suggest people are unhappy and it would be historically unprecedented for voters to feel so negative and yet vote for the incumbent party. It may happen but is unlikely.

If there is any hope for Harris in the closing stages, it may be the reaction to the MSG rally in terms of the comments made although Tony Hinchcliffe is well known as being deliberately obnoxious by design. If you see Republican leaders start to bicker or panic over this, it may suggest the issue has gained salience.

Ratters said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

To me the key is:

1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.

2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.

3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.

Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.

Leon said:

Ratters said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

To me the key is:

1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.

2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.

3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.

Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.

No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies

I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough

We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The fertility rate (as expressed by the number of births per woman) is still above replacement in over 90 countries including a significant part of sub-Saharan Africa - below replacement fertility is Europe, North and South America, India, China, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand and some other places.

Niger, Chad, Somalia and DR Congo all have above 6 births per woman so we can postulate in 15-20 years we could be facing a surge of immigration from those parts of the world unless we see the kind of economic investment and growth which creates the conditions encouraging people to stay.

I've long thought the future of capitalism lies in Africa if you continue to want a source of cheap labour (all other issues notwithstanding) or want to develop a part of the world hitherto largely neglected (China). Africa as the world's economic powerhouse by 2050 - who knows?

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

Renegade_pollster said:

Scott_xP said:

@lxeagle17
One of the "funnier" signals we have of a Kamala Harris victory is that I have *never* seen DC and corporate conventional wisdom more convinced of Trump running away with it than they are now.

It's really an election with no clear leader, but the GOP confidence is *astounding*.

These people have the worst vibes on earth (me included) and if they "feel" something, be skeptical. Insider vibes are the worst way to guess how the average American voter is going to react to anything.

The Republicans are projecting an image of a landslide and are hyped on early voting numbers in a way I have never seen before.

You can credibly construct an argument for Trump as a favorite, but we can do that for Harris too. The way people are buying it is incredible.

https://x.com/lxeagle17/status/1850703883460653313

As one of those who has been saying Trump will probably win for a long time, I can see a path to a Harris victory which is 2020 redux but with a much narrower gap in vote share and maybe even smaller majorities in swing states, particularly PA and MI. However, I think it depends on a lot of things going her way.

Re the "vibes" argument, again there can be a delusional element where people kid themselves but, usually, campaigns have an idea of what they see on the street. The key thing - for me - is that the underlying metrics on how consumers feel suggest people are unhappy and it would be historically unprecedented for voters to feel so negative and yet vote for the incumbent party. It may happen but is unlikely.

If there is any hope for Harris in the closing stages, it may be the reaction to the MSG rally in terms of the comments made although Tony Hinchcliffe is well known as being deliberately obnoxious by design. If you see Republican leaders start to bicker or panic over this, it may suggest the issue has gained salience.

Eabhal said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

To me the key is:

1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.

2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.

3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.

Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.

No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies

I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough

We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours

How are you going to design a policy that incentivises white couples to have babies but not other couples?

Leon said:

Ratters said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

To me the key is:

1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.

2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.

3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.

Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.

No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies

I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough

We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

My conclusion for the day. Korea is fucked




But they REALLY like baseball

South Korea now has the lowest fertility rate per mother of any nation in the world at 0.9, just ahead of Hong Kong (China) at 0.8 and below Singapore at 1.1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_fertility_rate

OnlyLivingBoy said:

moonshine said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

I wish more had been of this 10 -15 years ago, I might’ve got cracking earlier and aimed for higher than replacement rate

I managed to have 3 but they might be located on the wrong bit of the colour chart for the great replacement crowd.

Leon said:

My conclusion for the day. Korea is fucked



But they REALLY like baseball

Leon said:

This is a troubling case. Some sad deviant guy uses tech to make pedo images. Also “encourages” others to do depraved things

Definitely needs a custodial sentence (also therapy and probably severe medication). But 18 years in prison??? Really?

AFAICS there is no proof any living individual was physically harmed by his actions. Yet he gets 18 years. At the same time Starmer is releasing actual violent pedophile rapists after they’ve served far far less than that

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/oct/28/man-who-used-ai-to-create-child-abuse-images-jailed-for-18-years

Ratters said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

To me the key is:

1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.

2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.

3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.

Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.

No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies

I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.

I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.

I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.

HYUFD said:

KnightOut said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

My conclusion for the day. Korea is fucked




But they REALLY like baseball

South Korea now has the lowest fertility rate per mother of any nation in the world at 0.9, just ahead of Hong Kong (China) at 0.8 and below Singapore at 1.1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_fertility_rate

How can the fertility rate *per mother* be less than 1.0?!?

Surely by definition any mother has an individual fertility rate of at least 1?

Not if the average woman now has no children

Nigelb said:

Trafalgar has competition.

New Hampshire Polling:

Pres:
Trump (R): 50%
Harris (D): 50%

Gov:
Ayotte (R): 52%
Craig (D): 48%

Praecones Analytica / Oct 26, 2024 / n=622
https://x.com/USA_Polling/status/1850903773150912959

biggles said:

Leon said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.

I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them

When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings

However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy

Climate change is basically fixed. With the advent of likely policy change plus foreseeable technology, we’re heading for about 2.5 degrees of warming. Not great if you live in certain places, but not existential for the human race. And we should gain decent red wine.

OldKingCole said:

MattW said:

Nunu5 said:

MattW said:

eek said:

Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon jailed for 18 months for contempt of court...

That's ... interesting.

brilliant news! Along with my 2.1 degree result this is a great day so far

Good result. Well done.

If we have a student age person in our midst, you are going to have to be caught and studied carefully .

I didn't get a degree until I was 60+.

Leon said:

Ratters said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

To me the key is:

1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.

2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.

3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.

Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.

No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies

I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.

I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.

I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.

Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to

1. Want my own race to survive and

2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?

You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?

DavidL said:

So the Philadelphia Inquirer has not found that endorsement thing too tricky:

“Voters face an easy but tectonic choice in the race for the White House.

Will they choose the first woman or the oldest man to be the next president?

Will they choose the prosecutor or the convict?

Will they choose the candidate who supports restoring Roe v. Wade, or the man who bragged about overturning it?

Will they choose the candidate with a tax plan to help the middle class or the one who wants to help the superrich?

Will they choose the candidate who backs a tough bipartisan immigration law or the guy who killed the measure?

Will they choose the candidate who wants to combat climate change or the one who thinks it is a hoax?

Will they choose the candidate who upholds the peaceful transfer of power or the one who summoned a violent mob to attack the U.S. Capitol?

Will they choose the candidate who stands up to Vladimir Putin or the one who said Russia could do “whatever the hell they want”?

Will they choose the candidate who champions education, health care for all, and sensible gun safety laws, or the person who wants to close the U.S. Department of Education, repeal Obamacare, and told supporters after a school shooting to “get over it”?

Will they choose the candidate who supports the working class or the one who is anti-union and opposed raising the minimum wage?

Will they choose a woman of color who wants to unite the country, or a man with a history of misogynistic, racist, and divisive comments and actions?

Will they choose the candidate who supports LGBTQ rights or the one who wants to roll back protections for the gay community?

Will they choose the candidate who will uphold the presidential oath, or the one who was impeached twice for high crimes and misdemeanors, profited from the White House, dangled pardons to cronies, and was indicted four times?

This baker’s dozen list could go on, but the choice is clear and obvious. Vice President Kamala Harris wants to help all Americans.

Donald Trump wants to help himself.

That is why The Inquirer endorses Kamala Devi Harris to be the 47th president of the United States.

If elected, Harris, 60, would be the first Black, South Asian woman to hold the nation’s highest office. She rarely references her historic candidacy, and instead is laser-focused on earning votes through the substance of her vision, ideas, and temperament.” — Inquirer Editorial Staff

Dumbosaurus said:

Leon said:

biggles said:

Leon said:

This is a troubling case. Some sad deviant guy uses tech to make pedo images. Also “encourages” others to do depraved things

Definitely needs a custodial sentence (also therapy and probably severe medication). But 18 years in prison??? Really?

AFAICS there is no proof any living individual was physically harmed by his actions. Yet he gets 18 years. At the same time Starmer is releasing actual violent pedophile rapists after they’ve served far far less than that

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/oct/28/man-who-used-ai-to-create-child-abuse-images-jailed-for-18-years

One could almost argue he was doing a service, and we should offer this to paedophiles who want to engage and avoid offending, on the NHS, but for the fact he based them on real kids.

Yes the use of real images of children is what justifies a custodial sentence. But 18 years??!

This is an area of law which will only get thornier. If we can create perfectly plausible fake porn which satisfies pedos and stops them offending, should we?

If no one is hurt, why not? It will actually PREVENT real crimes and real hurt

Of course we should - adult porn is proven to reduce rape, so it's pretty much guaranteed that AI paedophile porn also would reduce child abuse. Plus even more importantly it's not hurting anyone anyway - AI content of any kind whatsoever should be legal imo.

But it's a complete political non starter about a very niche issue, so I wouldn't expend any more effort considering it. You might as well expect them to reform stamp duty!

Leon said:

Eabhal said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

To me the key is:

1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.

2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.

3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.

Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.

No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies

I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough

We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours

How are you going to design a policy that incentivises white couples to have babies but not not other couples?

I would forbid white men from accessing porn so they are forced to do the real thing

viewcode said:

Leon said:

Dumbosaurus said:

Leon said:

biggles said:

Leon said:

This is a troubling case. Some sad deviant guy uses tech to make pedo images. Also “encourages” others to do depraved things

Definitely needs a custodial sentence (also therapy and probably severe medication). But 18 years in prison??? Really?

AFAICS there is no proof any living individual was physically harmed by his actions. Yet he gets 18 years. At the same time Starmer is releasing actual violent pedophile rapists after they’ve served far far less than that

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/oct/28/man-who-used-ai-to-create-child-abuse-images-jailed-for-18-years

One could almost argue he was doing a service, and we should offer this to paedophiles who want to engage and avoid offending, on the NHS, but for the fact he based them on real kids.

Yes the use of real images of children is what justifies a custodial sentence. But 18 years??!

This is an area of law which will only get thornier. If we can create perfectly plausible fake porn which satisfies pedos and stops them offending, should we?

If no one is hurt, why not? It will actually PREVENT real crimes and real hurt

Of course we should - adult porn is proven to reduce rape, so it's pretty much guaranteed that AI paedophile porn also would reduce child abuse. Plus even more importantly it's not hurting anyone anyway - AI content of any kind whatsoever should be legal imo.

But it's a complete political non starter about a very niche issue, so I wouldn't expend any more effort considering it. You might as well expect them to reform stamp duty!

I completely agree. It’s the obvious cure for horrible pedophilia. I’d also create sexbots for them

Let these sickos enact their fantasies on harmless silicon robots - problem solved

Yet I suspect some weird Puritanism will prevent us doing this - so real kids will still be really hurt

The war is not against the act, it is against the concept.

kamski said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

To me the key is:

1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.

2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.

3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.

Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.

No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies

I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.

I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.

I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.

Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to

1. Want my own race to survive and

2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?

You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?

it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.

Leon said:

Ratters said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

To me the key is:

1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.

2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.

3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.

Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.

No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies

I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.

I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.

I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.

Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to

1. Want my own race to survive and

2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?

You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?

Leon said:

viewcode said:

Leon said:

Dumbosaurus said:

Leon said:

biggles said:

Leon said:

This is a troubling case. Some sad deviant guy uses tech to make pedo images. Also “encourages” others to do depraved things

Definitely needs a custodial sentence (also therapy and probably severe medication). But 18 years in prison??? Really?

AFAICS there is no proof any living individual was physically harmed by his actions. Yet he gets 18 years. At the same time Starmer is releasing actual violent pedophile rapists after they’ve served far far less than that

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/oct/28/man-who-used-ai-to-create-child-abuse-images-jailed-for-18-years

One could almost argue he was doing a service, and we should offer this to paedophiles who want to engage and avoid offending, on the NHS, but for the fact he based them on real kids.

Yes the use of real images of children is what justifies a custodial sentence. But 18 years??!

This is an area of law which will only get thornier. If we can create perfectly plausible fake porn which satisfies pedos and stops them offending, should we?

If no one is hurt, why not? It will actually PREVENT real crimes and real hurt

Of course we should - adult porn is proven to reduce rape, so it's pretty much guaranteed that AI paedophile porn also would reduce child abuse. Plus even more importantly it's not hurting anyone anyway - AI content of any kind whatsoever should be legal imo.

But it's a complete political non starter about a very niche issue, so I wouldn't expend any more effort considering it. You might as well expect them to reform stamp duty!

I completely agree. It’s the obvious cure for horrible pedophilia. I’d also create sexbots for them

Let these sickos enact their fantasies on harmless silicon robots - problem solved

Yet I suspect some weird Puritanism will prevent us doing this - so real kids will still be really hurt

The war is not against the act, it is against the concept.

Which is insane, right?

Eabhal said:

biggles said:

Leon said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.

I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them

When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings

However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy

Climate change is basically fixed. With the advent of likely policy change plus foreseeable technology, we’re heading for about 2.5 degrees of warming. Not great if you live in certain places, but not existential for the human race. And we should gain decent red wine.

For the umpteenth time, it's not. The more carbon there is in the atmosphere, the worse it will be, and there are indications that the damage incurred will increase exponentially with temperature change. Even if we blast past 2 degrees, 3 would be much better than 4.

"Survival of the human race" is not the outcome on which we should assess our efforts, IMO. I'm a little more ambitious.

Leon said:

Ratters said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

To me the key is:

1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.

2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.

3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.

Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.

No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies

I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.

I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.

I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.

Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to

1. Want my own race to survive and

2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?

You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?

SouthamObserver said:

JosiasJessop said:

kamski said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

To me the key is:

1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.

2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.

3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.

Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.

No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies

I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.

I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.

I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.

Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to

1. Want my own race to survive and

2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?

You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?

it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.

Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.

You have betrayed your race, it seems. My son has too.

Flatlander said:

Eabhal said:

biggles said:

Leon said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.

I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them

When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings

However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy

Climate change is basically fixed. With the advent of likely policy change plus foreseeable technology, we’re heading for about 2.5 degrees of warming. Not great if you live in certain places, but not existential for the human race. And we should gain decent red wine.

For the umpteenth time, it's not. The more carbon there is in the atmosphere, the worse it will be, and there are indications that the damage incurred will increase exponentially with temperature change. Even if we blast past 2 degrees, 3 would be much better than 4.

"Survival of the human race" is not the outcome on which we should assess our efforts, IMO. I'm a little more ambitious.

It depends what you mean by "worse". That is pretty much a human construct.

The species alive during the Eocene optimum would hate this ice age climate, so it isn't that 4 degrees would kill all life on earth.

It might flood London, but cities come and go.

Loss of natural habitat seems to me to be the most immediate problem. Species can't move if they are constrained, so instead they will be lost.

Cookie said:

Watching the Drop on daytime television. Debbis McGee's just been asked what SKS's job was before politics - law, banking or teaching. She went banking.
Instructive how little amateurs pay attention to what we think everyone knows.
He'd have been furious, though, right?

Leon said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.

I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them

When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings

However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy

Andy_JS said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

To me the key is:

1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.

2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.

3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.

Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.

No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies

I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.

I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.

I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.

Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to

1. Want my own race to survive and

2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?

You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?

Is there something special about your and my race? Why wouldn't it survive? Why does a country have to stay the same (not that I would expect it to change) and what do you propose to do about Australia, New Zealand, all of South America, North America, etc, etc which have all changed at some point in recent history regarding their ethnic makeup.

Or do we all pile back into Africa, back to where we came from.

The world is more cosmopolitan now which is great. The Uk is very different to what it was 150 years ago, but so are the other places I have mentioned. More so. Do you propose changing all of them as well?

I notice you haven't answered his question about Gambia.

Luckyguy1983 said:

Leon said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.

I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them

When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings

However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy

I don’t agree on any count. I think the number of humans on earth is perfectly fine, the climate is perfectly fine, and climate change can be mitigated fairly simply with the means we thankfully have at our disposal. We have a stupidity problem not a climate problem. Hence Net Zero.

Leon said:

SouthamObserver said:

JosiasJessop said:

SouthamObserver said:

JosiasJessop said:

kamski said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

To me the key is:

1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.

2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.

3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.

Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.

No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies

I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.

I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.

I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.

Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to

1. Want my own race to survive and

2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?

You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?

it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.

Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.

You have betrayed your race, it seems. My son has too.

If my 'race' involves being the same 'race' as @:Leon, then I'm glad I've put some slightly different blood into it. If he is a prime example of his 'race', then it is truly diseased.

Fortunately, from experience think he's very much an outlier.

Too much time alone + internet access = trouble

lol. I’ve just spent the last 3 weeks in east Asia mixing with a quite fantastical range of humanity. I know far more of the world than you

Stark_Dawning said:

bondegezou said:

18 months jail for Tommy Robinson for contempt of court. Good riddance.

But how long before elements of the Right start describing him as a political prisoner, rounded up and incarcerated by Sir Keir's police state?

SouthamObserver said:

Leon said:

SouthamObserver said:

JosiasJessop said:

SouthamObserver said:

JosiasJessop said:

kamski said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

To me the key is:

1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.

2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.

3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.

Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.

No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies

I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.

I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.

I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.

Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to

1. Want my own race to survive and

2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?

You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?

it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.

Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.

You have betrayed your race, it seems. My son has too.

If my 'race' involves being the same 'race' as @:Leon, then I'm glad I've put some slightly different blood into it. If he is a prime example of his 'race', then it is truly diseased.

Fortunately, from experience think he's very much an outlier.

Too much time alone + internet access = trouble

lol. I’ve just spent the last 3 weeks in east Asia mixing with a quite fantastical range of humanity. I know far more of the world than you

And yet you're a bog standard racist.

Eabhal said:

biggles said:

Leon said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.

I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them

When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings

However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy

Climate change is basically fixed. With the advent of likely policy change plus foreseeable technology, we’re heading for about 2.5 degrees of warming. Not great if you live in certain places, but not existential for the human race. And we should gain decent red wine.

For the umpteenth time, it's not. The more carbon there is in the atmosphere, the worse it will be, and there are indications that the damage incurred will increase exponentially with temperature change. Even if we blast past 2 degrees, 3 would be much better than 4.

"Survival of the human race" is not the outcome on which we should assess our efforts, IMO. I'm a little more ambitious.

Leon said:

Ratters said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

To me the key is:

1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.

2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.

3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.

Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.

No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies

I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.

I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.

I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.

Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to

1. Want my own race to survive and

2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?

You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?

To me, basing your fertility and migration based on "whiteness", i.e. race, is racist.

To take your points in turn:

1. Your race will survive. That's not a real concern, at least not with a timeframe less than 1,000 years.

2. I fundamentally don't care about the race of Britain. I care about Britain and would much rather live here than anywhere else. But it is not the whiteness of Britain that makes is a great place. Non-white Brits, or mixed-race Brits, are just as integrated into British culture as white Brits. There are exceptions, of course, but in general we are pretty good at it (and can aim to be better still).

Your Gambia analogy fails for the reason of pt 3 of my original point: controlled pace of migration being necessary. There is a limit to the pace of migration that any country can support as a proportion of the current population. If Gambia had migration at a sustainable pace, consisting entirely of white people who generally integrated into Gambian culture, and Gambians objected on the basis of race, then yes I would say is racist for them to object to that.

So no country is allowed to exist, in the future, on the basis of its ethnicity. No black, Asian, Latino, Inuit, or white country can say “our ethnicity is a fundamental part of what we are as a country and we want our ethnicity to dominate within that country, this is our ethnic homeland”

That’s your position? If so, I respect it. You are intellectually coherent and honest

I also think it is globalist drivelling nonsense which has caused evil already and will lead to far right governments everywhere, because it contradicts human nature

rcs1000 said:

It is extraordinary that the very small percentage of our DNA that deals with our skin pigmentation matter so much to some people.

Why that, and not - say - the DNA that deals with whether your ear lobes are hanging or not?

biggles said:

rcs1000 said:

It is extraordinary that the very small percentage of our DNA that deals with our skin pigmentation matter so much to some people.

Why that, and not - say - the DNA that deals with whether your ear lobes are hanging or not?

I personally continue to distrust all left handlers and monobrows.

rcs1000 said:

It is extraordinary that the very small percentage of our DNA that deals with our skin pigmentation matter so much to some people.

Why that, and not - say - the DNA that deals with whether your ear lobes are hanging or not?

Leon said:

SouthamObserver said:

Leon said:

SouthamObserver said:

Leon said:

SouthamObserver said:

JosiasJessop said:

SouthamObserver said:

JosiasJessop said:

kamski said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

Leon said:

Ratters said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

Andy_JS said:

These graphs on fertility in South America that I posted the other day are astonishing.

https://archive.is/m9QoN/c23861720c8c708e20b142a19684aa90cd5f00c0.avif

Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it

The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?

To me the key is:

1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.

2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.

3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.

Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.

No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies

I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.

I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.

I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.

Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to

1. Want my own race to survive and

2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?

You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?

it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.

Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.

You have betrayed your race, it seems. My son has too.

If my 'race' involves being the same 'race' as @:Leon, then I'm glad I've put some slightly different blood into it. If he is a prime example of his 'race', then it is truly diseased.

Fortunately, from experience think he's very much an outlier.

Too much time alone + internet access = trouble

lol. I’ve just spent the last 3 weeks in east Asia mixing with a quite fantastical range of humanity. I know far more of the world than you

And yet you're a bog standard racist.

Yes dear, have another Hobnob

Time for bed, Ossie.

You continue, despite my noble example, to use full
stops when not needed. Desist. It is ugly

The elegance of the un-perioded sentence is indisputable

Indisputable