7% Increase In Population. Are We Full?

[Mecky]

And there lies the problem you blame the students for your inability to enthuse and motivate them, It’s a long time ago but I do remember some teachers made lessons fun and they were the ones that I did well in and other teachers were so boring and tedious it was difficult to stay awake, they were the subjects I didn’t do so well in. Make the subject interesting and teach kids what they are interested in and they will be enthusiastic. Make it very clear that the benefits system isn’t going to provide for them and they will be more motivated to learn.

I have taught many teenagers that found school boring, but when you teach them something they find interesting, they learn.

 

Crikey, where do I start with that load of rubbish you just came out with? Teach them what they are interested in? You mean like how to get into Mary Jane's pants? How is it possible to teach a single subject in class when everyone is interested in different things?

 

Bold: Why will they be more motivated to learn if the benefit system isn't going to provide for them? I suppose it doesn't matter to you if people live at home with their parents then, laying around all day doing nothing, but not claiming benefits? I mean, you won't be paying for their upkeep will you ... and this is what it's all about isn't it? Me me me! I don't see why I should have to pay for all their benefits, blah blah blah. You'd soon change your tune if the shoe was on the other foot. It's the same old tory rhetoric - I've personally benefited from good public services in the past but now they of no use to me, it's time to pull up the drawbridge so nobody else can have those same benefits. It's a disgusting behaviour.

[Badlittlepup]

But you're saying that even if there were 'enough' jobs, we still wouldn't have the skilled people to fill them, so we'd require immigrants to come and do the jobs.

 

Why can't we train people who already live here to do the jobs? That's what we used to do. Now we allow the state to provide a poor or inappropriate education and employers to leave employees to languish in dead end jobs. We should be investing in people who are already here rather than importing people because it's cheaper in the short term. It's a false economy.

[Mecky]

Why can't we train people who already live here to do the jobs? That's what we used to do. Now we allow the state to provide a poor or inappropriate education and employers to leave employees to languish in dead end jobs. We should be investing in people who are already here rather than importing people because it's cheaper in the short term. It's a false economy.

 

Because as I said, some people cannot be taught and others don't want to be taught; it's always been that way and it will never change. Besides, are you suggesting we train you how to stack supermarket shelves for £2 per hour? I mean, someone has to do it don't they?

[retep]

Why can't we train people who already live here to do the jobs? That's what we used to do. Now we allow the state to provide a poor or inappropriate education and employers to leave employees to languish in dead end jobs. We should be investing in people who are already here rather than importing people because it's cheaper in the short term. It's a false economy.

 

20,000 out of work after university, figures show,

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/20000-out-of-work-after-university-figures-show-7896209.html

[callippo]

silly thread, with many silly replies. UK demographics are very healthy, the healthiest of any country, in western or any other part of Europe apart from France. Good to see us, competing head to head on this one now. If any of you actually had an education, which few of you seem to have, you would know that the historic demography of France is an exceptionally interesting subject.

[Rupert_Baehr]

20,000 out of work after university, figures show,

 

Does that not suggest that a significant number of people obtained qualifications in subjects for which there was little or no demand?

 

The University of East Anglia closed its school of physics some years ago. The population was expanding, so why did the school close?

 

According to the University, the standard of the applicants they had received during the recent previous years was pitiful and they were not prepared to 'dumb down' the course to allow incompetents to obtain degrees in Physics.

 

The population of the UK has increased dramatically during the past 15 or so years, yet it appears that the number of people prepared to undertake degrees in the so-called 'hard' subjects has declined.

 

According to a poster (on another thread, a few weeks ago) those who leave the UK are not missed - there are plenty of people coming in to 'fill the vacuum'.

 

Why then, given that the population is increasing, is there (apparently) a decline in the number of scientists, engineers and graduates from other 'hard' courses?

 

Some of those who are coming in to the country are indeed well-qualified - and their children may well be over-represented on the 'hard' courses - but it does seem that there is something wrong with the system.

[Rupert_Baehr]

...What do you make of the argument that immigration into the UK will avoid the problem of the massively contracting workforce that Germany will face in the next decade?

 

Germany does indeed have a contracting work force and - in some areas - there is no shortage of 'unemployable' people.

 

Germany does have a shortage of skilled people too, but it appears that the government's answer isn't: "Let's import a few million warm bodies", but rather: "Let's import people who have the skills we need."

 

They seem to be less concerned with 'quantity' than 'quality'. A contracting work force appears to worry them less than an increasingly unskilled work force.

 

20 years ago, I bought a house in Norfolk. It needed a lot of work. I'm pretty good at a number of building tasks - but I'm hardly a craftsman.

 

I had to put in a ceiling. I put up the plasterboard, applied the Artex, sealed it and painted it. It took me a long time! - It wasn't a particularly skilled job - I could do it, but it did take a long time and had I employed somebody else to do the lot, it would've cost me a considerable amount of money.

 

4 years ago I bought this house. When I signed the contract, the internal walls were bare brick. A few days later, 2 men came along with a plaster spraying machine and - in a little over half a day - all the nternal walls were plastered.

 

All of the downstairs ceilings were bare concrete. Labour in Germany is very expensive.

 

A man came along with another machine and - in a little over 2 hours - he sprayed all of the ceilings on the ground floor with a coat of 'ceiling compound' which dried to a textured finish and needed neither sealing or painting - it was all in the mix.

 

There were few unskilled or low-skilled labourers. - Most of the unskilled work was done with machines and the machines don't need welfare or healthcare, don't get pensions and don't take ages to do a job.

 

A shrinking work force isn't a problem, provided that the work force you do have becomes increasingly wealthy. The German government appears to be trying to attract workers with the skills which the economy needs. - They can't stop other EU citizens from coming to the country (Free movement of people applies here too) but they don't exactly make life easy for people who immigrate but are unable to support themselves.

 

There are low-skilled jobs available. - Most Supermarkets have signs up advertising for people to work the tills and stock the shelves. Those jobs pay 400 Euros for a 37½ hour week. - About £8.67 an hour, at today's exchange rates. If you take one of those jobs you will, however, find that you pay quite a lot of money in taxes.

[Cyclone]

Germany does indeed have a contracting work force and - in some areas - there is no shortage of 'unemployable' people.

 

Germany does have a shortage of skilled people too, but it appears that the government's answer isn't: "Let's import a few million warm bodies", but rather: "Let's import people who have the skills we need."

The rate of immigration is higher in Germany than in the UK.

The reason the population is falling is that the birth rate is much lower.

 

They seem to be less concerned with 'quantity' than 'quality'. A contracting work force appears to worry them less than an increasingly unskilled work force.

 

20 years ago, I bought a house in Norfolk. It needed a lot of work. I'm pretty good at a number of building tasks - but I'm hardly a craftsman.

 

I had to put in a ceiling. I put up the plasterboard, applied the Artex, sealed it and painted it. It took me a long time! - It wasn't a particularly skilled job - I could do it, but it did take a long time and had I employed somebody else to do the lot, it would've cost me a considerable amount of money.

 

4 years ago I bought this house. When I signed the contract, the internal walls were bare brick. A few days later, 2 men came along with a plaster spraying machine and - in a little over half a day - all the nternal walls were plastered.

 

All of the downstairs ceilings were bare concrete. Labour in Germany is very expensive.

 

A man came along with another machine and - in a little over 2 hours - he sprayed all of the ceilings on the ground floor with a coat of 'ceiling compound' which dried to a textured finish and needed neither sealing or painting - it was all in the mix.

 

There were few unskilled or low-skilled labourers. - Most of the unskilled work was done with machines and the machines don't need welfare or healthcare, don't get pensions and don't take ages to do a job.

 

A shrinking work force isn't a problem

It most definitely is.

GDP will decline and the population will not. GDP/capita will go down, and that means the standard of living will go down.

provided that the work force you do have becomes increasingly wealthy.

If the production of the declining workforce manages to produce as much as it did before the decline then the fall in GDP won't happen, but that seems pretty much impossible.

[Cyclone]

Bold: Why will they be more motivated to learn if the benefit system isn't going to provide for them?

Because the other option is to starve? Doesn't going hungry motivate even the laziest person to go and find some work?

I suppose it doesn't matter to you if people live at home with their parents then, laying around all day doing nothing, but not claiming benefits?

That's a problem for their parents to deal with, although they've probably failed if their children are of the age to claim benefits and aren't capable of making their own way in life.

I mean, you won't be paying for their upkeep will you ... and this is what it's all about isn't it? Me me me! I don't see why I should have to pay for all their benefits, blah blah blah.

That's a perfectly valid opinion isn't it? Why should we pay for the feckless to have an easy life?

You'd soon change your tune if the shoe was on the other foot.

We're not feckless.

It's the same old tory rhetoric - I've personally benefited from good public services in the past but now they of no use to me, it's time to pull up the drawbridge so nobody else can have those same benefits. It's a disgusting behaviour.

How have the people who work for a living benefited from a benefits system that allows the feckless to live without working?

[Cyclone]

Why can't we train people who already live here to do the jobs? That's what we used to do. Now we allow the state to provide a poor or inappropriate education and employers to leave employees to languish in dead end jobs. We should be investing in people who are already here rather than importing people because it's cheaper in the short term. It's a false economy.

 

That training doesn't happen overnight, it's a decade long process.