OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[Ram59]

It was my way of ridiculing your posts of me suggesting'things I hadn't said. I didn't mean to cause offence, but I was showing how things can be taken out of context and how you continually make up this 'hatred' I have for foreigners, which iI find no less offensive.

You must admit that, if it wasn't so ludicrous, what you have written Could have led to my summary.

[ramAnag]

It was my way of ridiculing your posts of me suggesting'things I hadn't said. I didn't mean to cause offence, but I was showing how things can be taken out of context and how you continually make up this 'hatred' I have for foreigners, which iI find no less offensive.

You must admit that, if it wasn't so ludicrous, what you have written Could have led to my summary.

That's absolute nonsense and you know it. What have I suggested you've said that you haven't? Where have I taken things out of context and where have I 'continually' made up this 'hatred you have of foreigners'? I disagree with you and imo you bang on about immigration too much but that's just my opinion. Debate should thrive out of disagreement and constructive argument is healthy...negative, groundless abuse on the other hand is why I have one particular 'contributor' on 'ignore'. I thought you were better than that and, as I say, that we were having a grown up debate. Apparently not.

[Andy_Faber]

If that's the case, I stand corrected Andy. What I see is astonishingly wealthy developers and some, often, not very well built housing developments in not very well thought out locations putting enormous stress on local facilities. I have to admit you appear to know much more than me in this area and my conclusion is anecdotally rather than fact based. What I do know is that in the area I live, which without being too specific is near Ashbourne, it is new housing developments and not immigrants that cause the local health and education services to appear overstretched. Of course I recognise the need for new housing but the authorities seem to fail to understand that a development of say 200 houses is likely to introduce 300 children into schools, 5-600 people depending on the health facilities and at least 150 cars to the roads and car parks.

P.S. All numbers are just estimates but you see my point.

Yes but you have the argument the wrong way round. Its not a case that builders build and people magically appear (ie supply based), its a case that there is a demand from people and the builders meet that demand (ie demand-based). The pressure to build is immense for both free-market and social housing, to the extent that some developers are exploring the return of prefabs (there are some great designs coming out of China), and where do you think that pressure is coming from? Pretty obviously, from the population increase, more than half half of which is due to immigration (immigrants generally need their own housing of some sort from minute 1, the increase in birth/death rate does not, as children don't need the equivalent house freed up by a death until they reach adulthood).

So your argument for infrastructure to support the homes increase is valid, but that need wouldn't be there (or at least it would be 60% less) if it were not for immigration. In the interest of balance I will add in the mix there is 'social mobility/climbing' to add to the mix.

Once again I am making an economic argument, not a racially motivated one, I have to keep stressing that, as it always appears I argue at a macro level against what I believe at an individual level (ie love and protect your fellow human)

And what makes you think it isn't immigrants either buying up those houses, or more likely given other nations habits, renting them off landlords? You may genuinely know, it's your area not mine

[ramAnag]

Yes but you have the argument the wrong way round. Its not a case that builders build and people magically appear (ie supply based), its a case that there is a demand from people and the builders meet that demand (ie demand-based). The pressure to build is immense for both free-market and social housing, to the extent that some developers are exploring the return of prefabs (there are some great designs coming out of China), and where do you think that pressure is coming from? Pretty obviously, from the population increase, more than half half of which is due to immigration (immigrants generally need their own housing of some sort from minute 1, the increase in birth/death rate does not, as children don't need the equivalent house freed up by a death until they reach adulthood).

So your argument for infrastructure to support the homes increase is valid, but that need wouldn't be there (or at least it would be 60% less) if it were not for immigration. In the interest of balance I will add in the mix there is 'social mobility/climbing' to add to the mix.

Once again I am making an economic argument, not a racially motivated one, I have to keep stressing that, as it always appears I argue at a macro level against what I believe at an individual level (ie love and protect your fellow human)

And what makes you think it isn't immigrants either buying up those houses, or more likely given other nations habits, renting them off landlords? You may genuinely know, it's your area not mine

Andy, firstly the twin issues of housing and immigration are not my 'areas' of expertise. I have a view but nothing more.
As I understand it the population of the UK grew, in net terms, by approximately 0.8% last year with immigration being responsible for about half of that growth.
I have never suggested that levels of immigration do not need to be taken into consideration, I do however grow tired of those - not you - who seem to wish to blame everything on migrants.
I fully recognise all the points you make about housing demand, your point about modern day pre-fabs is an interesting, possibly even an encouraging, one and I'm pleased you recognise my point about the need for appropriate infrastructure as being 'valid'. Along with my opposition to the endless immigrant 'bashing' from some quarters that was really the only point I was making in relation to housing.

[Andy_Faber]

Andy, firstly the twin issues of housing and immigration are not my 'areas' of expertise. I have a view but nothing more.
As I understand it the population of the UK grew, in net terms, by approximately 0.8% last year with immigration being responsible for about half of that growth.
I have never suggested that levels of immigration do not need to be taken into consideration, I do however grow tired of those - not you - who seem to wish to blame everything on migrants.
I fully recognise all the points you make about housing demand, your point about modern day pre-fabs is an interesting, possibly even an encouraging, one and I'm pleased you recognise my point about the need for appropriate infrastructure as being 'valid'. Along with my opposition to the endless immigrant 'bashing' from some quarters that was really the only point I was making in relation to housing.

http://www.constructionenquirer.com/...mes-factories/

https://www.theguardian.com/sustaina...rgy-efficiency

If those links don't work type construction enquirer chinese giant to build six uk prefab home factories and guardian sustainable business prefab homes housing crisis into a search engine

[Ram59]

Yes but you have the argument the wrong way round. Its not a case that builders build and people magically appear (ie supply based), its a case that there is a demand from people and the builders meet that demand (ie demand-based). The pressure to build is immense for both free-market and social housing, to the extent that some developers are exploring the return of prefabs (there are some great designs coming out of China), and where do you think that pressure is coming from? Pretty obviously, from the population increase, more than half half of which is due to immigration (immigrants generally need their own housing of some sort from minute 1, the increase in birth/death rate does not, as children don't need the equivalent house freed up by a death until they reach adulthood).

So your argument for infrastructure to support the homes increase is valid, but that need wouldn't be there (or at least it would be 60% less) if it were not for immigration. In the interest of balance I will add in the mix there is 'social mobility/climbing' to add to the mix.

Once again I am making an economic argument, not a racially motivated one, I have to keep stressing that, as it always appears I argue at a macro level against what I believe at an individual level (ie love and protect your fellow human)

And what makes you think it isn't immigrants either buying up those houses, or more likely given other nations habits, renting them off landlords? You may genuinely know, it's your area not mine

Be careful what you say about immigrants Andy. People on here refuse to discuss any change to the EU's freedom of movement, a FEW of which, include criminals. On the other hand they want a grown up discussion on euthanasia on our older population, who have a poorer quality of life, even though SOME of them fought in WWII to give us our way of life we have today.

I've highlighted 2 words, because otherwise I'd be accused of claiming that all immigrants are criminals and the all old people are WWII heroes.

I just wonder what people's agenda is, when arguing for the rights of criminals.

[ramAnag]

Be careful what you say about immigrants Andy. People on here refuse to discuss any change to the EU's freedom of movement, a FEW of which, include criminals. On the other hand they want a grown up discussion on euthanasia on our older population, who have a poorer quality of life, even though SOME of them fought in WWII to give us our way of life we have today.

I've highlighted 2 words, because otherwise I'd be accused of claiming that all immigrants are criminals and the all old people are WWII heroes.

I just wonder what people's agenda is, when arguing for the rights of criminals.

A potential solution with an impressive looking product Andy...wonder about cost and soundproofing but might be a major breakthrough.

You're really getting paranoid Ram59.
No one has refused to discuss changes to freedom of movement and no one denies that a minority of migrants are criminals.
If you're talking about me you have, as ever, jumped to conclusions and deliberately tried to mislead. I am actually the person who wrote, a couple of weeks or so ago, that to raise the issue of immigration is not necessarily racist and I have never, at any time, introduced euthanasia into the debate.
What I have said, and you have accepted, is that immigration shares responsibility for the growth in population with other factors such as a temporary 'baby boom' and the increase in life expectancy.
What I have also said is that we, as a society, have to think very, very carefully about our/science's ability to prolong life with no attendant quality of life.
It is, imo, a reasonable question albeit a grown up one which you have, for the sake of your own agenda, translated into me wanting to 'bump off old people' and terminate the lives of 'handicapped children' neither of which I have at any time suggested.
It is unfortunately so typical of you to use such tactics. Bumping off old people some of whom might be war heroes, arguing for the rights of criminals, terminating the lives of handicapped children, all designed to tug on the emotional heartstrings but none of which I have even hinted at. Honestly, if this was a boxing match you'd have been disqualified for repeatedly hitting 'below the belt'.
So what have I actually said? Based on my professional experience I've queried the morality of people having more children than they can afford to keep without relying on the state/taxpayer. That's an argument about personal responsibility nothing more.
As for the elderly argument, let me give you a couple of sad and graphic examples.
My best friend's father died not so long ago. For the last five years or so of his life he didn't recognise anyone at all, he was bed ridden and totally incontinent. He was kept 'alive' by modern technology and I question the wisdom of that when he had absolutely no quality of life.
I'll also cite the example of my own mother who suffered a very severe stroke about ten years ago. She went from being a life embracing eighty three year old to a 'vegetable' and the prognosis was very depressing in terms of quality of life. Fortunately...yes fortunately...she died within a week and I'm 'glad' she did because she wouldn't have wanted the life that lay ahead and all the family wanted to remember her as she was, not as she had become.
No mention there whatsoever about euthenasia, simply an adult response to an issue which is being replicated all over the world where science is able to prolong life but not quality of life.
I am asking the question...is that really what we want and is that really something we (society) can afford? Please stop putting words into my mouth and if you can't address the issues I've actually raised then, putting it more politely than I honestly feel, maybe you should just shut up.

[Andy_Faber]

A potential solution with an impressive looking product Andy...wonder about cost and soundproofing but might be a major breakthrough.

You're really getting paranoid Ram59.
No one has refused to discuss changes to freedom of movement and no one denies that a minority of migrants are criminals.
If you're talking about me you have, as ever, jumped to conclusions and deliberately tried to mislead. I am actually the person who wrote, a couple of weeks or so ago, that to raise the issue of immigration is not necessarily racist and I have never, at any time, introduced euthanasia into the debate.
What I have said, and you have accepted, is that immigration shares responsibility for the growth in population with other factors such as a temporary 'baby boom' and the increase in life expectancy.
What I have also said is that we, as a society, have to think very, very carefully about our/science's ability to prolong life with no attendant quality of life.
It is, imo, a reasonable question albeit a grown up one which you have, for the sake of your own agenda, translated into me wanting to 'bump off old people' and terminate the lives of 'handicapped children' neither of which I have at any time suggested.
It is unfortunately so typical of you to use such tactics. Bumping off old people some of whom might be war heroes, arguing for the rights of criminals, terminating the lives of handicapped children, all designed to tug on the emotional heartstrings but none of which I have even hinted at. Honestly, if this was a boxing match you'd have been disqualified for repeatedly hitting 'below the belt'.
So what have I actually said? Based on my professional experience I've queried the morality of people having more children than they can afford to keep without relying on the state/taxpayer. That's an argument about personal responsibility nothing more.
As for the elderly argument, let me give you a couple of sad and graphic examples.
My best friend's father died not so long ago. For the last five years or so of his life he didn't recognise anyone at all, he was bed ridden and totally incontinent. He was kept 'alive' by modern technology and I question the wisdom of that when he had absolutely no quality of life.
I'll also cite the example of my own mother who suffered a very severe stroke about ten years ago. She went from being a life embracing eighty three year old to a 'vegetable' and the prognosis was very depressing in terms of quality of life. Fortunately...yes fortunately...she died within a week and I'm 'glad' she did because she wouldn't have wanted the life that lay ahead and all the family wanted to remember her as she was, not as she had become.
No mention there whatsoever about euthenasia, simply an adult response to an issue which is being replicated all over the world where science is able to prolong life but not quality of life.
I am asking the question...is that really what we want and is that really something we (society) can afford? Please stop putting words into my mouth and if you can't address the issues I've actually raised then, putting it more politely than I honestly feel, maybe you should just shut up.

Ramanag, I think the new student building on the old Kennings site opposite Queen street 'Baths' in Derby may have been built like that - the outer face of that huge building is certainly not bricks, as it appears, but lightweight tiles/cladding (oops). You can see where repairs have been done (mainly at the back of the building, such repairs have been done in clusters of bricks (8 I think) which represent a 'tile'

Back on the OT, yes I do recall you daring to pop your head above the left-leaning/socially responsible parapet and confirm that there was indeed an issue with immigration, which only served to announce the departure (temporary I hope) of comrade Swale, so the argument has got a bit one-sided in the past week, at least in volume.

[roger_ramjet]

Just back from the land of the Jock where I spent a surprisingly pleasant few (wet) days. It was nice to hear different accents in the retail, particularly coffee shop, sector. Not just eastern european accents but eustern europen accents hybridised with scotch overtones.

Even the staff in the tearoom on the Royal Yacht Britannia were speaking the same way. Is nothing sacred? Her Maj would be turning over in her grave if she was dead.

But as if it wasnt hard enough to converse with someone with a broad scotch accent, you have to try a Romanian Scotch one. Almost incomprehensible

[ramAnag]

Just back from the land of the Jock where I spent a surprisingly pleasant few (wet) days. It was nice to hear different accents in the retail, particularly coffee shop, sector. Not just eastern european accents but eustern europen accents hybridised with scotch overtones.

Even the staff in the tearoom on the Royal Yacht Britannia were speaking the same way. Is nothing sacred? Her Maj would be turning over in her grave if she was dead.

But as if it wasnt hard enough to converse with someone with a broad scotch accent, you have to try a Romanian Scotch one. Almost incomprehensible

Did you take Swale with you Rog?

No 'dare' involved Andy...I may be somewhat 'left leaning' but don't believe in 'towing the party line'. Like you, I call it as I see it and hope to make some sort of sense.