- Joined
- May 30, 2019
- Messages
- 63,678
- Reaction score
- 141,601
Why do you want a reduction in the UK population?
Too much pollution, too much pressure on public services.
Why do you want a reduction in the UK population?
You don't think there might be other ways to address those issues?Too much pollution, too much pressure on public services.
Too much pollution, too much pressure on public services.
If you are going to complain about the challenges of 'low birth rates' in Canada and the US, while at the same time demonization and trying to limit immigration, then you are dumb.
You don't think there might be other ways to address those issues?
Don't be such a snowflake. Im here to listen to views different than my ownWhy bother. You don't want to hear it. You just want to say it's not true.
Well that is not an issue generally associated with immigration as immigrants, as a group, tend to have higher employment rates and higher rates of becoming entrepreneurs and employing other Americans.I'm not complaining about those things. If the population drops low enough, the problems that make having kids difficult for regular people go away, and people will start having more kids again.
The problems we have are caused by social programs that steal from the productive and give to the useless.
That's what needs to change.
So you are suggesting less government intervention , will allow developers to operate with less regulation thus bring housing prices down? less regulation?Regulatory fees, cause delays and drive up other costs. If you remove them you will cause a reverse snowball effect that will greatly reduce costs. The more we keep government hands out of the pockets of builders the faster and higher quality we can build, we can pay workers fairer wages so we can attract and keep qualified tradespeople building homes. We build shitty houses employing bottle of the barrel skilled workers to build the cheapest shittiest homes because that really all we can do and still make a profit with all the taxes and red tape in the way.
Hey, folks, look here. This is how you say, "I don't give a flying fuck about poor people, so fuck'em with a sharp stick," without saying you don't give a fuck about poor people.How is it trickle down when the $ never leaves your pocket? The consumer keeps their $ and gets to spend it as they see fit.
Isn't trickle down when you collect taxes, redistribute them innefficiently, then claim some sort of economic win?
I'm not the "tax me and govern me harder daddy" type.
Liberals give a fuck about poor people? Well they must have a huge heart because they have created a fuckload more poor people.Hey, folks, look here. This is how you say, "I don't give a flying fuck about poor people, so fuck'em with a sharp stick," without saying you don't give a fuck about poor people.
You don't think there's a way to improve social services without authoritarian means?Not that people would realistically do unless you want to be highly authoritarian, no
Liberals give a fuck about poor people? Well they must have a huge heart because they have created a fuckload more poor people.
Yeah it worked great IN CANADA. You are seriously asking for evidence of government regulations making things more expensive ?So you are suggesting less government intervention , will allow developers to operate with less regulation thus bring housing prices down? less regulation?
Where has this worked before?
I dont think this has anything do with the housing crisis in coastal provinces.
Again, im not saying you are completely wrong, but can you provide any resources where you heard/read this?