Census

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-66802440?at_format=link&at_link_type=web_link&at_link_origin=BBCScotlandNews&at_medium=social&at_ptr_name=twitter&at_campaign_type=owned&at_campaign=Social_Flow&at_link_id=8F3E33EA-52DB-11EE-BCA6-1E373AE5AB7B&at_bbc_team=editorial

Census results out. Population being supported heavily by immigration. Demographics are challenging to say the least though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bishop Hibee]

https://migrationpolicyscotland.org.uk/publications/attitudes-to-immigration-a-view-from-scotland/

Survey released today shows Scots want more immigration. Excellent and shows a remarkable degree of political sophistication given the constant barrage of anti-immigration propaganda in the mainstream media.

Is any party daring enough to introduce radical policies to promote couples having more than 2.2 kids to counterbalance our aging population?

[Stairway 2 7]

We have the same immigration policy as England but theirs dwarves ours. We need to find a way for immigrants to chose Scotland. English immigration numbers were huge this year, we need some of that or were knackered. Ageing nation we badly need young people and children by any means

[Pretty Boy]

The continuing decline of the population on many of the islands jumps out as a concern to me.

I suppose it's a range of factors. The changing economy limiting job opportunities, ease of travel that didn't exist in decades gone by, increased university attendance among the younger generations leading people of the islands, many of whom may not return permanently and of course 2nd home ownership pricing locals out of their communities. It's notable that the likes of Mull, Arran and Islay are among those seeing declines, they are also among the most desirable for the purposes of seasonal or holiday let accommodation.

Hopefully there is a way to reverse the trend and keep locals at the heart of their communities. It would be a modern day tragedy to see these places relegated to ghost communities or purely seasonal.

[superfurryhibby]

The continuing decline of the population on many of the islands jumps out as a concern to me.

I suppose it's a range of factors. The changing economy limiting job opportunities, ease of travel that didn't exist in decades gone by, increased university attendance among the younger generations leading people of the islands, many of whom may not return permanently and of course 2nd home ownership pricing locals out of their communities. It's notable that the likes of Mull, Arran and Islay are among those seeing declines, they are also among the most desirable for the purposes of seasonal or holiday let accommodation.

Hopefully there is a way to reverse the trend and keep locals at the heart of their communities. It would be a modern day tragedy to see these places relegated to ghost communities or purely seasonal.

I would imagine this plays a significant part in the challenges facing young people in our Island communities. It must be hard enough given the reliance on tourism and seasonal work, but lack of accessible housing must be a critical part.

Wondering, why is it important that our population needs to keep growing? Less tax coming in, but less resource used?

[Ozyhibby]

I would imagine this plays a significant part in the challenges facing young people in our Island communities. It must be hard enough given the reliance on tourism and seasonal work, but lack of accessible housing must be a critical part.

Wondering, why is it important that our population needs to keep growing? Less tax coming in, but less resource used?

Our population is already too old. There will be less tax coming in and more resources used.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[superfurryhibby]

Our population is already too old. There will be less tax coming in and more resources used.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Fewer young people means less money spent on Education, Health Care, Child Benefits, Tax Credits etc.

There are more older people but how do we know how the demographics/costs balance?

Older people need pensions, health care etc, but they also pay for care home costs (apparently there are 35,000 people in Scotland living in care homes) and the vast majority of them (in care homes) will receive end of life care in their care homes rather than the NHS.

Britain is already a hugely densely populated place, why do we need population growth? The environmental argument would say it's not a good thing.

I suppose the past 15 years of poor pay, rising costs of living etc, it's had an impact on the census? I also wonder how much is culture change. Younger people have very different expectations, opportunities and motivations from people born in 40, 50's, early 60's. Maybe this has an impact?

It's interesting info overall. Not something I know a great deal about, but fascinating nonetheless. Edinburgh growth lower than I had thought, maybe the impact of Edinburgh people moving to East Lothian? Also mitigated by the likes of Brexit and countered by growth in the numbers of students, growth from overseas folk on the Government's social care sponsorship scheme.

[Stairway 2 7]

Fewer young people means less money spent on Education, Health Care, Child Benefits, Tax Credits etc.

There are more older people but how do we know how the demographics/costs balance?

Older people need pensions, health care etc, but they also pay for care home costs (apparently there are 35,000 people in Scotland living in care homes) and the vast majority of them (in care homes) will receive end of life care in their care homes rather than the NHS.

Britain is already a hugely densely populated place, why do we need population growth? The environmental argument would say it's not a good thing.

I suppose the past 15 years of poor pay, rising costs of living etc, it's had an impact on the census? I also wonder how much is culture change. Younger people have very different expectations, opportunities and motivations from people born in 40, 50's, early 60's. Maybe this has an impact?

It's interesting info overall. Not something I know a great deal about, but fascinating nonetheless. Edinburgh growth lower than I had thought, maybe the impact of Edinburgh people moving to East Lothian? Also mitigated by the likes of Brexit and countered by growth in the numbers of students, growth from overseas folk on the Government's social care sponsorship scheme.

I don't think it's disputed that older populations are financially worse off and older people take more in pensions than they put in. That's not a criticism its deserved after putting in for a lifetime.

We badly badly need young people. We should motivate people to have kids through cheap childcare and encourage as much immigration as we can get. Immigrants are young on average, have kids and are net contributers. Uks gdp estimate goes up depending on how high the immigration is.

Yes services get stretched but that is the government's job there is more money so they should spend rather than syphon

Regardless of what we want the uks population is estimated to increase anyway. We had a net increase of 600k last year, the only question is how to get them to Scotland rather than England.

[grunt]

Britain is already a hugely densely populated place, why do we need population growth?

Uk is the 4th most densely populated country in the EU.
Within the UK however, there are significant differences ...

https://www.statista.com/statistics/281322/population-density-in-the-uk-by-region/

[McD]

Fewer young people means less money spent on Education, Health Care, Child Benefits, Tax Credits etc.

There are more older people but how do we know how the demographics/costs balance?

Older people need pensions, health care etc, but they also pay for care home costs (apparently there are 35,000 people in Scotland living in care homes) and the vast majority of them (in care homes) will receive end of life care in their care homes rather than the NHS.

Britain is already a hugely densely populated place, why do we need population growth? The environmental argument would say it's not a good thing.

I suppose the past 15 years of poor pay, rising costs of living etc, it's had an impact on the census? I also wonder how much is culture change. Younger people have very different expectations, opportunities and motivations from people born in 40, 50's, early 60's. Maybe this has an impact?

It's interesting info overall. Not something I know a great deal about, but fascinating nonetheless. Edinburgh growth lower than I had thought, maybe the impact of Edinburgh people moving to East Lothian? Also mitigated by the likes of Brexit and countered by growth in the numbers of students, growth from overseas folk on the Government's social care sponsorship scheme.


There won’t be less spent on education though, firstly because any political party that indicates they’d reduce that fund would be pilloried, secondly because the march of technology demands investment in hardware, software, and skills to support these.

I’m a long time away from school (sadly), but off the top of my head, there’ll be smart boards/screens instead of blackboards, much more diverse range of computer equipment than the couple of classroom’s worth of Mac Plus computers than when I was there, Wi-Fi support for school and privately owned devices, for pupils and staff, increased electricity costs to run these things, support staff to maintain and upgrade, website content and maintenance, software costs to support the use of these. There’s also ways for pupils to have money loaded onto a card to buy lunch etc, digital communication channels between parents and teachers. My daughter is in the school nursery, which has a huge smart board, and a number of iPads and such like that they use with the kids. That kit is only for the nursery children, the school itself will have more for the older ones.

Health care will be the same, advances in technology and ways of working will cost more even if there are less patients.

[superfurryhibby]

I don't think it's disputed that older populations are financially worse off and older people take more in pensions than they put in. That's not a criticism its deserved after putting in for a lifetime.

We badly badly need young people. We should motivate people to have kids through cheap childcare and encourage as much immigration as we can get. Immigrants are young on average, have kids and are net contributers. Uks gdp estimate goes up depending on how high the immigration is.

Yes services get stretched but that is the government's job there is more money so they should spend rather than syphon

Regardless of what we want the uks population is estimated to increase anyway. We had a net increase of 600k last year, the only question is how to get them to Scotland rather than England.

Immigration, whilst not a bad thing, can also be a challenge.

Scotland's social care sector has become reliant on a massive number of sponsorship workers (mostly from India or Africa). The issue is that these front line staff are often working for minimum wage, poor conditions and with zero hours contracts. Our sponsorship scheme is helping fill the gaps, but is it sustainable?

The question for me is a bit more nuanced than all immigration is good. What about quality of care, what about the impact of the sponsorship scheme on the communities where folk are coming from (often highly skilled people, with no past social care experience). Is this not just a case of a much wealthier nation exploiting their financial advantage to the detriment of developing communities?

I see immigration as keeping a ceiling on improvement in this sector (worth mentioning that c 80% of social care in Scotland is provided by the private sector).

[Stairway 2 7]

Immigration, whilst not a bad thing, can also be a challenge.

Scotland's social care sector has become reliant on a massive number of sponsorship workers (mostly from India or Africa). The issue is that these front line staff are often working for minimum wage, poor conditions and with zero hours contracts. Our sponsorship scheme is helping fill the gaps, but is it sustainable?

The question for me is a bit more nuanced than all immigration is good. What about quality of care, what about the impact of the sponsorship scheme on the communities where folk are coming from (often highly skilled people, with no past social care experience). Is this not just a case of a much wealthier nation exploiting their financial advantage to the detriment of developing communities?

I see immigration as keeping a ceiling on improvement in this sector (worth mentioning that c 80% of social care in Scotland is provided by the private sector).

I'm not arguing that every aspect of immigration is perfect but the good massively outweighs the bad. Immigrants are net contributers and have larger birth rates. We ate richer for them. I'd prefer this to come from free movement in the EU. We obviously gain from where other nations lose but although the way India and Nigerias population is going to explode, they can handle it. Those are the two nations that are bridging the gap in EU nationals the most. If we sign the trade deal with India there will be increased immigration with it. Hopefully we can encourage a good amount to Scotland

Businesses and governments need to be responsible with this money, they obviously aren't. It's the governments responsibility to make sure people are paid fair and resources are there for increased population, the also don't do this either