Food Prices Increasing

Pippa · Post by **Pippa** » 24 Aug 2006, 15:12

Don't worry, we've got elasticated trousers; they're called Wales and Scotland..............
We'll just have to send a few of "ours" over there to live with a few of "them" and if they don't like it we'll fight them for it and create a new union which we will call..........(trumpet fanfare) The United Kingdom of Embraced Multiculturalism which we will then shorten, to be known as Ukem henceforth and for ever more, amen.

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 24 Aug 2006, 15:25

Annualised population increase of 0.6%!!

At this rate of increase , the UK's population would be 78 million in 2050.

Maybe we are fecked !

skeptik · Post by **skeptik** » 24 Aug 2006, 17:23

Totally_Baffled wrote:Annualised population increase of 0.6%!!

At this rate of increase , the UK's population would be 78 million in 2050.

Maybe we are fecked !

Not neccessarily. The UK fertility rate is 1.66 children born/woman (2006 est.)
source: CIA factbook https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/fa ... os/uk.html
- which is low and in the absence of any other factors would lead to a falling population.

With zero net immigration the normal fertillity figure quoted for a population which will eventually stabilise is 2.1 children per women. (has to be slightly more than 2 children per woman to allow forfactors which prevent reproduction, such as the obvious one - death before reproductive age)

The 0.6% increase must therefore be as a result of a net population gain on the immigration / emmigration balance.

Stop immigration, and the UK population will morph into a slowly dwindling band of oldies.... Or maybe the the White Anglo component will gradually dissapear to be replaced by the more vigorously reproductive ethnic minorities.

Post by **mikepepler** » 24 Aug 2006, 17:24

It is a concern, especially with the level of immigration. I dread to think what the BNP will be able to do with these issues when Peak Oil causes economic problems - it will be very easy for people to blame it all on immigrants rather than see the underlying problem.

Post by **clv101** » 25 Aug 2006, 07:05

Comments from another forum:

Daily Mail 24 August ran a story on page 2 about how the prices of many foods and essentials in supermarkets was increasing by up to 10%. Included Orange juice (recently substituted in CPI by champagne - what a crock!), coffee and lettuce.

This is what the FT had to say.

"Analysts say the shift may be the start of a sustained increase after years of easing food prices. "It's not a temporary phenomenon," said Richard Ratner, analyst at Seymour Pierce. "I think the supermarkets will make these price increases stick."

Source - http://www.ft.com/cms/s/d00a9c36-3243-11db...000779e2340.htm

Another rate hike before the end of the year?

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 25 Aug 2006, 09:20

Another rate hike before the end of the year?

Some analysts are predicting two rises !

Anyway regarding dodgy inflation figures, its probably just as well they fudge them.

If inflation was declared at 10% - interest rates would shoot up to smiliar levels with it, the economy would then tank within months

The 0.6% increase must therefore be as a result of a net population gain on the immigration / emmigration balance.

You are right it is , and yes you are correct , if it wasnt for immgration the population would fall. I was just being alarmist.

Once the jobs are not there - I expect the flow of people will go into reverse.

ianryder · Post by **ianryder** » 25 Aug 2006, 09:30

Totally_Baffled wrote:Once the jobs are not there - I expect the flow of people will go into reverse.

Not totally convinced about that...think if the economy plunges here it's probably plunged everywhere else. As we're falling from a higher point than most of Eastern Europe it might well still be a better place to be. If all the EU money suddenly stopped flowing their way it would probably be very bad.

Lets face it...there might well be 70 million of us in 50 years, even if it's the last 70 million left! Unless the Gulf Stream has stopped of course, in which case there might be 3 of us...and some snowmen

Post by **clv101** » 25 Aug 2006, 09:34

Totally_Baffled wrote:You are right it is , and yes you are correct , if it wasnt for immgration the population would fall. I was just being alarmist.

The CIA World Fact Book says about the UK:

Birth rate: 10.71 births/1,000 population (2006 est.)
Death rate: 10.13 deaths/1,000 population (2006 est.)
Net migration rate: 2.18 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2006 est.)
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/fa ... os/uk.html

The ignoring migration then the population would be growing at 0.58 people per 1,000 per year. Or some 0.058%pa.

MacG · Post by **MacG** » 25 Aug 2006, 09:45

ianryder wrote: As we're falling from a higher point than most of Eastern Europe it might well still be a better place to be.

*Ahem*

Since when did it become an advantage to fall from a high place compared to a not so high place?

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 25 Aug 2006, 09:52

clv101 wrote:
Totally_Baffled wrote:You are right it is , and yes you are correct , if it wasnt for immgration the population would fall. I was just being alarmist.
The CIA World Fact Book says about the UK:
Birth rate: 10.71 births/1,000 population (2006 est.)
Death rate: 10.13 deaths/1,000 population (2006 est.)
Net migration rate: 2.18 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2006 est.)
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/fa ... os/uk.html
The ignoring migration then the population would be growing at 0.58 people per 1,000 per year. Or some 0.058%pa.

Ah yes - the BBC article backs this up also - so actually the net natural increase (without immigration) is positive 127,000 per year.

The death rate is falling , so despite a low birth rate the population keeps increasing. Damn.

ianryder · Post by **ianryder** » 25 Aug 2006, 09:54

MacG wrote:*Ahem*

Since when did it become an advantage to fall from a high place compared to a not so high place?

When you have a parachute? 1000 foot would be better than 50 foot

I'd rather be here than Sub-Sarahan Africa or Eastern Europe. Better infrastructure by miles. And we'll still be richer for a lot longer. Unless everyone comes here.[/quote]

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 25 Aug 2006, 09:57

ianryder wrote:
Totally_Baffled wrote:Once the jobs are not there - I expect the flow of people will go into reverse.
Not totally convinced about that...think if the economy plunges here it's probably plunged everywhere else. As we're falling from a higher point than most of Eastern Europe it might well still be a better place to be. If all the EU money suddenly stopped flowing their way it would probably be very bad.

Lets face it...there might well be 70 million of us in 50 years, even if it's the last 70 million left! Unless the Gulf Stream has stopped of course, in which case there might be 3 of us...and some snowmen

Where I was coming from was , that if you take the people from the EU accession countries m they're here to work and send money home.

At the moment - there is loads of work available, the labour laws are lax and allow it to happen.

This could all change quite rapidly. If the construction industry grinds to a halt (when the housing bubble bursts), then as a economic migrant you could find yourself unemployed with no access to benefits.

You could also find a resugance in people employing "there own" , bit like France - hence all the rioting they had.

In this position , many may return home.

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 25 Aug 2006, 10:01

Lets face it...there might well be 70 million of us in 50 years, even if it's the last 70 million left! Unless the Gulf Stream has stopped of course, in which case there might be 3 of us...and some snowmen

LOL , just read this --- very funny!

ianryder · Post by **ianryder** » 25 Aug 2006, 10:16

Totally_Baffled wrote: Where I was coming from was , that if you take the people from the EU accession countries m they're here to work and send money home.

At the moment - there is loads of work available, the labour laws are lax and allow it to happen.

This could all change quite rapidly. If the construction industry grinds to a halt (when the housing bubble bursts), then as a economic migrant you could find yourself unemployed with no access to benefits.

You could also find a resugance in people employing "there own" , bit like France - hence all the rioting they had.

In this position , many may return home.

True, I suppose some will go and some will stay - might depend on what they're going back to. I would think a lot will hang around here and hope things pick up, especially if they know there are no jobs back home either.

Totally_Baffled wrote:LOL , just read this --- very funny!

Thanks, lets hope it doesn't happen

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 25 Aug 2006, 10:34

True, I suppose some will go and some will stay - might depend on what they're going back to. I would think a lot will hang around here and hope things pick up, especially if they know there are no jobs back home either.

YOu could be right.

However - I think we are going to be entering a phase of families having to "pool" resources to get by.

Therefore , many may go home.

Also - if you take the Eastern Europeans , many of these countries still have a lot more land per head of population - they may go back to the farm rather than wait in line at a UK soup kitchen!