IMMIGRATION

Schools could be pushed to breaking over the next decade by the need to provide almost a million more places for pupils, town hall chiefs have warned.

The continuing squeeze on places could lead to a "tipping point" where there is no money or space left to expand schools any further, according to the Local Government Association.

Official figures predict that there may be around 900,000 extra pupils in England's schools over the next decade.

The Association said its own analysis had concluded that it will cost £12 billion to create enough school places for all of these children.


from >>> Press Association - ‎13‎ ‎January‎ ‎2015 via that newsfeed....










Alarm at surprise fall in life expectancy amid fears that cuts and pressure on NHS may be to blame for earlier deaths


Health officials are investigating a “statistically significant, sustained” decline in life expectancy among elderly people in some parts of England, amid warnings that cuts to social care and pressures on the NHS may be contributing to earlier deaths.

Public Health England said it was scrutinising life expectancy trends following an alert from a council in the North-west of England warning it was “likely” that in many parts of the region “older people (over 85) are no longer living longer”.

An email from Blackburn with Darwen Council’s director of public health, Dominic Harrison, sent to regional colleagues and to Public Health England, said the council had seen a “sustained reduction” in life expectancy at 85 in its area. “Actual sustained cohort reductions in life expectancy such as this are now extremely unusual,” the email says.

Possible explanations for the decline include government cuts to councils’ social care budgets, a lack of capacity in the GP sector or pressure on hospitals, it adds.

The increasing strain on NHS resources

Official figures show that, in the UK, women’s life expectancy at 85 has fallen slightly in recent years – bucking the expected trends of ever-longer lifespans.

Among men, life expectancy at 85 has remained stable nationally, but the email, sent before Christmas and seen by the Health Service Journal, says that in Blackburn and Darwen there have been reductions for both men and women, as well as some signs of a reduction in life expectancy for men at 65.


Charlie Cooper


The Independent - ‎13‎ ‎January‎ ‎2015

via that newsfeed.....













Security services 'on high alert for beheading attack' in Britain in wake of Paris killings
Security services are reportedly on “high alert” for a beheading attack in Britain after online “chatter” by jihadists discussing plans to murder soldiers, police and intelligence operatives.

It is feared that extremists want to copy Isis’ killing of James Foley, David Haines, Alan Henning and other hostages last year by abducting a target and posting footage of their death on the internet, The Times reported.


Lizzie Dearden


The Independent - ‎13‎ ‎January‎ ‎2015

via that news feed......










Cancer treatments funding to end


The Government is to stop funding 25 cancer treatments as part of efforts to cut costs by £80 million.

NHS England has announced that the budget for the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF), launched by David Cameron in 2010, will rise to £340 million in April from £280 million.

But a review carried out by doctors, pharmacists and patients' representatives has concluded that 25 of the 84 treatments currently offered by the supplementary fund should be dropped.

The prices for others have been reduced after negotiations with pharmaceutical companies, and three new drugs will be available through the fund in future.

The changes are intended to prevent the cost of the fund - originally £200 million - soaring to an estimated £420 million next year.


Press Association - ‎13‎ ‎January‎ ‎2015...via that newsfeed.....




IMMIGRATION
IMMIGRATION
IMMIGRATION

Simple solution, we need immigration going forward as even at present we have skilled shortages and also because we are going to need to address the age balance being as by 2050, 25% of people are going to over 65. This will mean more carers, doctors, nurses etc to accommodate more people susceptible to illness and this is just one problem.


So the simple solution is to build more infrastructure

then again

we will certainly not afford it....

look at the cost of cancer drug issue....

we hows about closing all the provided "interpreters" and using the savings from that to help fund it, HMMM?

if you want to come here..either speak the language...first....or manage I.E provide your OWN interpreter...


as for school places...yer right lets get EVEN more immigrants with even MORE kids...lets turn the equation into a logarithmic curve....

if we followed YOUR logic...we will be concreted over in 20 years.....

We still need immigration the point you are missing, so yes it will cost, but the facts are this, EU immigration/migration has benefited the country to the tune of 20 billion, where as British people have cost the nation to the tune of 600 billion.


We need immigration, you cannot get around this fact, it is no good whinging about it but how to deal with the increase in population needed.
So you need to build more infrastructure

DARKNESS is scared of that monster under the bed called "immigration"...

JUST THINK  ~  in another couple of years darkness will have left school and will be able to vote !

AND maybe start paying taxes, as well..

Should your "location" read "backwards and beyond"?

Brasidas wrote:We still need immigration the point you are missing, so yes it will cost, but the facts are this, EU immigration/migration has benefited the country to the tune of 20 billion, where as British people have cost the nation to the tune of 600 billion.


We need immigration, you cannot get around this fact, it is no good whinging about it but how to deal with the increase in population needed.
So you need to build more infrastructure

you do quote twatish figures....I know that old chestnut....and the figures behind it....more lefty/ liberal propaganda....you cling to that like some people cling to the frankfurt school....which quite frankly whilst also BS is probably near the mark....

and ...as an aside ...how much of this island are you going to cover with concrete....

how soon before all "open space" is soley in the hands of rich private individuals because its a precious resource and in short supply....

nicko wrote:Should your "location"  read   "backwards and beyond"?

nope nicko...thats his "status"

darknessss wrote:

Brasidas wrote:We still need immigration the point you are missing, so yes it will cost, but the facts are this, EU immigration/migration has benefited the country to the tune of 20 billion, where as British people have cost the nation to the tune of 600 billion.


We need immigration, you cannot get around this fact, it is no good whinging about it but how to deal with the increase in population needed.
So you need to build more infrastructure

you do quote twatish figures....I know that old chestnut....and the figures behind it....more lefty/ liberal propaganda....you cling to that like some people cling to the frankfurt school....which quite frankly whilst also BS is probably near the mark....

Insults just show you have no answer and you cannot refute my points.

Let me know when you can

Brasidas wrote:

darknessss wrote:

you do quote twatish figures....I know that old chestnut....and the figures behind it....more lefty/ liberal propaganda....you cling to that like some people cling to the frankfurt school....which quite frankly whilst also BS is probably near the mark....

Insults just show you have no answer and you cannot refute my points.

Let me know when you can

you are clearly easily insulted.....

darknessss wrote:

Brasidas wrote:



Insults just show you have no answer and you cannot refute my points.

Let me know when you can

you are clearly easily insulted.....

Or just bored you keep coming up with excuses

Immigration is a human right. Anybody who tells a peaceful person they have no right to be in a certain sector, that's a tyrant. Nobody gets to choose where or under what circumstances they're born, after all. Claiming certain parts of the Earth for one group or another, to the exclusion of everyone else, flies in the face of the principles of liberty.

Then again, I'm used to it. In my world, Muslims are the people who fix my car at the best rate in the area, black people are the parents I bump into at high-school sporting events and Mexicans are people like my boss. Maybe when Europe manages to be a bit less backward and "old world," it will join modern humanity and become a bit more sophisticated.

you are in a lift, or in your case "elevator" maximum safe weight 10 persons. 10 persons are already in the lift "elevator" Two more persons want to get in the lift "elevator" Do you let them? If yes why if no why?

nicko wrote:you are in a lift, or in your case "elevator" maximum safe weight 10 persons. 10 persons are already in the lift "elevator"  Two more persons want to get in the lift "elevator"  Do you let them?  If yes why   if no why?

Build a better lift

but it is a false argument anyway, and there are over 50 nations that get to use it before the UK

While far arguments can be raised about open immigration if someone is a law abiding tax payer they should be welcomed, after all both our nations have plenty of bludgers that need to be covered

If you let both "law abiding and tax paying persons" into the lift you get a big crash that kills all of them, and that's no good to any one, is it?

nicko wrote:you are in a lift, or in your case "elevator" maximum safe weight 10 persons. 10 persons are already in the lift "elevator"  Two more persons want to get in the lift "elevator"  Do you let them?  If yes why   if no why?

No. Wait for the lift to come back.

darknessss wrote:then again

we will certainly not afford it....

look at the cost of cancer drug issue....

we hows about closing all the provided "interpreters" and using the savings from that to help fund it, HMMM?

if you want to come here..either speak the language...first....or manage I.E provide your OWN interpreter...


as for school places...yer right lets get EVEN more immigrants with even MORE kids...lets turn the equation into a logarithmic curve....

if we followed YOUR logic...we will be concreted over in 20 years.....

well its the pharmaceutical companies that decide how much to charge for cancer drugs......gotta keep those stockholders happy and paying over the odds returns......

nicko wrote:If you let both "law abiding and tax paying persons" into the lift   you get a big crash that kills all of them,  and that's no good to any one,  is it?

nah there is normally enough leeway to allow a couple extra

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_density

Anyway what with the talk of full lifts? if the UK is a lift with capacity of 10 and we take a nation like Bangladesh(12th highest population density) to be a full capacity (10 out of 10 people) the UK lift has 3 people in it.

See a Completely Rubbish Argument

Nice. List!

That's hilarious, the UK is 53rd in the world and listen to the whining. South Korea is almost double the population density, and they just be like

The lift was made by an American company, OTIS, that's why it's crap!

nicko wrote:you are in a lift, or in your case "elevator" maximum safe weight 10 persons. 10 persons are already in the lift "elevator"  Two more persons want to get in the lift "elevator"  Do you let them?  If yes why   if no why?

I would announce loudly whilst turning to face the rest in the lift, that I am taking the stairs to allow the others to use the life.
Which would no doubt embarress someone else if not more to do the same.
Shame can be a powerful tool to use to resolve a problem as you presented Nicko.

Thanks didge, I was waiting for an intelligent answer.

No worries Nicko.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Immigration is a human right. Anybody who tells a peaceful person they have no right to be in a certain sector, that's a tyrant. Nobody gets to choose where or under what circumstances they're born, after all. Claiming certain parts of the Earth for one group or another, to the exclusion of everyone else, flies in the face of the principles of liberty.

Then again, I'm used to it. In my world, Muslims are the people who fix my car at the best rate in the area, black people are the parents I bump into at high-school sporting events and Mexicans are people like my boss. Maybe when Europe manages to be a bit less backward and "old world," it will join modern humanity and become a bit more sophisticated.

Well, America has a great advantage over Europeans in that regard.  America is a land of immigrants, whereas Europeans feel they have a genetic bond with their country.  Still, Americans have issues with immigration.  But those issues are mostly political.  As I've been telling you guys over and over, the problem conservatism faces is votes...not money, not mainstream ideology, but votes.

Old, white, male America sees a huge population shift going on.  Hispanics are now reaching 20% of the whole nation.  That's not just Texas, where Hispanics amount to 37.6% of the total population, but it includes New Hampshire and Wisconsin and everywhere.  (Oh, it does the heart good to watch those old white geezers fret about seein' a black or Mexican sheriff...remember the Mel Brooks film Blazing Saddles?)  Knowing that Texas will soon go more liberal than Michigan or New York, is a dream come true.

@Ben: Take a look at a book by Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (Oxford University Press, 1964).  While Marx juxtaposes technology and the pastoral idea in America, his main thesis revolves around the continual claim of the conservative 'haves': I've got mine, you can't have yours.  It is interesting that even the conservative oil Mandarins in the Dallis/FW area oppose the oil shale exploration in their area: I've got mine, you can't have yours!

I mention this book because a lot of the sentiment found in it, we also see regarding immigration...after all, most Americans were once immigrants. While most of them could walk across the frontier in their day, they are now building 20'-foot high fences along the Arizona and New Mexico border: I've got mine, you can't have yours.

you still evade the question


how much of this small island DO you want concreted over...

darknessss wrote:you still evade the question


how much of this small island DO you want concreted over...

The urban landscape accounts for 10.6% of England, 1.9% of Scotland, 3.6% of Northern Ireland and 4.1% of Wales.

Put another way, that means almost 93% of the UK is not urban. But even that isn't the end of the story because urban is not the same as built on.

In urban England, for example, the researchers found that just over half the land (54%) in our towns and cities is greenspace - parks, allotments, sports pitches and so on.

Furthermore, domestic gardens account for another 18% of urban land use; rivers, canals, lakes and reservoirs an additional 6.6%.

Their conclusion?

In England, "78.6% of urban areas is designated as natural rather than built". Since urban only covers a tenth of the country, this means that the proportion of England's landscape which is built on is…


2.27%.

Yes. According to the most detailed analysis ever conducted, almost 98% of England is, in their word, natural.

Elsewhere in the UK, the figure rises to more than 99%. It is clear that only a small fraction of Britain has been concreted over


http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-18623096


Stacks of room for more

darknessss wrote:you still evade the question

how much of this small island DO you want concreted over...

Space and land use are separate problems, Vic.  The issue of equity is another matter.  You only make your argument by confusing the two.

The full elevator only matters if your rule is "first come, first serve."  Their are other relevant criteria that could be used: who has the most immediate need to get to their floor?  Or, we might stagger arrival times so that there is no bottleneck.  In a sense, this is Irn's response: wait for the next car.  The point is, equity (who gets on the elevator car) is different from space (the car is too small).  

After all, if their isn't enough space, consider deporting Englishmen.   That'll get 'em discussing the equity issue real fast.

what a load of "massaged figures"
lefty liberal lies and deciet

greedy gasping lefties who's ideal is total control

lets forget "gardens"
they are private and unobtainable and most unsuitable for even a good walk around
similarly lets forget !parks and "green space"
they are nothing but a mockety of "country side" manicured mowed and half the time unuseable for "feral youths."
and with strict and profit making or restrictive caveats as to the use thereof.
most urban lakes ponds and resevoirs are similarly "restricted"
of course I know what the answer to this next point will be from Bra....its utterly predictable

but here goes....

in the towns "green space you cannot allow your dog to run loose...most if not all parks have a "lead only "policy...

out here in the bit of green I live in ...I can run my dog loose in the fields (the land owners dont mind because being properly trained, my dog doesnt worry stock....rabbits maybe but not stock....)Moreover there are always "empty fields" too) and also of course a fair bit of "common" land and forestry comission land within easy reach...

and lets be honest ....the "urban environment" is not the nicest or healthiest either...

for all the legislation and effort major cities are still the pits....with nothing to offer.

Why is it when people are face with facts, not only do they stamp their feet, offer nothing of evidence to prove otherwise and just end up with a massive sign on their head saying:
Fail

Original Quill wrote:

darknessss wrote:you still evade the question

how much of this small island DO you want concreted over...

Space and land use are separate problems, Vic.  The issue of equity is another matter.  You only make your argument by confusing the two.

The full elevator only matters if your rule is" first come, first serve.  Their are other relevant criteria that could be used: who has the most immediate need to get to their floor?/i]  Or, we might stagger arrival times so that there is no bottleneck.  In a sense, this is Irn's response: wait for the next car.  The point is, equity (who gets on the elevator car) is different from space (the car is too small).  After all, if their isn't enough space, consider deporting Englishmen.  

yeah well we know the jealous town living lefty liberals idea of equality is everyone in the basement.....the lowest common denominator.... the policiy of the headlong rush to the bottom...

I suggest you take up your views with the following Victor:


Until recently, conflicting definitions have made the calculation tricky but fortunately, a huge piece of mapping work was completed last summer - the UK National Ecosystem Assessment (NEA).

Brasidas wrote:Why is it when people are face with facts, not only do they stamp their feet, offer nothing of evidence to prove otherwise and just end up with a massive sign on their head saying:
Fail

why is it when people have no answer they answer like this??

your "facts " are rubbish...


private gardens and town "green spaces" are NOT open countryside...

like holocaust and insult are not the same....

like so much of your argument ....meanless distortions of reality....

"convenient invention" that has NO basis in fact .............

Brasidas wrote:I suggest you take up your views with the following Victor:


Until recently, conflicting definitions have made the calculation tricky but fortunately, a huge piece of mapping work was completed last summer - the UK National Ecosystem Assessment (NEA).

before I waste my time are they anymore reliable than your usual sources.....like PETA

darknessss wrote:

Brasidas wrote:I suggest you take up your views with the following Victor:


Until recently, conflicting definitions have made the calculation tricky but fortunately, a huge piece of mapping work was completed last summer - the UK National Ecosystem Assessment (NEA).

before I waste my time are they anymore reliable than your usual sources.....like PETA

Is that your defense to the facts on only 2% of the Uk is urbanized?





I think this is very apt for you here Victor on this

darknessss wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Space and land use are separate problems, Vic.  The issue of equity is another matter.  You only make your argument by confusing the two.

The full elevator only matters if your rule is" first come, first serve.  Their are other relevant criteria that could be used: who has the most immediate need to get to their floor?/i]  Or, we might stagger arrival times so that there is no bottleneck.  In a sense, this is Irn's response: wait for the next car.  The point is, equity (who gets on the elevator car) is different from space (the car is too small).  After all, if their isn't enough space, consider deporting Englishmen.  

yeah well we know the jealous town living lefty liberals idea of equality is everyone in the basement.....the lowest common denominator.... the policiy of the headlong rush to the bottom...

That's one idea, if you like it. But **note** we've now got you talking about equity, and not just space. We have exposed what you want to keep tacit: that you want only a world full of old, white Englishmen.

funny that ...how the NEA's ideas are those of the URBAN dweller....

think on this....


not far from here is a "closed and sealed " landfill covering a LOT of acerage..it is grassed over and a few manky (non native ) shrubs growing on it ...is that "green space"...well according to out LA it is....but its useless....
the very ground stinks...

every road and railway line effectively puts out of use (as far as the public is concerned ) at least 50 meters either side....



be back later...tea' is served"

darknessss wrote:funny that ...how the NEA's ideas are those of the URBAN dweller....

think on this....


not far from here is a "closed and sealed " landfill covering a LOT of acerage..it is grassed over and a few manky (non native ) shrubs growing on it ...is that "green space"...well according to out LA it is....but its useless....
the very ground stinks...

every road and railway line effectively puts out of use (as far as the public is concerned ) at least 50 meters either side....



be back later...tea' is served"

Your pastoral musings are beautiful, Vic. But you are evading the question of who gets to lie in the big English garden?!

Original Quill wrote:

darknessss wrote:funny that ...how the NEA's ideas are those of the URBAN dweller....

think on this....


not far from here is a "closed and sealed " landfill covering a LOT of acerage..it is grassed over and a few manky (non native ) shrubs growing on it ...is that "green space"...well according to out LA it is....but its useless....
the very ground stinks...

every road and railway line effectively puts out of use (as far as the public is concerned ) at least 50 meters either side....



be back later...tea' is served"

Your pastoral musings are beautiful, Vic.  But you are evading the question of who gets to lie in the big English garden?!

anyone who can respect it....at least on the "open" spaces...

granted us "rual" dwellers possibly get to use a bit more of it, but thats because the farmers know us and trust us to respect it...
lets face it NO farmer is going to allow every tom dick and harry open accesss to his fields...and with good reason
townies cant even be trusted to close gates they have opened, nor to control their dogs...

a good example of the two facedness of the townie is the up and comming "situation" with london

London is always telling the rest of us, and especially the north how "great it is" how it is the powerhouse of the economy and especially how RICH it is

Now it appears that london is sinki9ng ...at the rate of 3cm per year
a consequence of which is that its ancient and rotting sewerage system is on the point of ceasing to function

guess what.....the greedy b'stards want the rest of us to pay for it...they want a levy on our water bills to buy them their new system...

I say its londons shit...let em either sort it or sink in it.....

Seriously Victor you are one person saying what should be right based on your own conjecture, even though all animals migrate without restriction other than that caused and created by humans.

Just because the world will need more infrastructure built, does not mean just because you do not like this, as there are 8 billion other people on this planet besides yourself to think about. You only have what you have now based on what others have created before you, which enabled you to do so.

The fact is humans need to learn the capacity to share of what they think wrongly is theirs by birth right, to place a view which seeks to deny others, not of anything viable but something born from only one thing. Selfishness.

If the path we are going to take is selfishness, then I suggest we start by teaching this immoral view from the start, why bother to teach moral and ethical views in the first place, if people are only going to later in life ignore what they have been taught and base their views off greed and selfishness.

There is nothing ethical about your views on this, it is based on your needs and not the needs of others.

Brasidas wrote:Seriously Victor you are one person saying what should be right based on your own conjecture, even though all animals migrate without restriction other than that caused and created by humans.

Just because the world will need more infrastructure built, does not mean just because you do not like this, as there are 8 billion other people on this planet besides yourself to think about. You only have what you have now based on what others have created before you, which enabled you to do so.

The fact is humans need to learn the capacity to share of what they think wrongly is theirs by birth right, to place a view which seeks to deny others, not of anything viable but something born from only one thing. Selfishness.

If the path we are going to take is selfishness, then I suggest we start by teaching this immoral view from the start, why bother to teach moral and ethical views in the first place, if people are only going to later in life ignore what they have been taught and base their views off greed and selfishness.

There is nothing ethical about your views on this, it is based on your needs and not the needs of others.

"Share" is one thing

"have destroyed beyond use" is another

do you REALLY think "town parks" are in anyway "natural"....

if so you dont understand "natural"

natural woodlsnds sting you with nettles and scratch you with brambles....

they also contain 10,000 times more "nature" than your town parks
and most if not all rarities...

for instance I have yet to hear of a town park containing orchids...our shoot land does, 2 or possibly 3 varieties
fortunately "the general public" cant get there......or i guarantee within days if not hours they would be gone.....

nicko wrote:The lift was made by an American company, OTIS, that's why it's crap!

that Got a real LOL from me

2% is urbanized and to then equate on nature being again you are the product of urbanization is this country is again selfish based off not arguing against what brought about your own situation into being.
The very fact it is farmers themselves who have changed the very landscape eludes you not as well as civilization. The fact is again you are arguing off a belief onto nature which was taken away hundreds of years ago, of which I advocate to keep in balance but also to keep in balance how we need to also look after humans.
Your needs are based off a fib really because it is more about in keeping with what you want and not nature. If it was nature you would advocate we leave the lands to nature itself, hence why your reasoning has no validity and you are using nature falsely to deny people living here. Your real reason is born from a belief you have on a clash of cultures, nationalism and who you define can be a part of that.

English and British are just concepts, nothing more, thy are not biological, but something a collective group of people have adopted to identify themselves with, where this culture is forever changing.


Night

darknessss wrote:

Brasidas wrote:Seriously Victor you are one person saying what should be right based on your own conjecture, even though all animals migrate without restriction other than that caused and created by humans.

Just because the world will need more infrastructure built, does not mean just because you do not like this, as there are 8 billion other people on this planet besides yourself to think about. You only have what you have now based on what others have created before you, which enabled you to do so.

The fact is humans need to learn the capacity to share of what they think wrongly is theirs by birth right, to place a view which seeks to deny others, not of anything viable but something born from only one thing. Selfishness.

If the path we are going to take is selfishness, then I suggest we start by teaching this immoral view from the start, why bother to teach moral and ethical views in the first place, if people are only going to later in life ignore what they have been taught and base their views off greed and selfishness.

There is nothing ethical about your views on this, it is based on your needs and not the needs of others.

"Share" is one thing

"have destroyed beyond use" is another

do you REALLY think "town parks" are in anyway "natural"....

if so you dont understand "natural"

natural woodlsnds sting you with nettles and scratch you with brambles....

they also contain 10,000 times more "nature" than your town parks
and most if not all rarities...

for instance I have yet to hear of a town park containing orchids...our shoot land does, 2 or possibly 3 varieties
fortunately "the general public" cant get there......or i guarantee within days if not hours they would be gone.....

I have a question for you Are the British as capable as the Japanese?

they have achieved a reasonable balance and already have a significantly higher population density, I would suggest rather than concreting the wild lands you just build up (literally) in existing cities.

Technology it allows us to build bigger better and more efficient.

veya_victaous wrote:

darknessss wrote:

"Share" is one thing

"have destroyed beyond use" is another

do you REALLY think "town parks" are in anyway "natural"....

if so you dont understand "natural"

natural woodlsnds sting you with nettles and scratch you with brambles....

they also contain 10,000 times more "nature" than your town parks
and most if not all rarities...

for instance I have yet to hear of a town park containing orchids...our shoot land does, 2 or possibly 3 varieties
fortunately "the general public" cant get there......or i guarantee within days if not hours they would be gone.....

I have a question for you  Are the British as capable as the Japanese?

they have achieved a reasonable balance and already have a significantly higher population density, I would suggest rather than concreting the wild lands you just build up (literally) in existing cities.

Technology  it allows us to build bigger better and more efficient.

Oh I wish they would veya.....

then we could seal the townies into their high rise hells and forget about em

If I could I would remove totally any say townies have in rural affairs....

it is just the sensible thing to do, Humans already cover too much land (particularly when you include farm land etc) so we should use our brains and work out how to make or living arrangements more efficient.

darknessss wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

darknessss wrote:

"Share" is one thing

"have destroyed beyond use" is another

do you REALLY think "town parks" are in anyway "natural"....

if so you dont understand "natural"

natural woodlsnds sting you with nettles and scratch you with brambles....

they also contain 10,000 times more "nature" than your town parks
and most if not all rarities...

for instance I have yet to hear of a town park containing orchids...our shoot land does, 2 or possibly 3 varieties
fortunately "the general public" cant get there......or i guarantee within days if not hours they would be gone.....

I have a question for you  Are the British as capable as the Japanese?

they have achieved a reasonable balance and already have a significantly higher population density, I would suggest rather than concreting the wild lands you just build up (literally) in existing cities.

Technology  it allows us to build bigger better and more efficient.

Oh I wish they would veya.....

then we could seal the townies into their high rise hells and forget about em

If I could I would remove totally any say townies have in rural affairs....

Oh yeah -- illegal for people to own thousands of country acres they don't actually live on ... of course, it'd be a two-way street and country people would have no say in city affairs -- that would fix U.S. politics in a hurry! And kick those landed capitalist pigs right in the teeth. Together onward, comrade!

veya_victaous wrote:it is just the sensible thing to do, Humans already cover too much land (particularly when you include farm land etc)  so we should use our brains and work out how to make or living arrangements more efficient.

In the seas.
Of course much in the future, but there is vast space there

Ben_Reilly wrote:

darknessss wrote:

Oh I wish they would veya.....

then we could seal the townies into their high rise hells and forget about em

If I could I would remove totally any say townies have in rural affairs....

Oh yeah -- illegal for people to own thousands of country acres they don't actually live on ... of course, it'd be a two-way street and country people would have no say in city affairs -- that would fix U.S. politics in a hurry! And kick those landed capitalist pigs right in the teeth. Together onward, comrade!

Correct, making an argument based around what is decided is their of which nature never did.
Like I said earlier making arguments off nature are moot unless you take the view to allow nature to be itself, you would cease to have any construction and go back like other animals to nomadic life.

Brasidas wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:it is just the sensible thing to do, Humans already cover too much land (particularly when you include farm land etc)  so we should use our brains and work out how to make or living arrangements more efficient.

In the seas.
Of course much in the future, but there is vast space there

now THAT IS a good idea

put all the townies in them....and give me a sub with torpedos