I thought I'd flag up something of interest. Lend your thoughts, should you have any view on this.
Here are the official population trends from the 1920s till today (male and female recorded separately) according to 'Statistics dot gov dot uk'.
If you use your mouse to trace over the interactive graph, you might notice that births rocket during Tory administrations (with the exception of the austerity 1950s) and birth rates contract under Labour and left wing (Heath) administrations.
The relative increases in recent years may well have more to do with higher birth rates amongst the large immigrant communities, than any other factor.
What I deduce from this, is that couples feel more secure and happy with starting families and having more kids under relatively more sensible and fiscally prudent Tory governments. Administrations that tend to favour lower taxes, and therefore ensure relatively more freedom and money for people to make choices.
It is very likely that under useless, dangerous and destructive Labour administrations, people feel less up for having kids. Probably because they are broke and struggling.
The year I was born in, for example, is nestled amidst several years where there was a massive dip in birth rates. This was during the awful Callaghan government. This goes against what really ought to have happened - a higher birth rate. Because my parents were of the baby boomer generation of the post war years.
I think this worthy of comment. I also think the lack of wider comment on this comment is worthy of comment.
As ever, Boaty & D talk about the real issues, where others are boring sheep and people who like to fart in the wind. If you disagree, that's all good. You go back to reading about boring non-plots in a dying government on Guido. I'm sure that'll warm your exciting little cockles.
Bye, now.
Thursday, 7 January 2010
A comment on birth rate booms and dips
Posted by John Demetriou at 21:10
Labels: birth rates, labour is bad for the country, population trends, population trends under labour and conservative governments, useless labour
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
"As ever, Boaty & D talk about the real issues, where others are boring sheep and people who like to fart in the wind. If you disagree, that's all good. You go back to reading about boring non-plots in a dying government on Guido. I'm sure that'll warm your exciting little cockles."
But you're both talking about the same thing, just from different angles. :o)
I was thinking recently, Obo...on private property and the fundamental tenets of libertarianism, you and us aren't actually that far apart. We agree more than we disagree.
So why have you been getting such a fucking cob-on lately?
You need to chill out and read what we say properly, we don't actually diverge that badly on matters. You have a habit of hyping up the areas of disagreement, I feel.
Time for some maturity I think.
Money in pocket, that's what people want andd that is what makes them secure.
First thing that comes into your head when the word 'family' is mentioned is the word 'money'. Could we afford it? Could we cope?
Well, except in cuntland where they simply sign on a bit more.
Lower taxes and increased savings, more affordability and more choice, i.e. disposable income, mean that people answer yes to those questions.
I would say the recent boom has also been because of credit. People are deluded into a sense that they can in fact afford it, despite high taxes (mainly stealth), so they pump 'em out.
There was also the increased welfare system and historically low unemployment giving a sense of security.
Actually, I think you guys bring out the best in Obo...
Post a Comment