[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
random

Return ] Entire Thread ] Last 50 posts ]

Posting mode: Reply [Last 50 posts]
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 408833)
Message
File  []
close
gchq-the-only-government-department-that-actually-.jpg
408833408833408833
>> No. 408833 Anonymous
3rd March 2017
Friday 7:10 pm
408833 spacer
I've been wondering about the age demographics on .gs as we seem to be older and more cantankerous fellows than the average imageboard circle.

I can't remember if there has been a poll done before but I'm sure we have all aged since any previous one. Would you mind answering this so we can all learn something?
http://www.strawpoll.me/12455677
27 posts omitted. Last 50 posts shown. Expand all images.
>> No. 408923 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 3:38 pm
408923 spacer
>>408918

I like the way this post has no relevance to anything could be copy pasted into any thread and people feel the need to respond. Quality trolling material.
>> No. 408924 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 4:24 pm
408924 spacer
>>408913
>but it still seems the rule that if you want care into old age there needs to be someone to provide it.
If we weren't such massive racists we could just take advantage of the surplus population elsewhere in the world that isn't needed as badly as it used to be. We'd solve our demographic problem and their overpopulation problem. But apparently our country is full or something.
>> No. 408925 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 5:51 pm
408925 spacer
>>408924
I posted awhile back that the mass immigration solution was found to be impractical by the United Nations on the kinds of numbers we need. Must I post it again or will you just cry wacist like you (possibly) did the last time?
>> No. 408926 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 6:44 pm
408926 spacer
>>408924
>impractical

Because a population dominated by elderly cunts is far more practical? (What does "practical" even mean here anyway? Tolerable?)

This blighted isle is heading full speed toward banana republicdom regardless of these quibbles or is that banana monarchydom?. The question you should be asking is: who would I rather fight to the death for a can of baked beans - old fucks or starving Somalians?
>> No. 408927 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 6:47 pm
408927 spacer
>>408925
>found to be impractical by the United Nations
"The United Nations" isn't in the business of "finding" things.
>> No. 408928 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 7:33 pm
408928 spacer
>>408926
In this country the starving Somalis don't have guns, but the pensioners fought off the might of the Nazis, so I'll take the weak malnourished African please.
>> No. 408929 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 7:40 pm
408929 spacer
>>408926

I've got the solution, but nobody wants to hear it.

Make booze and fags free on the NHS. Arrest anyone who drives while under the drink drive limit. Abolish the free television license for pensioners and replace it with free bungee jumping. Make handguns mandatory. Release Charles Bronson and appoint him as Home Secretary.

We'll solve the pensions crisis and have an absolute hoot in the process.
>> No. 408930 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 8:11 pm
408930 spacer
Has anyone ever done a study into how many people our island could actually handle before it really is, in definite terms, "full"?

Like, what's the actual limit on things like space for houses, how many reasonably sized houses can we fit on the 315,159 km² of British Isles? How many humans would they inhabit and what's the amount of agricultural space we'd need to sustain them? Obviously if we cover the entire island with houses we'd have no room to farm and have to import 100%, so what's the balancing point of maximum humans without having to rely on the rest of the world?

What I'm saying is that there has to theoretically hard limit in how many people our country can support and I find it weird that we have so many arguments these days that revolve around this very issue and nobody seems interested in the practical truth. It's almost as if people are interested more in pushing their particular agenda than solving any real or perceived problems.
>> No. 408931 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 8:33 pm
408931 spacer
>>408930
There's a reason it's a theoretical limit. It's likely to be far above any population level we're realistically going to reach even in our great-grandchildren's lifetimes. Global population growth is slowing. Projections have us stabilising around the 11 billion mark. Assuming proportions remain the same, we're unlikely to hit nine digits, and if we do we're not going far over. Saying our public services are struggling therefore we should curb immigration is like saying the gutter and downpipe are struggling therefore it should rain less. Public services are struggling because the generation running the country are a bunch of ladder-pulling cunts who won't let necessary changes happen because it'll interfere with their four holidays a year or threaten the value of the house they bought on the cheap.
>> No. 408932 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 8:34 pm
408932 spacer
>>408930
W-what? You're questioning common sense with some uppity fucking scientific enquiry or some shit?

Ooooh, I can't wait until Article 50 goes through and we can cleanse this land of smart arses like you.
>> No. 408933 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 8:51 pm
408933 spacer
>>408931
How many of these 11 billion are going to be ugga bugga spear chuckers living in some godforsaken famine-ridden wasteland?
>> No. 408934 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 9:14 pm
408934 spacer
>>408933
There'll be around four billion in Africa, if that's what you mean. Exclude Russia (practicalities of dividing the population there and all), and Europe is unlikely to break a billion.
>> No. 408935 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 9:19 pm
408935 spacer

planet-observer_POPBRI.jpg
408935408935408935
>>408930

The population density of the UK is 268 per square km². In South Korea it's 507, in Jersey it's 844, in Singapore it's 7,797, in Macao it's 21,238.

We're not currently self-sufficient for food, but we could just about manage it with the imposition of rationing. Meat is immensely land-intensive and we eat an awful lot of it. To maintain our current diet and be self-sufficient, we'd need to reduce the population by tens of millions. Realistically, it makes more sense to import food from vast and mostly empty landmasses like Australasia and The Americas.

The UK is moderately densely populated by global standards (51st of 246), but it's still remarkably empty outside of the major urban centres. With intelligent urban planning, we could easily fit in dozens of Manchester-sized cities without significantly affecting the quality of life in existing settlements.

We have experienced major internal migration over the last few decades, with a huge shift from north to south; many former industrial communities in Scotland, Wales and Northern England have a glut of housing due to depopulation. A long list of political and social problems could be solved at a stroke if we figured out how to create good jobs in places like Bolton and Grimsby.
>> No. 408936 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 9:51 pm
408936 spacer
>>408935
If you were to take the entire population of the world (7.5 billion) and spread them evenly across the UK (243610 sq km), the people who used to live in Manila would be thankful for the space.
>> No. 408937 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 10:11 pm
408937 spacer
>>408936

We need a new global catastrophe. Like the Black Death in mediaeval times. Or the 30 Years War, which decimated the population of central Europe by as many as 40 percent.

Realistically, that is the only way that humans will have a future. Our natural resources are being overexploited, markets around the world are oversaturated, economic growth no longer provides prosperity for the majority of people. Say, about a third to half of the global population gets wiped out by a war, a global pandemic or a natural disaster. That would leave the survivors with a fresh start.

The way things are now, the human race is headed for squalor either way. Even if we could freeze global population numbers at the current level, seven and a half billion people are still not a long-term sustainable global population.
>> No. 408939 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 10:40 pm
408939 spacer
>>408927
http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/migration/migration.htm

>In contrast to the migration streams needed to offset total or working-age population decline, the levels of migration that would be needed to prevent the countries from ageing are of substantially larger magnitudes. By 2050, these larger migration flows would result in populations where the proportion of post-1995 migrants and their descendants would range between 59 per cent and 99 per cent.* Such high levels of migration have not been observed in the past for any of these countries or regions. Moreover, it seems extremely unlikely that such flows could happen in these countries in the foreseeable future. Therefore, it appears inevitable that the populations of the low-fertility countries will age rapidly in the twenty-first century.
http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/ReplMigED/chap5-Concl.pdf

>>408926
Neither is ideal but the idea of large migrant inflows to the level we need isn't going to happen and it is a pretty questionable solution anyway. The report above provides a likely result that the retirement age will be raised to 75 which doesn't sound very fun.

>>408930
The lack of any hard numbers is down to variables especially in the environmental questions. Are we just going to stuff the British isles with people and to hell with the newts? How many people can our supplies of water support and how will climate change pressure this? Is it humane to make people live in a Milton Keynes clone like >>408935 suggests?
>> No. 408941 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 11:07 pm
408941 spacer
>>408939
[not in citation given]
>> No. 408942 Anonymous
6th March 2017
Monday 11:15 pm
408942 spacer

serveimage.jpg
408942408942408942
>>408937
>> No. 408943 Anonymous
7th March 2017
Tuesday 12:09 am
408943 spacer

Untitled.png
408943408943408943
>>408941
?
>> No. 408944 Anonymous
7th March 2017
Tuesday 12:18 am
408944 spacer
>>408943
Yes, lad, we can read.
>> No. 408946 Anonymous
7th March 2017
Tuesday 12:28 am
408946 spacer
>>408944
How about you ask for sections and maybe I could have a look tomorrow instead of repeating an XKCD joke like a complete twat?
>> No. 408947 Anonymous
7th March 2017
Tuesday 12:31 am
408947 spacer
>>408946
I'm curious what reality you inhabit where pointing out that the source you've provided doesn't support the claim you've made is somehow "an XKCD joke".
>> No. 408949 Anonymous
7th March 2017
Tuesday 11:43 am
408949 spacer
>>408942

Is that Samuel L. Jackson? Or Lawrence Fishburne?
>> No. 408950 Anonymous
7th March 2017
Tuesday 12:07 pm
408950 spacer
>>408949
Denzel Washington?
>> No. 408954 Anonymous
7th March 2017
Tuesday 2:52 pm
408954 spacer
>>408950
Abraham Lincoln.
>> No. 408955 Anonymous
7th March 2017
Tuesday 3:20 pm
408955 spacer
>>408954
Change at Leslie Grantham.
>> No. 408956 Anonymous
7th March 2017
Tuesday 4:00 pm
408956 spacer

takingthepiss.png
408956408956408956
>>408954
>>408955
>> No. 408957 Anonymous
7th March 2017
Tuesday 4:49 pm
408957 spacer
>>408956
You want us to take a piss? Donald?
>> No. 408958 Anonymous
8th March 2017
Wednesday 11:11 am
408958 spacer
>>408921

Thankfully I lucked out on this one.
>> No. 408959 Anonymous
8th March 2017
Wednesday 12:08 pm
408959 spacer
>>408918

You probably don't get paid the most here. We have citylads and ex citylads and business owners and that one bloke who did all them patios.
>> No. 408961 Anonymous
8th March 2017
Wednesday 2:47 pm
408961 spacer
>>408959

Patiolad is probably pocketing more than any of us. You can't beat a bit of cash in hand.
>> No. 408962 Anonymous
8th March 2017
Wednesday 2:49 pm
408962 spacer
>>408956
Are all of those piss or is it more of a lucky-dip type situation?
>> No. 408982 Anonymous
9th March 2017
Thursday 9:50 am
408982 spacer
>>408959

Indeed. And I stand by my statement.

Sage checked for nothing to add, and agreeing not to comment further on this subject.
>> No. 408986 Anonymous
9th March 2017
Thursday 12:28 pm
408986 spacer
>>408982

Give me some money/a job please, sir.
>> No. 408988 Anonymous
9th March 2017
Thursday 4:37 pm
408988 spacer
>>408982

Give a rough figure per year lad, don't hide behind vagueness. Otherwise this post is less than nothing. You might as well be saying "un-huh" like a small child caught out on their bullshit claim that they live in a theme park.
>> No. 408991 Anonymous
9th March 2017
Thursday 6:29 pm
408991 spacer
>>408988

He has a job. Unless he runs a hedge fund or plays midfield for Man City, he is a long way from the wealthiest person on .gs.
>> No. 408992 Anonymous
9th March 2017
Thursday 7:07 pm
408992 spacer
>>408991

Y'know, I think Yaya Toure would quite like it here.
>> No. 408999 Anonymous
9th March 2017
Thursday 10:44 pm
408999 spacer
>>408991


>Unless he runs a hedge fund

You think we have such depraved human beings among us? Somebody who is devoid enough of any moral compass?

That said, I used to work for a business consultant firm. We got paid, and handsomely, for telling our clients who of their employees was redundant. What moral right did we have to say that a person was useless, who wanted only to work to earn their living, just like all of us.

So I quit, and now I spend much of my time tending to my high horse.
>> No. 409000 Anonymous
10th March 2017
Friday 4:11 am
409000 spacer
>>408999
You are too stupid to be paid much money.
>> No. 409001 Anonymous
10th March 2017
Friday 10:31 am
409001 spacer
>>408999
Dear God you're a moron.
>> No. 409002 Anonymous
10th March 2017
Friday 10:59 am
409002 spacer
>>409000
>>409001

These pricks are resentful that they've never been handed the opportunity to be as evil as you used to be.
>> No. 409003 Anonymous
10th March 2017
Friday 12:54 pm
409003 spacer
>>409002

Yeah, and I think the irony of the high horse bit was lost on them.
>> No. 409070 Anonymous
18th March 2017
Saturday 6:23 pm
409070 spacer
I was a regular here back when I was at uni as a 'mature' student, i still check in every now and then. Even used to go on the IRC sometimes. Now 31 and too busy trying to make enough money to not die to spend hours in imageboards. This makes be sad. [[x]Whinge] for moaning about not being as young as i was...
>> No. 409072 Anonymous
18th March 2017
Saturday 11:56 pm
409072 spacer
>>409070
What used to go on in the IRC? I vaguely remember something from 2010 that was quite interesting.
>> No. 409077 Anonymous
19th March 2017
Sunday 2:34 am
409077 spacer

aaaaa.jpg
409077409077409077
>>409070

You've got a lot to say m1

Why not sit down, have a cup of tea...........
>> No. 409078 Anonymous
19th March 2017
Sunday 3:08 am
409078 Ya mams fanny smells of cod
>>409072


.before .gs became a student Guardian bellend echo chamber

I was pissing arse in Tesco checkout girl, avoiding a poz loading and doing squats for a mental nignog from Liverpool.

Otherpurpz has killed .gs, nobody comes here anymore.
>> No. 409080 Anonymous
19th March 2017
Sunday 12:01 pm
409080 spacer
>>409078

Here's a list of other imageboards from 2012
http://pastebin.com/FpMrxREp
You want to go and see how active they are relative to this one?
>> No. 409092 Anonymous
20th March 2017
Monday 7:41 pm
409092 spacer

C6fg5D4WgAEZm1R.jpg
409092409092409092
>>409078

Move on, nothing to see here.
>> No. 409095 Anonymous
20th March 2017
Monday 10:51 pm
409095 spacer
I came here before Britchan died. I dread to think quite how long it has been.
>> No. 409096 Anonymous
21st March 2017
Tuesday 12:50 am
409096 spacer
>>409095
Do you remember when purple shared the link on britchan and it was ignored by everyone? It only had like 9 boards and was completely dead. Then yubyub fucked the server and we all went to krautchan but then there was another exodus as soon as britfa.gs became the board to be. Do you remember how everyone bitched about the name being difficult to type and how it'd be useful to sort out the chaff from the wheat?

Return ] Entire Thread ] Last 50 posts ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password