Talk:Britain is full/Archive1

This is an archive page, last updated 14 October 2021. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:  , (new)(back)

Disagree

I certainly disagree with the 'Britain is full' cry, especially since I'm trying to get my partner's visa extended here. But is it so much to do with houses, or jobs? --Grey (talk) 20:46, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Racism and anti-immigration certainly increases/gets louder when unemployment rises, but yes, it's also about jobs. I guess housing is more my favourite bone than jobs. Please add to the article if you have any good ideas. Totnesmartin (talk) 21:01, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't the article address the question: "Full of what?"--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 21:36, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

It's not racist/bigoted/xenophobic/xxxxxist to point out that the UK's infrastructure (in certain places at least) will not cope well if the population keeps increasing. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 23:17, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

True, but that's an infrastructure problem. I'd agree that southeast England is full - constant traffic jams, pressure on water supply etc (there's that well-known fact that the average glass of London drinking water has been through seven other people before you). Of course, if all britain ended up like the southeast then Britain would be full. But that's some way off. The projected maximum of 70 million can be coped with IF we sort the infrastructure. And no, DeltaStar, you're not a racist for pointing that out. Totnesmartin (talk) 16:59, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

What is the theoretical maximum population which the UK could support and give an acceptable standard of living to? How would you even start on the calculation?--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 17:15, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

if you have a service-based industry, which we are slowly creep9ing towards, and base your manufacturing on imported raw materials (which we've been doing ever since the coalmines closed), then there's no theoretical limit. The main limit is one of personal predilection - how much countryside do we want to have, and how many immigrants (and what sort) do we want to have? Totnesmartin (talk) 17:24, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree. Consequently "Full" for a country can have no objective meaning.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 17:48, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Also if taken literally it causes a few problems. If a country (or, as Toast suggests, a planet) is "full" (presumably of people) - what should you do? Control the birth rate? Euthanasia? --Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 18:32, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

perhaps something drastic, like legalising contraception in countries with high birth rates. Totnesmartin (talk) 18:35, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. But my point was really trying to illustrate that in any literal sense it is absurd to call the country "full" as anybody suggesting euthanasia (for that reason) would simply be laughed at.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 18:49, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Rename

"X is full" is pretty much always a codeword for racism. It's applied in a lot more places than Britain. I'd suggest this article be moved to "X is full" - David Gerard (talk) 18:22, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Earth is full! 18:27, 25 April 2010 (UTC) ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)}

I tried X is full (X being various English-speaking countries) on a search engine starting with G. (the predictive text for "America is full "made me laugh, btw. Britain was the only one that came up with racist cites, news reports about the BNP, etc. Can you point me to "[country] is full" examples for countries that aren't shaped like a witch carrying a pig? Totnesmartin (talk) 18:28, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, I remember it being applied to Australia as an excuse for racism. (As a reason to limit refugees, rather than immigration by white people.) There also happen to be infrastructural problems with profligate Western lifestyles on a continent without enough fucking water, but most of those are a problem because the Australians already there keep breeding - David Gerard (talk) 18:39, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

BTW, first hit on "America is full" is a sponsored link to this, subcat "www.zazzle.com › ... › United States › Issues › Immigration Reform". Eighth is this. No others in top 20 - David Gerard (talk) 18:44, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Wasn't there a White Australia policy there for a long time? that'd be worth an article. With see also's... we need an immigration category too. Also, if we did rename this, what, specifically, should the new title be? Totnesmartin (talk) 20:17, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that "X is full" is meaningful.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 20:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Is it listed in the code word article yet? ^narchist 21:28, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

"Britain is full" is fine, since it's a slogan. We can always write about other similar xenophobic movements and maybe even end up with an infobox! ħuman 00:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)