The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Living off our capital > Comments

Living off our capital : Comments

By John Coulter, published 5/10/2010

The assumption that Australia can continue to grow its GDP and population is putting us on a collision course for collapse.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
People with your brand of politic should remember that Aussies of European decent will descend to the minority if your ideas prevail , perhaps you should examine the mothers dressed in their nondeplume fashions walking to their mosque trailed by up to ten kids.
Perhaps you should examine the wonderland they came from , known almost forever as the promised land , why would anyone escape from the promised land to breed like flies in Australia ? Anyone fancy being the minority in our own country governed by the Islamic majority whose respect for Democracy is userped by Muslem Fundementalist's and their failed philosophy from the Promised Land? Not for me Thanks I did my bit for our Country 5 beaut Kids .
Posted by Garum Masala, Tuesday, 5 October 2010 10:25:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Moving one from Garum Masala's outburst, Coulter makes a few useful points but fails to get the debate any further. Assuming that we can agree that we wish to curtail population growth, how are we going to go about it? Cutting back on immigration quotas would seem like a useful place to start, but despite decades of complaints about rising quotas and governments, and senates, of various political leanings they always seem to increase - never decrease.
As a former senator, all Coulter has to offer as an explanation is a half-baked conspiracy theory covering part of that time. I was under the impression that Howard blamed the Senate for not approving cuts in quotas put forward by his government, but no matter. As noted, the quotas always seem to increase.. so never mind yet another article on wny immigration is bad. "Please explain" Coulter.
Posted by Curmudgeon, Tuesday, 5 October 2010 1:00:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Garum Masala,

It makes more sense to cut mass migration, which is currently supplying about two thirds of our population growth, than to engage in a environmentally and socially destructive breeding competition with migrant groups. Our fertility rate is below replacement level and has been since 1976, so the population will ultimately stabilise without it. In the very long run, we might even need a modest level of net immigration or to encourage people to have a few more babies.

Curmudgeon,

It doesn't require a half-baked conspiracy theory to imagine that people will pursue their immediate economic interests, regardless of any damage they cause to others, or even to themselves in the longer term. Consider tobacco advertising, for example. The current population policy gives the business elite bigger markets, higher profits from real estate speculation and development, and a cheap, compliant work force, with an unlimited supply of skilled workers already fully trained at someone else's expense. The business corporations donate heavily to the major political parties. It is not that hard to connect the dots. John Coulter is not saying anything different from the Productivity Commission or another conspiracy nut (from your viewpoint), Ross Gittins, Economics Editor of the Sydney Morning Herald. See

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/stop-beating-about-the-bush-and-talk-about-big-australia-20100803-115bg.html

The solution for the rest of us is obviously to put growthist politicians last on the ballot paper, particularly if they have a realistic chance of winning. Kevin Rudd's embrace of "a big Australia" was a major factor in his loss of popularity. Once the politicians learn that fostering high population growth is electoral death, regardless of how many donations they get, they will stop doing it.
Posted by Divergence, Tuesday, 5 October 2010 2:38:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
John Coulter has at least been consistent - when he first raised the need to cut migration quotas he was in the senate but at that time the 'ethnic vote' seemed a tangible reality for both sides of politics and any cut in migration threatened that vote.
The notion of a coherent ethnic vote was then and is now illusory (I was working with migrant communities and the Ethnic Communities Council at the time and their political views reflected the Australian mainstream) nonetheless ethnic leaders did a good job in persuading politicians that they had a constituency that would do as they were directed.
Today the problem is that cuts in migration are easily seen as xenophobic and racist hence an ongoing reluctance to address the problem.
If one adds to that the fact that 'skilled' migration has been an effective tool in keeping downward pressure on wages you cannot help but feel that politicians fear that cutting migration quotas may impact adversely on them at the ballot box.
Ideally what is needed is for people from all sides of the political spectrum make the obvious point that we live in what is by and large a desert so we cannot keep on adding yet more people to the mix.
Posted by BAYGON, Tuesday, 5 October 2010 2:39:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You have not been looking at one of the points, " For example according to ABARE, Australia’s black coal reserves amount to 39 billion tonnes and our rate of increase in exploitation is 2.3 per cent per annum. At that rate the reserves will all be gone just after 2050 when, on current rates of population growth, our population will be of the order of 40 million.The implicit assumption that Australia can continue to grow both its GDP (based on mineral exploitation) and its population is putting us on a collision course for collapse." ...If we won't have any coal, we won't have a lot of electricity, we won't have any industries, so why worry about anything else, just make sure that our stupid mob of politicans both state and federal, don't get back into power, but remember, that both parties, Labor and Liberal/National or LNP, stay out of power. If this means creating a new party, and I think it does, let's get into it quick, but no lawyers, they seem to be the main problem.
Posted by merv09, Tuesday, 5 October 2010 3:01:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The author’s use of statistics is misleading.

First, it’s not clear why the recently released population data are relevant to his calculations, as the most recent GSP data are for the 2008-09 financial year, with 2009-10 data unlikely to be published until late November or early December. So either he’s picking his population data from a different time to his economic growth data, or he’s not using the latest ABS GSP estimates.

Second, the relationship between population growth and GSP growth, if any, is hardly instantaneous. So comparative analysis of population and output growth rates such as this is conventionally presented as showing growth rates over a number of years, not in a single year.

This is especially so when that single year selected happens to be the one in which the world suffered its worst global recession since the second world war – hardly a representative year, but perfectly picked if you want to spin your story in the most negative possible light.

If we take growth rates in population GSP and per capita GSP over a longer and more representative timeframe, we get a very strong positive correlation between population growth and per capita GSP/GDP growth. States and territories with above-average population growth enjoyed above-average per capita GSP growth (Qld, WA, NT) and those with below-average population growth recorded below-average GSP growth (NSW, Tas, SA).

1998-99 – 2008-09:

Population growth:
NSW - 10.5%
Vic - 15.1%
Qld - 25.2%
SA - 7.9%
WA - 20.0%
Tas - 6.0%
NT - 15.9%
ACT - 12.0%
Aus - 15.0%

Real GSP/GDP growth:
NSW - 22.6%
Vic - 37.5%
Qld - 57.6%
SA - 30.5%
WA - 50.0%
Tas - 28.6%
NT - 52.1%
ACT - 39.6%
Aus - 36.4%

Per Capita GDP/GDP growth:
NSW - 11.0%
Vic - 19.5%
Qld - 25.8%
SA - 20.9%
WA - 25.0%
Tas - 21.3%
NT - 31.2%
ACT - 24.6%
Aus - 18.5%

Source: ABS Cat. 5220.0 - Australian National Accounts: State Accounts, 2008-09
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/ABS@Archive.nsf/log?openagent&5220001_annual_gross_state_product_all_states.xls&5220.0&Time Series Spreadsheet&D98A7832C01FA586CA2576930014081D&0&2008-09 (Reissue)&22.12.2009&Latest
Posted by Rhian, Tuesday, 5 October 2010 3:32:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy