It's bizarre that something this far-fetched gets a run. In that sense, it's best to ignore it, and certainly not bother to waste time demolishing it.

The only possible curiosity might be to see if 'Cheryl' bobs up and comments on her own work.

Perhaps we could send this twit to keep the peace in Woodridge, between some of that thriving multicultural society there. He'd pretty soon become the news, & probably a statistic to boot.

Only someone with their eyes wired shut could have written this bit of pulp. I wonder if writing this rubbish is his small PR business product.

The numerically-challenged Malcolm claims the value of Australia's food production is about ten times our actual gross national income ($500,000 times 23 million people is some $11.5 trillion). Just the first of his ridiculous tirade of numerical nonsense.
ABS figures, which he likes to quote, clearly show Australia's population growth over the past year was 1.6% per annum, the fastest rate among developed countries by a considerable margin. At this rate, we'd exceed our drought-year food production within two decades. It doesn't matter what proportion of those were temporary or permanent or 457s or Kiwis, or born to Australians or born to immigrants. That's the net result, year on year. It doesn't matter much how many of them live in one house - a completely spurious discussion.
Apart from vilifying people with legitimate concern for our ecological sustainability, I'm not sure what Mr. King is for. His argument that population growth is not a problem is based on arguing that immigration numbers aren't that high. (He doesn't actually say what figures any 'anti-pop' has cited that are wrong.) If it wasn't a problem, it wouldn't matter how high they were.
Thank heaven that he is no longer a director at DEEWR Labour Market Strategy!

Jos is quite right. If continued, that 1.6% population growth will double our population every 43.3 years. The ABS only counts people for net overseas migration if they have arrived and stayed in Australia for the past 12 months. Tourists, business visitors, etc. who come in for a few weeks don't count.

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/3412.0Explanatory%20Notes12010-11?OpenDocument

From the point of view of popukation impact on our environment and society, it doesn't really matter if people stay permanently or if they go home after a few years and are replaced by even more temporary migrants. In any case, that figure of 18% for 457 visa holders converting to permanent residency isn't believable. This was a reply in Parliament to a question by Senator Ellison in 2008

"SUPPLEMENTARY BUDGET ESTIMATES HEARING: 21 OCTOBER 2008
IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP PORTFOLIO
(33) Output 1.1: Migration and Visa Policy
Senator Ellison (L&CA 72) asked:
What is the percentage of 457s who have converted to permanent residency?
Answer:
The total percentage of 457 visa holders who have converted to permanent residence is subject to change over time and is therefore difficult to accurately express as a percentage. Subclass 457 visa holders can become permanent residents at any time over the period of their visa, which can be up to four years. Some visa holders may also be granted further 457 visas and become permanent residents while on a subsequent visa. However, the percentage of Subclass 457 visa holders who have become permanent residents can be provided for a specific point in time. For example, of the 37,430 people who were granted Subclass 457 visas in the 2003-04 program year, 18,441 (49.3 percent) have been granted a permanent residence or provisional permanent visa (as at 19 October 2008)."

Note that the real figure is likely to be even higher, as explained.

If Malcolm King can call us racists, then we can ask if he is motivated by greed. What are his employment or business interests that could benefit from high population growth or high immigration?

The growth lobby's arguments are so weak that the ONLY weapon they can find against the obvious problems of overpopulation in Australia is to speciously accuse perfectly tolerant Australians of racism. The growth lobby honestly has no other argument. The fact that the author is in the employment agency field places him squarely among the few focused beneficiaries of population growth. At the moment Australia cannot even supply local business with natural gas, despite running roughshod over democratic rights in order to force new mines all over the place. See http://candobetter.net/node/3157 Population growth in Australia is nothing short of coercive in its consequence and socially engineered in its design.

FANASY ISLAND - scene 1

TATTOO:

Mr Bourke, Ms Kanck - help! We didn't know we were counting Australian and New Zealand people as migrants! You should have told us. We didn't know we export more than $30 billion a food per year. We didn't know about the intrastate movement of people to the cities. The sky is falling in!

VOICE OF MR ROARKE AS IF GOD-LIKE

That's alright Tattoo, next time we try and scare the Australian people and run an anti-migrant fear campaign, we'll do some research first. Now, get back on the bus, we're heading home to Byron Bay.

TATTOO

But Mr Roarke you said we was going to catch de plane.

Fade out to internecine squabbling.