The numbers stack up and say exactly what I have said for years, one can have serious economic growth even with real population decline! We should slow our migration right down or stop it altogether, lest we wind up with some sort of polyglot country that is neither one culture nor another and just various ethnicities fighting each other for cultural dominance?

Even as we kill the economy!

Economic growth was never ever predicated on population growth but rather on demand. And demand is driven by growing the average mean income as clearly shown in numbers that don't lie!
Except for our ideologically driven politicians?

Demand is driven upward as energy prices and tax comes down. And as middlemen profit takers of all manner are driven out of the economy, be they fro the private sector or the public service provision model.

The latter easily bypassed with a direct funding model that circumvents or excludes them and their demands from any and all public service provision. And from the private sector with tax policy that punishes paper shuffling middlemen and or those lazy manufacturers who use them to run their sales delivery models.

And seen mostly as commisions for pushing products?

The Chinese model allows anyone to buy directly from the factory. And where this is the rule rather than the exception, literally halves the cost of living/doing business, while quite massively impacting positively on both demand and savings.

As well as allowing very healthy wages growth. Whereas overheated population growth (our current model) kills it and housing affordability.

Want a stronger more robust economy, minus unnecessary population growth?

Then attack and remove poverty in all its forms and guises along with the aforementioned recommendations and then just let it rip.

Given it will have no choice always providing we allow a free and fair market controlled by free, fair and fierce competition, which must, therefore, include the above and almost abandoned cooperative capitalism! Plus never ever embraced thirty-year self-terminating, government guaranteed infrastructure bonds! It's just too easy!
Alan B.

Footnote: Every western style economy rests on jus two support pillars, energy and capital!

Moreover, "we" control neither but have handed both, with "our" blessings to foreign-owned or controlled, price gouging, tax avoiding, profit repatriating entities? As "we" sell the country down the river and then try to stack it with folk from mostly entirely incompatible cultures?

Getting a stronger economy minus migration initiated growth, starts with the rollout of the cheapest possible energy.

And I've said enough on that on other threads to not have to repeat it here.

The other is capital and if we would reclaim our control of that and the purloined economic sovereignty that used to be ours!

We need a people's bank and or financed and facilitated, taxation advantaged, credit unions as the cooperative capitalist's model.

And given as such, far more control by the more internally active shareholding members! Who would surely be incensed by the current revelations emanating from the RC into the finance and insurance (ponsey schemes) sector! and able to actually do something about it!

Lastly, if we would have our future intake of migrants to settle in rural and regional Australia?

Then that ought to be a requirement of permanent residency or citizenship or both. And needs to be accompanied by a regional tax zoning plan that all but obliges our largest employers to migrate out of the capital cities and into the bush. Where the jobs go, migrants will follow!

Given they do that? Then all but force unheralded economic growth on the whole country via economic flow-on factors. Also need affordable energy and water security, plus rapid rail to assist/ensure just that!

Time for the politic-ing to end and affirmative action to begin! The only thing standing in the way are the usual suspects, powerful vest interest and Polly waffle pollies who will endlessly defer with yet another inquiry or feasibility study. We pay these folk to do stuff, not endlessly waffle, on how it might be done and by who!
Alan B.

If you remove Melbourne and Sydney from the discussion, Australia does not have population growth at all. It would also be interesting to calculate what the GDP might be if these two cities were left out of the equation. We might the get some better idea what is the situation for all the rest of the country, without the total figure being skewed by the two outliers.

David

Australia can handle a population growth but only it's a sensible population. To procreate with what is at hand at present gives us no chance.

Mysteriously missing in the article is reference to the latest version of coping with high population growth; forcing immigrants into the country for their first period of residency. Over forty percent is the goal.
A need (apparently), driven by the insatiable demand for cheap farm labour, and change influence by the National Party.

The policy has holes in its fence, big enough for a herd of elephants to walk through.
It's unworkable on too many fronts to go into here. But it's enough to demonstrate the lack of real interest in the subject among the rulers, who obviously don't give tinkers damn about negative outcomes of high immigration, and those under-resourced in dealing with housing pressure. A situation skewing the market artificially upwards, and abandoning this large group to deal with it.

If you live in the bush, or South Australia, looks like the problems are coming to a town near you. Such a lazy way to govern!

Specialists disclosed to Fact Check that whether Australia's flow growth rate proceeds will rely upon regular increment (births - passings) and net abroad relocation (landings less takeoffs).