sadly, I agree Hazza.
Needless to say, I'm disappointed Paterson has made no attempt to address my point about pensioners as a percentage of population.
Do you accept that at some point we must face population stability, Paterson; or do you believe we can -and should- continue to increase our population forever?
If we do have to face population stability, when is the best time to address the problem of a large percentage of pensioners; when the number is small, or when the number is big?
How do you justify merely putting a problem off, for your children or grandchildren to address, apart from simple self interest?
While I agree Australia is a large country with plenty of room for more people, our resources are still finite (and as current events testify, the bulk of us don't get a fair return on those resources now).
Your figures have failed to show any advantage to a larger population.
So long as natural resources are finite, more people means less 'pie' for each of us.

I'm not arguing that we are running out of space, water, oxygen or anything else.

I simply state that it is absurd to point out that a politician could (or should) ignore what 80% of the population WANT.

To the extent that they do do so, that is PRECISELY what is wrong with our current political system, the electorate does not exist to provide numbers for the elected and non-elected officials to crunch and play with. The electorate is the employer of the officials, both elected and unelected, the sooner we get back to that point the better.

James -

As Chris Rock says "You could probably drive your car with your feet if you really wanted to, but that doesn't make it a good idea."

High population growth makes every problem harder to solve except the rich getting richer.

James I imagine you would manage okay with 20 people living in your house. That doesn't mean it's the way you want to live. A billion people on our planet don't have running water or a place to go to the toilet. They are alive, but that doesn't mean they think they have a wonderful lifestyle. Maybe we should apply some of our entrepreneurship, ingenuity and creativity to helping them.

When should population growth stop? When the environment is really, really, really screwed or now when it is only sort of screwed. Why not take some time out and cure cancer and diabetes, help a billion people out of poverty, help them to learn to read.

Why cram more people into Australia just so rich people can get richer? What is your long term strategy? Just keep doing what rich people tell you to do?

In short, with absolutely no practical solutions being offered except expecting the existing population to 'take one for the team' for the greater good (a cheap, quick-fix quick-profit developer-friendly solution that ultimately is only convenient for them), and no actual answer to the questions being asked, or any proof that they're wrong, there exists little sign of the active lobbyists of this field don't really care, and don't really think there IS any good for most of the population beyond themselves either.