*Then, because we're trade in commodities by volume, it would fall rapidly leading to major economic contraction.*

Not so Cheryl. Because most of those exporters are highly productive.
When you are operating trucks which carry hundreds of tonnes etc,
it takes very few people to move massive volumes.

On the one hand we have a whole lot of OLO posters crying gloom
and doom, because we import consumer goods and don't manufacture
them here, apparently stealing all those jobs. On the other hand,
we have the WA export scene, screaming for trained workers, to
build and operate mines. They need people, from wherever they
can find them, if Australians don't want the jobs.

But where have many migrants been going? Sydney or Melbourne of
course. Increasing their problems. Many are students, who paid alot
of money to study here and were bribed into doing so, by the
potential of an Australian visa.

Yet much of the NSW and Victorian economies are not based on
efficient export industries, but on building and then administring
yet more houses for yet more migrants for Sydney and Melbourne.
Its one big Ponzi scheme.

So either train Australians who want to work, to take the jobs
on offer in efficient export industries, or target migrants who
add to the countries wealth and don't just create more houses for
more people, to sell to each other. No wonder that people in Sydney
and Melbourne are complaining.

A recent TV news item reminded me of this thread. China has just introduced a limit on the sale of cars in Beijing due to increasing traffic problems with a growing population and increased car ownership. This is in addition to a growing and very real pollution problem.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12072845

The trouble with the growth at all costs brigade is they cannot see past short term gains from population growth (ignoring the resultant infrastructure problems for the moment) in terms of a boon for property developers and the business sector, but what of the long term impact when land and resources can no longer efficiently support those growing populations.

We seem forever doomed to repeat mistakes rather than head them off at the pass, but with an ever growing lack of courage in our leadership and the short election cycle the growthist mentality will no doubt reign for a bit longer until the sad effects of unfettered and unsustainable growth lead to greater, not less, government interference.

Even Economics 101 knows that some resources are finite and that increasingly growing populations has an adverse impact on productivity and quality of life. The earth's carrying capacity is not endless and human beings are possessed with great abilities to solve problems before they are exacerbated. We need to get out of the mindset that unrestrained economic growth and consumerism as the solution and become creative thinkers who are not afraid to think laterally and beyond the standard economic mythology.

<"would you like more people in Australia", the majority would indeed answer "of course not".

But that is only half the question. If you completed it by saying "or suffer a slow but steady decline in your standard of living, and that of your children">

Where is the evidence for this? There are many examples of developed countries not reliant on population growth. Some decades ago we were told we needed high immigration so we could reach a critical mass to protect the manufacturing industry and avert the threat of invasion. Those reasons turned out to be spurious. And what about technology? Does it only apply in relation to the problems of population growth? I thought technological progress was the main factor in improving living standards, not population growth.

As Australia has had high population growth it is unsurprising that it has a large growth based economy which would be damaged with a cut in immigration. That is the basis of the "We're doomed if we cut immigration." mantra. But the mining boom provides the ideal opportunity to move away from the population growth based economy and its many problems. Australia could satisfy the skills shortage by cutting immigration and retraining workers displaced from the growth economy. This would greatly reduce the infrastructure burden which is driving Australian governments heavily into debt. It would also greatly ease the housing crisis.

Continuing high population growth is not a corner we have painted ourselves into. It is a choice, and it is disingenuous of Dema to pretend otherwise.

It would help you all if you read Jeff Rubin's book;
"Your World is About to Get a Whole Lot Smaller".

His thene is the coast of freight for international trade will reduce
the trade to low levels and that manufacturing will become local again.
It has already started in that steel and furniture manufacturing has
returned to the USA.

Another sign of this is that fast container ships designed for 25 knots
are running at 14 knots to save fuel. Some are experimenting with
flying spinnakers to save fuel. Isn't there a message there somewhere ?

Jeff Rubin, an economist would you believe, has a number of talks on
Utube and he has a web site, Google him, it will change the points
you make on here.

Well may they say that the Freedom of Information Act is really the Freedom from Information Act. BECAUSE NOTHING can justify witholding that section of the red book that dealt with the implications of low net overseas migration. If that is what happened, it is so crass, so pathetic, so mediocre and so plain chuckle-headed that it would make the authors of Yes Minister blush.

Clearly DIMA has been completely infiltrated at its top level by people in the pay of those vested interests who will benefit from untramelled population growth, just as the top levels of the Resource department have been totally taken over by the coal industry.

The idea that we live in any kind of democracy is a clever fiction, with regular "plays" at Parliament House by well-paid actors and gullible journalists all with the purpose of deluding the electorate into believing they have some say in affairs ... by withholding that section of the red paper the pollies show their hand blatantly.