Dick Smith in Australia.

Sir David Attenborough in Britain: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1365208/Sir-David-Attenborough-insists-tackle-population-growth-contraception.html

It seems when ever the subject comes up, the pro-population control comments consistently get overwhelming thumbs up and pro-population growth comments consistently and overwhelmingly get the thumbs down.

Consistently in terms of the number of people making the comments about the articles.

But given the trend is so widespread it is a good indication that it pro-population control represents the majority of western society.

I suspect that if the above two don't suddenly die and if more and more prominent public figures keep coming on board then we may be on the brink of a fundamental change in western population politics.

Dear Mr Windy

Let's hope so though it would be good if another word than 'control' could be used. It suggests coercion and we're not in favour of that! The longer it takes, however, for people to realise we do need to stablise/reduce population, then the more likelihood of coercion down the track.

"Let's hope so though it would be good if another word than 'control' could be used. It suggests coercion and we're not in favour of that! The longer it takes, however, for people to realise we do need to stablise/reduce population, then the more likelihood of coercion down the track."

Sorry buddy but I think that we are going to have to live with coercion with respect to fertility reduction, particularly in the third world where their lack of education prevents them from seeing the link between their high fertility and poor circumstances and where the mullahs and bishops are already coercing them into maintaining high fertility.

Anti-population coercion MUST win out over the religious coercion.

I think we must also be prepared for the possibility of requiring involuntary means of fertility control such as the biological vector previously suggested. Either that or enforced one child policies and abortions etc. I would rather the former if it came down to a choice between these two strategies.

Let us not shirk our responsibility to future generations and our civilisation popandperish.

Fertility CONTROL is exactly what is needed.

Whether it be by coercion, such as enfoced one child policies or by witholding of welfare, or by involuntary means, such as a contagious but harmless e.g. cold virus, biological vector that reduces fertility randomly and temporarily in those that it infects.

We make compromises on the human right to not be killed or not to be left to die when the circumstances suit all the time. E.G. The war on terror in Afghanistan and Iraq and medical triage during war and natural disasters. In both cases we generally accept a certain level of 'collateral damage' and indifference in individual cases in order to serve the greater good.

Why should the human fertility be more sacrosanct than human life?

Why should we not also be prepared to compromise on the human right of freedom of reproduction, for a period of time, in order to serve the greater good of future generations and our civilisation?

You stop population growth bots are nuts.
Our population is growing primarily due to our increased longevity and current low death rates. It is called our demographic momentum or swell as the nation ages for the first time in human history.
Think of it like this which age groups are actually growing in number. If we all still died at 50 our population would be 15 million.
I can easily see how the same nutters will then switch to euthanasia.
Australia is likely to see it's peak population early and could quite easily become a country in decline, like many countries today.
Our death rates are projected to double in the next 15 years to a point that looks like neutral natural growth. Same amour of babies ad deaths and no need for any intervention at all.
Migration is made up of immigrants minus emigrants. Now here is the problem as we now have peaking emigration and trending up. No govt controls here.
1000 skilled Aussies leaving permanently per week!

"Our death rates are projected to double in the next 15 years to a point that looks like neutral natural growth. Same amour of babies ad deaths and no need for any intervention at all. "

Sounds good to me!

Once the demographic correction in complete, Australia's population could be once again well below 20 million and on a far better long term ecologically sustainable footing.

Bring it on!