Are you telling us that a business-lobbyist who writes for the Australian- was just making up rubbish?
Who would have guessed that?

So the gist of the article seems to be a loudmouth spokesperson can't reason, and can't add up. In fact better than 70% of ordinary Australian's can do a better job than this elite conservative.

As spindoc remarked on another thread, there is a definitely a similarity between the AGW alarmists, the people who worry about population, peak oil and what not. This highlights it.

There are two courses of action you can take if an expert points out trouble ahead. You can either investigate if making a few mildly unpleasant changes now can avoid some hugely unpleasant changes being forced onto you in the future. Or you can do some swift calculations "mistakenly" adding up to 1+1 to be 3, thus proving the expert wrong and allowing you to continue your comfortable life style for the time being.

I guess there is the third option, as taken by Houellebecq. You can loudly proclaim you don't care what happens to anyone else either now either now or in the future, so screw it. Houellebecq has always possessed a certain charming honesty.

At some point I will check the ABS stats for myself, but if the workforce is set to expand rather than decline then so be it. Australia will stagger on as it always has.

But those who are worried about limits to resources and so on - without justification in my view - also have to take into account workforce productivity. The big gains in workforce productivity (and capital productivity for that matter) may be behind us, but those indexes are still growing, and gradually increasing the effect all those eager salary-earning, home-buying, SUV driving new workers are having on the economy and our resources.

So not only do the anti-pops have to "do" something about restricting immigration (good luck with that), they have to rein in population growth(forget about it!) and then "fix" productivity growth (seriously impossible).

Oh yes, and while you're at it, try telling people they can't use air conditioners on very hot days. The responses should at least be entertaining.

Beating up on Bernard in an OLO article may be a tiny, first step on this journey to green nirvana but its a long road ahead.

Curmy "But those who are worried about limits to resources and so on - without justification in my view ...... and gradually increasing the effect all those eager salary-earning, home-buying, SUV driving new workers are having on the economy and our resources."

Which side of the fence are you on?

David

Playing “gotcha” with Bernard Salt doesn’t disprove the idea that Australia’s aging population is a problem

According to the Treasury’s 2010 intergenerational report:
http://www.treasury.gov.au/igr/igr2010/report/html/02_Chapter_1_Economic_and_demographic.asp

“In 1970, there were 7.5 people of working age to support every person aged 65 and over. By 2010 this has fallen to an estimated 5 people of working age .... By 2050 the number is projected to decline to 2.7 people”

“In June 2010, the proportion of those aged 65 and over in the Australian population is projected to reach 13.5 per cent, up from 8.3 per cent in 1970. By June 2050, around 22.6 per cent of the Australian population is projected to be aged 65 and over. The proportion of the population aged 85 and over is projected to increase most rapidly, rising from 1.8 per cent in 2010 to 5.1 per cent in 2050.”

Australia’s combined dependency rate for both children and the aged has been in decline in recent years despite the aging population, because the percentage of young people in the population has fallen steadily. This decline in the child dependency rate has now halted, and over the next forty years child dependency “is projected to fluctuate around the current level.” In combination with the rise in aged dependency, the total dependency rate is projected to rise from current levels of 48% to about 66% by mid-century.
http://www.treasury.gov.au/igr/igr2010/report/html/10_Appendix_A_Projections.asp

What’s more, when looking at growth in the workforce, more needs to be taken into account than the number of 15-65 year olds. Within this “working age” population different age cohorts have different levels of participation, with participation falling steadily beyond age 50. As a result, Australia’s aging population will result in its labour force participation rate falling slowly but steadily in the next 40 years, reversing the trend growth of the past 30 years.

And, as Curmudgeon has said, there’s the added challenge of productivity.

Rhian:
Are you aware that countries that do not have an ageing demographic profile are the poorest countries in the world (e.g. Congo, Burundi and Ethiopia)? In contrast, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Norway have populations that are ageing sooner and more dramatically than Australia's. They don't see it as a problem, and they enjoy a higher level of wealth per capita than Australia. Demographic ageing is an indicator of a country's success. Trying to suppress it through massive immigration programs is as logical as a Ponzi scheme, and creates an economic time-bomb for future generations to address. Even Peter McDonald could figure that out.