The poor bloke who wrote this article probably wonders what the heck is going on when the anti-people lobby start throwing around population figures of 50 or 60 or 80 million for OZ. He has made the mistake of being a business man simply expressing an idea.

The anti-people lobby adopt the odd position that 34 million in 2050 is too many - but it was always goign to be 34 million as far back as the late 90s if we include international students as part of the pop.

They should have a look at the National Farmers Fed website and checkout just how much food we produce. Heaps - because we have farmers who know what their doing, rather than bearded gnomes, stroking their beards and pontificating on the end of the world.

Divergence
You may even have a point when you say that population can be controlled by reducing immigration numbers (I am mostly indifferent to whether we have a large population or not), but the trouble is I cannot see how it will happen. Immigration quotas (now around 180,000 a year) seem to increase no matter who is in power, and even when immigration is a sensitive topic in marginal electorates. Better to plan for the worst and then change those plans when, and if, quotas change. But its not a defence to say that its too difficult to have these extra people, or that there is some sort of innate limit. there isn't.

As for the reduced standards of living quote in the PC report, just in case you weren't aware the commission was probaly not talking about reductions on present standards of living, but reductions in future increases.. that is we'll still be richer on average, but not as rich as we otherwise would have been. I would quibble with that reasoning but I suppose there must be some effect from having new people come in all the time.. it would reduce the per-capita rate of growth, perhaps slightly (which could add up to a large difference over decades).. However, I should look at the report..

Cheryl
the ratio of food exported to food imported in dollar values is something like 6 to 1 (without looking at the figures), but I recall reading a DFAT report that points that we export mainly unprocessed, unpackaged foods and import stuff that is processed and packaged.. Most of the dollar value of the imports is in the packaging, so the actual food value of the import/export ratio is much, much higher..

Shouldn't that read Populate & perish ? For those who think Australia can easily cope with such huge numbers may I suggest you do a trial run of about ten years living in some overpopulated country before advocating such growth here.
By some of these countries' standards Australia could handle probably 100 million. If that's what you want.
I wonder why these so-called assylum seekers don't try to settle in new Guinea which is a far more fertile country.
What no hand outs there ? Naw, better go to Aussie.

That article is a load of hogwash. Hypothetically, emissions would increse with an increase in population cancelling out any effect the carbon tax might have.

As for immigration, by increasing the population in this way you are bringing the third worlds problems to Australia.

The government likes to create (perceived) problems which it can then solve (with taxes) and create another problem for them to "solve" in the process (more taxes).

Government should stop giving out handouts to have babies which in turn would lower emissions negating the need for a carbon tax (what problem?), saving us all a lot of money and simplifying the system, but they like more revenue,complexity and to be seen to be doing something.

I find the comments on these forums are more rational than the articles.

The thing that infuriates me about pro immigration and pro refugee bleeding hearts is that they will NEVER let the immigrants live next to THEM. They consider themselves the elites of the AUstralian populace who are the boss of US. The deem us too stupid to realise that all their cherished immigrants effectively OWE Australian communities $300,000 for every man woman and child in infrastructure overheads as soon as they arrive. They laugh as they pass these overhead costs onto poorer communities and live along with their beloved Malcolm Fraser in total isolation from the immigrant induced gridlock and melee whilst being the sole beneficiaries of any positives that the immigrants bring to Australia.

This entire immigration/big population con job will end up in revolution and civil strife because the injustice, this approaching new FEUDALISM, is so INTENSE.

Apart from the nasty infrastructure pinch, the other killer from immigration is that politicians no longer depend on delivering promises to voters. All they have to do is please a few imams or the greek or italian familias and their whole communities vote in unison. Say goodbye to DEMOCRACY and hello to FEUDAL GOVERNMENT and Feudal Budgets.

This is why, despite all the serious problems with islamic and other anti democratic communities, Western goverments are so devoted to them because their gerrymandering capacity in critical suburbs in elections is a BIG winner.

In summary, immigration and big Australia are fraud concepts and WE who consider ourselves a free people must be be vigilant against the likes of this author, bleeding heart young Liberal smartarses and people like Malcolm Fraser who are entirely too selfish and too big for their breeches in telling US 'children' that we have to pay for their 'parental wisdom'and guidance.

In a phrase -Check the bastards!