Nope, absolutely nothing to do with population.

About the time of the release of the 2011 Census, there was great lamentation amongst the anti-pops that these ravenous migrants would boost average household sizes faster than we could build houses for them. If that was true, average household sizes should explode.

Yet the 2011 Census found that the average household size remained steady at 2.6 persons per dwelling - the same average as what was back in 2006 and in 2001. ‘Hang on’, I hear you say. ‘If Australia’s population is exploding, shouldn’t the number of persons per dwelling be climbing?’ Absolutely. It is a direct indicator of population. We all need somewhere to live.

Why is it so? One reason is the death rate. Death and serious illness in old age turns over property. Most people these days die of old age 70+ or of illnesses associated with age. The property goes to the children or it is placed on the market. In 2011, 146,932 people died. The great majority of these were elderly. So even though the property market is tight, there are still new properties coming on to the market. Over the next 30 years you can expect much more of that.

There was a rise in couple families without children (+20.3 per cent between 2001 and 2011), one-parent families (+16.8 per cent between 2001 and 2011) and lone person households (+16.9 per cent between 2001 and 2011) grew at a faster pace than a couple with children households (+8.7 per cent between 2001 and 2011). No sign here of a population explosion. The population problem is in Africa, a fact the anti-pops such as Bazz and Shockadelic conveniently ignore.

Errr, who is an anti-pop ?
Not me, I believe that we need around three children per family.
What we don't need is a population boost at twice that rate.

We need to know more accurately how many people we can support in
the manner to which we are accustomed.
That "manner" has to be adapted to the amount of energy available to
produce the food we need.
That is what we do not know and what the politicians show no interest in finding out.

Cheryl "The population problem is in Africa, a fact the anti-pops such as Bazz and Shockadelic conveniently ignore."

Actually a google search for global pop-density maps clearly shows that Africa has rather low levels (Nigeria excepted).

The highest are China/Southeast Asia, India and Europe.
Europe doesn't have a high birth rate, Asia does.
Pop growth is cultural.

And Asia is where we now get 2/3rds of our immigrants from.
If they can't control their growth there, what makes you think they will in Hurstville or Parramatta?

Immigrants come here for a "better life", no?
You think they want to end up in the same overcrowded, dirty hellhole they left behind?

Comparisons to New York or Africa or anywhere else are not relevant.
The question is not just how many people Australia can support, but what is our *preference*.

If we want a small population, we can have it.
This is our land, it doesn't belong to "the world".
The future is our choice.
Immigration is not necessary, inevitable or compulsory.

Domestic energy consumption is less than 30 percent of gross production. We export almost 30 billion of food. Population is a non issue in Australia. Not even a starter. Handy if you want to run a fear campaign as per Stable Pop Party or the loonies in Adelaide.

Cheryl, I suspect you believe that food production is limited by land
and weather.
Other things being equal, that is correct. Unfortunately there is more
energy cost in the value of food than any other cost and it is that
which sets the cost and availability.

It takes 10 calories of oil to produce 1 calorie of food.

Bazz, I thought you were talking about housing. Now you're discussing energy. I saw a poet guy try that tactic discussing population growth with Bernard Salt a couple of years in a debate and Salt salted him good and proper.

Yep, it takes energy to grow food but not more or less than 50 years ago. We'll need to grow more to capitalise on the China market but of course the main source of energy is the sun. If the sun grows food and creates photosynthesis, doesn't that mean the earth is part of an open system? Of course it does.