You're sliding into the same territory as Malcolm King, Andras, namely casting aspersions on our integrity by aligning us with eugenics. How dare you! Only those without a credible argument to their name is reduced to that. Like it or not, population growth has deleterious effects on the environment (greenhouse gas emissions in particular) and on social matters such as housing (un)affordability. It matters not who comes here, as long as they abide with our democratic, liberal and humanitarian traditions, but it does matter how many. We are stewards of this country and we must protect the habitats of other species by not concreting over them for housing and infrastructure or by converting forest to farmland to feed ever more people.

Andras is also doing his best to obscure the population growth rate of 1.8%. The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) counts people as immigrants if they stay for more than 12 months, but it also counts people as emigrants if they leave after 12 months. What matters for the population growth rate is the difference between immigration and emigration. It doesn't matter if a migrant is temporary if he is just going to be replaced by another temporary migrant when he goes home. the impact of a series of temporary migrants on the environment, infrastructure, housing and job markets, etc. is just as great as that of a permanent migrant.

Population growth, through mass migration or otherwise, is a brilliant way for the folks at the top to siphon more of a nation's wealth up to themselves. They benefit from bigger domestic markets, high profits from ownership of residential land and other necessities, and a cheap, compliant work force. This can be most clearly seen in the case of the US. There was a previous era of globalisation in the early 20th century with very high immigration, but it was shut down after WWI, essentially because the elite were afraid of a revolution. There were then high tariffs and low immigration until 1965, when Congress changed the immigration laws, paving the way for very large numbers. How has it worked out? According to people like Malcolm King and Andras Smith, the average American should be much better off due to the marvellous benefits of mass migration and diversity.

(cont'd)

(cont'd)

But look at these graphs from State of Working America.

CEO to worker compensation ratio - from 20 to 1 in 1965 to 411 to 1 in 2000 (down to 231 to 1 in 2011)

http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/chart/swa-wages-figure-4-ceo-worker-compensation/

Most men are earning lower wages than in 1979, despite 35 years of technological progress.

http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/chart/swa-wages-figure-4c-change-real-hourly-wages/

Wages ceased to go up with productivity in 1972. Productivity is up 241% since 1948, but average hourly wages are only up by 108%.

Share of total household wealth growth accruing to various income groups since 1983. The bottom 60% of the population is actually poorer, while 74% of the growth has gone to the top 5%.

http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/chart/swa-wealth-figure-6b-share-total-household/

Andras Smith hasn't denied that he is a migration agent and would thus stand to lose substantial income if immigration is reduced.

Malcolm King has a public relations firm. He hasn't denied that he is being paid to rubbish people who want to stabilise the population.

Andras Smith "they need to be sure they are not being informed by those whom have an interest in eugenics and qualitative issues about 'immigrants'."

Who needs quality when you can have quantity?
All that matter is headcount, eh?

"till protagonists 'lurch' into social territory of identity etc."

Yes, how dare we have an identity.

Of course, immigrants can have theirs and are encouraged to stick to them like glue.
We must adapt, they musn't.

And there is the neo con style or predilection for smearing or individual personal attacks with whom they disagree with .... while not offering any clear analysis or empirical evidence for all the supposed negatives of immigration, population etc..

This article received applause from the pro-Tanton Sustainable Population Australia lobby on their Facebook page. 1/3rd of the pop will have to go.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/scientists-look-onethird-of-the-human-race-has-to,27166/

I know where I'd start.