Sorry, another bunch of naive idealistic idiots who are going to ruin the land of OZ by splitting the vote still further. we need LESS political parties not more. Every new political party is a disaster waiting to happen by splitting the vote & making life easier for the major mistakes parties.

Loudmouth,

Soon, as estimated by the ABS, would be some time in the 2030s, and even then the decline in Australia's immigration would be very slow at first. See my comments in the New Dick Smith Party thread last Wednesday and you will see links to evidence that high density urban living dramatically depresses people's willingness to have children. This effect appears to hold true all over the developed world,. Desired family size in Australia is high enough to keep the population stable even without net immigration. See

https://aifs.gov.au/publications/its-not-lack-wanting-kids-report-ferti/4-aspirations-about-having-children

If the government were to stop forcing people to live in child unfriendly ways, fertility rates would probably rise to replacement level. For that matter, there is no problem with having a bit of top-up immigration if we need it.

Global population trends aren't as rosy as you make out. Nigeria's fertility rate is still over 5 births per woman, for example. The slow decline in fertility in the more recalcitrant cultures is why the UN has to keep revising its medium projection upward. We are doing serious damage to our life support systems with even the existing population and so many living in poverty. See this chart from an article in Science, one of the very top journals

http://steadystate.org/wp-content/uploads/Planetary-Boundaries.F.-Pharand-Desch%C3%AAnes-Globa%C3%AFa.jpg

The Australian Academy of Science looked at the resource and environment issues here in 1994 and recommended 23 million as a safe upper limit. So far as I know, they haven't revised it upwards. If you don't live in a big city, you might not have noticed, but quality of life is getting a lot worse for most people: more congestion and longer commutes, less open space, unaffordable housing, especially housing suitable for families, an enormous infrastructure backlog that the government can't address while immigration remains so high, permanent water restrictions in the last drought costing the community more than a billion dollars, due to such things as cracks in walls and foundations, and so on. Don't be so sure that we are going to be seen as fringe nutters.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/the-tide-of-public-opinion-is-turning-against-immigration/story-e6freuzr-1226362835067

Certainly is wonderful news.
Can only improve as more thinking people realise that we cannot keep overloading this country and this planet.
Sadly there will always be those who seem to believe that another 83 million people a year increase is actually a decrease.
Dream on and keep your heads in the sand. It looks much better from down there doesn`t it?

imacentrist moderate,

You might be right if we had a first past the post voting system, because such a system effectively forces you to vote for the lesser evil. With preferential voting, you can vote for your first choice and allot preferences in favour of the lesser evil. Do you really think that the major parties have done such a great job running this country? Government is taking a bigger share of GDP than in the 1970s, when the aged pension wasn't means tested and tertiary education was free (if you could meet the entrance requirements).

Hi Ateday,

Don't confuse decline in population (which obviously isn't happening yet) with decline in the rate of growth of population. A few decades ago, it was close to 2 % p.a., mainly due to improvements in medical services (hence lower But if your figure of 83 million increase (in 2014?) is correct, then the rate of growth is down to barely 1.1% p.a. And even that may be the consequence of better medical services.

Given the rate of advances in medical treatments, rising standards of living, improvements in women's rights in the non-Muslim world and thus better education for women, etc., the combined effects of all of those factors might result in a levelling of world population in 40 or 50 years, and then a very gradual - 0.1% p.a. - decline.

If this is at all accurate, then world population may reach 9.5-10 billion by 2060, and halve by about 2830 or 2850: my best bet is about July 8, 2841, at about twenty to six pm. And it could halve again, to around 2.5 billion, by very roughly March 3561 +/- 20 yrs.

So what's your scenario ?

Cheers,

Joe

LM,
We are a million miles, and probably extinction first, away from a population growth rate of less than replacement.
Dream on and keep that head buried.