KAEP, sometimes this subject really gets me down. I have kids. Others here seem to think I'm a racist, or am some kind of regressive autarchy freak, or against progress. But it's exactly because I can see the potential for the Mad Max scenario's you are presenting that motivate me to keep going, despite the purile insults directed by pedants.

I in no way believe they are inevitable — but if the defeatist social mores of Perseus and Pericles have their way, we will avoid discussing peak oil and overpopulation until it is too late. People just cannot tolerate talking about population control incentives in this country — it's "grow grow grow!"

Kerala India got passed that mentality. Maybe it's because they have a far more socialist state? We are going to need that kind of authority in future.

Go ahead P&P, call me a communist — I just don't care. What I do care about is your denial and patronizing attitude to thousands of scientists. When I discussed the UCS and MA reports, the response was the sickly... "They are entitled to their opinion". That's worthy of Wormtongue from LOTR!

God help us all if Wormtongue advises our leaders during peak oil.

Eclipse,

Don't panic. You're winning.

Trust me!

The only problem now is the US.
They are close to war with Iran and are about to suffer another blitzkrieg of hurricanes in three months time.

God may be on their side but logistics ain't. This scenario promises to bring peak oil to a .. well ... head.

Levity aside, I think you understand the gravity of the situation. Small wonder we now have a new US ambassador.

Trouble here is that the new ambassador is a lawyer intent on enforcing global economy rules and regulations. That means immigrating bigger populations for exapanding markets. How screwy is that on the verge of a brewing crisis point?
It almost sounds like a US panic reaction?

Certainly this will give P&P something to reflect on over the coming months as it all unfolds. It will give us all something to reflect on.

eclipse, you are starting to sound despondent. As well you might.

>>Go ahead P&P, call me a communist — I just don't care. What I do care about is your denial and patronizing attitude to thousands of scientists.<<

You insist upon seeing everything in terms of labels and categories, which is probably the main reason why you cannot see the wood for the trees. Communism was a failure purely because human nature does not allow itself to be straitjacketed and coerced into forms of unnatural behaviour. While the tenets were - at least on the surface - very simple, the ability of a government to centrally plan every aspect of a citizen's life was a) impractical and b) offensive to the individual.

Your flirtation with communism - again, your category, not mine - as a resolution to our problems with sustainability, will come up against precisely the same barriers. Whatever the virtue or the logic, the practical implications of regulating the lives of 20 million Australians in the fashion you prescribe are literally insurmountable.

Until and unless you can formulate a workable plan, that has the willing acceptance of the population at large, you are condemned to remain on the outer fringes, railing at the dark, and inventing jejune slogans to convince yourself that you are "doing something".

Worse, you are making it more difficult for anyone who does actually have a clue to be heard above the rhubarb.

It might be best if I simply left the forum to you and that KAEP chap, who seems to think that we can exist as a nation without international trade. You make a good pair.

He shares with you a felicity with the meaningless phrase - have you fathomed out his "palpable populational nexus" yet? It sounds as though it should mean something, but when you examine it closely, it is empty.

Pretty much like "Resources / population = lifestyle!"

Pericles,

When you learn to read, people may respect your right to your incorrect opinions.

Remember this from my penultimate post?

-->"Keeping Australia to an ecologically sustainable 23 million population would strengthen it above and beyond what would be achievable with greater populations. This is because of the social instabilities and resource shortages inflicted by overcrowding in an overpopulated scenario.
Australia would be able to defend its self better and EXCHANGE people, ideas and TRADE across the globe far better as an ecologically sustainable entity than as a teetering economic powerhouse full of tensions and subverted ALP style loyalties.
This would in NO WAY shut us off from the rest of the world in any meaningful sense."

As for populational nexus, what do you call Sydney gridlocks, riots, poor hospitals, transport and police systems? The city has become overcrowded and unworkable and living standards are falling for the majority. YOU may not understand populational nexus but Morris Iemma sure does and he's doing the policy backflips to prove it.

Average Australians are too smart to have their standard of living reduced so the likes of you and John Howard can ride their backs to glory like some herd of sheep. The feeling in the Sydney community is very strong about this as shown by the Sydney litmus test. It has turned very red and very sour at the prospect of another 100,000 Howard beholden migrants again coming this year on top of all the existing gridlock and rage. If you don't like the citizenry of this country the way it is and has developed and the standards of living we expect then leave. The Majority always rules, not corporate vested interests, foreign global economy aherents, investors and their soulless hangers on.

You know, I can remember when there was a sense of community in Sydney. A lot of people want that back. There is clearly no place for community in your world.

Pericles,
communism in an authoritarian state failed, yes.

Socialism within a broader democratic society, with some strong leftish influences controlling far more than we do in Australia, is still alive and well in many parts of the world. I was not advocating Stalinism!

Oh, and I notice that all those Chinese are rebelling to the point that nothing gets done in China and it's whole economy is collapsing under the sheer weight of communism!?

Oh, and my original point here was that Kerala India HAS stabilized its population problem?

Oh, and I don't know that I spelt out ALL international trade dying, just a lot of superflous trade in the name of a "free market". We transport cheese from here to England and vice versa... this will not be economical after the end of cheap oil.

Pericles, you have some nice theories — it's a pity the laws of thermodynamics do not support them!

KAEP, you are not making sense, although it is unlikely I am the first to apprise you of this.

"palpable populational nexus"?

Do you actually know what a nexus is?

All you have done is to string three unrelated words together to form a slogan that is completely devoid of meaning.

>>what do you call Sydney gridlocks, riots, poor hospitals, transport and police systems?<<

Compared with the vast majority of major cities, we live in a veritable haven of free-flowing traffic, excellent health facilities, competent (though unremarkable) public transport and an efficient law enforcement system.

Have you ever been overseas?

Believe me, there is a huge elasticity in what people will put up with in order to live a full and fulfilled existence. We live in a seriously big country, with enormous reserves of what other countries would give their eye teeth to own.

eclipse, you are rapidly becoming incoherent.

>>We transport cheese from here to England and vice versa... this will not be economical after the end of cheap oil<<

No kidding, Einstein! Guess what: when it becomes uneconomic, it won't happen. But while it is, it will. What is it about this fact that you are unhappy with?

Let us get back to reality for a moment. Australia dipped below the natural replacement rate of 2.1 in 1975, and that number is still declining. Today, about four workers support each pensioner. In a few years, this will halve. Current extrapolations are that with a replacement rate of 1.2, the last Italian will die in 2180. The French will already have disappeared in 2107.

Does this not tell you that nature is already sorting out the problem?

In the meantime, we are going to have some very severe adjustments to make in our attitudes towards old age, work, retirement and euthanasia.

I still think that what you are really, deep down concerned about is that, with higher replacement rates, “other countries” will have more vibrant and viable economies than ours in the not too distant future. And they might take it into their heads to come here.