KAEP

Was that the 'Yellow Peril' terror or the 'Commies under the bed" fear you just let slip out?

The reality is we will eventually all have to live together, and more importantly, we will have to live with the rest of the earth's species, so that humans can continue to live at all.

The only argument for continued population growth is economic. However the earth doesn't give a pinch for such concepts. The earth works in practical realities, like the carbon cycle. And if you break the laws governing the carbon cycle, the consequences are far more dramatic than any man-made judgements.

To those who refuse to see apparent long term trends: Wake. Take a longer view, appreciate complex systems and see for yourself the inevitable outcomes we face.

Congratulations Jennie. Keep that flag flying

KAEP, you obviously haven't seen a whole town die when a factory goes down the gurgler. In most cases it takes place in a cyclical downturn and all they needed was 12 months grace and the factory would be profitable again. That is what guest workers could do.

So a town has only 50 people on the dole for 12-18 months and then back to full emplyment when the upturn kicks in. Without it, both the factory and the town never recover. And if our own unions are too incompetent to ensure that the scheme is only used for its intended purpose then who is to blame?

The fact is, we compete against US farmers who get Mexican farm workers at US$3.60 an hour. Our cities compete to attract corporate head offices here against competitive rents from Singapore where the buildings were constructed by Indonesian labourers.

I have a hillside full of Lantana that could be growing trees for timber but the cost of removing the Lantana, and keeping it out, is so high using machinery that the Lantana will still be there in 30 yearstime. With a couple of guest workers we could have trees on that hill in 3 months and be thinning out poles in 15 years. A pity for me and a pity for the environment.

If David Hasselgrove ever ventured beyond his own nose he would know that the biggest concern in all the western Queensland communities was the impact of stagnating or declining population on the viability of local businesses, services and infrastructure.

A family moves out, 3 kids leave the school and it falls below the quota for 4 teachers, so one teacher gets transfered and a house is left empty with no rent. The house is owned by the guy at the local garage so he has lost a years rental income and a years worth of petrol sales. And so it goes.

And it seems that all the people who think they can get by unscathed from a stagnating population policy are very well insulated from reality. Drop into any western town and see for yourself.

Brisbane and Perseus,

The carrying capacity of Australia is around 23 million people very nearly all in the capital cities and hinterlands. For that is where the big banks and their flunkies and pocket politicians can MAXIMISE profits. They orchestrate where and when lives and businesses will prevail. Foreclosures on country interests are at a record level as banks seek to shift their portfolios into city goldmines like funnel tunnel operations.

When peak oil hits and we start to kill each other for the last gallon of gas in the resulting big crowded cities, made that way by greedy entrepreneurs like you, I can assure you that country towns will still be in their death throes. As practising greedy entrepreneurial hopefuls I expect you like the big banks will have done the risk analysis on this and KNOW I am correct. But don't let that get in the way of your mendacity, please. Once the global trend for coastal urban migration began some 20 years ago country towns were well and truly written off, not just in Australia but world over.

And another thing. The first casualties in the coming changes from peak oil will be entrepreneurs like you. You will have the double whammy of losing your investments by not realising how they are all so closely knit with cheap oil, and you will be hounded into the ground by the rank and file who will be looking for scapegoats to blame.

Personally, I can't wait. Where's my knitting?

A bit more detail please, eclipse.

>>Resources / population = lifestyle! Go figure<<

I can certainly understand the logic behind the equation. It seems so simple that it has to be true, doesn't it?

But does it hold water historically? Did the inhabitants enjoy a better lifestyle when Australia had a population of only ten million? Five? Two? Half a million?

According to your equation, they must have. But empirical evidence would tend to contradict you, so your theory just went out of the window.

It is also axiomatic that at the other end of the scale, a population that tends towards infinity will have some major problems to overcome along the way, but I still would hesitate to simplify it into "less people good, more people bad".

That's just lazy thinking.

Pericles

You idiot

When Australia's population was only 5 million, it had the highest standard of living IN THE WORLD.

Check it out. It's a fact.

The more our population has grown, the lower we have gone on the standard of living ladder. True.

You check it out and tell us if if that's wrong.