Bazz, a balanced population does indeed need a high portion of working and tax-paying people. But if the way of attempting to balance the age distribution is to beef up the birthrate or immigration of young people, to the extent that our population keeps on growing indefinitely, or even to the extent that it becomes significantly larger before stabilising, then we really are on a losing track.

So, while it is important to consider a balanced population age structure, it is considerably more important to consider the total population size and its effect on our resource base.

It is completely nonsensical to think about a balanced population in terms of age structure without thinking very carefully about a balanced population in terms of our supply / demand resource regime, ie – a population that is in balance with its life-support systems.

Ludwig,
If Peter's three children proposal was taken up immeadiatly
by the time those children reached employment a very large number
of the older population will have died.
It cannot happen very quickly as the women have not learnt the lesson yet. My own daughter-in-law is an example of that.
My neice however has decided to have her children as soon as possible, her first is due next month and she was only married a year ago.
She is 30. She said her reason was the problems some friends had and the problems my daughter-in-law had.
They have a small unit at present and are trying to organise a job in a country town where they can get a cheaper house on one income.
So there is some hope but it will take time. The time taken will probably mean that the indigenous population will remain constant
so we can cut back on immigration.
Most of these infrastructure problems would be solved if we can get
a more demographically balanced society.

I saw a figure recently that in 50 years time there will be no more Italians. A BBC TV documentary showed an Italian village and there were
no children in the streets, whereas in previous times the streets would have been filled with children playing.

A demographer they interviewed stated that the Italian birthrate had fallen to an unrecoverable rate.
What he meant by that was that it was not possible even with an
endangered species program they could not recover.

I did not realise Italians were a separate species, I thought they lived in the boot shaped bit of rock.

Thanks for the info, I'll buy my next pizza from Luigi's. Can't loose pizza and grappa.

Good grief!

Yabby, corporations give money to BOTH sides (often equally) the government obliges and opposition’s silenced…it works, doesn’t it? – major parties ALL support National Competition Policy creator of Corporate monopolies’n’duopolies – supermarkets,fuel suppliers,etc.

‘If they gave large amounts, shareholders would squeal like hell.’

Yabby, even you can google the Australian Electoral Donations List…under your favourite Corporations…check BIG donations across major parties…scary stuff when you match the dots with the policies that BOTH sides support and see who benefits…significant government grants mainly follow the same pattern.

…and the shareholders aren’t even aware…nor are they aware of a great many corporate sqauanderings…you’ve just proved that…You didn’t know? No conspiracy…no theories, Yabby…join the dots…ALL FACTS!

RE: ‘piping’ water south…If you were smarter, Yabby, you wouldn’t exclude existing God-made river systems to send the water south, where possible…smarter people than you or I have had suitable plans years ago…they wouldn’t just solve Queensland’s problems, they’d go a long way to helping other southern states also…and drought-proofing much of the inland in the east-coastal states…but the trick is, the Corporates have to get their cut before government will entertain the idea.

You continually assume there is no cost to ‘recycled’ water…nothing could be further from the truth…especially where it would be recycled to bring it to a standard for human consumption.

A ‘small tank’ won’t supply enough water for household consumption in most areas, unless you live in one of the wettest towns in Australia…you’ll need a very BIG tank otherwise.

tbc...

Cont...

No Ludwig…you’re wrong, on two counts…re: population and the position of the Burdekin Dam.

The Burdekin Dam supplies ‘channel water’ to farmers in the Burdekin River Irrigation Area (north and south of the Haughton River) and water to both the Haughton and Burdekin Rivers (which are north and south of Ayr respectively) – it you’d like to visit the dam wall, you should travel through Clare…westward. The dam is NOT ‘south of the lower Burdekin agricultural area, and west of Mackay and Proserpine.’ Those living in the Gumlu (vegetable producers and cattlemen) or Bowen, Proserpine and Mackay (quite a distance south of Home Hill), would love to have access to Burdekin Dam water. In fact, Bowen (south) – is presently supporting the piping of water from that dam to their VERY dry township…Townsville in the north also has their supply supplemented from the dam when necessary. : )

The population argument has been addressed admirably in response already…

‘my perspective is national’

Then you will appreciate that there are few areas in Queensland that will hold a candle to the problems of Sydney and Melbourne metropolitan areas…and Toowoomba isn’t in the race to be one of them.

There’s some national perspective…

Glenwriter made valid points and Bazz’s right…Toowoomba and Australia aren’t teetering on the environmental edge…population balance is crucial to economic-survival and maintenance of essential-services.

…you’re full of information, Bazz…you’ll find that the same population info…re: Italy...if applied across most of the EU…would show much the same result…it’s been coming for years. Travel through Germany, Sweden, France and a number of other EU countries…children are few and far between.

Meg, some people connect the dots and come up with conspiracy theories :) What do you call a "big" donation? Big enough so that
every member of both parties conspires to defraud the public about
the truth, with no whistleblowers etc. I think thats a fantasy.

Competition policy is good for consumers, makes economic sense,
so its supported. People make the end decisions by voting with their
wallets. Nobody forces people to go to large supermarkets, they could go to the corner store and pay more. They don't.

Many people draw up large infrastructure plans, the question is always who pays for them, how much do they cost, will they gain
any votes. Voters don't seem to accept large Govt deficits anymore, so realpolitik applies. In WA, because the country always votes
conservative, when labor is in power, spending in the country is
largely cut back, in favour of where more seats could be won at the
next election. Perhaps the same realpolitik applies in Queensland.

How much water do you drink a day Meg? 2L perhaps? Most water that
you use, is in fact for your toilet, your shower, your lawn, washing
floors, dishes, cars, etc. etc. A family of four would thus only
need about 8-10 litres of actual drinking water, which can be
provided through a small tank and a separate tap. Lots of people
already install them, so that they don't have to drink the chlorinated stuff, it tastes a whole lot better and no need to
buy it in bottles.

Less population in Europe would probably be a good thing. They could
perhaps live more sustainably then they are now, not crowded into
those little flats. Owning a house in Europe is in many parts only
for the rich.

What will most likely happen however and already is, that the masses
will move from overcrowded Africa and the Middle East, Asia etc,
so the future European population will just be light brown rather
then white. No big deal really.