“Myself, I will procreate in the knowledge that this country has a declining birth rate, and will not really impact on the environment.” (Davo).

Actually Australia’s population will increase by about a million in the space of four years. With the present 1.8 fertility rate and current immigration, we are scooting along with a population increasing at about world average - over 1%. The component of the female population currently at breeding age plus politicians’ attitude to immigration combined, dictate that this will carry on for almost a generation – or more, perhaps.

And the rate of flogging our land to death in order to cater for the needs/wants of current numbers is greater than that of the genuinely beaut agricultural/technological tricks being devised to overcome degradation.

So Davo, there is no need to rush into unnecessary wear and tear on your sexual organ.

As the greatest cause of population growth in Aus is immigration, the easiest way to control growth is to further restrict immigration.

The existing population has a negative growth rate, so a zero growth rate is easy to achieve.

The problem with population explosion is not to be found in Aus and applying a birth tax here is at best purely symbolic and would do to the gov what work choices did to the liberals.

This proposal is very reactionary and a little naive. I agree with the journalist in that if we really wanted to reduce our carbon footprint we could, without taxing babies (incidently if it were to happen id just pay the $, but make my child pay it off in installments from the age of 10... ;) ). How about curbing the carbon suburbs like caroline springs and all of the gold coast? How about a million other things we could legislate to do... This idea would just serve to potentially make parents resent their children even more than they might.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2228284,00.html

This is exactly why we need biodiversity, for humanity to survive.
Cram more and more people onto the planet, nature will sort it
out for you.

But of course thats way over the heads of the religious and
the economists, who don't understand basic biology.

“As the greatest cause of population growth in Aus is immigration, the easiest way to control growth is to further restrict immigration.”

Yes Democritus, the easiest and most significant step towards population stabilisation is to reduce immigration way down. I would suggest that it should be reduced to at least net zero. At net zero, we would still have an annual intake of some 30 000.

“The existing population has a negative growth rate…”

No it doesn’t! The individual fertility rate is about 1.8, but the national fertility rate is about 2.2 or something of that order. This is due to a large number of young reproductive people in the population - a considerably larger number than there would be in a stable population age-distribution structure.

This is one of the great misunderstandings, happily promulgated by our highly unillustrious former treasurer (and baby bonus pusher), and supported by our equally unillustrious former PM.

“…so a zero growth rate is easy to achieve.”

No it is not. Even with net zero immigration and the current birthrate, our population would continue to grow for many years. If we really wanted to achieve zero population growth, we would have to go close to absolute zero immigration, and even then we would need to implement considerable incentives to lower the birthrate.

In fact, with zero immigration and an emigration rate of about 30 000 per annum, we would still have a growth rate in the order of 70 000 pa (I haven’t gone hunting for the correct figure, so if someone who likes to do a bit of on-line research can find it, I’d be grateful).

“The problem with population explosion is not to be found in Aus and applying a birth tax here is at best purely symbolic”

You could say the same about climate change. But most people agree that Australia needs to do its bit towards climate change and that the principle involved and the example set is vastly more important than the magnitude of improvements that we could achieve in this country. Similarly so it should be with population stabilisation.

Why delightful young footprints eventually contribute to devilish hoofprints.

From Australian Bureau of Statistics data.
Australia has past the 21 million mark.
More babies were born in the year to June 2007 than ever before.
There were an extra 315,000 people in the three months to June 30.
Immigration accounted for 56 per cent of Australia’s growth, while 272,900 births minus 134,800 deaths made up 44 per cent of the increase.
The 272,900 babies born in the year to June is the highest ever annual number of births.
The fertility rate climbed to 1.85 births per woman, the highest rate in 14 years.
One new citizen (after allowing for deaths) added, every one minute and 42 seconds.
Australia’s population growth rate (for the full year, not the final 3 months) was 1.5 per cent.

World average population growth rate is 1.1. More developed regions 0.2%; Less developed 1.3; least developed countries 2.3.
While we are on track to add another Sydney or Melbourne to our population in the space of the next 12 years, are we being responsible?
Maybe we should fix a few problems like water supplies, deteriorating health, education, and social cohesion, before increasing the numbers in order to fix the problems created by numbers (following the philosophy of an eminent demographer). If we did, it might indicate that we really want to retain a place in the statistics as a member of the “More developed regions”.