Why is so difficult to understand that there is a link between population and environment? Is it not obvious that when Australia gets a population of 100 million some time around the turn of the century, all crammed into the most fertile and wetter parts of the continent, there will be bigger environmental problems from more dams, roads suburbs etc. And why is it not obvious that one of the best things about Australia is that we can live in relatively clean and un-crowded towns and cities, and that we have a right to try to preserve these values? And for the economists amongst us, why is it not obvious that with a country that earns its living by exporting minerals, tourism and agriculture, none of which require a big population, we are better off with a small population. If you take a line north of the tropic, you account for a huge percentage of Australia’s export earning and a population of less than a million. We North Queenslanders would be much better off without the populated south, and Australia’s export earning would be bigger per capita if we did not have to do a division by a large number of people. So whether you care about the environment or your hip pocket, a larger population does not make sense.

Peter Ridd

Hi all. I would like to thank everyone for their input on this obvious problem that the capitalist pigs that don't seem to think there,s a tomorrow. There,s not much I can add, that most of you haven't covered, but I will say the problem is real, the consequences are real and the human race is going to pay a heavy price for there ignorance's.
Overpopulation or the human foot-print is pushing every live thing to the living end, and the evidence to the facts are as clear as the ice sheets are white, and we wont be seeing them for much longer. Pick your factors that's either man made or a natural cycle of the earth, which i believe to be the main cause, but the attitude of most greedy people is, " I only live for 60 or 70 years so why should care " and our fore fathers of the 19 century while times were good, thought the party would go on for ever and this means stuff you next generation and now we see the selfish results of a raped planet and nothing left for you.

I pray and I use that term lightly, that one of you makes it into government one day and stop this madness.

A simple policy. Let the death rate over-ride the birth rate and in one short life time is all it will take to put things back to where sustainability for all concerned will be a reality.

all the best

EVO

Q&A, Pelican and others, I highly recommend a listen or read transcript of yesterday's Background Briefing on Radio National.

The author and historian, Ronald Wright, discusses the vexing issue of population versus resources in his work on "A short history of Progress".

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2009/2548406.htm

He really puts human beings into context with the rest of the planet.

Thank you Fractelle for the link. even if nobody appreciated it.

But thats life.

EVO

Thanks for the link Fractelle, I have been away.

Having just finished listening to Ronald Wright, I would commend it to anyone, just find the time. There are so many quotable quotes - what he has to say is very illuminating, very challenging.

As I said in my last post (on another thread), I am taking time out (from OLO) to attend to personal matters. Nevertheless, thanks again for the link to his talk.

Best wishes
qanda

qanda

I'm pleased you took the time. I know we are buried in links here, and it is impossible to look at even some of them let alone all, but I thought that Wright's talk summed us up very well indeed and fell into the category of must read/listen.

Looking forward to your return to OLO.