Tragically, projections from the Australian Bureau of Statistics show that, at our high rates of immigration, there is very little change in the age structure of our population by 2050. All that the high immigration does is pass the baby boomer bulge problem onto the next generation and, like most avoidance behaviour, it makes the problem then even larger than currently (since population then will be closer to 50 million). We should be ashamed that we are pushing our demographic problem onto our children rather than solving it ourselves.

I think that the reason so few solutions are suggested to the world's population problem is that it is too late to do anything now. The momentum is too great. But we could stop making things worse for ourselves here by greatly reducing immigration to stabilize the Australian population. Ultimately, Nature will do it for us if we do not act ourselves. There is no escaping that. And the problems are coming faster than realised - they are already very evident in places like South Africa, The Solomons, Afghanistan, Haiti etc. Look closely and you can see the pressures of overpopulation at play.

Glad to see some general agreement on this one.
This is not necessarily a green sentiment, but more a call for a transparent political system and an end to the oligarchy that is subverting democracy and preventing rational governance. Of course there is a serious environmental issue here too, but those are the symptoms. As Aime says, the causes are political, so the solution must be too.
May I suggest the "Open Source" approach?
Technology now allows smaller communities to be viable than before. It starts with "Eco cities" where the local council is stacked and the internet mob moves in. The region must be productive and have resources. With an island against the parasites, this micro-economy can grow if the mob is selective enough to omit parasites and actually manufactures wealth that can be traded. (forget isolationism). Only when physical security is at hand can the political games begin at state and national level. There needs to be a test case big enough to distinguish the project from that of dreamers and ferals. The end-point: city states with minimal common law in a federation to ensure defense and free trade. In this cynical world it will take a disaster to kick it off, but the path can be followed one step at a time.
Calling greens fascist is a bit over the top. Greens are generally anti-corporation. Actually greens come in all political denominations which is why they cannot agree on much.
Runner as usual represents the ignorance vote: "I cant see it so you all must be wrong". As you know, I blame the mind games of religion for this. The impact of religion in politics cannot be underestimated either, though blind profits are more to blame. Most religions are tools of very cynical men.
In the end we are animals doing what animals do. Alas, only a fraction of a fraction of humans will survive, whether it be due to overpopulation/war, enviro-surprise, volcano, dino-killer asteroid, etc. Survivalists without a space program are probably doomed.

"I think that the reason so few solutions are suggested to the world's population problem is that it is too late to do anything now."

Now you tell me! First of all, I reject your initial premise. Unlike many in this forum, I still have some human agency. We're not all rooned. It's the Unsustainable People who are rooned if this blog ever hits a newsdesk.

Secondly, if immigration ain't going to make much difference, what's the prob? Let me wise you up. We'd need to have 400,000 people a year coming on board (mainly kids) to bump out the bottom of the demographic pyramid. Our immigration is a small.

Thirdly, how come you're suddenly a nationalist talking about Australia like it's a lifeboat? I can see some National Front tendancies in these posts but nothing I can compare with Patriotism.

There's a nasty genetics angle in these posts. Has anyone else noticed that?

Curmudgeon writes "There is nothing in any of the food production stats in the Western countries to even begin to suggest that a collapse is imminent."

Is it just coincidence that I had a similar discussion on this forum almost a year ago? At that time, I was pointing out that the global economy was on shaky ground and due for a collapse at any time -- not because of the statistics about economic growth, but because of the underlying factors. It was much more than poor economic and regulatory practices in the United States.

In the case of food production, it is also the underlying factors that people seem to conveniently ignore: among other factors, existing and looming water shortages, soil loss and depletion, the continued paving over of arable land even for higher density development, the heavy reliance on soon-about-to-be-scarce-and-expensive fossil fuels for food production and transportation (not to mention fertilizers, manufacture of farm and food production equipment, and other ways that most people don't seem to consider), and further population growth in high consumption countries.

Unless something drastic happens with fossil fuels prices and availability, the decline in food production won't be as rapid as the economic meltdown. But, just like the economic projections from earlier last year, global predictions about food production are pinned on invalid assumptions about underlying factor. Saying that, because have been upward, that will continue into the future reminds me of a physician staring at a growing tumor and predicting that, because it has grown to this point, it will continue to grow indefinitely.

Ah, Cheryl, you’re so typical of the overpopulation deniers.

Quickly bereft of logical and reasonable arguments, you fall into ad hominem attacks, with racism and xenophobia being the typical endpoint.

But accusations of racism don’t change the underlying facts, and here is why: http://sustainablesalmonarm.ning.com/profiles/blogs/accusations-of-racism-dont

Now, given the two post limit here, as my very wonderful Mexican neighbours say, “mañana.”

[But Cheryl: once they start looking for the "useless eaters" then it'll be less “genetic” and more “eugenicist” and plain “racist” i.e., M_I_A's “the problems are coming faster than realised - they are already very evident in places like South Africa, The Solomons, Afghanistan, Haiti etc.” Neo-Malthusians cannot even accept the idea of population adjustments in our current *emergency* conditions, where migration helps to balance out demographic age disparities, distributional injustice and backward delusions of “race homogeneity” all at once.]

Priceless stuff nonetheless! Again my good anti-fascist allies detect the argumentative absurdities in the genocidalists' case (Cheryl's focus on an uber-pessimist-loser's wallowing in discursive futility with “it is too late”).

Or to distill the essence of M_I_A's and Ozandy's posts: “it is too late...we are animals doing what animals do”.

Touché! Now there's a refreshingly honest neo-Malthusian, fascist statement of ADMISSION. Therefore, just corral yourselves off into some wildlife or safari park (preferably “maximum security”) and leave this politics and economics stuff to us HUMANS. “Too late” is a sentiment for no-hoping losers, and nothing is ever too late for real, properly matured, living and breathing (a.k.a. “carbon-emitting”), and life-affirming human beings motivated towards progress for civilization.

And should the degenerates ever seem to have succeeded in the short term, then we merely adjust our aims to resistance, then restoration of civilization, then back to progressive advancement.

Sooner or later, such a cause will always win out.