Well I don't wish to turn this into another IR debate, but seriously, if the governments were to make employing easier and the buying/depreciating of modern, automated equipment, harder, then this would have some impact on jobs.

The present systems rewards employers for buying automated plant, which ultimately decreases the workforce yet makes many employers jump through hoops when it comes to employing. (The recent gateway bridge E-toll is a prime example. Hundreds of jobs lost in favour of automated plant)

In any case, as long as we have advancement in technology, along with a growth in population, we are in deed destined to fall in a heap. It's like burning the candle at both ends.

Call for the compulsory sterilization of domestic moggies and you are caring, responsible and civilised: Call for people to have the means to control their own fertility and you are a closet Nazi human hater. Oh yeah, and dont forget the total terror we should feel because the average age of Aussies might increase by a few years; all the more amusing when the warning comes from an AGW denialist. I can only conclude that pro-populationists are resorting to comical arguments. I'm glad to see them lightening up. A bit of laughter will increase your lifespan, so if we all have a bit of a chuckle a few more of us might experience the Agegedden. It'll be a hoot. You'd better believe it.

examinator says

"Cheryl isn't necessarily a humanist..."

Sorry, mate, that my complex sentence structure threw you off. If you read carefully, you will see that Cheryl, in her rant, seem to be implying that she is a humanist. I certainly don't see her that way, as I have already stated very clearly.

"...such dismissive labeling may have worked during the stone age as a means to explain and thereby control the unknown. But this is a few millennia later."

Yes, it certainly is, but you seem to be doing exactly what you criticize me for: dismissive labeling. Are you doing that to try to explain and thereby control the unknown?

"'In short one swallow doesn't mean spring.'"

No, but for me it means the start of a good meal.

"This issue is serious."

Indeed it is, and it is so serious that I hope that you take the time to read and think about it much more carefully. In fact, I see it as the most serious issue facing humankind, and hope that we can use our so-called "intelligence" to actually mitigate the coming disaster. On the other hand, as one of my uncles said frequently, we shouldn't confuse intelligence with wisdom.

Jon J wrote: "Yes, because of course Asian and African nations are going to sit by quietly and let us drastically reduce our immigration quotas without batting an eyelid."

Last time I checked, Australia was a sovereign nation with an inalienable right to determine the size and composition of its own population. Australia's policies on immigration and population are its own affair and should be dictated by the national interest, not the phantom of "international opinion".

I'm not sure where this "all eyes on Australia" notion originates from, but the idea that the whole world is closely scrutinising our immigration policies, just waiting to condemn Australia the moment we reduce immigration to more sensible levels, is very silly.

Japan has a zero immigration policy. As do most Asian countries. As does most of Europe. In fact, aside from Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States, every country in the world tightly limits immigration. It hasn't hurt their international relations.

In response to Curmudgeon's claims about the economic benefits of immigration, let me say that I've heard all the arguments before and they are not convincing. The reality is that the economic case for immigration is incredibly weak, far weaker than most immigration enthusiasts would care to draw attention to.

The bottom line on the economics of immigration is that while it does increase the overall size of the economy by increasing the size of the population, immigration does not increase the figure that matters - GDP per capita. This point has been belabored over and over again on these forums, but still some people don't seem to get it.

I would also argue that the case of Finland is indeed very germane to this debate. The success of the low-immigration, low-population growth Nordic economies clearly demonstrates that increases in productivity, combined with greater innovation, more efficient use of labour and capital and an emphasis on export-orientated industries are the keys to economic prosperity, not domestic population size or growth.

As for whether immigration increases unemployment, the answer is complex. Unemployment is effected by two factors: increases in the productivity of labour and increases in its supply. As William Mitchell points out in People & Place:

"Simply stated, labour productivity growth reduces the amount of labour required for each unit of output, while labour-force growth [driven by immigration] increases the number of jobs that have to be created if unemployment is to remain unchanged. So both growth rates place upward pressure on the unemployment rate. If GDP growth is strong enough, the economy can absorb the increased labour supply and the growth in labour productivity. For the unemployment rate to be constant, real GDP growth has to equal the sum of labour-force growth and labour productivity growth. We can call this the required rate of GDP growth. Any better rate will lead to a falling unemployment rate, while any deficiencies in the required GDP growth rate will see the unemployment rate rising."

http://elecpress.monash.edu.au/pnp/free/pnpv4n1/mitchell.htm

Yes the population problem IS easy to solve.

WAR.

And it's coming.

The intellect of the ruling anglo-saxon elite in this country is about as perspicacious as on a Pig Farm.

Women and children are the weakest links and will have their upside down aspirations totally trashed as they will be the first, as in all wars to succumb.

And don't bother shooting the messenger. The laws of physics, in particular the second law of thermodynamics can be felt in growth mode as an EGO rush that seems never ending. But it just SEEMS that way. Take the foot off the immigration pedal and learn to live like the Finns and Norwegians before OVERPOPULATION & Global resource dynamics cause a THERMODYNAMIC Stagflation that will have your children fighting for the right to sweep chimneys.

You've all got till about 2020 to 2030 to make up your minds. Its easy alright..KAEP(reversing PEAK oil) or death. Everyone should know what KAEP is by now.

Oh, and don't bother shooting the messenger. What's about to happen is a very natural biological process. YOU are the NAZIS immigrating new market profitability as the stagnation penny drops upon you. What's different this time is ALL THAT CONSCIOUSNESS .. like the very real smell of fear form abattoired cows ramping it up to the bolt. An easy Death will be .. the new market leader.

Soylent Green anyone? Tastes SO good! If you'd sell this fragile country out to rampant immigrants then I KNOW you'd just LOVE it with a fine Kuh.Kuh.Kuh Chianti.