Adding to my last post….

...and to a decent level of input into international aid / refugee / sustainability / quality of life issues, by way of contributing at least the UN recommended level of 0.7% of our GDP.

Aussie eagle

I guess there are two overridingly important factors here;

1. to be able to achieve a sustainable society that is small enough and smart enough to be able to maintain a high quality of life based on what the resource base of this continent can provide and

2. be able to defend it, or to not live in fear of invasion or surreptitious infiltration, in the decades ahead as China grows in strength, the US declines, and turmoil increases in Indonesia.

Sustainability and the maintenance of a high quality of life have got to come first. If we can’t uphold these values, society will basically fall apart, the rule of law will break down and money will be poured into reactive issues rather than longer term goals including defence. Indeed, the defence budget would very likely be skittled.

I can appreciate the desire to build a much stronger defence capability as soon as we can, and that boosting our population seems like a sensible part of it. But if rapid population growth is going to prejudice our ability to ride through the energy crunch, and increase the chances of our society fracturing, then we just can’t have it (or at least, any half-sensible federal government wouldn’t have it).

We simply have to think about our defence capability and our influence on the world stage with a population that is only slightly larger than at present…. at least until we are confident of riding through the very ominous looming resource crunches of oil and water.

Well, I can certainly see that we are getting closer to reaching some common ground. I can also admit that developed countries with large populations (eg. Japan, France, Germany, UK, US) all face challenges partially as a result of their huge populations. Sure the European Union is a very integrated unit as of late, and they got a lot more rainfall than we do. However, they are also only human and we are in many cases almost as sophisticated as they are. As I said previously, a whole-hearted national approach to development is probably not the best course of action, rather one based on individual regions based on their specific challenges and desires. Regions that need less assistance in infrastructure need not be funded for growth as much as those that are more burdened by continuous growth, and therefore need more assistance. "The effect of growth" needs to be considered as a matter of environmental concern, however the costs of either halting (which in turn will result in either slow continuous growth or decline anyways) or slowing growth also needs to be considered in such strategies. However, I stick by my personal population targets and truly believe that with enough research and strategy it can be achieved without causing any serious damage and perhaps even reverse some damage as a result in change of how we use energy etc., and Australia will stand unchallenged in its economic and political sovereignty and natural role as one of the main players of the Asia-Pacific region, and in the future possibly on the world stage. We have a great oppourtunity to lead the world in better ways of using water and natural resources through our devotion to sustainable development.

One problem is that of national sovereignty and the strain on resources of having independent military capabilities and the perceived need for greater population which national sovereignty entails. We need a weaker national identity and a greater identity with the rest of humanity.

There is also an insane competition. There has recently been a call for increased funding to make Australia more competitive in the olympics. In my opinion Australia is over-competitive in that area now. It would be a more reasonable goal if we still stayed in the olympics to have Australia's olympic medals in proportion to Australia's population and use the funds now devoted to elite athletes in the Institute of Sport to general fitness and the transformation of obese couch potatoes into active human beings.

David f “We need a weaker national identity and a greater identity with the rest of humanity.”

That sounds like “internationalism”, a type of “Trotsky rubbish think”.

Rather than worrying about the rest of humanity, look after your own first and with what time is left over (assuming you have any if you are doing the job properly), ponder what a mess other folk get into and if they really want you pretending you “identify” with them.

For me “identifying” with other nations is pure “sentimentality” and is as self-indulgent as masturbation, it makes the practitioner feel good for the moment but does nothing for anyone else.

Better to be proud of who you are and the nation you are part of and lead by example of how things can be when people are free to choose for themselves.

Oh and to an earlier post on this thread from Aussie Eagle “You anti-growthists have no sense of patriotism or pride in national greatness,”

I am not an anti-growthist, like my previous post said, “growth” is merely an economists measurement tool for something economists think they understand. Personally I am more into “quality of life”, happiness and other things which actually matter but I digress, your comment regarding patriotism reminds me the definition of patriotism reminds me of Samuel Johnsons observation, it being the last refuge of the scoundrel.

I chose to become Australian, l am proud to be Australian, that does not means I work toward national greatness. Such “national greatness” is merely an illusion, created from the reflection of the individuals who comprise the nation.

What makes a nation great is not the government not its institutions. It is the individuals going about their daily lives with accountability for their actions, a strong sense of work ethic, respect and compassion for others.

“Patriotism” is just the sort of drivel which saw millions led to their deaths in WWI.

With all these great intentions, do you know what man will do about NOTHING. This is why the phrase that has echoed thought the sands of time and will never change. "It all goes in the too hard basket".
or, "she'll be right mate". I just love that one.

When Hitler killed the people of WW2, I can see a pattern appearing. In the same way, when we look at a plage of rabbits lets say, and no-one minds if man takes it upon him self and culls them, except the rabbits of course.
Man used to wage war to cull ourselves, amongst other reasons, basically man becomes frighten when the other sides grew to big. So man will try a new weapon of the microscopic kind( they say aids is doing well) cause any other method, the strain will be just to much to bear( planetary wise ). Yes I study conspiracy theories, and for every mountain of bullsh-t, there's always a nugget of truth.

Man cant stop his greed, so they will stop us to save ourselves.
Live well little rabbits.lol

Just a thought. Not fact.

EVO