Alright, I’ll try that again…. I fullY agree Cornflower.

Antonios, I’m sorry but all of your points are just terribly off the mark. None of your touted advantages are significant, and you just don’t seem to have any concept of balance between humanity and the natural environment or of the necessity of securing of a sustainable resource base.

Maybe we can discuss this further in my forthcoming new general thread on population.

Protagoras

1.Population density. Persons per sq km
Netherlands 466.45
United Kingdom 244.69
Germany 234.86
United States 29.77
World 14.42
Australia 2.47
We can multiply our population without problems!

2. pastoral leases cover some 42% of the Australian land mass. Many of the leases were issued unchecked to land speculators and were never occupied or developed and came back under government control early this century. These are known as "historic" or "ghost" leases and many of them are now undeveloped land owned by Governments.
http://www.nlc.org.au/html/land_native_wik.html
I do not know or care very much for old agreements as pastoral leases or any other kind of agreements. Is not it time to finish with these old stories and try to create the sweetable conditions for a STRONG Australia with big population, many and big industries? If we need to take hard decision let's do it!

3. I understand the rights of aborigines but I do not ignore or underestimate the needs for a strong Australia. Somehow we must speed up the whole procces about aborigines rights and create the right conditions for a strong Australia.
4. I support the idea for the creation of new towns across Australia, especialy in areas with enouph drinking water or not far from the sea. There are countries which use sea water for their needs in high degree, 50%-60% of their total needs, we can do it too. We must find the way to give life in most parts of our land.
5. Australia is a big country, is a rich country and it is our duty to try to create the strong Australia.
6. I can not forget the big fires in Victoria and the big lessons we learned from them. Some tried to save some trees or worms and at the end we lost our houses, we lost our wealth, we burned the forest and wild animals. I am against the supper sensitive naturalists who ignore human needs and underestimate the high risks and problems they create with their super sensitivities.

Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Antonios

I speak not of the beginning of the century. The buy back of pastoral freehold and resumption of leases in WA is current for conservation measures.

Now to whom can you attribute the blame for Australia’s massive bushfires in the past when the name, “environmentalist” had not yet been invented but regular forest fuel burn offs were being conducted – to no avail?

I believe that we are speaking to a brick wall for you appear not to have the ability to digest other people’s information. I remind you again that most of Australia’s land mass is arid and semi arid and unsuitable for crop production.

Furthermore, Australia’s arable land (suitable for crop production) is 6.4% of total land mass and feeds 60 million people. The Netherlands has 25% percent, Germany has 33% of arable land and the UK has 25%. Catch on Antonios?

Now come AS who put that last post in your name together for you, why the difference.
To say more migrants equals more wealth may be the reason some want them.
To call boats loaded with men not kids and wives refugees is stretching it.
I never ever said no migrants, or no refugees, I will not back away from it, I see no reason to except some who will not integrate , SOME not all Muslims.
SEE you get a chance to hate me, for saying what most say in private.
Numbers? come back to the thread in ten years tell me then if I am alive I was wrong.
Famine, war, awful government and religious bigotry are going to drive millions to become refugees.

Ludwig: << rather than comment on your interpretation of what Banjo, Belly or Cornflower have said, and rather than me trawl back through this very long thread in search of their posts, can I ask you to do the leg work and provide direct quotes or direct me to the appropriate posts for the issues that you would like me to address. >>

What a cop-out! You've been participating in this thread as long as I have, and if you're unaware of the comments to which I refer (among many others), then you've got very selective perception. Despite your protestations, your blind eye to the evident bigotry from some in this discussion is very telling.

As for this:

<< Are you sure it isn’t because you aren’t really that interested in population stabilisation and sustainability? >>

There probably is a bit of that. I'm certainly not as obsessed as you are, and I really couldn't be bothered dealing with the hateful bigots who use population sustainability as a more acceptable cover for their racism or misanthropy.

<< just a wee bit of perving on bikini-clad babes! { :>) >>

As I recall, wasn't one of the attractions of Balding Bay the absence of the bikinis? ;)

Protagoras
"Australia’s arable land (suitable for crop production) is 6.4% of total land mass and feeds 60 million people. The Netherlands has 25% percent, Germany has 33% of arable land and the UK has 25%" We speak for a whole continent! Can you estimate how many times bigger is the Australia’s arable land from Netherlands' Germany's or UK arable land?
Can you tell me why we are crying for water when every year huge districs overfooded from waters? Why we do not make water dams, why we do not use this water for our needs, and leave it to go to the oceans?
(I am busy, I must go work).
WE ARE LAZY, WE DO NOT LIKE TO USE OUR BRAIN AND THE ONLY THING WE DO IS THE EXPLOITATION OF NEW AUSTRALIANS AND THE SELLING OF OUR MINERALS TO FOREIGNERS IN VERY LOW PRICES!
42% of the Australian land mass leased to a small number of hands with very low lease, for long time, while new australians pay thousands of dollars for a small portion of land. This is unexeptable! We have land but we do not have the willing to use this land with a fair way!
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide