Rudds vision of population

When He stated recently on the 7.30 report that; “I make no apology. I actually think it's good news that our population is growing.”

He exposed for all to see that he is not the man to lead Australia into the future.

Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist.

Australia is already starting to suffer from overpopulation and it’s effects.

The river systems are on the brink of destruction.

The transport system is verging on the chaotic and there is not enough time or money to replace it with an efficient rail system.

We are dependent on a vastly polluting network of coal-fired power stations instead of building a new alternative energy system.

Money that should be spent on developing this is instead diverted into so called R & D by the coal industry to develop mythical “clean coal”.

Water is in ever decreasing supply and only by building power hungry desalination plants can the major and some minor cities be supplied.

Agricultural land is vanishing at an astonishing rate to be converted into yet more housing.

Housing is also in short supply due to the pressure of a rapidly increasing population.

How can there be any benefit to a population liable to increase by 60% in the next 40 years, when it is going to reduce our standard of living drastically?

If the country follows the Populate at all costs program, it will eventually bring disaster.

I would urge the ALP to seriously consider a replacement for him, before he does any more damage.

Sarnian,

"When He stated recently on the 7.30 report that; “I make no apology. I actually think it's good news that our population is growing.”

He exposed for all to see that he is not the man to lead Australia into the future."

Agreed but the other side will do the same because it suits the big end of town and because the ethnic lobby is now too well organised and strong to resist. Any mention of reducing immigration numbers and there is a barrage of criticism from predictable sources.

The only hope is to create enough awareness in the community of the risks and downside of large immigration to cause a swing of votes (preferably in the Senate) that is larger than the number the ethnic lobby can threaten the major parties with.

I totally agree Sarnian. Rudd is NOT the right person to lead this country. This has become patently obvious. He's GOT to go at the next election.

It is of the utmost importance that we impress on Turnbull that the path he and the Libs MUST take is the 'sustainable future' path, of which the stabilisation of our population is vital.

Numerous times on this forum I have implored Turnbull to set himself up as a very different alternative to Rudd by taking on the challenge of genuine sustainability. Sure it is a daunting ask, but I reckon that if he did this, he'd garner a huge amount of support from the general community and when they could see that he was genuine, he'd have enough support to win power.

This political direction simply HAS to happen in the near future. So if Turnbull doesn't do it, it will be up to his replacement.

Surely the Libs can see that if they just continue to be a shadow of the incumbents, with essentially the same policies, then they haven't got a hoot in hell of winning power.

I agree, sarnian, Kevin Rudd, for many reasons, is not the person to lead Australia into the future, though I'm afraid he seems to see himself more and more as the natural contender for the role.

I don't think it's the ethnic lobby, Cornflower, as much as the business lobby who's pushing for high immigration levels. Business wants a trained up and on tap labor force plus it needs an ever expanding population to keep consumer demand high.

As pointed out by sarnian, it's all totally unsustainable, but unfortunately both sides of politics seem locked into this mindset of continual growth at all costs.

Our humanitarian obligations need to be honoured, but apart from that, immigration in my opinion should be wound right back to minimum levels.

I agree with sarnian - however, the ALP has always advocated population growth and Rudd is simply parroting the party line. Unfortunately, the Coalition is, if anything, even more 'growthist' in its philosophy - so anybody who thinks they can convince Turnbull (or Hockey or whoever) to run on a sustainable population is seriously deluded.

The only mainstream political party to advocate a sustainable population for Australia is of course the Greens.

<< Population boom 'a recipe for tragedy'

September 18, 2009

AUSTRALIAN Greens leader Bob Brown has taken issue with Prime Minister Kevin Rudd for expressing enthusiasm for a growing population.

The Federal Government has released revised estimates showing Australia's population will increase from 22 million at present to 35 million by 2049, boosting 2007 estimates by more than 7 million people.

Mr Rudd said "it's great'' from an economic perspective that Australia's population was growing as other nations experienced a decline.

But Senator Brown said Mr Rudd needed to explain how population growth would affect economic prosperity.

"This population boom is not economic wisdom, it is a recipe for planetary exhaustion and great human tragedy,'' he said. >>

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26092455-12377,00.html

They want a big Australia for National Security reasons - people from the over crowded nations up North will eventually charge into Australia if they see all this room we have.

But what Australia should do is keep the Australian population as homogeneous as possible and around 20 million people. We should develop a stock pile of nuclear weapons, all problems solved, no nuclear armed country will ever be invaded (at least not till the end of days).