I think we should send Stephen Meyer home.

We are a nation of immigrants who have in the past reached out our hand to other immigrants be they British, or those displaced by our great wars, or those we needed to build our infrastructure like the Snowy Mountain Hydro Electric Scheme, or those fleeing conflict etc.

It has been a core Australian value, not quite “Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses longing to be free” but a fair approximation.

So Mr Meyer is not only old but against this Australian value. Kick the bugger out! Obviously he is only intent in stirring up trouble and social unrest! Away with him and his ilk!

Only joking, well sort of.

Hasn't old Johnny turned us even more into a bunch of selfish ingrates. 'I'm here now and no one else is allowed to share what I have'. 'You can shut the door now thanks, I'm settled' 'Unless further immigration can be shown to be definitively in Australia's best interest (by that I really mean mine) I don't want a bar of it.'

Reminds me of Australia's effort at the previous Kyoto negotiations. Through 'hard negotiation' Australia secure an increased target for emissions of 8% above 1990 levels rather than a reduction, was allowed to include a reduction in its horrendous land clearing rates, and still said not good enough and walked out, all in “Australia's best interest”.

What if we took a chunk from a high fertility country or area such as Jewish West Bank settlers, and within a generation we would have dramatically lowered that group's contribution to the population bubble, we would have eased some of the tensions in the region, plus I'm sure their food is just delicious.

As a wealthy country shouldn't we do something to help the world ride out the population bubble?

*As a wealthy country shouldn't we do something to help the world ride out the population bubble?*

We sure should Csteele. For a start we should provide some resources
for third world citizens, who lack the family planning options that
we have in Australia, so that families can actually choose how
many children they have. They still pop them out like rabbits in
parts of the third world.

But of course our religious fanatics freak out at the thought
of Australia providing family planning and abortion services,
as we have in Australia and as we take for granted.

What we have done in the third world is a scandal. We've shipped
in boatloads of food and planeloads of medicine, but ignored
family planning. We are then amazed that there are even more
people to deal with. Bringing them to Australia is not going to
fix it, good old family planning will, as has been shown in
countries where it is provided.

>As a wealthy country shouldn't we do something to help the world ride
out the population bubble?

There is something nagging at me about this whole
developed/underdeveloped country rating.
Whether it be for immigration or global warming considerations.
Some of the undeveloped countries had a head start of up to one or two

thousand years on us, some quite a bit less.
If we could pull ourselves up by hard work why should we compensate
them for muddling around for some hundreds of years ?
It is not a matter of resources either. We made the best of ours,
why didn't they do the same ?

CJSteele,
yes there is something we can still do to help the destitute and those whose lives have been ravaged by war. You're quite right.
Why dont we ask the authorities of these countries to allow us to transport out in our largest fleet of aircraft and airlift them all into Australia. Is that your vision? Now dont start making reservation about limiting them to some magic figure because then you'll be discriminatimg against the poor who have to be left behind.

You are sure,arent you, that we have the water and the food andhousing to accomodate the millions, or shall we say only the few hundred thousand? Sure about that?
Look at the state of those who have exercised the sort of goodwill and charity you advocate eg Holland,Belgium, Germany and the UK to name just a few. These countries have sold off the cultural and political birthright of its people whose future no longer are in their hands.Those countries are under permanent occupation.
Where will your goodwill and Christian charity land us in the future? thought of that, hsve you?

socratease

stevenlmeyer: "I am intrigued that no one here has been able to cite a single study that shows net benefits from large scale immigration."

You shouldn't be. This is the first time you asked for one.

This one recommends an annual intact of 80,000 if we want to avoid "spiralling population decline and substantial falls in the size of the labour force":

http://adsri.anu.edu.au/pubs/popfutures/01.pdf

Or: "the current level of clandestine US immigration may not be far from what society might view as socially optimal."

http://www.springerlink.com/content/m4j3227182068367/

Or: "Using a basic model, plausible assumptions, we show the immigration produces net economic gains for domestic residents" (page 4):

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=BUJFpYcaUnQC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=population+size+study+immigration+fiscal+benefits&ots=FAQeN25x4x&sig=1vmB2ykaOmUfgpbCIKKKUeMPm9w#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Dear socratease,

You said; "Those countries are under permanent occupation.".

No they are not.

I would love to answer your questions so I'm wondering if you would care to put them in a clearer manner.

Dear Yabby,

You are absolutely correct. Under the Howard government, with direct input from Tasmanian senator Brian Harridine Australia's annual overseas family planning aid went from $6.9 million in 1996 to just $2.3 million in 2007. A real disgrace.

However we need to be doing a lot more to lift some of these developed countries out of poverty. I recently re-acquainted myself with Han Rosings talk on global population and health. One very inspirational video!

http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_shows_the_best_stats_you_ve_ever_seen.html

The world is expected to reach its population peak around 2050 at 9.2 billion. However fertility rates have been dropping dramatically. From over 5 to 6 births per women 50 years ago to 2.6 world wide at present. Once below 2.3 it mean no further growth. Our grandchildren will be facing a world with a whole new set of problems that a declining global population will bring. For economies that haven't planned properly there will be real shortages caused by the lack of workers. If we had cut our immigration rates to zero a decade ago and refused to take in any guest workers we would be enjoying a diminished economy now. The challenge will be to decouple our economy from increases in population because when it begins to turn around we will be left floundering.

As there is no sign of any such plan from the government we have little choice but to keep the levels up.

To our credit though we have welcomed immigrants from strife torn areas such as after the fall of Saigon, from East Timor, from South American dictatorships, after Tiananmen square, from the Yugoslav conflict, from Lebanon and from Indonesia after riots there.

If we need to maintain immigration rates then why not do it on a basis that we can be proud of.