Ludwig if you release diseases into poor countries who have no nuclear weapons then all is well.The problem with viruses is they mutate very quickly and vaccines become useless.It may not be Govts but international drug companies experimenting with viruses since we are then taxed to solve the problem.Who knows?Some people firmly belive this but how could you prove it?

The Spanish Flu killed 20 million.They say the swine Flu may come back a more virilant form.Is this just another scare campaign?There is currently an investigation into the drug companies who made a fortune out of scaring our Govts into over reacting.Swine flu was no different from any other flu.They hyped up a few deaths which were less than normal flu and we all paid for unnecessary medication.

The over use of antibiotics on our farms is a real concern since many diseases are now resistant them.Why our Govts let this practise continue is beyond me.

The pop problem can be solved in part by education and raising living standards.Perhaps it is too late for some doomsayers but they had a great opportunity after WW2 when pop was just 2 billion,but elected to go for weaponry over education and development.Instead of helping countries the USA and the MIC[ Military Industrial Complex]went for empiralism keeping many countries poor and ignorant paticularly through debt.These poor countries could not trade unless they bought US dollars.

The debate about population sustainability can be had without hysterics on either side. Rational debate is possible on this issue without resorting to accusations of anti-human agendas. Paranoia is alive and well.

As others have said, you cannot achieve a humane end to a problem by using inhumane means.

The only way you can achieve population sustainability within any one nation is via changes to immigration policies (replacement only), ensuring social security safety nets and eradicate baby type bonuses while still affording some welfare to low income families with children.

Some decentralisation policies to reduce congestion and infrastructure problems in big cities would also go a long way.

At the Cairo Population Conference representatives of the Catholic Church supported the Muslim opposition to education for women in return for their support for the Catholic opposition to abortion. A Catholic I know who is fervent in opposition to militarism and other antihuman attitudes and practices cannot see that increasing population is any problem. She said, "We can always use more people." and contends that there will be an increasing food supply to fill the additional mouths.

I believe a population of 100 million is not only achievable, it may well be inevitable.
Currently, around 20 countries have achieved negative population growth; without draconian legislation or genocide. Negative population growth appears to be the natural consequence of a high standard of living, and a well educated population.
Would you believe one southern hemisphere country is actually paying people to have babies?
How long will it take? First,
we have to end poverty,
achieve a world wide infant mortality rate of less than 4% (that's right, I did say 'less than')
enforce world wide anti child labour laws, so children become a cost, rather than an asset, (this could be achieved by simply not trading with countries which condone child labour).
and of course, stop offering monetary incentives to prospective parents.

<< But if we do [limit our population in Australia] … we will still be seen as vacant land in comparison to some of our near neighbors >>

Belly, if we increased our population to 100 million, we’d still be seen as almost vacant, and indeed a very large part of Australia WOULD still be almost vacant.

There is very little point in increasing our population for defence or deterrence reasons. In fact, the maintenance of a high quality of life and a strongly coherent society which would allow us to maintain a strong technologically advanced defence capability, is much more important than the numbers of ‘foot soldiers’.

It is also vitally important for us to be able to have a significant input into refugee and population issues via our international aid programs.

A rapidly growing population severely threatens social coherence.

<< Would you believe one southern hemisphere country is actually paying people to have babies? >>

Yes Grim. Who woulda thunk it possible?

Talk about Ripley’s Believe it or Not?

I bet that just about anyone anywhere else in the world who had just heard about this for the first time would be standing there in total disbelief, wide-eyed, agape and in bad need of reality check!