Banjo

My own view of Hanson's political odyssey is one of alienating anyone who wasn't white, and I thought she did that with little assistance from the media. Have a Google of Nick Griffin and the BNP: I get the impression that this group with its alienating and hateful agenda has poisoned the debate in the UK. So I guess that we will have to agree to disagree about Pauline.

But it is a good example of how people can draw very different conclusions from observing the same event. And on this tack, while you and I might have big concerns about Australia's population, there is no guarantee that many will have similar concerns. Sure, there are people with vested interests in population growth, like the urban fringe koala exterminators keen to sell their shoddy housing estates, or infrastructure providers keen to build the likes of toll roads which would be unnecessary without the massive immigration. But the truth is that many people without a vested interest in population growth may be unconcerned about issues like infrastructure debt, water, congestion or housing affordability. And as an opinion is only as good as the evidence it is based on, they might even be right.

"Back to topic."

Exactly. I hope that a Sustainable Population Party maintains a conservative stance and focuses on the economic implications of high population growth rates. Any diversion from this and they will become irrelevant and give the major parties a green light for mass immigration for yet another decade. What will succeed in changing policy is well reasoned arguments. And such arguments will only succeed if people find them reasonable and relevant to their interests.

From Ludwig's link:

>>Michael Danby, chairman of the Federal Parliament's joint committee on migration, recently wrote that "a long-standing 'vibe' has prevailed in both major parties that population growth is good for the nation". <<

As soon as I read this, a picture of harmonic resonance flashed in my mind. It's where two vibrations exacerbate each other to give an out-of-control vibration like happened in the Tacoma Narrows Bridge disaster. The danger is that if both parties continue to reinforce each other's ideologies, Australia's population will exponentially balloon out to the point where there is some kind of crash.

It's probably about time common sense prevailed and the Australian public got the politicians to dampen our current overall immigration intake. if in doubt, Oz should take a breather for about a decade - ie slow down immigration - and then reassess the situation then.

It does not matter what the government says or does we will either
have a sustainable population or a declining population.

Without an increase in energy nothing can grow or expand.
We are not looking at an increase in energy, we are looking at a few
years of stable everything followed by a sustainable population and
industry if we can get our energy transition done carefully.

The trick will be to increase our alternative energy sources for
transport by use of electricity and keep our power plants running
whether on coal or some other base load plant such as geothermal.
Wind and solar is just not going to do it.
Reports from Europe are increasingly pessimistic about wind.
The overall cost and efficiency is becoming unsupportable.
The problem in Spain is that the feedin tarrif which is being
subsidised by the government has added a large sum to their financial
problem within the Euzone and is about to present a similar problem to
the Euzone as Greece has. Spain has a very large alternative energy sector.

The upshot is we reduce our energy demand or manage a transition,
or we go down the gurgler with a really big depression.
Population increase has no part in that scenario.

Ludwig
What policies would you like to see?

Thanks for asking Peter.

I’ve said it all before a bunch of times on OLO, but repetition is the nature of the beast.

I would like to see immigration reduced to net zero until it is lowered to something in the order of 30 000 per annum.

So in the first year, it would be reduced to about 80 000 as this is currently about how many people emigrate each year.

As the immigration rate drops, so will the emigration rate. So the following year would be down to something in the order 60 000, I guess.

With an intake of 30 000 we would still have some essential skills, family reunion and a considerably increased refugee intake.

The baby bonus should also be terminated forthwith.

This is all we need to do to direct our national population growth towards a stable level of not more than 25 million….. and to stop the pressure on our environment and stressed resources from constantly worsening.

There is nothing difficult or draconian about it.

Ozzie:

I for one agree wholeheartedly with this subject of accepting a stable population growth, and for the reasons that you stated in your response.

I did notice that until now, no one person has acknowledged your particular response, which could bring me to make to a very "unsavoury" observation and ask the following question,....how many participants on these Threads contribute purely for the sake of seeing their own names ( pseudonyms ) and / or simply wish to push their own one-eyed narrow-minded opinions, rather than entering into a stimulating and well-balanced exchange of views.

I will expand this statement further by quoting my many experiences with my many "contacts" participating in their own type of ongoing communication via the Internet, which inevitably day by day is a mind-blowing plethora of inane and repetitive jokes, cartoons and quips, however when any attempt to formulate a more sensible communication with them, based upon a reasonable standard of compository exchange, one is rewarded with either a deathly silence or another mind-numbing worn out "joke" of yesteryear!

In essence it appears that the average Internet "contact" is simply abusing the opportunity to utilize this mode of relatively cheap and simple communication, due to his or her apathy, or simple lack of communicatory skill or intelligence!

I myself whince when trying to develop a reasonable exchange of information with contacts with whom I spent my school years ( at the same school and in the same Form ) and find myself having to accept a meaningless short response accentuated with mis-spellings and very poor composition, without any address to the original subject, and followed shortly after by another of the many well-worn and idiotic "jokes"!

I close this comment by saying to you "well put! Ozzie!"