Anybody who think we could get away with that and not be isolated even in wars isn't looking very carefully or has forgotten the history.

We are exposed here folks we need to be thinking long term.

It is undeniable that the world population is too high and needs natural reductions.

By doing so at the point of gun in the mid ocean certainly isn't it.

We the western world need to be proactive and seek another way.

Examiner, you appear to be wasting your breath, unfortunately. I agree with what you say, and it furthers what I said previously. We cannot ignore the rest of the planet, nor will we be allowed to. Therefore, we should look towards expanding our infrastructure to cater to further influx of people, and plan for that. That is sustainable.

What is not sustainable, is ignorance of the rest of the world.

How did America become what it is today? "Bring us your outcast...." is how. Non-stop growth of people and expansion of infrastructure to become the power-house economy they have become. Yet we have people here wanting to keep things as they are with just over 20 million people. HELLO! Is there anyone paying any attention out there?!?

We are a few attempting to keep a resource-rich continent to ourselves in an ever-expanding globe of ever-reducing resources. How realistic does that sound?

I would rather welcome many, than have to attempt to repel many more, with so few.

Our future is not about sustainability, it is about survival in a world of reducing resources, of which fresh water and arable land have become of primary concern. This is not about having the 2.2 kids and 2 Commodores in the garage. This is about the survival of a species that is starting to outstrip the resources on which it survives. It is a global concern, not only a national one.

TBC..

The other thing that is mostly overlooked in discussion about the Western Economy, is this...the Western World as we have come to know it, only constitutes something in the vacinity of 1 billion or so people. China alone is 1.2 billion people, and becoming more and more a part of the Western Economy every day. India is another billion or more, and also joining the Western Economy. It could be said that in the last decade or two, that the Western Economy in number of participants is more than tripling. This has a lot to do with why there will be a very slow recovery from the GFC, as well as the fact that we'll never see things like they were again. Those days of economic frolic such as we had in the 80's and 90's, are over. These are the pressures being placed upon markets, workforces and the costs of labour, let alone global resources of minerals, for that extra two billion or more, also want to live like us. The point of fact is, 3 billion, let alone the entire planet of 6-7 billion people, cannot live like we do today in our Western countries, with our excess and over-consumerism. There just are not the resources in the way that we currently use them, to do it. But nor will those other 6 billion people tolerate the disparity any longer. So invite them in and be in control of that with planning, for there's too many of them to fight.

And if history has taught us nothing else, it should be that people will take what they need if it is denied them long enough.

*How did America become what it is today? "Bring us your outcast...." is how*

Sheesh, what a great reason to not copy their example, for it
would be sad indeed, if Australia became like America.

BTW, America is basically bankrupt. I would certainly not
live there.

* I won't even describe it as a "right", although I think it comes pretty close - of people to get together and create a family, is a good idea.*

Interesting question Pericles. Create a family yes, but where are
the limits? I watched a programme on tv the other night, where
an American family were on child no 19, with no 20 planned. It
was "God's will" apparently.

No doubt Govt will be paying most of the bills. So where do my
rights start and responsibilities finish?

I watched another programme where a man in Chad was complaining that
things were tough and he wanted food aid. He had 2 wives and
11 children. Do we just keep sending food to feed whatever
people decide to produce? What are the limits?

Yet another programme I watched, a CNN reporter went into the
backblocks of Nigeria and was amazed that women would approach
her in the street and offered to give her their babies. They
already had a whole lot and could not cope.

Basic human instinct will prevail, you won't convince people to
cross their legs, but all the surveys that I have seen suggest
that women in the third world would use contraception if it were
available and affordable.

That is not the case for hundreds of millions, so they keep
popping them out like rabbits. We are then amazed when the
global population keeps increasing by 80 million a year, with
even more poverty, hunger etc.

The elephant in the room remains population. Dick Smith addressed
the Australian issue, but it needs adressing globally.

Agree Yabby.

If people were given voluntary access to affordable birth control (meaning free for the world's poor), the world's population would stabilise. No coercion needed. No army of brownshirts needed to enforce the party line. It is simply a matter of offering people a choice. The reality is that the resistance is coming from political leaders who do not want their citizens to have access to birth control.

I watched Dick Smith's docco the other night also, and I was struck by the authoritarian nature of some of the growth advocates. It seemed a case of the growthist opinions being driven by self interest instead of sound evidence. I was particularly dumbstruck to see John Elliott talking about a water pipeline from Lake Argyle to the headwaters of the Darling. I had thought such ideas the province of extremist groups like the Citizen's Electoral Council, not former Liberal Party Presidents. If such views are not uncommon amongst politicians and business leaders, I would think Tim Flannery's idea of an independent authority to set Australia's immigration rate an excellent one.