Dick Smith wants a reduction in world population and here in Ausralia.He however fails to look at the reality here in Aust.Dick is alarmist is predicting that having 3 children will spiral our pop to 100 million at the turn of the century.

If you only have 2 children,the pop falls due to death rates and infertility.Also we have the factor of people choosing not to have children.Aust is ranked 167 of 221 countries in birth rates of 12.33 children born per thousand,which is a quarter of the top ranked countries like Niger.Even having 3 children pop remain steady because of infertility and accidents.

Dick Smith has failed to address the big influence on pop growth in Aust,ie immigration.25% of our pop is born overseas.This is the biggest influence on pop growth.

Why is Dick Smith attacking the size of our families instead of the size of immigration?

Why is Dick Smith attacking the size of our families instead of the size of immigration?

AJ....That has to be, the best Question I've ever seen.

LEAP

"Why is Dick Smith attacking the size of our families instead of the size of immigration?"

In the article I read,

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/limit-australian-families-to-two-kids-says-dick-smith/story-e6frf7l6-1226031080419

DS called for an immigration rate of 70,000 per annum. or well under half of what it is currently. So to answer your question, he addresses both issues, not just one.

Fester why have an immigration intake at all if pop growth here is that serious? Even 70,000 is a lot of people.Surely we should consolidate our culture here and create stability instead of division when given a choice between natural births and imported people.

In all reality,immigration is used to keep wages low.Dick admitted he prospered on high growth but Dick wants future generations to have much lower living standards.The lack of housing is not due to lack of resources,it is due to Govt policy of profiteering on land and the fact that we sold off our Govt Banks.All our new money for growth is now created as debt by private banks.That is the prime reason for fall in living standards.

Arjay:“Surely we should consolidate our culture here and create stability instead of division when given a choice between natural births and imported people.”

Why? Or how does stopping immigration and letting people breed consolidate our culture? Last time it was bought up on OLO I don’t think anyone could even describe the Aussie culture.

And when exactly in living memory were we hunter gatherers like Dick suggests? And chicken coops was mentioned in the article whereas you’d like to close the gates and make it a rabbit hutch Arjay?

Whole thing gave me the giggles, wanting to shut people out who already exist and start dropping new sprogs about the place. I wish countries would start acting like they are part of a whole world.

For weeks the news headlines have been dominated by cuts, food prices, Arab rebellions, nuclear disaster. Arguably these all have their source in the same fundamental problem: too many people chasing too many resources. Far-fetched?
Why are food prices going up? Because fuel prices are going up. Why are fuel prices going up? Because fossil fuels are beginning to run out.
Why should there be cuts in government expenditure? Because in the light of cost increases we can no longer go on offering ourselves the generous public services that we have come to expect as a right during the good times.
The rebellions in the Arab countries are thought by analysts (e.g. at the World Bank) to have come about right now because of food shortages. And famine is increasing, not decreasing, in Africa.
And nuclear disaster? The earthquake and the tsunami were geological phenomena. But if Japan had not been one of the most densely populated countries of the world, it might have been able to locate its (fewer) nuclear reactors more judiciously.
Perhaps Malthus was right after all. Perhaps we should indeed be doing all we can to ensure that our global population 'only' increases by one more billion to 8 billion in 2050, the minimum currently forecast by the UN, rather than the maximum it forecasts, 11 billion, a staggering 60% increase over present-day figures. Anything we can do to reduce the numbers in our little corner is worth many times the dubious value of a Carbon Tax