There are a lot of pages online about ways to terraform other planets into making them more habitable for human beings. Mars only has a third of our gravity so will never be a healthy place to live in all likelihood. Venus would require most of its atmosphere to be oblated away by asteroids before it could even approach becoming hospitable. Both of these projects would require supermassive engineering capability. Why not focus on a more realistic terraforming project. Australia!

Most of this ancient continent is dry desert and what keeps the rains along the eastern coastline is the great dividing range. Why not build a second one? We purchase a few thousand bulldozers and start piling up sandy loam. Just like they built up land in Holland and reclaimed it from the sea. We could slowly build hills all the way down the country. We put down a layer and then compact it. Over and over until a wind and rain break is established. All the dirt removed from the ground creates a long line of linked lakes to catch runoff from these hills.

It would reduce unemployment and create new land opportunities for farming and towns. That would mean more affordable housing. we could increase our population and become more competitive globally. This land once had rainforest from the Indian to the Pacific. We might not green Australia up that much but any increase in livable territory has to be good.

<<but any increase in livable territory has to be good>>

One cannot speak of something being good before agreeing on what "good" means.

I'm afraid some of the reasons you mentioned are not "good" to begin with:

Reducing unemployment = increasing slavery: More people forced to bid their boss's whims and bend their conscience around it; or forced out of bed early while still tired; not see their family enough; not have enough time to care for their own body and spirit; drive to the city at peak times; etc.

More affordable housing = more luxury, more waste, more energy consumption and ultimately more population.

Increased population = more mouths to feed, more demands, more specialization, more conflicts, less space, less privacy, less peace.

Globally competitive = more stress, more dependence, less compassion.

Willfulness is the problem, not the solution! Human effort is in vain, all success is fleeting and everything physical will crumble - but if efforts are made in the spirit of goodness, then it doesn't matter because the reward of goodness is goodness itself.

Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.

With that attitude to life its a miracle you haven't starved to death. Lifting food to your mouth must be agonisingly monotonous labour. More farms mean more food for more mouths. More people means more production and exports. That leads to a higher standard of living. Kevin Rudd wanted to increase the population but didn't address the realities of limited living space.

Presently the topsoil blows away in the outback because there is nothing to stop it. All the land needs is rain and it would become as green as the coastline. A second dividing range would protect the topsoil and trap clouds. With modern machinery it would be a lot less work than the snowy river scheme. Even a lazy ne'er do well such as yourself could learn to drive a bulldozer. You would be sitting on your backside all day.

Ofcourse the Greens would kick up a fuss about raping the natural state of this barren dust bowl. How dare we turn it into beautiful green hills and lakes! Thats easily taken care of. We give them what they want. If they want desert then we round them all up, drive them out to the middle of the Simpson and leave them there.

We are a long way away from that or even trying achieve it.
Very much needs doing before we spend many times the GNP it landscaping the country.

( :>|

!! !! !! !!

I don't know Belly.

Aren't our friendly greens trying to do just that. I thought they wanted to turn the country back to the garden of Eden as per 1769, & have us running around in the raw, looking for roots---& things.