I prefer to believe the ABS, Divergence.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/1301.0~2012~Main%20Features~Defining%20and%20measuring%20GDP~221

Incidentally, is there any reason why you did not use ABS numbers for this line item, as you did with the household data you referred us to later on? Did it not meet your requirements?

We can argue the minutiae as long as you like, but the reality is that our population has grown steadily over the years, and our GDP has grown faster.

>>Any economic gains from mass migration are thus wins in a zero-sum game. If you are better off, then some other existing residents are worse off.<<

Where do you find evidence for this? Intuitively, the new arrivals are likely to start off economically less well off than the existing population. It follows that in an environment where GDP per capita is increasing, the newcomers by definition have a smaller share of that growth, n'est-ce pas?

>>New residents in your community, whether from overseas or elsewhere in Australia, immediately need the full complement of infrastructure.<<

Not really. New residents begin by sharing existing infrastructure. Over time, as they become increasingly productive in the economy, part of that added value will be employed to expand the infrastructure, to everyone's benefit, not just their own.

>>It seems self-evident that demand for new houses (and hence prices) would be low if the population were stable<

You paint a picture that is too dreary to contemplate. Why would demand be low? Because no-one could afford to move. Why cannot they afford to move? Because the economy is stagnant. Why is the economy stagnant? Because the population is stagnant too. And ageing.

And bored out of their skulls.

There are other factors involved here. Think for a moment what the disappearance of growth from the economy would have on jobs. Pay rises would be non-existent, for one thing, leading to a mass exodus of talented youth to countries that didn't have such a short-sighted view of business.

Stagnant Australia. At least it will finally match the ambitions of those people who are still here.

At times for any one of hundreds of reasons threads end, or our taking part in one does.
I think for me at least this one is ending.
I see, and I am just as likely to be wrong as anyone, we are not giving thought to some things we can never change.
This country has no intention of stagnation, and not in population growth for sure YET.
Not party has policy's that fit stagnation.
We can craft fine fantasy's about the out comes of a policy that no one elected to govern has.
Or we can see truth, some are content to strike at windmills and convince them selves it is the dragon we kill.
We can continue to ignore, even at ground level, every country council wants more people more growth more not less.
Ignore too, if it pleases us the set out plans for every city to make room, for more not less people.
I ask that we older folk look at the home town weonce saw look so different than today.
Mine has gone from 140 people to 4.000

Pericles, what’s the point of us going over this subject yet again? We’ve done it so many times. You get trounced but you keep coming back for another thumping! ( :>/

You really did beautifully tangle yourself up this time, I must say.

<< When was the last time you saw a politician actually looking to the future, and making sensible decisions ahead of when they were forced upon them? >>, you ask.

But you do indeed support Gillard’s maintenance of high immigration, which has simply got to one of the most classic examples of a politician making a decision that is not looking to the future that we could ever get!

I’ve picked you up this sort of thing before. You really do hate our poor old polly’s guts, especially in relation to apparent poor decisions regarding infrastructure in Sydney, but generally on a very broad front.

And yet you effectively applaud the worst decisions of all – those to do with the facilitation of rapid continuous growth….

...which has got everything to do with them not being able to implement the necessary infrastructural improvements in overcrowded and still rapidly growing Sydney!!

See, the fundamentals of your argument just completely don’t add up, Pericles!

.

Now, I am having computer issues, which is a real bugger while I am on the road and far from home. So I could be unable to post for a while. I just don’t know.

If Ludwig your problem is the old one, pages sticking and not progressing.
Try what I constantly have to do, click back one space then try again, it works.
However I very much think, not just because of shared views, Pericles is a fair judge.
Surely if not now, after the new government takes over, you will agree that this is not a Labor only program?
By the way, the landslide looks less likely daily, victory still, but Abbott seems determined to make him self look a lessor man beside Turnbull.

Good on you Ludwig.
I`m with you all the way.
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Except soon we`ll see nothing but wall to wall people if some people have their way.

The graph that I linked to is from the Reserve Bank of Australia - a credible source, right? Here is a different graph directly from the Reserve Bank, but without total GDP. It also shows much the same thing, little real growth since 2006, although there has been an upturn in the past year. If population growth is so wonderful, why isn't it making us better off on average?

http://www.rba.gov.au/speeches/2012/sp-gov-080612.html

Of course your economy and total GDP will grow if you have more people, unless you are really near the point of collapse, but that doesn't mean that the average person is any better off. China has a vastly greater total GDP than Denmark, but where would you prefer to live as an ordinary person?

Wikipedia gives real GDP per capita (purchasing power parity) from the World Bank, the IMF, and other sources. There are differences depending on how the calculations are done, but countries like Switzerland or Sweden, which have miniscule population growth compared to ours, are doing just as well or even better than Australia. Population growth isn't necessary for prosperity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

New residents don't wait in limbo until more infrastructure is built and public services expanded before using them. With a $770 billion infrastructure backlog, according to Infrastructure Australia, I wouldn't hold my breath until the government catches up. They are short of money now.

Life without population growth may seem boring to you, because you are one of the people profiting from it. The rest of us might appreciate less crowding and congestion, cheaper housing and utilities, more open space, and shorter waits in hospital emergency rooms.