Foxy,

You really need to do the math. Our population is currently growing at 1.8% per year according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics and is currently about 23 million. A little work with a calculator will show that if growth continues at this rate, the population in 30 years will be 39.5 million, not 25 million. Stabilising at 25 million would be hard, even with zero net immigration. Currently 60% of our population growth is from immigration. The rest is natural increase, about a third of which is due to births to migrants. Eventually the demographic momentum will run out, and natural increase (at least for the native born population) will stop, but not until some time in the 2030s.

So far as aging is concerned, Australia is just changing to a stable age structure, where all the generations will be of approximately equal size until you get to extreme old age. If the Baby Boomers are those born from 1945-1964, and Generation X are those born from 1965-1984, then there are 10% more people in Generation X. The next generation is bigger yet. There just isn't an enormous overhang of Baby Boomers. Unless you want to kill people off when they get too old, every country is just going to have to learn to live with an older age structure.

Let's consider David f's figures on the water. If outcomes in the nastier range of the scientists' predictions come to pass, we could get drier yet. Responsible rulers will maintain decent safety margins for their people. We don't have them.

By the way, I am a woman

Divergence,
Found your info very interesting. Have you looked at the government sponsored family planning programs in Thailand and Iran? They dropped the birth rate from about 6 per woman to less than 2. It may also be useful to compare Thailand's economy with that of the Phillipines, which does not have government sponsored family planning.

If you have any further info on the adverse effects of high population or immigration rates I would like to see that. As a former farmer, I nearly cry when I see good land covered by concrete, bitumen and houses. Lots of people do not realize that the pioneers established towns on good land with water available.

How stupid for Brisbane council to allow housing subdivision below the 1974 flood level. That caused flooding to about 50% of the houses.

Dear Divergence,

Maths has never been my strong suit due to
being bullied at school by my mathematics mistress.
Thank you for the points you've made and the civil
way in which you made them.
BTW: I'm a woman too.

Dear Divergence,

I will re-state what I've made clear from the beginning:

While there are several ways of discussing immigration
I don't believe that immigration can be discussed without
understanding the political context. Policy may be made by
rational bureaucrats, but it's invariably developed within
a political process and against a background of public
opinion. While it is an aspiration of Australian policy
makers to be rational and detached, the reality is rather
different.

I'll say it again - that I believe that Australia needs a
continuing and planned immigration program into the
future and that the sources from which immigrants are drawn
make a multicultural approach to policy essential
and that policy should be shaped in the knowledge that
human beings are involved and not just factors of production.
I full accept that politicians must work within the
limits set by public opinion.

However as I've stated previously - I do not accept that
the majority opinion is always right.

Changing public opinion is a necessary feature of democracy and
in this area, often essential.

See you on another discussion.

See you on another discussion.
Foxy,
You seem to give those running shoes a fair workout lately.

Foxy,

It is a bit difficult to change public opinion when your opponents control the media and the education system, as well as being adept at manufacturing consent. From the reaction to Rudd's Big Australia, it is pretty clear that large numbers of people are unhappy about what is happening.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/big-australia-vision-goes-down-like-a-lead-balloon-20100803-115g7.html

Note that nearly half of non-English speaking migrants didn't like Big Australia either. As an Iranian scientist recently put it to me, "A lot of us come from countries that are overpopulated. Why would we want to duplicate the overpopulation in Australia?"

The problem is that the high population growth via mass migration is a second or third order issue for most people. They don't like it, but they haven't connected the dots between the population growth and the economic and quality of life issues that concern them most.

Banjo,

You have put up some good links over the years. Thailand vs. the Philippines is a real eye opener. Here in Australia, the Stop Population Growth Now party in South Australia has some good stuff on their websites, as do the publications (all online) of Sustainable Population Australia. Overseas there is Population Matters in the UK and Negative Population Growth in the US. You might also like this article by the economist Leith van Onselen

http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2014/04/no-alan-population-growth-is-not-an-economic-boom/

and

http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2012/05/highrise-harry-wants-more-people/