The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Climate

Climate

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 23
  7. 24
  8. 25
  9. Page 26
  10. 27
  11. 28
  12. All
Belloy,

Do you actually ever read other people's posts ? AC has tried to point out to you that, without immigration, our population may barely be growing at all, maybe 0.5 % p.a. ?

And that much of that is thanks to the youth of many immigrants who have their children, our children, here ? Without those children, our population may not be rising at all ? i.e., 0 % p.a. ?

And that without sufficient young people, i.e. under pension-age, doing the work, a huge burden is being put - and will increasingly be put - on younger people to provide the taxes in order to finance our pensions and other services like health care ?

Population is NOT a problem, certainly not for Australia. Get out of the fifties.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 8 October 2019 4:16:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hey Loudmouth,
Yes that was my point.

- Without immigration our population growth is less than replacement -

That means that immigration alone is the driver for growth.
Some predict Australian population of 38 million by 2050
http://www.afr.com/politics/federal/why-australia-needs-to-get-real-on-population-growth-20131130-ij9ym

This link looks better:
http://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/australia-s-population-projected-to-hit-42-million-by-2066-as-melbourne-overtakes-sydney-20181122-p50hjy.html

In the medium-growth model, Australia's population would hit 30 million in 2030-31, 35 million in 2043-44 and 40 million in 2058-59. By the year 2066, it would be 42 million. In the highest growth scenario, the population by 2066 would be as high as 50 million.
All of this is a created situation, created by immigration.

But I'm not sure these numbers should be believed.
"35 million in 2043-44 and 40 million in 2058-59"
They're predicting 15 years for 5 million people, 330,000 per annum total.
I think more like maybe 10 years?

Apparently the current immigration ceiling is 190,000 per year.
http://www.sbs.com.au/language/english/immigration-australia-s-migration-ceiling-to-remain-unchanged-in-2018-19_2

Google 'annual immigration rate australia'
"On 7 August 2018, the Australian Bureau of Statistics population clock reached 25 million, with 62% of the growth in the last ten years being a result of immigration."

Emphasis "62% of growth in the last 10 years being a result of immigration"

Now here's the catch.
If the Greta Thunbergs of the world have an argument that holds merit and the world is going to end in 12 years, why are we immigrating for growth?
Posted by Armchair Critic, Tuesday, 8 October 2019 8:34:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
[Cont.]
- Afterthought -
"They're predicting 15 years for 5 million people, 330,000 per annum total."

How do they expect us to believe it will take 15 years for that extra 5 million people from 2043 to 2058;
If its only going to take 12 or 13 years in their current predictions of 25 million in 2018 to 30 million in 2030/31?

They're effectively saying growth will slow down with more people.
That doesnt make sense.
Posted by Armchair Critic, Tuesday, 8 October 2019 8:45:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Loudmouth ok are you sitting on a nail
Do you value only your own point of view YES I READ EVERY POST
Even the ageing right of reality stuff
I remain convinced parts of the world are already over populated
In fact while this is not that thread please follow
IF we already have over population is it not clear to you that is here too? right now?
So why are you saying we indeed must grow/remain the same?
Bush fire crisis in two states temperature up to 40 northern Queensland
Climate we agree is changing, do we understand? do we take note it may not/likely will not, return to what we think is normal
IF so how many not coastal Australians can this country have?
Posted by Belly, Wednesday, 9 October 2019 5:10:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Belly,

Over-population ? Where ? Which parts of the world have reached the limits of the latest productive technology but are over-populated ?

Please don't say Singapore.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Wednesday, 9 October 2019 10:16:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Loudmouth gee you have changed, your opinion
Yes you have one and so do I maybe the problem is you do not want me to have one
Africa, how many are living with comfort? or not living a as they could be if the climate had not changed
Is India ok with so many in its current population, and is it ok to continue growing, China?
What if this drought is part of our new [remember we said it is changing] climate
How many can live inland without water
Posted by Belly, Wednesday, 9 October 2019 10:25:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 23
  7. 24
  8. 25
  9. Page 26
  10. 27
  11. 28
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy