Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4
Send Topic Print
Who wants 35 million in aussie ?? (Read 8613 times)
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 41388
Gender: male
Who wants 35 million in aussie ??
Jan 24th, 2010 at 9:18pm
 


Not me.

Quote:
Plans to massively boost Australia's population are a bad idea and must be stopped, entrepreneur Dick Smith says.

The federal government favours a "big Australia" and wants to increase the country's headcount from 22 million to 35 million by 2050, largely by immigration.

But Mr Smith said this was ridiculous.

"We need to do something about this incredible increase," he told reporters at an Australian of the Year dinner in Parliament House on Sunday.

"No one is allowed to talk about it ... I am."
Mr Smith said Australia did not have enough water or food to support millions more people. It was crazy that seawater was being desalinated for drinking water to supply a booming population.

"I believe in 100 years time people in Australia will be starving to death."

The intake of skilled migrants should be slashed and women should be discouraged from having more than two babies, Mr Smith said.

He believes nine out of 10 Australians do not want a population boom.

Mr Smith is working on a documentary on the issue.

The government wants to increase the population because it means more young taxpayers to pay the rising health and pension costs of the ageing population.

But a recent poll showed most people did not like that plan and some green groups have voiced concerns about the environmental costs.


http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/no-one-wants-big-australia-dick-sm...
Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 52826
At my desk.
Re: Who wants 35 million in aussie ??
Reply #1 - Jan 24th, 2010 at 9:29pm
 
Im leaning towards a lower population I think. All the things I like most about Australia are a result of a low population. Foremost, there are fewer people. You can go out and catch a decent fish on the weekend, or shoot an enourmous pig. Land is cheap. The beaches aren't crowded. I think we are wealthy in a more genuine sense, as well as financially, because of the low population.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 41388
Gender: male
Re: Who wants 35 million in aussie ??
Reply #2 - Jan 24th, 2010 at 9:33pm
 

yes, I'ld go for a lower popn than we presently have.

pretty well ALL the infrastructure problems would be gone.
housing would be cheaper.

there are no benefits to doubling our popn.
Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
Hlysnan
Senior Member
****
Offline


Riht, Fr[ch275]od[ch333]m,
Wærscipe

Posts: 449
Burwood
Gender: male
Re: Who wants 35 million in aussie ??
Reply #3 - Jan 25th, 2010 at 7:26am
 
I would definitely support a two-child policy and removal of the baby bonus. We would be much better off with a small population.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
sir prince duke alevine
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male
Re: Who wants 35 million in aussie ??
Reply #4 - Jan 25th, 2010 at 2:32pm
 
Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 24th, 2010 at 9:18pm:
Not me.

Quote:
Plans to massively boost Australia's population are a bad idea and must be stopped, entrepreneur Dick Smith says.

The federal government favours a "big Australia" and wants to increase the country's headcount from 22 million to 35 million by 2050, largely by immigration.

But Mr Smith said this was ridiculous.

"We need to do something about this incredible increase," he told reporters at an Australian of the Year dinner in Parliament House on Sunday.

"No one is allowed to talk about it ... I am."
Mr Smith said Australia did not have enough water or food to support millions more people. It was crazy that seawater was being desalinated for drinking water to supply a booming population.

"I believe in 100 years time people in Australia will be starving to death."

The intake of skilled migrants should be slashed and women should be discouraged from having more than two babies, Mr Smith said.

He believes nine out of 10 Australians do not want a population boom.

Mr Smith is working on a documentary on the issue.

The government wants to increase the population because it means more young taxpayers to pay the rising health and pension costs of the ageing population.

But a recent poll showed most people did not like that plan and some green groups have voiced concerns about the environmental costs.


http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/no-one-wants-big-australia-dick-sm...


Sprint, why you and Dick Smith so worried? You guys probably won't even exist by then.

Point 1: It's not that we have no water - it's that we use way too much, and don't have the right infrastructure.  This is a non-issue with a population debate.

Point 2: If Australians can afford to spend billions in food over christmas, and then discard billions in food the next day, then I don't see how they will be "starving" in 100 years, or how we don't have enough to sustain more people.

Point 3: I'm surprised you even published this garbage article - it has communist connotations of direct control on population (i.e 1 child policy).  Are you communist sprint? Or Nazi? I'm confused...

The fact is Australia can sustain a lot more people than it currently has.  It's about smart planning, and yes, about sacrifice.  For example, if Japan, a developed nation, can use recycled water to clean their clothes than it makes no sense that we can't.  Why do we always believe we are so blessed? It's Nazi Germany thinking.

Back to top
 

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.
 
IP Logged
 
Hlysnan
Senior Member
****
Offline


Riht, Fr[ch275]od[ch333]m,
Wærscipe

Posts: 449
Burwood
Gender: male
Re: Who wants 35 million in aussie ??
Reply #5 - Jan 25th, 2010 at 7:34pm
 
My view is not of sustainable concerns in Australia, but more of what is happening in the world overall. It has been said in a few reports that the world is already beyond its limit in providing enough resources to humans and that it will only be a matter of time when the problems begin to arise in developed countries. Also, the PRC's one child policy (I'm assuming this is the one you are referring to) isn't a direct control of population. It's only a disincentive for those who have more than one child. Example: the parents of two children will not be able to receive discounted schooling and other benefits for the second child. Also, people in rural areas and people of ethnic minorities are exceptions to the policy, which makes the actual average number of children per family closer to 1.8 rather than 1.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Sunny_beach_babe
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 841
Re: Who wants 35 million in aussie ??
Reply #6 - Jan 25th, 2010 at 7:52pm
 
Quote:
Sprint, why you and Dick Smith so worried? You guys probably won't even exist by then.

Point 1: It's not that we have no water - it's that we use way too much, and don't have the right infrastructure.  This is a non-issue with a population debate.

Point 2: If Australians can afford to spend billions in food over christmas, and then discard billions in food the next day, then I don't see how they will be "starving" in 100 years, or how we don't have enough to sustain more people.

Point 3: I'm surprised you even published this garbage article - it has communist connotations of direct control on population (i.e 1 child policy).  Are you communist sprint? Or Nazi? I'm confused...

The fact is Australia can sustain a lot more people than it currently has.  It's about smart planning, and yes, about sacrifice.  For example, if Japan, a developed nation, can use recycled water to clean their clothes than it makes no sense that we can't.  Why do we always believe we are so blessed? It's Nazi Germany thinking.


Why do you make no sense. Why is everything a non-issue to you?

Point 1.
Australia is the driest continent on earth and we are already moving to desalination to service the population that we already have. Using your leftwing method of strict control and access (we use way too much) will not solve any problem

Point 2.
This doesn't make sense. Please come back and try to formulate a reasonable reposnse

Point 3.
Questioning his right to publish said article is far more Nazi and Communist like. I am not surprised, coming from you.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 52826
At my desk.
Re: Who wants 35 million in aussie ??
Reply #7 - Jan 25th, 2010 at 8:00pm
 
Quote:
The fact is Australia can sustain a lot more people than it currently has.  It's about smart planning, and yes, about sacrifice.  For example, if Japan, a developed nation, can use recycled water to clean their clothes than it makes no sense that we can't.  Why do we always believe we are so blessed? It's Nazi Germany thinking.


Alevine, it has nothing to do with what we can do. We could support ten times as many people if we were prepared to adopt a third world lifestyle. The question is whether we want to.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Sunny_beach_babe
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 841
Re: Who wants 35 million in aussie ??
Reply #8 - Jan 25th, 2010 at 8:06pm
 
Alewives does because it suit her ideology of a large population of low socio-economic voter base
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
sir prince duke alevine
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male
Re: Who wants 35 million in aussie ??
Reply #9 - Jan 25th, 2010 at 8:07pm
 
Sunny_beach_babe wrote on Jan 25th, 2010 at 7:52pm:
Quote:
Sprint, why you and Dick Smith so worried? You guys probably won't even exist by then.

Point 1: It's not that we have no water - it's that we use way too much, and don't have the right infrastructure.  This is a non-issue with a population debate.

Point 2: If Australians can afford to spend billions in food over christmas, and then discard billions in food the next day, then I don't see how they will be "starving" in 100 years, or how we don't have enough to sustain more people.

Point 3: I'm surprised you even published this garbage article - it has communist connotations of direct control on population (i.e 1 child policy).  Are you communist sprint? Or Nazi? I'm confused...

The fact is Australia can sustain a lot more people than it currently has.  It's about smart planning, and yes, about sacrifice.  For example, if Japan, a developed nation, can use recycled water to clean their clothes than it makes no sense that we can't.  Why do we always believe we are so blessed? It's Nazi Germany thinking.


Why do you make no sense. Why is everything a non-issue to you?

Point 1.
Australia is the driest continent on earth and we are already moving to desalination to service the population that we already have. Using your leftwing method of strict control and access (we use way too much) will not solve any problem

Point 2.
This doesn't make sense. Please come back and try to formulate a reasonable reposnse

Point 3.
Questioning his right to publish said article is far more Nazi and Communist like. I am not surprised, coming from you.



Point 1: The biggest issue in Victoria when it comes to water, is not that there is no rain.  Rather, it is that the dams are located in the wrong places - not catching enough of the rain we receive.  Fair enough we can't rebuild our dams, but we can look at how to capture and use the water we discard.  The rain we throw out as "waste" is 400 gigalitres per year.   This is more than enough to sustain ourselves, if we were to have good policies.  Furthermore, looking at how people across the world live, our "150 megalitres per month" quota in Melbourne is way over the top.  Seeing how you sit at home drinking beer all day droopy eye, I doubt you would understand this point - but it's okay. 

Point 2:
Read, or get someone to read to you: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/editorial/a-waste-of-good-food-and-so-many-other-resources-20100110-m0l3.html

If we can waste food, we can afford a bigger population.

Point 3: I wasn't arguing that he has no right to post this article. I was saying that because it has in it items he doesn't agree with, or shouldn't agree with based on his ideology, I was surprised he posted it. 

Try again droopy eye.

Back to top
 

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.
 
IP Logged
 
sir prince duke alevine
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male
Re: Who wants 35 million in aussie ??
Reply #10 - Jan 25th, 2010 at 8:09pm
 
freediver wrote on Jan 25th, 2010 at 8:00pm:
Quote:
The fact is Australia can sustain a lot more people than it currently has.  It's about smart planning, and yes, about sacrifice.  For example, if Japan, a developed nation, can use recycled water to clean their clothes than it makes no sense that we can't.  Why do we always believe we are so blessed? It's Nazi Germany thinking.


Alevine, it has nothing to do with what we can do. We could support ten times as many people if we were prepared to adopt a third world lifestyle. The question is whether we want to.


My point exactly freediver.  I'm not suggesting third world living; I'm suggesting that it is inevitable our population will grow. With it growing, we need to not whinge and cry but rather get prepared, and yes in some ways change our lifestyle..

*EDIT* My apologies freediver - I didn't completely read your post.  I agree with you 100%.  It is whether we want to.  For the sake of people around the world, not just Australia, I truly hope we do. I hope you do too.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jan 25th, 2010 at 8:15pm by sir prince duke alevine »  

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.
 
IP Logged
 
sir prince duke alevine
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male
Re: Who wants 35 million in aussie ??
Reply #11 - Jan 25th, 2010 at 8:13pm
 
Hlysnan wrote on Jan 25th, 2010 at 7:34pm:
My view is not of sustainable concerns in Australia, but more of what is happening in the world overall. It has been said in a few reports that the world is already beyond its limit in providing enough resources to humans and that it will only be a matter of time when the problems begin to arise in developed countries. Also, the PRC's one child policy (I'm assuming this is the one you are referring to) isn't a direct control of population. It's only a disincentive for those who have more than one child. Example: the parents of two children will not be able to receive discounted schooling and other benefits for the second child. Also, people in rural areas and people of ethnic minorities are exceptions to the policy, which makes the actual average number of children per family closer to 1.8 rather than 1.


Hi JaeMi,

Definitely I share your concerns about the sustainability of the world.  Hence why we, as Australians, need to look at our way of life and really consider how much we consume, and how we can reduce this to a sustainable level where everyone benefits. 

As for a "2 child" policy, to me it sounds too much like China's "one-child" policy.  I don't believe in a government being able to tell me, through policies, how many kids I can have.  It is not in their role description.  They can always "suggest" what is optimal, but putting together policies around this leads to social problems that I hope Australia would never see.
Back to top
 

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.
 
IP Logged
 
Sunny_beach_babe
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 841
Re: Who wants 35 million in aussie ??
Reply #12 - Jan 25th, 2010 at 8:23pm
 
Hi Alewives

Quote:
Rather, it is that the dams are located in the wrong places

That would be the fault of the state Labor govts getting into bed with the Greens
Quote:
Furthermore, looking at how people across the world live, our "150 megalitres per month" quota in Melbourne is way over the top.

So you do advocate third world lifestyles. Good to know.
Quote:
Point 2:
Read, or get someone to read to you...blah, blah blah

Are you unable to formulate your own argument?
Quote:
Point 3: I wasn't arguing that he has no right to post this article. I was saying that because it has in it items he doesn't agree with, or shouldn't agree with based on his ideology, I was surprised he posted it. 

I know this will surprise you but the world is often shades of grey- not just the black and white progressive and repressive society you would wish upon all.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
sir prince duke alevine
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male
Re: Who wants 35 million in aussie ??
Reply #13 - Jan 25th, 2010 at 8:29pm
 
Sunny_beach_babe wrote on Jan 25th, 2010 at 8:23pm:
Hi Alewives

Quote:
Rather, it is that the dams are located in the wrong places

That would be the fault of the state Labor govts getting into bed with the Greens
Quote:
Furthermore, looking at how people across the world live, our "150 megalitres per month" quota in Melbourne is way over the top.

So you do advocate third world lifestyles. Good to know.
Quote:
Point 2:
Read, or get someone to read to you...blah, blah blah

Are you unable to formulate your own argument?
Quote:
Point 3: I wasn't arguing that he has no right to post this article. I was saying that because it has in it items he doesn't agree with, or shouldn't agree with based on his ideology, I was surprised he posted it.  

I know this will surprise you but the world is often shades of grey- not just the black and white progressive and repressive society you would wish upon all.


Dear Droopy,

This is my last response to you because you clearly do not read, or care in having a proper debate Smiley  

Firstly, can I say that if you are going to call me alewives, it should be alewife...unless you think I am 2 people?  

Secondly, please read the article, or have someone read it for you Smiley  

Thirdly, yes, the state Labor Government in Victoria has done a major screw up.  No doubt about it.  But the issue also is that the state liberal opposition has provided no alternative.  If they do during this election year, I will gladly vote for them.  

Lastly, yes there are shades of gray.  I can't believe that a person such as yourself, who is so badly brainwashed by propaganda, understands this.  Did you get this from a cut and paste?

Have a nice time replying to my posts. But please, provide some, just a tiny bit if possible, substance.

With much love,
alevine (alewife as you have so happily spent the past 4 hours coming up with, even if it was incorrect)
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jan 25th, 2010 at 8:43pm by sir prince duke alevine »  

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 52826
At my desk.
Re: Who wants 35 million in aussie ??
Reply #14 - Jan 25th, 2010 at 8:29pm
 
Quote:
My point exactly freediver.  I'm not suggesting third world living; I'm suggesting that it is inevitable our population will grow.


Not true. Most first world nations have a birth rate below the replacement level. It is only the stubborn refusal of old people to kick the bucket, and high immigration rates, that keeps the population rising.

Quote:
*EDIT* My apologies freediver - I didn't completely read your post.  I agree with you 100%.  It is whether we want to.  For the sake of people around the world, not just Australia, I truly hope we do. I hope you do too.


You hope I do what? I do not want a higher population. What is the point of that?

http://www.un.org/popin/icpd/newslett/94_19/icpd9419.eng/3briefs.html

http://www.un.org/popin/icpd/conference/bkg/egypt.html

NEWS IN BRIEF



More than 300 lawmakers from 107 countries gathered at Cairo's Meridien

Hotel on 3 and 4 September for the International Conference of

Parliamentarians on Population and Development (ICPPD). After a series

of working group discussions, they adopted by consensus the Cairo

Declaration on Population and Development.



     The declaration stresses the importance of a successful outcome at

ICPD, and calls for placing family planning in the broader framework of

reproductive health and removing barriers to family planning

information and services. It also endorses the education goals of the

ICPD Programme of Action, emphasizes "the right of all people to have

access to primary health care by the end of the current decade", and

acknowledges abortion as a major public health concern.



     ICPPD was convened by the Asian Forum on Population and

Development, the Inter-American Parliamentary Group on Population and

Development, the International Medical Parliamentarians Organization,

the Global Committee of Parliamentarians on Population and Development,

and Parliamentarians for Global Action.



     Speaking at the 3 September inaugural ceremony were ICPD

Secretary-General Dr. Nafis Sadik; Dr. Mustafa Kamal Helmy, Speaker of

the Shoura Council of Egypt, the President of the conference; Mr. Shin

Sakurai, Member of the Japanese House of Representatives and Secretary-

General of the conference; and Dr. Hiroshi Nakajima, Director-General

of the World Health Organization.



                                 *



In connection with ICPD, United Nations Radio has produced six 15-

minute programmes on population issues:



     "Population and Development" looks at the link between population

growth, sustainable development and consumption; "Reproductive Rights

and Health" examines the right to decide on family size and the

importance of counselling and access to counselling about both

sexuality and family planning services; "Gender Equality" analyses how

respect for women may be one of the best ways of stabilizing population

growth; "Focus on Adolescents" discusses the consequences of early

sexual activity and the importance of making available to teenagers

information and counselling about sexuality; "Male Responsibility"

looks at the importance of encouraging men to take responsibility for

their sexual and reproductive behaviour as well as for the children

they have; and "Migration" examines the growing phenomenon of people

leaving their places of origin to escape conflict or persecution or to

seek a better life.



     All six of the programmes are available in English, Spanish and

Swahili (four programmes are available in Arabic, Bengali, Chinese,

Dutch, French, French Creole, Hindi, Indonesian, Russian and Urdu) on

request from UN Radio, Room S-850F, United Nations, New York, NY 10017;

tel. 212-963-6977; fax 212-963-1307.



                                 *



To disseminate ICPD materials and facilitate world-wide involvement in

Conference-related activities, the Population Information Network

(POPIN) of the UN Population Division set up a communication and

reference centre at the Conference site. Staff members collected all

the statements given in the ICPD plenary and electronically placed the

texts in the POPIN gopher, a data facility accessible through the

Internet computer network and electronic mail.



     A large number of delegates, journalists and NGOs used the

centre's services to make copies of the statements and other population

information; thousands of others around the world electronically

accessed the information in the gopher. Technical support for the

centre was provided by the Information and Decision Support Centre of

the Egyptian Cabinet and the Association for Progressive Communication.

For more information, contact Population Division, Department for

Economic and Social Information and Policy Analysis, 2 United Nations

Plaza, New York, NY 10017; tel. 212-963-3179; fax 212-963-2147; e-mail

popin@undp.org.



                                 *



Four independent daily newspapers on ICPD were produced in Cairo for

distribution at the Conference. All four offered up-to-date reports on

activity in the plenary and Main Committee, as well as analyses of the

issues under negotiation, interviews with participants, and background

articles from around the world on a variety of population and

development topics.



     The papers are: "The Earth Times", published in English by the New

York-based Earth Times Foundation; "Terra Viva", published in English

by the Inter Press Service, a non-profit association of journalists
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Send Topic Print