Australia's Population 'Dilemma '

[SSD-85]

I chose "other" because a 2 child policy is nonsense for a start. Our non-refugee immigration policies are fine, but we need a country that would be considered nice to live in. ie: not an over-governed, contradictory, nanny-style dictatorship we have now.
We need a government interested in supplying the infrastructure to support a growing population. As opposed to lining their own coffers for personal gain.

Oh well, a man can dream....

[Auturbo6]

Humans are in plague proportions on this planet, and something has to and will give at some point. Think China and india, are driving this issue to the breaking point quicker than any of us can speculate.

[Jim Goose]

Australias growth is actually slowing down....

What is growing is the capitol cities population. People are leaving the smaller regional centers and heading to the big smoke.

[ebxr8240]

It must have something to with rice and Curry ???

[snappy]

Originally Posted by flappist

The problem is concentration of people.

If there were some way of ensuring that the newcomers don't just fall into the "ethnic ghettos" in the major cities and got out into the rest of Australia maybe it would be a good thing.

There is lots of land and lots of opportunity out in the bush. All it needs is some way to entice the newcomers out there.

It doesn't work and it has been tried .
I remember a scheme in W.A was tried giving free housing to asian immagrants to stay in those rural area's and every single one of them over time moved to sydney or melbourne to pretty much all the same suburbs to .
You need to move whole communities unfortunately

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by ebxr8240

It must have something to with rice and Curry ???

fish and chips..... bbq chooks... kebab shops??... ..

[tapeworm]

Let's face it. Humans to the Earth are what Cancer is to the Human. If a limit is placed on the amount of people brought into this world, it would save a hell of alot of trouble in the future.

+1 for 2 kids max per couple. Only the selfish would say otherwise.

[GreenR]

As I do not really believe limiting child births would work I would have to go with the slow or stop immigration. Although there are positives to immigration as mentioned before (food, work, culture etc) I think it is something that will slow the rate of increasing population. The introduction of more strict laws, immigration, citizenship, permanent residence etc is and was a step in the right direction in my opinion.

[Keepleft]

Observes, holds own opinion, tic tic tic . . .

[JC]

Originally Posted by tapeworm

Let's face it. Humans to the Earth are what Cancer is to the Human. If a limit is placed on the amount of people brought into this world, it would save a hell of alot of trouble in the future.

+1 for 2 kids max per couple. Only the selfish would say otherwise.

Or those that have more than 2 already. Be careful what you wish for - you may be "blessed" with none. unfortunate thing about child rearing, is that anyone can do it, whether they deserve to or not, and often those most qualified are not always fruitful, and those who shouldn't, do.

[ThaFlash]

My take on the situation....

We are all here for the ride, human beings are an ever expanding organism and we are are unstoppable, good or bad. There is no amount of planning or banning that will stop the expansion.

Becasue if there were, our World population would be half, there would be no food shortages, no water shortages, no slums, no traffic, no migration (legal or illegal) we wouldn't be paying for nature's goodies such as water, the ozone layer would be intact (if you believe that it isn't) the list goes on and on.

How arrogant of any politician or human to think we can prepare for anything like this or that there is a solution.

Only an un-natural solution is practical and for argument's sake, though controversial (not my view and no offence), 1 nuke for China and North Korea for good measure, 1 for India and Pakistan for good measure and there is a real solution, the World's population havled in a second and after 10,000 years the earth might be better for it in the long run.

Obviously none that is likely to happen, though judging by some of the posts in here that is what they are thinking.

I just can't see how expansion is gonna stop, whether in Australia or anywhere else in the World.

Sorry if I have offended anyone, just using an example of what capabilities the human race has in order for me to prove a point and participate in this discussion.

[XWGT]

Originally Posted by FTE72

If you build it, they will come sort of style?

Well thats exactly what I did with my family this year.

I moved from the Melbourne suburbs to a very quiet rural historical town, 30 minutes drive from a major rural town.

I have been able to move my professional employment as has my wife, and our eldest son has moved his apprenticeship easily.

Our disposable income is the same if not better as wages did not drop significantly and our quality of life is through the roof. I have gone from commuting on the Monash Freeway every day to the corporate office to cruise control for 30 minutes and would be lucky to see 5 cars on my commute. I could however catch the train or bus if I needed to quite easily.

The services we have given up are few. Specialist medical care, a wider variety of shopping, sports and entertainment are now 1 hour and 30 minutes away to the Melbourne CBD (less if we dont need to go into the city). We have done that once so far to see Metallica and will probably do it once more for Xmas shopping. In reality it would have taken 60 - 75 minutes to commute to the CBD anyway living in the Melbourne SE suburbs.

The pay off is now 10 acres of land instead of 800sqm, less than half of our city mortgage, great neighbours, zero traffic, great historical town, access to great camping and 4WD areas, access to great regional areas.

So why does it work? As someone pointed out, concentration is the key.

You need to be able to work, live and play in regional areas without having to return to the suburbs or CBD. As I posted earlier, that means infrastructure. Water, power, roads, schooles, hospitals...........that are NOT in the suburbs. That is the investment equation required to increase population and sustain it.

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by HP4ME

Only an un-natural solution is practical and for argument's sake, though controversial (not my view and no offence), 1 nuke for China and North Korea for good measure, 1 for India and Pakistan for good measure and there is a real solution, the World's population havled in a second and after 10,000 years the earth might be better for it in the long run.

Where do I start...

Well if your going to take part in a bit of good ole fashioned genocide and murder half the worlds population in an effort to solve our resource problems, you would do well to drop the nukes on countries that actually use said resources.

China, Korea, India, Pakistan??? Common!?!?! Not your view? Fair enough, but why even regurgitate such ignorant, racist rubbish?

To re-quote David Attenborough's documentary "how many people can live on planet earth" - if everyone in the world lived the way the people of India do, the planets resources could support 15 billion people. Thats double what we have now! If everyone lived like the USA, the number is 1.5 billion...

Nothing more really needs to be said on that one...


Oh and btw, 10,000 years? This population problem we have now has popped up only in the last 100 years. Up until the late 1800's the worlds human population was naturally governed at an entirely manageable and sustainable 1 million people, or thereabouts. In just over 100 years its exploded to over 7 billion.

The reason for this can be exlpained with one word: OIL

(which will run out eventually)

[glavas]

my beliefs are a bit hardline, right winged you may say so i wont even bother listing them and wasting the moderators time delteting it. but i will say the population of australia is fine the way it is now. 22-24 million is plenty.

[Riksta]

I can't see a two-child policy working.

Not when we have people like Shazza who goes down the pub and gets preggo to a different bloke each week so she gets her baby bonus and extra payments from "sennalink" (I hear of this "sennalink" a lot but have yet to see anywhere wearing that name?) so she can afford more booze and durries and to go out next week to get preggo again.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by Riksta

so she gets her baby bonus and extra payments from "sennalink"

Maybe get rid of the baby bonus before making a x amount child policy first?

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by vztrt

Maybe get rid of the baby bonus before making a x amount child policy first?

Yes the 2 or 1 or any maximum number child policy is very extreme.

There are a lot of other economic policies that could be implemented to reduce the birth rate in less intrusive ways. Improvements in the availability and quality of education, and incentives for more people to take advantage of it, would see big reductions in birth rates for a start.

[onfire]

Immigration isn't the issue. What is the issue, is reproduction. And it doesn't matter if a person has immigrated from India, segregates themselves and their families from Australian culture or is a home grown Australian going back 5 generations.

I mentioned this in the David Attenborough thread a while ago.
http://www.fordforums.com.au/showpos...1&postcount=57

Removing the incentives to breed is part of the answer. Or at least removing the safety net that catches every parent involved in another unplanned or excessive pregnancy.

- Take away the " Baby bonus " and every other cash type incentive.

- Replace cash handouts with specialized " food stamps " .. eg. If the stamp reads " Woolworth's Home brand Nappies " the receiver of the coupon can only purchase said item. Dockets from supermarkets in turn will reflect items purchased using food stamps and become deemed un-returnable or exchangeable for cash or credit.

- If not food stamps, specialized debit cards that can only be used to purchase from a list of say for example 500 specialized items from Milk & Bread to Baby Food & Nappies. Any attempt to purchase items not on the list results in a instant denial at the register. Cash withdrawals or returns for cash or credit are also blocked.

- Establish free day care clinics for receivers of any assistance ( coupons, debit cards, etc ) with in house access to doctors and dental. In exchange if not already employed, receivers must complete some form of community service or assistance for a minimum of 15 hrs per week while children are under care of the clinic.

How many members of the lower social demographic breed as a means of income? From what it appears a hell of a lot. How about we make it a lot harder for people to have children? Remove the support system and only at the most extreme cases offer financial support. I'm sure telling people they wont be receiving money for simply having children, and that their spending and purchasing will be limited and governed by a coupon / debit system then being told they need to donate their time and energy in exchange for access to a day care clinic.. will stop a decent percentage of peopled having too many unnecessary children.

The entire point of the Baby Bonus scheme was to entice the intelligent, middle to upper class women of this country to begin having children instead of working full time. Quite clearly the entire scheme has been brutally mis-used and abused by a large percentage of the lower social demographics regardless of race or religion.

As brutal as this next part sounds.. we need to stop rewarding the scum who have children as the don't understand the concept of using protection, that same scum who breed like rabbits and survive on child endowments, baby bonuses and center-link payments rather than fully contributing to society, regardless of race, religion, place of birth, etc.

[Mickxr8]

How about we toss the b/b scheme, put a muzzle on all the do gooders that no doubt will come out bleating loud ?
might take a while for the message to get through but 1 less bogan breeding (or others for that matter ) has to be a step forward ?
my 2cs

[Fled74]

Originally Posted by flappist

The problem is concentration of people.

If there were some way of ensuring that the newcomers don't just fall into the "ethnic ghettos" in the major cities and got out into the rest of Australia maybe it would be a good thing.

There is lots of land and lots of opportunity out in the bush. All it needs is some way to entice the newcomers out there.

This.
I was going to post, but Flappist read my mind.

[leighm]

I think a 1 child limit on welfare is a great idea. Above and beyond that you pay your own way, that will help stop population growth and increase productivity if more current Australian's contribute to society rather than leech off it.

[tapeworm]

Originally Posted by leighm

I think a 1 child limit on welfare is a great idea. Above and beyond that you pay your own way, that will help stop population growth and increase productivity if more current Australian's contribute to society rather than leech off it.

very smart idea

[grandpa_spec_F6]

My ex manager had his first kid about a year ago, the whole 5K went into coil overs and new bushes for his R33 Skyline......

[sleek7]

Originally Posted by leighm

I think a 1 child limit on welfare is a great idea. Above and beyond that you pay your own way, that will help stop population growth and increase productivity if more current Australian's contribute to society rather than leech off it.

Agree with this. If you want more than 1/2 kids (whatever the limit may be), you pay for them all by yourself.

[Auslandau]

For those wanting a 2 child policy ..... easy to say .... but the implementation? What happens when Shazza has number 3? Do you get a knock on the doors saying handover?

[grandpa_spec_F6]

Originally Posted by Auslandau

For those wanting a 2 child policy ..... easy to say .... but the implementation? What happens when Shazza has number 3? Do you get a knock on the doors saying handover?

Good point, I'll have to ask some of my Chinese friends about that, apparently it IS enforced over there, the price to have an extra child is quite large from what I've been told.

[Bud Bud]

Originally Posted by tapeworm

Let's face it. Humans to the Earth are what Cancer is to the Human.

If everybody in the entire world stopped having children right now from today on, then in less than 130 years from now there would be not 1 human soul living on earth anywhere. And they say there is no cure for cancer.

I will go against the trend here. I think an ever increasing population is a good thing well in this country anyway. If you look at Brisbane for example, they have gone ahead in leaps and bounds with infrastructure over the past 10 years because of the exploding population there. In Adelaide we lack any real infrastructure to take us forward into the next 20 + years (that bloody stupid one way road for example arrrgh) because our population is too small to invest too much on. Hopefully the desal plant will be the start of the growth that we really need here.

Bud Bud

[geckoGT]

I put other as I think the answer to the population problem is not something that can be found in one solution.

I do not agree with a 2 child policy but I do agree with the limitation of baby bonuses and child payments to a max of 2 children. If you want more then pay for them yourself, if you do not want to pay for them then don't forget the raincoat or to take that pill.

I also believe in limiting immigration and instead of importing skilled workers, lets better our education system and make our own.

I also believe in increasing the opportunities in rural areas and entice people to move there, not an easy answer though.

Now I am going to be really provocative. I think we should limit life saving medicine in some areas. So often I see mega bucks spent prolonging the life of an 80 year old and preventing death from a disease that is primarily age related. I think society start to realise that we can not live for ever and there is a time for everyone. Now does that mean I think a child should not be saved from cancer or a 30 year old should not have cardiac surgery? Of course not, but I do not believe a 85 year of should have that cardiac surgery, they should be made comfortable. I just think that sometimes modern medicine gets so clever that we are actually shooting ourselves in the foot. Now we have an older population which places more strain on our society and that is increasing all the time.

[xbgs351]

Originally Posted by onfire

Immigration isn't the issue. What is the issue, is reproduction. And it doesn't matter if a person has immigrated from India, segregates themselves and their families from Australian culture or is a home grown Australian going back 5 generations.

Immigration is just as big an issue as reproduction as is clearly evident from the figures Jim Goose posted earlier.

* There were 295,700 births registered in Australia in 2009
* In the six months of July to December 2009 the number of permanent additions was 109 778. This translate to around 220,000 for the year.


In addition, you will find that recent immigrants from countries like India are having more children than the "home grown Australians going back 5 generations". Hence the higher our current immigration rate, the higher our future reproduction rate.

[ThaFlash]

1. Chinese
2. Kiwis
3. U.K.
4. India

That is the order of immigrants coming to Australia, from most to least.

It's no surprise that Chinese Australians and Indian Australians are the fastest growing ethnic group in Australia.

I am intrigued as to how our country will turn out in the future, however I fear the current living generation will not be here to witness it.

If we could ALL adopt an "Australian Patriotic Mentality", given our diversity we could become an invincible Nation across a lot of areas not to mention some really nice food!!!