Rightsizing Australia
 

What is the 'right' size population for Australia? Given that its geographical area is about the same as USA + Canada (pop 300M) or Central + Western Europe (pop 400M depending on what you count), I would suggest that something more than 19M is appropriate.

Maybe 75M in the short term (50-75 years)?

Doesn't Australia have economic/ ethical good reason to accelerate the population growth just a tad?

It would speed things up a bit for those on the PR waiting list as well.

Best

Re: Rightsizing Australia
 

newstartnz <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
    > What is the 'right' size population for Australia? Given that its geographical area
    > is about the same as USA + Canada (pop 300M) or Central + Western Europe (pop 400M
    > depending on what you count), I would suggest that something more than 19M is
    > appropriate.
    >

Might be a good idea if you went and looked in an Atlas and get a better idea of
geographical sizes! Australia is slightly smaller in size than the continental USA
(ie 48 states not including Alaska and Hawaii) Canada is between 1.5 and 2 times the
size of Australia!

Both these places like Australia have areas where it is very difficult to habitate so
any poplulation increase can only occur providing the natural resources are there to
sustain the population. As to what that figure maybe for Australia, I wouldnt know.

Ashley Watson

Re: Rightsizing Australia
 

    >I say the fertile/livable areas is probably the equivalent of the US 3 West coast
    >states + the whole US East coast, plus maybe Florida. If I use that for
    >comparison, it can probably support 100 million max but I think that people here
    >would like that.

Oops, forgot to put the "don't", I meant people here wouldn't like that.

Re: Rightsizing Australia
 

1. 'artesian basin' : limiting factor #1 Holds almost all the obtainable water
for 70% of the mainland land mass. The water underground originates in the
eastern ranges, and seeps, slowly slowly into the centre of the continent.
Within our lifetime, we will exhaust the supply which has taken centuries to
accumulate. The foreseeable end of the artesian basin capacity will DEPOPULATE
much of the interior.
2. 'western values' : limiting factor #2 Everybody wants a car, a house, and as often
as not, green grass on the lawn. There is no tomorrow, there is only the next
barbeque. Australia's 2 major cities are heading the way of all suburban sprawl
dinosaurs, which is to say, badly. Economic growth is not guaranteed, and thank
goodness for that.

Much of Australia's present self-image is based on cashing in on what came easily.
The future will have a different complexion.
L."newstartnz" <[email protected]> wrote:
    > What is the 'right' size population for Australia? Given that its geographical area
    > is about the same as USA + Canada (pop 300M) or Central + Western Europe (pop 400M
    > depending on what you count), I would suggest that something more than 19M is
    > appropriate.
    >
    > Maybe 75M in the short term (50-75 years)?
    >
    > Doesn't Australia have economic/ ethical good reason to accelerate the population
    > growth just a tad?
    >
    > It would speed things up a bit for those on the PR waiting list as well.

Re: Rightsizing Australia
 

"Larry Cook" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:B8B54130.2105%[email protected]...
    >
    > Much of Australia's present self-image is based on cashing in on what came easily.
    > The future will have a different complexion.

Business groups are the most prominent supporters of increasing the population,
obviously because it creates a larger market for them. More consumers = more need for
products/services = economic growth = new jobs = larger market with a proportinately
similar spending capacity per capita. Others also want those with skilled labour to
keep on coming in.

Chris

    > L.

Re: Rightsizing Australia
 

you are nuts! there is no where to put that many people! (75M) everyone (well most
folks) lives on the east coast here, with a few hardy souls living in the middle. The
hardy souls do without decent education, health, shopping, and other resources
because no one wants to live with them in the stinking hot desert :) (I grew up in
the simpson desert) great to grow up there, a 10 year old with his own motor-bike,
car, horse, rifle and dog is a great life but gets a bit dull as you get older and
the nearest pretty girl is 100km away and she is in a relationship with her boyfriend
in boarding school 1000km away...

"newstartnz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > What is the 'right' size population for Australia? Given that its geographical area
    > is about the same as USA + Canada (pop 300M) or Central + Western Europe (pop 400M
    > depending on what you count), I would suggest that something more than 19M is
    > appropriate.
    >
    > Maybe 75M in the short term (50-75 years)?
    >
    > Doesn't Australia have economic/ ethical good reason to accelerate the population
    > growth just a tad?
    >
    > It would speed things up a bit for those on the PR waiting list as well.
    >
    > Best
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Re: Rightsizing Australia
 

If the UK is about the size of Victoria and we have nearly 60 million people, even
with loads of sparsely populated land in Wales and Scotland, I figure you could get a
few hundred million along the East coast easy. If you run out of fresh water get some
solar powered desalination plants. Then start building upwards until you have a
Manhattan skyline over the entire South East Coast. Oh and don't forget about
Tasmania. You'd get 50 million on there no bother.

I think you've been spoilt living in the desert (well except on the girlfriend
front). That's why so many Asian's are coming to Australia. It's to Educate the state
on the Tardis principle of city planning.

--
devnull

"David" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > you are nuts! there is no where to put that many people! (75M) everyone (well most
    > folks) lives on the east coast here, with a few hardy souls living in the middle.
    > The hardy souls do without decent education, health, shopping, and other resources
    > because no one wants to live with
them
    > in the stinking hot desert :) (I grew up in the simpson desert) great to grow up
    > there, a 10 year old with his own motor-bike, car, horse, rifle
and
    > dog is a great life but gets a bit dull as you get older and the nearest pretty
    > girl is 100km away and she is in a relationship with her boyfriend
in
    > boarding school 1000km away...
    >
    >
    > "newstartnz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > What is the 'right' size population for Australia? Given that its geographical
    > > area is about the same as USA + Canada (pop 300M) or Central + Western Europe
    > > (pop 400M depending on what you count), I would suggest that something more than
    > > 19M is appropriate.
    > >
    > > Maybe 75M in the short term (50-75 years)?
    > >
    > > Doesn't Australia have economic/ ethical good reason to accelerate the population
    > > growth just a tad?
    > >
    > > It would speed things up a bit for those on the PR waiting list as well.
    > >
    > > Best
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > --
    > > Posted via http://britishexpats.com

Re: Rightsizing Australia
 

Water. This is the driest continent in the world, could we get enough water to support this population? Not a critisism, just a question by the way.

Also very few aussies or immigrants want to live in the outback. Sydney and Melbourne are the most populus, why, they are the cooler parts with the most facilities. Most Aussies would KILL for a BMW, bigger house, the neighbours new TV, we are as materalistic as any race. Just look at our love of credit cards.

We need millions of immigrants tho, just to support the aging population, so I should imagine many many more will be allowed in.

Re: Rightsizing Australia
 

Australia is surrounded by oceans and has plenty of free energy (sun, wind, wavepower...). Innovative cost-effective desalination techniques to be developed over the next 50 years will solve the world's water supply problems. You heard it here first

Best wishes.

Re: Rightsizing Australia
 

dotty <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
    > Water. This is the driest continent in the world, could we get enough water to
    > support this population? Not a critisism, just a question by the way.
    >

Sorry to be smart arse and is not directly related to the debate but Australia is not
the driest continant. In fact it is would you believe it is Antartica, It just doesnt
rain there, so despite the fact that 70% of the worlds fresh water is located in
Antartica there is no precipitation in the form of rain, thus making it the dryest
continant on the planet.

Ashley Watson

Re: Rightsizing Australia
 

    >Water. This is the driest continent in the world, could we get enough water to
    >support this population? Not a critisism, just a question by the way.

I saw the other day a program on ABC or SBS on terraforming Mars. Maybe NASA should
experiment in Australia's desert first.

    >Also very few aussies or immigrants want to live in the outback. Sydney and
    >Melbourne are the most populus, why, they are the cooler parts with the most
    >facilities. Most Aussies would KILL for a BMW, bigger house, the neighbours new TV,
    >we are as materalistic as any race. Just look at our love of credit cards.

True. Some come from hellholes called "Asia" (I know, I used to live in one) and why
would they want to go through all that bother to live in another hellhole.
Short-sighted solution: Keep expanding Sydney until it occupies half of NSW. :)

    >We need millions of immigrants tho, just to support the aging population, so I
    >should imagine many many more will be allowed in.

Yep, pension and social security is just one big Ponzi scheme. But they'll have to
cut back on those elderly parents' visas or that defeats the point.