Society/Culture Support for Big Australia falls dramatically.

[Seeds]

If that's a ridiculous assumption then maybe you should state what you're thinking rather than generalize.

No because everyone should automatically assume it. To think it means every person is just bizarre.

 

[Seeds]

I don't think there is much evidence to suggest that in spite of reducing population that their quality of life has fallen significantly or even at all. Does a lower population growth really have to mean standard of living drops, the permanent pursuit of GDP growth is at the expense of demographics has its own burdens which are only now being felt.

Japan is an extreme example anyway, we aren't talking about sending our population backwards but controlling our growth, currently seeing nearly 1% net immigration a year is very high, support is waning because the average person doesn't feel the benefits only the pain that increased population brings even if those benefits may be real.

Your argument is correct but tax systems have been set up around the world based on low dependency ratios. If we dont increase population growth then the share of retirees vs workers increases which means pensions become unsustainable. The alternative to immigration is to delay the retirement age for pension payouts by 5-10 years. Would you prefer this over immigration?

 

[Craven Morehead]

The world is about to hit a turning point where agriculture land will start shrinking because we dont need as much of it as we used to in order to feed the world.

Could you expand on that please?

 

[Balls In]

Um its global population that matters for climate change. Immigration has no effect on it. Many greenies do advocate lowering fertility rates. Something i disagree with but they are at least consistent with their population views and its impact on environment. Where greenies are inconsistent is not in their views on populatiom but on their views on trade and trying to end poverty.

What about the loss of biodiversity in Australia from overclearing and human encroachment? Where's the water going to come from? Pollution, air quality impacts, runnoff into waterways and to the Barrier reef, overfishing etc etc more people makes every environmental issue harder to manage and its especially the case in our arid landscape.

 

[Seeds]

What about the loss of biodiversity in Australia from overclearing and human encroachment? Where's the water going to come from? Pollution, air quality impacts, runnoff into waterways and to the Barrier reef, overfishing etc etc more people makes every environmental issue harder to manage and its especially the case in our arid landscape.

But any of those environmental damages created from immigration means there is less of it happening overseas and frankly we take better care of our environment then most countries overseas so people coming here probably improves the global situation.

We have no major water problems. Aren't all our dams pretty full. We can always build more and their is heaps of water in the north. Other countries have water problems. Australia doesn't.

 

[Benny78]

I blame planes. Even with ships there's no way we could turn in that many migrants.

I would shut off all our borders and reduce the migration/tourist number to zero. All the conservative tradies that go to thailand every 3 months hoping to marry a ladyboy can gagf.

 

[Balls In]

But any of those environmental damages created from immigration means there is less of it happening overseas and frankly we take better care of our environment then most countries overseas so people coming here probably improves the global situation.
.

Really, global environmental socialism?

Are you mad?

 

[Mofra]

I don't think there is much evidence to suggest that in spite of reducing population that their quality of life has fallen significantly or even at all. Does a lower population growth really have to mean standard of living drops, the permanent pursuit of GDP growth is at the expense of demographics has its own burdens which are only now being felt.

Not immediately, but it will be a growing problem as more and more people live far beyond retirement age, and for much longer.

I only hear Australian ratios so have no idea about Japan but we've reached a threshold where 1 in 3 people's tax take is used entirely to support one person living on welfare (predominantly the aged pension) and without continued population growth that ratio will continue to reduce (from memory at the establishment of the aged pension it was 1 in 7 but happy to be corrected).

As an aside the tax reductions from the superannuation scheme are almost as large as the outgoings on the aged pension. It's a sector in desperate need of reform.

 

[Seeds]

Really, global environmental socialism?

Are you mad?

Do you even know what socialism is? Cos I dont think you do.

Ofcourse environmentalism is a global issue. Why do you think most conservatives argue that reducing emissions is pointless if China and India don't?

 

[Balls In]

Do you even know what socialism is? Cos I dont think you do.

Ofcourse environmentalism is a global issue. Why do you think most conservatives argue that reducing emissions is pointless if China and India don't?

We should load up on migrants to reduce the environmental harm overseas? You're off the reservation. How about we look at the environmental problems caused by overcrowding and establish a sustainable population strategy thanks.

 

[Magus]

Why is the world overpopulated? Ive never heard a good argument saying it is. What does overpopulated even mean? World poverty levels are falling. The world is about to hit a turning point where agriculture land will start shrinking because we dont need as much of it as we used to in order to feed the world. Co2 emissions are hitting unsustainable levels but we already have the tech to fix that problem as well.

Even if overpopulation was a problem immigration has no effect on overpopulation unless the immigrants are coming from other planets.

Where are you getting your information that agricultural land is shrinking?

 

[Bombermania]

Due to technology and improved farming techniques then yes less farmland will be needed for global production needs, in the case of Australia we already produce substantially more than is consumed domestically. CNN reported last year the number of people living in real poverty has falling below 50% and is trending lower.

 

[Craven Morehead]

Due to technology and improved farming techniques then yes less farmland will be needed for global production needs, in the case of Australia we already produce substantially more than is consumed domestically. CNN reported last year the number of people living in real poverty has falling below 50% and is trending lower.

Again, because Seeds seems reluctant to answer that claim, I call upon you to do so.

 

[Bombermania]

Again, because Seeds seems reluctant to answer that claim, I call upon you to do so.

Technological advances in the agriculture sector are or will change the way food is produced and how land is managed.

Much of Australia's land problems could be fixed by planting more trees.

 

[Craven Morehead]

Technological advances in the agriculture sector are or will change the way food is produced and how land is managed.

Much of Australia's land problems could be fixed by planting more trees.

That's a little simplistic. Yeah?
Where do we plant the trees exactly?
Technological advances, (your term) are providing increasing yields in both crop harvest and livestock yield. Undoubtedly.
Yet, due to the global demand, we are seeing agriculture expand to feed the growing population.

 

[Magus]

Technological advances in the agriculture sector are or will change the way food is produced and how land is managed.

Much of Australia's land problems could be fixed by planting more trees.

Yeah, that's not very specific.

"Deforestation is the permanent destruction of forests in order to make the land available for other uses. An estimated 18 million acres (7.3 million hectares) of forest, which is roughly the size of the country of Panama, are lost each year, according to the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)"

https://www.livescience.com/27692-deforestation.html

 

[Bombermania]

That's a little simplistic. Yeah?
Where do we plant the trees exactly?
Technological advances, (your term) are providing increasing yields in both crop harvest and livestock yield. Undoubtedly.
Yet, due to the global demand, we are seeing agriculture expand to feed the growing population.

Large parts of Australia are actually quite capable of having more trees. People often make the mistake of thinking Australia is one big desert which it isn't and in many cases is only clear due to farming or earlier hunting methods.

Farm production can be increased via technology but it is also possible that it can be done more productively with less land than previously but in Australia's case we already produce way more than is consumed domestically.

 

[Bombermania]

Yeah, that's not very specific.

"Deforestation is the permanent destruction of forests in order to make the land available for other uses. An estimated 18 million acres (7.3 million hectares) of forest, which is roughly the size of the country of Panama, are lost each year, according to the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)"

https://www.livescience.com/27692-deforestation.html

Disagree it is permanent, if a paddock or block of land is cleared then replanted then it is reforested so it is not permanent, also forests have been expanding and shrinking throughout history.

 

[Bombermania]

Yeah, that's not very specific.

"Deforestation is the permanent destruction of forests in order to make the land available for other uses. An estimated 18 million acres (7.3 million hectares) of forest, which is roughly the size of the country of Panama, are lost each year, according to the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)"

https://www.livescience.com/27692-deforestation.html

Hopefully the link works but here is an article by landcare

https://landcareaustralia.org.au/project/reforestation-offers-long-term-soil-carbon-benefits/

 

[Magus]

Disagree it is permanent, if a paddock or block of land is cleared then replanted then it is reforested so it is not permanent, also forests have been expanding and shrinking throughout history.

You cant just return agricultural land to its previous form through planting trees. GE crops in particular have devastating effects on soil. There's also the loss of wildlife and natural habitat for indigenous peoples to be considered when clearing forests.

 

[Craven Morehead]

Large parts of Australia are actually quite capable of having more trees. People often make the mistake of thinking Australia is one big desert which it isn't and in many cases is only clear due to farming or earlier hunting methods.

Farm production can be increased via technology but it is also possible that it can be done more productively with less land than previously but in Australia's case we already produce way more than is consumed domestically.

You really don't know what you're talking about.
Get a bit more specific instead of generic talking points you learnt off a website and I'll get back to you.

 

[Bombermania]

You really don't know what you're talking about.
Get a bit more specific instead of generic talking points you learnt off a website and I'll get back to you.

I am being specific and I don't do talking points thanks!

Funny you think I have to take the UN seriously only for you to dismiss Landcare.

 

[Bombermania]

You cant just return agricultural land to its previous form through planting trees. GE crops in particular have devastating effects on soil. There's also the loss of wildlife and natural habitat for indigenous peoples to be considered when clearing forests.

Think the Department of Environment and Landcare might disagree on that because they have long worked on projects designed to restore cleared farm land.

 

[Craven Morehead]

I am being specific and I don't do talking points thanks!

Funny you think I have to take the UN seriously only for you to dismiss Landcare.

Sorry, you're not being specific at all.
Where do we plant the trees exactly? Do you think all farms have no trees?
Why is Australia producing more than it consumes a bad thing?
There is no doubt that farm production and yields are increasing.
Yet why are we looking at damming rivers in the North to secure Australia as a foodbowl?
Why is Ord Stage 2 going ahead?
Why is the Amazon being cleared at an untold rate? ( btw I am horrified at this).
I could go on and on and on.

I take it you're a farmer, yeah?

 

[Bombermania]

Sorry, you're not being specific at all.
Where do we plant the trees exactly? Do you think all farms have no trees?
Why is Australia producing more than it consumes a bad thing?
There is no doubt that farm production and yields are increasing.
Yet why are we looking at damming rivers in the North to secure Australia as a foodbowl?
Why is Ord Stage 2 going ahead?
Why is the Amazon being cleared at an untold rate? ( btw I am horrified at this).
I could go on and on and on.

I take it you're a farmer, yeah?

Australia is a very large island and I never said all farms have no trees but many have been cleared of their vegetation.

I didn't say it was a bad thing that Australia produced more than it consumed domestically.

Politicians talk about damming Northern Australian rivers due to the massive amount of rain each wet season.

Brazil is a very different country to Australia. The Amazon has been progressively cleared over several decades.