Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
AUSTRALIA: Immigration not only way to counter ageing population
Share:
by Maireid Sullivan | September 18, 2009 at 05:50 pm
606 views | 13 Recommendations | 3 comments
Australia is struggling to manage increased immigration. For a start, we don't have sufficient infrastructure (transport, housing, energy, health and education, and especially water), in place for the current 22 million citizens. Limited supplies of water top the list, especially in high population centres in the southern reaches of the island. The current drought, which began in 1992, doesn't look like it will end soon. Scientist say it is due to global warming impact on Indian ocean currents. Southern State governments have launched controversial, expensive and environmentally dangerous channel building and river re-direction projects which won't solve the problem in the long term, but will certainly create to huge debt for future generations. This is the neo-classical economic formula at work,– all motivated by arrogance, power and greed – which, sadly, may cause the end of a wonderful era of "laid-back" Aussie culture.
Immigration not the only way to counter our ageing population, by Stephen Lunn–
THE Rudd government should be wary about using high levels of immigration in coming decades as a means to counteract the decline in productivity resulting from an ageing population because more over-55s are staying on in their jobs, a population expert warns.
Monash University demographer Bob Birrell said Treasury's new population estimate for Australia -- 35 million by 2050 -- was based on immigration levels of about 180,000 a year, a rate that may not be necessary to keep the economy running and will be difficult to provide for in terms of urban infrastructure and services.
"The government seems to have bought the argument that business in Australia needs a high amount of labour force growth to keep it going in the future. The rest of us are going to have to bear the consequences of that," Professor Birrell said yesterday.
"The government doesn't seem prepared to explore how we need to make social adjustments; rather, they are relying on the prop of bringing in more people of younger ages to essentially put all the older people to bed."
In a speech yesterday to launch the new Australian Institute for Population Ageing Research at the University of NSW, Wayne Swan noted the previous estimate of Australia's future population contained in the last intergenerational report in 2007 -- 28.5 million by 2047 -- was likely to be well short of the mark.
"Australia's population is projected to grow by 65per cent to reach over 35 million in 2049, up from around 21.5 million people now," Mr Swan said.
"This ... is largely driven by a greater number of women of childbearing age, higher fertility rates and increased net overseas migration."
Mr Swan said while the number of people of working age would grow by 45 per cent over the next 40 years, those aged 65-84 would double and those 85 and older would increase by 4.5 times.
"Population ageing will lead to slower economic growth ... and it will lead to increasing levels of Australian government spending per person. Together these factors will contribute to significant ongoing financial pressures," the Treasurer said.
the article continues...
Advertisement
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (3)
at 07:12 on September 20th, 2009
21 million people is enough. Adjustments in the economy can be made for an older workforce.
Very good article.
at 21:44 on September 23rd, 2009
Thanks for the comment, 158,
This week I heard outrageous figures for increased carbon emission rates for every million people added to the population, so hopefully, the government will take this into consideration. Have you heard of Steady State? Here is the wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steady_state_(macroeconomics)
and here is the link to a dedicated website: http://www.steadystate.org/
I haven't read through these sites yet, but I've read other sources on it, and it looks good - but the best I've come across is the Classical Political Economics theorem, (prior to current neo-classical economic theory) which has a huge following, but never gets a look-in at government levels. E.g. Dr. Terence Dwyer submitted a highly detailed (I've read it) excellent explanation on this approach to the AU Tax Office current Henry Review of taxation, and he wasn't even invited to a special ATO conference on the subject held at Melb. Uni. recently.
The gov. just don't want to know about a system that would relieve ALL socio-economic 'symptoms' of the current neo-classical economic system (Real-estate boom -busts cycles for one)....a system that would draw a single tax, of around 10%, on all resource use (known as Resource Rent or Law of Rent) and not on personal income, production, or business productivity, and, which could then afford to guarantee a "living-wage" for everyone, without the stigma of unemployment benefits. Of course, this has huge positive implications for changes in our way of living.
Learn about Classical Economics here: http://www.schalkenbach.org/
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Green Card (not verified)at 11:55 on September 25th, 2009
From a humanitarian perspective, our fellow human beings, who migrate to support their families, continue to suffer at the hands of immigration policies that separate them from family members. This suffering should not continue. Now is the time to address this pressing humanitarian issue which affects so many lives and undermines basic human dignity. Our society should no longer tolerate a status quo that perpetuates a permanent underclass of persons and benefits from their labor without offering them legal protections.