Another backlog of articles and such to list! I have neglected posting out of sheer despair; I feel so powerless and insignificant as nothing I say can do anything to change the government’s policies.
“No ‘we are full’ sign for Melbourne”, The Age, 7/3. With tedious predictability, Ted Baillieu’s Liberal Government has decided not to do anything to restrict Melbourne’s population growth as it is good for the economy. Certainly not for the residents who have to endure the erosion of living standards resulting from such growth! To say I am disgusted and disappointed is an understatement. The city I grew up in is essentially ruined. Disturbingly:
He said 84 per cent of Victoria’s economic growth over the past five years had come from population growth, compared with 71 per cent for Australia as a whole, an unsustainable situation that would require higher productivity from Victoria’s workers to reverse.
Earlier, however, Planning Minister Matthew Guy was saying, “Bigger may not be better for Melbourne”.
Victorian Labor politician Kelvin Thomson now has his own blog; he is one of the very few politicans who seem to understand that excessive population growth is not a benefit for Australia (or the world).
SPPA convener William Bourke wrote an opinion piece on the ABC News site, “Ageing Australia: a crisis or triumph?”, saying that an older population is not necessarily something to be concerned about, despite the scare-mongering by businesses and politicians.
“Planet could be ‘unrecognizable’ by 2050, experts say”, 21/2. A planet of 7 billion is bad enough, but 9 billion will be even worse, as this article predicts. Feeding all those people is the main issue. In the rest of the natural world, animal, bird and insect populations tend to increase in times of plenty – but when famine strikes, many will perish from starvation (the boom and bust cycle). The “Green Revolution” has helped humans avoid this for the most part (at least where food is evenly distributed), but it is reliant on environmentally-unfriendly means of production such as synthetic (petroleum-based) fertilizers and monoculture crops controlled by corporations. The only way to avoid this cycle – with the prospect of millions fighting for dwindling resources – is to give everyone (i.e. in all countries) access to family planning, and remove incentives for having large families in times of plenty, even if this tends to go against human instinct to reproduce.
Don't get disheartened! You write beautifully and and I assure you I read every post.
ReplyDeleteThe rest of society WILL come around to think the same way, it is a matter of simple maths. Essentially, we can make the decisions to reduce population growth or m other nature will make the decisions for us.
Thanks for the encouragement! But I feel a lot of damage will have been done to the environment, etc. before people come around to that thinking :-(
ReplyDeleteThere's a chance that change will come before nature decides to spank us back into shape, and that change will come from the thinking people out there who may or may not be "intellectuals" but are alert-minded, grounded and active in their communities.
ReplyDeleteThe type of writing on this blog exemplifies what they like to read: sane, sober, clear and not fearmongering posts that make their case logically without excess drama. We're linking it.