Gillard urges against a 'big Australia' (1 Viewer)

[xMaNx]

Prime Minister Julia Gillard has urged against a "big Australia", saying we need to develop policies for a sustainable nation.

The prime minister contradicted her predecessor Kevin Rudd, who was in favour of population growth, as she signalled a tougher approach, Fairfax newspapers say.

"Australia should not hurtle down the track towards a big population," she said on Saturday. We need to stop, take a breath and develop policies for a sustainable Australia."

Ms Gillard said she's not talking about "bringing down the shutters on immigration".

"I don't want business to be held back because they couldn't find the right workers. That's why skilled migration is so important. But also I don't want areas of Australia with 25 per cent youth unemployment because there are no jobs," she said.

Meanwhile, a new poll shows voters want Ms Gillard to get on with the job of running the country and are urging her to fix the mining-tax debacle, stop wasting money and sort out the health system.

The Galaxy poll, published in News Ltd newspapers on Sunday, shows that although most voters believe Ms Gillard gives Labor a better chance of staying in power, they are deeply uneasy about how Kevin Rudd was dumped from office.

Voters believe the deposed leader was treated harshly and want Mr Rudd to stay in parliament and be given an important Cabinet job.

But the poll shows voters overwhelmingly believe the switch to Ms Gillard was the right move.

In the poll, Labor is now in an election-winning position, jumping ahead of the Coalition by two percentage points on a two-party preferred basis, leading 52 per cent to 48 per cent.

But voters insist Ms Gillard must move quickly to settle the mining-tax issue, with 30 per cent of poll respondents saying it should be her first priority and 24 per cent saying she should fast-track health and hospital reforms.

Her third priority should be to get the Budget back into the black, they say.

Only 11 per cent of the 800 voters polled believe Ms Gillard should revive the emissions Trading Scheme to tackle climate change and 13 per cent feel she should get tougher on asylum-seekers.

Labor's primary support has locked in at four points higher than after the Budget, on 41 per cent, but the Coalition has dropped only one point to 42 per cent and that loss has been at the expense of the minor partner, the National Party.

Thoughts?

 

[Phoenix Fury]

I say good, we don't have the infrastructure to support it and I can't see us having it for quite some time.

 

[badquinton304]

Good. Increases/decreases in population should generaally be very steady, otherwise you have large youth unemployment or worse an aged population.

 

[FreeWorld]

Infrastructure is fine, more like the availability of houses. Has anyone noticed a huge influx of foreign chinese? or are they more visible because of their flamboyant shit and stop greeks coming in as well because there's too many of those two. Bring more Americans - north and south.

 

[Tangent]

Australia cannot sustain a large number of people. We have limited resources, and they will run out eventually. Eg. most of Australia is uninhabitable because there is a great big desert in the middle that cannot sustain human life!

Also, making more babies will not solve the problems of an aging population (as this would increase exponentially over time if this mentality was maintained)

I think that instead of importing immigrants to do jobs in Aust., make more incentives for Australians to fill those jobs.

Even though i think that we should lower our immigrant intake, there is a need for a more compassionate refugee scheme, where we accept and process refugees quicker as to uphold our multilateral agreements. We have signed the UDHR.

P.S: get rid of the baby bonus

 

[brendroid]

Although I'm not too sure about Gillard's stance on things, this looks like something that could be good short term.

It seems that the biggest argument against population increase for Aus would be the desert in the middle of the country, well, maybe attempts should be made to perhaps reclaim that. Even if it's not so that we can live there, greenery is nice

 

[Jimmy Recard]

how the fuck do you suppose we "reclaim" desert you gook

 

[Jimmy Recard]

especially considering how sparsely populated regional nsw is lol seriously cmon

 

[LoveHateSchool]

This is a good, I never agreed with Kevin trying to increase the population so largely and so rapidly. We need the infrastructure to care for the population. By having the baby bonus, it encourages people who wouldn't normally have children to have children. Therefore in 15 years, you end up with all these anti social teenagers that society has to take care of.

 

[Tangent]

ok so you are an anti-refugee racist and a paedophile too. you should be reported.

You are confusing immigrant and refugee. Refugees make up a minute part of the immigrant population. And slowed population growth would also apply to those also in aust. ie stop at one of two kids

 

[Chemical Ali]

---------------------------------------- <-- the idiot line

everyone who posted above this line is an idiot (except maybe Phoenix fury, he's cool)

 

[brendroid]

Reclaim desert would mean attempts to make it habitable. Trying to re-introduce nutrients, so that plants can be planted and last there, not whither and die. With plants would come evapotranspiration and more rainfall. Because there'd be more nutrients farms could be constructed further in. We're talking a slow process, not something 'zip bam done finished in 4 years'. If we're going to try terraforming something like Mars, or at least attempt it, how about we try relatively small areas to not only test new ideas but also to improve our own world. I may just be an idealist with this thing though, but better to try and think of practical ways to improve the country than to shout hollow policy like some politicians.

Love how you tried to attack me and not my statement too.

 

[Jimmy Recard]

im a genius

 

[Jimmy Recard]

Reclaim desert would mean attempts to make it habitable. Trying to re-introduce nutrients, so that plants can be planted and last there, not whither and die. With plants would come evapotranspiration and more rainfall. Because there'd be more nutrients farms could be constructed further in. We're talking a slow process, not something 'zip bam done finished in 4 years'. If we're going to try terraforming something like Mars, or at least attempt it, how about we try relatively small areas to not only test new ideas but also to improve our own world. I may just be an idealist with this thing though, but better to try and think of practical ways to improve the country than to shout hollow policy like some politicians.

Love how you tried to attack me and not my statement too.

shut up that is dumb

 

[scuba_steve2121]

Reclaim desert would mean attempts to make it habitable. Trying to re-introduce nutrients, so that plants can be planted and last there, not whither and die. With plants would come evapotranspiration and more rainfall. Because there'd be more nutrients farms could be constructed further in. We're talking a slow process, not something 'zip bam done finished in 4 years'. If we're going to try terraforming something like Mars, or at least attempt it, how about we try relatively small areas to not only test new ideas but also to improve our own world. I may just be an idealist with this thing though, but better to try and think of practical ways to improve the country than to shout hollow policy like some politicians.

Love how you tried to attack me and not my statement too.

lol climate says no. even if aus had a perfect climate in the desert our soils are some of the worst in the world, cant fucking grow anything. and the places that do have good soil, we built cites

 

[Jimmy Recard]

Reclaim desert would mean attempts to make it habitable. Trying to re-introduce nutrients, so that plants can be planted and last there, not whither and die. With plants would come evapotranspiration and more rainfall. Because there'd be more nutrients farms could be constructed further in. We're talking a slow process, not something 'zip bam done finished in 4 years'. If we're going to try terraforming something like Mars, or at least attempt it, how about we try relatively small areas to not only test new ideas but also to improve our own world. I may just be an idealist with this thing though, but better to try and think of practical ways to improve the country than to shout hollow policy like some politicians.

Love how you tried to attack me and not my statement too.

how fucken high are you

 

[zombie omie jay]

Speak is tricking man he just hates Muslims

 

[Tangent]

Reclaim desert would mean attempts to make it habitable. Trying to re-introduce nutrients, so that plants can be planted and last there, not whither and die. With plants would come evapotranspiration and more rainfall. Because there'd be more nutrients farms could be constructed further in. We're talking a slow process, not something 'zip bam done finished in 4 years'. If we're going to try terraforming something like Mars, or at least attempt it, how about we try relatively small areas to not only test new ideas but also to improve our own world. I may just be an idealist with this thing though, but better to try and think of practical ways to improve the country than to shout hollow policy like some politicians.

Love how you tried to attack me and not my statement too.

Actually, this would be possible with today's technology. With high nutrient fertilizers, and genetically modifies plants, it would be possible to make the desert habitable.

Though there are many factors that could go wrong, not to mention this would be a huge costly project. Also, the nutrients would need replenishing regularly as they are used up by plants.
The displacement of rain, would be just that, it would deprive other places of rainfall, which would leave untold damage on those areas.
Also, the unique environment we have out there right now would be destroyed, along with the native animals that call it home.

 

[Graney]

The Australian desert is already habitable, dumb gooks. Antarctica is habitable. Orbiting the earth at an altitude of 400km is habitable.

You mean arable. Central sydney isn't arable and cunts live there, so who cares.

 

[Jimmy Recard]

Actually, this would be possible with today's technology. With high nutrient fertilizers, and genetically modifies plants, it would be possible to make the desert habitable.

Though there are many factors that could go wrong, not to mention this would be a huge costly project. Also, the nutrients would need replenishing regularly as they are used up by plants.
The displacement of rain, would be just that, it would deprive other places of rainfall, which would leave untold damage on those areas.
Also, the unique environment we have out there right now would be destroyed, along with the native animals that call it home.

lol

come on are you cunts serious