I need to get something off my chest. I get more than a little annoyed with people like our Prime Minister and the likes of Dick Smith issuing holy writ on matters that they clearly know little about.
Not long ago, in speaking to a report on Australia’s aging population, Prime Minister Rudd virtually decreed that we will all need to work harder. Sure, we know that our aging population will require a higher tax take on the diminishing work force over time; no sensible person would deny that and it didn’t really need the authority of a formal report to declare it so. But work harder? What kind of a solution is that?
Australians are known the world over as hard workers – Aussies don’t shirt putting in the hard yards. What the PM really means is that we’ll all have to work longer hours to get paid more so that the ATO can tax us harder. Putting aside the fact that this is really a non-solution from a Prime Minister who simply doesn’t have the ticker to name the elephant in the room, it’s deeply offensive to all Australians and young families in particular when families (working families) are already stressed beyond reason and good sense in the time that they’re away from the home striving to pay the bills.
The elephant in the room, by the way, is the reality that we’re beginning to reap what we’ve sewn over the past thirty years and more. Every economist knows that children and young families drive the domestic economy. Abortion isn’t simply a choice for an individual – it has significant long term ramifications for all of us. When we begin to understand that many of those children aborted in the 1970s and even 1980s would themselves now be forming their own families we can see the compounding effect that these ‘choices’ have.
And while the real answer to the aging population lies in increasing the nation’s birth rate from the current (admittedly historically high) 1.9 children to at least the basic replacement rate of 2.1 children per couple, there are other breast beating prophets who would rather see us spare the planet by putting humanity on the endangered species list.
Renowned entrepreneur, Dick Smith, recently called for families to limit their offspring to only two children for the sake of the planet. Smith, like the earlier famed Malthusian, Paul Ehrlich, either simply doesn’t get humanity or ignores ‘inconvenient truths’ for the sake of his argument. Smith bases his apocryphal predictions that an increase in our population will spell doom for us all on the premise that our food and water supplies simply could not cope with this increase. Smith, like Ehrlich before him, fails to consider the ingenuity of mankind and our ability to find solutions to complex problems (that is, when we’re not wasting time and money at events like Copenhagen!).
Maybe I’m just riding high on my hobby horse. Please, you don’t have to believe what I say, check it out for yourself. Two movies that should have won Nobel Prizes instead of Al Gore: Demographic Winter and the Population Bomb tell the real story.
You can view the trailers at: http://www.demographicwinter.com/index.html
I watched Wayne Swan deliver the National Press Club address where he discussed The Intergenerational Report.
ReplyDeleteSome of the spectators in the audience looked angrily cynical, and others looked downright fearful.
I thought the main aim of the report was to force people over the age of 65 to remain in the workforce.
I think it would make more sense for young people who are full-time students to give up their part-time jobs, so that those in the 50+ age group and young people seeking full-time employment can be accommodated.
This should improve educational outcomes, reduce depression in the unemployed, and cut the welfare bill.
I went to see a movie entitled: "Capitalism: A Love Story" that I considered very enlightening where the power of huge corporations was concerned.
I think Lord Monckton is making significant inroads into the Climate Change farce.
I'm hoping that few voters will be interested in what is actually a proposed Financial Climate Change (Green backs).
Kevin Rudd goes to church, but I don't think he could possibly have any real Christian values.
From what I've seen, he has the primary goal of becoming World Sector Leader of the Chinawealth of Nations. He has no problem with selling Australians out at every opportunity.
This would concur with his desire to have an Asia/Pacific Economic Union in place by 2020.
I think both of the major parties are communist/treasonist in their agendas.
Interesting thoughts, Lorikeet.
ReplyDeleteNot so sure about fulltime students NOT working. I know so many who plainly just have to to get by.
Sorry Paul, I should have said high school students living with their parents. I didn't mean university students.
ReplyDeleteAs for Dick Smith wanting to limit families to 2 children, I guess no one has told him that even with a Baby Bonus in place, the birth rate is still only 1.9 babies per couple.
I think our country has been at or below ZPG ever since the contraceptive pill came into widespread use in 1961. Here are the figures for my parents' extended families. Mum (born 1927): 2.0 Dad (born 1923): 2.2.
Dick Smith needs to realise that there are plenty of couples who can't/won't have any children and single people who never marry or have children.
In 1969, ZPG was considered to be 2.3 children per couple, but that figure seems to have gone down for some reason.
I'm predicting that the Baby Boom will be followed by a Baby Bust, if being below ZPG can be considered a boom at all.
Wayne Swan keeps pushing for greater productivity, when most people are already doing enough work for 1.5 jobs, and also being expected to do quite a number of hours without being paid. We need to drive home the message that we don't want to become a Member State of the Chinawealth of Nations.
John Howard expected women to have 3 children each (2 to replace parents, and 1 for the country). Although this figure is good for Age Pyramid purposes, it seems both Labor and Liberals expect Australian women to work as hard as Chinese women.
It seems they have not considered that most Chinese women have only one child to care for, and a much smaller house to maintain. Some Chinese grandparents also take care of the grandchildren while the parents work.
Here's another interesting comment from Dick Smith. He said bringing in hundreds of thousands of migrants each year is just another Ponsy Scheme. Perhaps he is right about that.
It has certainly become clear that visa holders (a lot are from third world nations) are being brought in specifically to increase competition for jobs and drive wages down.
Thirty years ago, the Chinese government dictated that couples should have only 1 child, when the average at that time was 6 children per couple.
Because of gender selection through abortion, there is now a significant surplus of males and a thriving trade in prostitution.
There is also almost no one to look after the elderly. I've heard of instances where the only grandchild now has to look after 4 ageing grandparents.
There is very limited access to aged care, which costs about $50 per week. Elderly people are crammed into dormitory style rooms, with barely enough space for a very slim nurse to walk between the beds.
All laundry is washed by hand!
Whoops! Sorry, I made a mistake.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this again, it seems both Labor and Liberals expect Australian women to WORK HARDER than Chinese women.
Ladies! We need to give them a reality check!