Last week, the ABS released its latest population data, which registered near record population growth for Victoria, with nearly 115,000 residents added to the state in the year to March 2016:
This result followed the Victorian Government’s latest population projections, which forecast a whopping 115,000 new residents for the state each and every year for the next 36 years, with Melbourne’s population projected to swell by 75% to 8 million:
Following the release of the ABS’ latest population data, The Age published an article entitled State of excitement as Victoria’s population passes the six million mark, which triumphed that Melbourne’s population will overtake Sydney as Australia’s biggest city.
The comments section of this article were scathing, with around 90% of respondents pushing back hard against the population influx being thrust upon them. Below are some examples:
DisgustedMelbourne,Sep 22 2016 at 6:47pm
This is nothing to celebrate.Local residents are living with the consequences of an immigration program that has been too high for too long. Our roads are permanently gridlocked, the cost of housing is going through the roof, accessing essential services such as hospitals and schools has become more difficult, our suburbs are under serious threat from inappropriate over-development and we are losing our amenities and quality of life..
People are no longer comfortable and relaxed about our immigration program and our policy-makers need to start listening and ACTING.
The time has come to end this PONZI scheme before it collapses under its own weight and reduce immigration to ZERO-NET inclusive of all categories including refugees…
AndrewSep 22 2016 at 7:02pm
…and no actual new railway lines to anywhere since Glen Waverly in 1932, and also the full list of other infrastructure deficits – so remind me again, what are we excited about?…MartinWarrnambool ,Sep 22 2016 at 7:07pm
How dreadful. Quality of life going down but who cares as long as we’re selling more widgets.. Humans will end up like all species that overpopulate…WobertSep 22 2016 at 7:11pm
Hardly think it’s anything to be excited about, previous article I read was about record overcrowding on the suburban rail network. Until the Feds do something about the population ponzie, and cut immigration numbers to the long term average of about seventy thousand per annum, from the current two to three hundred thousand, the States haven’t got a hope of keeping up with the required infrastructure. Melbourne and Sydney will grind to a halt because of congestion…longshotnorth melbourne,Sep 22 2016 at 7:16pm
The great population ponzi scheme continues …MikeOcean Grove,Sep 22 2016 at 8:06pm
What a shame! When are we going to stop growing? Maybe when we have 50 storey high rise all the way to Mildura! What I hate about Pauline Hanson is that she has made the immigration debate one about race or religion and we can’t have a serious, educated debate about population growth. One day population growth has to stop, let’s stop now (in a controlled way so that people who rely on that growth are not too affected) before we forced to stop with the guaranteed dire consequences. We might have enough “space” (for the moment) but we do not have infinite resources…AndrewReservoir,Sep 22 2016 at 8:09pm
Seven million! No thanks. Havent we ruined the country enough with massive immigration. Who is this really to benefit?..russSep 22 2016 at 8:33pm
6 million people a good thing? You can’t be serious…CzarSep 22 2016 at 8:58pm
If this rate of population growth continues, then our children will be the poorer for it.The State and Federal governments think population increases are the key to future prosperity. It’s simply not true…
ABMelbourne,Sep 22 2016 at 11:48pm
The Age has the headline “State of excitement as Victoria’s population passes six million”, the following headline is “Big squeeze: Overcrowding on trains hits new high. The huge immigration program started by John Howard continues abated, enthusiastically embraced by the major parties. They are selling us out. Vote for minor parties that have a sensible population policies…DaleWheelers Hill,Sep 23 2016 at 12:03am
Awful…just awful. 6 million people and growing fast is nothing to be proud of.Government at all levels is fixated on a “bigger is better” model…… and quality of life is going down the toilet as a result.
Eventually, we populate ourselves to extinction…
PragmatistMelbourne,Sep 23 2016 at 8:01am
Oh this is awesome news! Just think of all those easy sales for our retail industry. Every new person needs a new telky, new fridge, new car. Who cares that we dont manufacture anymore and it takes an hour to drive or train to work when it used to take thirty minutes. Who cares about that impact on the ordinary person as long as we can record lazy economic growth…snapdogSep 23 2016 at 8:15am
It doesn’t make me feel excited. It makes me feel depressed that the political class and their big business backers are so dependent on this continuous growth in consumers in order to maintain their grip on power, to feed their greed and to maintain the charade of the holy grail of continuous GDP growth. Ponzi scheme describes it perfectly…Alcountry Victoria,Sep 23 2016 at 8:29am
This is exciting. Third world living conditions coming to you soon…Lord Haw HawSep 23 2016 at 9:44am
This is good news…why?????? have you seen infrastructure, continuous urban development, falling apart schools, hospitals that can’t cope??? Train systems already inadequete…WhatThe?Melbourne,Sep 23 2016 at 11:17am
I don’t know anyone who thinks this is a good thing.
The idea of another couple of million people in Melbourne with our current lack of proper forward planning is horrifying…bilmcSep 23 2016 at 12:26pm
Very sad news… The problem is not really the actual number but the fact that most of the new arrivals end up in Melbourne. Melbourne is already an unmitigated disaster – most liveable city – what a joke. And we happily continue to “plan” ?? for more people. My only consolation is that I am an octogenarian, not in great health, so will not have to suffer the place for much longer…TomSep 23 2016 at 1:00pm
Ummm who is celebrating? Crime is up. Homelessness is up. Traffic is congested. What a joke
The fundamental factor that brought down the past two Victorian Governments – the Brumby Labor Government and the Napthine Liberal Government – were concerns about declining living standards caused by Victoria’s rampant population growth (immigration).
This kind of uncontrolled growth has seen an increasing strain on infrastructure, such as public transport and roads, as well as greater congestion, which has been deeply unpopular in the electorate. It has also led to expensive and unpopular infrastructure projects, such as the desalination plant and the East-West Link, just to keep up with the growing population. And it has helped push-up housing costs to deeply unaffordable levels.
Meanwhile, the evidence suggests that Victorian’s material living standards have not been increased from the state’s population growth fetish. The most recent state accounts revealed that Victoria was the only jurisdiction in Australia where per capita GSP had gone backwards since the GFC (see next chart).
Victoria also had the lowest per capita gross disposable income on the mainland, only just beating out lowly Tasmania (see next chart).
Effectively, the strong population growth has masked Victorian’s poor economic performance. That is, the economic pie has grown due to population growth, but everyone’s slice of that pie has remained unchanged.
If you want an explanation for why recent state governments have been so unpopular, look no further than the state’s false economy which has seen Melbourne growing for growth’s sake, pushing against infrastructure bottlenecks, and failing to increase the living standards of the existing population.
YOU MAY ALSO BE INTERESTED IN
Greg Jericho is feeding hate far more than any 'hater'
From Greg Jericho today: The simple explanation
Immigration minister cherry picks lies to support a 'Big Australia'
By Leith van Onselen On Friday, Australia's
How the Aussie economy compares to when RBA last cut cash rate
By Gareth Aird, Senior Economist at CBA: Key
ScoMo crashes consumer confidence
I don't usually report the weekly given the
Love the octogenarian’s quote.
Old Fart, what would he know? 😛
“The time has come to end this PONZI scheme before it collapses under its own weight and reduce immigration to ZERO-NET inclusive of all categories including refugees”
People who post things like this don’t deserve a seat on the train.. Seriously, just move out to the countryside we’ll all be happier for it. That should buy another 50 years before you have to worry about sharing another squared meter with anyone.
Yeah that’s right Kipron. Focus on this guy’s comment only and ignore the rest of the article and comments.
Look, sorry for posting that rashly. This kind of talk just makes me so upset. As a society we’ve had to struggle hard against xenophobia which is often borne out of envy and greed. I’m a 2nd gen Greek and was lucky to avoid feeling that directly, however i saw the effect it had on the previous generation and it’s happening again here.
It’s a numbers game, Kipron. If you keep funneling 100,000 people into a city year after year, there will be push back. The maths simply doesn’t add up.
@ Kipron4747. As a second generation Greek I guess your parents (or grandparents) must have emigrated to Greece from somewhere. Australia perhaps? If so I guess that it must have been your parents tales of the wide open spaces here that led you to check the place out for yourself.
Kipron4747, you come across as a very intolerant person. In a democracy each person is supposed to have an equal say.
Voters are entitled to have an opinion on the level of immigration. One might want 0 net immigration, another might want 200,000 per year. Each opinion is equally worthy.
I support zero net immigration, but would tolerate more if and only if infrastructure and planning policy matches.
Sorry if that comment sounded intolerant. Perhaps I’ll stop while I’m behind.
“you come across as a very intolerant person. In a democracy each person is supposed to have an equal say.”
By that logic, isn’t Kipron’s comment equally valid, hence making those who complain just as intolerant?
isn’t Kipron’s comment equally valid
His desire for more immigration is valid. His desire to move others out to the countryside is not so valid.
I will state however that I am prepared to move out of Sydney into the countryside and have Sydney bulldozed and replaced with a continuous concrete pour, 100% highrise development and sold 100% to Chinese.
All I ask is that all the spivs, sell-outs, liars, politicians, neoliberals, and a few boomers, get mixed in with the concrete as it is poured.
How is that for tolerance?
TC,
The way I saw it Kipron wasn’t complaining about anti-immigration sentiment, but the anti-immigrant sentiment, there’s a difference. For the life of me I cannot understand why people cannot seem to separate the issues, I’m anti large volume immigration, but I don’t push my problem with that into an anti-immigrant stance, meaning the people, instead of the mechanism.
Racists/bigots etc are using large scale immigration to target their hates and people are responding to that. The blame lays with our politicians and business community (esp. RE) who gain from it, regardless of the cost to the community. They should direct their hate to them, not the immigrant.
Edit: TC, I’ll be corrected on some of this, having read a comment from Kip, below. 🙂
Switch on your sarcasm detector. BTW he’s right, it will collapse under its weight, so its good advice except its years too late; the Ponzi scheme IS the economy, it’s all we’ve got left/
How dare someone point out the unsustainably self-destructive insanity of endless population growth
Of course, you are right. I’m sorry I overreacted.
I think this is a really interesting blog, I’ve been reading it for a few years now. Unlike many people here, I feel that having a strong immigration programme is a key strength of our multicultural society. I agree that Sydney has terrible infrastructure issues but the infrastructure was so archaic to begin with that closing the door on immigration will not fix that problem.
If we can work as hard as our (immigrant) parents did, then perhaps we can leave our cities in a better place than we found them.
Kipron. Australia was a multicultural nation before it dramatically ramped-up its immigration program in 2004. This would not change under a more moderate immigration program. But it would give us a chance to catch-up on housing, infrastructure, etc.
Sorry to join the pile-on, Kipron – you seem to have gotten the point already. But to be clear: zero-net migration implies neither an end to immigration, nor a racially/ethnically selective migration program. No-one worth listening to is advocating for a return of the White Australia Policy (coincidentally, I’m part Greek through my Kytherian refugee great-grandfather who arrived in 1923, when the WAP was very much active).
I also don’t see why it’s up to people already living in population centres like Melbourne to move out to the sticks to make way for immigrants. Humans are social animals, we have networks of family, friends, work connections etc., so why uproot locals in favour of others who’ve already made the decision to uproot themselves and travel halfway around the world? I might add, migrants to Australia have not always been so snobbish (Sydney/Melbourne or bust!) about where they choose to settle. You can see the evidence of that in rural communities all over this country.
“I might add, migrants to Australia have not always been so snobbish (Sydney/Melbourne or bust!) about where they choose to settle. You can see the evidence of that in rural communities all over this country.”
This is a really good point.
Sorry again all for my ill-thought out comment above. I really respect UE for trying to get some discussion happening on these (very sensitive) issues.
In an attempt to add something useful to this, I’ll ask the following: Suppose the question of immigration controls was being seriously considered, would you want it decided by parliament or via a referendum? Who has the more vested interest, MPs or the public that puts them into power?
No need to apologise Kipron. You’ve done nothing wrong.
I might add, migrants to Australia have not always been so snobbish (Sydney/Melbourne or bust!) about where they choose to settle. You can see the evidence of that in rural communities all over this country.
Worth considering is that this is not just a migrant “problem”. Natives have been abandoning/shunning regional areas for decades as well.
Natives have been abandoning/shunning regional areas for decades as well.
In Victoria that includes places like the LaTrobe Valley, where the main local industry (power generation) has shed jobs by the bucket load over the last 25 years, so within Victoria there is noticeable drift out of the regions into Melbourne, which is not going to change without viable industries being set up in those regions.
well I understood what you meant mate.
Yes, I take the comments from a random article to be representative of the majority as well…
And as for this comment:
“The fundamental factor that brought down the past two Victorian Governments – the Brumby Labor Government and the Napthine Liberal Government – were concerns about declining living standards caused by Victoria’s rampant population growth (immigration).”
How can one be sure this is the reason they got the boot? There are so many factors involved in elections, one can’t just make a call like that…
Its a phenomenon that’s sweeping the world. They underestimated feeling around Brexit and it will turned out to be the most significant event in UK’s modern history. PM’s and more were sent to the scrapheap.
I’ve lived in Melb 40 years and watched it turn into a fucking morass, and if we end up with 6 million people quick smart, well, I’m not exactly going to wait around for a State Govt run by One Nation.
I don’t argue that there’s a strong uprising against it (and I agree with the conclusion of the article).
It’s more the evidence used to make that claim…
I’ve only been in Melbourne for three years (moved to escape the insanity of Sydney) and have noticed the decline already. It led me to sell my house as I was being surrounded by inappropriate developments all built ON the fence line. So I’m already positioned to leave. Can imagine how lovely this city would have been 20-30 years ago.
This endless population growth is what got me looking at Newcastle as a place to live. Sure it’s a little small in feel now, but I think it will grow due to the lifestyle it allows and they are building more infrastructure in the area. Just not quite sure I can pull the trigger yet. But it is a great place.
Newcastle is in the process of being royally screwed by both the State and Federal governments. The beautiful post office building in CBD left derelict. The heavy rail into the CBD ripped up with no workable replacement in sight and the iconic Newcastle railway station left derelict. $450 million promised to Newcastle and the Hunter region quietly withdrawn just recently by the State government. Hunter Street is being vandalised by grotesque post-modernist architecture, and we have traffic jams in peak periods now which we didn’t have 10 years ago. Sure, move to Newcastle ?
http://www.theherald.com.au/story/4177615/wiped-out-major-hunter-funds-board-gone/?cs=12
Hate to say it but here is what will happen:
Nothing. There’s too much gravey in the immigration business and both sides of politics are hooked on it. A bit like their entitlements. The issue won’t come up to be voted on.
Yes, they all think they can get away with it during their political careers and someone down the line will have to deal with it. And they will. What they forget is it probably won’t be Labour or Liberals as they will have caused the birth of some other party ……. It’s already happening!
That’s why you vote Hanson, even if you hate what she stands for in many respects. She is a clear signal that the populace is fed up. Like the rise of Trump and Brexit, or the upswell in Germany and Europe over mass immigration. The people have spoken, they don’t want it.
+1
Did anyone else notice the ‘tall poppy’ in disposable incomes for households in the ACT? I know this is a state-dependent phenomena, but political influence runs downhill.
I am encouraged that there are other people who are voicing their dismay about the force fed population increases we’ve copped over the last decade or so. For myself I have finally had enough of the deliberate absence of a population policy by the more progressive political parties and have joined one of them. I am tabling an outline of a population policy at the next branch meeting and hope that a policy will eventuate at the national level.
I have some idea on what I’m aiming for but any useful evidence based links would be appreciated.
Best will be to share some draft of the work you are presenting here and we can all comment to add some ideas/suggestions?
The size of the immigration intake should be part of the referendum
The size of the immigration intake should equal the number of departures.
Fixed
Little surprise from the Big Australia supporting Age newspaper. They dont even pretend to have balance, they announce this story as unequivocally good news. Same goes for any article in The Age regarding traffic congestion, public transport overcrowding, school classroom crowding etc. Never once will The Age in these stories mention the reason behind these problems is massive population growth and that it supports population growth and therefore the problems it creates. Because The Age is not intereseted in reporting the cause of these problems if it shows its beloved Big Australia policy in a bad light. I stopped subscribing online and buying the paper because it has so little interest in reporting the full story about population growth, indeed that would go against its interests. That’s not a news source I am prepared to waste money on any more.
An example of what happens when the Pop-Ponzi goes into reverse……
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-25/bankrupt-mining-town-downsizes-to-avoid-becoming-a-ghost?utm_content=business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&cmpid%3D=socialflow-twitter-business
You don’t have to go that far to see that sort of thing – starting from Melbourne, going 130km east to get to the Latrobe Valley allows you to see similar stuff – and doubly so once Hazlewood shuts.
(and people leaving regional Victorian areas which are dying is an unexplored aspect of Melbourne’s constant biggering)
Spain: http://www.businessinsider.com.au/spain-ghost-towns-satellite-2011-4#valdeluz-700-people-live-in-a-town-planned-for-30000-1
Ireland: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2531852/Exorcising-Irelands-ghost-estates-Demolition-begins-housing-projects-built-economic-boom-left-country-300-000-homes.html
The scripting is making this blog almost unreadable at times even after switching from Firefox to Chrome.
try ghostery
Better still, get a Mac and run Safari; MB reads fine on the Mac platform.
A distant relative came from Greece recently (he hold an Aussie passport as he was born here) to escape the Greek crisis and build a better future for his kids. He found a job and stayed nearly 3 months, and then decided to cancel his family’s visa applications and go back. He couldnt believe how far away he had to live to make ends meet (he paints houses for a living), and once he did that he realised he was totally cut off from relatives and friends on the other side of the city as it would take him 3hrs to get there and back. He also realised that his chances of ever paying off a family house within a manageable radius from work/life were pretty much non existent in his lifetime. I swear to God I didn’t tell him that, he figured it out just by asking around.
He said he will try Germany next.
He got here too late.
I know a few Greek families who bought up land ages ago and seem to own half a suburb each in Melbourne. So they are now the beneficiaries of the problem that drove your relative away. They also keep expanding their rental empire, have wonderful family trusts and love a bit of cash in hand. I also know more than a few people who aren’t Greek that do this or aspire to having this system in place for themselves. It is the great Australian dream.
The system is stuffed. It rewards the above behavior to the detriment of the community. Those that do it are just playing by the rules and norms that have been put in place. Until the rules and norms change those that have will be able to have more and those that don’t have, go and buy a lotto ticket.
The first arrivals of the Greek families that you talk about would have most likely immigrated to Australia from the mid to late 50’s up to the mid to late 60’s, the vast majority of them came here with very little to their name.
They were able to find jobs relatively easily, worked hard, invested in housing early and reaped the benefits of negative gearing etc.
They were also able to integrate and contribute to the betterment of our multicultural society.
One thing they didn’t do was arrive here already cashed up and seeking to invest/hide their assets from a government they don’t trust.
One cannot begrudge them.
Too late is correct. His father did exactly the same thing as him but 40 years earlier, and in the space of about 2 decades he had a accumulated enough wealth to allow him to go back to Greece and live off it. Now it’s his son’s turn, but the opportunity is just not there any more.
Sorry,
I should have pointed out that I don’t have a beef with them, or any other group.
As I said, I know many others who have done the same thing.
I was just attempting to point out the difference in opportunity and how the current system (immigration, tax laws, lack of action from FIRB and ATO, etc, etc…) now assists to remove opportunity and favours the already established.
lol I recall a few years ago the crashniks predicting Melbourne unemployment would rise, the population would fall and this would cause a drop in house prices
The opposite happened
Long live the population ponzi
Yeah yeah Patrician. Give it a rest.
More of a slow motion crushing of living standards, underemployment and job prospects than a sudden shock induced avalanche. They’ll do all they can to keep the Ponzi going, no matter what, and with the car industry supply chain closing next year, things are only going to get more precarious, so it seems slow motion crush as far as the eye can see but one can never tell.
Not to worry St J, we have been reliably informed that an Australian housing crash will occur on 24 Oct 2016
Only 28 sleeps til Chrashmas
Seriously, what are these immigrants doing to earn a living? Is the construction industry absorbing all these people? According to Thanassis (above) the ROI for some immigrants moving here may be negative. It would be great if someone could explain what jobs all these new arrivals are occupying. It’s one thing to open the immigration spigots. It’s another to provide them all with jobs.
Moron
A little nuance may be warranted in such analysis, and the projections used as the basis for this post need to be taken with some salt. The past indicates falls as well as rises, and the percentage change in the population is more helpful as an indicator of change rather than numbers.
What has certainly changed is the policy toward immigration in the years since Howard. A shift has occurred toward using immigration as a mechanism to grow a society to an instrument for growing an economy. Thus, the profile of immigrants has shifted a little. Its hardly surprising that much if the influx seeks to settle in cities if a greater portion of the influx are seeking better economic circumstances for a period (rather than a new life post war as per the 1950s) and often come with some capital.
Moreover, the States are hostage somewhat – they don’t set numbers, and the Commonwealth doesn’t have to live with the consequences.
If things are going to head south fast, as MB has posited for some time now, the numbers coming in may well drop dramatically too. What might that look like? Port Hedland writ large?
TP
I don’t understand if 90% in comments have strong views against it then why did they vote Lib/Labs/Greens when there was a chance to vote against them. Why they don’t have a voice except hanson/NickX(who for all is killing this debate), if it is funding for a party like SAP then why not start a funding program with donations directly from people? This will either go ugly or will be suppressed by establishment, much better will be to strengthen what MB is doing by going more public through a representation at the political level.
I voted for the Sustainable Australia party, yet turns out they didn’t get many votes… So beats me..
I voted SAP in the Senate in the previous election (when they were still called SPP) and was shocked by how few votes they got. I was more shocked by how few they got in the most recent election given the issues associated with excessive population growth had only become more obvious and their greater focus on States where that population growth has had the most obvious impacts.
And yet Hanson was elected with three other unknowns – all based on her brand recognition. It’s sad to say but I think any realignment in population policy that doesn’t come from exogenous factors outside the control of domestic politics is going to come from street smart operators moving in and getting elected under the banner of people like Hanson. Rational policy making by a diverse, experienced and educated group like the SAP candidates seems a pipe dream.
Our preferential voting system means you have to number every option on the house of reps paper. The proportion of people giving their first preference to a major party is actually very low (I don’t recall the exact figure but you can research it on the AEC website). Unfortunately the majors well know that in most cases they still get elected on preferences unless there is a very popular independent or small party running.
AE – ALP/LNP/Greens together constitute 72% – feel free to correct if I am wrong here. If you add NXP & Hanson this is 80% within these.
http://results.aec.gov.au/20499/Website/SenateStateFirstPrefsByGroup-20499-NAT.htm
You make sense if we debate the seats won, my observation is that none of those comments look unjustified and are not closer to hanson’s belief so why they didnt put SAP as the first pref. If uncontrolled immigration into two cities mattered to them why are 266K tempted to put justice party or 192K for shooters as first pref while just 26K for SAP? We either deserve that or the message is not getting to the masses. There are things SAP can do to atleast target a bigger share of first pref, for which I believe it will need funding to have a team working on it.
I also think Sustainable Aus is a wrong name, it wont get the attention that one will be tempted to open its web page which is the first step into the door.
Derryn Hinch’s Justice Party 266,607 1.93 +1.93
Shooters, Fishers and Farmers 192,923 1.39 +0.44
Family First 191,112 1.38 +0.26
Christian Democratic Party 162,155 1.17 +0.63
Animal Justice Party 159,373 1.15 +0.46
Australian Liberty Alliance 102,982 0.74 +0.74
Democratic Labour Party 94,510 0.68 -0.18
Australian Sex Party 94,262 0.68 -0.64
Health Australia Party 85,233 0.62 +0.62
WTF has more than SAP – Sex Party/HEMP 76,744 0.55 +0.55
Jacqui Lambie Network 69,074 0.50 +0.50
.
.
.
Sustainable Australia 26,341 0.19 +0.08
Lotta people on here thing the intelligence is here only, and MSM readers are the lumpentariat prole-set.
Seems the comments of Teh DomainFax disagree.
What then, can be done to harness this intelligence and direct it usefully.
I won’t read too much into comments left at a MSM rag. Once the commenter realise that their property prices are dependent on the population ponzi, they will disappear stat.
John Howard once said that he never met anyone who complained about the value of their house going up. Yes, the traffic is annoying, but that’s a minor blip compared to satisfaction from the well-deserved capital gains.
Did it ever meet anyone who complained about their politician getting decapitated?
Melbourne is fast becoming a shit heap courtesy of population growth on steroids.
Those who argue we need immigration are moronic.
Our city is dropping in liveability.
It is overcrowded.
We are not spending $ on infrastructure to keep pace.
All melbournians born here know it
Stop this fucking madness.
We don’t need more people.
We have enough homeless on the streets now without adding to it.
The only reason they keep bring in people is to import wealth and hide the reality of diluted wealth and prosperity for those that exist here already.
THIS IS A SCAM PEOPLE AND WE MEED TO FIGHT BACK.
Governments are looking after one working sector – the housing/building and construction sector at the expense of everybody else.
Wake up.
We build to our detriment.
yes and our sustainable population by CSIRO research is about 22 million (water, topsoil which blows out to sea, climate) and where does one live now to get to work in the CBD? govt is run by amateurs and profiteers.
Typical boiling frog syndrome. We won’t realise the mess created until it’s too late. I do agree with other comments- the immigration Ponzi has too many vested interests. Real estate, education, construction, services, visa factories etc. This area is the only support the economy has at the moment and sadly I cannot see any change. we have become addicted to the easy Ponzi population option. A false growth but at least growth to keep our heads above the water. But it all leads to a quality of life that is downhill. Very sad that Melbourne is self-destructing. And as for the most liveable city crap- we are one of several world’s most liveable cities. Just depends on the index used.