GDP per capita has nothing to do with population. One of the leading indicators of per capital growth is disposable income and this directly contradicts SPP claims of misery and woe.
I'll quote directly from the Measures of Australia's Progress: Summary Indicators, 2012 (1370.0.55.001).
"During the decade 2000-01 to 2010-11, Australia's real net national disposable income grew from $38,500 per person to $49,100 per person in 2009-10 dollars. Year-on-year growth of around 2-3 per cent was consistent for most of the decade, until real net national disposable income peaked in 2008-09 at $47,400 per person. This was followed by a 1.3 per cent decline in 2009-10. Australia's real net national disposable income per capita has since recovered, with growth of 4.8% between 2009-10 and 2010-11."
Advertisement
For those who have an obsession for rankings, according to the World Bank, Australia ranks 16th in the world at about $40,000 per person by GDP (PPP) on a per capita basis (2011). It's a fairly meaningless comparison because of the unusual and unique petro-dollar based economies of Qatar, Kuwait and Brunei and the bank rich economies of Luxembourg and Macau, who all rank in the top ten. It's beholden on fledgling political parties to get the facts right. Australia's economy is first division whereas the SPP's thinking is amateur league.
In 2009, Simon Butler, a writer for the Green Left Weekly, succinctly put the argument against population control. I have paraphrased his comments here.
Population does not cause climate change.
Anti-populationists want reduce the number of humans on the planet to control climate change. People are not pollution. Blaming too many people for driving climate change is like blaming too many trees for causing bushfires. The real cause of climate change is an economy locked into burning fossil fuels for energy and unsustainable agriculture.
The world is not 'full'
Advertisement
The world is not experiencing runaway population growth. While population is growing, the rate of this growth is slowing. This is mostly due to rising urbanisation and marginal improvements in women's access to birth control technology. The rate of population growth peaked at 2 per cent annually in the 1960s, and has fallen consistently since then.
According to the UN, the average number of children born per woman fell from 4.9 in the late 1960s to 2.7 in 1992. Yet the rate of greenhouse gas emissions is rising. Polluting technology, rampant consumerism and corporate greed are driving this increase - not population.
Population and upside down thinking
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
105 posts so far.