Reality check

[L Bernham]

Reality check:
Aus USA
Population 20m 300m
Area 7m 8m (sq km)
Area/person 350,000 27,000 (sq m)

I found this on some other forum and found it thought provoking.

Oz had better not receive too many more immigrants as I'm not sharing my 350,000 sq m with anyone else.

before I get a barrage referring to the Great sandy desert I should add I am well aware that much of central Oz is uninhabitable, but then so is much of the US.

 

[always_learning]

OZ is huge, even the good green bits 200Km from the coastlines, we could easily have 50Million without effort, imagine 5 main cities of 4Million +, 10 hubs of 2M and rest being smaller regional and country people! Fresh water being the limiting resource.

 

[D.T.]

Hi L Bernham

I pray that we get a few million immigrants in the next few years.
Why?

According to some research, there will be about 5 million retirees in 10 - 15 years time. In my opinion, they will become a major voting power. Therefore, the government of the day will have to aim its policies at that group if it wants to stay in power.

A majority of these retirees (as we all know) have nothing by the way of financials, and they're super, probably (like everyones) isnt doing to well, nor would it last them very many years even if it was. This means that the majority will have to either work for ever or live in poverty if the government is unable to afford their pensions, let alone contribute to the size of the health budget that will probably be needed.

The solution to this in my opinion is get a whole pile of more young tax payers to balance the act up a bit. Where from? Other countries seems a pretty good source to me.

Long live financial independence

I'm not sharing my 350,000 sq m with anyone else.

My Dad always told me as a kid, "if ya dont like it, ya know where the door is"

-Regards

Dave

 

[brains]

"A majority of these retirees (as we all know) have nothing by the way of financials"


What a load of %^&*. this is.

The majority of the privatley owned wealth of this country is held with baby boomers - thats why they are such a strong force - every era they have passed through they have changed and when they retire their influence will be huge because of their spending power.

They own the majority of prime property in this country and the businesses and the cash and the shares...you name it, they own it.

I dont know where you get your opnions from dtreager, but id ask for my money back

Originally posted by dtraeger2k
Hi L Bernham

I pray that we get a few million immigrants in the next few years.
Why?

According to some research, there will be about 5 million retirees in 10 - 15 years time. In my opinion, they will become a major voting power. Therefore, the government of the day will have to aim its policies at that group if it wants to stay in power.

A majority of these retirees (as we all know) have nothing by the way of financials, and they're super, probably (like everyones) isnt doing to well, nor would it last them very many years even if it was. This means that the majority will have to either work for ever or live in poverty if the government is unable to afford their pensions, let alone contribute to the size of the health budget that will probably be needed.

The solution to this in my opinion is get a whole pile of more young tax payers to balance the act up a bit. Where from? Other countries seems a pretty good source to me.

Long live financial independence

My Dad always told me as a kid, "if ya dont like it, ya know where the door is"

-Regards

Dave

 

[Mikhaila]

Hi Brains,

Do you seriously suggest that all baby boomers are wealthy? How many people out of the 5 million retirees will be financially independent? Even if it is 20%( which I doubt) it is still a minority and the rest will still straggle. I guess dtreager’s point is valid.

 

[MarkB]

Brains

Wealth and spending power (income) are two different things, but I agree with you - the facts don't lie!

"Australia is about to experience the biggest inter-generational transfer of wealth in its history: more than $600 billion of assets will be inherited in the next 20 years"

Source, BRW Rich 200, 2001 -

http://brw.com.au/lists/Richlist/20010518/2001rich200frameset.htm

"Today, an estimated 330,000 families have net assets of $1 million or more. About 3.6% of all Australian families are millionaires, up from about 180,000 families in 1998"

"The highest-earning 10% of Australians have an income 2.4 times the average, pay 3.5 times the tax and spend twice as much"

"Millionaires have average family wealth of $1.7 million, compared with average wealth of $200,000 for the rest of the population. The richest 1% of families in Australia have just under $3 million in wealth on average and own 12% of total wealth. The wealthiest 5% own 18% of total wealth. And the richest one-quarter own an estimated 70% of all household wealth in Australia"

"The poorest 25% of families each possess about $7400 of assets. The next 25% own an estimated $67,500, and the next 25% have accumulated an estimated $218,000 each. Continuing up the wealth ladder, the top 25% of families own about $720,000 each, while the top 5% of families average just over $1.5 million each in accumulated wealth"

"Forty-five per cent of Australians are aged 45 or older, but 90% of millionaires are aged 45 or older; 18% of Australians are aged 65 and over; 38% of millionaires are aged over 65. On average, millionaires aged over 65 have assets of about $2 million, compared with $1.6 million for millionaires aged 45-64. "

"The average income of millionaires may seem surprisingly low. Average earnings are about $57,000 a year; another $42,000 a year comes from other sources, such as investments and superannuation"

Source, BRW Rich 200, 2002 -

http://brw.com.au/lists/Richlist/20020523/frameset.asp

Mark

 

[cad]

Brains,

I believe the baby boomers are capable at establishing new trends, because there is so many of them....nothing to do with wealth, just that everything occurs on mass.
IMHO

In the 1970's & 80's the Baby Boomers established the trend towards outer surburban living, now most are able to down size to quality smaller homes, funded from the selling price of their existing larger home.
What is the housing trend at the moment?....thanks to the baby boomers.

cad

 

[Peter_Tersteeg]

I'm all for increased imigration in a controlled manner. Australia has a very high production to population ratio. If this ration can be maintained as the population increases, Australia could become an economic superpower. A larger population base would also increase business oppertunity and it would also put increased & sustained presure on the housing market.

Here's some thoughts - not really an opinion or based on any hard evidence, just some thoughts...



Increased imigration might not solve the potential problem of aged care, it might only delay it by 30 years leaving future generations with an even greater problem.

The birth rate is declining and it's not the baby boomers who are responsible for this - it's the current generation of 20-40 year olds. Increasing immigration will offset this to a degree, but if the majority increase in population is in the same 20-40 age group, this might solve the medium term problem, but it may also only produce a new generation of baby boomers.

If this new generation has to fund the current baby boomers retirement, they might find themselves retiring with less assets than our current baby boomers, creating an even larger problem for their children.

Just some food for thought. A well thought out and well managed immigration policy would probably mitigate these risks. It's also worth mentioning that in a capitalist society, not everyone can be wealthy.

 

[MarkB]

Bear

A mate of mine and I were discussing this whole situation re: funding baby boomers retirement just a couple of days back.

The problem we see: no problem!

All this talk of a shortage of people to work and pay for baby boomers retirements conveniently ignores the 600,000 or so persons still unemployed.

A decade or so after the great push for microeconomic reform and making our industries and economy more efficient, we still have a massive resource laying idle.

I also believe that the baby boomers will be in for quite a shock when it comes to just who pays for their retirement years.

The immigration issue is an interesting one.

Mark

 

[brains]

I still think its wrong. You are forgetting that the generation just about to retire has had a lifetime of accumulation behind them. What other generation has been able to accumulate assets for the last 40 or so years? and it just happens to be the most prosperous 40 years in history in a material sense.

I think the amount of baby boomers that are poor and need to rely on social security or pension would be a very small percentage.

If you guys live in Sydney, have a look at the age of the owners of most the homes in the expensive eastern/northern suburbs and while youre there have a look whos driving most the Porsches, Mercs...etc..you will see the same thing all over Sydney.

Originally posted by Mikhaila
Hi Brains,

Do you seriously suggest that all baby boomers are wealthy? How many people out of the 5 million retirees will be financially independent? Even if it is 20%( which I doubt) it is still a minority and the rest will still straggle. I guess dtreager’s point is valid.

 

[Jean]

Thrift has gone out of style and so has the simple life thanks to the hidden persuaders on TV. I have several friends in the 30 something age group who are retail therapy junkies and through their consumption they have few resources. However they can afford to expend $240 per month on mobile and cable. They cannot exist without bought entertainment and this is why all in one coastal resorts are booming. Each outfit they buy could keep two homeless kids for a month.

I have work associates who spend more than $200 on Friday night to ensure they have regrets for Saturday. They have good incomes yet they are forever moaning about what the pensioners get!

Better to forget what other generations are doing and get on with your own investment. Most of us can save heaps through not being conned into buying housefulls of material possessions (I refuse to call this rubbish assets). We can also afford to be more generous with charity, the Americans and the Brits leave us for dead in the amounts they contribute to charity. Cripes we are mean spirited at times.

Sorry about the rant, I really object to the political use of intergenerational jealousy (and other hatreds) to keep voters away from any of the real issues out there.

 

[Sim]

Biggest reality check we all need to think about for the future survival of Australia as a habitable country - ignoring any future immigration even... is the supply of fresh water. Thank goodness there is starting to be some traction on this issue, but I fear it is too little too late.

Outside the Murray Darling basin there is almost no usable water - especially to the west where most of the land that makes up our vast land exists. The great artesian basin doesn't really count - it's not an infinite resource... and the water from it is as salty as anything (I used to shower in it).

Now if we could come up with some ultra-efficient and cost effective methods for extracting vast quantities of drinkable (or at least usable) water from pure sea water (which we have rather an oversupply of !) - then there is hope.

Maybe economies of scale will lead to the development of such technology to allow us to tap this resource girt-ing us.

 

[plainsong]

Very interesting discussion,

I have been thinking lately about the long term effect on the
younger 30s 40s people who have traditionally benefited
from the inheritance of the parental estate.. often this was used as a house deposit or to upgrade their home ect (just generalising here) but people are living much longer and entering
retirement establishments quite a lot younger -sometimes in their fifties-- point i'm trying to make is-- these places are
extremely expensive these days,, to enter care people have to virtually sign over their house and estate to the institution, as well as paying quite hefty weekly fees,, so the institution/care
establishment requires in many cases that the person entering
who needs care is really required to sell the house to fund their
care- otherwise the nursing home will loan them the money for entering and charge interest on the loan, waiting for the house to sell.. if they die or leave they then get a portion back,
Also how many pensioners are there living in expensive houses that they are afraid to sell because they will then lose their benifits (seems like a bad trade to me-but anyway) who will get the benifit of the house,?,not the family in most cases.. big chunk will go to the nursing home - and thats all fine as we want people to have comfort and good care in their later years and they deserve the very best, but is seems to me with increased longevity and the high cost of care now that nest egg will not be there for the younger people as it has been in the past,, so anyone spending their younger years surfing and waiting for the inheritance had better think again,, the entities who will get the
inheritance will increasingly be the nursing homes -not the
children.. I'm thinking this will eventually have an effect.

well , just my thoughts,

 

[cad]

I lived in the WA Pilbara region for quite a few years this area is mainly desert the summer temps exceed 50 deg regularly winter averages 28.
No dam water literally…all comes out of the ground, it tastes OK.
If you travel down the No 1 Hwy towards Perth there is a little town that desalinates their water from the ocean & it tastes great.

Also a mining Co found a very large water recourse (underground lake) out in the sticks somewhere in WA that was large enough to supply the Perth population for hundreds & hundreds of years, we also have the ORD in the Kimberly, which has a never ending supply.

WA is made up of a huge expanse of deserts with numerous mining Co dotted around all over the place; they manage to tap into water, so it’s out there.

I believe that it could be possible to inhabit the desert areas if these water resources where used to sustain the population.

There is an abundance of water out there for WA to tap into, it’s just up to governments to be forward thinking & utilize these recourses or come up with an alternate method to ensure there is adequate water supply for the future.

Recently most states of Australia have been suffering a water shortage & something needs to be done to rectify this problem, governments are short sighted and this is a huge long term very costly issue- it’s easily placed into the too hard basket.

Sorry didn’t mean to write a novel.

cad

 

[Jean]

I think many boomers will not have adequate reserves for their 'third age' because compulsory super is a recent initiative. Many who presently have super will not do much better than the age pension. For example, the average white collar employee with 30+ years of super contribution may be flat out getting
$20 000 pa. Some have already got the bullet from work and are reducing their reserves while looking for work.

Short-sighted Govt approach is to strip retirees of assets shortly after retirement through stringent income/assets test.

Divorce is common - it diminishes assets, income and later lifestyle (for many).

Boomers will not have the benefit of extended family support, as their grandparents may have.

Govt is most reluctant to increase public housing.

Encouraging increased fertility is a part remedy but there are sections of the community who are damned it they will ever put $s into that. And raising children is not celebrated as a worthwhile aim in life. Migration and resettlement is much more expensive and it is a part-solution. Higher employment would help, but it seems unlikely.

So the likelihood is for a further reduced quality of life for the aged (quite a feat!).

For those who can stomach it (not me), there will be money in ghetto housing for the aged (New York style) Of course that could be supplemented by a bit of rent fixing by Govt. But then some Govt agencies have a growing belief that private rental housing is there for welfare purposes.

 

[D.T.]

Brains,

I disagree with you on this one. Go look up the figures, your in for a shock

-Regards

Dave

 

[brains]

Thanks Dave. Im ready to be shocked. Can you show me the figures?

Originally posted by dtraeger2k
Brains,

I disagree with you on this one. Go look up the figures, your in for a shock

-Regards

Dave

 

[Sim]

Originally posted by cad
WA is made up of a huge expanse of deserts with numerous mining Co dotted around all over the place; they manage to tap into water, so it’s out there.

I believe that it could be possible to inhabit the desert areas if these water resources where used to sustain the population.

There is an abundance of water out there for WA to tap into, it’s just up to governments to be forward thinking & utilize these recourses or come up with an alternate method to ensure there is adequate water supply for the future.

My point is that the underground water courses are not necessarily infinite - and as such it is not particularly valid to assume that there will be enough there to satisfy the needs of a decent sized city.

WMC tap into the great artesian basin (Australia's inland sea) for their Olympic Dam mine - but they need to be very careful about the amount of water they extract from it lest it lower the pressure so much that the environment is affected - it really is that fragile.

Desalination is an extremely costly exercise at the moment - the township of Roxby Downs relies on desalinated water from the artesian basin - but imagine a city the size of Canberra or even Adelaide without a source of fresh water - the costs would be enormous with current technology.

If some serious reseach was done I'm sure a much more cost effective method of desalinising the vast quantities of water required to sustain a decent sized city along with all of it's industry could be found.

Until then, I really don't think we will see anything other than smaller towns (supported by mining dollars) in Australia's desert regions.

 

[cad]

Sim,

I tend to believe that it is possible, just not cost effective.

Cad

 

[bundy1964]

Originally posted by Sim
but imagine a city the size of Canberra or even Adelaide without a source of fresh water

Hey Sim

When has Adelaide ever had fresh water

bundy