Melbourne risks becoming 'a backwater like Adelaide': Brumby

[JamesXander]

This, THIS is why we are a backwater. This is why we have so many problems, so many Nimbys. This is the true problem of South Australia, it explains everything



AGE DISTRIBUTION

South Australia has continued to age with people aged 65 years or more contributing 15.2% of South Australia's population in 2005, compared with 14.5% in 2000. While the proportion of older residents in South Australia continues to increase, the proportion of younger people continues to decline. At 30 June 2005, the proportion of the state's population who were children aged under 15 years was 18.4%, compared with 19.5% in 2000.

Median age

South Australia's median age continues to be the highest of all states and territories in Australia, with the median age (the age at which half the population is older and half is younger) increasing from 37.2 years in 2000 to 38.8 years in 2005. This is consistent with the national trend, with Australia's median age increasing from 35.4 years in 2000 to 36.6 years in 2005.


Children (under 15 years)
In 2005, South Australia had the lowest proportion of its population aged 0 to 14 years (18.4%) of all states and territories. Nationally 19.6% of the population was in this age group. In South Australia the total number of children declined from 285,800 in 2004 to 283,600 in 2005, a decrease of 0.7%.


Persons aged 45 to 64 years

The proportion of South Australia's population aged 45 to 64 years in 2005 was 25.6%, which was higher than the national figure of 24.5%. In South Australia the total number of people in this age group rose from 386,300 people in 2004 to 394,600 in 2005, an increase of 2.1%.


We are getting Older, we have less young people. Our population growth is under 1%, but would be almost 0 if not for the foreign immigrants coming here on lax immigration rules for SA.

Populate or Perish.

This comes to SA 50 years after the rest of Australia heeded the call, but hey, thats the SA way

[Wayno]

We need Wayne Swan to publish this mandate: all australian women must have one child for mum, one for dad, one for the country, and a spare one who can immigrate to Adelaide!

[Will409]

Or increasing the Baby Bonus to $10k if they are delivered in SA.

[frank1]

Those statistics make SA sound so bad. The last i heard, the whole of Australia had an ageing population and relies on immagration. Although SA is technicaly the highest, the other states are not much better.

[Brando]

Funny how the Vics love to attack but can't handle getting their own back. I remember when i was living in Melbourne and this happened about 10 years ago. Jerry Seinfeld refered to Melbourne as the "anus of the world".

http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/st ... 60,00.html

Have a read of some of the comments. It's really quiet funny.

[Will]

This, THIS is why we are a backwater. This is why we have so many problems, so many Nimbys. This is the true problem of South Australia, it explains everything



AGE DISTRIBUTION

South Australia has continued to age with people aged 65 years or more contributing 15.2% of South Australia's population in 2005, compared with 14.5% in 2000. While the proportion of older residents in South Australia continues to increase, the proportion of younger people continues to decline. At 30 June 2005, the proportion of the state's population who were children aged under 15 years was 18.4%, compared with 19.5% in 2000.

Median age

South Australia's median age continues to be the highest of all states and territories in Australia, with the median age (the age at which half the population is older and half is younger) increasing from 37.2 years in 2000 to 38.8 years in 2005. This is consistent with the national trend, with Australia's median age increasing from 35.4 years in 2000 to 36.6 years in 2005.


Children (under 15 years)
In 2005, South Australia had the lowest proportion of its population aged 0 to 14 years (18.4%) of all states and territories. Nationally 19.6% of the population was in this age group. In South Australia the total number of children declined from 285,800 in 2004 to 283,600 in 2005, a decrease of 0.7%.


Persons aged 45 to 64 years

The proportion of South Australia's population aged 45 to 64 years in 2005 was 25.6%, which was higher than the national figure of 24.5%. In South Australia the total number of people in this age group rose from 386,300 people in 2004 to 394,600 in 2005, an increase of 2.1%.


We are getting Older, we have less young people. Our population growth is under 1%, but would be almost 0 if not for the foreign immigrants coming here on lax immigration rules for SA.

Populate or Perish.

This comes to SA 50 years after the rest of Australia heeded the call, but hey, thats the SA way

I have been consistently reading your posts and I have come to the conclusion that you have no idea what the term 'backwater' represents.

In your one dimensional arguement, you call SA a backwater solely based on population growth figures, which may i add are outdated. In 2004 we still had 0.6% population growth. I wonder whether you are aware that last year, the state recorded a population growth rate of around 16 000. And it was not just due to foreign immigrants. The state recorded its highest birth rate in more than a decade, but also our net loss due to interstate migration was 700 less people than in 2006.

I say your arguement is one dimensional, because you fail to realize than in the developed world, a 1% population growth rate per annum is actually considered quite high. Compare this to many European countries or Japan who have figures hovering around 0.2% per annum. You call SA a backwater solely due to our lower population growth figures. I wonder, do you also call countries like Germany or Japan a backwater too?

Calling a place a backwater is more complicated than population growth figures alone. You have to take intro account things such as literature, quality of cultural institutions, gastronomy, quality of educational institutions etc....

[JamesXander]

Maybe my perception of a backwater is different to yours. To me a backwater is something that doesn't see alot of action, is always one of the last places to be considered. Things go slower, everything happens slower in a backwater



Just read those stats. The only reason our net state immigration loss was slightly less can be attributed to the mining industry.

We are older, losing people, having less children. This state is almost going backwards. We live in AUSTRALIA, this is not Japan or Germany. Australia where we have been experiencing nearly 2% population growth. HUGE economic growth and cultural change. Yet this is hardly happening in SA at all. We are lagging behind the other states.

Look at the last ten years. Hardly anything has happened here. Only just now are we seeing some signs of life.

[frank1]

I agree. My definition of 'a backwater' is no action, but just stagnates i.e.no overall population growth, no new projects,
no businesses,etc, which was like Adelaide in the 90's

[Wayno]

The financial Review published this article last week:

LIVE IT UP IN AUSTRALIA - Australian cities are among the world's most livable, according to a survey by the Economist Intelligence Unit which ranked nearly 130 cities. Vancouver Canada was the highest scoring city, followed in 2nd place by Melbourne. Perth, Adelaide & Sydney are ranked 5th to 7th respectively.

We should rejoice in the knowledge that our little town is considered among the Top 10 livable cities! This also means we are the No #1 backwater in the world!!!

[Will]

Maybe my perception of a backwater is different to yours. To me a backwater is something that doesn't see alot of action, is always one of the last places to be considered. Things go slower, everything happens slower in a backwater



Just read those stats. The only reason our net state immigration loss was slightly less can be attributed to the mining industry.

We are older, losing people, having less children. This state is almost going backwards. We live in AUSTRALIA, this is not Japan or Germany. Australia where we have been experiencing nearly 2% population growth. HUGE economic growth and cultural change. Yet this is hardly happening in SA at all. We are lagging behind the other states.

Look at the last ten years. Hardly anything has happened here. Only just now are we seeing some signs of life.

Your arguement would be relevant 10 years ago, when you could say, "look its 1998 and the city looks the same as it did in 1988" and people would generally agree with you. The fact that you have said it now surprises me, with the blind contempt you have for this state. I will not dignify your statement that nothing has changed in the last 10 years with an arguement.

And the statement "The only reason our net state immigration loss was slightly less can be attributed to the mining industry." is actually a sad indictment on your reasoning capacity. The very fact that states such as WA have such strong population and economic growth is primarily due to the mining industry. For you to dismiss the industry which in the future will give us growth as strong if not stronger than WA or QLD is quite sad really.

[JamesXander]

I didn't say things couldn't change.

The fact of the matter is we have a crappy population growth and also econmic growth. Our biggest events are the Clipsal and the tour down under. The menatlity is to preserve what we have.

I beleive Adelaide is a backwater. Most of Australia thinks Adelaide is a backwater and infact the youth of this state thinks Adelaide is a backwater.

Its gotta change.

[muzzamo]

I kinda agree - one reason this state can sometimes feel like a backwater is because of the percentage of older people. It just skews our culture towards that which most of us on this site resent.

However i take a more positive view, sites like sensational adelaide show that there is a group of south australians that are fed up and want change!

[Will]

I didn't say things couldn't change.

The fact of the matter is we have a crappy population growth and also econmic growth. Our biggest events are the Clipsal and the tour down under. The menatlity is to preserve what we have.

I beleive Adelaide is a backwater. Most of Australia thinks Adelaide is a backwater and infact the youth of this state thinks Adelaide is a backwater.

Its gotta change.

How can things change if people like you continuosly say that we are a backwater? Do you understand the damage you are doing by continuing to say that we are a backwater?

The state has problems that require action, but if we want the state to change we first need to lose our negative culture. Things wont change if you tell your family and friends that we are a backwater. Investors wont be interested in investing here if they are continuously told we are a backwater.

From what you have posted it appears that you want this state to change; this is a good thing. But I want you to understand how self-defeating your constant attacks on Adelaide are. If you genuinely want the state to change, you have to stop calling it a backwater, and use more intelligent words such as "yes the state has problems but we are moving in the right direction (highlight something positive)...."

This state has great potential, but we will never realize it if we don't first lose our negative inferiority complex. If you want the state to change be positive about the state, and don't always put it down. Because constantly putting down the state does not help anyone.

[frank1]

Those stats are definitely old. I was listening to the ABC radio a few weeks ago and they were talking about the ageing population in each state. They said that SA had progressed out of last spot and now Tasmania has the highest percentage of old people (based on a ratio scale between each state). That doesn't sound like 'a backwater' to me. This state definitely is no longer living in the 90's where it was 'a backwater'.

[Pistol]

How can things change if people like you continuosly say that we are a backwater? Do you understand the damage you are doing by continuing to say that we are a backwater?

The state has problems that require action, but if we want the state to change we first need to lose our negative culture. Things wont change if you tell your family and friends that we are a backwater. Investors wont be interested in investing here if they are continuously told we are a backwater.

From what you have posted it appears that you want this state to change; this is a good thing. But I want you to understand how self-defeating your constant attacks on Adelaide are. If you genuinely want the state to change, you have to stop calling it a backwater, and use more intelligent words such as "yes the state has problems but we are moving in the right direction (highlight something positive)...."

This state has great potential, but we will never realize it if we don't first lose our negative inferiority complex. If you want the state to change be positive about the state, and don't always put it down. Because constantly putting down the state does not help anyone.

Amen Brother!