How many people do you want to share NZ with

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › How many people do you want to share NZ with

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2287
Inactive user

#284003 25-Mar-2021 09:15

There was a discussion on TVNZ last weekend about the ideal population for New Zealand.

I was a little surprised that both contributors, neither of which I knew, thought that we should have a much larger population citing the UK and Japan as countries with roughly the same land mass but with much larger populations.

One of them even cited Sydney as an example which has the same population as the whole of NZ. Another comment was how boring NZ was in the 1970's when the population was only 2.5 million although by my estimate the commentator was around 5 years old at the time so how would they know.

Personally I don't think bigger is better. Covid-19 is an example of where we undoubtedly fared much better than other places because of our smaller population.

My own estimate would be something under 10 million but spread more evenly around the country but I'm interested in what other people think.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 8

335 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 224

#2680161 25-Mar-2021 09:19

Many, many years ago when Keith Holyoake was Prime Minister, he predicted a population of 30 million by the year 2000.

Even then, a lot of people thought he was fantasying.

networkn

Networkn
32871 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15468

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2680167 25-Mar-2021 09:30

I am happy with continued growth in theory, but no in our major cities which are already broken due to lack of infrastructure. I'd like to see a significant drop in new people entering the country for a few years, to allow time for our infrastructure to catch up, or prioritize those people incoming, who can contribute to it's deployment. It's a tricky subject.

Bung

6734 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2927

Subscriber

#2680184 25-Mar-2021 10:00

decibel:
Many, many years ago when Keith Holyoake was Prime Minister, he predicted a population of 30 million by the year 2000.

Even then, a lot of people thought he was fantasying.

Have you got the numbers right? I doubt that Holyoake would have predicted a gain of 27M in 30 years.

1101

3141 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1143

#2680190 25-Mar-2021 10:15

Adding more people wont help NZ economy.
It will mean more people churning the same limited NZ money pool. So kiwi's will get poorer on av , long term .

To make NZ richer, to bring in money to pay these extra people , we need more export $
increasing the population will not bring in more export $ (with a few minor exceptions)

NZ's export $ now comes from farming (fruit, cows, trees) , adding more people wont help (aprt from the few fruit pickers we need)

Its the same limited internal money pool. Increasing population doesnt increase our money pool or national wealth (a few minor exceptions of course).
Just having a huuuge population hasnt helped the av person in India nor many other countries .

GV27

5977 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2680191 25-Mar-2021 10:23

Adding more people requires a reset of our social contract between government and the public.

Our current population is drastically under-served by infrastructure and housing, yet we aren't even acting like we're interested in catching up.

Can't really support that in good conscience until we stop undermining our own standard of living by importing population pressure with no means to serve the added burden it will bring.

I'd really like to hear the government clearly articulate what their planned levels of migration are post-Covid.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2680192 25-Mar-2021 10:23

For reference, here's a graphic of Stats NZ population and age demographic modelling (to 2073):

(footnote: the linear Y axis on the first chart could mislead if you're looking for the line to show % growth trend)

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2680195 25-Mar-2021 10:36

We can easily accommodate 60-70 million with our current land mass and arable land. However climate change and rising sea levels will impact that significantly and reduce the supportable population. Aotearoa has suffered over the decades with under population with the earning sector stretched to support infrastructure development. The current birth rate is not sufficient for population growth so in order to attain a sustainable population growth immigration of those in the earning years needs to be sustained or increased. Climate change may force us to increase immigration to much higher levels than we have now.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2680196 25-Mar-2021 10:40

networkn:

I am happy with continued growth in theory, but no in our major cities which are already broken due to lack of infrastructure. I'd like to see a significant drop in new people entering the country for a few years, to allow time for our infrastructure to catch up, or prioritize those people incoming, who can contribute to it's deployment. It's a tricky subject.

The issues in major cities is more a result in poor management and planning. Local bodies can only see as far as the next election and even screw up that short term management. To sustain population growth there needs to be a review of local government and a quantum change in how we manage out cities. This in my very humble opinion needs to be migrated to central government and write enterprise.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

GV27

5977 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2680206 25-Mar-2021 10:43

MikeB4:

The current birth rate is not sufficient for population growth so in order to attain a sustainable population growth immigration of those in the earning years needs to be sustained or increased.

The question no one wants to ask is "Are people having fewer kids because they legitimately want to, or are they having fewer kids because we've made things like housing and other living costs so prohibitive that they don't feel they can afford to have more?"

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#2680231 25-Mar-2021 11:06

I disagree with @1101. Immigrants increase the size of the NZ economy. (What decreases the average Kiwi's wealth is the concentration of wealth amongst the wealthy few, and the export of profits, but that's a different argument altogether). Immigrants are a boost, not a drain, to the economy... they more than pay their own way tax-wise, and spend a large proportion of their income in NZ.

NZ's export dollars also increasingly comes from tourism and education, and you need people to provide those services.

I'd like to see a change in the way the population is distributed, in particular the urban sprawl of Auckland. Only if we have high density housing will we be able to have high quality public transport.

As an ex-colony, we are still in a continual economic bind of not having enough money to build the infrastructure we need, so needing more people to provide the income to build the infrastructure. But there's only a small nett gain from each person, so it's a slow process with little relative improvement unless we borrow money heavily for infrastructure construction.

A bigger population would allow for wider lifestyle choices (e.g. more concerts, art galleries, professional sports teams, range of housing types). The downside would be increasing competition for things we can't create -- beaches, forests, space in general.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2680232 25-Mar-2021 11:06

GV27:

MikeB4:

The current birth rate is not sufficient for population growth so in order to attain a sustainable population growth immigration of those in the earning years needs to be sustained or increased.

The question no one wants to ask is "Are people having fewer kids because they legitimately want to, or are they having fewer kids because we've made things like housing and other living costs so prohibitive that they don't feel they can afford to have more?"

That is a very complex topic. There are many factors affecting the desire to have or not have children. It would take more time than I have today (seeing a surgeon) and any full response would be a giant wall of text. I will ask my son (psychologist) if he can give me Readers Digest answer or an elevator version.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2680235 25-Mar-2021 11:08

Lower growth suits me. But we need to stop complaining over expensive goods, such as drywall was the other day. We have no economy of scale here, thats why, the benefit to that is we are not sardines. We should actually shut the border to immigration (apart from that, that suits us, skills etc) and sort out our own house before we consider an ideal population.

GV27

5977 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2680236 25-Mar-2021 11:10

frankv:

A bigger population would allow for wider lifestyle choices (e.g. more concerts, art galleries, professional sports teams, range of housing types). The downside would be increasing competition for things we can't create -- beaches, forests, space in general.

The problem is we took on the last million people without reaping many of the benefits you list and got all of the costs. I suspect Kiwis would be more open to the idea of bringing in more people if there was a proven track record of governments and councils being able to plan and deliver things like housing, zoning and transport so that it didn't mean longer and longer commutes and less time with their families, but that's what we got.

There's also going to have to be some awkward conversations about our wages - why pay locals more when so many professions are on the regional skilled labour shortage list? This problem is also deeply complex, but we have an obligation to future Kiwis to have the debate before we commit to bringing in more and more people from overseas.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2680242 25-Mar-2021 11:16

tdgeek:

Lower growth suits me. But we need to stop complaining over expensive goods, such as drywall was the other day. We have no economy of scale here, thats why, the benefit to that is we are not sardines. We should actually shut the border to immigration (apart from that, that suits us, skills etc) and sort out our own house before we consider an ideal population.

The UK has a population circa 65 million and has a similar amount of roads, main trunk rail, back bone power reticulation etc to Aotearoa. We are trying to fund this with a earning population of circa 2 million. Our low population has been holding back our GDP and infrastructure development and maintenance for decades. Managed immigration growth greatly improve our GDP and infrastructure investment. If we want to stay a small population nation then we will have to accept higher and increasing taxation.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

kobiak

1615 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 551

Trusted

#2680251 25-Mar-2021 11:23

I'd like Auckland and Wellington to become Melbourne type city with population 4-5 mills with their transport options only plz.

And as soon as you're out of town - there's dead land in AU and NZ. You can walk for days in our National Parks and see no other human on public easy trails. If you go harder - every other person you see (very unlikely) you treat them like a brother. and it's only 20 mins out of civilization.

I just hate to see how government and local bodies does not understand, that building major housing areas (read out west of AKL, eg. westgate, kumeu, etc) without planning public transport (oh yeah additional bus route every hour) - is no no no no no Noooooo No. I live myself at one of these townhouse villages and it takes me 12 mins to drive to the city without traffic and 30-50 mins during peak hour. But it takes me 40-50 mins on the bus without traffic and 1-1,5hrs during peak hours. do I take bus? :)

Therefore, government is not prepared for the growing population at all... like lot's of "planning" on paper, but little gets done. I'm living in AKL for almost 20 years now, and they are still discussing cycling/walking options on the harbour bridge or building another one next to it.

helping others at evgenyk.nz

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 8