Figure 2 - uploaded by Katharine Jane Betts
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
On balance demographic ageing is not a net burden in Australia. It is not a major contributor to the cost of health care, the welfare costs are manageable, and the longevity dividend can add to productivity.
Importing high numbers of immigrants is no cure for a largely imaginary disease. Migrants age too and the law of diminishing returns soon set...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... the additional years are years of good health. Figure 2 above (p. 3) shows impressive improvements in life expectancy at birth from 1901 to 2016: from 55.2 years for males to 80.5 and from 58.5 for females to 84.6. ...
Context 2
... growth as measured by changes in GDP per capita has not flourished during Australia's decade or more of high population growth. On the contrary, Figure 20 makes it clear that, as the population has grown, the rate of growth in per capita GDP has declined. ...
Context 3
... the overall picture gives little support to proponents who argue that population growth in some fashion drives growth in productivity. 70 (See The data shown in Figure 22 are consistent with those analysed by Murray and van Onselen for the years 2000 to 2017. 71 They observe that: 'Since population growth rates and population ageing are negatively related, this matches the research showing that ageing increases economic performance'. ...
Context 4
... statistical triumph was achieved at the expense of growth in GDP per capita. (See Figure 20.) It has also led to rapid increases in the size of Australia's major cities and fuelled demand for city-building and people-servicing industries. ...
Context 5
... what effect do high levels of net migration have on Australia's demographic profile? Figure 24 presents eight different population projections published by the ABS in November 2018. ...
Context 6
... all there are 12 projections for the high life expectancy set and 12 for the medium life expectancy set shown in Table A1. Figure 24 shows that a total fertility rate of 1.95 (labelled high by the ABS) and nil net migration (series 16) leads to the population leveling off at around 27 million. A similar result would be achieved at a lower fertility level with net immigration in the order of net 40,000 to 50,000 per year, but the ABS has not provided such a projection. ...
Context 7
... and notes: see Figure 24. In 2017 15.4% of the population was aged 65 plus and the population was 24.6 million. ...
Context 8
... size of the population in 2066 varies between 23.9 million (series 12) and 49.2 million (series 13A). And, as illustrated by the eight projections shown in Figure 24, it is immigration that makes the difference. Slight variations in the TFR and in life expectancy affect the median age but play a much smaller part in the overall numbers. ...
Context 9
... the eight projections illustrated in Figure 25 show, the five which include NOM of 175,000 to 275,000 lead to a lower median age in 2066 then do the three that assume nil net migration. But is this an efficient way of making Australians younger? ...
Context 10
... If we grow a little younger by adding a few more babies we can shave two to four years off the series 24 median age at a cost of a 5-10% increase population from 2018 to 2066. While this leads to modest population growth, Figure 24 shows it stabilising at around 26 to 27 million by 2066. ...
Context 11
... compares with median age of 44.1 with NOM of 175,000 and TFR of 1.65. The figure of 40.9 is not much higher than the current median age of around 37 ( Figure 25). ...
