Melbourne Fastest Growing City

[Lambethlad]

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/australians-flock-to-melbourne-as-victoria-becomes-australias-fastest-growing-state-20150625-ghxj27.html

And seven of the top 10 Australia's fastest growing suburbs are in Melbourne. Probably because of it's popularity with Indian and Chinese migrants.

http://www.domain.com.au/news/australias-fastest-growing-suburbs-are-on-city-fringes-new-figures-shows-20160330-gnt6ld/

[starlight7]

And don't we know it- lots of extra traffic. Wish they'd go to WA instead.

[flag of convenience]

Nothing but the insanity of Australian government, egged on by business and vested interests, which will impact by enforcing a lower standard of living, unaffordable living, more competitive work places and in time restructuring involving lower pay rates

 

Á race to third world status one may argue.

[Mike@Bonbeach]

It probably won't get any better, fuelled by this insane ambition of Victorian powers that be, to be the biggest and best at everything especially over Sydney and NSW.

 

 

Mike

[flag of convenience]

Well the Ponzi must be fed to sustain the ogre that has been created, with no idea from government what else could take its place. House prices and the economy depend on this monster to sustain economic activity regardless of future hard groundings ahead.

[Kenfrapin]

The people migrating is increasing a lot more now due to the increasing numbers and money power of the Asian middle classes. The rules and points system, if not stricter now, are still the same when everyone else started migrating over from who knows when.....

So comments like why 'they' cant go elsewhere is rubbish, just because a lot more are entering the country? I guess the govt needs to make sure there is space for who they welcome. All us Poms came over gleefully in the boom days and still do, so let everyone else come too

 

I do agree it will bring in more competitiveness and traffic but isnt that the price of getting talent, making locals study/work harder and have an open market and open life?

 

Just saying...

KnK

[flag of convenience]

The people migrating is increasing a lot more now due to the increasing numbers and money power of the Asian middle classes. The rules and points system, if not stricter now, are still the same when everyone else started migrating over from who knows when.....

So comments like why 'they' cant go elsewhere is rubbish, just because a lot more are entering the country? I guess the govt needs to make sure there is space for who they welcome. All us Poms came over gleefully in the boom days and still do, so let everyone else come too

 

I do agree it will bring in more competitiveness and traffic but isnt that the price of getting talent, making locals study/work harder and have an open market and open life?

 

Just saying...

KnK

 

Well surely importing for growth alone, as in The Big Australia Concept, does not imply the locals will be forced to work/study harder necessary, but will result in poorer living standards and conditions. Nothing wrong with immigration, but in a Sustainable way. I would suggest the growth in Sydney and Melbourne at present favour few outside of the real estate and associated areas and of course employers.

 

It is not and never was a question of race or nationality. Poms were not the only entrants during the boom times. China and India have for a considerable number of years been the principle sources of migrants. And good on them. All good but lets have a policy and not rely on immigration and rapid population increases as the main contributor of growth.

[calNgary]

I have deleted 2 pages of personal comments and bickering. Please discuss the topic in the OP and refresh yourselves with the forum rules.

 

Thanks

Cal x

[Kenfrapin]

Well surely importing for growth alone, as in The Big Australia Concept, does not imply the locals will be forced to work/study harder necessary, but will result in poorer living standards and conditions. Nothing wrong with immigration, but in a Sustainable way. I would suggest the growth in Sydney and Melbourne at present favour few outside of the real estate and associated areas and of course employers.

 

It is not and never was a question of race or nationality. Poms were not the only entrants during the boom times. China and India have for a considerable number of years been the principle sources of migrants. And good on them. All good but lets have a policy and not rely on immigration and rapid population increases as the main contributor of growth.

 

Dont disagree at all with what you have said, no country should depend on immigration as the main growth contributor, but then are you sure it is a major driving force for growth and development. I can say that compared to some other countries, Australia's migration isnt that big but then it's a wrong comparison because it's impact is very specific to the country in question.

 

Are there any stats on how big the net migration is and it's direct effect on house pricing and over population etc? Again, this may not be a right comparison because Australia has always been a country people moved to. I recently read that birth rates have fallen drastically among Australians, so even more the need for net migration to keep the economy growing. It's so subjective.

 

There is a very 'similar' problem in the UK, and its been so for years with people flocking to London and surrounding areas across Berkshire, Hampshire, Kent etc. Though its locals moving in, the problems it creates is the same - more traffic, insane sky rocketing of properties, overcrowding, you name it....and the local councils and the govt cannot cope to maintain facilities with this increase in people coming in...no one will go to a city where there isnt work : more work, more opportunities, more people and so on....that's just the way the world works

 

KnK

[flag of convenience]

Dont disagree at all with what you have said, no country should depend on immigration as the main growth contributor, but then are you sure it is a major driving force for growth and development. I can say that compared to some other countries, Australia's migration isnt that big but then it's a wrong comparison because it's impact is very specific to the country in question.

 

Are there any stats on how big the net migration is and it's direct effect on house pricing and over population etc? Again, this may not be a right comparison because Australia has always been a country people moved to. I recently read that birth rates have fallen drastically among Australians, so even more the need for net migration to keep the economy growing. It's so subjective.

 

There is a very 'similar' problem in the UK, and its been so for years with people flocking to London and surrounding areas across Berkshire, Hampshire, Kent etc. Though its locals moving in, the problems it creates is the same - more traffic, insane sky rocketing of properties, overcrowding, you name it....and the local councils and the govt cannot cope to maintain facilities with this increase in people coming in...no one will go to a city where there isnt work : more work, more opportunities, more people and so on....that's just the way the world works

 

KnK

 

Well not exactly Kenneth, Australia maintains one of the highest immigration rates in the world, on a population basis. If not the highest on that basis.

Birth rates are close to highest among 'developed countries' but have slightly declined in the past year after a rapid increase, in part brought on by government intervention, in part by high migration.

 

I can fully agree with a similar scenario playing out in certain UK cities, London in particular, I suspect allowed for similar reasons, although of course very different in the way of 'free migration' within EU, while government implemented high numbers within the Australian context.

 

Do you really believe the cake expands so much, or less of it just has to be distributed among more.?

[JockinTas]

I thought Australia would be pretty high on the list for migrant intake but actually far from it.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/12111108/Mapped-Which-country-has-the-most-immigrants.html

[flag of convenience]

I thought Australia would be pretty high on the list for migrant intake but actually far from it.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/12111108/Mapped-Which-country-has-the-most-immigrants.html

 

Well no Australia does have a very high immigration intake although has declined over the past year. The UAE has a very high rate of foreign workers but for the most part are not citizens and will return at some stage to their own countries as does Kuwait.

 

In overall per cent terms only Luxembourg and Israel and possibly Monaco, have a greater per cent of their population born overseas.

 

Of course in overall numbers USA takes the most but it has a population way in access of 300 million as well. The total number of foreign born is well below Australia's.

[dxboz]

That article is very misleading. The meaning of the word immigrant is a person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country. UAE does not allow any immigrants in. They only allow what they call 'guest workers' who can only stay as long as they have a sponsored job. If you lose your job you must leave within 28 days.

[Kenfrapin]

I did take a look at that and it isnt a fair comparison to use for this discussion. I agree that in terms of developed countries, Australia is pretty much the leader when it comes to people moving over to work and live permanently.

 

What I was trying to imply is it's a give and take relation. The Australian economy would amount to nothing without the influx of people and people will only work and live in cities that have jobs. Perth was one of the places to go during the mining boom while Sydney and Melbourne have always been go to destinations but in the recent past, with Technology and Construction now leading the way, people are flocking to Mel and Syd which is really quite obvious because that's where the jobs are. You can't ask the question why they can't go somewhere else because why will they if those other places dont provide employment opportunities?

 

The govt cant do much really too other than keeping pace and improving facilities, so I agree forward planning is vital. But let's be honest, the country is so spaced out and vast that it isnt really causing that much of a problem right now. I admit it's getting busier with more people arriving but there is still a lot of space for a lot of people to come in.....

 

KnK

Edited April 3, 2016 by Kenfrapin

[flag of convenience]

I did take a look at that and it isnt a fair comparison to use for this discussion. I agree that in terms of developed countries, Australia is pretty much the leader when it comes to people moving over to work and live permanently.

 

What I was trying to imply is it's a give and take relation. The Australian economy would amount to nothing without the influx of people and people will only work and live in cities that have jobs. Perth was one of the places to go during the mining boom while Sydney and Melbourne have always been go to destinations but in the recent past, with Technology and Construction now leading the way, people are flocking to Mel and Syd which is really quite obvious because that's where the jobs are. You can't ask the question why they can't go somewhere else because why will they if those other places dont provide employment opportunities?

 

The govt cant do much really too other than keeping pace and improving facilities, so I agree forward planning is vital. But let's be honest, the country is so spaced out and vast that it isnt really causing that much of a problem right now. I admit it's getting busier with more people arriving but there is still a lot of space for a lot of people to come in.....

 

KnK

 

The government can do plenty. They control the immigration intake every year and as such control the numbers. I don't get your argument that the country is 'so spaced out', unless you mean by substance abuse. By far the greatest numbers of migrants flock to our two largest cities, which are experiencing difficulties with the growth due to creaking infrastructure and a lack of suitable housing. Is that really the way to grow an economy? Cities cannot forever outwards. There appears little motivation to develop areas where population is falling or develop alternatives of a practical nature that will ease the strain on cities now.

 

Of course the 'boom' utilised a great number of people in the WA context. Did WA come out better? Certainly not in the broader sense, although the CBD did get a much needed makeover. Today a fifth of office space is vacant. There is now a population flow in the Eastern States direction and migration has more than halved.

[flag of convenience]

That article is very misleading. The meaning of the word immigrant is a person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country. UAE does not allow any immigrants in. They only allow what they call 'guest workers' who can only stay as long as they have a sponsored job. If you lose your job you must leave within 28 days.

 

The Indian/Bangla/Pakistani workers work often in dire conditions and close to modern day slaves, those that labour at least, in many cases.

[JockinTas]

The Indian/Bangla/Pakistani workers work often in dire conditions and close to modern day slaves, those that labour at least, in many cases.

 

My brother worked in Saudi years ago and he was disgusted at how badly the Saudis treated their Filipino maids, nannies and housekeepers.

[flag of convenience]

My brother worked in Saudi years ago and he was disgusted at how badly the Saudis treated their Filipino maids, nannies and housekeepers.

 

Shamefully not only in Saudi either. Indonesian and Filipino maids are treated often harshly in Singapore as well.

[Kenfrapin]

I don't get your argument that the country is 'so spaced out', unless you mean by substance abuse.

 

This made me chuckle, my apologies it was the wrong use of words. I meant in its literal sense, there is still a lot of space in Australia to grow outwards which I see happening rapidly in Melbourne, so it really isnt a huge problem. Australia is about 30 times the size of UK (let's say 10 times because the central parts are not even in consideration) but has only 22 million compared to 65 million in the UK so space isnt an issue

 

I agree the govt needs to have a proper plan in place to address this growth and since I havent been/seen the change I cant really comment or judge

 

KnK

[flag of convenience]

This made me chuckle, my apologies it was the wrong use of words. I meant in its literal sense, there is still a lot of space in Australia to grow outwards which I see happening rapidly in Melbourne, so it really isnt a huge problem. Australia is about 30 times the size of UK (let's say 10 times because the central parts are not even in consideration) but has only 22 million compared to 65 million in the UK so space isnt an issue

 

I agree the govt needs to have a proper plan in place to address this growth and since I havent been/seen the change I cant really comment or judge

 

KnK

 

I can't agree Kenneth. The ever growing spread of Australian cities is largely unsustainable. We just, for the main part, lack the infrastructure to cope with it, it is too expensive to provide the necessary amenities, that local government is expected to provide as well as stretching resources.

 

We already have some of the most sprawling cities in the worst with the lowest densities and the most car centric. Such continued expansion will see it close to impossible to provide services and risk becoming economic ghettos, home to those unable to afford alternatives. An out of sight out of mind scenario can easily develop. This of course risks social problems, with bored teenagers, bored stay at home mums and al that involves.

[akiralx]

At least one new city needs to be built, the cost of infrastructure accepted and provided, some government agencies moved there, and many new migrants compelled to live there for a period at least (10 years?).

 

I believe Worksafe in VIC is moving from Melbourne to Geelong soon, this should be the norm.

[flag of convenience]

Decentralisation has been talked about for many decades. At least a positive move if Worksafe is relocating to Geelong. Much more needs doing of course.

[Kenfrapin]

I can't agree Kenneth. The ever growing spread of Australian cities is largely unsustainable. We just, for the main part, lack the infrastructure to cope with it, it is too expensive to provide the necessary amenities, that local government is expected to provide as well as stretching resources.

 

We already have some of the most sprawling cities in the worst with the lowest densities and the most car centric. Such continued expansion will see it close to impossible to provide services and risk becoming economic ghettos, home to those unable to afford alternatives. An out of sight out of mind scenario can easily develop. This of course risks social problems, with bored teenagers, bored stay at home mums and al that involves.

 

Ouch, you paint a very grey image but I know exactly what you mean :err:

 

Hope there is a positive move to ensuring we dont have ghostly suburbias few years down the line and a robust plan to have a self sustaining economy, with or without migration being the corner stone as it seems to be today

 

KnK

[Petals]

We had decentralised business and the Vic Gov at the time closed all the cottage hospitals, made it impossible for the small businesses to be economic and the small towns died. There are a lot of good places to live in Victoria apart from Melbourne still if one is fortunate to be able to get a job there. I have just returned from Yarrawonga and I love it up there on the Murray and its got everything going for it. I will probably move up there in a few years to be near my son. Its such a relief to go somewhere where there is not so much traffic, clean air and the sky is really blue. When I drove back get to the top of the Divide and look down on Melbourne and all I see is the pollution hanging over the city.