Putting forward a reasoned view on Australian immigration

Ivan - The Founder

Ivan is interested in how communities have access to education, housing, health, employment, recreation and each other. People in public and private organisations can be frustrated in their ability to contribute to this “good society” when they don’t have the right information to make critical decisions. Ivan’s idea is to introduce spatial thinking to organisations, look at places through a demographic lens, and use the power of storytelling to be persuasive. Today over 40 smart people have joined him in this mission. Each year over 1.5 million people use id’s 500+ web applications to inform their decision-making. Over 10,000 people subscribe to .id’s newsletter and over 50,000 learn from .id’s blog every month. Today over 30 smart people have joined him in this mission. Each year over 1.5 million people use id’s 500+ web applications to inform their decision-making. 10,000 people subscribe to .id’s newsletter and over 30,000 learn from .id’s blog every month. Ivan loves surfing, his family and the dog.

You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. Thanks for the article, but I disagree that ‘the ideal to strive for is balance in the population profile’. I think the ideal is to strive for population density in each area which that area either wants, or tolerates.

    The reality of higher migration is that areas like mine are told we must have five storey flats in place of single storey houses, even though the roads are choked, the trains are crowded and everybody here opposes higher density.

    My alternative is set out at http://www.wewilldecide.info. I used some of your figures at one point.


  2. Peter Strachan says:

    The environment does not care about percentage change in feet on the ground as an issue, it only sees the number of feet, plus of course how heavily each of them tramp to give us the total environmental footprint. I can see no evidence anywhere that any society is achieving a reduction in the average individual footprint. Unfortunately, improving one’s quality of life seems to involve more consumption and a heavier individual footprint, not a smaller one. Even if individual reductions could be achieved, continual population expansion would eat up any gains, leaving a less sustainable future.
    Sure we have technologies that can help but in the past, all new energy efficient technologies have simply enabled us to consume more at a lower cost. After 200 years of industrial revolution with all sorts of fantastic new technologies coming into commercial application we have ended up where we are, facing huge environmental disruption. How do you think that continuing to do as we have been doing (but recycling bottles and building wind turbines) will lead to a different outcome?
    The bulge of middle age and aging Australians in the current demographic profile is made up of Australians who were born overseas, not native born Australians. Your idea that bringing younger people in will somehow alter this over the long term is ridiculous.
    One problem you don’t mention is family reunion. Once a young family settles, often from a country where 3-5 children is more common than local families who prefer 1-3, they set about getting grandma and grandpa to join them, undoing your demographic tinkering.

    Peter Strachan

  3. Aman Mehta says:

    Thanks for sharing the blog, keep updating the with the same.

  4. Sailee Kale says:

    Hey Ivan, Thanks for sharing such an informational post it was very useful for me glad that you shared.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

.id blog