'It doesn't feel justifiable': The couples not having children because of climate change

I really enjoy reports like this.  It would  be great if all Greenie fools took themselves out of the gene pool that way

Morgan and Adam have always wanted children but fears over climate change are making them reconsider.

The committed pair, aged 36 and 35, are part of a growing trend for young couples to abandon plans for a family because of the climate crisis.

Millions of people around the world rallied for climate action over the past two days, including 300,000 in Australia on Friday, ahead of a United Nations climate action summit on Monday.

"I feel so sad, it's such a hard thing to let go of," says Morgan, who works in logistics. "My conscience says, 'I can't give this child what I've enjoyed, I can't give them the certainty of a future where they can be all that they can be ... or have the things they should have, like breathable air and drinkable water'."

Morgan is feeling "pretty damn certain" a baby is off the cards, even though she fears she might regret it. She has at least two close friends in their early 30s, with good partners, who have made the same decision.

Her partner Adam, who works in web development, agrees. "I have a lot of love to give and would love to raise a child … but it doesn’t feel justifiable. The world is heading blindfolded towards catastrophe."

Prince Harry made headlines when he revealed in an interview in British Vogue, in the September issue guest-edited by his wife Meghan, that the couple would have two children "maximum" for the sake of the planet.

The idea of limiting family size to two children to represent net zero population growth has been around for decades. But is no children the new two children?

Dr Bronwyn Harman, a lecturer at Edith Cowan University in Perth who studies people without children, says it is a progression of the same theme. She says some people are avoiding parenthood because they are worried for their unborn children, while others are motivated not to make things worse.

"They're saying things like ‘we don't want to add children into the mix and put more strain on the planet’," Harman says. "It's started coming up [in my research] in the past six months but it's not very common."

The phenomenon is growing. The Age and Sun-Herald have spoken to 20 and 30-somethings all over Australia wrestling with the dilemma. Most asked to use first names only to avoid online harassment.

"I’m terrified that in another 50 years, if my hypothetical child was all grown up, what would our world look like?" says Jessica Ivers, 29. The digital specialist and yoga teacher from Northcote in Melbourne says she is "100 per cent certain" about her choice.

In Mackay in Queensland,  community organiser Emma, 32, says she and her partner Mick, 33, were planning to start trying for a family next year but changed their minds after the federal election.

"After the LNP won - with no climate plan - we cried and agreed that the dream of a family wouldn't be for us," Emma says. "It's a terrifying thought for us that the world will be uninhabitable in a few decades if we continue charging ahead with fossil fuels and approving coal mines like Adani."

Melanie, 24, from Highgate Hill in Brisbane terminated an unplanned pregnancy last year and says the climate crisis was the "ultimate deciding factor". She read scientific articles about the best and worst-case scenarios and decided she would never have children.

"It's been a hard year coming to terms with the reality of the situation," says Melanie. "I cannot justify bringing children into a world in the midst of a mass extinction event and facing total ecological collapse. "

Shalini, 33, and David, 35, from Summer Hill in Sydney have decided not to have biological children but would like to adopt or foster in the future.

"It makes more sense for us to look after a child that is here and needs someone rather than make more children," says David, a 3D animation artist.

Shalini, a public servant, says climate change is a big reason, along with her focus on career.

“I don't eat meat and I'm really conscious about consuming goods and services that that are more sustainably produced and in the same vein, I don't want to produce more people,” Shalini says. She finds it hard to discuss with friends because she doesn't want them to feel judged.

Maddie, 32, from the lower north shore, sought counselling to deal with her grief and anxiety over climate change and her dilemma over having children.

“My psychologist is having more and more couples coming to her about this,” she says. “The first thing she said to me was, ‘this is not a manifestation of normal anxiety, this is a real threat and real grief that you're carrying’.”

Maddie would love children but feels an obligation to fight for her newborn niece and friends' children instead.

Australian Bureau of Statistics figures suggest one in four women aged 15 to 35 will never have children. Harman says roughly two-thirds of those women make an active choice to be "child-free" while one-third are "childless" because of circumstances, including fears over the state of the world.

A global trend

In Britain musician and activist Blythe Pepino, 33, kicked off the "BirthStrike" - a movement of people pledging not to have children "due to the severity of the ecological crisis and the current inaction of governing forces in the face of this existential threat".

In February, US Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez commented on the grim scientific outlook and political inaction: "It does lead young people to have a legitimate question: is it OK still to have children?"

American singer and actress Miley Cyrus, 26, told Elle magazine’s August 2019 US issue that Millennials didn't want to reproduce because they knew the Earth could not handle it.

"We’re getting handed a piece-of-shit planet, and I refuse to hand that down to my child,” Cyrus says. "Until I feel like my kid would live on an Earth with fish in the water, I’m not bringing in another person to deal with that."

Yet even at the coalface of climate change research, some see this as extreme. Earlier this month, Petteri Taalas, secretary-general of the World Meteorological Organisation (parent body of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), weighed into the debate.

"The latest idea is that children are a negative thing," Taalas told a Finnish magazine. "I am worried for young mothers, who are already under much pressure. This will only add to their burden."

He warned facts could be hijacked to justify "extreme measures" in the name of climate action.

Taalas told The Sun-Herald  in a statement he supports strong climate action and a science-based approach offers hope.

“We must not be driven to despair, given that reasonable solutions are available to the international community, governments and civil society," he says.

SOURCE  






Qld public servants to be given $1250 bonus to ‘boost economy’

So where is the money coming from?  Other taxpayers.  Why should one class of taxpayer be rewarded at the expense of other taxpayers?

Queensland public servants will be in line for a cash bonus of $1250 in a move labelled by the Opposition as a ‘cash splash for votes.’

Treasurer Jackie Trad announced the bonuses for more than 200,000 workers. It comes on top of annual wage increases of 2.5 per cent, which is more than the current rate of inflation.

Almost all public servants who sign, or have signed new workplace agreements from March 2018 to March 2021 will be eligible for the bonus. That includes, nurses, midwives and teachers.

Senior executives and senior officers will not be eligible.

It’s set to cost taxpayers $250 million, with the Opposition slamming the move. “This taxpayer funded cash splash should be tied to guaranteeing better services as Labor have created a major health crisis, with waiting lists blowing out, and education results slipping,” Deputy LNP Leader Tim Mander told News Corp.

Ms Trad insists the payment is about supporting Queensland’s economy. “The Governor of the Reserve Bank last month called for all levels of Government to provide additional support above existing caps on wages growth to drive economic growth,” she said.

But experts have dismissed the Treasurer’s claims saying it will do very little to boost the economy. University of Queensland economist John Mangan says most of the money will end up going towards bills and credit card payments. “People will pay debt off. It’ll do nothing at all,” Professor Mangan told AAP.

“That’s what always happens when you get these one-off income jolts. “If it were a permanent pay rise, that would be a completely different thing.”

SOURCE  






Climate-sceptic academic seeks $1.5m in donations to fight unlawful dismissal appeal

The climate-sceptic academic Peter Ridd has asked supporters to donate another $1.5m to fund ongoing legal costs after his former employer, James Cook University, lodged an appeal against an unlawful dismissal ruling.

This month the federal court awarded Ridd $1.2m in compensation. The court has made clear its finding related to Ridd’s employment rights and not his academic freedom.

After JCU lodged its appeal and most of the compensation payout was ordered to be quarantined in a trust account, Ridd relaunched a public fundraising site for his legal costs.

The site has collected more than $350,000 in total public donations, including about $100,000 in the past 24 hours.

In recent months Ridd has held a speaking tour, promoted by agricultural groups, that supported their campaign against new Great Barrier Reef pollution regulations. Ridd has personally promoted their cause and joined lobbying efforts.

In a statement soliciting donations, Ridd cites his position on the reef issue – which disputes the scientific consensus and has been compared with the strategy used by the tobacco industry to raise doubt about the impact of smoking – as a “point of principle we must fight for”.

“JCU will use its infinite financial resources – effectively government money – to appeal,” Ridd said.

He said donations would “send a powerful message to governments about what the public expect of our universities”.

The court last week put a stay on the compensation payout. JCU is required pay more than $1.2m into a trust administered by Ridd’s lawyer. Of that money $1m will be quarantined and $215,000 made available for Ridd’s legal costs.

In April federal circuit court judge Salvatore Vasta found the actions of the university, including Ridd’s repeated censure and ultimate dismissal, were unlawful.

Vasta made clear the case was about employment law and not – as Ridd, his supporters and conservative media outlets have repeatedly stated – about academic freedom.

“Some have thought that this trial was about freedom of speech and intellectual freedom,” Vasta said. “Media reports have considered that this trial was about silencing persons with controversial or unpopular views.

“Rather, this trial was purely and simply about the proper construction of a clause in an enterprise agreement.”

JCU’s appeal argues there are “errors of law” in the judgments.

SOURCE  






Thirty million by 2030: Mass immigration will see Australia's population grow by 160,000 a YEAR - putting more pressure on home affordability and public services



More than 160,000 migrants are expected to arrive in Australia every year over the next four years putting unprecedented pressure on the nation's infrastructure.

A new report reveals government plans to spend billions of dollars on improving roads and transport to cope with exploding population numbers.  

Sydney, Melbourne and southeast Queensland have absorbed 75 per cent of the nation's population growth in the last 10 years.

The boom has taken its toll on public transport and roads, which are now overcrowded and congested, and the cost of housing has soared.

'The freeways have slowed, trains are sometimes at crush capacity and housing construction has not always kept pace,' said the report, called Planning for Australia's Future Population. 

 'Avoidable congestion is already estimated to cost $25 billion and is forecast to reach $40 billion by 2030 without further change.'

To cope with the growth the government has vowed to spend billions of dollars trying to relieve the congestion in the pressured capitals pledging a $4billion urban congestion fund to relieve pressure on the roads.

The government also plans to spend $4.5 billion on regional roads connecting ports, airports and freight routes, in an effort to boost regional employment.

And another $9.3 billion for an inland rail corridor stretching from Melbourne to Brisbane and $2 billion for a fast rail connection from Melbourne to Geelong.

Since 2010, migration rates have outstripped birthrates with about 59 per cent of Australia's total population growth coming from migration, the report said.

Of those migrating to Australia, the vast majority have moved to urban areas.

In the past 20 years, migrants have made up nearly two-thirds of Sydney's population increase and half of all population growth in Melbourne and Perth.

More than 1,400,000 international student visas granted since June 2015 according to Home Affairs department figures.

Population growth needs to be sustainable, the report said.

'It needs to occur at a rate where infrastructure and services can be put in place to match the growing population. If this does not occur, the result is increased congestion, housing pressures, pollution and lack of support and amenity. This has adverse consequences for quality of life.' 

Australia's total population is forecast to expand from 25 million to 29.5 million by 2029, the report said.  

Both Sydney and Melbourne are expected to add just over a million people each,  increasing to 6.4 million and 6.3 million respectively over the next decade.

The Morrison Government said on Monday that the permanent migration intake had been lowered from 190,000 per year, and it would try to deflect new migrants to regional areas in order to relieve the pressure on Sydney and Melbourne.

Population minister Alan Tudge said the 160,000 yearly cap would include 23,000 skills visas requiring people to work outside the big cities for three years before being eligible for permanent residency.

Seven Designated Area Migration Agreements have been made to allow regional employers to sponsor skilled workers.

Changes have also been made to the Temporary Graduate visa for international students who have completed their studies at a regional campus of a university, so they can continue to live and work in regional Australia, the report said.

Mr Tudge said the plan would also create incentives to encourage international students to go to regional areas and smaller cities to study.

Economist Leith Van Onselen, who worked for Treasury, Goldman Sachs and now writes for website Macrobusiness, was scathing about both the Coalition and Labor's plans to cope with mass migration through infrastructure spending or diversion to regional areas.

 'The only 'solution' to maintaining Australia's liveability is to slash immigration back to historical levels – well below 100,000 people a year – to allow housing and infrastructure to keep pace,' he wrote on Monday.

'Anything else is treating symptoms, not the cause, and are merely policy smokescreens.'

Daily Mail Australia has asked Mr Tudge's office for economic modelling to show the cost-benefit analysis of mass migration set at 160,000 per year. 

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here