Sensational-Adelaide.com

mattblack wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 06, 2023 1:08 pm

rev wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 06, 2023 12:10 am

[Shuz] wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 05, 2023 9:48 pm

Hmm, I can think of a very easy way to save $15bn in funding.

Scrap the N-S Motorway.

So they want to cut back on infrastructure? Infrastructure that's badly needed yesterday? But they wont cut back migration which will create an even worse situation.
We don't have enough housing. We don't have employment to sustain that growth. We can't keep up with infrastructure requirements.
Australia doesn't need hundreds of thousands of new residents every year.

This Labor government is a clown show.

You do know that migation has been falling for a number of years don't you, actually, year on year since 2009 across both political persuasions from a high of 11.4% to now 5.1%

Chart and table of the Australia net migration rate from 1950 to 2023.

The current net migration rate for Australia in 2023 is 5.173 per 1000 population, a 4.54% decline from 2022.
The net migration rate for Australia in 2022 was 5.419 per 1000 population, a 4.34% decline from 2021.
The net migration rate for Australia in 2021 was 5.665 per 1000 population, a 4.16% decline from 2020.
The net migration rate for Australia in 2020 was 5.911 per 1000 population, a 4% decline from 2019.

Although still quite high by world standards

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/A ... rom%202019

Ah... the old percentage per head of population argument. Its irrelevant when over 2 years, Australia will have welcomed over 700000 new residents, into a situation where there is no available housing and already groaning inadequate infrastructure due to an underspend on infrastructure to keep pace with the previously high immigration numbers. A unsustainable circle. Cue some university study saying we need even higher immigration to catch up with the backlog. Some call immigration an unsustainable Ponzi scheme, whereby the overall economy grows, but everyones slice of the pie diminishes, until the bubble pops.

Chicken or egg really. Is migration a problem (we are an immigrant country with a low birth rate that can't sustain an older population moving forward) or govt. (state/feds) inaction (or poorly directed funds) on housing/transport/manufacturing/infrastructure/health etc???

mattblack wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 06, 2023 1:08 pm

rev wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 06, 2023 12:10 am

[Shuz] wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 05, 2023 9:48 pm

Hmm, I can think of a very easy way to save $15bn in funding.

Scrap the N-S Motorway.

So they want to cut back on infrastructure? Infrastructure that's badly needed yesterday? But they wont cut back migration which will create an even worse situation.
We don't have enough housing. We don't have employment to sustain that growth. We can't keep up with infrastructure requirements.
Australia doesn't need hundreds of thousands of new residents every year.

This Labor government is a clown show.

You do know that migation has been falling for a number of years don't you, actually, year on year since 2009 across both political persuasions from a high of 11.4% to now 5.1%

Chart and table of the Australia net migration rate from 1950 to 2023.

The current net migration rate for Australia in 2023 is 5.173 per 1000 population, a 4.54% decline from 2022.
The net migration rate for Australia in 2022 was 5.419 per 1000 population, a 4.34% decline from 2021.
The net migration rate for Australia in 2021 was 5.665 per 1000 population, a 4.16% decline from 2020.
The net migration rate for Australia in 2020 was 5.911 per 1000 population, a 4% decline from 2019.

Although still quite high by world standards

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/A ... rom%202019

You know that migration has actually increased in the past year to the highest it's been in a decade? These figures don't include people who've arrived as part of the humanitarian programs.
https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/research ... 022-23.pdf They're expecting some three quarters of a million more to call Australia home in the next two years now. Even the radical leftist tabloid trash the ABC is reporting that. They're even reporting net migration pre covid was over 230,000 a year, probably taking into account refugees/humanitarian migrants.

The point though wasn't whether there's been a decline or if we're at levels pre-covid or even record levels, but that our infrastructure can't cope with the amount of people we have now, but they want to bring in basically record numbers of people while now also proposing to cut back on infrastructure spending.
Coincidentally on the side of that, they've been telling us theres a shortage of labor, not enough skilled tradies etc etc for a long time.
So since they're cutting back on infrastructure spending/cutting back or eliminating projects, logically that should also see a reduction in so called "skilled labor" migrants..right?

There needs to be a circuit breaker. Other then refugees, we should cut migration right back to bare minimum for a short period.

Chalmers says that infrastructure spending is pushing up inflation, but so does the tens of thousands of migrants spending their handouts, so does the already stretched home building industry which also drives up prices.
Demand outstrips supply, cost increases, pretty basic, you'd think the bloke in charge of the nations finances would understand that. But apparently there's other priorities and agendas that are more important then the cost of living for the 26 million people who call Australia home already.

The cost of living, which is finally acknowledged by the head clown honeymooning in China at the moment with his CCP comrades, is partly being fuelled by mass migration.
They'll never admit that though, because for Labor it goes against their socialist open border doctrines, and for the Liberals it goes against their policies of taking care of the big end of town.
We're not experiencing economic boom times like we did in the early 2000's under Howard when our mining sector fuelled Chinas massive economic growth.
Wages and salaries are stuffed for the majority, the standard of living is dropping for the majority.

I don't really see how they could bin this upgrade. If the NSM tunnel is going ahead, and we're being told it still is, this intersection needs to be upgraded well in advance to deal with the significant increase in traffic it will see during construction (bearing in mind it's barely functional for much of the day already).

Also consider the cost vs actual work required, it's expensive, but assume much of that cost is tied up with property acquisition, so the actual tools required to build it will largely include bulldozers, plus work realigning underground services (which will help develop experience to build the NSM), and surface works.

Saltwater wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 06, 2023 3:37 pm

I don't really see how they could bin this upgrade. If the NSM tunnel is going ahead, and we're being told it still is, this intersection needs to be upgraded well in advance to deal with the significant increase in traffic it will see during construction (bearing in mind it's barely functional for much of the day already).

Also consider the cost vs actual work required, it's expensive, but assume much of that cost is tied up with property acquisition, so the actual tools required to build it will largely include bulldozers, plus work realigning underground services (which will help develop experience to build the NSM), and surface works.

Be interesting to see if the NSM is affected. I notice the Melbs metro tunnel is quarantined from cuts? Typical. The NSM is far more important economically due to transport logistics than a commuter train in Marvellous Melbs… but watch SA’s project get the chop.

claybro wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 06, 2023 10:44 pm

Saltwater wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 06, 2023 3:37 pm

I don't really see how they could bin this upgrade. If the NSM tunnel is going ahead, and we're being told it still is, this intersection needs to be upgraded well in advance to deal with the significant increase in traffic it will see during construction (bearing in mind it's barely functional for much of the day already).

Also consider the cost vs actual work required, it's expensive, but assume much of that cost is tied up with property acquisition, so the actual tools required to build it will largely include bulldozers, plus work realigning underground services (which will help develop experience to build the NSM), and surface works.

Be interesting to see if the NSM is affected. I notice the Melbs metro tunnel is quarantined from cuts? Typical. The NSM is far more important economically due to transport logistics than a commuter train in Marvellous Melbs… but watch SA’s project get the chop.

The Metro Tunnel in Melbourne is largely finished. Test trains have been running through the tunnel for months

Regardless of what prior decisions should have been made or what should have been done differently, scrapping the remaining NS corridor is totally non-viable as there has been too much development done assuming it will happen, and it will just become more and more of a bottleneck.

The Marion/SDB intersection feels like it should be considered part of the same development, since it's gonna be really important for traffic avoiding that corridor as the works on building the trench are done.

This intersection upgrade would also complement the Marion Road/Cross Road tram grade separation project, a current bottleneck that will also be worsened by the N-SM project.

SouthAussie94 wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 07, 2023 12:57 am

claybro wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 06, 2023 10:44 pm

Saltwater wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 06, 2023 3:37 pm

I don't really see how they could bin this upgrade. If the NSM tunnel is going ahead, and we're being told it still is, this intersection needs to be upgraded well in advance to deal with the significant increase in traffic it will see during construction (bearing in mind it's barely functional for much of the day already).

Also consider the cost vs actual work required, it's expensive, but assume much of that cost is tied up with property acquisition, so the actual tools required to build it will largely include bulldozers, plus work realigning underground services (which will help develop experience to build the NSM), and surface works.

Be interesting to see if the NSM is affected. I notice the Melbs metro tunnel is quarantined from cuts? Typical. The NSM is far more important economically due to transport logistics than a commuter train in Marvellous Melbs… but watch SA’s project get the chop.

The Metro Tunnel in Melbourne is largely finished. Test trains have been running through the tunnel for months

That is one short section in the CBD.

The Metro Tunnel isn't scheduled to be completed until 2084.

You're talking about the Suburban Rail Loop, not the Metro Tunnel. And it is very likely that when the Liberals return to power in Victoria, they will most likely scrap the project. So it will just be SRL East completed, not the whole thing.