"Still, it’s important to challenge the common assumption that prosperity inevitably leads to lower birth rates: Wealth does not always mean fewer children."
I think it's important to challenge the base idea that there is an ideal population level and rate of growth or decline. People and politicians are always swinging back and forth between too much and too little, and frankly I have had enough. Is the danger global warming or cooling? Over population or under population? too many rich people or too many poor? FFS, just let people and nature take their course and quit trying to F with everything and every one. People need to stop thinking that they know what is right or what needs to be done and just leave other people alone. All of the evidence indicates that 9 times out 10 our "experts" can't even identify what is a problem and what is not, let alone what is most important or how to actually solve it. We see time and time again that things we focus on are not even what we should, weren't even really a problem, and that the effort we put into changing them actually caused more problems and solved none. The only time a human should interfere with another human is if that other human is harming or clearly about to harm the person or property of another human.
Too "bloody" right matey !! You have just expressed what a lot of people have said but are not game to write down publicly ! I recently read an article on "experts" and the "so called facts" that they "spew hither and thither" [ from their self-assumed position of authority !! OR in your Pirate-Speak : Their Ivory F...... tower ! ] and that stupid politicians quote frequently as the basis for most of their actions , or inactions , which invariably turn out to be wrong either way .......or have unfortunate adverse 'outcomes' !
They "actually caused more problems and solved none." sums up the careers of MOST POLITICIANS and unfortunately , MANY "EXPERTS" !
So....who do you trust then ? THAT is where HISTORY comes into the calculations !
....Oh ! Wait ! "They" [ the education "experts" ] no longer teach history per se do "they" !
So......precedent.....which plays such a large role in LAW ...is unable to guide the present and future !.........and who cares anyway........"my opinion" is just as valid as "your opinion"
even IF I don't have a clue and you have actual experience [ ' history ' ] and knowledge !
I can STILL get a PhD and become a "Federal Govenment Treasurer" just for writing about a "treasurer who knew what he was doing " , even if I don't have a clue and demonstrate THAT DEFICIENCY every time I open my mouth ! So....who cares ! I'm popular ! And "we" got re-elected ! What more do you want !?? More people....that's what immigration is for !
In many fields of study, predictions are frequently wrong and disagreements amongst “experts” commonplace.
Yet when it comes to public policy, many politicians and media personalities reference ‘expert opinion’ as though such opinions represent conclusive statements of fact.
Many of our most contentious policy discussions are dominated by phrases like “the science is settled” and “the experts agree”.
When ‘expert opinion’ is invoked in this way, it commonly replaces any logical justification for a policy decision. As a public relations tactic it works well: a politician can avoid making difficult arguments, whilst still maintaining credibility. Because after all, if an ‘expert’ says it’s a good policy then case closed!
How often have we seen so called fringe ideas be denounced as “conspiracy theories” only to be proven correct 6 months later. It reminds me of the joke “What is the difference between a conspiracy theory and the truth”…… Answer, ”About 6 months”.
Last year I gave a speech in Parliament where I touched on many of these themes. You can watch it here:
A key Liberal principal is belief in the ‘marketplace of ideas;’ that free and open debate is the best generator of good policy. Foundational to this is the requirement that all ideas be judged according to their logical merit.
When considering issues of public policy, we should of course seek to hear from informed people. However, we should not make the mistake of holding the opinion of such people as inherently superior.
17th century philosopher John Locke, who is often considered the “Father of Liberalism”, derided this fallacy as an ‘argumentum ad verecundiam,’ a Latin phrase he coined meaning ‘appeal to shamefacedness.’ He gave it this name in reference to the way those employing this fallacy count on their opponent lacking the self-confidence to publicly challenge the view of a supposedly learned individual.
This is precisely the way we see appeals to authority used today. Whenever someone is so bold as to question decisions made in such sacrosanct policy areas as health or the climate, they are immediately chastised for “ignoring the experts” and not “trusting the science.” No matter how many times a publicly lauded ‘expert’ is proven wrong, this mentality continues to dominate the discourse.
I do not find it surprising that three of our country’s greatest public policy issues over the past ten years have all had their public debate impeded this way.
Net zero, childhood gender treatment, and the COVID pandemic response are all areas where free and open debate were shunned in favour of parroting the sacred pronouncements of ‘experts.’
Politics must resist the tendency by some to blindly elevate ‘expert opinion’ to the level of unquestionable, conversation-ending ‘truth.’
All ideas should be wrestled with and challenged before being embraced, no matter who is promoting them.
"Wealth doesn’t have to mean demographic decline."
Let's HOPE that this is true because EVERYONE is striving to be wealthy and certainly better-off than they are now !
If attaining wealth results in the failure of their society and culture and even their existence , then this would be self-defeating and a very bad out-come for the entire human race !
There are some cultures that I would prefer to remain and some that I find that I am less fond of , but overall the richness and the variety of people and their cultures adds to everyone's life !
"Still, it’s important to challenge the common assumption that prosperity inevitably leads to lower birth rates: Wealth does not always mean fewer children."
I think it's important to challenge the base idea that there is an ideal population level and rate of growth or decline. People and politicians are always swinging back and forth between too much and too little, and frankly I have had enough. Is the danger global warming or cooling? Over population or under population? too many rich people or too many poor? FFS, just let people and nature take their course and quit trying to F with everything and every one. People need to stop thinking that they know what is right or what needs to be done and just leave other people alone. All of the evidence indicates that 9 times out 10 our "experts" can't even identify what is a problem and what is not, let alone what is most important or how to actually solve it. We see time and time again that things we focus on are not even what we should, weren't even really a problem, and that the effort we put into changing them actually caused more problems and solved none. The only time a human should interfere with another human is if that other human is harming or clearly about to harm the person or property of another human.
The "Crimson" Pirate :
Too "bloody" right matey !! You have just expressed what a lot of people have said but are not game to write down publicly ! I recently read an article on "experts" and the "so called facts" that they "spew hither and thither" [ from their self-assumed position of authority !! OR in your Pirate-Speak : Their Ivory F...... tower ! ] and that stupid politicians quote frequently as the basis for most of their actions , or inactions , which invariably turn out to be wrong either way .......or have unfortunate adverse 'outcomes' !
They "actually caused more problems and solved none." sums up the careers of MOST POLITICIANS and unfortunately , MANY "EXPERTS" !
So....who do you trust then ? THAT is where HISTORY comes into the calculations !
....Oh ! Wait ! "They" [ the education "experts" ] no longer teach history per se do "they" !
So......precedent.....which plays such a large role in LAW ...is unable to guide the present and future !.........and who cares anyway........"my opinion" is just as valid as "your opinion"
even IF I don't have a clue and you have actual experience [ ' history ' ] and knowledge !
I can STILL get a PhD and become a "Federal Govenment Treasurer" just for writing about a "treasurer who knew what he was doing " , even if I don't have a clue and demonstrate THAT DEFICIENCY every time I open my mouth ! So....who cares ! I'm popular ! And "we" got re-elected ! What more do you want !?? More people....that's what immigration is for !
And HERE is that article I mentioned !
In many fields of study, predictions are frequently wrong and disagreements amongst “experts” commonplace.
Yet when it comes to public policy, many politicians and media personalities reference ‘expert opinion’ as though such opinions represent conclusive statements of fact.
Many of our most contentious policy discussions are dominated by phrases like “the science is settled” and “the experts agree”.
When ‘expert opinion’ is invoked in this way, it commonly replaces any logical justification for a policy decision. As a public relations tactic it works well: a politician can avoid making difficult arguments, whilst still maintaining credibility. Because after all, if an ‘expert’ says it’s a good policy then case closed!
How often have we seen so called fringe ideas be denounced as “conspiracy theories” only to be proven correct 6 months later. It reminds me of the joke “What is the difference between a conspiracy theory and the truth”…… Answer, ”About 6 months”.
Last year I gave a speech in Parliament where I touched on many of these themes. You can watch it here:
A key Liberal principal is belief in the ‘marketplace of ideas;’ that free and open debate is the best generator of good policy. Foundational to this is the requirement that all ideas be judged according to their logical merit.
When considering issues of public policy, we should of course seek to hear from informed people. However, we should not make the mistake of holding the opinion of such people as inherently superior.
17th century philosopher John Locke, who is often considered the “Father of Liberalism”, derided this fallacy as an ‘argumentum ad verecundiam,’ a Latin phrase he coined meaning ‘appeal to shamefacedness.’ He gave it this name in reference to the way those employing this fallacy count on their opponent lacking the self-confidence to publicly challenge the view of a supposedly learned individual.
This is precisely the way we see appeals to authority used today. Whenever someone is so bold as to question decisions made in such sacrosanct policy areas as health or the climate, they are immediately chastised for “ignoring the experts” and not “trusting the science.” No matter how many times a publicly lauded ‘expert’ is proven wrong, this mentality continues to dominate the discourse.
I do not find it surprising that three of our country’s greatest public policy issues over the past ten years have all had their public debate impeded this way.
Net zero, childhood gender treatment, and the COVID pandemic response are all areas where free and open debate were shunned in favour of parroting the sacred pronouncements of ‘experts.’
Politics must resist the tendency by some to blindly elevate ‘expert opinion’ to the level of unquestionable, conversation-ending ‘truth.’
All ideas should be wrestled with and challenged before being embraced, no matter who is promoting them.
Yours sincerely,
Alex Antic
Liberal Senator for South Australia
"Wealth doesn’t have to mean demographic decline."
Let's HOPE that this is true because EVERYONE is striving to be wealthy and certainly better-off than they are now !
If attaining wealth results in the failure of their society and culture and even their existence , then this would be self-defeating and a very bad out-come for the entire human race !
There are some cultures that I would prefer to remain and some that I find that I am less fond of , but overall the richness and the variety of people and their cultures adds to everyone's life !