Infinite growth is an oxymoron for the planet

October 28, 2026 — 8:00pm

To submit a letter to The Age, email letters@theage.com.au. Please include your home address and telephone number. No attachments, please include your letter in the body of the email. See here for our rules and tips on getting your letter published.

I’m not sure why we anticipate the never-ending growth of our cities. Virtually no living thing on our planet grows forever. If humans do not stop growing after reaching maturity we become obese. If our cells don’t stop growing they become cancerous. Both scenarios are likely to make us sick and shorten our lives. The same could be said for the environment when we continually extract resources faster than they can be replaced. Endless expansion doesn’t just affect local communities; it degrades the wider continent and the planet. Building quarries in prime farmland is a perfect example (″⁣The quarries eating land to feed building boom″⁣, 27/10). As accelerating climate change is already threatening our basic resources, we must face reality: ″⁣sustainable growth″⁣ is an oxymoron. By demanding infinite growth on a finite planet, we are destroying the very systems we need to survive.
Jennie Epstein, Little River

Productive agricultural land must be preserved
Isn’t it time that, as a society, we truly valued agricultural land? Prime farming land in West Gippsland is now being earmarked for a quarry. Who will protect our best-quality farmland from the encroachment of quarries, mining and housing developments? Where are the councillors and politicians who recognise that productive agricultural land must be preserved for future generations?
Australia’s fertile farmland is a strategic asset. If we continue to sacrifice it for short-term development, how will future generations access locally grown food? Nature-friendly farming practices also support biodiversity and protect native ecosystems, while quarries, mining operations and urban sprawl often result in the loss of native flora and fauna.
Let’s ensure our grandchildren have the opportunity to eat Australian-grown food. It’s time we recognised high-quality agricultural land for the goldmine it is. Let’s protect it.
Deborah O’Connor, Berrys Creek

The obscene wealth imbalance
Many articles and letters have been published recently lamenting the parlous state of society, and searching for causes and solutions. It would appear obvious that one of the root causes of dissatisfaction is the vast and increasing gap between rich and poor. According to a recent Oxfam study, “The richest 1 per cent have more wealth than the bottom 95 per cent of the world’s population put together.” (Multiculturalism in an Era of Global Oligarchy, 2024). This is an appalling statistic. Wealth and power are concentrated in the hands of the very few, and they are determined to hold on to, and increase, this obscene accumulation. According to the World Inequality Report 2026, 60,000 people – 0.001 per cent of the world’s population – control three times as much wealth as the entire bottom half of humanity. Everything from famines to long telephone wait times can be traced back to the greed of those few individuals. Let’s start ensuring they carry their fair share of the needs of humanity.
Keith Fletcher, Glenlyon

Tipping the scales on ill-health
The Foodbank hunger report made for disturbing reading given a third of surveyed households reported food insecurity (″⁣For millions, Australia is the hungry country″⁣, 26/10). Ninety-five per cent reported eating less than they thought they should. The title of the report, and this finding, would suggest millions are going hungry. This may be true but we have to balance this with the fact that we have high rates of obesity and overweight people. We rank 10th in the OECD and 33rd globally.
The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare reports that 70 per cent of people in low socio-economic areas are overweight or obese. Sounds like most of us are eating too much. Maybe we need more education on how to buy and prepare healthy low-cost meals. It can be done.
Peter Harris, Preston

THE FORUM

Responsible governing
Kylie Moore-Gilbert (″⁣The online and offline disconnect″⁣, 28/10) correctly states, “The first class action against the social media giants for harming children is long overdue”. Much of the rise of political violence can be attributed to uncontrolled social media. In such a volatile environment, the Coalition’s reflex opposition to the government’s proposed digital duty of care is irresponsible. It is an initiative to curb digital harm and target algorithms that maximise anger and violence. These same feeds expose children to pornography and self-harm, leaving parents pleading for regulation.
Indefensibly, the Coalition opposes the proposed legislation, dismissing common-sense user controls as overreach. By choosing partisan obstruction, the Coalition ignores parents, unprotected children, and vulnerable adults, exposing them all to extremists. Reining in big tech’s algorithms is not about political gamesmanship. It is a government responsibility to protect families, safeguard our leaders, and defend our democracy.
Bryan Long, Balwyn

Hate goes deeper
It would be naive to think that social media is to blame for the recent expressions of hate, anger, ugliness and threats of violence. Sadly, these sentiments have been a part of human interaction for millennia. What’s different is the way that social media amplifies and broadcasts people’s hateful attitudes with impunity. Social media makes us all very brave so that we say and send things online that we wouldn’t dream of saying face to face.
Nick Toovey, Beaumaris

Loved theatre work
We were looking forward to seeing The Nutcracker at the State Theatre this week, and, in contrast to your correspondent (Letters, 28/10), we thought the refurbishment was wonderful. We found the supportive, more straight-backed seats to be much more comfortable than the old saggy, lounge chair-like ones, the new aisles were easy and safe and the aircon kept the theatre at an even temperature without cold gusts.
The people near us agreed and I spoke to an orchestra member on the way to the tram who said the new pit was wonderful.
Congratulations on the build, which finished early and and on cost.
Heather Barker, Albert Park

The air we breathe
Your correspondent (Letters, 28/10) needs to talk to coal companies about why they are not building more plants. She says that burning coal here is not a problem because we already send a lot of it offshore.
I agree it’s much the same thing, but that is not to say it is a good thing – anywhere. We all experience the same atmosphere, which is being damaged by coal and gas emissions.
And batting for nuclear too? Anyone with solar panels and a battery can quickly inform your correspondent about how they work together to obtain a reliable and low-cost supply of power. The initial costs are nothing like the cost of building nuclear plants. Nuclear requires huge investment, a large, centralised population to justify the pricing, expertise in the workforce, expensive safety regulations, and the social licence of the Australian people to change laws in state and federal governments.
With the supply of renewable power to the grid at 40 per cent in 2025, and still rising rapidly, with a good amount of it coming from people’s rooftops, what reason could there be for altering course so radically?
Elaine Hopper, Blackburn

Opportunity lost
Articles and opinions, especially from the conservative side of politics, regularly detail the inability of renewables to provide an adequate energy supply; therefore arguing that Australia must expand and invest in existing and new fossil fuel sources. Also, nuclear power, because it is carbon neutral, regardless of its inexhaustible drain on water resources and inherent safety concerns is viewed favourably.
The sad irony is that if a bipartisan approach recognising the reality of climate change had been in place say two decades ago, we would be in a position in 2026 to most likely have had most of our energy needs supplied by wind, solar, hydro power and battery storage capabilities vastly improved by this an all in approach. What an opportunity has been lost.
Paul Jurkovsky, Ferntree Gully

A sad day all round
When I read the article ″⁣Libs gamble on retreat from climate policy to fund budget cuts″⁣ (27/10), I assumed that Tony Abbott had returned as leader of the opposition and reverted to his policies of some one-and-a-half decades ago.
But no, the accompanying photo assured me that it was still Angus Taylor who, as warned by one of his own senators, is proposing to introduce policies that are “solely focused on encouraging pollution” and opined that “it is a sad day for the Liberal Party”.
Sad indeed, not just for the Liberals but for the entire nation, in particular for those like me who care more for the future of their children and grandchildren than for short-term budget repair.
Kevin Bailey, Croydon

Go nuclear
I can only concur with your correspondent’s call to lift the ban on nuclear power (Letters, 28/10). Environmentalist concerns about storing nuclear waste are largely unfounded.
The United States stores its nuclear waste in secure steel canisters, which have been safely transported around the country for decades without harm to the public, while other countries, such as France, recycle their nuclear waste as fuel.
In 2021, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) noted that nuclear power has the lowest carbon footprint of any energy source except hydropower, and warned that international climate objectives would not be met if countries continue to exclude nuclear power from their energy mix.
We should heed the UNECE’s advice, and use our vast uranium and thorium reserves to generate clean and reliable nuclear energy for ourselves, instead of exporting much of it to other countries as we do now.
Nikhil Dhanabal, Clyde North

Rising to the occasion
Thanks to your correspondent for using the word “climateflation” (Letters, 28/10). A 2024 study analysing more than 27,000 monthly consumer-price observations worldwide found the effects of temperature on food alone contributed around 0.7 percentage points to headline inflation. The inflationary effect of spending on repairing damage to infrastructure, and the resulting rise in insurance was not included in the study.
Fossilflation is another story.
Yvonne Parker, Portarlington

Tend to the needy
I am sick of political parties, such as the Coalition and the Greens, offering tax cuts to all. There are 1 in 6 Australians living in poverty who don’t need tax cuts – they need increased social security spending. The minimum tax threshold of $18,200 has not been increased since 2012. The Grattan Institute estimates that a single maximum rate age pensioner paying private rent is likely to be living in poverty – with a total income of $38,000 pa, including rent assistance. In reality, the minimum tax threshold should be increased to at least $30,000. The government would then redraw the income tax schedules determining new thresholds and rates. But the sad truth is MPs from all sides can only see people like themselves – middle to upper income earners who find it harder to pay their mortgages. Meanwhile, according to a recent report, one in three Australians has faced food insecurity (gone without food) in the past 12 months. I don’t think any MP would have experienced that.
John Rome, Mt Lawley, WA

The politics of wealth
Columnist Ross Gittins explains clearly the mechanisms of the economy, the way different sides of politics prosecute it and indeed use it in electioneering (Comment, 28/10). One of his priorities is in the pursuit of more equality, hence his advocacy of those who are able to pay more tax to do so. Gittins argues the opposition’s claims that government’s unnecessary spending is to blame for our increasing inflation is inaccurate. He calls for more tax on “foreigners who buy our exports of minerals and energy”. Why is this not being done?
What is most concerning is conservative politicians being unconcerned about the plight of poorer Australians. Politicians’ mandate is to serve their whole communities. Reducing government spending on essential services and minimising tax for wealthy Australians and foreign investors ends up wrecking social cohesion and we know where that leads: anger, unrest, increasing crime and an atmosphere of hate and violence.
Jan Marshall, Brighton

Cartoon character
How low can One Nation go, now using Bluey as a political party cartoon? Pauline Hanson attacked Anthony Albanese some weeks ago making comments about his mother, now she is using a much-loved cartoon character to send her message. It is another nail in the coffin for her and One Nation, as we ask ourselves is this woman serious? Well done ABC for calling her and her party out, Australians need to wipe One Nation out because they really are a joke, and their message is a cartoon in itself.
Julie Ottobre, Brunswick East

Stoop to anger
Watching Donald Trump in action, reminds me of the quote widely attributed to Abraham Lincoln: ″⁣You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry.″⁣ Says it all.
Rich Gard, Glen Iris

AND ANOTHER THING

Cricket
I am a cricket enthusiast. Can someone explain why Scott Boland, with the best bowling figures and his brave batting, has not been included in the side for the third Test in Cape Town? What is wrong?
Jennifer Milne, Armadale

Scott Boland left out of the third Test. Please explain!
Don Hyatt, Dingley Village

Does Scott Boland have to move to NSW to keep a regular place in the Australian cricket team? After his previous sterling performance it does not seem to make a lot of sense that he is dropped and Marnus Labuschagne is retained.
Marie Nash, Balwyn

Boland + Victorian + Plays very well = Dropped. Others + Not Victorian + In team = Undroppable.
John Hand, Melbourne

What does Scott Boland need to do for selection? Give blood?
Ingrid Rodger, Williamstown

If Scott Boland came from NSW, would he be a better chance of playing more Tests for Australia?
Ian Maddison, Parkdale

The critical selection problem Australian cricket faces is the selection of the selectors.
David Champion, Ivanhoe

Furthermore
I agree ABC, Bluey is not to be corrupted by rotten politics. What if a child saw this by accident? Bluey is a child’s joy. What’s next, Alice in Wonderland?
Nola Cormick, Albert Park

OK, it’s not the drivers, it’s the software (Letters, 27/10).
Craig Tucker, Newport

Matt Golding’s cartoon (26/10) succinctly summarises our collective daily dose of fear and loathing. I religiously record the hour of 7.30 and ABC News each night and whiz through it in about 10 minutes with my thumb on “fast forward” and “mute.“
Peter Russo, West Brunswick

Finally
We all need to be reminded of the lyrics from the hit song by Edwin Starr back in 1970, ″⁣War, what is it good for? Absolutely nothin’!“
Mark Hulls, Sandringham

From our partners