Originally posted by gps777
Originally posted by BLV12A
WA - 2.3 million pop, $197 billion gdp
But back to reality, WA represents 2% of the national population.
Back to reality Australias population 22,300,000 thats just over 10% for WA`s population,math fail for starters.
Your other opinions your welcome to have,we`re too busy diggin over here at the moment.
Eh, big deal, one little error that I read off another site and didn't bother to check as I was on the phone at the same time as I was typing.
Congrats, do you feel like a big man now?
The point I was making is still valid.
WA is not a sizeable, population wise, part of the country.
It has 2.3 million people.
Queensland 4.5 million
NSW 7.3 million
Victoria 5.5 million
ACT 365 thousand
Total 17.6 million out of the 22 million total population of the country.
Three quarters of the Australian population living on the eastern seabord, as opposed to around 10% living mostly in one single city in the south west
Yes, I can see how WA has been short changed.
If WA thinks that it deserves a bigger slice, that's their problem. They can always tax the mining companies more.
The fact is besides WA's exports which mostly come from its mining sector, which is the only thing it really has going for it, WA isn't as special
as they think they are.
Queensland is the other big mining state at the moment. I don't think I've ever heard them have a tantrum and threaten to break away from
The Feds wanted to turn part of outback South Australia into a nuclear waste dump. A bigger issue then WA not getting enough federal funding compared
to NSW or VIC.
I remember a few years ago, NSW was also complaining it didn't get enough federal funding, despite most of the GST receipts coming from them.
Fact is every state has a little cry every now and then about federal funding.
But fact is the east coast has the bulk of the population and therefore will always get more funding.
Even if those decisions weren't politically motivated, you aren't going to build the same level of infrastructure for 2.3 million people, as you
would for 17.6 million people.
It's just simply not needed and a massive waste of money.
Of course, if Perth is short on money, they could always scrap their new $1 billion 60,000 seat stadium before construction starts.
And rather spend a few hundred million instead to upgrade Subiaco.
They are also building a 15,000 seat indoor arena.
They have a freeway network.
They are building some giant underground train tunnel system.
Maybe they should scale back their ambitious plans, or increase their time frame, if they cant afford them...rather then threaten like children to run