I'm glad this angle has been brought up. (I'm in Sydney too, not that that really matters.) Its one thing increasing housing density; it's another providing ser

I'm glad this angle has been brought up. (I'm in Sydney too, not that that really matters.) Its one thing increasing housing density; it's another providing services (particularly basic ones like water and sewer) and maintaining a quality of living. It's like, you could fill your bedroom with 4 or six beds, but there won't be enough bathrooms, living rooms, the house internet speed will degrade... it won't be a nice pace to live. At some point it's sensible to go somewhere else. Now, about Sydney in particular and Australia in general: we are dry, don't get much rain, most of the continent except for the costal strip is arid and infertile, and that's where something like 80% of the population live. Sydney's water supply is limited and there are only so many people the water resources can supply reliably (we nearly ran out several years ago, and we currently have level 1 water restrictions in force now). That population is much smaller than the number of people that can be housed on the land in high density developments.