-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
If you reckon Tony Abbott is a good bloke, you should barrack for Carlton.
- Thread starter tigergollywog
- Start date
U2Tigers said:
Point is, the issue is not, in reality, based on the hysteria that Abbot bathes himself and his lack of policy in. We're not being inundated with people, we're not in danger of losing our "Australianism", what ever that is. See lamb22's post for the details and figures.
We need a better refugee policy in order to work through the technicalities of the problem, and this is something both sides of politics are attempting to formulate. It is not a labour incentive to have people drown at sea, and any lack of a structured policy at the moment is due to neither side being able to agree on something.
lamb22 said:
My Richmond membership in 1996 (?) cost me $70 for the 11 home games and $20 for my reserved seat.
A total of $90.
These days, I still have the same reserved seat and pay for an 18 game membership.
Total: $700+
People focus just on utilities as they are are crucial to our lives, but its usually the other things that provide us with a life of fulfillment and enjoyment that is getting people down at present about the economy and where we are headed as a nation.
Coburgtiger said:
A high percentage of "refugees" are coming here for a 'better life', not to just get out of Afghanistan or Iraq because of persecution.
If you are escaping a country where you fear for your life and that of your family, I would imagine you would get across the border to the nearest safe haven, get on your knees, and thank God you are safe.....not travel through numerous countries and then risk your lives and that of your family again, by coming on a leaky boat to Australia.
The refugee policy should be based on people escaping countries like Afghanistan and Iraq going to the nearest safe haven and we process them there...and take our refugee quota from there after they have been security cleared and medically checked.
All boat people arriving here should be turned around and sent back to Indonesia (or where they came from).
This would soon stop boat people and smugglers, as well as have refugees not take stupid risks or be taken advantaged of by trying to come all the way here.
Liverpool said:
It's always useful to invent stats and vagueries.
A "high percentage" of that post was pure fabrication.
Coburgtiger said:
Well, a refugee and/or asylum seeker is someone escaping either persecution in the home country, or is homeless due to war or famine.
Would that be a fair enough statement?
So if you are escaping persecution and homelessness....why would you go through numerous other countries that are not persecuting you, to come here for?
Liverpool said:
"Yes, hello, insurance company? Hi, yeah, my house burned down, i was wondering if you could book a hotel for me to stay at?"
"Stay at your next neighbour's house."
"Oh. Well, see, my neighbours only have a single bedroom, and there's already a family of twelve living there... Are you sure you couldn't organise a hotel?"
"Stay at your other neighbour's house."
"Um, well, I would, only they're renovating, and half the house is missing. Any chance i could find some place for me and my kids to stay tonight?"
"Why would you go through numerous other (houses) that are not persecuting you, to come here for?"
We have the space. Pretty simple.
Coburgtiger said:
Its nothing to do with space.
Let the genuine refugees/asylum-seekers go to their neighbouring safe-haven.
Get processed there and then we take our quota of refugees from there.
We would be still adhering to the quota of refugees we have agreed to.
No need for boats. No need for people smugglers. More safe for the refugees. And if they aren't refugees, they don't have far to go to be re-patriated to their country of origin.
People arriving on boats would be clearly outside the quota and can be turned around and sent back to the country they departed from.
Considering the refugees come from mainly Afghanistan, Iraq, Burma, and the African continent then any boats coming from Indonesia are illegal and should be treated as such.
Liverpool said:
Back to my original premise, sort of ..... How come if Tony Abbott is willing to sell his arse to get the top job (or any corporate *smile* trying to demonstrate their persistence and 'passion' on their CV) is considered dogged and determined, but a 10 YO afghani kid whose hometown is getting bombed to the sh!t and is ushered into a crappy boat with an old uncle and his grandad and chugs half way around the world with the sleeziest prick since Craig Thompson at the helm and then watches his uncle and pop drown as boats motor past and wave hello and then he cant go home to his mum or his mum cant come to him so he has to get buggered in some grim camp full of nut cases for 4 years ALL ON HIS OWN. All this in an attempt to get a tolerable life. He is a towel head que-jumper. He should just dye himself white and arrive on South African Airways business class. He's not tenaceous and tough and passionate about a better life? Isnt his CV pretty compelling? Hasnt this kid demonstrated a fortitude that us increasing soft and squishy apathetic p!ss weak white aussies only dream of every Anzac day
sorry if i busted the swear filter mods. I try to contain myself
Liverpool said:
You're right. We've wasted all this time considering humanitarian approaches. Lets bomb the refugees.
tigergollywog said:
Yes, that kid is a queue-jumper.
But if he went with his parents, uncle, and granddad and seeked asylum or refugee-status at the nearest safe-haven...and we took our quota of refugees from there....then no sleezy boat captains, no grim camp with nut cases, and no drowning uncles.
I think the demand for taking such boat trips here would dry up pretty quick once people realised that to come here, they need to go through a proper process at a recognised centre in the nearest country to their own and not just arrive here adhoc on a boat.
Coburgtiger said:
Who said anything about bombing refugees?
All I'm saying is that to stop boates coming here, you either solve the root problem, or take control of the situation.
I don't think we'll ever solve the root problem, and the Government is too *smile* weak to take full control...but the least they can do is put measures in place that not only fulfil the obligations we have in taking refugees and asylum-seekers, but also make it as safe as possible for them and us as well as financially better for us.
Take our quota from a displacement/refugee centre in a nearby safe-haven that the people have fled to and anyone else we can deem "illegal" and not going through the correct channels.
Sooner or later, the penny will drop once boats are turned around...and people-smugglers will not be in demand anymore and the people themselves will not need to cross great distances to get here illegally.
Liverpool said:
yes, i dont understand why people dont just wait in their refugee camp where they can get on with living their lives, get an education, work and support their family and wait to be one of the 10,000 people (out of 43 million displaced around the world) to be given a visa. Im sure refugee camps in Pakistan, Kenya, Sudan, Egypt, Lebanon, india etc are lovely places to be.
Brodders,
I find that many conservatives have problems with basic maths.
At least 10 million refugees in the world and less than 100,000 resettled each year through UNHCR and western countries so the "queue" to the extent it exists is over 100 years long.
And there is alot of "why dont they just stay in the nearest country". In fact most do . 75 % of refugees are in the nearesty country to that they escaped from.
2.7 MILLION afghan refugees now wait in either Pakistan or Iran.
The following may be helpful.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jun/20/refugee-statistics-unhcr-data
I find that many conservatives have problems with basic maths.
At least 10 million refugees in the world and less than 100,000 resettled each year through UNHCR and western countries so the "queue" to the extent it exists is over 100 years long.
And there is alot of "why dont they just stay in the nearest country". In fact most do . 75 % of refugees are in the nearesty country to that they escaped from.
2.7 MILLION afghan refugees now wait in either Pakistan or Iran.
The following may be helpful.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jun/20/refugee-statistics-unhcr-data
lamb22 said:
Its not just conservatives who have the mathematical problems.
It should be pretty obvious to the left/"open the floodgates to anyone" group that the more people you bring onto an island, then the more resources and infrastructure that will be needed to keep that island in a livable state.
Which group of people complain the most when a new dam needs to be a built, a new electrical substation, a new sewerage plant, a new highway through a national forest, a new high-rise apartment block instead of a park, native wildlife threatened by subdivisions, increase in carbon emissions due to more cars and trucks on overcrowded roads, safety concerns due to overcrowding on trains, rivers and lakes being overfished, increased rates of landfill....the list goes on?
Usually not the conservatives but the same groups who advocate bringing in more and more people into the country!
If we have an agreement to bring in "X"-amount of refugees as our quota, then I do not see what the issue is by taking these people from the refugee camps in Pakistan, etc after they have been security/medically screened.
Then if we turned the boats around, it would become quite clear and apparent to people contemplating a boat trip here that this will not be tolerated and they need to go through the correct channels.
This would surely lower the number of boats that even attempt to come here as it would be futile, and therefore lower the risks for the refugees as well as kill the market of people-smuggling by boat here.
We would still be fulfilling our international quota of refugees so the 'left' should also be appeased that we are doing the right thing.
<
Tears as state says sorry for thousands of forced adoptions (TheAge)
|
Crikey we will have 2k members by the time we hate each other on this part of th
>
