-
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
Liverpool said:
Seriously?
I don't understand how people still don't understand how the world works. How everything in the entire history of human evolution works.
More people = greater growth = greater prosperity.
The more people there are, the more people we have to develop infrastructure.
Unless, of course, you feel that refugees have less quality as humans than people born here?
We could "open up the floodgates" and it is mathematically evident, that the number of refugee influx wouldn't be any greater than population growth we already have. It wouldn't even be comparable.
By this logic, for every refugee we don't let in, we should also tell one family they can't have another child.
This fear that these scary immigrants are going to steal all our food is absurd, and inherently racist.
People are people. Refugees allowed to live here could contribute as much, or more to our economy and growth than any child born here.
Coburgtiger said:
More people on an island doesn't mean greater growth, as where are we going to grow to?
Even though our land mass is big, a lot of it is uninhabitable and why the majority of the population is housed around the coastline as it is.
China and India are the two biggest populations on the planet...but go and ask a factory worker earning $1 per day and living on site if they think they have greater prosperity seeing they live in a country of 1.3-billion.
We have a population of just over 20-million and have had water restrictions for a few years...where would we be food-wise and water-wise if we had 65 times the population we have now?
You talk about more people to build infrastructure...but like I said...usually the same groups who advocate more immigration are the same groups who complain when a company wants/needs to build a dam, highway, bridge, electrical substation, mine, etc to help fund these new arrivals.
Where are these people going to get jobs considering more and more companies are moving offshore?
Do we really want to bring in more and more people and with our climate and limited livable land-mass, make ourselves the next third-world nation?
Coburgtiger said:
I don't understand. I think the majority of people accept the need for immigration. Livers has even said so himself.
surely correct procedures/checks needs to be followed for all immigrants who come to our country.
scary that people don't see that.
Liverpool said:
Oh wow.
Boat people are going to make us a third world nation...
Boat people are going to make us like china....
China's a third world nation?
Besides, the point is missed. The number and volume of people arriving by boats is so minute that it is a NON ISSUE. The fear that they are going to swamp us, and bleed us dry is hysterical and illogical. Our own population growth exceeds any possible number that could occur from illegal boats.
It concerns me how worried we are about afghani's taking all our food and water. And turning us into a third world nation. and increasing our population 65 times...
They're just a small group of scared people in boats. Let them work on our building sites, in our mines, restaurants, whatever.
It's not going to hurt anyone.
Coburgtiger said:
Its only a non-issue until it becomes an issue, and as we saw with China and India...once you have a growing population, then it is very difficult to stop it.
And with a nation like ours that has already had water issues and a land that is very susceptible to the climate, then a burgeoning population is not going to help us in the future.
The point isn't being missed.
It is you who is missing the point.
Why not take our quota of refugees from the camps in Pakistan (for example) and then turn the boats around?
If you are so concerned about the refugees, then putting a process in place that deters people attempting dangerous trips on leaky boats should be paramount as well as Australia still fulfilling its international obligations.
Turning boats around and taking refugees directly from camps in Pakistan ticks both boxes.
Liverpool still has a problem with basic maths.
1. Since 1976 about 40,000 'boat' people have come to Australia. Of those about 80% were found to be genuine refugees so 8000 people returned to country of origin or left. Net 'invasion' since 1976 = 32,000.
2. Howard let in about 40-50 thousand back door immigrants per year in the latter years via dodgy private education institutes. The scam worked this way. An agent back in the homeland procured a "student" usually for a hairdressing or cook type course. The school in Australia would then give a kick back of around 10 % of the fees paid by the student to the agent. Students usually didn't even have to attend many classes and probably worked illegally during the course. Degrees were awarded for the most basic compliance by the students. Students then qualified for possible permanent residence status on degree completion. The ALP fixed up this rort on gaining government.
3. Another 50,000 'illegals' who overstay touust, student or other visas " overrun" us each year. Luckily many are blonde pommy female topless barmaids so they can stay, bless their souls.
4. Australia's population grows naturally at about 7,500 per week.
5. So under Howard we had 50,000 back door queue jumpers come in each year (pure economic migrants) and another 50,000 illegals who came in by 'plane' roaming about the place oozing and swarming taking our fruit picking, taxi, kitchen hand, barmaid and hairdressing jobs and yet we focus on the insignificant number of asylum seekers most with legitimate causes to escape the hell holes they come from.
6. Business of course likes a bigger Australia for the reasons Coburg Tiger mentioned . It builds wealth. Australia is now the 12th largest economy in the world mainly because Australia has grown by over 10% since the GF while other developed economies have tread water or gone backwards. For us to become a real powerhouse economy we need to grow our population to around 50 million by 2050 so that we can leverage a strong dpmestic market into further export opportunities. I am talking about real value added stuff to add to the dig it up or grow it stuff.
7. There are of course limitations on growth . Environment is one. However the infrastructure argument relates mostly to poor planning and historically poor leaders in state governments. Ausralia needs to take an australia wide approach to planning and build up major cities and regional cities, while providing 'green space' and 'agricultural space' and protecting public space (beach , forrest, water, parks) while linking Australia through appropriate infrastructure. In this regard the NBN is a massive investment. A few fast trains between regional and major hubs wouldn't go astray either.
8. We had a bipartisan immigration policy until Howard and Reith invented children overboard and tried to link a few desperate people (ironically escpaing from the Taliban and Saddam Hussein in 2001) with the terrorism of the (mostly Saudi) 9/11 terrorists. It was a gutless and shameful display for which we are still paying the price.
9. The Department of immigration and most sensible experts believe a regional solution is needed which of course has been Gillard's proposed solution since 2010. While she has acted as an adult, the clowns in the media focus on fripperies relating to an inabilty to get countiries like East Timor or Malaysia up. The LNP in fact deserve a gold medal in hypocrisy for requseting an amendment to the migration act which would have made their policy at the 2010 elction unlawful as well as Howard's pacific solution.
10. The quid pro quo in getting the region to be involved is actually doing our share of the load carrying. In this respect an increase in our humaitarian numbers is warranted and the Houston panel recomendation of 27,000 by 2017 seems about right to me. For refugees to avoid the boats they need to have some realistic alternative of resettlement and we should probably concentrate on the relatively few refugees who make it to Indonesia and then hopefully have room for resettlement of others who have waited patietly in say Africa and Malaysia.
11. The deterrents, the best of which is by consensus of the experts is Malaysia, will work only if some alternative hope is offered. That's why the entirety of the Houston recomendations should be implemented in full and those ar$e clowns in the LNP who only trade in politics but not reason or basic humanity should get out of the way. The recomendations also look at assistance in source countries and indeed foregn aid. The world needs to address the many failed states in Africa and the Middle East in particular because until that happens no matter what we do the problem is intractable if we have 45 million displaced people looking for a home and a future.
1. Since 1976 about 40,000 'boat' people have come to Australia. Of those about 80% were found to be genuine refugees so 8000 people returned to country of origin or left. Net 'invasion' since 1976 = 32,000.
2. Howard let in about 40-50 thousand back door immigrants per year in the latter years via dodgy private education institutes. The scam worked this way. An agent back in the homeland procured a "student" usually for a hairdressing or cook type course. The school in Australia would then give a kick back of around 10 % of the fees paid by the student to the agent. Students usually didn't even have to attend many classes and probably worked illegally during the course. Degrees were awarded for the most basic compliance by the students. Students then qualified for possible permanent residence status on degree completion. The ALP fixed up this rort on gaining government.
3. Another 50,000 'illegals' who overstay touust, student or other visas " overrun" us each year. Luckily many are blonde pommy female topless barmaids so they can stay, bless their souls.
4. Australia's population grows naturally at about 7,500 per week.
5. So under Howard we had 50,000 back door queue jumpers come in each year (pure economic migrants) and another 50,000 illegals who came in by 'plane' roaming about the place oozing and swarming taking our fruit picking, taxi, kitchen hand, barmaid and hairdressing jobs and yet we focus on the insignificant number of asylum seekers most with legitimate causes to escape the hell holes they come from.
6. Business of course likes a bigger Australia for the reasons Coburg Tiger mentioned . It builds wealth. Australia is now the 12th largest economy in the world mainly because Australia has grown by over 10% since the GF while other developed economies have tread water or gone backwards. For us to become a real powerhouse economy we need to grow our population to around 50 million by 2050 so that we can leverage a strong dpmestic market into further export opportunities. I am talking about real value added stuff to add to the dig it up or grow it stuff.
7. There are of course limitations on growth . Environment is one. However the infrastructure argument relates mostly to poor planning and historically poor leaders in state governments. Ausralia needs to take an australia wide approach to planning and build up major cities and regional cities, while providing 'green space' and 'agricultural space' and protecting public space (beach , forrest, water, parks) while linking Australia through appropriate infrastructure. In this regard the NBN is a massive investment. A few fast trains between regional and major hubs wouldn't go astray either.
8. We had a bipartisan immigration policy until Howard and Reith invented children overboard and tried to link a few desperate people (ironically escpaing from the Taliban and Saddam Hussein in 2001) with the terrorism of the (mostly Saudi) 9/11 terrorists. It was a gutless and shameful display for which we are still paying the price.
9. The Department of immigration and most sensible experts believe a regional solution is needed which of course has been Gillard's proposed solution since 2010. While she has acted as an adult, the clowns in the media focus on fripperies relating to an inabilty to get countiries like East Timor or Malaysia up. The LNP in fact deserve a gold medal in hypocrisy for requseting an amendment to the migration act which would have made their policy at the 2010 elction unlawful as well as Howard's pacific solution.
10. The quid pro quo in getting the region to be involved is actually doing our share of the load carrying. In this respect an increase in our humaitarian numbers is warranted and the Houston panel recomendation of 27,000 by 2017 seems about right to me. For refugees to avoid the boats they need to have some realistic alternative of resettlement and we should probably concentrate on the relatively few refugees who make it to Indonesia and then hopefully have room for resettlement of others who have waited patietly in say Africa and Malaysia.
11. The deterrents, the best of which is by consensus of the experts is Malaysia, will work only if some alternative hope is offered. That's why the entirety of the Houston recomendations should be implemented in full and those ar$e clowns in the LNP who only trade in politics but not reason or basic humanity should get out of the way. The recomendations also look at assistance in source countries and indeed foregn aid. The world needs to address the many failed states in Africa and the Middle East in particular because until that happens no matter what we do the problem is intractable if we have 45 million displaced people looking for a home and a future.
If it's really worrying you Livers, lets send Abbott out into the ocean in his speedo's to do some duck dives. Should turn away even the most persecuted of refugees.
Liverpool said:
Really depends if you want to live in a rat-infested refugee camp in Thailand or Malaysia where there is corrupt administration and you enjoy living in a tent with your family for an indefinite period eating crap food and with no prospects.
lamb22 said:
I have said nothing about "allowing" any illegals and do not care what mode of transport they use to come here or what their country of origin is.
I guess we focus on boats as that is what seems to cause the most anguish to people when the boat sinks and a number of people die.
You rarely get scores of people dying on planes they have been smuggled onto.
I stand by my comments....Australia should take their quota of refugees from the camps in Pakistan and all illegal immigrants coming in on planes, trains, or autombiles can be re-patriated to their country of origin or where they departed from.
I still don't see what the issue with this is?
antman said:
Don't know why people are complaining about the detention centres on Christmas Island and Nauru then...they should be the Hilton compared to the picture you are painting.
Liverpool said:
I believe this debate arose from the comment earlier in the thread.
U2Tigers said:
The point of contention being that boat people are NOT a big issue. Immigration is something that should be considered, and as evidenced by lamb22's post, a labour government has addressed the majority of the influx of illegal immigrants that the howard government left rampant.
"We'll stop the boats" is not a sensible election campaign, and is not something that should take precedence over issues of healthcare, education, climate change, NBN development, or economical stability.
It's a sign of a perspective so misguided it must belong to a carlton supporter
Coburgtiger said:I believe this debate arose from the comment earlier in the thread.
It's a sign of a perspective so misguided it must belong to a carlton supporter
Nicely done Phil. Joined the circle perfectly. Nowhere left to go now really. Im off to the Gina V ClIve thread.
<
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
>
