Flood of migrants overwhelm Australia's borders

rederob said:

In this thread I contend that as a wealthy nation we can afford a greater refugee intake, that our recent migrant intake has been of benefit and, that as a nation we are much the better for it.

Click to expand...

the problem is you are saying "bring more immigrants" yet you fail to specify how many we should bring in, whether we should be looking at a population cap given the state of our infrastructure, where we want to source the immigrants from, where we will house them, and how much the rest of us should be paying to facilitiate their arrival.

considering you are a first generation australian (if your mother was a refugee as you state) i find it rather rude you demand the rest of society lowers its own standard of living to accommodate an unspecified number of arrivals from unspecified corners of the globe, then have the gall to throw around terms of "racist" and "xenophobe" when people rightly call you up on your lunacy. "yay more immigrants!" he wails flailing his arms around in the air.

here in australia it is a fact that we have certain groups of ethnics who exhibit a massive propensity towards criminality and long term welfare dependence. you suggest we should be sourcing more of these people? or perhaps just open the borders and let any enterprising spirit make the leap by means fair or foul and welcome them with open arms regardless of their background, ideology, beliefs, work ethic or intentions?

you're quite the ideas man aren't you? not so big on the implementation obviously, but points for effort.

helicart said:

And a reasonable share is what Chairman?

Click to expand...

You mean that when you re-read all my posts to discover an inconsistency, this was the best you could do!
Take care to quote in context, as I did say it was a reasonable share of our responsibilities that should be accepted.
In that context I repeat what I have said about refugee intakes in that we can afford to take more: That we have a capacity to ratchet the numbers higher over time.
Government expenditure need not be taken from anywhere as the additional costs could be covered by maintaining tax bracket levels rather than adjusting them incrementally as wages/salaries increased.

disarray said:

the problem is you are saying "bring more immigrants" yet you fail to specify how many we should bring in, whether we should be looking at a population cap given the state of our infrastructure, where we want to source the immigrants from, where we will house them, and how much the rest of us should be paying to facilitiate their arrival.

Click to expand...

At no point in this thread have I said "bring more immigrants".
In relation to infrastructure, it is curious is it not that in over 200 years of settlement with consistent new arrivals from overseas we have managed to prosper. Exactly how will future years be different if our governments manage as well as they have in the past?

By the way, check carefully and you will find this is the only time in this thread that I have used the word racist, and I use it only to make that point. It appears you and others have fed from your own suggestions about views I have never here expressed, and come to conclusions that have their foundations in your arguments rather than mine.

rederob said:

You mean that when you re-read all my posts to discover an inconsistency, this was the best you could do!

Click to expand...

No, from memory it was the first inconsistency I found.....in either your first or second post to the thread....I didn't bother looking any further after that....


Don't bother addressing the utilitarian calculus dilemma. I realize it would angst you out having to make a choice on which foreigners to help and which to ignore...

rederob said:

In relation to infrastructure, it is curious is it not that in over 200 years of settlement with consistent new arrivals from overseas we have managed to prosper. Exactly how will future years be different if our governments manage as well as they have in the past?

Click to expand...

Rob I'm surprised you think government have managed well. Only because of recent unusual levels of rain have Brisbane residents been able to use a hose occasionally. The water restrictions there for the past few years have been very rigid because the government failed to provide the water infrastructure to meet the needs of the growing population. The roads are choked, and the hospitals overflowing.

Sydney has had several major power outages in the CBD because of ageing infrastructure, also has traffic and healthcare problems.

Don't know much about the other States but gather the water situation in at least Victoria and S.A. is dire also.

So I'd disagree that our infrastructure can easily cope with an increased level of population.

helicart said:

No, from memory it was the first inconsistency I found.....in either your first or second post to the thread....I didn't bother looking any further after that....

Click to expand...

You and Bobby need to get together.
You seem to have a lot of trouble with logic, and now I catch you out making yet another statement without any factual basis.
It does seem to be a theme you are developing with some consistency.

Julia said:

Rob I'm surprised you think government have managed well. Only because of recent unusual levels of rain have Brisbane residents been able to use a hose occasionally. The water restrictions there for the past few years have been very rigid because the government failed to provide the water infrastructure to meet the needs of the growing population. The roads are choked, and the hospitals overflowing.

Sydney has had several major power outages in the CBD because of ageing infrastructure, also has traffic and healthcare problems.

Don't know much about the other States but gather the water situation in at least Victoria and S.A. is dire also.

So I'd disagree that our infrastructure can easily cope with an increased level of population.

Click to expand...

Julia
You will have seen in my earlier post about infrastructure that I excluded "water" from our accomplishments.
There are other avenues available to address some of your other concerns, like better transport planning, or more public transport. Or increased migration for professionals in short supply!

rederob said:

You seem to have a lot of trouble with logic, and now I catch you out making yet another statement without any factual basis.
It does seem to be a theme you are developing with some consistency.

Click to expand...

You only see it that way because you don't understand Adam Smith and human nature......up to your eyeballs in Marx and Lenin though.

I could list the various cognitive biases you have been guilty of in this thread, but it would take too long, and I have employees to tend....but doubt you could relate to that...

Garpal Gumnut said:

While I would agree with many of the initiatives of the ALP government I feel that they are being schmoozed by the rich and powerful in Asia in to allowing queue jumpers to hire boats and just land on our Northern border.

I can see us down the track having "Australians" with agendas in other places, calling themselves Australian when all they seek is a piece of paper to further their agenda.

It reminds me of the Keating years when the Lebanese conflict was headlines, and for which we Australians are still paying.

gg

Click to expand...

You do understand we are all illegal immigrants and only one group of people can complain about the mass arrival of foreigners on their land!

>Apocalypto< said:

You do understand we are all illegal immigrants and only one group of people can complain about the mass arrival of foreigners on their land!

Click to expand...

And they were boat people too, albeit a few thousand years earlier!

>Apocalypto< said:

You do understand we are all illegal immigrants and only one group of people can complain about the mass arrival of foreigners on their land!

Click to expand...

Prospector said:

And they were boat people too, albeit a few thousand years earlier!

Click to expand...

Ah the latte leftie "sorry us caucasian homo sapien sapiens exist and strive to ease the ignorance and suffering of the human race" guilt, that quests to devolve us all to a previous life as Cro Magnons dwelling in the primordial slime....

helicart said:

Ah the latte leftie "sorry us caucasian homo sapien sapiens exist and strive to ease the ignorance and suffering of the human race" guilt, that quests to devolve us all to a previous life as Cro Magnons dwelling in the primordial slime....

Click to expand...

Cant help yourself make assumptions, can you? And so rude. Again you show you cant engage in any discussion about an argument without personally attacking the person, in this case the 'latte leftie'. If you really knew anything about me you would be really embarassed by that assumption.

Prospector said:

Cant help yourself make assumptions, can you? And so rude. Again you show you cant engage in any discussion about an argument without personally attacking the person, in this case the 'latte leftie'. If you really knew anything about me you would be really embarassed by that assumption.

Click to expand...

But I don't know anything about you (but your posts are a giveaway) and you aren't volunteering, ergo, I am not embarassed.....

Now off you go, back to the wt loss support group thread to exchange mollifying niceties and misinformation.

Just jumping into this thread to remind people about ASF's Rules of Engagement, as I have noticed things getting a little too personal for my liking.

• Argue the issues, do not attack people personally.
• Only refer to people by their ASF user names. Referring to someone by a name other than their user name is considered a personal attack and will not be tolerated.
• Anyone who is here just to provoke others or disrupt the thread will find themselves in hot water.
• Everyone is entitled to their opinions, however hatemongering and vilification is not permitted at ASF.

Please feel free to continue this discussion with the above points in mind. Those who choose to ignore them do so at their own peril.

Joe Blow said:

Just jumping into this thread to remind people about ASF's Rules of Engagement, as I have noticed things getting a little too personal for my liking.

• Argue the issues, do not attack people personally.
• Only refer to people by their ASF user names. Referring to someone by a name other than their user name is considered a personal attack and will not be tolerated.
• Anyone who is here just to provoke others or disrupt the thread will find themselves in hot water.
• Everyone is entitled to their opinions, however hatemongering and vilification is not permitted at ASF.

Please feel free to continue this discussion with the above points in mind. Those who choose to ignore them do so at their own peril.

Click to expand...

OK, then this is my last contribution to this thread.

I don't want to have the facts I use to form my non racist views, censored by Joe's (or any forumite who disagrees with me) fuzzy interpretation of the spurious concept 'vilification'.

It is after all a term the law is inconsistent in defining and executing, as in its lax treatment of hate mongering against Christian conservatives, the Catholic church, and its priests (religious vilification)....and its aggressive stance against reflecting non caucasians in a poor light.

A highly damaging example of the latter is that caucasian criminal suspects can be called so in the media, but the race of non caucasian suspects is suppressed, with prejudice.

In the mean time, effective real world solutions go begging. And everyone ends up worse off down the track....It is this very pussyfooting by PC elites who like to exploit lower paid migrants, that has led to California's insolvency and compounded race issues in Europe.

On this thread I have not argued against migration per se...I have argued that an optimal rate and mix of migration must be sought, so that the std of living and future environmentally sustainable economic viability of the country is not heavily compromised.

Some in the thread cannot or will not debate what is a viable level of migration, because their thoughts are not evolved enough to clearly delineate what is reasonable debate of such and what might be purveyed as racism.

And it is sad that this same lack of delineation is continuing to compromise debate of these extremely important issues in the media.

It is sad because it shows there is not enough maturity and subtlety of intelligence amongst some, to walk the middle path through these issues and find a more favourable outcome for all. Instead, the migration debate is shut down and demonized by PC extremists and elites who think they will benefit from downwards pressure on the minimum wage.

And to clarify, anyone who has read what I said earlier in the thread about my life history, and then implies I am a racist or that I have been toying with racial vilification, are themselves guilty of deliberate and provocative hate mongering against me and people who share my values.

>Apocalypto< said:

You do understand we are all illegal immigrants and only one group of people can complain about the mass arrival of foreigners on their land!

Click to expand...

Australia has been colonised more than once. The first occupants didn't sprout up out of the ground.

helicart said:

On this thread I have not argued against migration per se...I have argued that an optimal rate and mix of migration must be sought, so that the std of living and future environmentally sustainable economic viability of the country is not heavily compromised.

Click to expand...

And this is how you went about it:

helicart said:

According to your line, Australia should drop its standard of living so guys like you can have warm and fuzzies.

Your view is subversive and racist in that you consider 3rd world citizens so intellectually and physically challenged, that they can't organize themselves into large groups, fight for a better future for their countries (pakistan and afghanistan), exercise restraint from bonking long enough to bring down their populations to sustainable levels (sudan and most sub Sahara), and get on with a democratic free market economy.....

though why bother when you can fast track into a developed nation hey Chairman Red?

Yeah all that wealth was spent on welfare.....servicing debt on higher property prices brought about by dill left enviro nazi anti development government...

Click to expand...

Some in the thread cannot or will not debate what is a viable level of migration, because their thoughts are not evolved enough to clearly delineate what is reasonable debate of such and what might be purveyed as racism.

Click to expand...

Which you eloquently captured:

helicart said:

I said that because I know what GDP per capiita is a derivative of, and migration no longer has the weight you believe it has. You seem to not understand the importance of capital in driving productivity, and the source of Australian capital is evermoreso from overseas.....why? because we have a welfare state, poor savings, no culture of R&D or venture capital, and ridiculous unproductive resi property prices to name a few. The left wing goons that go on about how wealthy we are don't understand these things....and in doing so, they want to import the poverty of more ignorant overpopulated cultures to Australia........

Click to expand...

And it is sad that this same lack of delineation is continuing to compromise debate of these extremely important issues in the media.

It is sad because it shows there is not enough maturity and subtlety of intelligence amongst some, to walk the middle path through these issues and find a more favourable outcome for all. Instead, the migration debate is shut down and demonized by PC extremists and elites who think they will benefit from downwards pressure on the minimum wage.

Click to expand...

Do you mean this kind of maturity and subtlety?

Or don't tell me you are one of those greedy affluenza types who wants to steal all the smart people from the third world for your own smug well being, and leave their poor cousins back home at the mercy of the less cerebral.

That really is a sad and selfish mind set..... All these foreign doctors we have in Australia could all be back home helping the country folk whose toil paid for their medical education, to climb out of malnutrition and aids and all sorts of other ignorance......So think of the misery your selfishness is perpetuating overseas, when you next invite asylum seekers like the sri lankans (who apparently aren't asylum seekers at all) and skilled migrants to come over for 10 bites of the cherry while 9 of their cousins back home miss out.

Click to expand...

Talking about boats that contain Afghan men , these guys have left family , women & children behind as they target here for a better economic pig-out.

At the same time we are sending our troupes to help their country .

Our hero's go there , their cowards come here !

Bobby said:

Talking about boats that contain Afghan men , these guys have left family , women & children behind as they target here for a better economic pig-out.

At the same time we are sending our troupes to help their country .

Our hero's go there , their cowards come here !

Click to expand...

Why not train these guys and then post them in Afghanistan!!

mayk said:

Why not train these guys and then post them in Afghanistan!!

Click to expand...

We are training them over-there , these grubs are just parasites , if they don't give a sh*t about there home land , imagine what sort of loyalty they will have for Australia ?