Stop the boats. 5k a head. (cont. in Part 2)

[scon]

John Cleese Explaining Stupidity - YouTube

 

[Northalives]

Scott Morrison has saved many lives from the possible death of drowning at sea, he slowed the boats down to absolutely nothing. Is it too much that a bit if gratitude be shown rather than abuse. To me the one you should be directing your vitriol is Tony Burke whoever oversaw numerous boats capsizing at sea and ignored all the drownings that occurred as though he was looking the other way and could not be bothered to stop this , this is the man Tony Burke who should die of shame.

and now our esteemed Messrs Morrison, Abbott, Brandis et al have paid a $40 million bribe to that paragon of gentleness and upholder of liberty, Hun Sen, to take these poor sods who have been bombed, starved, terrorised out of their countries (with a bit of help on occasions from us as lackeys of Uncle Sam), "team Australia" has bribed this warm and loving human being to allow us to dump them in his poverty stricken and violent country where they can be forgotten about.

Go team Australia! That'll learn them refos that it's better to stay in their own countries and die from, starvation, disease, violence, terrorism than to die in another country of the same causes. Yeahhh team Australia!! Onward Christian soldiers!!!!!!

 

[louismaxwell]

and now our esteemed Messrs Morrison, Abbott, Brandis et al have paid a $40 million bribe to that paragon of gentleness and upholder of liberty, Hun Sen, to take these poor sods who have been bombed, starved, terrorised out of their countries (with a bit of help on occasions from us as lackeys of Uncle Sam), "team Australia" has bribed this warm and loving human being to allow us to dump them in his poverty stricken and violent country where they can be forgotten about.

Go team Australia! That'll learn them refos that it's better to stay in their own countries and die from, starvation, disease, violence, terrorism than to die in another country of the same causes. Yeahhh team Australia!! Onward Christian soldiers!!!!!!

You don't realise that these measures taken are very much necessary to avoid people taking dangerous journeys across open waters where more likely than not the boat will capsize and everyone drowns or take by sharks. I just don't get that these other alternatives are less humanitarian than just sitting idly by whilst people drown in their thousands or taken by sharks. Why not stay in the first country you made safe passage to and then wait in the queue for resettlement if they are actually genuine, you may be surprised a lot have ulterior motives to gain access to first world living standards. If you say come one and come all then don't complain if living standards slip to those of the third world. You can't have it both ways if you want unlimited refugees then expect a major fall in your living standards as someone has to pay for it all eventually as their is no magic money tree some people think their is.

 

[Floor Pie]

You don't realise that these measures taken are very much necessary to avoid people taking dangerous journeys across open waters where more likely than not the boat will capsize and everyone drowns or take by sharks. I just don't get that these other alternatives are less humanitarian than just sitting idly by whilst people drown in their thousands or taken by sharks. Why not stay in the first country you made safe passage to and then wait in the queue for resettlement if they are actually genuine, you may be surprised a lot have ulterior motives to gain access to first world living standards. If you say come one and come all then don't complain if living standards slip to those of the third world. You can't have it both ways if you want unlimited refugees then expect a major fall in your living standards as someone has to pay for it all eventually as their is no magic money tree some people think their is.

Where do you get your in depth knowledge, that might surprise us, from?

 

[louismaxwell]

Where do you get your in depth knowledge, that might surprise us, from?

just common basic sense, i don't pretend to be any Einstein or anything but i dare say my point of view would be the same as the average joe in the street

 

[Floor Pie]

just common basic sense, i don't pretend to be any Einstein or anything but i dare say my point of view would be the same as the average joe in the street

Would you be willing to educate yourself, past what ypu perceive as common sense?

 

[louismaxwell]

Would you be willing to educate yourself, past what ypu perceive as common sense?

All i say i know what is right and what is wrong and i will never be gullible to follow the line of allowing mostly economic refugees free rite of passage into the country. I don't mind a few migrants but our intake is way over the top and our quality of life and economic well being is on a one way spiral down. I shoudn't bother as i'm alright but you guys just don't see it and its seems alot of you would prefer to be seen as the more politically correct one than supporting your own best interests.

 

[Floor Pie]

All i say i know what is right and what is wrong and i will never be gullible to follow the line of allowing mostly economic refugees free rite of passage into the country. I don't mind a few migrants but our intake is way over the top and our quality of life and economic well being is on a one way spiral down. I shoudn't bother as i'm alright but you guys just don't see it and its seems alot of you would prefer to be seen as the more politically correct one than supporting your own best interests.

So, you wouldn't be open to educating yourself further on the issue. Outside of an average Joe understanding of an incredibly complex situation?
You're steadfast in what you believe, and you are not interested in looking deeper into the issue?

 

[Northalives]

You don't realise that these measures taken are very much necessary to avoid people taking dangerous journeys across open waters where more likely than not the boat will capsize and everyone drowns or take by sharks. I just don't get that these other alternatives are less humanitarian than just sitting idly by whilst people drown in their thousands or taken by sharks. Why not stay in the first country you made safe passage to and then wait in the queue for resettlement if they are actually genuine, you may be surprised a lot have ulterior motives to gain access to first world living standards. If you say come one and come all then don't complain if living standards slip to those of the third world. You can't have it both ways if you want unlimited refugees then expect a major fall in your living standards as someone has to pay for it all eventually as their is no magic money tree some people think their is.

You know louismaxwell, people don't get on leaky boats and risk their lives if it is at all possible to stay in their country of birth. It's a big deal to leave one's own land.

I have many Vietnamese friends who either came here as "boat people" or are first generation Australians descended from "boat people" and every single one of them/their parents, have told me exactly the same thing, "do you think that I wanted to leave Vietnam? It was where I was born!"

I remember the filth of the National Party and the filthy "Dries" of the once Liberal Party carrying on exactly the same way as the now quaintly named "Liberal" Party, who have purged all the "Wets" from their Party and are now nothing more than a racist, bigoted Party in the true traditions of the Thatcherite Torries, this "Liberal" Party is now led by a bloke who does "whatever it takes" to gain and maintain power and that means the deployment of dog whistles is a "legitimate" tactic in any and every power play.

Please louismaxwell, don't fall for the disingenuous lines being peddled stating that the inhumane way we are treating these wretched souls is "saving lives'. That is an insult to your intelligence and an insult to mine by you regurgitating such disgusting propaganda.

 

[Floor Pie]

So, you wouldn't be open to educating yourself further on the issue. Outside of an average Joe understanding of an incredibly complex situation?
You're steadfast in what you believe, and you are not interested in looking deeper into the issue?

louismaxwell
I'll take you ignoring it, as a 'no, you wouldn't'.

 

[louismaxwell]

louismaxwell
I'll take you ignoring it, as a 'no, you wouldn't'.

I think i have gone as deep as i need to, look i know its not all black and white but my gut instinct which is correct in most instances a lot of the refugees are chancing it with us and we are being an easy gullible lot. If you are really fleeing persecution you don't travel half way round the world , you would flee to the nearest port of safety. Especially the tamils who only have to go 30 miles by sea and reach their original homeland. Look their are probably a few genuine among the others but all up we are being taken for a bit of ride. Good luck to them if they can get away with it , anyway the subject is almost finished the flow has been stopped. I am no longer so pissed off as i was when boat after boat arrived i can accept we should process the ones we have in detention quick smart so the issue will die down and people don't get so worked up about it.

 

[romeoh]

All i say i know what is right and what is wrong and i will never be gullible to follow the line of allowing mostly economic refugees free rite of passage into the country. I don't mind a few migrants but our intake is way over the top and our quality of life and economic well being is on a one way spiral down. I shoudn't bother as i'm alright but you guys just don't see it and its seems alot of you would prefer to be seen as the more politically correct one than supporting your own best interests.

Can you tell me what our intake is ( the way over the top one)?
Then can you explain to me how that intake is affecting the spiral down?

 

[Floor Pie]

I think i have gone as deep as i need to, look i know its not all black and white but my gut instinct which is correct in most instances a lot of the refugees are chancing it with us and we are being an easy gullible lot. If you are really fleeing persecution you don't travel half way round the world , you would flee to the nearest port of safety. Especially the tamils who only have to go 30 miles by sea and reach their original homeland. Look their are probably a few genuine among the others but all up we are being taken for a bit of ride. Good luck to them if they can get away with it , anyway the subject is almost finished the flow has been stopped. I am no longer so pissed off as i was when boat after boat arrived i can accept we should process the ones we have in detention quick smart so the issue will die down and people don't get so worked up about it.

You base your knowledge on your gut instinct. And you have no interest in actually learning more about the issue.
You understand that the issue is more complex than you know, but you don't want to look deeper.

You're being intentionally ignorant. That is a terrible thing to do. And there is no excuse for it.
That kind of attitude pisses me off!

 

[romeoh]

All i say i know what is right and what is wrong and i will never be gullible to follow the line of allowing mostly economic refugees free rite of passage into the country. I don't mind a few migrants but our intake is way over the top and our quality of life and economic well being is on a one way spiral down. I shoudn't bother as i'm alright but you guys just don't see it and its seems alot of you would prefer to be seen as the more politically correct one than supporting your own best interests.

Well it seems to me that if you know what is right and what is wrong-isn't it right that a country as privileged as ours helps out with a world-wide, increasing, not going away refugee scenario? To dismiss it as 'politically correct' strikes me as wrong.

 

[Northalives]

I think i have gone as deep as i need to, look i know its not all black and white but my gut instinct which is correct in most instances a lot of the refugees are chancing it with us and we are being an easy gullible lot. If you are really fleeing persecution you don't travel half way round the world , you would flee to the nearest port of safety. Especially the tamils who only have to go 30 miles by sea and reach their original homeland. Look their are probably a few genuine among the others but all up we are being taken for a bit of ride. Good luck to them if they can get away with it , anyway the subject is almost finished the flow has been stopped. I am no longer so pissed off as i was when boat after boat arrived i can accept we should process the ones we have in detention quick smart so the issue will die down and people don't get so worked up about it.

Good onya louismaxwell. Nothing wrong with gut feelings but make sure you are well across your subject matter and that means devouring all the information you can get your hands on. Not just info from a few sources but as many as you can.

This internet gizmo and all the "new" information mediums including so called "social Media", whilst fantastic for retrieving information, also has the unwanted consequence of flooding us with so much information it can and does swamp the indelible truth which would otherwise be much easier to uncover with "white noise".

People once read books within which their authors sought to extrapolate a theory, history etc. Now, things have become "sound bites", so to speak and humongous, complex issues have been reduced to things like "goodies versus baddies".

 

[louismaxwell]

Can you tell me what our intake is ( the way over the top one)?
Then can you explain to me how that intake is affecting the spiral down?

Around 20,000 refugees a year and 180,000 migrant intake. The more people their are the less that per person gets out of the resources of the country . The cities are overcrowded , infrastructure has not kept up and the more people their are leads to lower quality of life all round. I prefer it without stumbling over people everywhere you go, might be selfish i don't want the beach, shopping centre, parks etc swarming with people , i like it when you have room to move.

 

[Maggie5]

Around 20,000 refugees a year and 180,000 migrant intake. The more people their are the less that per person gets out of the resources of the country . The cities are overcrowded , infrastructure has not kept up and the more people their are leads to lower quality of life all round. I prefer it without stumbling over people everywhere you go, might be selfish i don't want the beach, shopping centre, parks etc swarming with people , i like it when you have room to move.

Do you live in India, China? Are you obese as I cannot think of anywhere, where you can't move freely around, unless you are referring to leaving a game at the MCG, it does get a bit tight.

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

You don't realise that these measures taken are very much necessary to avoid people taking dangerous journeys across open waters where more likely than not the boat will capsize and everyone drowns or take by sharks. I just don't get that these other alternatives are less humanitarian than just sitting idly by whilst people drown in their thousands or taken by sharks. Why not stay in the first country you made safe passage to and then wait in the queue for resettlement if they are actually genuine, you may be surprised a lot have ulterior motives to gain access to first world living standards. If you say come one and come all then don't complain if living standards slip to those of the third world. You can't have it both ways if you want unlimited refugees then expect a major fall in your living standards as someone has to pay for it all eventually as their is no magic money tree some people think their is.

We could let them drown or be the recipient of state sanctioned child abuse. I wonder which option asylum seekers in detention would opt for? (given the recurring suicide attempts, I could hazard a guess)

 

[midorigreenwood]

We could let them drown or be the recipient of state sanctioned child abuse. I wonder which option asylum seekers in detention would opt for? (given the recurring suicide attempts, I could hazard a guess)

Or option 3 - They would try somewhere else.

http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2014/10/07/2014100701526.html

New Politics Alliance for Democracy lawmaker Shim Jae-kwon on Monday revealed data from the Foreign Ministry, which had been asked by the Belgian, British, Dutch and Danish governments to check the fingerprints of North Korean asylum seekers there.

The four countries asked Seoul to check the fingerprints of 141 asylum seekers from North Korea, and it turned out that 112 had already obtained South Korean citizenship.

The findings concern only those countries that asked Seoul to carry out fingerprint checks. Other countries like Canada conduct ID checks through the Interpol, suggesting that the actual number of fake North Korean asylum seekers is much larger.

as mentioned earlier if western countries stop taking in sri lankans, the obvious option for them is to go to India. By taking a boat to Oz, they're making a decision no different to any immigrant to try to improve their place in the world. Unfortunately, Australia can only control its own fate in this policy area.

Activists helping North Korean defectors say many of these bogus asylum seekers are persuaded by commercial people smugglers that they would enjoy a better life and benefits overseas than in South Korea, since they often found it difficult to adjust to life here.

Some defectors have only sought asylum in English-speaking countries to ensure a better future for their children.

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

Or option 3 - They would try somewhere else.

http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2014/10/07/2014100701526.html



as mentioned earlier if western countries stop taking in sri lankans, the obvious option for them is to go to India. By taking a boat to Oz, they're making a decision no different to any immigrant to try to improve their place in the world. Unfortunately, Australia can only control its own fate in this policy area.

The Cambodian solution? That's proven useful for Uighurs af China anmd the Montagnards of Vietnam

Cambodia has a record of colluding with countries from which people who sought its protection fled. In 2009, the government labelled 20 Uighur asylum seekers "illegal immigrants" and despite protests from the United Nations and the US, deported them to China. The members of the ethnic minority were fleeing a Chinese government crackdown and reports later alleged four of those returned had been sentenced to death and 14 sentenced to life imprisonment.
Cambodia has also forcibly returned Montagnard refugees to Vietnam where they face ethnic and religious persecution.
In the case of the Uighur deportees, the benefit to Cambodia was revealed when the China’s Vice President, Xi Jinping, visited the day after their repatriation and signed US$1 billion of contracts.

http://www.kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/sites/kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/files/cambodia_factsheet.pdf

At least they'll have access to the finest mental health treatment in the world today

government spokesperson Phay Siphan says mental health is not a priority.
“The government prioritises maternal health and malaria. For mental health, I know that other governments have the money to subsidise that, but we are poor,” he says, adding that families or monks could help treat the mentally ill. “We have a very strong culture where, even when you turn 18, you still have a strong connection to your family here, and that connection always stays… You can also get rid of your problems with religion, with the help of a pagoda.”

In turn, most cases of mental disorders are never properly diagnosed, according to Thida, and the patients at the Khmer-Soviet Friendship Hospital usually arrive after years of suffering.
Among the country’s large rural population in particular, the mentally ill are still treated by traditional healers, who aim to drive out bad spirits by burning the skin, or by the untrained staff of one-room health clinics who prescribe everything from pain-relief tablets to cough syrup.
“They go to traditional healers who mix roots with water and then try to drive out the bad spirits, or they burn [the patient] so the spirit leaves,” Thida says.
If these treatments don’t work, many seek the help of local health clinics, who – ideally – refer the patients to the Khmer-Soviet Friendship Hospital. But not everybody knows that treatment is available in the capital, and in rural areas the belief that the mentally ill are being punished for the sins of a previous life – rendering them beyond help – remains common. If their illness causes violent behaviour, patients are frequently tied to beds or locked in rooms, often for years.

Despite such cases and the large number of people in need, the ten beds at the Khmer-Soviet Friendship Hospital remain the only ones for the mentally ill and, after two weeks, every patient will be sent back to their families.

http://sea-globe.com/storm-mental-health-cambodia-southeast-asia-glob/

 

[midorigreenwood]

The Cambodian solution? That's proven useful for Uighurs af China anmd the Montagnards of Vietnam

If you've read my previous posts I've argued against the Cambodian plan so I'm not sure your point.

I've also argued for the tenet of cross border protection to allow in displaced people fleeing from immediate danger. (eg: if the shit hits the fan in New Zealand or Indonesia, there wouldn't be much Australia could do to stop the boats if hundreds of thousands of people flood to the country. We would probably have camps similar to Jordan or Turkey)

The point is to encourage asylum seekers to go to the nearest safe haven rather than simply the richest country.

eg: For the Uighurs, that could be neighbouring countries like Kazakhstan or Turkey where they have cultural links.

 

[The Coup]

Or option 3 - They would try somewhere else.

http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2014/10/07/2014100701526.html



as mentioned earlier if western countries stop taking in sri lankans, the obvious option for them is to go to India. By taking a boat to Oz, they're making a decision no different to any immigrant to try to improve their place in the world. Unfortunately, Australia can only control its own fate in this policy area.

But as pointed out earlier, India isn't a realistic destination and can't actually offer any refugees protection, so its a stupid option and your comment is a stupid comment.

 

[The Coup]

If you've read my previous posts I've argued against the Cambodian plan so I'm not sure your point.

I've also argued for the tenet of cross border protection to allow in displaced people fleeing from immediate danger. (eg: if the shit hits the fan in New Zealand or Indonesia, there wouldn't be much Australia could do to stop the boats if hundreds of thousands of people flood to the country. We would probably have camps similar to Jordan or Turkey)

The point is to encourage asylum seekers to go to the nearest safe haven rather than simply the richest country.

eg: For the Uighurs, that could be neighbouring countries like Kazakhstan or Turkey where they have cultural links.

How about the fact there aren't enough boats in Indonesia or New Zealand put together to deliver Australia teh kinds of numbers of refugees and displaced people in Jordan or Iran or Pakistan or Thailand or Kenya or Chad etc etc etc?

Your entire view on this issue has been shaped by the media. You have seriously nfi what you are talking about.

 

[smokingjacket]

just common basic sense, i don't pretend to be any Einstein or anything but i dare say my point of view would be the same as the average joe in the street

louismaxwell as the everyman. What a precious thought. Personally I think you're a paid Liberal party troll but hey.

I think i have gone as deep as i need to, look i know its not all black and white but my gut instinct which is correct in most instances a lot of the refugees are chancing it with us and we are being an easy gullible lot. If you are really fleeing persecution you don't travel half way round the world , you would flee to the nearest port of safety. Especially the tamils who only have to go 30 miles by sea and reach their original homeland. Look their are probably a few genuine among the others but all up we are being taken for a bit of ride. Good luck to them if they can get away with it , anyway the subject is almost finished the flow has been stopped. I am no longer so pissed off as i was when boat after boat arrived i can accept we should process the ones we have in detention quick smart so the issue will die down and people don't get so worked up about it.

First bold. Government line. Several posters have already shown why this is not possible. Australia is the only country in the region with a commitment to resettle refugees that we haven't paid.

That "few genuine" would be a consistent figure upwards of 90% who are considered genuine refugees.

Around 20,000 refugees a year and 180,000 migrant intake. The more people their are the less that per person gets out of the resources of the country . The cities are overcrowded , infrastructure has not kept up and the more people their are leads to lower quality of life all round. I prefer it without stumbling over people everywhere you go, might be selfish i don't want the beach, shopping centre, parks etc swarming with people , i like it when you have room to move.

Have you workshopped these Joe? These honestly sound like takeaways from a middle australia focus group.

I have concerns Louis. Not enough football related posts too much government mouthpiece. You're either subliminally regurgitating or actively trying to do so.

 

[smokingjacket]

Sorry Max I was away for a bit. I know it's a bit off topic but I had to pull you up on both.

And what was the GDP per capita? If the GDP raises at the same rate the population does is there any actual growth or are we simply maintaining?

Real growth was referring to growth post inflation. Which you linked noted as well. Rising prices leads to increases in nominal growth. The very source you provided uses the term real GDP and nominal GDP.

Demand on its own is useless. Simply wanting shit is not growth.

I'm aware of the difference Max that's why I put real in quotation marks. Your initial post referred to "has there been real growth?" I'll refrain from sarcasm in the future, it's a bad habit.

The problem with what you're saying is laying straight in front of you in the figures. In fact in your own sentence. What's wrong with growing our population and maintaining a small amount of growth in what is one of the highest GDP per capita in the world? Many of those people will hopefully go on to be drivers of future economic growth. We are privileged in many ways in this country. None more so than that we're considered an attractive destination for the best and brightest of the world to come and contribute their skills and knowledge here.

Demand on it's own is hardly useless when we're talking over the cycle. We don't live in a model. No modern government is going to accept taking 10, 20, 30 years to get back to a 'pure' equilibrium and nor should they.

I have no idea what that last bit means.

A lack of population causes environment issues? Thats a new one. You only need constant population growth for your economic if you are trying to run an constantly growing consumption machine. A economic system which is based on debt and thus shifting financial burdens onto later generations.

Indeed max, it's actually not a new concept at all. It's been a part of the discussion of arguments around Australian agriculture for years. Not enough hands on the land in this country has led to unsustainable exploitation of it's resources. For example the squatters stripped the pasture bare for short term economic gain rather than the long health of the land itself because they thought they could always find some other place to move the stock once it was ruined. The same mindset has infected most of Australian society because we're so sparsely populated. Take water for example. As we're constantly being told, we inhabit one of the driest countries in the world and yet even basic water recycling measures like storm runoff are only now being implemented. Same goes for housing. Why build denser communities when you can just flatten another swamp for an estate? Our sparse population has given us the illusion of never ending abundance when in fact our country is incredibly fragile.

It's been a while but I don't remember reading Keynes say that a government's role was to be heavily indebted. On a basic level it's about balance across the cycle. Save in the good times, spend in the bad. A well managed neo-Keynesian strategy would be that of the Clinton administration that paid off nearly all of US Federal deficit during a property boom. If Bush didn't piss it all away in a series of wars and wanton fiscal irresponsibility, he or Obama might have had a great deal more room to stimulate the economy without putting pressure on its deficit.

Well isn't it up to the people to what they want their country to be? If people want cities with 4x2 in capital cities why the hell shouldn't they? Maybe the city won't grow into the overseas giants but is that such a bad thing?

If you want to live in a shoebox in rat city there are plenty of cities in the world that will welcome you with open arms. Not every city has to follow the same rules.

You're trying too hard to disagree with me Max and it's showing. Aren't developers capitalists too? Am I not also entitled in the free market to live in a "shoebox?"

Or in this instance do you support the regulation of planning to preserve the carbon intensive, car commuter, banal, lifeless suburbia we've created?

Have your big house with the picket fence in the suburbs. I'd just like a vibrant inner city.