The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Middle Eastern migrants aren't 'piling on to the dole queue' > Comments

Middle Eastern migrants aren't 'piling on to the dole queue' : Comments

By John van Kooy, published 8/2/2017

The data actually shows that, after an initial period of relatively high unemployment, labour force participation and employment rates amongst migrant communities eventually reach parity with the rest of the population.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
I find this hard to believe. The general wisdom is that 80% of Middle Easterners (Muslims) are still on the dole after 5 years; Allah (in the form of the Australian taxpayer) provides! These people have neither the skills nor the language to participate in the economy. 33% of ALL newcomers are on the dole right now. Yet, suddenly, the Muslims are not on the dole-wagon? Come along, now. 99.9% of the population doesn't have access to statistics and the methods of obtaining them. But,we all know that there are 'statistics' and lies. This sounds like the latter.
Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 8 February 2017 8:51:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The author could shorten his CV to "bleeding heart multiculturalist" and everything would fall into place. His article is entirely predictable and contradicted by everything else we know. I know that's light on for facts, but I'm not going to waste any time on disproving his talking points.
Posted by calwest, Wednesday, 8 February 2017 9:14:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hey John,

Quote>>"By the time they have been in Australia 15-19 years, labour force participation (66.2%) approaches the overall rate in Australia (67.9%)."<<

So let me get this right after 20 years a third of the imports are still good-for-nothings that the rest has to pay for for?
Do you think people born here should bear the costs of those that weren't?
I say equality is a lie and they should pay their own way or not come at all.

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1617/RefugeeResettlement#

The government website lists 6000 people per year as refugees.
I don't see why hard working Aussies should pay 1 extra cent towards anyone else.

Not only do you want us not only to cough up for own own welfare recipients, you want to justify importing them as well.

I'd say you're own stats prove your own argument completely wrong, and I challenge you to find out the actual financial cost to working Australians of everything you suggested.

You're quite entitled to bear the full cost of this alone if you feel so strongly about it, just don't expect others to pay for your own personal goodwill ideologies.
You're trying to justify stealing from the purses and wallets of hard working Aussies to pay for something they have no obligation or responsibility to pay for.

So rather than importing migrants and all the trouble that goes with it I think we'd honestly be far better off just exporting people like you instead.
Posted by Armchair Critic, Wednesday, 8 February 2017 9:41:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
How about a breakdown on all sources of income for refugees after years in this country?
Just because people are not on the dole doesn't mean they are working.
Many are permanent students on Austudy and a very high number are on the DSP or aged pension.
Some of the women are on Single Parent Benefit due to being second or third wife.
Cherry picking data is never a good idea.
Posted by Big Nana, Wednesday, 8 February 2017 10:11:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
From your article - "To find and secure a job, migrants also need time to develop knowledge about the Australian labour market and how recruitment works"

They certainly have a VERY good knowledge of how the welfare and legal system can help them and be scammed to help them more than Australian citizens.

They are knowledgeable enough to know that if they destroy their documents they can't be sent home.

They also have to have a basic understanding and command of the English language which a lot do not want and have refused to learn.

Finally do you really believe the Government is giving the correct information with unemployment and other statistics, especially when it concerns issues that if they were bad would have a great effect on the Governments tenure.
Posted by Philip S, Wednesday, 8 February 2017 10:52:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The majority of middle eastern migrants are from Labor's recent border failures, and most of them are still on the dole. Trying to project their future behaviour based on previous migrations of Vietnamese and Chinese is more than a little optimistic.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Wednesday, 8 February 2017 11:17:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Perhaps migrants, who were not corrupted from childhood by the Australian secular-education system, have more of a moral backbone (or in the least more shame) than the natives, refusing to accept the proceeds of theft and robbery which the Australian government offers?

Muslims in particular tithe for charity, which among them is able to support those who, for whatever reason, do not work - without recourse to this immoral custom of dipping into other people's pockets without their consent.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Wednesday, 8 February 2017 11:38:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So it takes 15 to 19 years to reach parity, all the while being a cost to the existing citizens.

So if you take 3 people, pay them Centrelink for 5 years - how much will that cost?
Assuming $600 each a f/n Centrelink Benefit
(more for pension and family)

$1800+ per f/n total for 3 people +any extra benefit / assistance expenses
After which (5 years) approximately 1 person of the 3 (38%) will have a job paying tax.
How much tax will he or she pay?
Lets say $200 per week ($400 f/n).
So after 5 yrs we're paying for 2 people's welfare but getting the tax of 1 person.

Cost $1200+ per f/n benefits total +any extra benefit / assistance expenses whilst recieving $400 f/n tax contribution.

After 9years we have 55% participation.
So lets say we have 4 immigrants; and after 9 years, 2 of them are working (paying $800 in tax total per f/n) and 2 are still recieving Centrelink benefit? Cost $1200 f/n +any extra benefit / assistance expenses.
So after 9 years they contribute approx $800 a fortnight in tax (possibly more if they get good jobs) but still cost $1200 a fortnight in benefits.

All the while existing taxpayers are paying for this cost of this and every dollar they pay is a dollar less that can be spent on services for them is this not correct?
Balance the budget and all that?

How is any of this fair to naturally born hard working Australians?
And there is further costs too, taking our jobs, gang violence, police task forces, court and prison costs; social programs etc...

I'd like the author to write a new article, one that weighs up the total cost to existing taxpayers, whilst highlighting the services and benefits they could have enjoyed had they not been subjected to the cost of relocating foreigners.
Posted by Armchair Critic, Wednesday, 8 February 2017 12:04:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So there it is.

All these so called refugees cost us is,
$20,000 original settlement assistance
$50,000 for English lessons
$120,000 each in welfare payments.
$130,000 in the interest payments on the public housing they get.

So just a miserly $320,000 for starters, EACH, & that is only what is in plain view. Meanwhile some of us are living under bridges.

Time to fold up the welcome mat & put it away for ever.
Posted by Hasbeen, Wednesday, 8 February 2017 2:39:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hey, your figures are wrong you are not taking into account things like free medical, councilors, legal costs, cost of them being allowed to bring family members, I am sure there are more.
Posted by Philip S, Wednesday, 8 February 2017 2:54:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lets have a look at other countries experience.

Sweden - Of the almost 163,000 people who arrived in the country fleeing their homes, less than 500 found a job.

Germany - 1.2 MILLION migrants arrived in Germany in two years: just 34,000 or 2.8% have found a job
ONLY 34,000 refugees out of 1.2 million who have arrived in Germany over the past two years have managed to get a job.

German migrant bill to reach £13 BILLION for those who have arrived in last 18 months
GERMANY will spend over £13 billion on migrants that have arrived in the country in the last 18 months.

Every single migrant costs the German taxpayer £10,519 a year to look after, according to the government.

By the end of this year Germany will have taken in around 1.3 million refugees in an 18 month period, meaning the total spent on refugees will be over the £13 billion mark.

That is the average expenditure to feed and clothe them, provide language lessons and schooling and the care of unaccompanied minors.

The figure does not include training courses or the costs to the taxpayer to deport failed would-be migrants.

Anyone who thinks Australia has a greater capacity to create jobs than Germany is delusional, which equates to welfare for lifers at taxpayer expense.
Posted by Philip S, Wednesday, 8 February 2017 3:07:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It would be interesting to see how well refugees from those parts of the world go when they are resettled in more prosperous areas with similar cultures.

If they do better then surely we should be pressuring those countries to take more. An added benefit might be that those countries might do more about regional security rather then leave it to the west.

You can't tell me the gulf states can't do more?
Posted by Cobber the hound, Wednesday, 8 February 2017 3:38:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cobber the hound - I think you will find the Gulf States which have money to be able to support them have taken ZERO.
Posted by Philip S, Wednesday, 8 February 2017 3:46:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The rabid right posters, the familiar tags are there, are falling out of their tree to attack you John. Nothing you say will ever convince these folks that Middle Eastern migrants are nothing but 100% terrorists, grandma included, living off the public purse ad infinitum.

These learned lads have their own set of "alternate facts" set in concrete, regardless of wherever they got them from, possible from a Trump adviser, there is nothing you can say that will ever diminish their rock solid belief in the evilness of you know who.
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 9 February 2017 4:43:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'The rabid right posters, the familiar tags are there, are falling out of their tree to attack you John.'

That's a bit over the top, Paul. Yes, they're right wing - most OLO posters are, and some are pretty 'rabid'. However, they're coming from a reasonable perspective that rejects the enormous long-term social and economic cost of receiving non-English speaking, non-Anglo immigrants en masse. Only one poster so far has played the terrorism card, and that's you.

Migration has comprised a large part of Australia's history, but we're at saturation point. The economy is over-indebted and in trouble. The advantages of mass immigration no longer apply.

The multicultural winds are changing right across the globe. Brexit and the Trump victory are canaries in the coal mine. People are sick and tired of having their cultures and economies stretched to breaking point by absorbing refugees and immigrants from countries ravaged by wars that the Western powers are largely responsible for. Even those who don't believe the West is behind these wars still strongly oppose the mass bureaucratic absorption of immigrants from war-ravaged countries, as the destination countries are running out of the considerable resources needed to resettle them.

Not only that, the countries of origin are losing valuable people, and their families are suffering the ravages of separation.

While I'm sure you are genuine in your compassion for Middle Eastern migrants, history has parted company with you. Globalisation, multiculturalism and mass migration are slowly falling into disrepute.
Posted by Killarney, Thursday, 9 February 2017 6:18:50 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

The reason that the article is being attacked is that its argument has holes in it you could fly a jet through. Firstly the stats he uses does not differentiate between asylum seeker and 457 job applicants. Recent arrivals are predominantly asylum seekers, but those of 15-19yrs since arrival are predominantly those arriving with skills to jobs on 457 visas.

His comment at the end of the article sums it up:

"It’s often not until the second generation that the biggest demographic dividends” from refugee resettlement are realised."

i.e. the illegals are a write off, but maybe their kids will be OK.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Thursday, 9 February 2017 9:47:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The underlying assumption here is that the nature of the immigrants over time remains similar and therefore comparable. But this is patently not so.

Taking one example, the type of immigrant from North Africa has changed dramatically over the 20yr period the author wants to talk about. In the past most immigrants from that region were Egyptians. Clearly they weren't refugees although I venture most were Coptic Christians with some education and a degree of sympathy to western values. Now the vast majority are Sudanese and we all know (though some won't admit) the problems that lay therein.

Similarly, the make-up of the immigrants from the M-E has changed dramatically over time. Up to the late 1990s the vast majority were Lebanese and Turks. But now the largest numbers come from Iraq.

Using the same database as used by the author we can see that the unemployment rate for this North African/M-E cohort for those who'd been here less than 5 yrs was, back in 2000. a touch over 10%. Still double that of the national total but vastly better than the current problem.

That these changes over time in the statistics weren't even alluded to by the author suggests an agenda rather than a search for the truth, and that's never pretty.

Why can't the refugee industry (and that includes the government) just come out and tell the Australian people that, when we take these humanitarian intakes, we aren't importing economic assets but instead an on-going economic drag. The refugee programme is presented as though its cost-free and/or a net economic benefit when it clearly isn't.

The programme should, and maybe could, be sold on the warm inner glow factor alone and leave the economic lies out
Posted by mhaze, Thursday, 9 February 2017 12:35:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'they're coming from a reasonable perspective that rejects the enormous long-term social and economic cost of receiving non-English speaking, non-Anglo immigrants en masse.'

Really? What does that say about our history and Australians of long standing who do not fit that WASP profile, who washed up 'en masse' e.g. Irish, European etc.?

I could list dozens who don't fit on the back of a cigarette packet within a minute, what does it take to be an authentic citizen of Australia?

Suggests 'blood and soil' to me, but that's just an opinion.
Posted by Andras Smith, Sunday, 12 February 2017 4:22:21 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy