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 > General Discussion > 300,000 more immigrants next year?!

300,000 more immigrants next year?!

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. All
Spendocrat

If we keep bringing the people in here from overpopulated countries we are taking the pressure off these countries to face the consequences of overpopulating and doing something to deal with it. Like turning on the silly male priests and leaders of these countries and putting in leaders who will insist on providing contraception for the people. The United nations and the West could provide billions in aid to set up family planning clinics all over the world. These clinics could also provide medical aid to ensure the survival of the children that are born and food could also be distributed through them to the mothers and children where its most needed instead of going through corrupt officials and the army first. Too many male leaders in the United Nations would view this as a plot to usurp their male power or a Western conspiracy and then you have silly George Bush closing one down because of his religious beliefs recently.
Nothing will change while the rest of the world keeps dealing with the consequences of other countries overpopulations and corrupt leaders
Posted by sharkfin, Thursday, 24 May 2007 1:30:53 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
Spendocrat, the ageing workforce argument for high immigration is fallacious. Read the 1999 parliamentary research paper entitled "Population Futures for Australia: the Policy Alternatives" which explicitly states: "It is demographic nonsense to believe that immigration can help to keep our population young."

Full report:

http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rp/1999-2000/2000rp05.htm#8

Interestingly, the report also states: "As we have argued, annual net migration of 150 000 per annum seems to be beyond our present absorptive capacities."

Australia's absorptive capacities are obviously no longer a concern for the mass immigrationists in the Howard Government.
Posted by Oligarch, Thursday, 24 May 2007 8:02:28 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
Leigh,
You are quite right, we are just too bloody complacent. The polys and media keep us occupied with incidentals such as state of origin football and BB. This hides what else is going on. The farmers in France dump manure, or such, on the steps of their parliament if they don't like what the Government does, while we just sit back and take it.

On immigration, both parties have high immigration policies so it does not acheive anything voting one out for the other. The only poly to advocate lowering immigration was Pauline and they killed her off.

What can we do to shake off apathy before we end up the same as England and Europe. We should learn from the mistakes ot othes.

I write letters to MPs, Ministers and papers but much more needs to be done
Posted by Banjo, Thursday, 24 May 2007 11:12:51 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
Heh. 'Mass Immigrationists'. Love it.

The impression I get is that most here are concerned with this country only. I see myself as part of the world and part of humanity, not part of a country, as borders are obviously arbitrary and man made to me. So when one lucky group of wealthy people in a specific geographical area (ie this country) is worried that sharing the wealth with people who happen to be born into a less fortunate geographical area may lessen their own cushy lifestyle, it's hard for me to see it as anything other than selfish and greedy. But maybe that's just me.
Posted by spendocrat, Thursday, 24 May 2007 12:48:29 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
And maybe spendocrat, you should use your head instead of your bleeding heart. Your not a world citizen. You have no right of abode in or access to the social services of other countries. Try gaining residency in Switzerland and then you'll see how far your "global citizenship" gets you.

If Australia is your home, then your primary concern should be for this country and its people. Australians cannot be held responsible for the world's poor.

I should also remind you that Australia did not develop into one of the world's most stable and prosperous nations through sheer luck. Rather, Australia's priviledged status can be attributed to its British inheritance, but also the tenacity of its people. This is what makes Australia a nation which is envied by so many people in other parts of the world.

If you don't believe me, compare the history of Australia with that of another resource-rich colonial nation in the Southern hemisphere, Argentina. Why is it that while British-settled Australia has thrived, Spanish-settled Argentina has gone from military coups to economic collapse? Is it conceivable that Argentina's misfortune could be a direct result of social and cultural factors?

British historian Paul Johnson noted:

"The development of Australia rates as one of mankind's greatest achievements. Australians have created one of the most advanced and prosperous societies on earth. It is an achievement with few parallels in the history of human adventure."

It is asinine to believe opening the floodgates to mass immigration will somehow lift the world's poor out of poverty. In reality, it will only make life worse for ordinary Australians like you and me.
Posted by Oligarch, Thursday, 24 May 2007 2:30:27 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
Mmm. I wasn't putting the idea forward as if I had a solution to the worlds problems. In fact the idea that you would suggest that is quite amusing. I'm just calling it as I see it. Like I said, it could just be me. You call it a bleeding heart, fine. I call it not being quite so selfish. Because I don't believe we have more of a right to wealth just because of we're our parents shagged.

And yes, we are genuinely all equally valid parts of one humanity. Even if no one else in the world acknowledged it, the fact would remain. Just because we instinctively maintain a tribal sense of 'us and them', as the tendency was passed on to us because it benefited survival in the past, doesnt mean there's any inherent truth in that view.

But anyway, I honestly cant be bothered detailing the ins and outs of why I see things the way I do. Admittedly its more philosophical and less politicky, mildy indulgent, and more of an exploration of the hows and whys of the way people think, as opposed to 'heres a problem, whats the solution'. And I doubt you'd be particularly interested in that discussion.

But I will say that I believe your opinion is largely influenced by an instinctive fear of the unknown. I simply try to remove fear from the equation during my considerations, as it doesn't seem to serve much positive purpose to me.

I thought this was an amusing and loosely relevant little article:

http://www.theonion.com/content/opinion/im_prepared_to_give_my_life_for
Posted by spendocrat, Friday, 25 May 2007 1:00:43 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. All

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