Luciferase,

".while the present numbers of refugees continues, Australia will be battling to stem the flow of boats."

What's wrong with that?

It's my opinion.

This is an opinion forum.

What is it with certain contributors who get shirty and fling abuse because another poster has an alternate opinion and/or chooses not to take the bait and the snide garbage which accompanies it?

(Thanks, Luciferase. From now on I'll put you in the same basket as Joe)

untl the Big Bang
Ojnab,
we've already had a couple of big bangs but obviously not big enough because there's no shortage of morons who do all they can not to clean up the gene pool. They're not happy until everyone is brought down to their level of unrecoverable sense.
If people can't get their act together at home then they won't be able to do any better abroad by not only dragging their baggage with them but even forcibly imposing it on others wherever they go. if they want a better life then by all means go where you can get a better life but you'll need to discard your excessive superstitions otherwise you're just wasting everyones time.

Hi Poirot,

Down here in sleepy Adelaide, there used to be an orang-utan at our Zoo named George who used to fling his turds at spectators - great fun for unsullied observers. George loved his turds.

So when you talk about 'having a right to express an opinion', you are right except for the problem that you don't seem to have one - you simply fling, willy-nilly. That's your right, but some of us here are serious about trying to nut out what to do about a very serious problem.

Fortunately, thanks to the protocols and procedures of OLO, we are fore-warned when you are about to let fly, and can turn off.

So when you have something substantial to contribute, we may not actually be on-line, we may assume that it is yet another one :(

which is really a tragedy for genuine discussion and a spirited exchange of views.

Joe

Candida,

Having brought out people on 457 visas, I can testify that it is a very expensive process, and one that is not taken lightly.

Asylum seekers given refugee status get benefits worth about $50k p.a. incl:

a) Access to medicare - 457s get nothing and the employer needs to pay about $6000 p.a. per family member in medical insurance.

b) free schooling. - 457s pay about $8000 p.a. per child to go to public schools.

c) Welfare incl housing, school kids bonus etc. - 457s get nothing, even for 2 years after getting PR.

d) Employers can be held responsible for the cost of returning the 457.

So whilst there are a few cases of rorting they are lower than for most programs at a couple of %, and even then cost the taxpayer nothing.

P,

Rates of boats coming is nearly doubling every year. The present rate is 50 000 p.a. Next year?

Dear Individual,

I understand what you are saying and as I told
you in my previous post - we form our viewpoints
based on personal values and experiences. Each of
us is inclined to perceive facts selectively and
to interpret them accordingly.

Dear Saltpetre,

You've raised some valid points and I don' have the
answers to the big questions of this issue. I'm still
trying to make sense of it all. However, there
appears to be flaws in both party's "solutions,"
to the problem. I've always thought that this was a
regional problem needing regional co-operation. Whether
the PNG attempt will work - we'll have to wait and see,
it is due to be reviewed in a year's time. And if the
Coalition wins the next election - well, I guess we'll
soon find out if what they have on offer is viable as
well. It is a complex issue that I'm sure will perplex
us for some time to come.

Dear CHERFUL,

Thank You for your civil response and kind words.
For me, the best case scenario would be that we don't
pre-judge people. As I stated earlier, we might achieve this
through education programs, or just education. As for what's
happening in countries overseas, especially in Islamic
societies, these problems arise out of specific social and
cultural conditions within those regions

Aw, jeepers, Joe.

I'm really sad that my "opinion" that "both parties' solutions will be ineffectual at stopping refugees" doesn't meet the standard you require.

Fancy it being a new rule that I have to respond to your scornful interrogations or cop abuse from you and your assistant if I fail to comply.

Your tale of your friend, George, and his turds sums up well the extent of your craft and your intentions.

That's about your limit, isn't it....you're all style.

I've sat here long enough over the years, fascinated by your penchant to slither your way through post after post of sneering sarcasm and derision - not only to me, but to anyone who may hold a view contrary to your own.

On the whole, I've come to the conclusion that you're getting way too many jollies from trolling Poirot. I know how invigorating it must be to follow me about and put the boot in whenever the opportunity arises, however, I'd be obliged if you could see your way clear to shutting down that particular avenue of enjoyment.
(Yes, I know you'll come out with your standard response to my complaints about your trolling - "It's not all about you, Poirot". One has only to take a peek at your posting history to see that it "is" often all about Poirot)

Here's an idea!

Instead of chasing my contributions up hill and down dale on OLO, and leading little deputations to tell me how dissatisfied you are.....why don't you just ignore them?

That would appear to be the sensible option - albeit, you'll have to forgo your little amusement of baiting Hercule.

A small price to pay for your peace of mind, I'm sure you'll agree.

(my latest "fling" - hope none of it missed:)

...........

SM,

I appreciate the rate as increased. All I was saying was that I suspect halting the flow may be easier surmised than achieved.