Foxy,
how about one of your links to address this ?

LEGO,
Agreed, Those arriving, or attempting to, by boat are shonks who get here by deceit and bribery. They attempt to gate crash and lie to our immigration officials and make it difficult to deport them, by destroying their documentation.

Congratulations to Scott Morrison for his success thus far and we wish for the continued success.

I think the support for stopping the boats would be much higher than 60%. Somewhere about 80-90%. There will always be a few dissenters.

To quote the words of G Richardson, 'Whatever it takes' to deter these illegals from coming.

@speegster

Perhaps we should rename you FRAUDster --it'd be a much better fit.

You told us: << last year I managed a project commissioned by the Department of Immigration ...I base my opinion on this rigorous (sic)...research>>
Subtext: *that "research" showed me the truth and the light --Hallelujah!*.
However, from your very first --and sorry-- post on OLO, you showed yourself to be a bred-in-the-bone illegal immigration advocate --even at that stage you were well versed in all the clichés--see here:http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=14974#258195
So there was no Road to Damascus experience (as your tried to imply),ay!
And Dept of Immigration ought to be rapped over the knuckles for employing such a biased overseer.

Then we have this little attempted con:
<< [my little junket incurred minor costs] ... compared to the $200 million a month we're spending on Sovereign Borders and offshore detention>>
I looked far and wide on your post history for any comment that bemoaned the cost of putting the HMAS taxi service, on 24/7 call (in the Julia-Kevin era) to pick-up any Tom, Dick and Ali who might dial 000 from just off the Java coast –- but found nary a whimper! (if you did protest the cost of the HMAS taxi pick-up service by all means point it out).
So suddenly (under Abbott) you’re a fiscal conservative -– what a joke!

Actualy, the amount spent on deterring these asylum scammers is likely to be a small drop in the ocean compared to the cost of providing a lifetime of freebies –or special opportunities – for them and all their relos if they were ever to be settled. (again something your ilk would never raise a whimper about)

And as for this: <<What's missing from your retort … is an actual reply to my "clichés>>
What’s missing from your tone is any desire to hear the answers –and any real desire to adjust your mindset if you heard them.

Come-on fess up you're still fretting about that Dept of Immigration gravy train ticket --now you'll have to get a real job, ay!

@SPQR You are pathologically incapable of arguing from anything except pure conjecture backed up by nothing but totally erroneous assumption.

Your assertions regarding asylum seekers and their potential strain on the fiscal coffers not only demonstrates your feckless inability to consider empirical evidence (which more often than not demonstrates that immigrants - whatever their circumstances of arrival - contribute a net benefit to the national budget), but also your total lack of empathy and compassion, as well as a dyed-in-the-wool racism.

"...from your very first --and sorry-- post on OLO, you showed yourself to be a bred-in-the-bone illegal immigration advocate --even at that stage you were well versed in all the clichés"

That comment, dummy, was made in May 2013, when the project had almost run its course and all of the results were in, results which vindicated the Immigration/RRT decisions quoted in my original comment.

"Actualy, the amount spent on deterring these asylum scammers is likely to be a small drop in the ocean compared to the cost of providing a lifetime of freebies –or special opportunities – for them and all their relos if they were ever to be settled. (again something your ilk would never raise a whimper about)."

Again no evidence, just bald-face and incorrect assumption. My "ilk would never raise a whimper about" it because it is essentialising racist tosh.

"What’s missing from your tone is any desire to hear the answers –and any real desire to adjust your mindset if you heard them."

So you can hear my "tone" through the copper wires eh? I note this diversionary tactic, because you STILL haven't answered my queries! Because you just don't have any worth the time of day.

Why can't you be happy with who you are? Why twist yourself in knots when you can just come out and admit you just don't like brown-skinned people?

*Sent on my lunch break from my computer in my office at my day job, the same one I had when I did that project. Do you know about working and companies and grown-up things?

speegster,

Before you accuse all and sundry of "pure conjecture backed up by nothing but totally erroneous assumption" I would suggest that you stop doing exactly the same.

The immigrants from the wave of illegal boats in the last few years that have achieved PR remain mostly unemployed and living off benefits. Given that an average person has to earn nearly $60k p.a. before making a net contribution to the state coffers your claim that they provide a net benefit is pure conjecture backed up by nothing but totally erroneous assumption.

Remember the howls of outrage from the left whingers when Howard's pacific solution was costing $500m p.a. and the complete silence when Rudd / Juliar's open borders was costing nearly $3bn p.a.

Similarly your claim that Operation Sovereign borders is costing $200m per month is blatantly disingenuous as the vast majority of the cost is processing the economic migrants that labor invited, and the cost of patrolling the oceans and turning back the boats is a small fraction.

@speegster

<< [SPQR] Your assertions ...[that asylum scammers are a net cost] ... only demonstrates your ...putdown, putdown, putdown >>
And your knee jerk rejection of my point only demonstrates your lack of research. I'll link you to another poster on OLO who HAS done her research --see here:
"The per capita economic benefit from mass migration is very small and mostly distributed to the owners of capital and the migrants themselves...http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/113407/annual-report-2010-11.pdf
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6302#185225
(you would benefit greatly from reading some of her posts)

<<That comment… was made in May 2013, when the project had almost run its course and all of the results were in, results which vindicated the Immigration/RRT decisions quoted in my original comment.>>
So are you hon-est-ly trying to sell us on the proposition that prior to that “rigorous" research (excuse me whilst I stifle a fit of laughter) you were a fence sitter on this issue –not bloody likely!

<<So you can hear my "tone" through the copper wires eh?>>
Yes-- loud and clear.


Like most advocates you clearly have a fixation with skin color:
<< it because it is essentialising racist tosh.>>
<<but also your total lack of empathy and compassion, as well as a dyed-in-the-wool racism>>
<< admit you just don't like brown-skinned people?>>
Two small points to console you:
1) The Iranians who up till recently made-for a large percentage our illegal boaties are hardly "brown-skinned"!, and
2) I would hazard a guess that my skin tone is a lot browner than yours.

<<*Sent on my lunch break from my computer in my office at my day job, the same one I had when I did that project.>>
Does your employer /shareholders know you are using company resources to further you own private policitical ends/fantasies?
It’s a bit of an insight into your morals & business ethics, ay!