Any immigration of people, other than those NEEDED by Australia for economic reasons, is ridiculous in present day Australia. We don't have the costly infrastructure needed - and our idiot politicians are not interested in providing it - and habitable land is limited to about two thirds of the coastline, which is already crowded.

And, enough about the 'value' of so called refugees (illegals).The author appears to be just another elitist who doesn't see the majority of "refugees" , say, in Western Sydney, who get on the dole and stay on it for the rest of their lives.

Fortress Australia is what is need into the foreseeable future.

I would suggest that Australia, one of the most generous of western nations in this respect, to accept refugees commensurate (per head of population and GDP) with those of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and other gulf nations. I think that this would be fair and equitable don't you?

@tbn - you have missed the central point of te article - namely that given we bring in 200,000 extra people a year we have a choice regarding who comes in. It is hypocrisy to claim we are doing all we can for clearly we could choose to bring in 200,000 refugees.
This is not inconsistent with fortress Australia; we can still set the numbers and conditions under which refugees are accepted. For example we could come to an arrangement with our pacific neighbours that we will process potential refugees offshore -boat people will be sent to such detention facilities to await their turn.
As far as the question of population growth is concerned I agree that we should not take any migrants under any scheme but given that is unlikely to happen we should structure our policy to take as many refugees as we can.
Your assumption that the dole bludgers are refugees is simply not supported by the facts - if anything they are less likely to be refugees. The government rarely published data with respect to the success of its migration policy - such research as has been carried out suggests that upward of a third of all migrants either return or fail to gain stable employment. For unlike refugees those who come out on the strength of their professional qualifications tend to be reluctant to explore lower paid jobs. Whereas refugees will take anything that is going; nopt least because many of them send money back home to support their extended family.

Baygon,

I have not missed anything. You just disagree with me. I believe in a fortress Australia, apart from trade, in this bad economic and dangerous time.

The "refugee" lurk is kept going, particularly now, by the blackmailing of politicians of weak character more interested in their standing with the useless, corrupt United Nations than they are with Australia. The UN encourages mass movement of people with the idea that it will relieve poverty, when all it will do is lower the standards of the countries and continents these people are invading.

You apparently think this is OK. I do no not. In fact, I believe the whole nonsense should stop altogether. I accept that my opinions are not universal, but I am not going to change my beliefs to fall in with anyone else's ideas of right or wrong, good or bad, nice or nasty.

TBBN put your brain into gear.

The point your making is that the refugee problem is a manifestation of the economic collapse that has been heralded since 1972 (The Limits of Growth) I AGREE

You effectively argue that the proposed solutions are merely papering over the cracks of a system that is no longer working. I AGREE

The only point of disagreement and I struggle to think why you would disagree concerns our migration quota. My personal view is that the number of migrants coming into this country should be zero. BUT if we are going to admit migrants then we have to ask the question who should we admit. When Tony Abbott on the one hand says we cannot take more refugees and on the other that we can accommodate 200,000 migrants then clearly he is making a particular choice. If he wants to come out and say as you do we have the capacity to take up to 200,000 refugees but I refuse to do so and am sticking with our current policy then at least that would be an honest response. But he cannot argue that we cannot accommodate more refugees for based on his logic clearly we can.

Baygon,

I read you advice to "get your brain into gear" and decided not to read any more. If you want to be competitive, go for Mortein.

"Has anyone asked why it is that these refugees are able to pay the exorbitant amounts that the people smugglers are demanding?"

Has anyone asked why they can't pay Qantas the non-exorbitant price of an airline ticket?

Has anyone asked why they come to Australia, which is nowhere near their homeland, on the other side of the planet, when Europe is a hop, jump and skip away?

"their priority was to get to a country that was politically stable."

Why not North Korea then?

And the irony is: the more immigrants we take from 6000 cultures, the more *unstable* we become.

"there was simply no future for them or their children"

You only get what you believe.
Or fight for.

Why are we to be responsible for their future?
What of the future of the 700,000 Australians already unemployed?
And the 100,000 homeless?

Where is your concern for their future?
Those people are ALREADY HERE!

Shockadelic,

The open-borders urgers don't ask themselves anything. They are all blab and no thought. They will still be blabbing inanely as they are swamped by these invaders.

The constant refrain from the traitor castes is that Abbott is "taking us back to the 1950's", yet I don't hear them complaining that he's honouring an outdated, 1950's era treaty to allow the latest batch of dole bludgers and drug dealers into the country.

I liked your questions, John. How about I throw some back at you?

Have you ever wondered why every non European in the world wants to immigrate to a European country? Is there something about the European way of thinking that creates prosperous societies? Is there something wrong with the cultural values of third world societies which makes them unfit to live in? If European societies keep importing unassimilatable non Europeans, and encourage them with "multiculturalism" to maintain their cultural and ethnic uniqueness, how long before European societies become third world societies themselves?

But the biggest question for you, John, is where are you going to go to after you have ruined this country?

One would have thought that all we need to do was look at the problems in Europe with mostly Muslim "refugees" causing nothing but trouble, to figure out that we do not want to repeat their mistakes. Although, Australia has had plenty of troubkle from it;s own refugee imports. The Vietnamese suburb of Cabramatta is the nations heroin capitol. The importation of Lebanese was a social and economic disaster, with Australians fleeing the suburbs where the Lebanese live. One definition of "insanity" is "making the same mistake, over and over again." Unless Germany in particular does not use it's military force to keep Muslim "refugees" from over running their country, the German will be wishing that the Fuehrer was back.

The only way that the western world can stop refugee numbers exploding, is to invade the Middle east and Africa. Recolonise them, force the people there to become Protestant Christians, and force them to accept birth control, all at gunpoint if necessary.

Australia is almost in a state of civil war. The RAAF is now about to drop bombs on "Australians" fighting against Australia, in Syria. That is what your idiotic humanitarian policies wave wrought us

7billion people on earth.
Not Europes fault at all

The people overrunning Europe remind me of big
Migrating herds of wilderbeasts.

Desperate for new, richly providing, territorial resources.

Of course they will Run across Europe when those police or army men at the borders
Have absolutely no approval to use force to drive them back. They are just like useless statues standing there.

And the refugees? Know iit. Although recently, some common sense came into play and the police have been allowed to use batons.

For poverty stricken people they all seem to have expensive mobile phones.
Western nations need to pull out of the United Nations. In terms of lives lost in conflicts
And it's having to solve the problems of every failed state in the world it has been nothing but an a disaster in the cost if our soldiers lives and billions of dollars in weapons. I said a few years ago that one day the West would come to realise it had shot itself in the foot by all this goody two-shoes business.

Well that day has just come in Europe..

One of the movement's great protagonists is Donald Trump, but why are the Democrats smiling?

Trump, along with the zero population growth and white nativist movements, helped along by pro 'European' puppets and protagonists Paul Ehrlich (The Population Bomb) and John Tanton ('The anti-immigration crusader'), have guaranteed electoral oblivion for unwitting conservatives who take on and believe their 'research' on 'other types'.

What the anti immigration, anti refugee etc. campaigners are achieving is notoriety, and guaranteeing they will slowly die out, as population growth subsides, people spread round and most will be cocoa coloured .... if not I'm sure the white nativists have some ideas on assisted dieing and who can procreate, that's what it's really about isn't it?

It is why a conservative, Angela Merkel, has welcomed refugees, because Germany like most of the developed world, understands population demographics and crashing working age/tax base population of young people, to support the other main drivers of population growth, prosperity and longevity of the oldies and soon baby boomers.....

Ironic isn't it that the grandchildren of Nazi Germany generation are welcoming refugees while the former Anglo WWII allies who fought aginst Nazis and their ideology, are suggesting otherwise, as they are being manipulated by those white nativists with admiration for the Nazis, eugenics, population control etc.?

As many Australians complain about lack of moral compass amongst politicians, media, advocates, society etc. regarding racism, immigration etc., Germany leads the way.

Andras Smith

Don't see any black countries letting in
Millions of whites.

And if the situation was reversed, the whites
Would have no chance of being let in.

So let's not play the racism card.
It goes both ways.

What do you want? Civil war in Europe,because that is what will
Happen eventually as these ethnic tribes decide they want control
Of the country or a separatist state.

Maybe that is what you want. The destruction of Europe.
What ethnic group are you from? Are you sure your motives aren't racially
Motivated against white races.

Or are you just one of these left wing hippie, zealot types,
That think male tribal warriors from different tribes will all hold hands
And sing love and peace forever more. These aren't terrorist attacks, they are
Territorial attacks. Look at History, it is full of tribal warfare, even now as we speak in Syria. You think that can't happen in Europe. Why.
Or do you want it to happen?

Andras Smith "Germany leads the way"

So Germany will be the starting point for yet another World War.
Fueled once more by utopian fantasies.

Deja vu.