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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?