Albert “Does it matter that they came across half the world to get here? The fact is they are here now, and now is all that matters. You can't go back in time and tell them to stop when they get to Pakistan.”

Di “my limited knowledge of US history is that California was once frequented, and perhaps populated by "Mexicans" before the US decided to own it. Invaders? They are hardly trespassing by crossing the border, but hey! they're breaking the law these days.”

The world to day is the world of passports, national sovereignty etc.

If Alberts Pakistan travellers had set sail 150 years ago and arrived here – no one would have known and they most likely would have assimilated into whatever community they found.

If Di’s Mexicans did the same thing the outcome would have been the same – build or assimilate into the existing community – although by then the US was rapidly defining its borders and national integrity and the right to refuse entry to migrants from Europe with communicable diseases like TB etc.

As Abert rightly says – “You can't go back in time” but Albert – we are talking about "NOW". You cannot ignore the rules of entry that these illegal migrants attempted to usurp. We have no "free entry – just arrive with suitcase" system any more. Today entry is a documented and pre-approved process – if we applied Alberts logic – the only requirement is to “arrive” then I can think of one of the few remaining communist countries which has a few hundred million who would most likely take him up on the offer – for economic reasons alone.

I have no desire to see Australia become the last bolt hole for all and sundry regardless of character or what intent they may have displayed and regardless of whatever it is they may claim to be “refugeeing” from

Col said --> "I have no desire to see Australia become the last bolt hole for all and sundry regardless of character or what intent they may have displayed and regardless of whatever it is they may claim to be “refugeeing” from"

and about "just arriving with a suitcase"

Most of them have nothing when they arrive - nothing but a few shreds of clothing on their backs...

Please, at least go and meet some of these people before you cast judgement on them - the people I met were just ordinary people like you and me, who have been put under extraordinary circumstances - abuse, persecution, made to do things and had things done to them that you or I could not even begin to imagine in our most horrific nightmares.

They are on the most part qualified, educated people who just want to give a little to this country - they have not sought out Australia to live in - mostly they had no idea where they were going or thought they were going somewhere else - do you really think they had heard of Australia in Iran or Pakistan? Most of the people I speak to in the USA don't even know about Australia. Some of the people I spoke to thought they were going to Canada.

They just need assylum - or at the very least they need to be not locked up for up to six years without being convicted of anything. Its just wrong and illegal in the eyes of the International community, morality and in the eyes of Amnesty International.

Di: I didn't post on "Mexifornia" because I wanted to debate the rights or wrongs of the Mexican War (or the Norman Conquest for that matter). An injustice probably was committed, but it was more than 150 years ago. There were very few Mexican settlers in California at the time, and I believe they all got US citizenship if they wanted it. Nor was I trying to imply that things in California are bad because Mexicans are bad people. The same dynamics would exist if the illegal immigrants were Swedes.

Albert: The best explanation is economist George Borjas' 2004 paper "The Demand Curve for Labor is Downward Sloping" (available at www.borjas.com). Basically labor behaves like eggs or peaches: when there is an excess supply of it, it gets cheap. The US minimum wage actually has nearly a third less purchasing power than it did in 1968. Barbara Ehrenreich's book "Nickeled and Dimed" explains what it is like to live on such a wage. Illegal immigrants can't even insist on the minimum or on minimum health and safety standards. The same thing is happening here. There are award wages, but enough unpaid overtime is worked to be the equivalent of hundreds of thousands of jobs. Very few people work without pay for fun; they are afraid of getting the sack if they don't. This is one reason why the business elite loves mass migration, legal or otherwise.

Mandi: No one, not even Col Rouge, is suggesting that we refuse to take in people fleeing from persecution or detain them for longer than is needed to establish their bona fides. We are concerned about illegal immigrants who get in by falsely pretending to be refugees. Article 31 of the 1951 Refugee Convention (available on the Web) requires refugees to seek asylum in the first safe country they come to. Col Rouge was raising the question of whether a refugee who passes through safe country A to get to rich country B loses his claim to refugee status.

Mandi “they have not sought out Australia to live in”

So they were out for a Sunday row and lost track of the time?

Trans-navigation of the Pacific Ocean, Indian Ocean, Timor or Arafura Seas (or the Southern Ocean for that matter), is not something undertaken by anyone who is not expecting to arrive in Australia –

You write using a simplicity of logic I would expect from someone born yesterday.

FYI some of us have been around a little longer.

I refer you to Divergence’s post – for further explanation.

As for “They just need asylum” – they achieved “asylum” once they crossed the national border from whence they fled.

Divergence, agree completely with what you posted re minimum wages - illegals debase the economy by working well below the minimum wage laws - beggars are not choosers and when you cannot go to an arbitration tribunal for a fair wage, because you have no legal right to work in the first place, their is not alot government or anyone else can or will do about it.

The West's, and Australia's, obsession with border protection is unrealistic
By Greg Barns - posted Thursday, July 10, 2003

"But when it comes to people, both the major political parties in this country want to maintain a fortress mentality. Both are refusing to face up to the reality as described by a leading European affairs commentator, Neal Ascherson. Mr Ascherson has pointed out that the poor world is moving into the rich world on a scale never seen before.

The realities are that this movement is in the long-run unstoppable, that Europe (and for this one can include Australia) is becoming dependent on immigration as its populations age and diminish, and the distinction between asylum-seeker and economic migrant is meaningless. As Australians we cannot take the upside of globalisation including cheaper products and new industries and ideas without taking the other side, represented by more people wanting to live where better life and economic growth will be"

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=453

Like it or not, welcome to the real world

I agree. I find the increasing obsession held by many in wealthy Western countries about 'border protection' a little bit 'rich' (pardon the expression), given that the globalised economy has overwhelmingly benefited the industrialised world to the detriment of the majority, i.e. the 'developing' world. Particularly given that we show little compunction in sending our military to the very places (from which many of these same refugees have escaped) in order to further the geopolitical projects of our 'allies'. Think Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Vietnam etc etc etc.

People who are economically disadvantaged, displaced or persecuted (or various combinations thereof) will inevitably move across arbitrary borders in order to seek security and opportunity. Rather than trying to stem the inevitable tide (and jettisoning our humanity in the process) we should welcome genuine refugees, skilled immigrants and separated families, in order that we can maintain our population into the future.

Unusually, I find myself in almost complete agreement with Greg Barns.