The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Immigrants: the market needs them > Comments

Immigrants: the market needs them : Comments

By Lucy Young, published 14/5/2007

Phillipe Legrain believes it is futile to resist the breakdown of national borders but does not consider the role they have in constructing national identity.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Legrain could never get himself elected to any parliament anywhere. So why do we get so worked up about his extreme views?

Even the Greens want to restrict immigration (if only for environmental reasons).
Posted by grn, Monday, 14 May 2007 2:02:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ironically, a completely 'porous' border would lead to the collapse of the democratic process. That is, democracy means little in countries with split ethnic, religious or cultural identities because everyone votes according to their 'tribe'. So, when the previous ethnic, religious or cultural majority is condemned to the status of a powerless minority by a larger group of politically assertive immigrants then chaos, conflict and bloodshed is bound to result.

Countries like the UAE understand this political reality and have therefore shunned democracy to protect their ethnic, religious and cultural heritage. Hence, despite the fact that Emeri Arabs currently make up only 19% of the population (the majority are from South Asia) they have kept the country stable and conflict free by maintaining their Federation of seven Absolute Monarchies.

So, if you want an open democratic society then keep the borders well maintained and well defined. It is also advisable to keep a vigorous and assertive ethnic, religious or cultural majority. It doesn't really matter which of those three categories come to the fore, as long as one does - otherwise chaos and civil conflict is almost inevitable.
Posted by TR, Monday, 14 May 2007 3:58:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Has anyone considered the huge skilled workforce available in Australia should immigration be markedly reduced? This workforce is currently engaged in building the infrastructure to cope with an increasing population. It is high time that per capita economic comparisons were done to show whether immigration provides a per capita benefit.
Posted by Fester, Monday, 14 May 2007 5:21:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lucy,

Excellant article. Phillipe Legrain seems to me to be a romanicist that does not consider the practicalities of what he is proposing. Bit like someone proposing we feed all the starving millions. Sounds good but not practical nor consideration given to ongoing problems.

I shudder to think of the problems of millions of people moving from country to country with no control. In short time the whole world would be one gigantic slum.

Someone forgot to give Legrain a brain
Posted by Banjo, Monday, 14 May 2007 8:09:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Fester, immigration has become a zero-sum game for most Australians. In terms of economic gains per capita, the benefits of high immigration are negligible.

Tom Gosling writes:

"So what’s in population growth for the average Australian? Nothing, except higher house prices and rents, more congested roads and transport, more pollution and waste, more apartment blocks, more crowds everywhere, more pressure on our parks and nature reserves - AND, of course, less water per capita.

If you don’t believe me, check out the Productivity Commission’s report of January 17, 2006, which showed Australians’ per capita income would be only 0.06 per cent higher if we had 50 per cent higher skilled immigration over the next 20 years.

Not only would there be negligible economic gain, but the Productivity Commission said there would obviously be environmental costs, but it could not take these into account because they are “externalities”, too difficult to count using conventional economic methods.

The costs mentioned, but not counted, by the Productivity Commission included air, river and ocean pollution, land degradation, increased use of natural resources, biodiversity loss, increased congestion of roads and public transport - and, of course, the increased water use that would result from higher immigration."

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=4154

As for Philippe Legrain, his pernicious delusions can be attributed to his own divided loyalties. He proclaims himself to be British, French, American and Estonian. His dismissive attitude towards national identity and the nation-state in general merely reflects his own lack of vested interest in any one particular country.
Posted by Oligarch, Monday, 14 May 2007 11:36:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There is a complete, comprehensive solution to all of our immigration problems, which would eliminate detention centres, refugee quotas, and the like:

Bring back the Dictation Test.
Posted by plerdsus, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 9:02:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy