You've got to be kidding. It would be like a plague of locusts moving from one place of prosperity to another. Feeding on the local resources, overloading the local environment and when the boom is finished, moving on to the next greener pasture.

This is the silliest idea I have heard in a long time.

Well Mirko, you have excelled yourself this time. Some of your articles have been good, but this one is the most extraordinary load of bunkum!

Your arguments aren’t worth the effort of countering, other than to say that racist attitudes have got stuff-all to do with it, and if you really want to see a hardening of racist / ethnic / religious / cultural divisions, then you’ll certainly get it with hugely increased influxes of third-world peoples into the first world.

You couldn’t possibly get a significant rise in average the quality of life of the world’s poor without significantly lowering the QOL of the reasonably well-off. This would most definitely lead directly to all manner of conflicts in first-world countries and a hardening of attitudes against the poor masses.

Mirko as usual misses the point of poverty, I have commented several times before to no avail, producing offsprings when the parents know full well that they cannot support them nor can their country because they have produced too many children over decades resulting in their lands being raped of the capacity to produce the required grains, meat etc to feed the masses.
In all kindness to the people of the third world and the beautiful children born to die in their arms, birth control is the answer and until the Western World move in that direction with their Overseas Aid poverty will never be eliminated. We continue to send food to make the people of the third world healthier so they have more children, we send them medicines to help to eliminate diseases then they are healthier so have more children ad nau'seam. Get the message Mirko?

Actually, the best thing that could happen for the world's poor in the long run is the US and Europe abolishing all their trade tarrifs and agricultural subsidies.

It's pampered European and US farmers you should be castigating, not us.

Only dangerous lunatics advocate the free movement of people. Different cultures should be separated, and the constant fiddling with the natural order of things stopped.

Leigh

You're masterly. Another scintillating comment: "Only dangerous lunatics advocate the free movement of people. Different cultures should be separated, and the constant fiddling with the natural order of things stopped."

I love the delicate way you use words - "dangerous lunatics". And I love your use of magic words - "natural order of things" - that obviate the need for painful thought.

Whatever did the Anglos think they were doing in 1788 when they came to New South Wales and interfered with the "natural order of things"?

Now what's to be done, Leigh? Perhaps you could advocate a moratorium when all the white Australians could go "home". (What will we do with those who have intermarried, but?)

After that we'll turn to the Americas and send all the blacks, Latinos, Anglos, Europeans - all those huddled masses - back to where they came from, leaving the land to the people of the First Nations.

Only kidding Leigh - I'm not one of your dangerous lunatics. Pull that rug up tight, go back to sleep and when you wake up it, we'll have them all sorted into their different coloured boxes. It was all a bad dream.