Parrot,

Firstly, the stats you show are from 2011/2 5 yrs ago and under an incompetent government, even then the acceptance rate of non illegal maritime arrivals was at 44% about half the acceptance of illegal maritime arrivals > 80%.

However, the statistics are that most refugees are unemployed even after 5 yrs (about 30%) and are a drain on the economy.

"Luciferase still has his nose out of joint because Poirot preferred the opinions of economists to that of a self-interested negative-gearer who made a profit from a tax break."

Nobody makes a profit from from NG. It is not a concession, a subsidy or a rort, but don't let truth get in the way of a good mantra.

Your remark, albeit inappropriate to this thread, allows comparison with the fact you won't commit to whether IMAs deemed refugees should displace other prospective immigrants (including refugees overseas), with, whether operating losses should be quarantined from determining taxable income.

In both cases you deny the obvious consequences of such woolly Green thinking, being, Australia will have borders completely open to peaceful invasion, and, we will be reduced to a socialist state where risk and loss are carried by the individual but profit is shared with those not carrying that burden.

One great big beautiful melting pot, eh?

Poirot

The main cause of all the refugees and wars in these countris is not so much
caused by American bombs as tribal hatreds and warlords stealing women, territory
and resources. Boko Harem to name one.

The male ignorance and dominance that doesnt allow women control over their own wombs so they end up with a10kids to feed, and then think Australia and Western countries should bail them out and feed the resultl of their stupidity with 7billion people on earth and rising.

I know the African fellow of which you speak, I saw his talk on TV and I did admire the way he worked and studied to become a lawyer, but thats where my admiration ended, because what did he do with his lawyer abilities,
He promptly became a lawyer trying to fight to bring more refugees in here.

In other words he is now throwing his weight around trying to bring as many of his tribe here as he can. He has not become a lawyer to in anyway serve Australia.
only other tribes from overseas, particularly Africans I'm sure.

70% of Australians were against the mass immigration that was allowed bigtime with the Hawke government and successive governments but those governments went ahead and did it anyway. So it was hardly a democratic decision based on the will of the Australian people. There shouldnt be any surprise now at the back lash coming from people who never were allowed a referendum on it in the first place

Big timing themselves in the United Nations signed that refugee agreement, again an undemocratic decision, one which I shouok my head at, and thought I dont want them signing that in my name.

let the idiot male leaders in these troubled countries, figure out why their people are so bloody, miserable, full of hatred and always at each others throats. Not our problem.
Posted by CHERFUL, Wednesday, 25 May 2016 2:03:32 PM

SM,

"Firstly, the stats you show are from 2011/2 5 yrs ago and under an incompetent government, even then the acceptance rate of non illegal maritime arrivals was at 44% about half the acceptance of illegal maritime arrivals > 80%."

Yes, if you'd noted earlier, my point was that over 7,000 applications were made from non-IMAs in 2011-12 - and that although IMAs were now being turned around, flown back or refouled - there are no doubt still applications from non-IMAs...and that all the anti-boat crew around here never mention those applications.

Btw, the percentage of IMAs found after processing to be genuine refugees was more like 94%.

Cherful,

"In other words he is now throwing his weight around trying to bring as many of his tribe here as he can. He has not become a lawyer to in anyway serve Australia.
only other tribes from overseas, particularly Africans I'm sure."

Lol!...not even worth a reply.

Can I just say that it's always instructive debating the mature men of OLO.

No sooner has Loudmouth acquiesced to ceasing his "sweetie" and "honey"...than along come the next two adolescent chappies with "Pirouette" and "Parrot".

Which, I s'pose would be considered really clever if we were a bunch of 12 year-olds.

Hi Poirot,

Sorry, that sentence should have read:

"The argument is about refugees coming without authorisation, i.e. NOT part of that intake, by leaky boat."

Still waiting for your answer to the question "Do you support taking in refugees who arrive here without authorisation but by leaky boat, after paying exorbitant fees to smugglers ?"

Yes/No

But obfuscation and diversion, the wounded swan act, will tell us a lot about you, yet again. Entertain us :)

Joe