2017 Provides Australia with a genuine opportunity to do something constructive about the global refugee crisis. 14 million people are displaced by wars. The Australian Government is committed to bringing in 200,000 migrants each year. Whilst such numbers are unsustainable we surely could limit our total intake to just 80,000 new arrivals and then go the next step and join the solidarity city programme and ensure that the majority of them are refugees. https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/eurocities/solidarity-cities-cities-acting-for-refugee-integration?utm_source=Daily+Newsletter&utm_campaign=0ef8ebde0c-DAILY_NEWSLETTER_MAILCHIMP&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_717bc5d86d-0ef8ebde0c-407380753

How about you start with cities in solidarity to the rest of the nation?
I don't want our cities becoming more of cities of immigrants telling the rest of the country how they should or should not live with this wave of progressive pro-immigrant anti-nationalist ideals.

This is OUR COUNTRY.
Not a piece of clay immigrants can mold in the shape of whatever hellhole they came from.

Take your Safe Cities, Strong Cities, Solidarity Cities or whatever you want to call them, and shove them.
Those are just pied-piper names to convince 'useful idiots' to turn the country over to immigrants and a pro-globalist agenda shafting the rest of country who identify as Aussies.

I'm not against helping others in need, but sell my country out?
Not going to happen.

Repeat the word 'Temporary Visa' 10 times out loud and then maybe we can make a compromise.

Seriously, if we got rid of all the refugees
would this speed up the 2 hour drive on
choked roads that many of us take to and
from work, or boast the numbers of nurses and
doctors in our public hospitals, or make our education
system any better ir increase wages, the dole, or
pension payments?

There are contradictions in this country that need
to be confronted. The anger at the effects of
globalisation, the deterioration in services
and infrastructure across the country, the increasing
"casualisation" of the Australian workforce, the
growing gap between the inner city and the rest of
society, the ageing working population, the
degration of our transport, education and health systems ...
None of these can be addressed through "Stopping the
Boats."

Yet immigration can revive country towns, refugees can
be settled in rural Australia to work in hospitals and
on farms

I really don't see that taking in people who are nothing but a burden to Australia is an "opportunity" - it's more like a death wish. There are too many useless, problem-causing people here now, including the products of the ridiciculously high 'legitimate' 200,000 per year stampede.

I've recently read an article in The Monthly that
disturbed me somewhat it pointed out the following:

"It appears that broader effects to change Australian
hearts and minds about the treatment of asylum seekers
have not succeeded. We'll lock up asylum seekers in
off shore detention centres, we'll stand idly by as
they slowly go crazy or harm themselves, we'll refuse
journalists the right to speak to them or to name them,
we'll redefine our borders to not let them in, we'll
farm them off to our impoverished, under-developed neighbours
rather than construct a humane and efficient system to
process their claims for asylum. It doesn't matter
that more than 83 % of asylum seekers who arrive here by
boat are found to be genuine refugees, and that as
signatories to the UN Refugee Convention we are obliged
to offer these people refuge..."

It is probably too late to save all of Oz, we probably need to remove NSW & Victoria, & try to save the rest, although I'm not sure Tasmania or SA are worth the effort.

I was in a major Sydney suburb recently, Fairfield, trying to find a taxi rank. It was only the 11Th person I spoke to, who could actually communicate in English. What is left to save?

Hasbeen,

We still speak a bit of the old lingo in Adelaide, mate.

Migration is a double-edged sword.
We could say we only want ones with skills; but what this effectively does is take the best and most talented out of their third world country and relocate them to the west.
So their country is now deprived of their most talented people, and the disparity between rich and poor nations continues.

In this way immigration isn't the solution, its actually the cause of the problem.

We could take the unskilled, but then the cost of welfare and other expenses falls unfairly on the taxpayer at a time of significant existing debt.
You're effective asking existing Australian taxpayers to carry the burden of immigrants whilst at the same time accepting a reduction in their own services and an increase in the nations debt.
Funds are relocated towards the costs of immigrants which would otherwise normally be spent on services for existing Australian's.
Like older Australians for example.
When they die on a hospital waiting list, at least they can be glad they helped a foreign family with kids get a free handout.

Question: No one can say Baby Boomers didn't work hard for this country.
They don't make em like they used to.
But as caretakers of this country did that generation take care of that which was their responsibility and hand the country down to the next generation in better condition that they found it?
Some might think Baby Boomers were asleep on their watch and have handed down a complete basket case.

We can always rely on the rabid right to put up an emotive argument against migrants, being doing it ever since Chinese came to the goldfields. In their 'minds eye' today, they picture hordes of men with big black beards, and turbans on their heads, being followed by their dutiful women, clad head to toe in traditional black hijabs, faces covered, 4 or 5 children following close behind, all strolling across the tarmac at Sydney and Melbourne Airports . With some kindly government official ushering them in with the words: "this way to 'Centrelink'!"

The above minds eye view could not be further from the truth, of what is Australia's mass immigration intake. In 2014/15 we took in 189,097, plus another 13,756 through the Australian Humanitarian Program. Some of the 13,000 odd could possibly fit the above emotive rabid right description. However, the vast majority of the intake are classed as 'skilled immigrants' about 127,000 of the above, and are very valuable migrants to Australia. Another 60,000 odd are classed as 'family reunion' and do receive both government and family support, the rabid right can mount an argument against that class if they wish.

One group of temporary migrants, who are a valuable "export" earner for Australia are the 300,000 overseas students we took in 2014/15. They cost us nothing, but bring in plenty. Although I must say I do get frustrated when they get on the bus and stall the driver wanting to know if "this bus go UTS," but hardly an argument to kick them out.

No matter what, the rabid right will continue to live the lie, and never find a taxi rank in Fairfield, why not try the train station, or move to Adelaide and converse with the like minded in Jabberwocky.

Nothing rabid about it Paul.
Though I won't hold back char grilling those George Soros clones intent on wrecking every nation they get their little rat claws on, so I'll let you have that one.

Where shall we start, women with 4 or 5 kids?
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/treasury/parental-welfare-pays-more-than-work/news-story/5f4d825e0957e954fea4e13e7ff2fe26

Skilled migrants?
Which of these requires skilled workers?
McDonalds, KFC, Coles, Woolworths, Aldi, Red Rooster?
Please explain.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/national/maccas-looks-overseas-for-staff/news-story/812a7734dc07c4f2a4211f2b02152cbf
http://www.mathersons.com.au/exploitation-of-457-and-417-visa-holders/
"The workers stated that they viewed their travel to Australia as a “one-way ticket” and that they were upset that the company had not followed through on their obligations."

457 is not a job, its a relocation plan.

We could go back 70 years and take a look at the white paper on employment and ask what happened?
http://www.billmitchell.org/White_Paper_1945/index.html
They got us all working and fighting for a war, but when it's just about the nations citizens that's not important anymore?

What did we get from the war except half of Europe taking up residence?
And Jews reminding everyone how hard done they are when we were on the side that liberated them and helped them to start a nation?
- But at least they did not come here expecting a handout.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/data-shows-migrant-welfare-clusters/news-story/81257effae73e55cc5e5c9f231711a1e

Many of you see migrants in an exploitation sense anyway.
Work our fields, Work our hospitals, Di Natale hiring full time nanny for $150 a week.

You need to understand something Paul, I have a fairly good BS meter.
Go pour a bucket of water over your head and face reality.
I think you've been in dreamland too long.

Seriously, its not enough to make us strangers in our own cities and kick us out of our own suburbs but you want to deprive our kids of jobs as well?
Have you seen youth unemployment figures?

Let me tell you something pal.
Ideals and solutions are two different things.
You can have all the good ideals you want, but that won't equate to solutions and better management of the nations issues.

People like yourself intent on turning our country upside down...
Really who needs terrorists?

Dear Paul,

The following link may be of interest to you:

http://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2013/september/1377957600/christos-why-australians-hate-asylum-seekers

cont'd ...

Dear Paul,

My apologies for the typo.

Here's the link again:

http://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2013/september/1377957600/christos-why-australia-hates-asylum-seekers

Dear Paul,

I'm having a problem with the link.

If you Google - "Christos why Australia hates
asylum seekers," it will come up.
It's a long essay but well worth a read.
And explains a great deal about some people's
attitudes.

Thanks Foxy, that is a good essay.
Australia has real problems, high youth unemployment, unworkable cities, over crowded hospitals, the list is almost endless.
Whilst we squabble about showing some human compassion towards asylum seekers we are distracted from demanding that we use the wealth that Australia has not just to settle asylum seekers but also to address those other problems. When we put boundaries around compassion we will justify a response that blames 'others' for our problems and so nothing gets done.
Those embittered folk who object to providing asylum should realise that whether we provide asylum or not will make not a jot of difference to their lives. But what it may just do is create a new morality among our politicians to care for the most vulnerable members of our community.

Foxy, here is that link;
http://tinyurl.com/jbw36gx

The original worked for me.
Also Baygon you also need to use Tinyurl.
These multiline urls are ridiculous.

Foxy, I can see you have your Rose couloureds on again.
First those in detention are not in detention they can leave tomorrow.

The intake of 200,000 a year is absolutly stupid.
The building industry said that we cannot build enough housing at that rate.
Also no one can afford to build it. Not even the government.
It will be like Europe soon, they will be camped in the parks.

There is every likelihood of a financial crash this year and we are
to put another 200,000 into it !
There is every chance of an energy crunch this year or next.
They will finance it by borrowing more money !
I can only believe that the government structure has gone stark raving mad.

"Those embittered folk who object to providing asylum should realise that whether we provide asylum or not will make not a jot of difference to their lives. But what it may just do is create a new morality among our politicians to care for the most vulnerable members of our community."

Baygon,
That above statement - were you referring to 'the most vulnerable members of our community' (homeless, jobless, disabled and elderly etc.) or 'the most vulnerable people of another bombed out or failed states communities' that you think we should all pay for?

- You're entitled to your opinion and you are personally entitled to spend as much as you'd like on them, but you have no right to tell others what their taxes should or should not be spent on if it doesn't directly benefit existing Australians.

To suggest that other Australians be forced to spend their hard earned taxes on foreigners is totalitarianism.
Do you support 'totalitarianism'?

If you have personal ideals there is nothing to stop you opening you wallet right now, just don't entertain the idea that it's any any way 'right' to force anyone else to, myself included.

Put your own money (not other peoples) where your mouth and beliefs are.

As for the causes of these wars and displaced people, I most certainly do not support the tactics used by the west in creating these global problems; and I won't accept the moral responsibility of using my country as a toilet to clean up the messes they make around the planet deliberately for a globalist agenda.

Do not think I'm that ignorant that I won't look for the real causes of these wars.

- The link below will take you to what is, in my opinion the words biggest smoking gun.

"Day 84, still no Braverman."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioFGJmrvai0

Dear BAYGON,

Thank You for reading the link.
And for your comments.
It made sense to me and explained quite
a lot. There are contraditions in our country
that need to be confronted. The link points
that out so well.

Thanks Foxy, CHRISTOS TSIOLKAS essay made for a very interesting read. Conservative politicians from both major parties along with the entrenched racists from the likes of One Nation successfully exploited the 'Asylum Seeker' issue to their advantage. John Howard and later Tony Abbott, and I'll include Rudd/Gillard, and of course Pauline Hanson in that group, with a helping hand from the conservative mainstream media were able to pander to the basic fears of the general populace. They portrayed asylum seekers arriving as being only the vanguard of a mass of such humanity waiting just over the horizon to descend upon innocent Australia. Their intention being to destroy our "way of life", and god knows what else they intended to do, from rape and pillage, to outright murder, a totally undeserving mob of queue jumpers at best! According to our leadership this critical threat had to be contained at all cost, and that could only be done through punitive action on our part, forget any though of humanitarianism, we were in a crises which required immediate action. That action included turning back the boats, offshore detention and no prospect of resettlement.
Many, if not most in our society supported this draconian action, as totally necessary, and now believe a serious crises has been averted! We can once again rest easy in our beds. As for the asylum seekers with no human face, we can forget them, they were simply an unreasonable problem we successfully dealt with in true Australian fashion. Is it raciest, you be the judge.

Oh Asylum Seekers you all say,
Well they aren't a problem because they don't come here.
Now I honestly feel sorry for the ones stuck in Manus or Naru, I think of them as political prisoners, (who can leave if they choose to) and we should make sure they have reasonable living conditions since they are being used as pawns.

But if we let em in, more will come and more will drown on boats.
Neverending Story.

I don't support letting them into the country.
Firstly you have the issue where they through all their documentation overboard, so we don't know who many of these people are.
Some have faked passports.

Turnbull is hard on asylum seekers so he can let more legal ones in, I've heard him explain it; its basically a sleight of hand trick, to pretend to be hard on the issue.

You want to let undocumented immigrants possibly fighters from warzones enter the country because of your little 'feels good' ideals?

They aren't genuine asylum seekers anyway.
If you travel one or even two countries away you're an asylum seeker.
If you travel the distance of five or six countries then you are an economic migrant, no matter how you started out.

-And if you really were seeking asylum, you'd be grateful for a temporary visa, even though your long term prospects were in doubt.
You're either running away from persecution and a warzone or you're not.

I don't see why Syrians can't go home now, thanks to Russia.
If they fought the government and can't go home is that our fault?
That they decided to take on their own government and are now stateless - is this our fault?
Let Sauda Arabia, Turkey, Qatar and the US, France and Britain pay the price of these migrants, they armed and funded the rebels.
Why should we pay for it?

@armchair critic - we have heard you. No need to repeat your views ad nauseam.
Basically your position is that before you will help someone in need you will check their passport. You will also only help them if there is no cost to your own comforts - someone stranded on the road? You will stop and help unless of course they look suspect or if it is not too inconvenient. They are the values you live by. So no need to say any more - we all know that there are people who spent their lives justifying why they should not help people in need. These are the people who label all those on welfare as bludgers but are first in the queue when they need help.

Actually BAGON, it is the stupidity that you & other like Paul produce ad nauseam that is the problem, & the majority of real Australians are totally sick of.

Try giving away only that which is yours to give. Leave our birthright the hell alone.

<<I really don't see that taking in people who are nothing but a burden to Australia is an "opportunity" - it's more like a death wish. There are too many useless, problem-causing people here now, including the products of the ridiculously high 'legitimate' 200,000 per year stampede.>>

Well I suppose, people living here right now, will be forced to abort all children (about to be born) who have a medical condition or disability, Australia will be gassing people to death who are seen as a burden to society, or Australia will be bringing back the death penalty for those who have been seen to have committed serious crime.

Innocent until proven guilty, thrown out the door?

I'm sure there would be some who oppose others who put forward opinions on this page and would see them as having no value and being a burden to Australia - but please consider some basic respect, particularly those who have done nothing wrong towards others.

Dear Paul,

I'm glad that you enjoyed the link I cited earlier.
It disturbed me greatly and made me think.
Hopefully with time things will continue to change
in this country. We have to keep working towards
that goal - especially as far as our children and
grand-children are concerned.

OK Baygon, let's for the moment assume that your 80000 refugee number is achievable and is what we need to demonstrate our compassion.

So we increase our refugee intake from 20000 to 80000. Hurrah for us, warm inner-glow for all.

But then the eighty-thousand-and-first person decides to rock up in a borrowed boat. What do you do? Let 'em in because you're so compassionate? The eighty-thousand-and-second? The eighty-thousand-and-third? At what point, which number, do you say to the pooooor refugee, "No, we're full up but let me show you the delights of Nauru"?