What about if we maintain our net level of migration by trading off 'skilled migrants' for refugees on a one-for-one basis?

We let in hundreds of thousands of skilled migrants a year, but I doubt they have any useful skills that one can't learn here, save perhaps for fluency in uncommon languages. I suspect we draft them to do the jobs that Aussies don't want to do, or think are 'too hard'. Snowflakes. Saw a report today that we're severely under-represented in science graduates. It galls me to think that we might be importing foreigners trained in the sciences because snowflakes think science is too hard. It's really not - I'm trained in analytical chemistry, and I'm an idiot: just ask any of our resident Tories.

And the skilled migrants we let in? Well, they're usually quite well off in their home country. Because they have skills, and can get well-paying jobs there. They're not Rohingyas in Burma, or Jews in Nazi Germany, or whatever. They're not in fear of their life, or the life of those they love. They are economic migrants.

So here's my crazy idea, Joe: fewer foreign professionals that we don't really need because we can train our own right here at home, and more refugees who we can train to fill any skills shortages. We'll still have the population growth which apparently is so essential, and we'll get a better cross-section of humanity. Half the problems I see in the world these days are caused by too many chiefs and not enough indians (native americans), and the skilled migration program targets chiefs. Maybe we could do with a few more indians (not necessarily ones from India).

We can't take them all: that's mental. But maybe we could take a few more, without altering our net immigration level, by swapping them out for economic migrants. What do you think?

Hi Toni,

Second time lucky. Bastard computer.

I'm sure you're not an idiot ;)

But the migration issue and the refugee issue are completely different, they're not interchangeable.

Yes, we should be training far more highly-sought-after professionals, if they would only come forward. Perhaps their HECS/HELP debt could be waived ? Conversely, all those wanting to enrol in interpretive dance or mime or telephone sanitization could be required to do a year or two of fruit picking in SA's beautiful Riverland, or melons in the Kimberley.

Alternatively, such snowflakes could face the exciting challenge of living with their parents on absolutely no government financial support whatsoever for an equivalent time.

Certainly, we haven't got it right yet. Until we do, I don't have the slightest problem with taking in fully-qualified Indians or Chinese or Filipinos or Koreans.

Cheers,

Joe

Perhaps if we were to pay English, Geography, Media Studies & Dance teachers what they were worth, {not much], & Math, Physics & Chemistry teachers what they were worth, [a hell of a lot more], & got rid of the no hoper teachers, [a large number], we might again have kids capable of handling science subjects.

We have no chance with our dumbed down education, run by feminists.

Dear Toni,

What a mistaken impression you have of skilled migrants:

«They're not Rohingyas in Burma, or Jews in Nazi Germany, or whatever. They're not in fear of their life, or the life of those they love. They are economic migrants.»

You really think that the Australian economy is so bright and shiny?
Skilled people could do economically better in most other countries, but they come here either for personal reasons (falling in love with an Australian; family reunion) or for the exact reasons listed above.

People are not less persecuted than others because they happen to be skilled.

I see myself as a refugee, but for the formal paper-work I arrived here on a skilled visa. If all I had on my mind was to make money, then I could have stayed there where by now I would have become miserable, but a billionaire.

The whole 'Stop the Boats' thing is just a publicity stunt to give an impression they are tough on immigration when they're actually letting hundreds of thousands of foreigners in every year.

It's just 'sleight of hand'; 'look over here, not over there'.
It creates a talking point in which they are 'seen to be tough'.
Without it they'd have nothing to ramble on about; they'd have no line of defense for criticism in regards to immigration.
Politics is bs.

Loudmouth: Well I feel I have accomplished something. If it took you umpteen times to read my post, at least you did manage to read.
OK to make it simple for you, by putting a tariff on companies that have off shored, I mean they will have to pay a tariff on what they want to bring into Australia.

*Blocking immigration of skilled workers* Well maybe that would encourage Australian companies to put on more apprentices and maybe to make the neocons drop their huge payments for university education. I think it would take a government with ideology not so engraved in stone but you never know.

*Many companies would be most grateful to be bought out at inflated prices* well I am thinking that if they are so badly off they could hand back the mineral rights of what really belongs to Australians and implement my nr 5.
I am sure that the offshore tax havens will miss the deposits but we will gain them.

I will wait for your next ad hominem.