hippyboy1

It is an additional stream of immigrants.

MattW82

Most of whom bring nothing to the country whilst sponging off the state. Marvellous.

Vash the Stampede

Why?

This place needs skilled labour. Unskilled labour is not in demand, and people who qualify for little else other than a factory job are not in short supply. Many illegal immigrants (if not most) tend to be unskilled workers - often from poor countries with poor education systems.

This place does not need large numbers of illegal immigrants clogging up the system and slowing down the applications of legitimate migrants and legitimate asylum seekers.

Vash the Stampede

This is an excellent reason for maintaining tight immigration controls and screening out false asylum seekers.

Remember the Bakhtiyari fiasco?

Ali Bakhtiyari's claim to asylum was rejected by two governments - British and Australian - on the grounds that it was fraudulent (Bakhtiyari had claimed to be an Afghan refugee, but was in fact an illegal immigrant from Pakistan).

Evidence was collected from a multitude of sources, and investigations carried out not only by the DIMIA but also by various media bodies, including the Age newspaper (which sent a reporter to Afghanistan, where he visited the village in which Ali Bakhtiyari had claimed to live).

All investigations were unanimous in their finding that Ali Bakhtiyari's claims were false; and finally, Bakhtiyari admitted it himself:
Source.

So don't sit there and tell me that "white bread public servants haven't a clue how to ascertain genuine refugee status", because it's simply not true.

No, it's proven fact. Someone with a false claim that drags on for months (or even years) because they deliberately fight the authorities all the way, is clearly clogging the system.

Look at the Bakhtiyari case:
Source.

You see that? The Bakhtiyaris were false asylum seekers, but they tied up the courts for four years! If that's not a case of "timewasters clogging the system", what is?

I'm glad that the sons apologised, though. At least they had some decency, unlike their lying father.

Why does Australia need people from the third world regardless of their skill set? And why the third world specifically?

This was in the post-war years, when unskilled labour was in demand, and skilled workers were not a priority. It was also a very different era, in which skilled work was not as sophisticated as it is today (no computers, high-level electronics, etc.) and career migration was arguably easier.

Nevertheless, as time went on, the "open door" policy began to reveal its flaws. Many unskilled immigrants ended up in depressed areas with high unemployment rates because they had no skills to offer.

Subiaco (to take just one example) stagnated for decades, and was largely dilapidated until its revival by private investment and the influence of neighbouring suburbs. But many suburbs of Western Sydney still languish in poverty and high unemployment; the legacies of poorly regulated immigration during the 70s and 80s.

Are you kidding? Have you any idea about the scale of poverty and deprivation in the US?

sonlymewalter

hippyboy1

To be honest, this is thinly veiled racism, white Australia policy style, really. Paul Hansonism wrapped in a token liberalism.

NedKelly

If you like immigrants so much why don't you go and live in Pakistan or Somalia?

hippyboy1

Sorry, perhaps that was a bit harsh, the point i am trying to make is that to you multiculturalism seems to be a neccessary evil-justifiable on economic or moral grounds-in your ideal world everyone would be picture-perfect white middle class 'decent folk'.
For me multiculturalism is the ideal, I like those ethnic suburbs that you would describe as economically backward (not true but anyway), I like the variety-your ideal world would bore me senseless-its why I left Surrey for Sydney.

hippyboy1

That makes zero sense, totally stupid-as if Somalia is full of immigrants-if one likes immigrants Australia would be the ideal destination-I think you were politely using the word immigrants as a subsitute for 'darkies' or something.

If you don't like immigrants why did you become one.

NedKelly

You didn't need to come all the way to Sydney. You could have moved to East London or South London or pretty much anywhere in England. You will find illegal immigrants, asylum seekers by the plenty and even a few legal immigrants as well. There are more economically backward people there than in Sydney.

NedKelly

I do like immigrants, just not the same ones that you like.

hippyboy1

As if that comment implied that multiculturalism was the only reason I came here-I think you need to look at the real reason s behind your rabid racism-what is it yuo fear so much.

MartinLuther

I think it's immoral to suggest that false claimants should get priority over bona fide asylum seeks just because they jump the queue.

hippyboy1

i did'nt suggest that-I said they should be given achance-not ahead of genuine claimants.

Wol

Australia already has, according to some figures, between 1.5 and 2 times the longterm sustainable population. That obviously depends on living standards etc.

*Longterm* means just that: in the short term by flogging off all the commodities we can import food and other essentials but that's not sustainability.

The global population is going to have to go down quite dramatically for the planet to have longterm sustainability: expect to see hundreds of millions and into the billions perishing through starvation, disease and wars before we have an equilibrium situation. And within the lifetime of your children, too - possibly within mine too.

There are quite literally billions who would migrate to Australia or other countries for economic reasons and probably hundreds of millions who would come within genuine refugee status. Clearly the numbers don't add up.

Survival, not comfort, is going to be the word in the near future.