Boat People - where to now!

 
  2301 Train Controller

Location: Banned
I'm not having much luck here doing the copy and paste thingy, but with reference to your comment about my comment on the financial burden this is placing on the country's finances, you ask me for proof.  

Well, one only has to look at the current state of play concerning the Government's precarious budget position for proof.   $33.3 billion black hole in just 2 months and so far the boat people debacle has costed $11.6 billion and rising.

What are the lost opportunities for that $11.6 billion dollars.........and rising.  Not to mention the cost of placing these people on the welfare system and resettling them into the community.

Sponsored advertisement

  Barrington Womble Photo Nazi

Location: Banned
Yes, your opinions are obviously biased too. Should we discount the arguments you have put forth? Going by your logic, the answer would be "yes". You still haven't proven any of the economics of your claims either.

Throwing a few arbitrary figures around is no way of proving your case. How do you suggest that we get out of debt - a debt that is quite small when compared with most other countries in the world. People seem to forget that you cannot have a surplus under government. If you do, then it means you aren't spending money where you should be. Selling publically owned assets is not the answer either. Tell me something. Is it cheaper to house refugees here, with potential for them to get jobs, and pay taxes; or is it cheaper to spend a heap of money on defence to keep towing the boats back? If the number of boats is as big as you'd have us believe; then towing them back is going to be a very costly operation, with no guarantee that it'll stop boats from entering our waters. Processing refugees would probably be a lot cheaper. Those who are not found to be genuine are deported back to their country of origin via air. Those that are could be settled here, and go to work like everyone else.

Also, you've conveniently side-stepped the fact that the value of our dollar has dropped in the last couple of months. $11.6 billion dollars is for something we are obliged to do under UN agreement, with no actual proof to your claim that it's going to rise much further. You're also working on the pretence that it's going to stop costing us if the Liberal Party get in. It won't, and you're kidding yourself if you think it will. All that will probably happen is the mainstream media will stop covering it, which has been the trend for years. It'll only pop up again before the next federal election as is the norm, to scare a few skittish people into voting for either political party. At the end of it, all I see is some very scared people with no reason to be scared. Hiding behind economics isn't the answer to this problem. It's going to cost this country no matter which avenue is taken.

As for the links I provided, they actually grill both the Coalition, and the Labor Government's treatment of refugees; so I fail to see how they are biased, or who they favour. I'd be interested to see what Aaron is referring to in regards to the UN agreement. Have you actually read the links - and yes, they are relevent to the topic. I wouldn't have posted them otherwise. If these refugees are as you say cashed up, and wearing expensive clothing, then they won't pass the screening process, and won't be allowed into the country. However, I'm not talking about economic refugees, I'm talking about the genuine ones.
  Barrington Womble Photo Nazi

Location: Banned
I'm not having much luck here doing the copy and paste thingy
2301
It's not that hard to work out. You know how to quote people; so now all you have to do is split the post up, and reply to each part.
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!
You have changed your tune from a couple of weeks ago haven't you?  Before you were implying along the lines that there was no problem.  Why have you changed your view?

I beg to differ on the crisis part.  It is a crisis which we are all paying for in our taxes and in reduced services. Do you want to work until you are 80 because the Government says to you we can't afford to have you retire?  Meanwhile a lot of our friends coming in on the boats will probably never contribute and may be of the opinion that they shouldn't have to.
2301

You haven't been paying attention have you...

I just don't subscribe to that A + B = Z that works for cock jocks and their disciples Rolling Eyes

Typical is this A+B = 'crisis'... over the top rubbish. We are a 17 trillion dollar economy with 23 million people. In the scheme of things the 'boat' people is hardly a threat to that.

As I've always said it is a serious issue to be addressed. They are putting themselves and their families in danger as well as those who may have to rescue them. Having the resources to circumvent the immigration process doesn't make them anymore deserving that someone sitting in some camp waiting their turn. But of course I've made those points before.

Meanwhile creating a heightened sense of crisis and feeding on paranoia speaks volumes about those doing so Evil or Very Mad
  T88 Junior Train Controller

Location: Banned
Unemployment is going up. The dollar is going down. Simple answer?.... put unemployed people on boats to patrol our shore line. Oh yes and give them wooden guns with 2 weeks training.
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork
Meanwhile creating a heightened sense of crisis and feeding on paranoia speaks volumes about those doing so Evil or Very Mad
cootanee

In other words, all 3 of the major political parties?
  trainfoamer Beginner

I do not believe for a single second that the majority of these people are refugee's. The majority of these illegal arrivals are men. I don't buy that these people are saying when come over here fearing that they would be killed in their country of origin, whilst leaving their wives, mothers, children in their homelands 'face the bullets.' They are taking advantage our whatever goodwill is left in our country and international laws made decades ago after WW2. There is no way Tony Abbott is going to stop this problem with Nauru and TPV. His solution will see more death in the northern seas as these illegal immigrants destroy the vessels they are travelling on. A short trip to Nauru or PNG would not bother me. I would swim through shark infested waters to get to Australia. End 2GB style rant.
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!
I do not believe for a single second that the majority of these people are refugee's. The majority of these illegal arrivals are men. I don't buy that these people are saying when come over here fearing that they would be killed in their country of origin, whilst leaving their wives, mothers, children in their homelands 'face the bullets.' They are taking advantage our whatever goodwill is left in our country and international laws made decades ago after WW2. There is no way Tony Abbott is going to stop this problem with Nauru and TPV. His solution will see more death in the northern seas as these illegal immigrants destroy the vessels they are travelling on. A short trip to Nauru or PNG would not bother me. I would swim through shark infested waters to get to Australia. End 2GB style rant.
trainfoamer
Seems like some aren't going to risk those sharks (and crocs)...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-09/an-asylum-seekers-in-indonesia-abandoning-plans-for-australia/4875072
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
A short trip to Nauru or PNG would not bother me. I would swim through shark infested waters to get to Australia. End 2GB style rant.
"trainfoamer"
You don't know where Nauru is do you? Even PNG to mainland Australia will see you swimming about 150km, the sharks are not your biggest problem, your inability to swim that far is the impediment. Nauru? Well that's the best part of 3000km coast to coast, a half hour swim at most I'd say.
  2301 Train Controller

Location: Banned
Barrington, you sound like you really are living in hope.  In your comment you say that our debt is quite small compared to other countries.  Don't you think that is a bit like comparing apples to oranges?  I am sure the Governments of Greece, Spain, Cypress and the USA to name a few were saying the same thing at one stage.  Just because the rest of the world wants to neck themselves why should we follow them under the pretence that because they are doing we should?

I suggest for a start that we "stop the boats" so that we stop the costs associated with them, because we could have built some pretty big nation building projects with that 11.6 Billion.  I can't see anywhere where the UN has directed Australia to spend $11.6 Billion on illegal immigration, you might like to shed some light on that one if you could?

Yes, the Liberals will have a hard time stopping the boats, but that does not excuse Uncle Kev and Labor for the bloody mess they created and why should their policy failure (Labor) reflect badly on the Liberals when they say "stop the boats" because at the end of the day someone has to stand up to the people smugglers and say enough is enough, you are not going to trash our country so you can make a quick buck!

The  Turn the boats back" phrase has a lot to do with symbolism the way I read it.  Turning the boats back will symbolise to the crooks and their customers that you will not get your own way, and I personally think that is what it will probably take to get the message through.
  Barrington Womble Photo Nazi

Location: Banned
Barrington, you sound like you really are living in hope.
2301
Condescension noted, but I'd rather have some hope than none.

In your comment you say that our debt is quite small compared to other countries.  Don't you think that is a bit like comparing apples to oranges?  I am sure the Governments of Greece, Spain, Cypress and the USA to name a few were saying the same thing at one stage.  Just because the rest of the world wants to neck themselves why should we follow them under the pretence that because they are doing we should?
2301
The reality is that our debt is small, and it's a favorite ploy of the Liberals to exaggerate that in order to win the votes of skittish people. Also with the amount of things that previous governments **cough**Liberals**cough** have de-regulated, we are now part of that global economy. You can call "oranges and apples" all you like, but it doesn't change that the point I made is valid, and you have no counter argument.

Let's have a look at a few figures which will put things into a bit more perspective. Australia is only getting 15,000 people arriving by boat, and you're worried? Let's have a look at some other countries (which have far higher debts than here), and the amount of refugees THEY have arriving. Admittedly these stats are from 2011, but if we have seen an increase in refugees, it would be naive to presume these countries haven't also had in increase in refugee numbers:

Pakistan: 1,702,700
Islamic Rep. of Iran: 886,500
Syrian Arab Rep.: 755,400
Germany: 571,700
Kenya: 566,500
Jordan: 451,000
Chad: 466,500
China: 301,000
Ethiopia: 288,800
United States: 264,800

Where's Australia again? Bitching about 15,000 people trying to seek refuge in their country, and making out that it's a crisis?
You'd better tell Rudd that he's at fault for the number of refugees entering these countries as well.

I suggest for a start that we "stop the boats" so that we stop the costs associated with them, because we could have built some pretty big nation building projects with that 11.6 Billion.  I can't see anywhere where the UN has directed Australia to spend $11.6 Billion on illegal immigration, you might like to shed some light on that one if you could?
2301
Australia signed the agreement, and it has cost the country $11.6 Billion to carry out that agreement. Pretty clear cut if you ask me. I wonder if it were the Liberals which signed the agreement with the UN, whether or not your opinion would change.

Attempting to stop the boats is going to cost millions - even billions, with no guarentee that it's going to stop anything. The thing you fail to acknowledge is that you can't stop the boats. It's not a simple equation, or as Cootanee would say: "I don't subscribe to the A + B = Z theories". You are seriously fooling yourself if you think it's that simple. Towing the boats back won't stop them from coming, and will cost millions/billions. If a boat sinks whilst under tow, what then? Would you also suggest that Australia invade the refugees' country of origin looking for people smugglers, or boats which are about to sail in order to stop them...?

I'm still waiting on you to answer some of my previous questions too.

Yes, the Liberals will have a hard time stopping the boats, but that does not excuse Uncle Kev and Labor for the bloody mess they created and why should their policy failure (Labor) reflect badly on the Liberals when they say "stop the boats" because at the end of the day someone has to stand up to the people smugglers and say enough is enough, you are not going to trash our country so you can make a quick buck
2301
This was one of my original questions to you: what proof do you have to say that the dismantling of the "Pacific Solution" is the cause of the problem? What is the likelyhood of refugees even knowing about Australian political decisions? They are simply fleeing their country to seek refuge - which is a Worldwide trend. We're not an isolated case by a long-shot

It would appear that "Uncle Kev" has done you a big favour by sending the refugees to PNG; which going by the logic you have displayed, you should actually be applauding. As for trashing our country. How are they trashing our country exactly?

This looks more and more like a simple case of bigotry the further we go with this debate.


The  Turn the boats back" phrase has a lot to do with symbolism the way I read it.  Turning the boats back will symbolise to the crooks and their customers that you will not get your own way, and I personally think that is what it will probably take to get the message through.
2301
Ah yes, symbolism. A rather naive viewpoint you have too. I love this quote from the D-Generation: "Ya know what I like about 'Strailya? You can be sexist, and racist, and still have a social life!". Tell me that quote isn't true.

Towing the boats back won't solve anything. 15,000 people compared with 1,700,000 or even 260,000 is a drop in the ocean (no pun intended). If this country can't at least help these people, then there is something seriously wrong with us.
  David Peters Dr Beeching

Location: "With Hey Boy".
Mr Womble I could not give a fig about overseas asylum seeker figures we are not in any of those countries ,but the 15,000 that get here are and that is 15,000 too many for just about any one. I would rather see the boats turned back or if they do make land put them on the first flight out of Australia to either their country of origin or at least to where they started from. It is a simple rort on their part and they are getting away with it. Stop it once and for all dead in its tracks and no one will make money from others misery and Australia will save billions trying to do something about it.

Like I said after the first few times it gets done they might all get the drift of the idea, but if the Australian Govt is going to be a wimp, which it is, they will just keep trying. You have to be cruel to be kind at times and this is one of those times. They do it legally or not at all it is simple really and less costly to them to start with.

Just on this point of cost, were do all these so called refugee's get all this money they pay these people smugglers. A true refugee would have virtually nothing at all except a few memories maybe but these all pay to be bought here so they must have money or they do illegal things to get money. Either way they do not look like real refugee's to most people just on the money side of it. These people smugglers are not going to take IOU's or rubber cheque's they want cash up front and in the thousands as well.

Throwing papers and children overboard is also not a good move either,what have they got to hide if they have to do things like this.

Sorry but boat people are not real refugee's in my eyes. A refugee in my eyes has the clothes on their back, some memories and maybe a bit of family and that is it and they were being persecuted or worse in their own country or something. Some that get off these boats look like they got off the last plane into Indonesia at times travelling first class. Some most probably do going by how much they pay these people smugglers to bring them to Australia.
  Barrington Womble Photo Nazi

Location: Banned
Oh dear.

I expected better of you, David.
  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
David: As a signatory to the original UN Convention on Refugees we are obliged to assess these people once they hit our shores (or even our waters); it a document devised very early in the United Nations history.  We don't have any choice in that matter - this is why during John Howard's government there was repeated debate about leaving that treaty prior to coming up with the "Pacific Solution"; Johnny Howard was a pragmatist but even he baulked at the idea of breaking that Convention.  The Jewish community in particular would be very upset as it was devised in the wake of the refusal to help the future victims of Nazi Germany prior to and during WWII.  That's why the government response, both Liberal/National and Labor, has been to try and find ways around the treaty rather than actually breaking it... hence the "Pacific Solution" and now Rudd's "Pacific Solution MKII".

Whether or not those people once they reach our shores are real refugees or not is a completely different matter.  On a certain level I agree with you - there's a big difference between Christians fleeing radical Islamists shooting at them and (for example) middle-class Iranians buying a one-way ticket because they've apparently been in trouble with the secret police.  How you tell the difference between 'deserving' and 'undeserving' refugees is a really, really complicated matter we could spend years trying to unravel and codify.
  allan Chief Commissioner

I've stayed out of this discussion for too long.

These refugees are not being pulled toward Australia. They are being pushed. Hard.

The traffickers are businessmen, meeting a clear need. Eliminate the need, and their businesses will collapse. (It's just like dealers in illegal drugs: legalise the drugs and the business model will inevitably collapse...)

The problems, and solutions, are at the points of origin of the refugees. If the refugees are unable to find refuge in Australia (or PNG or Nauru) they have little choice but to look elsewhere. This is not a solution, only a relocation of the problem.

It may well be that there is no complete solution to the refugee "problem", but demonising these people cannot help. The modern nations of Australia, NZ, USA and Canada (and any number of other countries that I have overlooked) have largely been built by refugees. Show a little compassion - it goes a long way.
  2301 Train Controller

Location: Banned
Barrington it sounds like you really are living in a Kumbaya world.  One only has to look at the trends and what is happening to understand that dismantling the Pacific solution is a main determining factor.  I don't know where you get the 15 000 number from because I understand that we passed the 50 000th person I think on Thursday and as David has said you are comparing apples to oranges mate.

You say our debt is small.  I can't see how you can come to that conclusion when they are saying that the debt limit needs raising to $300 billion with a country of a population of 23 million?  The problem is what happens if things get further out of control and we plunge into a debt spiral like all these other countries? - it really isn't that hard to comprehend that things aren't looking very good for all of us, especially when a $33 billion hole appears in the space of 2 months!

I really think you should give these so called refugees more credit than you are giving them.  Do you really think these people aren't cunning or looking at for their own self interest just by going on their modus operandi?  Do you really think that they are not looking at Australia as the land of milk and honey where once your in you never have to work and where all essential services are free, unlike where they come from?  Why wouldn't one try this on if you see other people before you getting away with it.

You might be happy for your hard earned tax dollars to be pissed up against the wall, but I sure as hell are not and I would think most people would side with me.
  2301 Train Controller

Location: Banned
I've stayed out of this discussion for too long.

These refugees are not being pulled toward Australia. They are being pushed. Hard.

The traffickers are businessmen, meeting a clear need. Eliminate the need, and their businesses will collapse. (It's just like dealers in illegal drugs: legalise the drugs and the business model will inevitably collapse...)

The problems, and solutions, are at the points of origin of the refugees. If the refugees are unable to find refuge in Australia (or PNG or Nauru) they have little choice but to look elsewhere. This is not a solution, only a relocation of the problem.

It may well be that there is no complete solution to the refugee "problem", but demonising these people cannot help. The modern nations of Australia, NZ, USA and Canada (and any number of other countries that I have overlooked) have largely been built by refugees. Show a little compassion - it goes a long way.
allan
Compassion will not solve anything, it will only make things ten times worst especially when you are dealing with cunning deceitful people who are out for their own self interest.  That is like saying to a con man, I trust you.
  allan Chief Commissioner

Compassion is the key. The cunning, deceitful, self interested people are the problem. It is their victims who need, and deserve our compassion.
  Barrington Womble Photo Nazi

Location: Banned
Barrington it sounds like you really are living in a Kumbaya world.  One only has to look at the trends and what is happening to understand that dismantling the Pacific solution is a main determining factor.  I don't know where you get the 15 000 number from because I understand that we passed the 50 000th person I think on Thursday and as David has said you are comparing apples to oranges mate.

You say our debt is small.  I can't see how you can come to that conclusion when they are saying that the debt limit needs raising to $300 billion with a country of a population of 23 million?  The problem is what happens if things get further out of control and we plunge into a debt spiral like all these other countries? - it really isn't that hard to comprehend that things aren't looking very good for all of us, especially when a $33 billion hole appears in the space of 2 months!

I really think you should give these so called refugees more credit than you are giving them.  Do you really think these people aren't cunning or looking at for their own self interest just by going on their modus operandi?  Do you really think that they are not looking at Australia as the land of milk and honey where once your in you never have to work and where all essential services are free, unlike where they come from?  Why wouldn't one try this on if you see other people before you getting away with it.

You might be happy for your hard earned tax dollars to be pissed up against the wall, but I sure as hell are not and I would think most people would side with me.
2301
I see.

So once again you conveniently side-step what has been put before you, and the questions I have asked you to answer. It seems to me that you are totally incapable of answering them because you know deep down that you have no idea what you're talking about, and you have no counter argument. All you have done is simply replied with more condescension; the same rhetoric, and the same ignorance. I doubt you're even thinking of a solution beyond what the Liberals are feeding you with their spin (yes, your beloved spin). They can't even string an election policy together. If they can't do that, then they are incompetent, and aren't fit to run a country.

One other thing you said previously: you don't care what the circumstances of the refugees are, yet you are continually prattling on about how they're wearing decent clothes, and sunglasses when they arrive...You either care, or you don't. Apparently you do, so why say you don't? It's obvious that you have some form of prejudice towards any sort of refugee, or you wouldn't have mentioned it. You obviously haven't read much of what I have written previously - If a refugee is found not to be genuine, then they will be deported. If they're trying to rort whatever system we have in place by conning their way into the country, again, they will be caught, and deported. You have provided no proof that the refugees aren't genuine in your diatribe. Others have also mentioned that the real immigration problem is the people who fly in with a holiday visa, and disappear, not the people in boats. You've side-stepped this as well. What about the New Zealanders coming here? Why don't you have your knives out for them?

I have provided you with facts, and figures. I have provided you with links to the sources of the information for consideration, yet when you're asked, you can't provide any proof at all for your diatribe, beyond the typical Liberal Party spin. No links to articles, or statistics, nothing. You have not explained how exactly you see Abbott stopping the boats; how much it will cost, and whether it'll work of not. I can tell you from the outset that it won't, and that our so-called crisis is not at all a crisis, merely another pathetic pitch by the Liberals to gain the votes of bigoted idiots by using their beloved scare tactics, and demonising people who need our help. Why can't these people be processed; if found genuine settled here, and get a job like anyone else? I work with quite a few refugees, and they put in just as much as the next person. They also pay their taxes like everyone else. The only difference is that they have come here via plane, rather than a boat. Why can't the same thing happen to the people arriving by boat?

You compare the amount of refugees with other countries - countries which already have far higher debt; far higher populations than here, and have less ground space (most being smaller that Victoria), and they accepting many thousands more than we are. The 15,000 (aprox. figure based on numbers from the refugee council) people who are sailing into our waters is bugger-all. It also shows that Australia is not the first "preferred" country of refugees - if they even have a preference as you'd have us believe. They're going in their millions to Pakistan for Christ's sake - Pakistan - of all places! It shows that the amount of refugees coming here is minute. This is a worldwide thing. It's not restricted to just Australia, and saying it is showing how truly ignorant you really are.

Before I sign off, you can also provide the source for your figure of 50,000 refugees, and proof that they aren't genuine (if there even is that many). I haven't been able to find a reference to that figure anywhere, and I have been looking for it. Also, where is your proof that the refugees are conning people?

As for your remarks about people siding with you about this, grow up. This isn't a pissing contest, and some people actually do care about these things, and recognise that it's not a simple equation with a simple solution. The sooner you get your head around that, the better.
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork
Methinks it is time to bury this thread, it is going nowhere.
  northbritish Chief Train Controller

Womble, for how long are you and your ilk going to make excuses for these people? They are gatecrashers pure and simple and should be treated as such.
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
There's one key thing that all from the left either conveniently ignore, or choose to forget that they know.

A migrant ceases to be a refugee once they have found safe refuge. The UN Convention allows people to seek assylum, but does not allow country shopping.

A genuine refugee ceases to be a refugee when they leave the non persecuting nation of Indonesia to make an unsafe journey here. They become what even Bob Carr calls them 'economic migrants' and they are (rightly) not protected under the refugee clauses of UN.

Indonesia does of persecute Muslims (you'd be a fool to believe they did), they do not persecute Sri Lankans (who are fleeing what, exactly?). They are SAFE in Indonesia, Australia has diplomatic postings there, and yes Mr Womble, Cootanee, etc, this is where the 'queue' starts. Now the greens will tell us 'there is no queue' and to some extent they are right, it's not a 'front up at the delicatessen and take a number' queue, it's a 'lodge your paperwork and wait for processing' queue. It's an ordered process, a line up (or queue) of processes, not an ordered list of names processed in order.

Those that arrive with their paperwork in order, identification etc and are legitimate get processed quickly and probably have their airfares shouted for them to Australia, those that dump their paperwork, or otherwise conceal who they are, or have found to have done the wrong thing in the past wait for the trail to be sorted. It's close to the same process for everybody, hence the popular term of queue, but the later type of would be migrant do not hold up those who have got their smeg together and apply properly, hence not a queue as such.
  2301 Train Controller

Location: Banned
Methinks it is time to bury this thread, it is going nowhere.
TheBlacksmith

Why? You could say the same about other threads or every thread in general.  There is nothing stopping you from joining in - What harm is having people talking/debating a topic doing to you?  You sound like the thought/speech police.

Don't you think you are being a bit dictatorial?
  2301 Train Controller

Location: Banned
Barrington, your argument about non genuine refugees being sent back does not stack up.  Yes, the Government has made a few headlines about a few Sri Lankans being forcibly sent back but the vast majority are staying even though they do no meet the refugee criteria, especially in the case of the Iranians who are not fleeing anything but for god knows why their Government refuses to take them back.

This than goes back to what I was saying about symbolism.  If people at the back of the queue see other people succeeding with their plans than it only stands to reason that they are going to give it a try, and so the snowball gets bigger and bigger with dire consequences for all involved, including the taxpayers of Australia, you and me.

You also propose to resettle these people and that they will get jobs and so on and everything will be fine and dandy, but how do you think this will happen with the economy going the way it is and unemployment expected to go through the roof in the next couple of years?

Finally, you seem to continually deny hard facts that are on the public record.  I don't know if you are using this as a blocking tactic, one which the left really love to use or whether you are trying to characterise people that have an opposing view by using the bigot word?
  2301 Train Controller

Location: Banned
Compassion is the key. The cunning, deceitful, self interested people are the problem. It is their victims who need, and deserve our compassion.
allan

Are the victims you're talking about the ones paying very large sums of money in their currency, so they can jump over everyone else including legitimate refugees to buy their way into paradise?

Don't you think that they are making victims at of other people that are legitimately fleeing for their very lives, not with their money and designer sunglasses and a dream of having a permanent holiday.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.