A belated topic that would have been better on ANZAC DAY...

French jurist said:
Tricky subject, why not talk about abortion ?
Click to expand...

Totally, FJ. But I'll say just this:

In the case of Argentina, we aren't an example of correctness exactly. When in school, I found funny how my teachers taught me about our "great patriots" and how the kicked the Spaniards out, how they repelled the English, and how they subjugated the native savages. The dessert campaigns were as epic as the resistance against the English invasions of 1806 and 1807. All I could think was "Were we so different from the English when we overran the Indians?"

For some reason, this country attracts people from neighboring countries, such as Paraguay. Many times I talked with people from Paraguay and they all said they came here "trying to give their children a better future". My first spontaneous though was "life in Paraguay must suck big, big, big time". But in the end, cynicism aside, those guys were doing something very basic and instinctive: they were trying to survive. Like it or not, legal or not, can I blame anyone for being self-preservasionist? Is the illegal immigrant a criminal?

What about the Australian guy wanting the invaders out? If I asked them, I'd probably get an answer in essence similar to the Paraguayan's: "My children are living a good life here and I want to make sure it stays that way for them". Again, self-preservation. Is the guy a xenophobic monster?

About what happened in "the past":

Once I watched an intellectual and Holocaust survivor being interviewed on the French television. He said that many times, when lecturing in Germany, German students approached him asking for forgiveness. He explained them that guilt is neither collective nor inheritable, and that what happened wasn't their fault. IMO, that's common sense talking.

But then I found this:

Not long ago I watched a German movie called Die Welle. I don't remember the exact words, but when talking about the Nazi regime, one kid said it wasn't their fault as it all happened long before they were born. What really caught my attention was the reply he got: a girl said "it's part of our history, and so we are historically responsible to some extent". With all in her favor, the girl would not avoid responsibility. It kept me thinking.

I don't have a solution for this. I don't know if there should be one. I can't blame anyone for doing what they can in this world. I just wish we would be more considerate with each other and their situation. At least that. It may help us all see through the xenophobe and criminal smoke walls and get a glimpse of the struggling human being behind them, surviving day by day in this crazy, unfair world. It may reduce the noise a little.

Just my thoughts.
 
I hate to disappoint you there but even *I* sleep sometimes :) I don't actually work in Argentina - I service customers back in Australia by voip telephony - and am paid in Oz and pay taxes there - although in the future I will probably establish my own business here too - unlike the illegal immigrants I have been talking about making their way to Australia every day...

Unlike these illegal immigrants I pay my way here in Argentina - contribute to the economy and rather than dodging taxes and responsibilities when I am fully established here I will be paying my taxes and making the sorts of contributions I should...

I am here with the woman I love (who is Argentinian) and in due course we will be married and I will be applying for citizenship here - and in the meantime (as it should be) I follow the rules and do what I need to do to ensure I remain legal...

Unlike the people I have been talking about and the issue of illegal immigration in Australia I was brought up to respect the law and to follow the rules...

Anyway - off to sleep for me - but whilst you've ''cherry picked'' from the links I provided above at least I have to give you credit for having read them - thats got to be a positive :)

BTW - there are a million links that I left out - but I am sure anyone with an agenda could find fault with them all - but at the end of the day whether people like it or not this issue I have raised IS a real problem for Australia and many other western nations as well - and it won't just ''go away''...
 
Extraordinary, just about every contested premise Johnno put forward has been dismembered with factual data and yet he still persists with the same baseless arguments and appears to be under the illusion that he is running rings around everyone, I think they call that the Dunning–Kruger effect.

Here are some more for you (facts):

In terms of asylum applications submitted from 2006 to 2010 Australia received 2% among a list of 44 industrialised countries. For applications per 1000 inhabitants Australia ranks 22nd on the same list with 1.3 well behind Austria, Belgium Cyprus, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Ireland, Lichtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, The Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK. For applications per 1 USD of per capita GDP on the same list Australia ranks 19th well behind Austria, Canada, Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, The UK and the US.

This data set is of course skewed as the entire developing world which carries the primary burden in the assistance of asylum seekers globally (around 70-80%) is omitted. A global comparison of asylum seeker applications on a per capita GDP basis would demonstrate that Australia and much of the industrialised world has little cause for complaint. For 2009 refugee populations per dollar of per capita GDP the first western country to appear is Germany ranked 26th, there are 14 LDC's in the top 25 (all UNHCR data).

Johnno if you have put forth any arguments that haven't already been comprehensively refuted could you please summarise them for us.
 
Um - I am still awake - for some reason - I think its the last drink and cigar to celebrate one problem having been solved - the Osama factor - but even so - and even though I've knocked off my fair share of oporto tonight - do you REALLY believe that comparing apples with oranges will work? A country of 20 million like Australia should be shouldering what? The burden of a country with 200 million? I was never much of a maths person - but really...

As for what has been 'refuted' - well - like I said previously - people see what they want to see - following your logic I could try to assume that because you have said that everything I've raised as an issue or problem (in the Australian context) has been somehow ''debunked'' that its no longer a problem - but as I said above, the ''problem'' (whether people choose to SEE it or not) remains a PROBLEM - and one that will not go away :) lol

''Comprehensively refuted''? Mmmmmh - no - you are correct - there are no boats - there are no detention centres being burnt down, there is no expense to the Australian taxpayer and just like Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz (pun possibly intended) I'll just click my heels and say ''there's no place like home'' and ALL will be well :)

Well - the wonderful thing about freedom, democracy and all of that is that we DO have the right to think as we wish and (to a certain extent nowadays anyway) to still SAY what we mean - I think the way to go from here is to ''agree to disagree'' and I'll polish off my last port and cigar for the night and wish you well :)
 
Johnno said:
do you REALLY believe that comparing apples with oranges will work? A country of 20 million like Australia should be shouldering what? The burden of a country with 200 million? I was never much of a maths person
Click to expand...

Whoa, it seems I really overestimated you. The figures were given as a measure of population and of GDP thus enabling a comparison between nations of different size and wealth, I don't really have to explain this to you do I?

Disregarding the ranting and misinformation about terra nullius, the hundreds of boatloads of asylum seekers arriving daily, equivocations between asylum seeker/refugee/illegal immigrant and the smilies and lols, the gist of your argument is that asylum seekers are both criminals and an enormous economic burden on Australia. Both have been refuted on several occasions but you have continued with the arguments without addressing what exactly you believe to be fallacious about the rebuttals.
 
Oh - sorry about that - you're obviously correct - its not costing Australia (and therefore the Australian taxpayer) anything at all - the fact that its costing us hundreds of MILLIONS of dollars is obviously ''all in my mind'' - its not really a problem at all :) And yes, the fact that the criminals smuggling these people in *illegally* (in terms of Australian law) are actually breaking the law - that is a figment of my imagination as well - including those documented cases where the criminals have been prosecuted successfully...

As to percentages of those found to be legitimate refugees (after all the extensive health/security and other checks that all the relevant government agencies have to make - in the meantime keeping these people accommodated/fed/looked after (all of which is free of course - its not costing Australia anything either)) - even if 99% are eventually found to be legitimate refugees (in which case there was no NEED for them to come in illegally in the first place - they could have gone through official channels) the fact that even 1% turn out to be ''sleepers''/security risks/threats to the national security of Australia - um, its kind of obvious really here really isn't it ? - but ask yourself THIS: how many terrorists did it take to do the London bombings? The Madrid bombing? 9/11? The Bali bombings? Not many people at all really...

It might be a little simplistic - but in this case perhaps simplistic is the way to go - if you own a home you have a right to choose WHO you do (or do NOT) open the door to - who you let in... In the same way the Australian people have the *right* to a say in the immigration policies of our own government/country - something that has been effectively denied to us by successive governments over the last 40 years or so...

Its a bit like you telling me who I am allowed to have come into my apartment or not - rather than ME having that choice...

No - I think my initial response to the post above was the best one - to go back to having my coffee and croissant and enjoying my morning :)

FREEDOM is a wonderful thing - for those countries that still have it - and the freedom to think and believe what we want to is a large part of that - and at the end of the day you are free to think as you wish and I am free to do the same - so I think I'll leave it on this positive note - there are some discussions that go beyond the rational/realistic into what I can only describe as the ''twilight zone'' - but whereas I used to really enjoy watching the TV show there just isn't the same pay off here... :)
 
Johnno said:
Oh - sorry about that - you're obviously correct - its not costing Australia (and therefore the Australian taxpayer) anything at all - the fact that its costing us hundreds of MILLIONS of dollars is obviously ''all in my mind'' - its not really a problem at all :) And yes, the fact that the criminals smuggling these people in *illegally* (in terms of Australian law) are actually breaking the law - that is a figment of my imagination as well - including those documented cases where the criminals have been prosecuted successfully...
Click to expand...

I see you've backed away from calling the asylum seekers who arrive by boat "illegal". I'll assume you now realise that they are not "illegal" in any sense of the word and consider that a small victory against stupid rhetoric.

Almost every last cent of the "cost" involved in processing asylum seekers arriving irregularly is the cost of the show that Australian governments of both political persuasions put on to make bigots like you feel safe.

If these arrivals were processed in a humane and dignified yet still secure manner, the cost would be next to nothing. It's people like you who drive up the cost by forcing the government to respond to your fear mongering and then whine about the cost.

Johnno said:
As to percentages of those found to be legitimate refugees (after all the extensive health/security and other checks that all the relevant government agencies have to make - in the meantime keeping these people accommodated/fed/looked after (all of which is free of course - its not costing Australia anything either)) - even if 99% are eventually found to be legitimate refugees (in which case there was no NEED for them to come in illegally in the first place - they could have gone through official channels) the fact that even 1% turn out to be ''sleepers''/security risks/threats to the national security of Australia - um, its kind of obvious really here really isn't it ? - but ask yourself THIS: how many terrorists did it take to do the London bombings? The Madrid bombing? 9/11? The Bali bombings? Not many people at all really...
Click to expand...

You still don't get it, do you? There is no queue, there is no "official channel". There is no Australian diplomatic post in any of the countries we're talking about. The closest Australian diplomatic post to Iraq or Afghanistan that accepts asylum applications in Bangkok. They didn't come illegally, they came in a perfectly legally acceptable manner.

How many of the people responsible for the atrocities you mention were asylum seekers? Oh, that's right, none! How many of them were either born in the country in question or entered through other migration programs unrelated to asylum claims? Oh, that's right, all of them!

Can you draw our attention to a single asylum seeker who has committed a terrorism offense in Australia? Can you even point us to any statistic that indicates that asylum seekers have any increased risk of criminality over the general population? Or even the same risk of criminality, as opposed to less?

If you can't provide these statistics, then what you have left is simply racist fear mongering.

Johnno said:
It might be a little simplistic - but in this case perhaps simplistic is the way to go - if you own a home you have a right to choose WHO you do (or do NOT) open the door to - who you let in... In the same way the Australian people have the *right* to a say in the immigration policies of our own government/country - something that has been effectively denied to us by successive governments over the last 40 years or so...

Its a bit like you telling me who I am allowed to have come into my apartment or not - rather than ME having that choice...
Click to expand...

You get to decide who enters your home. It's not "your" country. It's mine, it's yours, it's the person who looks a bit different's country, it's the person who perhaps worships a different god than you's country, it's everyone's country who calls it home.

Your elected representatives get to decide the laws concerning who will be allowed entry to Australia. If you don't like their decision, you're free to vote for some nut job like Pauline Hanson or AAFI. That's your choice. What? Not enough people agree with your narrow minded racist ideas to make Australia completely ignore it's obligation to human rights?

Nothing has been "denied" to you. In fact, both sides of politics in Australia in a string of populist governments have given rednecks like you far too much consideration, effectively limiting and disregarding Australia's obligations under international and domestic law, as well as common human decency.

Johnno said:
FREEDOM is a wonderful thing - for those countries that still have it - and the freedom to think and believe what we want to is a large part of that - and at the end of the day you are free to think as you wish and I am free to do the same - so I think I'll leave it on this positive note - there are some discussions that go beyond the rational/realistic into what I can only describe as the ''twilight zone'' - but whereas I used to really enjoy watching the TV show there just isn't the same pay off here... :)
Click to expand...

Yes, you have the freedom to think and believe whatever you want, but if I were you I wouldn't be wearing your racism, stupidity and ignorance like a badge of honor.
 
This thread is now being sponsored by the Australian Tourist Authority.
 
This thread is moved to "World Politics".
 
You can throw all the red herrings you like, nobody is arguing that there is no expense, we are contesting your argument that the burden is enormous (and, as ndcj said, we'll assume you've conceded the point regarding the legal status of asylum seekers considering no counter argument has come forth in your last 5 or 6 posts).

In the same way that if someone here claimed his salary of 2000 pesos was enormous the first thing someone would do to verify the statement would be to put it in context, ie make a comparison with other salaries using various statistical tools like mean, median etc...

We have put your claim to a similar test comparing Australia to other nations. Every year there are x asylum claims, the burden of these claims is shared (unevenly) around the world. What the figures I supplied demonstrate is that when measuring the number of applications in raw data or by population or by GDP Australia sits about mid table (ie: it doesn't receive a particularly high nor a particularly low number of asylum claims). Unfortunately (for your argument) this is just a comparison of 44 industrialised countries. The rest of the world each year takes 70-80% of the burden of asylum claims. I don't know how much I need to walk you through this but that means Australia thanks to its geography is able to get away with not pulling its weight for a country of its size/wealth in providing assistance to asylum seekers.

I understand this will not change the way you think, but unless you have figures to refute what I have just demonstrated, you are in effect saying that even though in global terms Australia doesn't pull its weight in assisting asylum seekers for a country of its size/wealth (or even in raw terms) it should do even less. Even though the original path by which you arrived to this conclusion has been deconstructed for you on this thread you are of course absolutely free to continue with this opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top