Leaderboard

GON, you forgot to mention Trump has buggered up the American economy, having to pay $37B in taxpayer monies to U.S. farmers whose major soybean market he ruined. He has destroyed nearly every economic/trade agreement around. He's made enemies of a multitude of former Allies - then complains when they won't help with his war he started. He's done nothing to create "regime change" in Iran, and has almost certainly created a more hard-line regime there, who will just bide their time to strike back at the U.S. in bitter revenge. He's created greatly increased U.S. inflation, started wars when he claimed he was the greatest peacemaker in the world, has done nothing to stop the Ukraine-Russia war, and is preparing to invade Cuba. He's enriched himself massively by turning the U.S. Presidency position into a simple extension of his business dealings. He's lost tens of billions in U.S. military equipment losses, from aircraft to defence installations, all across the Middle East. He's had nearly all his tariff imposts overturned by the U.S. Supreme court. He's broken every election promise he made - such as, he "would stop the Ukraine War in one day". We have a good Australian name for people like him. "A Supreme Bullshit Artist".

Trump is still better than Johnson and Nixon, they killed off 56,000 young Americans for no good reason, no good reason at all. Trump closed the Southern Border, cleaned up Biden's illegal immigrant mess, and what a mess it was. He then started clamping down on illicit drug importation, not fooling round either. Now he's letting Islamists know who's boss. Trump warned them some time ago, don't mess with the United States, Christianity nor Western societies.

The general opinion of the immigration problem seems to be that immigrants lower the standards many Anglo-Europeans set in earlier days - as regards cleanliness, levels of service, and general behaviour standards. The previous laws relating to immigrants appear to have been seriously watered down. Originally, immigrants had to produce a clean criminal history, be sponsored by an Australian citizen and have a job to go to, and they were on "probation" for a couple of years after arrival. Any criminal offence soon after arrival would see them deported quickly. But now we have "African Crime Gangs", "Middle Eastern Crime Gangs", and Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs taken over by immigrant thugs. There has been a major upsurge in drug dealing, money laundering, car theft, car rebirthing, financial scams (especially involving NDIS and child care payment scams), and a major upsurge in the use of bladed weapons in serious assaults and home invasions. A lot of this crime upsurge is directly related to immigrants with criminal histories and tendencies who were let in, apparently unchecked. This is not the way to improve a country.

Ol' Barnaby works pretty hard on stopping other stupid politicians allowing stuff in that can wreck our bio security.

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to see how the post appears when each quote is precededed by 'willedoo said'. That's the problem with the way quotes work. You would have been better off just cut and pasting the relevant section, that way the quote would not attribute the words to me. I'd be happy if the mods kept the post up but removed the sections attributing the quotes to me. As said, it's in context to anyone who has read and understood my preceding post, but some people don't do that, and to them the post appears to be attributing those words to me which is not acceptable.

We haven't got a lot to Winge about compared to Many others. Nev

Box Hill Central is a busy shopping centre built over a railway station, with a bus terminus on the roof. You can sit in the mall for half an hour and be lucky to see half a dozen caucasions. Mainly Asians of various nationalities - Chinese, Vietnamese, Indian, Sri Lankan, Singaporean, etc.

Edited as requested.

I was about to say that Barnaby works hard at being a clown, but I think it comes naturally.

I would be very interested to know how immigrants have affected people PERSONALLY. There's a lot of anti-immigration rubbish on here. It's all general. Personally, in my team at work there are 3 people who emigrated to Australia. They're hard workers and good people. So I'm interested why people have a problem with Australia's current immigration regime. Is it because of the stories in the Murdoch press? Is it because you want a simple scapegoat for complex societal problems like house prices? Or have you been personally impacted by immigration?

One Nation policy: Deport 75,000 illegal migrants because Australia’s immigration laws must be enforced, not ignored. Visa overstayers, illegal workers, and unlawful non-residents undermine national security, drive down wages, and take advantage of public services meant for Australians. I don't fundamentally disagree with this, but noit for the reasons quoted. For me it is fairness. 75,000 illegal immigrants, even if all are working are not going to make a dent to wages, which are covered the the fair work act and collective bargaining agreements, anyway. Nor are they going to be able to claim public services with the exception of health and subsidised transport. What they will doi is take a few jobs under deprived conditions for them. I am not sure how the undermine national security - except those working legally in foreign embassies. One Nation policy: Cut immigration by over 570,000 people from current Labor levels by capping visas at 130,000 per year to ease pressure on housing, wages, and infrastructure. That was one year which was after COVID as a ballon.. and it is a gross migration, not net migration figure. Those numbers are dropping to normal levels already. Note, most of our immigration is for skilled migration visas, of which there is a chronic shortage (thankfully; even at my age, I should be able to get a job). One Nation policy: Stop the skilled visa rorting that allows cheap foreign labour to undercut Australian workers. I agree with this; I can't remember the Visa numbers (419?) This was introduced by the Coalition specifically to provide cheap overseas labour to their sponsors in lieu of Aussie labour. One Nation policy: End the student visa loopholes that turn study into a backdoor to permanent residency or low-wage labour. This is the same issue as we have in the UK. Whilst I philosophically agree with this, Australia has a chronic skills shortage, which they have to import. So, may as well use the people we have trained. Note, on skilled migration, it has to be tempered to balance developing talent locally, keeping salaries real, and making sure the economy continues. It is a balancing act. that some governments don't come close to performing. One Nation policy: Stop the Administrative Review Tribunal being abused with endless, weaponised appeals that clog the system and delay rightful deportations. Immigration enforcement must not be held hostage by legal loopholes. Reintroduce Temporary Protection Visas a proven, effective policy that prevents permanent residency through the back door and deters illegal arrivals. On the first one, I have no idea. In the second, is that not available already? Usually TPVs result in permament residency when it is proived that the person subject to it will be under the same or dsimilar threat for a sustained period of time. One Nation policy: Deport any visa holder who breaks the law. Weak law enforcement policies have put Australians in danger for too long. If you commit a crime, you lose your visa and the right to stay. We have to be careful with this.. Very populist, but let's face it, the Bondi hero who disarmed one of the shooters was on bail or something, wasn't he? I think this should be qualified by indictable offences and even then, of certain types. If someone shoplifted something small, for example, would that really be cause to deport them? Given nothing happens to locals who do it, It is a value judgement. One Nation policy: Introduce an eight-year waiting period for citizenship and welfare, ensuring new arrivals contribute before they take. Again, this is a great soundbyte as people think of unemployment benefits cheats, etc. But what happens if someone is a permanent resident waiting for citizenship in an average job and suffers a car accident not their fault and can't work for 12 months. Are they to be denied public health services (a benefit), unemployment benefit, etc; Or do we make them destitute? IMHO, once they or their family pay taxes, they are eligible. Simples. Do we make locals wait 8 years of paying tax before they can claim benefits? This sort of policy assumes every migrant is here to abuse the system,. IO am sure some are... but not all.. There may be some things you want to put limits on - e.g. child allowance (if that is still a thing), etc. I guess. One Nation policy: Refuse entry to migrants from nations known to foster extremist ideologies that are incompatible with Australian values and way of life. I would prefer, if this is really an issue, potential migrants having to pay for a proper psychometric assessment or something. Some people may be leaving precisely for that reason and they want nothing to do with such ideologies. In fact, they would be quite opposed to extremism and vocally so. Where this is coming from, with respect to Pauline is the ME, and there are many more Imams in the country than the one or two hate preachers. Of course, the press doesn't focus on that side of the coin. One Nation policy: Withdraw from the UN Refugee Convention because Australia will not be dictated to by foreign organisations when deciding who we accept into our nation on humanitarian grounds The evidence would suggest that, regardless to Australia being a party to the refugee conventions (not just one), it does already not fulfil its obligations, because being a signatory to an international convention is just that; your a signatory. International pressure may be applied to Australia, but so far, Australia has ignored it. A convention is only legally binding when it is imputed in local law, by an act of parliament; and in the same way, we can change what we will do, and then repeal it... It is our law that determines what we do and what we don't do - if we do anything - under an international convention. Again, a great soundbyter to get support, but of no practical significance. (Edited as requested by @Jerry_Atrick and @willedoo Mod.)

What Gina wants

It's one of the reasons I started this thread - because IMHO, there is a lot of hyporcisy on both sides of the argument. For instance, what exactly is good for scaring the nation? |Immigration itself, or discussing it? If the latter, I think that suppressing it is playing into the far right. If the former, not discussing it is playing into the far right. It's lose/lose. But discussing it; hearing peoples' grievances as well as peoples'praise for it - whether real or perceiv ed - is important, and hopefully (very wishful thinking) cutting through the BS and getting to the facts will refine what people think abouit it. Suppressing or dismissing it is just playing into the ideologues' playbook. Another example is by what measure should Britain have stayed in the EU. Would it have seen Britain prosper or would it have slowed the decline? It is easy to state an opinion, but if you think that those who voted Brexit are racists, my observations are very different. Yep, there were some, but most were fed up and it was a protest vote. It hasn't helped them, but a lot of people who voted for it are not really affected either way, as they are largely economically and socially left behind. So, you could argue they were votinhg to make it harder for those who seemed to dispropritionately benefit. Migrants were getting the blame, and they still are - I will concede that.. but that is because the other side simply dismiss the anti-immgration rhetoric as nonsense without actually addressing it. IMHO, there are quite a few reasons for it. What do you define as mass immigration, exactly? Is it purely numbers coming in, or numbers coming in from a specific country/culture? There are always waves of cultures/countries coming in.. But their overall numbers remain relatively low - less than 1/2 the toital immigration number. As a percentage of the population, it barely registers - at about 0.25 of a percent.. and even at the height of the migration intake after COVID, out net immigration remained relatively constant, which, since 2020 (so immedately after COVID with the big numbers of immigrants), peeaked at a little over 140,000 in total. Thats is 0.5% or 5/1000ths of the population. That, to me, is not mass immigration. And most of the people that emigrated after COVID were not Australian born according to AI.. so it is not a matter of losing "traditional" Aussies to non-"Traditional Aussies" in the net migration numbers. It even pours boiling water over the argument that immigration is the main driver fdor rental and house price increases. In fact, Australia's housing prices are more to do with overseas buyers who don't live here, usually looking for ways to launder money thanks to Australia's weak anit-money laundering laws; the generous tax concessions for residential invetors, increasing populations in the cities due to economic factors and low density housing that is having a bigger impact than < 150k new people a year. Unless Australia is so short of land, like, I dunno, Ireland, that it simply cannot cope. Be that as it may, you haven't said how it affects you personally - how are you worse off because of immigration? They didn't have flags, but they had a hierarchy of soverign identification, the main one I recall was totems. pre-European First Nations was a sophisticated social and territorial structure, designed around moeity. A flag is nothing but an identification oif a people - and First Nations had tiered approach that allowed clear identification of mobs, clans, and the like. And there were very clear rules about engaging the other mob/clan/etc. And yes, I agree with @Siso - they are all puppets of their sponsors.. Though the popularity of a leader/cabinet may temper it. What.. how can mass migration - however you define it - be anti-Australian. Modern Australia was founded on it - and a hostile version of it, to boot. I would argue it is the very essence of Australian., especially if yoou look at our society when I was a kid, let alone today. The facts don't add up to your perception.. there ain't hordes.. And of those "hordes", a disproportionate nunmber go on to contribute well beyond the 9 - 5 worker. In my view, tradiitional Aussies are First Nations people; tough and able to survive and thrive against a fairly inhospitable environment full of all sorts of nasties; looking out for each other, and ensuring everyone works together. Yep, they had their issues, but they also embodied a lot of what we like to think traditional Aussies do. Modern Aussies are the ones who started with the mass-immigration of the 1770s and beyond. They are not just the British - but other Europeans, the Chinese, the Afghans - all early arrivals that have grown and shaped this country and successiuve waves. When I was a kiod, it was Italians and Greeks, followed by the Vietnamese and then the Turks. After WWII, it was the Eastern Europeans, presumably Jews; now we are welcoming Africans, Indonesionas, Middle Easterns, etc. It all eventually blends. Each cultural wave, when it firt arrives, tends to stick to their home traditions and it is usually the next generation that mix and further adopt their new home's culture. Yes, there have been events like the Bondo shooting, which is horrific and arguably and imported issue. But at the same token, most of our shooting events have been home grown; and continue to be so. The question for me is how to better integrate the first wave into our wider community.

Yeah, SOME migration ... not hoards of third-worlders making a nation unrecognizable.

Why pick Pauline out, they are all puppets and none really have any talent except for bull****. Sick of career politicians. at least she has had a real job. Gave you an example of shallow Albo is with his carrying on about the fuel reserve in 2020?. and no doing anything about it when he came to power. all muppets.

It's not so much "immigration", but "mass immigration" created by the conjoined major parties. They ignored public opinion and went ahead with it anyway. Immigration was no longer included in the democratic process, and still isn't. You can have your say, but it inevitably falls on deaf ears. Things might be changing though, with the high cost of living and shortage of housing, the pig-headed major party politicians can't help but hear rumblings from nearly every sector of the broader community. Mass immigration drove me to support One Nation, that's how it affected me. I will not support or vote for parties who find it convenient to gang up against the Public for selfish reasons. They promise sweeteners at election time, but the issue of immigration is completely off the table. As the major parties lose their influence over the general public, as is happening now, we'll get a chance to gain power over them and tell them what we want, not what they want all the time. Mass immigration is not doing what it is intended to do, making us stronger, no, it is making us weaker in every respect you can think of. Why do we have a trillion dollar debt? Why do we have so much drug crime? Why is the nation split into 200 different groups with 200 different flags? Why did we have an anti Semitic "Bondi", and blocked streets full of River to the Sea people? We shouldn't go around with blinkers on. Take them off and look around.

Just a little out of date now, but still funny ...

I didn't grow Wine grapes then, but I drank wine. 8 weeks Later I was flying to Papua New Guinea . POM LAE. What a change from what I was used to. Nev

In a week, it will be 61 years since I moved here ( Melbourne) for a Flying Job . Nev

I've worked wth a lot of traditional owners over the years. They vary a lot depending on the location of the traditional land. In areas where their ancestors were relocated, generally very few if any were living on traditional lands. All were mixed race and a lot born and bred in the cities. They used to come out to their traditional land to work with us as cultural heritage monitors. Very few had any experience or knowledge of it but they were put through training induction courses to teach them what was what. At times I sensed a bit of embarrassment on their part, particularly the city people who had to learn some of the most basic things like how to boil a billy. They were all generally good people but that sense of disconnect to their traditional land weighed heavy on them. On the other side of the coin, we sometimes worked with traditional full blood people who had never left their land. Some could barely speak English, but those that you could converse with were very knowledgeable about their country and the ways of their part of the world. I must admit, when I first worked with full blood traditional people in the early 80's, I got a bit of a surprise to see young men with big thick tribal cicatrices on their bodies. I thought at that stage in history it might have been a dying practice and only found on the older men, but not so. Tribal customs are still solid in some of those areas.