and as religion has already been brung into this.... remember..

“For of those to whom much is given, much is required”
Bible (Luke 12:48)

wave knave said...

and as religion has already been brung into this.... remember..

“For of those to whom much is given, much is required”
Bible (Luke 12:48)

I've sort of purposely avoided dwelling on the religion side of it because that would derail the whole discussion towards a religious debate.
Such debates are ultimately unwinable from all sides so are pointless.
However, since you make a quote, I think this one is more applicable.
"For to him who has will more be given and he will have abundance, but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away." Mat 13:12 Revised standard version.

To me this says lots.
Have a look at the pathetic situation all the muslim world is in compared with the rest of the world and ask if this quote might be applicable.
Which of course is why they want to come here.
Which, and also of course, is why I would be very sad to see Australia be swayed towards embracing a muslim society, even a little bit.

I could say pages and pages on this aspect but I know I wouldn't get past the first post before the topic is locked so I wont try.

Sorry Laurie. No more quotes from me. I promise.
Save the lock for the kiters forum. They need a heavy duty one over there last time I looked.

Are we not all either missing the point or just evading it?

Austalia, and all other first world countries, encourage immigration because it FUELS THE ECONOMY.

The way our economy is structured it has to GROW.

If it stops GROWING it goes into RECESSION.

So the easy answer is to import CONSUMERS that we cannot BREED ourselves.

Until we wake up to this fact, in all likelihood never, the population will continue to expand at a frightening rate, until such time as it becomes unmanageable and unsustainable.

Fortunately I will not be around when it reaches this stage.

ANDREW TILLETT CANBERRA, The West Australian
April 6, 2010, 10:26 am


The Federal Government's asylum seeker problems are continuing with another boat stopped near Ashmore Reef.

It is the third boat to be stopped this month and follows a record number of arrivals in March and will place more pressure on the Christmas Island detention centre.

HMAS Childers stopped the boat last night, near West Island at Ashmore Reef, Home Affairs Minister Brendan O'Connor said in a statement.

He said initial indications suggested 22 passengers and one crew member were on board.

"The Australian Government remains committed to protecting the Australian border from maritime threats, including people smuggling," Mr O'Connor said.

"People smuggling is a global and regional problem and the Australian Government continues to work closely with our regional neighbours to address this issue."

The group will be taken to Christmas Island, despite the detention camps being overcrowded.

Since Kevin Rudd came to power in late 2007, 104 boat carrying asylum seekers have been intercepted.
During March, 16 boats were stopped, breaking the record set under then prime minister John Howard in November 1999, when 14 vessels carrying asylum seekers reached Australian waters.

Gypsy Drifter.........myyy, you have drifted into old age!!!!!

poor relative said...

GypsyDrifter said...
""I would like the Government to be seen to be doing something about this issue.""

I want this Government (not as in Lib's or Labour) to grow a back bone.

like what??

Well what we could is buy a second hand 747, keep them on xmas island untill they have enough numbers to fill it then take them back to where they came from. Easy!
Now that would be cheaper than holding them for two years on xmas island, wouldnt you think?

From what I've read there is little restriction on foreigners owning Australian houses. I discussed this with a colleague today who is from India. He believes this rule will allow criminal gangs from India to launder their money by purchasing houses in Australia. Their dirty money will become clean here and they will display all the trappings of respectability.

If the rules do not allow an individual to own more than one house then this rule will be dodged by them using their proxies to purchase houses in their names.

Mobydisc said...

From what I've read there is little restriction on foreigners owning Australian houses. I discussed this with a colleague today who is from India. He believes this rule will allow criminal gangs from India to launder their money by purchasing houses in Australia. Their dirty money will become clean here and they will display all the trappings of respectability.

If the rules do not allow an individual to own more than one house then this rule will be dodged by them using their proxies to purchase houses in their names.

So what are all these "Asians" going to DO with these millions of houses they're going to buy??? Stand back and look at them? Send pictures of them to their chums? What?

Indonesia pushes asylum seekers for deal
April 7, 2010, 5:09 pm

About 200 asylum seekers aboard a boat moored in the Indonesian port of Merak for six months after trying to reach Australia have been given five days to come ashore or face deportation.

The Sri Lankans had previously refused to come ashore until they were offered a special deal similar to the 78 asylum seekers who were picked up last year by an Australian Customs vessel, the Oceanic Viking.

Officials of the Indonesian navy, foreign ministry and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) arrived at the boat unexpectedly on Wednesday.

Namil, a spokesman for the refugees, said UNHCR staff took photos of every person on the boat and asked for personal details.

One of the group's chief demands is for the commission to confirm their refugee status before they leave the boat.

This is very unlikely to be met.

"We have asked them for five days to wait in the boat," Namil told AAP on Wednesday.

While he was focused on the group's immediate concerns, Namil was keen to emphasise their goal - life in Australia.

"Australian government must help us for resettlement," he said.

The boat was headed for Australia late last year when Prime Minister Kevin Rudd intervened.

Learning the boat was on the way, Mr Rudd phoned Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and asked him to stop it in Indonesian waters.

The Indonesian navy apprehended the boat and took it to the Javan port of Merak on October 11.

But the Sri Lankan asylum seekers - then numbering 254, including 31 children - refused to get off the boat, fearing they'd have to wait years for resettlement if their refugee claims were processed in Indonesia.

Mr Rudd intervened after a similar standoff with 78 asylum seekers who were taken aboard the Oceanic Viking earlier in 2009.

The Australian boat picked up the ethnic Tamils in international waters inside Indonesia's search and rescue zone in October and took them to the Indonesian island of Bintan.

But the group refused to leave the Australian vessel and enter Bintan's detention centre, sparking a four-week standoff.

The Rudd government finally enticed them ashore with the promise of rapid processing and resettlement in a third country.

Indonesia promised the group in the Merak standoff it would not force them off the boat, but its patience appears to have come to an end.

Refugee advocate Ian Rintoul called the actions of the Indonesians inflammatory.

"They are trying to intimidate them," Mr Rintoul said.

Indonesian immigration official Harry Purwanto was keen to claim an agreement had been reached.

"Yes, the negotiation reached (a) deal," Mr Purwanto told AAP from Merak Port.

But his claim was rejected by Mr Rintoul.

"No agreement has been reached," he said.

This was confirmed by Namil.
Immigration Minister Chris Evans and opposition immigration spokesman Scott Morrison have been contacted for comment.

From the Daily Reckoning:

-Hi

Why all the concern about the Chinese buying up units and houses?

You frequently write how money spent on Mc Mansions is dead capital but if we start selling to overseas customers, house building becomes an export (productive) industry!

Of course we not only sell the house but also the block of land on which it sits, so to some extent this export industry involves a bit of "selling the farm" too unfortunately. But, hey, we need to import capital and selling land may not be a bad way of doing it. Unlike selling coal or iron ore the sold goods cannot be taken out of the country and we do not lose dividends as we might do if we sell parts of our businesses to foreigners. Of course we may lose capital appreciation but isn't it better that foreigners buy from us believing property prices will increase for ever than us believing it ourselves?

It sticks in our claw [sic] because it is pricing our young out of the property market. If we believe in free (international) markets we just have to wear this. If we are not prepared to wear it we must wear the alternative of government intervention (first home buyer's grants, restrictions on imported capital etc).

Kind Regards,

Ian H.




--Dear Dan

I have thoroughly enjoyed reading the DR and its sister (paid) publications. Good work. My family and I moved to Perth from Canada in 2002 to take up an employment opportunity.

We fell in love with the climate, the people and the lifestyle but we could never make sense of how people made ends meet with the cost of living being so high, especially the cost of property.

Having owned our house in Canada outright, it was (emotionally) difficult for us to take on a large mortgage for what appeared to us to be a pretty average property.

As we all know, property went up from there and for nearly 8 years we have rented. When the GFC hit, we decided to start looking at buying a property as we expected the prices to relax, even if only just a little. We soon realised that the government was working against us, and for good reason: the whole 'miracle' economy is dependent on ever increasing property prices.

To make a long story short, we have decided to 'vote with our feet' and move back to Canada. We have already purchased a property there which is far from average and will own it outright at far less than we would have paid here for a basic 4x2.

We love Australia and may even return one day but it seems that, at least for now, the property "crisis" has changed the course of our journey and has cost Australia an Oil & Gas Engineer/Project Manager, a Maths Teacher and three bright young kids with heaps of potential.

To have it attributed to a 'land shortage' is an assault on any form of intelligence, but anyone who subscribes to such rubbish will recognise that we have helped alleviate the shortfall in available properties by one!

Cheers,
Steve

New refugee boat intercepted off north coast of Western Australia
April 07, 2010 10:44PM

ANOTHER boatload of asylum seekers was intercepted tonight, putting further pressure on the Christmas Island detention facility.

The latest boat - the 37th to arrive this year - was picked up by authorities off the north coast of Western Australia.

It was carrying 99 passengers and four crew.

Home Affairs Minister Brendan O'Connor said the group would be transferred to Christmas Island for processing.

More than 200 asylum seekers have been sent to Christmas Island since Good Friday.

Um, having enough room isnt the problem GF.

Sorry doggie - was simplifying cause me rant was overlong awready.

We have excellent public health, oodles of space (despite the fact that we spread 1/4 acre blocks everywhere - unlike most of the world) and enjoy a pretty affluent lifestyle that can fairly easily accomodate genuine refugees. We bounced back better economically than most and have been sitting pretty economically for 20 yrs now.

Wanna save money on refugees? Close CI. Process them thouroughly but effeciently (as has begun happening in recent years) and stop spending mega $$ trying to convince the public we can build a rabbit refugee proof fence.

1952…. An English immigrant [ female ] arrives Australia
She fairly quickly is married to her skipper friend….that’s now 2 people
By 1960…..They have seven children, 4 boys and 3 girls….now its….. 9 people
By 1980….. There are seven partners, husbands and wives……………. 16people
By 1990….. A total of around 57 grand children are produced………… 51people
2006…… There are now 14 great grand children and more to come…65people

In just over 50 years “1” has grown to 65


The Other Boat People 2010

Around 106 boats have arrived average people 70 each craft……7,420 people
Mostly men and boys, few women, so lets say………………………..7,000 people
Maybe a percentage [ 1,000 ] wont be allowed to stay……………6,000 people
So after being accepted/granted and working for two years
They bring out their Spouses and young children X 2…..thats….24,000 people
+ the 6,000 already here……………………………………………………30,000 people
They then bring out fifty percent of grandparents………………….42,000people
They continue producing offspring, big family people…30,000..72,000 people

6,000 originals X 7 kids apiece that’s 42,000 people+72,000 = 118,000

That’s by about 2030 and by that time great grandkids are coming on stream
Lets say 70,000 breed at 5 per head……350,000 by 2050 out of 106 boats.

The World cannot accept this growth, Australia has no chance of survival.
The growth industries have to be in the line of sterilization for some to survive, or at least so the earth may continue. It will be truly the survival of the best off.
The “serfs/workers” will be an endangered species. Mankind as we know it
cannot survive under such strain, it’s just down the track away’s
Another so called civilization hits the wall…….into oblivion.

NotWal said...

I remember it was mooted many many years ago that land should not be held in freehold title. As you probably know freehold title is not an unconditional right of ownership. It used to be the Crown but now it is Australia that retains ownership of all Australian land and permits the use of this land under freehold title. This is a legal device that allows resumptions etc. Anyway it seems to be within the power of government to disallow the rights of freehold title if they so choose. It was mooted that land should only be held for finite time spans like lease hold. That way there is a natural depreciation working against all the natural appreciative pressures and makes land a less desirable commodity for speculative investment. The idea is that this would keep the price of land low and accessible.

I don't know if it would work. I'm not sure that it's even politically possible but the notion appeals to my socialist leanings. I should add that I know zip about economics

You can just check on the house prices in Canberra to answer that question.
All property in Canberra remains under the ownership of the Commonwealth.
When you buy a house you buy just the house and you lease the land from the government.
The maximum lease is for 99 years and it is not reset when you buy an established house from someone else. That is, it is possible to buy a house with only a few years left to run on the land lease. Many Canberra houses are now in that category.
Having leased land off the commonwealth, I can reliably say that you can end up getting totally screwed.
You ultimately have far less rights than owning freehold property and you are pretty much powerless to do anything about it when it suits the government to do something with it which is not in your best interest.
I would certainly not want to go down that path for all residential property.

As to whether it would keep the prices lower, Canberra house prices are not much different from other cities in Australia. They seem to be a bit cheaper than Sydney and are probably on a par with Melbourne.
Compared to other inland cities they are a bit on the high side.