Should we reduce the refugee intake? (2 Viewers)

[JohnMaximus]

maybe stop buying the newspapers and buying into political rhetoric, then maybe you'll stop hearing about it.

It appears to be the main argument in the upcoming election (on tv). It's a seemingly stupid topic for Abbott to bring up again and again. You don't need to buy into political rhetoric to hear about it, child.

 

[Crobat]

The truth is I'm just tired of hearing about boat people.

And so am I - it's become a campaigning tool for Labour and Liberal, and it wouldn't be so much of an issue if Labour didn't dismantle the Pacific Solution that the Liberals instated which was more or less working, at least a lot better than this PNG solution. PNG as a country is shocking in terms of human rights, I could go on but I won't because it's just plain stupid what Labour has done. The real issue I have with it is that this asylum seeker thing has begun to overshadow legitimate problems like immigrants overstaying their Visas, the absolute shit-tastic job Labour has done with the mining tax, and the need for the RBA to lower the interest rate (which is bad economically). But despite my annoyance that doesn't justify sinking asylum seekers, denying them their human right which we as a country are sworn to provide them with, and creating enormous international issues that could pose harsh ramifications to the country as a whole.

This is the real world, not COD. If you have nothing of substance to say then leave the people who are interested in maintaining a civil conversation to talk. Your opinion is unfortunate in that it is what I am sure 90% of the bogan demographic believe to be right due to an incredible lack of understanding as to what asylum seekers are, their rights as human beings, and our responsibility as a country that has ratified the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and is highly ranked in terms of refuge provision and safety. Really it comes down to the Labour and Liberal parties' insufficient provision of information to the public. They both failed in that respect, and there was a very interesting article written by a senior human rights barrister which stated this in detail. If I can find it again, I will link it.

 

[JohnMaximus]

And so am I - it's become a campaigning tool for Labour and Liberal, and it wouldn't be so much of an issue if Labour didn't dismantle the Pacific Solution that the Liberals instated which was more or less working, at least a lot better than this PNG solution. PNG as a country is shocking in terms of human rights, I could go on but I won't because it's just plain stupid what Labour has done. The real issue I have with it is that this asylum seeker thing has begun to overshadow legitimate problems like immigrants overstaying their Visas, the absolute shit-tastic job Labour has done with the mining tax, and the need for the RBA to lower the interest rate (which is bad economically). But despite my annoyance that doesn't justify sinking asylum seekers, denying them their human right which we as a country are sworn to provide them with, and creating enormous international issues that could pose harsh ramifications to the country as a whole.

This is the real world, not COD. If you have nothing of substance to say then leave the people who are interested in maintaining a civil conversation to talk. Your opinion is unfortunate in that it is what I am sure 90% of the bogan demographic believe to be right due to an incredible lack of understanding as to what asylum seekers are, their rights as human beings, and our responsibility as a country that has ratified the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and is highly ranked in terms of refuge provision and safety. Really it comes down to the Labour and Liberal parties' insufficient provision of information to the public. They both failed in that respect, and there was a very interesting article written by a senior human rights barrister which stated this in detail. If I can find it again, I will link it.

Keep your pants on, you aren't the only one who read 'kite runner'. Like I said, not srs.

 

[AB940]

It appears to be the main argument in the upcoming election (on tv). It's a seemingly stupid topic for Abbott to bring up again and again. You don't need to buy into political rhetoric to hear about it, child.

I think we're all tired of the issue being used as a political chess piece. This does not change the fact that at the heart of this issue are people escaping from dire situations, which they are entitled to do under the UN's declaration of human rights. If you're just 'venting' there is no need to make such bigoted statements and to add fuel to the smear campaign against refugees that is perpetuated by both major political parties on a daily basis. They are not a "national security threat", they are people who have been robbed of their human rights in their homelands and for the Australian government to rob them of more is atrocious.

 

[Crobat]

Keep your pants on, you aren't the only one who read 'kite runner'. Like I said, not srs.

Didn't read Kite Runner. Girlfriend was in absolute tears over it the entire way so I decided to give it a miss and I couldn't even make out what she was saying was happening. I'm more of a Marquez person.

But I don't take ignorant posts like that lightly, and tonight I'm already pretty annoyed because there are some genuine idiots on Facebook I am tearing into too for an unrelated matter to this.

And FYI: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...people-here-are-the-facts-20130718-2q5rv.html

 

[Garygaz]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...r-over-segregation-for-asylum-seekers.html?fb

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-10/swiss-vote-for-tougher-asylum-laws/4743236

even the swiss are getting fed up of refugees. for years they have allowed double the european average (relative to population) of refugees to enter their country, a policy decision all you bleeding heart hippies would love. but now what? 80% of the population wants the numbers reduced and legislation has been passed, refugees are banned from using public services. welcome to reality.

 

[Crobat]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...r-over-segregation-for-asylum-seekers.html?fb

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-10/swiss-vote-for-tougher-asylum-laws/4743236

even the swiss are getting fed up of refugees. for years they have allowed double the european average (relative to population) of refugees to enter their country, a policy decision all you bleeding heart hippies would love. but now what? 80% of the population wants the numbers reduced and legislation has been passed, refugees are banned from using public services. welcome to reality.

I can understand why the asylum seeker issue is annoying, but is promoting segregation really the best way to go about it? And if we completely neglect them and ban them from public services, where does that leave them in regards to their right to asylum, and by extension, their right to a new life? I don't vote based on social issues, but morally I think it's unjust to institutionalise discrimination, especially against those who have been desperate to escape life or death situations.

 

[obliviousninja]

FYI, there are more illegal Irish backpackers coming into Australia and overstaying their visas, then there are refugees.

 

[Crobat]

FYI, there are more illegal Irish backpackers coming into Australia and overstaying their visas, then there are refugees.

Indeed. One of the reasons the refugee thing is so annoying because it's overshadowing legit issues that had nothing in place to deal with it beforehand...

 

[Garygaz]

except those irish backpackers:
-already speak english
-aren't collecting welfare
-are culturally aligned with australia
-aren't all moving to the same closed, ethnic communities/suburbs

but yes, it is an issue, albeit, a separate one to the refugee problem.

 

[Crobat]

except those irish backpackers:
-already speak english
-aren't collecting welfare
-are culturally aligned with australia
-aren't all moving to the same closed, ethnic communities/suburbs

but yes, it is an issue, albeit, a separate one to the refugee problem.

My thoughts exactly, but seeing as everyone is getting riled up over the "illegal entry" and "jump the queue" crap into the country it feels right to consider it a bigger issue than it is being treated.

 

[isildurrrr1]

except those irish backpackers:
-already speak english
-aren't collecting welfare
-are culturally aligned with australia
-aren't all moving to the same closed, ethnic communities/suburbs

but yes, it is an issue, albeit, a separate one to the refugee problem.

1. so what
2. no shit sherlock, you realize asylum seekers can claim welfare because they are for humanitarian reasons right? and salary caps don't help much either.
3. australia is a multicultural society whether you like it or not.
4. i bet it scares you whenever you see a non-english sign in australia doesn't it.

careful white boy, yellow australia 2016

 

[AB940]

except those irish backpackers:
-already speak english
-aren't collecting welfare
-are culturally aligned with australia
-aren't all moving to the same closed, ethnic communities/suburbs

but yes, it is an issue, albeit, a separate one to the refugee problem.

Pauline Hanson is that you?

 

[spatula232]

1. so what
2. no shit sherlock, you realize asylum seekers can claim welfare because they are for humanitarian reasons right? and salary caps don't help much either.
3. australia is a multicultural society whether you like it or not.
4. i bet it scares you whenever you see a non-english sign in australia doesn't it.

careful white boy, yellow australia 2016

That's quite an interesting thing to say lol. Does that mean all of the middle eastern people fleeing we call yellow?

 

[isildurrrr1]

That's quite an interesting thing to say lol. Does that mean all of the middle eastern people fleeing we call yellow?

still part of asia innit

 

[obliviousninja]

its the person who thought Islam was a country and that halal food supports terrorism.

Pauline Hanson is that you?

 

[Garygaz]

1. so what
2. no shit sherlock, you realize asylum seekers can claim welfare because they are for humanitarian reasons right? and salary caps don't help much either.
3. australia is a multicultural society whether you like it or not.
4. i bet it scares you whenever you see a non-english sign in australia doesn't it.

careful white boy, yellow australia 2016

ahah i love it, oh someone mentioned a minority issue - just pull the racism card! the play of a simpleton.

and no shit i realise they are collecting it for humanitarian reasons, but do you realise that there are probably a billion people in the world are most likely deserving of our aid, but how many do you think we can afford to accommodate? do you care to have that conversation? or would you rather go for the intellectual dwarf response and just scream racism again?

 

[isildurrrr1]

ahah i love it, oh someone mentioned a minority issue - just pull the racism card! the play of a simpleton.

and no shit i realise they are collecting it for humanitarian reasons, but do you realise that there are probably a billion people in the world are most likely deserving of our aid, but how many do you think we can afford to accommodate? do you care to have that conversation? or would you rather go for the intellectual dwarf response and just scream racism again?

Most of them coming in are from 3 places, iraq, a-stan and sri lanka. I'm pretty sure the ones coming from iraq and a-stan do deserve our help more than anyone else BECAUSE we've been fucking up their livelihoods and putting THEIR people at risk as a direct result of our military intervention. ISAF doesn't have the will to fight a counter-insurgency anymore and a-stan will implode when the troops pull out in 2014. And why shouldn't we help the tamil people escape a genocide? These aren't people whose going to come over to australia to shoot up all your jobs with their low riders, 90% of them are GENUINE refugee. spending millions on ads about people smugglers in sydney CBD isn't really sending a message to people smugglers now is it?

These ARE genuine refugees, whose lives WILL be at risk if they were returned home. Were still spending money outsourcing our commitment to PNG, it's not like it's an economic reason. It's just pure and simple political rhetoric and media spin to win votes. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[spatula232]

Most of them coming in are from 3 places, iraq, a-stan and sri lanka. I'm pretty sure the ones coming from iraq and a-stan do deserve our help more than anyone else BECAUSE we've been fucking up their livelihoods and putting THEIR people at risk as a direct result of our military intervention. ISAF doesn't have the will to fight a counter-insurgency anymore and a-stan will implode when the troops pull out in 2014. And why shouldn't we help the tamil people escape a genocide? These aren't people whose going to come over to australia to shoot up all your jobs with their low riders, 90% of them are GENUINE refugee. spending millions on ads about people smugglers in sydney CBD isn't really sending a message to people smugglers now is it?

These ARE genuine refugees, whose lives WILL be at risk if they were returned home. Were still spending money outsourcing our commitment to PNG, it's not like it's an economic reason. It's just pure and simple political rhetoric and media spin to win votes. Nothing more, nothing less.

Yeah. But when people that hate the fact that we are letting in these people it will sway their vote won't it. If I was a firm believer against letting refugees in I would support the Mark 2 policy. Don't know about you, but I think that it is a good political gesture, yet gaining fans also gets you enemies.

 

[Frostbitten]

My opinion on the issue is that it is being abused by politicians to divide the country and from there obtain votes because lets face it, the vast majority of influential politicians are pieces of shit who don't represent their supporters and lie continuously just so they can achieve their own little personal goals of power and position.

However for the actual content of the issue I strongly believe that the genuine refugees should be allowed, however therein lies the rub (strong/10 Hamlet). It is impossible to really determine who is genuine and not partially because all documentation gets torn up before they arrive in Australia as part of the agreement they make with the smugglers and also because we possess no information on them. All that can be really done is assume some parts of the asylum seekers are productive members of society.

My mother worked at the centre in Villawood as a guard and particularly remembers it was a bad experience.
-The men generally have no real value for their women or children and strongly believed they were entitled to everything.
-The men also try to scam a lot of things out of the workers and overall abused the system to its fully potential.
-They constantly had violent outbreaks and caused a lot of destruction.
-They were not the type of people who would be terribly poor in their own country. Often the ones who are cannot muster up enough to pay for the trip.
-There were often some very desensitised people who lacked the strong judgement between right and wrong as a lot of them come from very, very traumatic and violent upbringings.

Mainly the men were bad (particularly young men) but the women and children were generally decent and worthy candidates for admission. If there were to be people accepted it should mainly be the women and their children as they are most likely less affected by their old lives and also have greater intentions to assimilate and succeed for the good of their children.

This was her take on the situation and I would imagine that this would be the solution we should be going for.

It certainly is a conundrum, due to the nature of the topic there simply cannot be a perfect answer where everyone wins.