Australia economy shows recessionary behaviors.

[The_Hypocrite]

Hi Neddy,

this is my take about the whole situation. Kevin Rudd is popular with the people as compared to Gillard. Rudd was overthrown by the faceless men of the labour party. Which is a worry as an elected MP can be overthrown by unelected people. Just as bad as PAP.

With regards to Rudd letting in refugees through the back door, I heard that John Howard was doing that when he was PM. That is why if u look at Balga and Mirrabooka, heaps of refugees living there. Like Little India in Spore. They came during the Howard years. Anyway most of the politicians are 2 faced snakes.

Now for my take on the Refugees. The reason why they are here is due to the influence of the Refugee Lobby who dont give a shit about the working class. This Refugee Lobby compose of refugee advocates who earn $$ through Government funding. Also this Refugee Lobby have the bleeding heart left wing assholes and the Greens in their pockets. Also the Dept of Immigration is benefiting from these boat arrivals as they are earning heaps on overtime pay, free travel etc. In addition you have industries like Salvos etc who benefit from funding to house these refugees etc. Its in their interest to ensure the boats come in as there is money to be made from Government funding. I heard that one of the CEO for an advocate group is earning 100k/year for doing fuck all.

These scums are ruining the country, in Singapore there is complaints about low uneducated foreigners getting PRs etc. This is the same with the refugees who are nothing but economic migrants. If they are soo persecuted,,why dont they go to India? It cos India is poor and Oz give them more rights and welfare. Of course they will come.

I hope when the Liberals win the next election, they will reinstate Howard mandatory policies. However it will be too late,,,as too many of them are here. Also when Rudd was elected, 2 Liberal MPs Judy Moylan and Petro Georgiou supported Rudd on the ending of mandatory detention. Both are traitors.

To me the whole lot should be hang for treason. And it seems Tony Abbot has gotten his finger on the right button. But he is not willing to commit on what he will do with the Boat people as he is just a politician. He will act if the tide is turns against these refugee advocates. The tide is turning,,just not sure by how much. But amoungst my frens, they are quite pissed off with these boat people getting benefits at the expense of the tax payers.

Ok about One Nation, during the 90s they got a bad reputation due to the media being against them. I hope this time they will be smarter and use the alternative media to get their message out like what Obama did in 2008.

Another party is the Clive Palmer Party...if he is not a greedy rich man, and he does not owe the faceless men or refugee advocates, he might be able to get the right policies across. Or he could turn around and be a Party for the rich than we will all be screwed anyway.

I dont know much about the Aust 1st Party but at this stage anything is better than Labour. Since the Democrats imploded, the Government in Oz has gotten from bad to worse. With the Greens holding the balance, thing really is bad.

For me, I will vote Labour for both the Senate and House of Representative. Bcos I know they will lose but i dont want the liberals to be given a clean sweep. After what happen when Liberals won both houses, I really scared to have Liberal holding both houses again. I hope Liberals win government but dont control the upper house. For one thing, I wont Greens. They have destroyed the country by being assholes.

Another thing, Tony Abbott has a bad reputation as I find him rude and arrogant. They way he attack Julia shows just what an undignified person he is. But Liberals will win.

The story is that Kevin Rudd, a self serving bastard, let the asylum seekers in without proper checks. He is a maverick without union backers, so popular policies with his supporters is critical to his PMship. He did simple heroic acts like saying Sorry and made a statement against Workchoices (which is why there are now more part-time and contract jobs compared to permanent jobs in Australia)

The Gillard govt does not have power to deal with the problems because Labor Left and Green Left are against the idea and her fragile minority govt will fall anytime if she returns to Howard policies.

Just watch. One Nation Party is coming back and they appear to have nailed the refugee issue and have sensible ideas about solving the $10billion issue. (Her policy is the same as Liberal)

Can ignore another nationalist party, the Australia First Party.

 

[winnipegjets]

I never said anything about reverting to the white australia policy. I am just saying that Aust should not accept anymore refugees and should leave the refugee convention which is nothing more than a dud policy that creates social problems for the host country. Y should any country that have concern for its own citizens allow blood suckers and leeches into their country and let its own people pay to feed others? These refugees are not accepted based on the skills that they can bring to their host country. They are nothing but cost and social problems. by closing the borders to them, the country saves heaps and the deficit will end within a year.

Accepting refugees is a charitable act. Any country can opt out, just be prepared for the international backlash and the soured reputation.

When such a harsh attitude towards weaker beings become acceptable, it is a matter of time before the attitude grows into racism.

 

[winnipegjets]

Australia takes in 13,000 annually
http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/60refugee.htm#d

Immigration is 150k - 190k
http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/02key.htm

Which could be the bigger drain on finances?

 

[The_Hypocrite]

What backlash from what international community? the whole damn world only 4 countries accept refugees. If there is a backlash, these countries can open their doors to refugees. I hope India and China start accepting refugees. These refugees cause more problems to their host countries,,,why should the citizens of the countries put up with it? Look at the recent case in England? Look at all the ethnic ghettos coming up in Europe etc,,u think its worth it? If u think it is,,please put your mouth where your money is and donate to the Refugee Commission. But I dont see why tax payers must pay for them. Left wing bleeding heart liberal assholes are destroying the country from within. No wonder Europe is in a mess...thanks to these assholes who are nothing but traitors.

Accepting refugees is a charitable act. Any country can opt out, just be prepared for the international backlash and the soured reputation.

When such a harsh attitude towards weaker beings become acceptable, it is a matter of time before the attitude grows into racism.

 

[The_Hypocrite]

The boat arrivals for last year is 17000.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/immigration/boat-arrivals-up-55pc-on-a-year-ago/story-fn9hm1gu-1226597663564

And please read this other article

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/boat_people_arrivals_now_hit_3000_a_month/

And that 190K immigrants if they are skilled migrants have to pay their way through. They do not get any benefits when they arrive for the 1st 2 years of their stay. So what drain on finances do skilled migrants cause? For your information, 1 of my migrant family friends arrived last year. Their 3 kids are in University this year and they are paying full fees, no HECS etc. They do not get welfare, free housing, free white goods like the way refugees do. That is why the boat people cause 7 to 10 billion. New skilled migrants pay their way through everything. NO freebies unlike trailer park trash refugees.

Australia takes in 13,000 annually
http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/60refugee.htm#d

Immigration is 150k - 190k
http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/02key.htm

Which could be the bigger drain on finances?

 

[winnipegjets]

The boat arrivals for last year is 17000.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/immigration/boat-arrivals-up-55pc-on-a-year-ago/story-fn9hm1gu-1226597663564

My data is from the government website if you see the link.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/boat_people_arrivals_now_hit_3000_a_month/

And that 190K immigrants if they are skilled migrants have to pay their way through. They do not get any benefits when they arrive for the 1st 2 years of their stay. So what drain on finances do skilled migrants cause? For your information, 1 of my migrant family friends arrived last year. Their 3 kids are in University this year and they are paying full fees, no HECS etc. They do not get welfare, free housing, free white goods like the way refugees do. That is why the boat people cause 7 to 10 billion. New skilled migrants pay their way through everything. NO freebies unlike trailer park trash refugees.

Two thirds of the 190k are skilled immigrants.

For simplicity sake, let's take your $10 billion as a fact. $10 billion is the total cost spent on dealing with the refugee problem, not solely to support the 17k accepted refugees. If Australia doesn't accept any refugee, it is still not going to make a dent as refugees will still keep coming. Unless, your suggestion is to fire upon the refugee boats to sink them and let those people die in the seas. Then Australia will have a reputation as good as PRC government.

 

[The_Hypocrite]

U will be surprised how many support the idea of shooting the boats when it enters the waters illegally. The AUstralian Navy does need live firing practice anyway.

To solve this problem of the boat people. Australia needs to end accepting refugees. All illegal boat arrivals will be detained on manus island etc and given basic food and medicine. The bare minimum. Children etc go into refugee camps like in other countries. No legal representation will be given like the way they do now. When the whole world knows the gates are closed,,,they wont come by boat. Howard policies stopped the boats,,,Labour welcome them with open arms.

These Refugees already arrived will be sent back to their country of origin. For your info, refugees did not come by boat when John Howard implemented the mandatory detention policy. The boats were stopped. The people travelling here by boat stopped as they knew they cant get in. So to say refugees will continue coming is ridiculous as it was stopped before.

The boat arrivals for last year is 17000.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/immigration/boat-arrivals-up-55pc-on-a-year-ago/story-fn9hm1gu-1226597663564

My data is from the government website if you see the link.



Two thirds of the 190k are skilled immigrants.

For simplicity sake, let's take your $10 billion as a fact. $10 billion is the total cost spent on dealing with the refugee problem, not solely to support the 17k accepted refugees. If Australia doesn't accept any refugee, it is still not going to make a dent as refugees will still keep coming. Unless, your suggestion is to fire upon the refugee boats to sink them and let those people die in the seas. Then Australia will have a reputation as good as PRC government.

 

[winnipegjets]

U will be surprised how many support the idea of shooting the boats when it enters the waters illegally. The AUstralian Navy does need live firing practice anyway.

To solve this problem of the boat people. Australia needs to end accepting refugees. All illegal boat arrivals will be detained on manus island etc and given basic food and medicine. The bare minimum. Children etc go into refugee camps like in other countries. No legal representation will be given like the way they do now. When the whole world knows the gates are closed,,,they wont come by boat. Howard policies stopped the boats,,,Labour welcome them with open arms.

Howard, like all right-wingers, played on fears, founded or unfounded, to stay in power. The tough measures on refugees violated basic human rights. Now, if you think human rights is not important, then we have no reason to discuss this further.
Labour accepts 17k refugee ...that's not very generous ...that's only 10 percent of the 190k of immigrants it takes in a year. And it is only 0.07 percent of the population.

Australia doesn't take in that many refugees after all - 2011 data.
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1294102/At-a-glance-Who-takes-the-most-asylum-claims

These Refugees already arrived will be sent back to their country of origin. For your info, refugees did not come by boat when John Howard implemented the mandatory detention policy. The boats were stopped. The people travelling here by boat stopped as they knew they cant get in. So to say refugees will continue coming is ridiculous as it was stopped before.

On Howard's stop the boat policy - The reality is the Howard government only successfully turned back four boats to Indonesia in 2001. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...al-after-capsize/story-fn9hm1gu-1226606848463. Impression is different from reality.

http://theconversation.com/all-the-kings-drones-wont-stop-the-boats-13447

 

[The_Hypocrite]

On the contrary. I believe human rights r important especially mine. I do not see y tax payers need to pay for other countries mess. 17k extra people with no real tangible economic benefits is a disaster waiting to happen. As welfare is paid to them etc. Tax payers human rights r violated.

Howard, like all right-wingers, played on fears, founded or unfounded, to stay in power. The tough measures on refugees violated basic human rights. Now, if you think human rights is not important, then we have no reason to discuss this further.
Labour accepts 17k refugee ...that's not very generous ...that's only 10 percent of the 190k of immigrants it takes in a year. And it is only 0.07 percent of the population.

Australia doesn't take in that many refugees after all - 2011 data.
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1294102/At-a-glance-Who-takes-the-most-asylum-claims



On Howard's stop the boat policy - The reality is the Howard government only successfully turned back four boats to Indonesia in 2001. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...al-after-capsize/story-fn9hm1gu-1226606848463. Impression is different from reality.

http://theconversation.com/all-the-kings-drones-wont-stop-the-boats-13447

 

[winnipegjets]

On the contrary. I believe human rights r important especially mine. I do not see y tax payers need to pay for other countries mess. 17k extra people with no real tangible economic benefits is a disaster waiting to happen. As welfare is paid to them etc. Tax payers human rights r violated.

You don't seem to understand the concept of human rights. You definitely know self-interest and preservation. Let the world be damn as long as you are alright. Sinkapore is a better place for people with such attitude.

I am all for Australia making itself an international pariah by sinking boats carrying asylum seekers and letting those people drown if that is the will of Australians. Fortunately, I think most Aussies have human decency to know what is right and wrong. Thus, the white-only policy was ditched. If Aussies were as bigoted, we won't be seeing that many yellow and dark skins over there.

 

[SgGoneWrong]

Not taking in boat refugees is not about bigotry. Australian economy is not doing that well like before and even cost of living is getting higher, jobs are getting harder to come by, etc. Working class is struggling and those who really want to work are not getting comfortable amount from centrelink to help them through a stressful period while they try to get themselves back on their feet.

If you are not here yourself, you will not understand the situation. Yes, too much self interest for some government departments, govt funded organisations not to lobby for more resources to go to boat people.

As a taxpayer, I feel my human rights are violated and I constantly fear that Australia will go bankrupt in the future and my plight will be like one of those in Greece I saw on tv. Why do I have to work to pay for economic refugees and their families when I'm struggling to pay for my own work expenses and other living costs? Why do I have to pay for more social problems to be created in my country? Why do I have to take care of the well-being of people from other country for the rest of their lives at the expenses of myself and my loved ones?

Some yellow and dark skins can be hardworking and help Australia to flourish economically. It's known that places where the Chinese are, they flourish economically. Also, 2 countries with the biggest population are china and India. Australia wants money and Asian countries can provide the immigration processing fees which add up to heaps through skilled migration, business visas, etc. Of course Australia can go all white and take in jobless from Europe, US, etc, but they are smarter and won't do that. Also, Asians tend to see 1st world countries as better and want to migrate here. This can be true for countries like India.

 

[winnipegjets]

Not taking in boat refugees is not about bigotry. Australian economy is not doing that well like before and even cost of living is getting higher, jobs are getting harder to come by, etc. Working class is struggling and those who really want to work are not getting comfortable amount from centrelink to help them through a stressful period while they try to get themselves back on their feet.

Not taking in ANY refugees is the first step towards bigotry. Eventually, the bigotry will be directed at the non-white immigrants. That's how it has happened and that's how it will happen again.

By all means reduce the financial support for refugees to the level of welfare - we are talking about 17k people - but don't close the door. There are more people working in Australia under different cheap labour programmes than the number of refugees.

As a taxpayer, I feel my human rights are violated and I constantly fear that Australia will go bankrupt in the future and my plight will be like one of those in Greece I saw on tv. Why do I have to work to pay for economic refugees and their families when I'm struggling to pay for my own work expenses and other living costs? Why do I have to pay for more social problems to be created in my country? Why do I have to take care of the well-being of people from other country for the rest of their lives at the expenses of myself and my loved ones?

Let me see ...you picture ALL refugees are in Australia to fleece the system and that they are the source of social problems. If that is not bigotry, what is?

Let's be clear - the 17k refugees are NOT consuming $10 billion a year. How much do you think these 17k refugees are taking away from you?

You are a beneficiary of the generosity of early generations of Australians. So, why can't you show some generosity to others who seek to have a better life as you have?

Some yellow and dark skins can be hardworking and help Australia to flourish economically. It's known that places where the Chinese are, they flourish economically. Also, 2 countries with the biggest population are china and India. Australia wants money and Asian countries can provide the immigration processing fees which add up to heaps through skilled migration, business visas, etc. Of course Australia can go all white and take in jobless from Europe, US, etc, but they are smarter and won't do that. Also, Asians tend to see 1st world countries as better and want to migrate here. This can be true for countries like India.

Racists don't give a hoot to how much benefit immigration of non-whites bring. They just don't want people who are different in skin colour. The target now is refugees (which are invariably people of colour), what's stopping them from turning against non-white residents, be they citizens or PR?

 

[The_Hypocrite]

Not taking in any refugees is a Nation's right. Bigotry is you imposing your will on others as you are not bearing the cost. I believe the 7 to 10 Billion is the correct figure and that is the deficit the Australian government is facing.

Not taking in ANY refugees is the first step towards bigotry. Eventually, the bigotry will be directed at the non-white immigrants. That's how it has happened and that's how it will happen again.

By all means reduce the financial support for refugees to the level of welfare - we are talking about 17k people - but don't close the door. There are more people working in Australia under different cheap labour programmes than the number of refugees.



Let me see ...you picture ALL refugees are in Australia to fleece the system and that they are the source of social problems. If that is not bigotry, what is?

Let's be clear - the 17k refugees are NOT consuming $10 billion a year. How much do you think these 17k refugees are taking away from you?

You are a beneficiary of the generosity of early generations of Australians. So, why can't you show some generosity to others who seek to have a better life as you have?



Racists don't give a hoot to how much benefit immigration of non-whites bring. They just don't want people who are different in skin colour. The target now is refugees (which are invariably people of colour), what's stopping them from turning against non-white residents, be they citizens or PR?

 

[The_Hypocrite]

http://www.news.com.au/national-news/federal-election/don8217t-forget-why-kevin-rudd-is-no-longer-prime-minister/story-fnho52ip-1226664351038

Staff Writers
News Limited Network
June 16, 2013 12:00AM




Don’t forget why Kevin Rudd is no longer Prime Minister


REMEMBER ME?

In case you’ve forgotten, these are just some of the reasons Kevin Rudd is no longer Prime Minister of Australia.

EAR WAX

He ate his own. In Parliament. Is there anything more to say?

KEVIN 007

Rudd made a career of backstabbing members of his own party. First it was then-Opposition foreign affairs spokesman Laurie Brereton, whom Rudd undermined by leaking internal Labor business to the Liberals. Then-Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said it was a blatant attempt to get Brereton’s job.

Rudd’s half a chance for Gillard’s job

Mr Rudd - or his ‘sympathisers’ in Caucus - mounted orchestrated leaking campaigns against leaders Kim Beazley and Simon Crean. Rudd and his forces are widely regarded as being behind destabilising leaks against Julia Gillard.

Kevin Rudd on the campaign trail in his electorate, West End, Brisbane. With Marilyn Trad, Jackie Trad, Sam Goddard, Cat Green, Justine Barrett and Helen Abrahams.
TANTRUM MAN

In January 2009, he blew up on an Air Force flight when he didn’t like the meal he’d been served, leaving a RAAF air hostess in tears.

Then he was forced to deny that in 2008, while visiting troops at Afghanistan’s Tarin Kowt base, he “threw a wobbly” when Diggers were unable to find a hairdryer for him.

In 2011 he exploded in a foul-mouthed tirade after fluffing his lines on a pre-recorded video in his office - then launched a witch-hunt to find out who leaked the video. “Just tell these dickheads in the embassy to just give me simple sentences!” he ranted.


While attempting to negotiate international climate change agreement, he famously declared: “The f------ Chinese are trying to ratf--- us”.

DRUNK AT SCORES

Was asked to leave a New York ‘gentlemen’s club’ in 2003 after becoming intoxicated. Management warned him against touching the dancers.

DRUNK ON POWER

In 2008 ordered Defence boss Angus Houston - the nation’s most senior military officer - and top bureaucrat Michal L’Estrange to come to his office, then kept them waiting for several hours on chairs outside his office while he allowed a Cabinet meeting to drag on.

UNRISE’S FALSE DAWN

In 2007 Rudd and his office conspired with Channel 7 to ‘delay’ dawn at Long Tan - one of the nation’s most hallowed battlegrounds - to better suit Australian broadcast times - then fibbed about it until News Limited published the proof.

MISMANAGEMENT

Bungling and bureaucratic incompetence blighted his rushed federal stimulus programs Building the Education Revolution - which saw waste of up to $1 billion - and the poorly regulated ‘pink batts’ insulation program, in which four young installers died.

NO MANAGEMENT

The Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme started in a blaze of publicity, then was dropped when the heat became too much. In 2010 Rudd proposed a tough new mining tax without consulting the industry or his own Cabinet. Then he panicked in the face of a furious backlash by the miners, who ran a successful ad campaign by Neil Lawrence, the formerly loyal Labor ad-man whom Labor sacked after he won them the election with his Kevin07 election campaign. The ‘FuelWatch’ never got off the ground. Rudd promised 300,000 laptops for schools and to commit 0.5 per cent of gross national income to foreign aid by 2015-16. Neither has happened.

WITH FRIENDS LIKE KEVIN

Prime Minister Julia Gillard

24 February, 2012 “I worked damned hard as Kevin Rudd’s deputy, worked very, very hard in days of chaos and paralysis to try and keep his government running.

Treasurer Wayne Swan

23 February 2012

“There’s no doubt that he sought to tear down the 2010 campaign. The truth is that Prime Minister Rudd was deeply flawed. Yes he does have some very significant achievements but on the flip side he has great weaknesses, great weaknesses which to date have not necessarily been seen in public.”

School Education Minister Peter Garrett

February 27, 2012: “If Mr Rudd were to prevail, I wouldn’t seek to serve in his ministry, even if he chose to ask me.”

 

[Ash007]

What about Bob Katter's I'll vote for him when I get the chance.

The story is that Kevin Rudd, a self serving bastard, let the asylum seekers in without proper checks. He is a maverick without union backers, so popular policies with his supporters is critical to his PMship. He did simple heroic acts like saying Sorry and made a statement against Workchoices (which is why there are now more part-time and contract jobs compared to permanent jobs in Australia)

The Gillard govt does not have power to deal with the problems because Labor Left and Green Left are against the idea and her fragile minority govt will fall anytime if she returns to Howard policies.

Just watch. One Nation Party is coming back and they appear to have nailed the refugee issue and have sensible ideas about solving the $10billion issue. (Her policy is the same as Liberal)

Can ignore another nationalist party, the Australia First Party.

 

[valiant20]

Here's an interesting article from The Age. I doubt it will ever appear in the Singapore News Media:

http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/books/the-good-life-at-last-20130616-2ocpu.html

 

[neddy]

Here's an interesting article from The Age. I doubt it will ever appear in the Singapore News Media:

http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/books/the-good-life-at-last-20130616-2ocpu.html

If I am right, she had some problems with SJOG pathology while in Perth.

There are a lot of wrongdoings going on in management, esp when these people are chasing jobs that are out of their depth. The politics are pretty bad but I know a number of Singapore emigres who suffered this in their baptism of fire into the Oz workplace culture.


About the priests abuses in Singapore.
Is this ever acknowledged in Singapore?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases_by_country

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-...s-list-of-priests-guilty-of-sex-abuse/4723660

 

[The_Hypocrite]

Is the abuse case in singapore very bad? I have not heard anything about spore. In the past if u go catholic school. U kenna cane if u out of line. Never heard of those sexual cases like in oz. In todays singapore. Priests r very well fed as parishioners buy them makan all the time. Dont think they got time for sex.

If I am right, she had some problems with SJOG pathology while in Perth.

There are a lot of wrongdoings going on in management, esp when these people are chasing jobs that are out of their depth. The politics are pretty bad but I know a number of Singapore emigres who suffered this in their baptism of fire into the Oz workplace culture.


About the priests abuses in Singapore.
Is this ever acknowledged in Singapore?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases_by_country

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-...s-list-of-priests-guilty-of-sex-abuse/4723660

 

[valiant20]

In Aus, there's an "ombudsman" culture, thus cases like these and similar often come out into the open (?), granted sometimes these bodies are "for show" purposes..

In sg.. whoever's heard of an ombudsman? (please don't mention CASE) There may be many cases of priest-child abuses but no one knows as media doesn't report...

Also, its time for singapore to have a paedophile watch-list, like how we have it over here in Aus. How backdated is sg??

 

[neddy]

Is the abuse case in singapore very bad? I have not heard anything about spore. In the past if u go catholic school. U kenna cane if u out of line. Never heard of those sexual cases like in oz. In todays singapore. Priests r very well fed as parishioners buy them makan all the time. Dont think they got time for sex.

No idea how bad. But in this case, when the priest was in his early 30s, and the girl was a teen from a all-girl school when hormones was raging, and Changi airport and Singapore reservoirs have private secluded corners.

When the Catholic church knew about it, the church "cleansed" her by asking for all photos, letters and other evidences of the abuse and destroy them.

So, no one in Singapore will know.