BF2S Forums Australian politics thread.

Problem is I don't think Morrison would be a competent leader. He was a competent Immigration Minister mostly because he had a clear goal, clear means, had no regard for his own personal popularity, and was protected from scrutiny. That doesn't necessarily bode well for someone leading a political party who does have to care about personal popularity and who does have to come under a lot of scrutiny, (and who's leading a political party that doesn't seem to have a clear goal or clear means.) However that's why I think he'd be a good Treasurer - far better than Diamond Joe. Especially if he has someone charismatic like Turnbull able to offset the fact that he's an unsympathetic dickhole.

Bishop is probably a more able leader on her own but I can't see her leading anything other than Tony's leadership team. If she made waves and tried to form a leadership team of her own they'd turn against her.

Youse a buncha racists.
http://www.cracked.com/personal-experie … ia_p5.html

Last edited by Jay (2015-08-18 05:15:03)

Jay wrote:

Youse a buncha racists.
http://www.cracked.com/personal-experie … ia_p5.html

Jay wrote:

Youse a buncha racists.
http://www.cracked.com/personal-experie … ia_p5.html

So tell us Jay, when has/will the USA allow unrestricted migration from South America and Mexico?

When has America not had a racial immigration policy?

Cybargs wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

When has America not had a racial immigration policy?

At least it didn't take them till the 70s to get rid of it. That's the point.

We still have quotas based on how many people from a certain country can come every year, legally. It's restricted to 7% of the cap per country of origin per year. I.e. we can accept 480,000×.07=33,600 Aussies (that number is absurdly low)

http://m.immigrationpolicy.org/?url=htt … rrer=#2707

Last edited by Jay (2015-08-19 04:45:56)

Jay wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

When has America not had a racial immigration policy?

At least it didn't take them till the 70s to get rid of it. That's the point.

We still have quotas based on how many people from a certain country are already here. I.e. if there are 10,000 people from Somalia they'll accept 500 visas or something but if there's 100,000 Chinese they'll accept 5,000. I guess the premise is that it stops flooding and culture change.

I know there's a 'diversity lottery' green card that you have to be a citizen from a certain country. I don't think the quota exists anymore since this act replaced the old quota system

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigrati … ct_of_1965

But green cards are hard as fuck to get unless you're rolling in bank. The avg person immigrating are gonna be skilled workers, which nationality isn't really part of the process.

Australia still has huge amounts of foreign born citizens (1 in 4).

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

When has America not had a racial immigration policy?

Before the quotas on Japanese in the 1800s it was a free-for-all. There were Trump-style nativist backlashes but it's rather hard to restrict immigration when your navy is small and you have a million miles of coastland. People still get through, obviously, so the whole thing is as pointless as the war on drugs.

Not that immigration from third world non-white countries was really a problem before mass transportation of poor people became common.
When it was restrictions were put in place - you're hardly on the moral high ground there.

As I've stated numerous times before, I'm not a fan of my countries immigration policies and prefer open borders.

( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c … population )

australia is now closer to 28%


i've had a gander and i'm generalising, but australias population grows closer to 1% each year due to immigration while the usa grows closer to 0.3% each yeah due to immigration.....

U.S. immigrants and their U.S.-born children now number approximately 80 million persons, or one-quarter of the overall U.S. population.

25% of aus is just immigration- with their children no idea...

i'd also be interested.

I think it's important to put it into percentages for economical and growth reasons, instead of just flying numbers around. We're ~1/14th the size of america, so if we just suddenly had as many immigrants as you one year we'd collapse

Ty, over three years ago, wrote:

I'm not sure how dirty Thomson is, his claims of being framed seems a little far-fetched but I think far more dirty than Thomson could ever be is the Health Services Union itself. Michael Williamson and Kathy Jackson seem far more like the real crooks to me. Williamson seems greedy and stupid and Jackson seems greedy and naive. Both were horrendously overpaid; they were paid more than twice as much as big union boss herself Ged Kearney. I think the higher-ups wanted to continue benefiting hugely from members' money but didn't trust each other with the infighting and subterfuge and it was Jackson who thought "I'll get out while the getting's good and act as the whistleblower". Yeah right Kathy, like no-one would look at the horrendous amounts of money you were paying yourself and conclude you weren't as neck-deep as the rest of them.

Last sentence does not apply if you are Chris Pyne, (or Jackson's other Liberal cheerleaders including Tony Abbott.)

Christopher Pyne, two years ago, wrote:

"Kathy Jackson is a revolutionary, Mr Speaker, and Kathy Jackson will be remembered as a lion of the union movement."

Really interested to see if Pyne has anything to say on this subject now. I mean since we're all talking about unions and corruption and Jackson is just emerging worse and worse. Craig Thomson's rorting was around tens of thousands, Jackson's is up around $1.4m.

Cybargs wrote:

SuperJail Warden wrote:

In practice, America has the freest immigration system in the world. We give unconditional birthright citizenship to anyone born here. Our multicultural society accepts people of any nationality as long as they are self-supporting. All of our government services come in multiple languages in order to make sure immigrants have an easier time integrating.

Being a colonial nation, Australia should be ashamed of itself for being so restrictive on immigration. The countries in the western hemisphere and Australia don't have the moral authority to have harsh immigration policies. Our nations were founded on the ruins of a dead civilizations after all.

You obviously have no idea how actual immigration works.

Good luck getting a green card in the US through work. An NZ lawyer who worked in Columbia and was published in several law journal's couldn't even get a green card because no company would sponsor him.

H1B visas' are fucking hard to come by. The only way for people to get citizenship is to have a mommy that somehow popped you on the country.

We give citizenship to kids who lived over 5 years in aus on their 10th birthday if they're residing.

We give PR to those who NEVER step foot in the country (skilled migration). Australia is by far one of the EASIEST countries to immigrate to. US is a fucking nightmare of paperwork.

A lawyer is different than a tech worker. On the west coast, there are tons of people with H1Bs. They actually want to raise the amount of those we give out every year too.

That's more than 10% of the total amount of legal immigrants we let in. How many do you want?

While we are on the subject of immigration, I wish the U.S. would step up and take the Christians and other non-Muslim religious minorities in Iraq-Syria as refugees. Non-Muslims are discriminated against pretty badly because of their religion. If the U.S. thinks itself a Christian nation, we should do more to protect foreign Christians.

We could make extra refugee slots specifically for them that way Muslims can't cry racism because the amount of slots available for them will remain unchanged.