Should we apply the immigration brakes?

Some of you may recall that I was involved in a public debate a few weeks ago on the issue of immigration. Strange Times has posted two video clips of the affair. I’m linking to the short 6 minute clip, that captures – more or less – the gist of the evening. The longer 90 minute clip is at the Strange Times link.

The next debate is 9 September between Alan Moran and John Daley on renewable energy.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to Should we apply the immigration brakes?

  1. Butterfield, Bloomfeld % Bishop

    of course not

  2. Very well said, Sinclair. You made some good points (and presumably some others that weren’t in the short clip). You’re almost proud of the gnome line, aren’t you? ;-)

    Interesting to see Friends of the Earth opposing putting on the brakes. But I guess they’re thinking globally.

    Jill Quirk seemed out of her league. Desalinated water is inferior? What a numbskull.

    And ‘Arthur Dent’ seemed good value.

  3. C.L.

    For all Greeks from the island of Paxtonopolis, yes.

  4. The troll formerly known as Tom N.

    Whatever Australia’s optimum population might be, this debate exhibited a disappointing focus on lower migration as a source of lower population, when domestic reproduction is so heavily subsidised at present. Someone said ‘babies are the best migrants’, but actually its the other way around.
    T.

  5. .

    Optimum?

    The Murray Darling with 2-3% of runoff can support 11.5 mln people with runoff alone.

    Let me guess: sustainable population is also a function of technology. That’s what you might say if you look at population since 1750.

  6. JC

    I would take a rough guess and suggest Australia’s optimum population would be around 400 to 500 million people and that would be the bottom side of estimates.

  7. Sinclair Davidson

    Tom N – the debate didn’t rise to the levels I had hoped.

  8. Sinclair Davidson

    Jarrah – I love the gnome line.

  9. asf

    All the dimwits in favour of halting population growth should be shipped off to Outer Mongolia. A resource rich, sparsely populated country with inadequate defence is going to be a target for northern invaders. We need a couple of big cities up north and some serious weaponry.

    Besides, places with no people are boring. If we halt population growth, Australia will become the most boring country on earth in no time flat. I don’t want to live in the retirement home of the South Seas.

  10. JC

    good idea, ASF. They have as much space as they want drinking camel milk while they contemplated the big
    sky.

    Correct me if I’m wrong but the type of hols Australians have overseas are either beach type hols or they visit Cities and have lots of fun.

    Beach hols are good because there are lots of bikini clad ladies hanging around and if you’re really lucky a large number take their tops off if they’re European.

    One destination of preference is either London, Paris or New York which are extremely densely populated places. Invariably no one comes back and says they didn’t have fun.

    As i said, we should be thinking about 400 to 500 million people as a minimally suitable population base. Queensland alone could hold 250 million easily and there would be enough water to fill a swimming pool for every home.

  11. jtfsoon

    Jill Quirk seemed out of her league. Desalinated water is inferior? What a numbskull.

    I thought that was some kind of joke until I heard it. How does she tell one form of H2O from another??

  12. JC

    Can I add my two bit worth on that. Desal water tastes like crap.

    There actually are I think different tastes if water. Try one of those Fijian bottles vs say Perrier vs tap water. They do taste different. It has something to do with the mineral content or the level of oxygen/ whatever, but they do taste different.

    Perhaps the residual salt content in desal makes it taste like crapola. I can very well imagine desal water tasting different now because of better technology than it did 15 odd years ago.

  13. JC

    I should correct my sentence.

    Desal water tasted like crap when i first tasted it around 15 years ago.

  14. JC

    We don’t have a problem with water in the cities, or at least some of the cities. We have a problem with catchment as a result of morons planning the water catchment areas.

    The person or the group that signed up to this should either be taken to the town square and have people throw rotten tomatoes at him/her/them or their graves to should be left as unmarked or written over “here lies and idiot”

    Look at this idiocy.

    http://www.melbournewater.com.au/content/water_storages/water_report/water_report.asp

    One fucking Melbourne dam (Thompson) carries 60% of the city’s water.

    Take a look at the current holding at 26% vs basically normal or close to normal capacity in all the other dams.

    Whoever approved this freaking this water plan was a complete freaking moron.

  15. rodney

    Seriously Proffessor are you proposing unlimited number of boats be admitted containing persons of Middle Eastern appearance, who will then embark on careers of multiple identity welfare fraud and recreational raping of unveiled women.

  16. Sinclair Davidson

    rodney – that’s just being silly. I was asked about crime on the night – the answer is simple; enforce the law and send criminals to gaol.

  17. Rodney

    People wish to come to Australia for economic reasons.A number acceptible should be determined each year and visas be auctioned.
    Refugees should not be accepted. The problem is so great and our contribution so small that it is token and therefore hypocritical.
    The current policy of multiculturism in practice allows breaches of Australian Law. The Iman who sent young men out to rape unveiled women was not prosecuted and is still the head of the biggest Mosque in Ausralia. When multiculturism is changed then immigration should be revisited. Not before.

  18. FDB

    “Refugees should not be accepted. The problem is so great and our contribution so small that it is token and therefore hypocritical.”

    There are a couple of problems with your argument here, Rodney.

    Firstly, you put the conclusion at the beginning. That’s never a good sign – it implies a predetermined conclusion.

    Secondly, your argument makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

    Thirdly, why did you mention boats? Are you suggesting that’s how the “Iman” [sic (or is David Bowie's wife an Islamic community leader in Western Sydney? Who knew?)] got here? The one who you are using this website to criminally libel? This post is about immigration and population – almost nobody arrives here by boat, so it’s not really relevant is it?

    Fourthly, though admittedly this is incidental to my critique, you are a racist and a moron.

  19. .

    “The current policy of multiculturism in practice allows breaches of Australian Law.”

    Where is the legal authority for this?

  20. FDB

    Name one breach of Australian Law that’s been “allowed” by “multiculturalism”, Rodney.

    Do you even know what you’re talking about?

  21. Mitch

    The first speaker needs to put his hands above the table. He looks like an idiot.

  22. Mitch

    Does the IPA or CIS (or you. individually, Sinclair) have any books on the issue of immigration?

  23. So far the arguments in favour of draining the brake fluid are:
    A: if you disagree you’re a racist.
    B: it’s being nice to the people have stuffed up their own country and are now looking for any port in a storm.
    C: more people mean a higher standard of living. (technically our living standards grow anyway. Immigration means that they grow faster)
    D: the bully nations will be less able to kick sand in our face.

    I think A and B speak for themselves. C and D are prima facie rational arguments. However:
    C: It’s not actually that we have the standard of living of back in 1931. We already are a rich, first world country. Just how many Ipads, smart phones, Plasma TVs and overseas holidays do you want such that you’re prepared to put up with even more water restrictions, traffic jams, public transport congestion, immigrant integration problems and housing shortages?
    D: by size, nature and history the most threatening bully on our block is China. Considering they out populate us by a ratio of 56:1 just how many immigrants do you want to allow in? I think we have to face reality that we can’t independently defend ourselves and as long as we always do right by our big Uncle Sam then our security is best assured as it reasonably can be. We have gone to America’s side in combating aggression in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq 1990, Iraq 2003 and Afghanistan, and compared to New Zealand, we also house its intelligence facilities and give berth to its nuclear ships. I think if any country wanted to invade us we should advise them that it would be more in their interests to take their armada east across the Tasman.

  24. Rodney

    FDB suffers from the Philip Adams syndrome. P.A. believes that anyone who disagrees with him about anything is a racist.
    My proposal to auction of visas is specifically non-racist.
    By labelling me “racist” he is admitting that he has no answer, whilst still aserting his moral superiority to me though not of course culturally appropriate rapists.

  25. Jc..

    Stick’em on ebay and allow vendor bids, Rodney. Lol

    Have the pics of the potential aspirants up there with zoom in facilities, particularly for the sheilas as birdie would say.

  26. Sinclair Davidson

    Mitch – I don’t know if the CIS or IPA have books on migration. I do not. I can recommend Julian Simon.

  27. Peter Patton

    Rodney

    There is no “current policy of multiculturalism.” One of Howard’s more laudable legacies is removing that chimerical blight on our polity

  28. Abu Chowdah

    “The Iman who sent young men out to rape unveiled women was not prosecuted and is still the head of the biggest Mosque in Ausralia.”

    This is a lie. He did no such thing. You should be ashamed of yourself, distorting his (albeit unhelpful) doctrinaire moralising as a call to commit a crime. Shame on you for writing such tripe.

  29. Peter Patton

    This notion that wanting any more immigrants is racist as a matter of logic is garbage. It is nothing but a presumption projection of moral vanity. By creating the ‘Other’ racist, the pro-immigration chanter is less making a statement about his/her attitude to immigration than making a public statement of his/her own virtue.

    It is also largely a racist projection, because it tends to assume that an anti-immigration person is white. Pssssstttttt…there are quite a few million non-white Australians nowadays; many of whom are fervently anti-immigration.

    While I myself am very pro-immigration, most of those people I know who are not, are overwhelmingly not racist; merely selfish.

  30. Sinclair Davidson

    Yep – what Abu said.

  31. Steve Edney

    PP no one has been called racist here for not wanting immigrants.

    However it seems fair to call this opinion and the person expressing it racist.

    persons of Middle Eastern appearance, who will then embark on careers of multiple identity welfare fraud and recreational raping of unveiled women.

  32. THR

    t is also largely a racist projection, because it tends to assume that an anti-immigration person is white. Pssssstttttt…there are quite a few million non-white Australians nowadays; many of whom are fervently anti-immigration.

    There’s no logical reason why a non-white bigot cannot be as racist as a white bigot, so your argument falls down. Secondly, whatever ‘good faith’ objections there may be to immigration, which are unjustly dismissed, you also have the reverse scenario, where racist groups seek to hijack debate by hitching a ride on one ‘issue’ or another.

  33. Peter Patton

    SE

    You’re right. But I wasn’t accusing anybody here; just making a comment about a meme which is REALLY popular ‘out there.’ ;)

  34. Peter Patton

    THR

    I realize that. DER! But that scenario is not the ‘reverse’; it is hegemonic. That’s all we hear “anti-immigration = racist.”

  35. daddy dave

    Wow, Sinclair. Good performance.

    I liked the comment from that guy who said “Wanting a sustainable Australia isn’t racism. It’s just parochialism.” What a slapdown.

  36. JC

    I just read the earlier Rodney comment that i missed before I commented.

    on ya Abu.

  37. rodney

    It is difficult to find the original reports of Hilaly’s statements, but the Wikapedia report gives the flavour. I particularly liked his call for the rape victims to be punished.
    The was much wriggling around and weasel words but a number of young women were raped by young men from his Mosque. Whose side are you on.

  38. rodney

    The current business migration program is extremely dodgy, involving strange business transactions and much arbritrary bureaucratic decisionmaking.
    I find it odd that nobody at C considers the possibility of a market based approach.

  39. Nice work, v. enjoyable Spencer. Interested in the demographics of that debate – people obviously there from very very different backgrounds.

  40. Abu Chowdah

    Rodney, you said “he sent… etc”. So you claim he commissioned a crime, when in fact his unhelpful doctrinaire comments came AFTER the crimes. You’re a liar.

    Criticise the man for what he did say or do, but you don’t get to make shit up and you don’t get to imply that anyone who draws you up for misrepresenting the facts is a supporter of sex crimes. Moron.

  41. Boris

    It is funny PC is in force on this thread.

    I’m struggling with issues of racism etc.

    1) I am for big australia and for increasing refugee quotas but I have difficulty with uncontrolled arrivals. The number of bat people is tiny but if we say ‘it’s tiny so let them in’, the numbers may become millions. Maybe I am a control freak, but I do not like uncontrolled things.

    2) It does seem that majority of Australians have problems with people from the middle east. Call it racist all you like, but I see no reason why can’t they have the right to say who can arrive.

Comments are closed.