Compare and contrast

The current population of the United States is approximately 323 million.

The annual legal immigration intake of the United States is 1 million.  That is approximately 0.3% of the current US population.

The current population of Australia is approximately 24 million.

The annual legal immigration intake of Australia is 190,000.  that is approximately 0.8% of the current Australian population.

0.3% vs 0.8%.   Australia’s legal immigration program is proportionately over 2.5 times the scale of the US program.

Another way to look at it is to note that the US economy is over 18 times the scale of Australia and its population is 13 times the scale of Australia, yet its immigration program is 5 times.

Last week, the US Senate proposed halving the size of the legal US immigration program, most of which will come from reducing the family reunion numbers from 600,000 to 90,000.

Of Australia’s 190,000 program, 32% is family migration, or approximately 61,000.

Sparty would propose a discussion of Australia’s immigration program, but to do so would mean, by definition, that he is a xenophobe.

Follow I Am Spartacus on Twitter at @Ey_am_Spartacus

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to Compare and contrast

  1. mh

    Treasurer Scott Morrison is a believer in a large immigration program because they all need to consume.

  2. old bloke

    Sparty would propose a discussion of Australia’s immigration program, but to do so would mean, by definition, that he is a xenophobe.

    Not only a xenophobe, but, (shock, horror), an “ultra-nationalist”.

  3. rickw

    Set immigration levels high enough and you create a situation where most of the population hardly has a clue about all the subtle elements that had previously made Australia great. Look no further that our parliament to see how this works, not Australians but Globalists.

  4. Uh oh

    Not only would he be a xenophobe but also a hate speaker.

  5. Roger

    The annual legal immigration intake of Australia is 190,000.

    How’s this for a comparison:

    That’s about the same or greater than Britain’s annual legal immigration intake.

    Trump is cutting American immigration in half.

    Theresa May has promised similar (>100 000).

    Yet here the government remains unresponsive to community concerns about the pressure high immigration puts on social cohesion, housing, infrastructure and services.

  6. Tel

    0.3% vs 0.8%. Australia’s legal immigration program is proportionately over 2.5 times the scale of the US program.

    But in the USA the immigration law is very poorly enforced if at all, and there are significant numbers of people actively opposed to any sort of enforcement.

    I think in Australia we do a much better job of regulating the situation.

  7. Senile Old Guy

    Sparty would propose a discussion of Australia’s immigration program, but to do so would mean, by definition, that he is a xenophobe.

    Not only a xenophobe, but, (shock, horror), an “ultra-nationalist”.

    Also, a racist and homophobe; probably kicks his own dog.

  8. Infidel Tiger

    Someone has to prop up the housing ponzi.

  9. There are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know – Thomas Chalkley

    Poor fellow my country (apologies to Xavier Herbert)

  10. Myrddin Seren

    Interesting – following one of Sparty’s links further afield:

    The preliminary estimated resident population (ERP) of Australia at 31 December 2016 was 24,385,600 people. This is an increase of 372,800 people since 31 December 2015, and 78,400 people since 30 September 2016.

    The preliminary estimate of natural increase for the year ended 31 December 2016 (152,600 people) was 6.5%, or 9,300 people higher than the natural increase recorded for the year ended 31 December 2015 (143,300 people).

    The preliminary estimate of net overseas migration (NOM) for the year ended 31 December 2016 (209,000 people) was 16.5%, or 29,700 people higher than the net overseas migration recorded for the year ended 31 December 2015 (179,300 people).

    Pretty much the natural increase people, being babies, are living with other folk and their infrastructure requirements are modest.

    Plus I would suspect that a lot of people assumed to be here temporarily – student visas, aged parent visas ( why do we need more frail elderly people being imported ? ) aren’t EVER going home. And in the meantime they require housing, transport, utilities, infrastructure etc etc.

    So effectively ‘We’* are adding a Canberra/Queanbeyan every year.

    * This high rate of growth seems to be a Uniparty policy – it never gets a mention in major party election platforms. I haven’t voted for it – not directly. My opinion does not count with ‘We’.

    Many moons ago I did lodge a submission to a Senate inquiry on population suggesting that bringing in large numbers from cultural groups not disposed to assimilate and who, by virtue of their numbers, could isolate themselves in self-selected ‘ghettoes’ would be a social disaster. My opinion did not count then either, but I think time has proven me correct.

  11. Helen

    What was the immigration rate for the USA when its population was 24 million? This line of research could be pursued for both countries: how has the rate varied with overall population over time. Both the USA and Australia of course exist specifically because of immigration.

  12. Fisky

    Last week, the US Senate proposed halving the size of the legal US immigration program, most of which will come from reducing the family reunion numbers from 600,000 to 90,000.

    Also, abolishing the invincibly stupid “diversity lottery”. What country selects immigrants completely at random?? Absurd!

  13. Fisky

    This bill is an important landmark in US history, hopefully reversing some of the disastrous effects of the 1965 act. I can’t wait to see the “libertarian” movement marching lockstep with the Left in opposing this bill!

  14. stackja

    Housing developers need more customers. So they get politicians to import them.

  15. Malcolm Thomas

    The 32 % figure forAustralia’s ‘family’ stream is misleading, as the Productivity Commission pointed out. That’s because many people who come in under the skill stream atre in fact ‘secondary applicant’, read family members.

  16. zyconoclast

    Sparty would propose a discussion of Australia’s immigration program, but to do so would mean, by definition, that he is a xenophobe.
    Not only a xenophobe, but, (shock, horror), an “ultra-nationalist”.

    Stop being polite and call him what he is. Nazi.

  17. Muddy

    Sorry, but that’s xenofauxb. It’s important to get the spelling corect.

  18. miltonf

    * This high rate of growth seems to be a Uniparty policy – it never gets a mention in major party election platforms. I haven’t voted for it – not directly. My opinion does not count with ‘We’.

    The political class at war with its own people. Same with electricity.

  19. zyconoclast

    Stop immigration for 12 months.
    Nothing bad will actually happen. Except maybe some affect on house/rent prices and associated “industries.”

  20. Squirrel

    I think we had recent statistics to the effect that most of the jobs growth in our two largest states has been in public sector jobs – so aside from importing consumers for our retailers, and buyers/tenants for our property developers and landlords, we are importing clients for our tax and debt-funded public sectors.

    All of this at the same time as we are in a race to have the world’s highest power costs, and the world’s most unaffordable housing – which makes it increasingly likely that we continue to lose jobs and miss new opportunities in internationally competitive sectors of the economy, and thus become ever more reliant on foreign debt and asset sales to keep the whole circus going. Complete and utter madness.

  21. Yohan

    We need those immigrants.

    I mean, if we don’t import masses of 3rd world, low IQ, non english speaking migrants from Syria, Eritrea, Somalia, Bangladesh e.t.c who is going to pay for our pensions and gold plated boomer retirement lifestyle?

    Think of all the Afghans sitting on Manus and Nauru, all that untapped entrepreneurial potential waiting to contribute to our economy ! (Afghan welfare usage after 5 years of Oz residency is 91%)

  22. John Constantine

    Helen should ask what welfare benefits the United States made available to the immigrants that arrived when the population of America was 24 million.

    Without slavery would the population growth of the South have been as fast?.

    Would a slower population growth have avoided the Indian Wars?.

    The developing resources of America would have come into production, but would a more structured immigration system have avoided the civil war, the indian wars and the civil war?.

  23. LGS

    mh
    #2460681, posted on August 6, 2017 at 1:28 pm

    Treasurer Scott Morrison is a believer in a large immigration program because they all need to consume.

    That might be true if a significant proportion of the immigrants (if not the majority) were not beneficiaries of the taxpayer (i.e. on welfare), instead of being taxpayers themselves.

  24. fhb

    Reducing immigration would reduce the demand for housing. This industry is the only thing that keeps Australia from entering a permanent recession/depression. We no longer produce anything apart from houses. Our energy costs and labour regulations make it impossible to compete on the world stage and these do not constrain the housing industry. Our politicians on both sides know the economic jig will be up if they cut immigration.

  25. mareeS

    Happily, we live in a good regional city where immigration has been manageable and mostly beneficial, re medical skills, university/education, IT and generally nice, assimilating new citizens.

    Sydney and Melbourne seem to have big problems, though, and big immigrant populations with big problems.

  26. Andrew

    I don’t give a shit how many. As long as each one
    – speaks and reads rudimentary English enough to be able to function
    – has a useful skill that would get them employment
    – carries long term health insurance long enough that they’re unlikely to be looking for Medicare for a pre existing issue
    – is on probation and will only qualify for full residency after a long period of employment, good conduct and English fluency
    – they are without burdensome families without these skills
    – they are of good character
    – they can be identified and checked out

  27. Roger

    Our politicians on both sides know the economic jig will be up if they cut immigration.

    The current rate of economic “growth” at c. 0.3% shows that returns on this Ponzi scheme are drying up.

  28. True Aussie

    Stop immigration for 12 months.
    Nothing bad will actually happen. Except maybe some affect on house/rent prices and associated “industries.”

    A year? A decade would be better.

    This industry is the only thing that keeps Australia from entering a permanent recession/depression

    Let the housing industry collapse. Young Australians are being priced out of their own housing market.

    Happily, we live in a good regional city where immigration has been manageable and mostly beneficial, re medical skills, university/education, IT and generally nice, assimilating new citizens.

    That’s what the people in Sydney and Melbourne said at first.

  29. Sydney Boy

    Actually, until recently it was more like 240,000 per year. There was an additional 50,000ish Kiwis moving to Australia each year – and their numbers were not counted in official immigration statistics due to the mutual tans-migration scheme between Australia and New Zealand.

    Another interesting point – immigration pundits keep pointing to Australia’s “inadequate” refugee intake. But as Sparta pointed out, although Australia’s official refugee intake is 19,000 per year, in reality it is more like 79,000 as the majority of the family reunion bunch as family of the inital refugees.

  30. Crossie

    Treasurer Scott Morrison is a believer in a large immigration program because they all need to consume.

    Yeah, why not? It’s not his money he is giving away, he is guaranteed a very comfortable life after retirement or being booted out at the next election.

  31. Crossie

    Young Australians are being priced out of their own housing market.

    They have a vote like everyone else and they can vote as if house affordability is important to them.

  32. jupes

    Obviously the one thing Australia needs now is more Muslim immigrants. Think of the benefits:

    More people to help identify terrorists,
    More security jobs at airports,
    More public service jobs at Centrelink,
    More jobs for bollard manufacturers,

    You know it makes sense.

  33. Yohan

    although Australia’s official refugee intake is 19,000 per year, in reality it is more like 79,000 as the majority of the family reunion bunch as family of the inital refugees.

    This is exactly right. And this subset of the migrant intake is guaranteed to be lifetime welfare recipients, and not just direct dole, but services like health, as they will never be buying private health insurance. This is the real secret as to why health spending has blown out in the last 20 years, and is now growing parabolically. The ageing population excuse is a lie.

    We can thank Tony Abbott’s moronic moral signalling, suggested to him by Greg Sheridan, to increase our refugee intake by 3x — all over the staged picture of a drowned boy.

  34. Also, a racist and homophobe; probably kicks his own dog.

    What a bastard. A real Aussie would pay someone else demand a government subsidy to kick his dog.

  35. Treasurer Scott Morrison is a believer in a large immigration program because they all need to consume.

    Yeah, why not? It’s not his money he is giving away, he is guaranteed a very comfortable life after retirement or being booted out at the next election.

    The only good thing to come from the islamic invasion is knowing that once we’re all dead, our dickhead politicians who think their ivory towers are impervious to such things will wonder in horror how their treachery could be repaid by such hordes with violent death. Karma’s a bitch. And then some.

  36. vicki

    Reducing immigration would reduce the demand for housing.

    This, of course, is the proverbial elephant in the room, of which no one speaks.

    Much easier to espouse self-righteous twaddle about greedy capitalists (including the mums & dads of said house-hunting millennials) pricing the kids out of the market.

    One-sided arguments about expansion of markets for business, the aging population (do migrants not age?) and cultural diversity (how much is enough, & what about the existing culture?) have sustained extraordinarily high levels of immigration for a very long time in this country.

    Long overdue for debate. Oh, but “progressives” don’t use that term any more, do they? They don’t seem to enjoy “conversations” either.

  37. Whalehunt Fun

    Easily fixed. Cancel the visas and citizenship of a randomly selected 80% od legal immigrants and 100% of refugees that arrived in the last 20 years. Seize their assets to pay the cost of deporting them to Syria and leave a large profit, thereby allowing a cut in taxes.
    While yoy are at it criminalise any form of verval or active objection to the plan. If I am to have no free speech due to filth like Triggs then I want the left jailed and assett stripped every time they open their gob.
    Simples!

  38. Nerblnob

    There would be an immigration dividend if you got the smartest and most productive.

    Smart prospective immigrants have noted Australia’s anti-business environment.

    They might consider Australia if they can’t get into the USA or Canada or the UK.
    So Australia is left with the welfare dross or those whose height of ambition is a government job.

    I talk to the smart people.
    In the words of one Indian: in Australia the racehorse can only run as fast as the donkey.
    He is better-informed than most Australians.

    They don’t care about “equality” . What kind of demeaning aspiration is that? They want to be able to get ahead.

  39. JohnA

    The Beer Whisperer #2461070, posted on August 6, 2017, at 10:14 pm

    Also, a racist and homophobe; probably kicks his own dog.

    What a bastard. A real Aussie would pay someone else demand a government subsidy to kick his neighbour’s dog.

    TFTFY 🙂

  40. Fisky

    This is exactly right. And this subset of the migrant intake is guaranteed to be lifetime welfare recipients, and not just direct dole, but services like health, as they will never be buying private health insurance. This is the real secret as to why health spending has blown out in the last 20 years, and is now growing parabolically. The ageing population excuse is a lie.

    We can thank Tony Abbott’s moronic moral signalling, suggested to him by Greg Sheridan, to increase our refugee intake by 3x — all over the staged picture of a drowned boy.

    Can someone please put Greg Sheridan out of his misery?? Seriously, the man has taken too many hits to the head.

  41. Fisky

    We can thank Tony Abbott’s moronic moral signalling, suggested to him by Greg Sheridan, to increase our refugee intake by 3x — all over the staged picture of a drowned boy.

    Australia now has at least 40,000 Somalis and Sudanese combined. That number will go up to about 200,000 within a generation on natural births alone. It’s entirely possible that in 30-40 years, we will have 400,000-500,000 Somalis and Sudanese living here, with the help of family reunion.

    They will be almost entirely on welfare, largely unemployable, with no skills worth anything in the mid-21st century economy. The crime rate will be astronomical. By then of course, the government will probably be sentencing people to jail terms based on “pre-crimes”, the only measure that will likely keep this population under control.

    This is all thanks to Amanda Vanstone, a former immigration minister with no natural descendants (we should amend the constitution to ban all ministers from being sworn in unless they have children).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *