Foreign Policy: Australia’s “unprecedented experiment in mass immigration”

From Foreign Policy comes Salvatore Babones an American sociologist at the University of Sydney and the author of The New Authoritarianism: Trump, Populism, and the Tyranny of Experts:

Since the global financial crisis of 2008 to 2009, the U.S. economy has chalked up  nine years of solid growth. That’s 36 consecutive quarters of GDP moving in the right direction, which amounts to the second-longest run in U.S. history. If the growth continues for just one more year, it will unseat the boom of 1990s to become the longest.

That’s impressive. But if you’re looking for a developed country that seems to be entirely recession-proof, go to Australia. Australia has enjoyed 27 years of uninterrupted growth since its last recession—108 consecutive quarters of economic expansion and counting.

A few developing countries such as China can match that record, of course, but no other developed economy even comes close. When even China started to slow down in 2012, it raised fears among commodity exporters like Australia. Iron and coal are Australia’s top two exports, and China is their No. 1 destination. But even then, Australia’s GDP growth merely slowed from 3.9 percent in 2012 to 2.6 percent in 2013. Other developed countries might be thrilled just to reach 2.6 percent in the first place.

But Australia’s extraordinary economic statistics mask a more difficult economic reality.

At the lowest point in the spring and summer of 2013, Australia’s quarterly growth rates fell to 1.7 percent. At the same time, Australia’s population was growing at an annualized rate of 1.8 percent. Measured in per capita terms, then, Australia’s economy actually shrank for two consecutive quarters.

Australia also experienced a “per capita recession” for four quarters during the global financial crisis and for two quarters during the dot-com bust of 2000. It recorded a quarter of negative per-capita GDP growth in 2003. Viewed this way, Australia’s economy has in fact matched every U.S. recession of the last 40 years, with one additional slowdown in the first half of 1986.

Economists don’t usually bother to adjust quarterly GDP statistics for population growth. For most developed nations, population growth is so slow and steady as to hardly matter on such a short-term time horizon. Not so for Australia. Australia’s population has grown by nearly 45 percent since 1991. No other major developed country even comes close to that rate.

Unlike similarly fast-growing countries in Africa and the Middle East, Australia doesn’t have a particularly high fertility rate. In fact, the rate is well below the replacement level required to keep its population stable. The majority of Australia’s population growth comes from immigration. In turn, Australia’s so-called economic miracle is based on immigration, too.


The Australian Bureau of Statistics reckons that Australia’s population passed the 25 million mark “just after 11 p.m.” on Aug. 7. That represents a doubling of the country’s population in less than 50 years. An equivalent growth rate in the United States since 1970 would have made for two extra Californias on top of the country’s actual population growth over the last half-century.

At the same time, 50 years of unparalleled immigration have given Australia the largest foreign-born population of any major developed country in modern times. As of 2016, over 28 percent of people in Australia were not born there. With immigration hitting new records in the 2017 to 2018 fiscal year, that figure is almost certain to breach 30 percent by the end of the decade. Immigration is now adding nearly 1 percent per year to Australia’s population. By contrast, in the United States today, nearly 14 percent of the population is foreign-born. For America, that is nearly a record. The American foreign-born population never exceeded 15 percent even in the 1890s heyday of mass immigration.

Australia is, in essence, in the midst of an unprecedented experiment in mass immigration the likes of which the developed world has never seen. And this influx of people feeds into its growth story through several channels. The first is that more people means more demand—for everything, but especially for housing. A typical four-bedroom house in a middle-class suburb about 20 miles west of central Sydney will set you back around 1 million Australian dollars (about $700,000). Mass immigration has also led to a massive building boom that still has not kept pace with population growth in Australia’s major metropolitan areas.

The second has to do with labor. In Australia, immigrants are selected based on a points system of the kind that U.S. President Donald Trump has proposed for the United States. More than two-thirds of permanent migrants to Australia are admitted on account of their education and skills. These immigrants often fail to find work that corresponds to their professional qualifications. Nonetheless, they are usually working-age adults in the most productive periods of their lives.

Their presence gives the economy a boost—and saves the government a lot of money. Australia has a universal single-payer health care system called Medicare, which is similar to the U.S. Medicare program but is open to all citizens and permanent residents. With immigration continuously boosting the population of healthy, working-age, taxpaying adults who need little medical care, Australia is able to support its national health system at relatively low cost.

Third, Australia has even managed to turn immigration into an export industry. After minerals, Australia’s largest “export” may well be educational services, represented by tuition fees paid by international students studying in Australia. It is an open secret that most of these students view an Australian degree as a back door to permanent residency. In effect, Australian universities are selling more than just a quality education. They are selling the hope of a permanent resident visa along with it.

As a result, Australia, with a population of about 25 million, is ranked fourth in the world for the number of international university students, welcoming nearly one-third as many students as the United States (population 325 million). In addition to 382,000 international university students, Australia hosts a further 248,000 junior college and high school students. And international enrollments are growing at double-digit rates, with about one-third coming from China.

In Australia’s most populous state, New South Wales, a recent government report found that revenue from international student tuition made up close to two-thirds of all tuition revenue in 2017. Given that the vast majority of Australia’s 43 universities are public institutions, international student tuition has become a lifesaver for the Australian taxpayer. And even as most student visas allow international students to work part-time—and pay the associated income taxes—international students are not covered by public health insurance or most other government welfare programs.

—————————————

Inevitably, all these economic and budgetary upsides come at a price. Roads are clogged, schools are full, power grids are strained, and housing is scarce.

Politicians and activists of all shades agree that Australia’s infrastructure is not keeping upwith population growth. And then there are the social tensions that result from mass immigration, ranging from the voluntary self-segregation of ethnic communities to outright racism and social exclusion.

For more than 20 years, a majority of Australians have consistently preferred lower levels of immigration. An April poll found that 64 percent of Australian residents thought that recent immigration levels were “too high,” with more than one-third saying that they were “much too high.” And these results should be read in light of the fact that around 15 percent of Australia’s residents (and, presumably 15 percent of those polled) are not Australian citizens.

In fact, a majority or plurality of voters who identify with every major political party in Australia express a preference for less immigration. Yet, as in the United States, calls for reductions in the level of immigration are repeatedly answered with charges of racism. Certainly there is racism in Australia, as in every country. But when a country allows some of the highest levels of legal immigration in the world, twice as much as the United States did in its most immigrant-friendly era, it seems reasonable for people to ask: How much is too much?

And beyond the social strain, there is the economy to think about: As Australia’s population grows, the country needs exponentially more and more immigrants in order to continue to reap the same economic benefits. As a result, Australia’s heavy reliance on immigration to float the economy and fund government budgets runs the risk of turning into a giant immigration Ponzi scheme. So far, Australia has more or less been able to stretch existing infrastructure to accommodate a much larger population. But sooner or later, things will come to a head. When they do, Australia may experience the world’s first immigration economic crash.

There are two takeaways for readers. First, this nicely demonstrates who the real radicals are in the debate. It is not those supposed fringe-dwellers fighting to cut the intake. It is those defending the wild experiment that are the extremists.

Second, the immigration-led economy puts Australian support directly behind the evolution of a Chinese regional hegemony as it opens ever wider channels of influence to Beijing via resource and services trade dependence, people-to-people links and cultural shift. Yet it is the US liberal hegemony that secures Australia’s military, democratic and the progressive principles that enable the mass immigration experiment in the first place.

Whether the experiment fails internally or externally first is anybody’s guess but we’d better pray for the former.

David Llewellyn-Smith

Comments

  1. I hate what the elites have done to this country via mass immigration. They have destroyed it’s livability and turned it into a rat race just like big brothers China.

    • It’s the arrogance that annoys me. Even now they pretend that they do more good than harm whilst they line their own pockets, actively disenfranchising Australians

      • Stewie GriffinMEMBER

        It is the cult of the migrant – propaganda to shift the credit and entitlement of Australia and all that we stand for, away from Colonial Australians who carved the nation out of the dust, to the noble “immigrant”.

        Under this carefully cultured viewpoint, it doesn’t matter if you are 7th generation Australia, whose family and ancestors constructed practically the entire nation, formed the core values that are identified as ‘Australian, or someone fresh of the plane from Calcutta. Under this new version of Australia, Australians and their children are just as entitled to the social capital that resides here as some migrant from the subcontinent whose failed every other visa standard other than having enough money to by a 711 franchise. Because, nothing speaks of being Australian under this model, than having money.

        The purpose of this propaganda is to counter any claim that Australia should be primarily run for Australians – thus the reasoning goes. “there are no Australians, only immigrants. Who are we to stand in the way an deny more immigrants access to what they’ve already constructed? Because it isn’t Colonial Australians who built Australia, those descended mainly from Irish and English stock, NO, it is the noble immigrant – even if they flew in on the last plane from Calcutta and have contributed nothing more to making Australia a great place to live, than out compete a local born Australian for a job or wage…. their contribution is every bit as important.”

        In this culturally re-defined history, Colonial Australians are the evil murders and genocidal manics that wiped out the peaceful indigenous folk who lived in here in a peaceful prosperous utopia. For the next hundred years or so, Australia’s history basically consisted of goose stepping Nazi’s oppressing all until the arrival of the “enlightened” European immigrant from the mid 50s – it was this particular ‘class’ of immigrant that truly built Australia and its endless shopping malls…. by flooding it with everyone from everywhere, so the society that resided here before was turned into an economy.

      • That certainly has seized both sides of Parliament since the 1970s. This has since been reinforced by the Peter Scanlons and the migration council on one hand and the “racist!” Shrieking SJW useful idiots for the CFMEU on the other. Money is what keeps this party together, exemplified by MT ducking the question Why don’t we have a population policy when spruik img melbourne’s airport rail link…

        I think the narrative you refer is supported by this greed, and it is a fraud on young Australians. You are spot on about the filching of this social capital. It has enabled the socialised losses and privatised profits. My eldest is now contemplating his own migration to the Middle East as a part of our resulting brain drain.

      • There is a chapter about NZ and one about Australia in Arthur Kemp’s ‘March of the Titans Vol 2.’ that explains very clearly what you have said above Stewie. Almost exactly correct – his book explains the environmental vs. culture theory of economic development as related to Australia quite clearly.

  2. i think more new arrivals need to be housed in
    mosman
    toorak
    ascot
    hamilton
    point piper

    and not some far flung burbs

  3. reusachtigeMEMBER

    Mass immigration has been extremely beneficial to Australia as it has helped turn an extremely dull and backward province into a vibrant and almost bustling nation-like place. I pity those early pioneers who suffered last drinks at the pub at 6pm. Farkn tortured souls. Mass importation of human capital has brought about far more interesting options but still it is nowhere near enough to be good enough! We need a lot more!

      • My dear boy, you show your youth. There was a time on this blog, maybe five years ago, when a young Reus was looking to buy a house. Continually denied the opportunity by the parasitical system, he then remarked that he would become its biggest cheerleader. What originally started as easily discernible satire, has, by the wonderful policies of successive governments become all too believable as a point of view.
        The frightening thing about it, is that he has been right, in his supercilious guise, more than the writers of the blog and those that comment here. He is your mirror, as much as he is mine. And if you ever question why the dystopian has become concrete, then look no further than his comments and those in power that have allowed his satire to become far too real.

        He has been correct for five years now.

      • Lol. Maybe at one point it was meant to be satire, but it’s more a form of brutal honesty, where the humour drips from the despair.

    • True. True. True. Things were so boring that people didn’t even bother to lock their doors. And our food is much better now.

  4. With immigration continuously boosting the population of healthy, working-age, taxpaying adults who need little medical care

    This assumption needs to be put through the wringer.

    From my viewpoint as an emergency department Doctor I see PLENTY of very recent arrivals of working age (whether they actually work and pay taxes is not clear to me) with all manner of medical, surgical and psychosocial issues requiring emergency department care and, not infrequently, admission to hospital.

    I do not know what the numbers are, but to be convinced of the fact, I would need much more objective evidence that migrants of any given age bracket do not consume more medical services per capita than Australian born residents. That may in fact be true, though anecdotally I will tell you that it is almost certainly not.

    ….

    So far, Australia has more or less been able to stretch existing infrastructure to accommodate a much larger population.

    This is a very unfortunate and very incorrect assumption, which the authors of this report would certainly not have made if they had been allowed to go behind the scenes in an Australian metropolitan tertiary hospital for 24 hours.

    • I would think an emergency dr probably has exposure skewed to younger patients with accidents and similar, rather than long term elderly or terminal patients. I would think that most medical services are consumed by these groups rather than emergency cases.
      Clearly the assumption that infrastructure can be stretched is true, as it has happened. Stretched implies lower levels of service but guess what, the immigrants are here, and the hospitals are still working.

      • Not sure if that is sarc so apologies if it is – the hospitals are defn not working. From a patient care perspective the current public system is a disgrace – despite the best efforts of doctors & co. If you, a family member or friend has had the misfortune of being admitted to a public hospital you would struggle to contain your anger at the politicians who have driven this outcome (and the sheep who keep voting them in). When the economic rationalists at head office start centralising cleaning to save money without a thought for the poor patients or staff dealing with filth uncleaned for hours and hours (yes sometimes people can’t control their functions when they are sick) you can see the system is broken.

      • Might need some hard data to determine what % of emergency patients are young vs elderly – frail, elderly people don’t need to drive the car like a d**khead to end up in emergency, they only have to slip in the bathroom.

      • @C3PO
        Go visit the US, or Bangladesh and then tell me our hospitals aren’t working. I’m sure they could be better, and were in the past, but saying they aren’t working is alarmist BS.

      • So we want to compare ourselves to US or Bangladesh health system bj? We used to be so much better than this. It is not alarmist it is fact the public health system has been ruined and is getting worse each year.

      • bjw678 ……….. when was the last time you visited or were an in/out patient in one of our major city tertiary hospitals… and which one(s) ??????????

      • My dad was taken to Prince of Wales emergency with heart problems last week. He received excellent care. However, I have to add if you’re ever around Auburn or Lakemba during the call to prayer you’ll see masses of men of working age suddenly emerge from doorways all over the place and start making their way to the mosque. And we do have statistics on these things. There are some ethnic groups who have an unemployment rate of >80% 5 years after coming here.

      • “Prince of Wales” and “heart problems” is a good combination. He was in the right place at the right time.

      • Hi bj – this topic is getting old so I dare say we are going to have to agree to disagree. My Aunty got sick in Norway and was in hospital for the past month or so over there. The care was amazing – like stepping back in time for this country. She was well enough to travel home 2 weeks ago and has been in RNS since. Her operations have been bumped daily (ie no medication or food all day only to be told an emergency has come up so they can’t operate). She has been passed around wards – some completely inappropriate. The nursing care has been beyond pretty ordinary (my wife was a nurse and to note the difference between when she used to work and now – simple things like being able to communicate in English is disappointing.). IMO this is not the fault of he doctors or nurses – it is the dumbing down of our whole country and economic rationalist oitsourcing BS. You know the most frustrating part – when my family complains and I suggest maybe they voted for this – complete denial.

  5. Could just change the heading of this Australian story for a general ‘Globalisation Manifesto’…

  6. If you look at our pollies, none of them are up for reduced immigration with the exception of Katter/Hanson, so there is no way the main parties will pull back unless we push them into marginal government, but that will get harder as we fill up with foreign born residents who’ll vote for more not less immigration most likely. I think this issue is almost lost. To be clear I’m not anti immigration, I’m up to slow it down so we can build and take pressure off resources, but at some point how many can a desert island support. Australia right now is a mess, and no pollie wants to admit it.

    • The issue is that population growth is the main issue, but one never side really wants to mention. However, Matthew Guy did mention that he believes that population growth is out of control (https://twitter.com/MatthewGuyMP/status/1048746310608666624), however, his policy of shifting it to the regions will not work. On the other hand, the Andrews government refuses to admit that it is an issue and thinks it can outbuild it (it can’t).

    • I feel that we are fighting a losing battle also. I think what was good about Australia is lost for ever.

      However I don’t agree that all foreign-born residents will vote for more immigration. They are many who won’t. Take the example of a selfish cretin with no loyalty to a country or community. This cretin left his country of birth to come to Australia for money. This cretin will vote for whatever gets it more money – not necessarily more immigration. If the cretin-immigrant works now a normal job in a typical immigrant occupation then he will suffer from further immigration. He might vote against immigration. This cretin’s vote can be bought in other ways.

      Then take the example of a decent intelligent immigrant. Will they vote for more immigration?

    • Laughing this morning about how messed up things are when the only voting path is sustainable Australia preferencing One National in the Senate, and a cock and balls to the duopoly in the forced preference Reps.

    • Two things:

      1) Sustainable Australia’s whole purpose is lower immigration. Everything else hangs off that, because without it, the country can’t be sustainable.

      2) It isn’t the case that all immigrants want more immigration. Maybe the third-worlders who want to bring 23 family members over do. But I got my PR in 2013, and I’m all for lower immigration, as someone who migrated from a first-world country with much cheaper housing, who can’t even begin to come up with a deposit for housing here.

    • One of the key take-aways from that piece is that it is, functionally, a ponzi scheme, which means that immigration levels will actually have to increase in the years to come just to help GDP growth and the budget position stand still.

      What a disaster. Ill feeling is building rapidly now and will continue to do so when the people feel like they have no voice. Who knows how this resolves itself but when the inevitable recession arrives that should be enough to up-end this farce.

  7. The money quote:

    “A majority or plurality of voters who identify with every major political party in Australia express a preference for less immigration. As in the United States, calls for reductions in the level of immigration are repeatedly answered with charges of racism. Certainly there is racism in Australia, as in every country. But when a country allows some of the highest levels of legal immigration in the world, twice as much as the United States did in its most immigrant-friendly era, it seems reasonable for people to ask: How much is too much?”

  8. Hi There,
    I am hoping to bring the Australian Sustainable Party to everyone’s attention. They are an independent and they want to reduce immigration to 70K. I am promoting them. Am I wasting my time or is it worth it. Please share your thoughts. Our immigration levels are too high.

    • You are not wasting your time, I am a member too. That is only done if you support the ALP LNP or Green candidate. There are a number of anti Big Australia parties out there make sure you give them your preference. You can always work out who you want to vote against and work from the bottom up.

      • Thanks Fitzroy. I have had a flood of questions from people and I do not want to give misinformation. Are SAP in the upper house or lower house. What is the impact. I have always been a die hard Liberal Voter. Not any more.
        So you vote SAP Number 1 and your second preference would be ALP/LNP/Greens right. Sorry about the dumb question its is just that a lot of people I know are in a major revolt and looking to turn to an independent now. Same with me as I am learning as I am changing my voting experience. What are you doing to promote SAP and that I said I don’t see much activity from them in regards to promoting the profile of their party. Am I wrong on this.

      • I would put the ALP LNP Greens last. The rest is up to you. there are a number of anti mass immigration parties out there and not all of them will be on the ballot paper. My second preference would not be ALP/LNP/Greens. Put those you hate most last, usually an easy task. I like ALA but that is my choice and there are others.

      • Since we don’t have first past the post voting, you really should base this on preferences. Here is a suggestion. I look at the policies of all the parties running for the Senate, and divide them into 3 groups: those opposed to Big Australia, those without a policy, and those who explicitly or implicitly (the Greens) support Big Australia. Preferences are allotted in that order. Within the anti-Big Australia group and the second group, I allot preferences in the order of how I feel about their other policies and whether they have a chance of being elected, so Sustainable Australia first, then One Nation, Katter, and the others. Among the Big Australia parties, the ones with a realistic chance of being elected go last.

        So far as the MPs are concerned, you may not have the choice of an anti-Big Australia party, so the idea is to disrupt the major parties (and the Greens) as much as possible, so put them last and put the sitting member last of all. There is nothing that will concentrate the mind of a politician as much as kicking him or her off the gravy train, and it might not be that hard in a marginal seat.

      • Agree with the above, Sustainable Australia first, the Big Australia NLP/ALP/Greens last. Everyone else in between.

    • Putting the jokes aside, Sustainable Australia is shaping up as an excellent party with evidence based policies, not beholden to vested interests, and the environmental policies we have been wishing for. They are not tied to extreme progressive or conservative values – it’s a green shoot of hope in a desert of conflicted interests and progressive mumbo jumbo.

    • robert2013MEMBER

      Politicians cannot be trusted. Vote flux party so that we can tell the pollies every day in the senate whether we will let their bills pass or not.

    • I think SAP is fairly well known here, they don’t need much of an intro.

      I would personally argue you are not wasting your time promoting them, mostly because I support them. 🙂

      The mainstream party most closely aligned with SAP is the Greens, as they are both centre-left economically and socially liberal. However, the Greens do not have anything like the explicit policies SAP do around limiting immigration (ie: a hard number), it’s wrapped up in waffle about “sustainability”, not exploiting foreign workers, and properly defining and policing “skilled” immigration, so if immigration is your single issue and you’re otherwise not interested in and/or opposed to a centre-left policy base, then SAP is probably not the party for you.

      Ask yourself this: would you be putting the Greens third-last on your ballot above Labor and Liberals ?

    • I plan to Vote 1 Sustainable Australia unless Labor comes somewhere close to matching their 70K immigration target.

    • The Greens and Sustainable Australia may converge in some areas of policy, but there are significant differences as well and this has a big practical outcome. The Greens are not an environmental party anymore, they are a far left progressive party, they just don’t talk about it too much because they know it is electorally unappealing to many environmentalists. They are now controlled by postmodern progressives who’s main ideology is centred around attacking what they see as entrenched systemic hierarchical failures. This comes with the objective of dismantling, or the indifference to, what many would see as established and respected social norms.

      Therefore any policy convergence with SA is more theoretical than real. The big one is obviously open border ideology, but there are many others. For example, in the last Queensland election they ran a massive city infrastructure policy that was expensive to the point of absurdity, carried on the disaster of extreme densification and ignored the environmental evidence and the social evidence that this is not what people want.

      • They are now controlled by postmodern progressives who’s main ideology is centred around attacking what they see as entrenched systemic hierarchical failures. This comes with the objective of dismantling, or the indifference to, what many would see as established and respected social norms.

        Uh huh. Like what ? See if you can answer without talking about immigration, since we’ve already established that’s one area in which they diverge.

        Therefore any policy convergence with SA is more theoretical than real.

        Sounds like it should be pretty easy to identify some significant differences in their social policies then. Since the Greens are just out the wreck the joint whereas SA are the good guys.

  9. Australian migrant impact / update.

    The issue is not only the migrant intake numbers but also the migrant quality & the economic & social impact.

    We have on any measure the most corrupted & economically & socially damaging migrant intake of any Western/OECD country globally.

    First some national stats.

    🔹Australian Unemployed now 1.3 million.
    A record high number & now close to 10%.
    🔹Australians seeking work now 1.1 million
    2.4 million out of work or looking for work.

    Roy Morgan 2018.
    https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/7683-roy-morgan-australian-unemployment-july-2018-201808100237

    ABS – 1.91 million new PR/Citizen grants in the last decade.
    Impact.
    ABS – CPI 2.0% plus, lower income CPI relative to income & expenditure over 4%.
    ABS – Wages growth 1.6%, negative
    ABS – casualisation of jobs over 30%
    ABS – % Jobs to new migrants 55%.
    ABS – % New migrants unemployed or welfare dependent 28% – with up to 45% in various ethnic groups.
    PC – Australian productivity in decline.
    ‘Jobs created’, over 60% are part time.

    ➡️ Net -the PR Migrant intake far exceeds job capacity & growth. It is dragging down productivity, wages & employment tenure for all Australians.
    -/-

    Now add on the really big impact.

    🔹We has onshore 2.431 million non TR & long stay / repeat stay visitors. This is as at March 2018. It’s increasing exponentially and by now(October 2018) it will be over 2.5 million.

    This 2.5 million is in ADDITION to the PR/Citizen grant intake.

    🔻See this link for detailed breakdown.
    https://www.vsure.com.au/many-temporary-residents-working-australia/

    29% growth of TR since 2012.
    Far exceeds the 1.9 million PR/citizen intake by 130% or an extra half a million.
    Or equal to 15 years worth of PR intake.

    🔹Country of origin & Skills.
    Over 82% are of third world origin (including one third of NZ SCV using NZ as the back door). See the table in link.
    Over 90% are adult & unskilled.
    That’s 2.0 million third world & 2.2 million unskilled mostly adults, with at least 1.6 million working illegally & not paying tax.

    We now have more third world unskilled migrant guestworkers than Gaddafi at his peak. His migrant guestworkers at least paid tax.

    🔹Migrant TR Concentration.

    Of the 2.431 million in March 2018, over 88% or 2.2 million were in Sydney & Melbourne.

    1.31 million TR in Sydney. 1 in 4 people.
    🔹🔹1 in 4 people.. 🔹🔹
    Yep. It’s amazing, but true.
    1 in every 4 people.

    0.90 million TR in Melb, 1 in 5 people. Overflow from Sydney & the now established migrant enclaves creating very rapid Melbourne TR growth.
    0.23 million elsewhere.

    🔹Employment impact.
    70% of the 2.431 million or 1.7 million are working illegally in visa breach. (SMH/ UTS/USyd study).

    Non resident migrant guestworkers steal the equivalent of 1.5 million Australian FTE jobs, usually no tax paid.

    Creating both unemployment and a tax burden on Australians. The Migrant guestworker Fake ID. Cash in hand. ABN & labour services rackets is a core industry.

    The entire migrant guestworker sub economy is estimated at over $133 billion with $71 billion being cash in hand, fake ID, ABN, labour services, and over 1.7 million migrant guestworkers being willing participants on pretext visas, only here to work illegally in visa breach.

    As a test – if current visa conditions of partial work rights were enforced, over 1 million third world migrant guestworkers would self exit.

    If we removed work rights from all TR foreign students, partners, guardians, bridging visas, long stay, visitors, non Nz born SCV l, then 1.7 million will self exit.

    They are poor, live week to week in the illegal migrant cash sub economy.
    They are only here to work illegally, to repay the foreign agent procurer debt, to send back remittances & hoping to secure a PR as a anchor for chain migration.

    🔹Housing.
    The 2.431 million TR & long stay visitors are permanent stay, very long stay (see the data in link), long stay & repeat multiple visit stay.

    93% rent in ‘private shared accommodation’ (DHA, SCC housing study) which is code for migrant only bunk & mattress slum share.
    Now half of all renters nationally and the majority of renters in Sydney & Melbourne.

    Occupying some 550,000 ex Australian dwellings, mostly low end very modest units of small houses in Sydney & Melbourne. Now owned by foreign criminal syndicates, bought with dirty money, usually laundered via a proxy and then converted into migrant only sublet – cash in hand bunk & mattress slum share.

    ➡️ There’s your housing bubble.

    That alone is a $25 billion cash in hand racket with only $11 billion (legal occupancy) declared.
    This dirty money onshore either repaid back to the foreign syndicate, or washed into buying more low end Australian dwellings for migrant slumshare.

    Over half a million dwellings, or over 15 years of Australian affordable housing has now been removed from Australian ownership or occupancy – to be exclusively foreign owned & migrant guestworker occupied.

    🔹Social impact.
    Education.
    The 624,000 foreign students and partners in a range of visa categories They form a $31 billion onshore illegally working sub category.
    That money is all EARNED HERE so it is not an ‘export’.
    They only bring in $2.1 billion of declared funds, often frauded.
    They pay $7.5 billion in fees (Deloitte Access Economics) from that money EARNED HERE.
    Australian education has now fallen 10 places globally/doubled in cost as it debased itself to provide a migrant guestworker alibi.
    Only 110,000 people at most are employed in foreign education services versus some 520,000 foreign students working & some 450,000 working illegally in fake ID, cash in hand or in visa breach. It is massively Job negative, tax negative, socially negative.
    Australian International education is not an export industry at all.
    It’s a corrupted and negative GDP.

    🔹Congestion.
    Vast migrant guestworker slums from horizon to horizon. At double or triple the intended planned occupancy rate for that housing & infrastructure usage.
    The 2.4 million TR drive some 380,000 cars, mostly old bombs, registered on international drivers licences. No fines or penalties collected by NSW SDRO as they are on fake ID or whereabouts unknown.

    The result is major congestion (double or triple the intended suburb density) on our public transport, roads.
    Urban & suburban filth, squalor, crime, foreign criminal gangs, entire non Australian migrant guestworker zones now across both cities.

    🔹Homelessness.
    Pushing the Australian poor, needy & our now (migrant guestworkers caused) jobless youth onto the street.
    112,000 Australian permanent homeless & 400,000 seeking affordable housing.

    -/-

    Summary.
    It’s getting worse.
    In fact it’s out of control.
    Australia is now facing a recession, structural job loss, and yet the migrant guestworker illegal worker intake keeps going up.

    Something needs to snap.

    And it may just be from an unexpected, but highly logical lobby group.

    This would be the new Australian’ migrant PR/citizen community (800,000 now as citizens who can vote in key Sydney & Melbourne electorates) who push & lobby to massively slash & exit the TR intake.

    After all these new legal migrants know its a racket. That’s how they got in.
    And Australia isn’t the place they want it to be either. They are also third world unskilled and at the bottom of the economic ladder.

    The new legal migrants are by far the most impacted in job loss, housing impact & living standard degradation caused by the runaway TR intake.

    I think you will find there’s considerable voter support in these new Australian migrant communities for:

    A. Removal of work rights from all the TR.
    B. Visa cancellation of 1.6 million TR in visa breach.
    C. A massively reduced PR & TR intake.

    • I am a migrant who as of 2014 became an Aussie citizen. I got in here by a 457. Which I overstayed between employers, but apparently was still within a grey area of “until they actually TELL YOU you have to leave, you don’t have to leave.”

      My first 457 job was at HALF my former first-world salary in my home country… I recognised it as the “guest worker discount” for salaries, that guest workers in my home country were subjected to as well. I figured, that’s to weed out SOME of the people who might otherwise come for financial reasons rather than really wanting to be in the country. The whole time I was in that job, I repeatedly said, “If some Aussie comes up to me and says he or she wants my job, and he or she is qualified to do it, I think they should have it.” Because I knew that the game was the same as in my home country — that there were no Aussies who applied for the low-paid job because better pay was available elsewhere, and that the employer was taking advantage of migrant labour to get work done at a discount.

      And so, I took advantage of the employer, because I so wanted to be an Aussie that I was willing to take the salary hit, live in sharehouses with a pedophile doctor, druggard, and other savoury characters in a mining town, and ultimately end up homeless for a few weeks between jobs. At the same time, I felt badly enough about what this was doing to everyday Aussies, that I held the position I held that if any Aussie wanted my job, they should have it.

      After that first job, I got back up to market rate and found an employer who’d actually sponsor me for PR, instead of just SAYING that they’d sponsor me for PR but not do it, because then they wouldn’t have the threat of sacking me and forcing me to return home to extract extra work out of me. In the past 5 years, I’ve paid the top marginal tax rate (just very barely) twice. The country is getting value out of me as someone with no tax deductions to speak of.

      > I think you will find there’s considerable voter support in these new Australian migrant communities for:
      > A. Removal of work rights from all the TR.

      Not entirely agreed. Allow very-high-paid (top tax bracket, $180K and up) specialists in, because there are skills out there that Australians do not possess and cannot acquire easily. But DO NOT allow them property purchase rights. [And do not allow family included in that one worker’s visa work rights.] Everyone else is optional IMHO.

      > B. Visa cancellation of 1.6 million TR in visa breach.

      Hear, hear.

      > C. A massively reduced PR & TR intake.

      Hear, hear.

      • Well that’s broadly in line with the feedback from many recent migrant PR citizen grant arrivals – most (70%) who are unskilled & at the bottom of the socio economic ladder in wealth, jobs & housing ownership.

        They are the most impacted by the 2.4 million TR/visitors – many working illegally – some 1.5 million in some form of visa breach working & occupying at least 550,000 Australian dwellings.

        Even if we enforced current visa conditions on all TR & visitor tourists it would be a start.

        If we removed work rights from foreign students, bridging visas & the other rackets it would better.
        That’s well over 1 million exited. Self exiting.
        If they can’t work they won’t stay.
        Only here to work illegally, repay the foreign agent procurer & send back remittances.

        That’s say 500,000 FTE jobs & 200,000 modest ex Australian dwellings (10 years supply) currently occupied by migrant guestworkers back on the market.

  10. Salvatore Babones: “In fact, the rate is well below the replacement level required to keep its population stable.”

    This statement is wrong. Even one of his own supporting links says “Natural increase and NOM contributed 37.8% and 62.2% respectively to total population growth for the year ended 31 March 2018.”.

    At http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/latestProducts/3101.0Media%20Release1Mar%202018 it has “Natural increase contributed 143,900 additional people to Australia’s population, made up of 307,200 births and 163,200 deaths.”

    Australian families seems to have plenty of babies.

    • You have made a common mistake Hasse. The so called natural increase includes past immigrants having children. To look at it another way if we stopped immigration tomorrow then we will stabilise after a couple of decades and then start to decline as the death rate kicks in. The replacement fertility rate is not called that for nothing.

  11. Thanks everyone for your support. I hope you are all putting Sustainable Australia Party as your number 1 vote for the next Victorian and NSW state elections (if you are residents) and the Federal Election once announced.

    I am so fed up with Sydney being trashed that nothing is going to stop me now. I intend to make sure that all 16.2 million voters across Australia know about the Sustainable Australia Party and hopefully has the sense to vote for them. I know this is going to be a huge battle but I need to keep hope as Australia is just getting worse. This party seriously seems like our only hope. If anyone has any ideas to promote that would help. I also ask that you support me by making this party known by discussing with friends, family, neighbors, colleagues and the list goes on and on.
    VOTE 1 SUSTAINABLE AUSTRALIA PARTY.