Davos elites push open borders immigration agenda

By Leith van Onselen

The Australian’s Judith Sloan has done a terrific job tearing apart the theme of the 2019 World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos: “Globalisation 4.0: Shaping a Global Architecture in the Age of the Fourth Industrial Revolution”.

The annual WEF forum in Davos is attended by the ‘who’s who’ of global elites, ranging from corporate executives to wealthy celebrities and senior government figures. Not surprisingly then, the WEF’s latest dodgy pre-Davos survey of so-called ‘ordinary people’ has found that 57% of respondents supposedly believe that immigration is mostly good for the receiving country. As Sloan points out, this is in stark contrast to the latest global survey by the Pew Research Centre, which found that only 14% of respondents favour allowing more migrants into their country:

The WEF typically puts out some serious-sounding reports before Davos, including surveys of ordinary folk around the world (do they know any?) as well as of company executives. The results always accord with the pres­umptions that globalisation and high rates of immigration are good and that nationalism is simply a form of destructive populism that must be rejected.

This year’s survey of ordinary folk revealed that most respondents (57 per cent) believe immigration is mostly good for the receiving country. According to this dubious survey, North Americans (66 per cent) and people from South Asia (72 per cent) are particularly supportive.

But these results do not mesh with the more reliable Pew Research Centre.

Its worldwide survey undertaken in 27 countries last year found “a median of 45 per cent say fewer or no immigrants should be allowed to move to their country, while 36 per cent say they want about the same number of immigrants. Just 14 per cent say their countries should allow more immig­rants.”

Moreover, support for immigration has fallen sharply during the past several years, including in Australia. But it’s not the Davos message…

It is the most compelling example of the conceit of the well-heeled elite lecturing to the masses about the value of globalisation and open borders while feathering their own nests by cooking up new forms of crony capitalism to rip off taxpayers and consumers. All in the name of doing good and saving the planet, you must understand.

I will add that the overwhelming majority of recent opinion polls in Australia show majority support for lowering immigration, including:

  • Australian Population Research Institute: 54% want lower immigration;
  • Newspoll: 56% want lower immigration;
  • Essential: 54% believe Australia’s population is growing too fast and 64% believe immigration is too high;
  • Lowy: 54% of people think the total number of migrants coming to Australia each year is too high;
  • Newspoll: 74% of voters support the Turnbull government’s cut of more than 10% to the annual permanent migrant intake to 163,000 last financial year;
  • CIS: 65% in the highest income decile and 77% in the lowest believe that immigration should be cut or paused until critical infrastructure has caught up;
  • ANU: Only three out of 10 Australians believe the nation needs more people.

Sloan is 100% correct. The Davos elites must be ignored. They are all about lining their own pockets, not representing ordinary folk.

[email protected]

Unconventional Economist

Leith van Onselen is Chief Economist at the MB Fund and MB Super. Leith is an economist and has previously worked at the Australian Treasury, Victorian Treasury and Goldman Sachs.


  1. Lowy: 54%

    Just curious: what did the Lowy Institute poll say before he sold up his shopping centres?

    Don’t tell me: 14%?

  2. reusachtigeMEMBER

    I believe Davos as they know their stuff about vibrancy! The world needs much more vibrants the world over otherwise it will remain a dull world and no one wants to live in a world like that.

    • Take a pinch of white man
      Wrap him up in black skin
      Add a touch of blue blood
      And a little bitty bit of red Indian boy
      Oh like a Curly Latin kinkies
      Oh Lordy, Lordy, mixed with yellow Chinkees, yeah
      You know you lump it all together
      And you got a recipe for a get along scene
      Oh what a beautiful dream
      If it could only come true, you know, you know

      What we need is a great big melting pot
      Big enough enough enough to take
      The world and all its got And keep it stirring for a hundred years or more
      And turn out coffee coloured people by the score

      • And then, when all our different traditions & cultures that we now travel to celebrate in all their glory become globally syndicated & homogenized (already happening in places if you talk to constant globe trotters) – what then? No diversity? Bland sameness? What’ll the trippers have to engineer then?

      • That is why Japan is killing it with tourism – their intact culture is attracting those that want a unique experience.

    • Make ‘vibrants’ Word of the Year for 2019! I want to hear Virginia The Holy talk about it here Sunrise Today 2.0 show. I want to see her smug head explode!

  3. Amongst Angio-Celtics,
    The English Civil War was the last time anger against the tryanny of the Elite resulted in voilent insurrection.

    Anger is good,
    Anger gets shit done .

    American Gods Season One

  4. I’m gonna make another entry on my list. Rather than individual names, to keep it simple it’ll just be “Every cnut at Davos”.

  5. Pew and Davos surveys don’t really disagree.

    davos says 57%.

    Pew says 50%: “while 36 per cent say they want about the same number of immigrants. Just 14 per cent say their countries should allow more immig­rants.”. 36%+14%=50%.

    The issue is that the masses are hoodwinked and mislead about how immigration impacts them. Not that the stats are cooked.

    • 26% of Australians are foreign born – there would be a descent chunk of this amount who would be recent arrivals, who would be keen for the rest of their extended families and friends to come here. I would say the majority of Australian-born and those migrants who came here before the Howard Helter Skelter Immigration Years would not support further mass immigration.

      • exactly …… but we’re not the, how’s it said, ‘vibrant’ enough and surely not enough ‘diversity’ …

      • You can’t have too much diversity. Even in countries that are so diverse they’re practically ungovernable like the US, you need more diversity. Even in a country like Syria where Sunnis were killing Shia who were killing Alawites who were killing druze, and all of whom were killing Christians and Kurds, you still can’t get enough diversity. Even if a place is so diverse that you need a tyrant to hold the country together, you can’t get enough diversity….. You just can’t.

      • So the trick is to get immigration rates so high that migrant votes drown out the votes of those who were born here.

  6. The key thing for me is just how hard it is to get the views of the majority implemented into actionable policy. Last time I checked we had another record permanent intake of around 290K, which is way more than most people would want, I’m sure. Insane.

    I’m currently based in the US and if anyone has a mandate to reduce immigration it’s the Republicans under Trump – he tried to introduce a merit-based visa system about a year ago but that got dinged, and look at all the grief he has copped in trying to secure funding for a US$5bn wall (is absolute peanuts for a country with a GDP of ~$US21T). Granted, the wall is purely symbolic because many visa overstayers and illegals fly in but the objection to something so necessary and practical is astonishing.

    The only positive thing for me is that people are starting to talk more honestly about the impact that immigration has on their lives and they now feel comfortable framing it in terms of congestion, wages, cost of living, safety, opportunities for their kids etc. It was taboo to even raise the slightest concern about immigration even five years back, so that is some progress in my book. Maybe in another 5 years we’ll have found some electable politicians in Oz with the minerals to go to an election with a promise to close the floodgates.

    • there’ll be some sensible reforms in the US over the next couple of years, particularly with the pressures of 2020 looming. Mad Dems will double down on ‘diversity, diversity rah rah rah’, but it’ll alienate many outside the deplorables as the realities of the costs of illegals and ‘sanctuary’ city and state policies become more widely understood….

      As for Oz ……. nah. Not in my lifetime ….

      • I really hope you’re wrong about Oz – we need to get our shite together soon. I don’t have any kids but I do have four very young nephews there and I really worry for them. As for the Dems in the US, they are absolutely making themselves unelectable by moving way too far to the left, just like the Libs in Oz. Immigration reform will be tough over here and Trump is the last roll of the dice because I don’t think we’ll ever find someone who’ll push the barrow like he does. Check out Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez if you want to see what the Dems have ready to enter from stage left…..words fail me right now.

      • What what What? The Libs in AU are moving to the left? Just checking you’re not referring to bizarro world. Or are we playing opposites today.

        Just to dispel any ambiguity here- this is the coal-lovin, homo and lady-hatin, bonafide-God-lovin’ Libs we’re talkin’ ’bout innit? (TESTIFY!)

      • not quite HC – to be clear, I don’t see any established mainstream political now (or in the foreseeable) future ‘reforming’ immigration to significantly alter the population ponzi.

        The only way the current absurd rates decline in any meaningful way is if the potential newcomers decide, for whatever reason to not come ……. our ruling class, the political class and the managerialist hanger-ons that make it all possible are too vested in the population ponzi to do anything substantively change the law/policies.

        And, unfortunately the sheeple are willing to go along with it. Yellow vests they are not ……

      • What what What? The Libs in AU are moving to the left?

        When you’re way, way out to the right, anything looks far left. Even the lady of the moment promoting ideas that are uncontroversial and demonstrably superior like universal healthcare.

        A lot of people (who have typically been voting Coalition (or Republican for USians) most of their lives) really struggle with the reality that high immigration is a right-wing policy, enacted by right-wing Governments, to squash [non-unionised] labour power, suppress wages, and increase profits. Which is kind of odd, since in most cases those are the reasons they’ve spent most of their lives voting Coalition.

        High (and loosely policed) immigration is an application of supply-side, neoliberal market principles. Which is why it’s being dominated by low-skill, low-cost immigrants in the grand race to the bottom. Limited, selective, targeted immigration would be an interventionist, socialist, left-wing policy.

      • “…Check out Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez if you want to see what the Dems have ready to enter from stage left…..words fail me right now….”

        The nickname “Occasional Cortex” is a good one….

    • If anyone has a mandate to reduce immigration, it is Trump, apparently. He ran the issue as the centre piece of his mid term campaign and in the House of Reps he lost 40 seats to the Democrats, worst result for Republicans since Watergate mid terms in 1974 – mandate. His current approval rating during this wall fiasco is in the mid 30s. Mandate. Otherwise some good remarks which I agree with

      • The point I was trying to make is that Trump campaigned strongly in the 2016 presidential race on border security and attempting to gain more control of who comes into the country and on what terms. He wanted to focus on skills the country needs, rather than family reunion (which to my way of thinking has a place but not when it accounts for the vast majority of migrant numbers). Many over here felt he had a mandate to pursue immigration reform after 2016 but as you rightly point out that stance was probably weakened after the midterms. The key takeaway in reference to my initial comments in response to Leith’s article is that the Republicans had absolute control of the House and the Senate in the first half of his term and yet they still couldn’t find a way to pass any meaningful legislation. This outcome made me think that there really is no stopping the global immigration juggernaut – these guys were sitting so pretty and they still couldn’t get it done. ‘Straya is in a far worse spot politically to effect change right now, as much as people seem to want it.

      • Fair enough, yes it is a juggernaut. I see the UN published some sort of resolution recently stating that immigration was a human right. The UN said it was non binding but even so, a lot of people wouldn’t agree it was a human right

      • Astro Boy

        Trump increased his majority in the senate. The senate is the true power in US politics, not the House and not even Obama increased his numbers in the senate. In fact Obama lost both the majority in the House as well as the senate. The voters had their say.

        Selective one sided data to suit your agenda is not a good look.

    • Granted, the wall is purely symbolic because many visa overstayers and illegals fly in but the objection to something so necessary and practical is astonishing.

      Necessary seems a strange way to describe something that’s only been a talking point for a couple of years and an “emergency” for a few weeks.

      • It’s been necessary for years. Until Trump, none of the options for “elected representatives” were prepared to admit it or do anything about it. Hence the pent-up potential support for the first genuinely “representative” candidate. Same thing everywhere.

        If the numbers prepared to hold their noses and vote for a distasteful populist who the MSM smear as a “racist”, are not as high in some countries, that tends to indicate they haven’t had the problem to sufficient extent yet. Even Europe hasn’t had anything like the USA’s “decades of porous southern border”. Give it time there. Straya has the blessing of sea as a de facto wall – floods of people by boat can’t ever match the floods that just walk in if this is an option.

      • It’s been necessary for years. Until Trump, none of the options for “elected representatives” were prepared to admit it or do anything about it. Hence the pent-up potential support for the first genuinely “representative” candidate.

        That’s not what the numbers say.

        Trump did not win the popular vote.
        A majority oppose the wall (and have since the first time it was mentioned).

        (The shutdown tantrum isn’t helping his overall popularity either.)

        Anyone who thinks Trump and co. cares the slightest for the plight of working people is off their rocker. Outside of dog whistling and empty campaign rhetoric they can’t even muster up a facade of concern.

      • Schmidty

        Quote, “Trump did not win the popular vote.” so what !! Your point is ??

        This tripe is constantly used by the ignorant rusted on socialists.

        A US president is elected via the Electoral College system, not the popular vote.!!

        Obama won both the presidency and the popular vote and you have to go back to Eisenhower in the period 1953 to 1961 to see the last time this happened.

        Clearly you do not understand how the US system works, or you are deliberately dishonest, hardly surprising. In matters not who won the popular vote but who wins more seats under the US Electoral College system. Get it Schmidty ??

        Short history lesson for you.

        In 2006 this;

        Two-thirds of the Republican-led House approved the bill, including 64 Democrats, and 80 of 100 senators approved the bill in the Senate. Then Sens. Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton were among the 26 Democrats who approved the bill. Supporters also included Sen. Chuck Schumer, who is set to take over leadership of the Senate for Democrats in 2016.

        Other Democrats in the Senate who voted for the wall in 2006 are Sens. Barbara Boxer (CA), Sherrod Brown (OH — then in the House), Tom Carper (DE), Dianne Feinstein (CA), Barbara Mikulski (MD), Bill Nelson (FL), Debbie Stabenow (MI), and Ron Wyden (OR).

        These Democrats in 2006 voted for the wall, get it ??

        Now the very same Democrats are playing politics whilst 800,000 workers suffer.

        Recently, Pelosi and team were on their way to Europe and Afghanistan for a week and negotiations to end the shutdown were obviously not front and centre for the Democrats. Story on BBC and ABC Australia.

        The American people voted for Trump and the wall at the Mexican border was an election promise. No surprises there.

        I realise that dealing with facts is not your strong point.

        You might enjoy this Obama story.


        The Obama home in the posh D.C. neighbourhood of Kalorama had a wall built around it before they moved in as part of security upgrades put in by the Secret Service.

        The hypocrisy from the Virtue Signalling PC brigade is on display for all to see.

      • LOL.


        I am well aware of how the US electoral system works, and I have at no point disputed Trump’s election from it.

  7. Ever read Indian public service job ad headlines?

    “1000 roles, 14m applicants” that sort of thing.

    Now open the borders.

    I’ll be out of work pretty quickly. So too will most of us born here.

    I’m not special enough to believe I could do more and better work than the 2-10 people who would take my wage.

    • Indians will also work 70 hours a week and always business as usual on a Sundays. Harden up mate if you don’t want to work everyday to compete you must lazy! Also work while sick, employ your kids for free labour to compete come on myne compete, woof, woof.

      Dog eat Dog was Howard’s vision for Australia it is coming true.

      • Our own ancestors worked like that too. There is supposed to be a “development dividend”. The West’s elites have got sick of the development dividend for their own proles.

  8. Well said Colin, why do so few think like you an I do? It’s like going to Bali only to hang out with the same Aussie bogans I try to avoid here at home. Does a melting pot mean two Indian restaurants in every suburb? Is this supposed to be the great mixing of cultures the billionaires are talking about?