Labor takes baby steps toward immigration reform

Even before the COVID-19 pandemic hit, there was a strong case to cut immigration, which had run at turbo-charged levels for 15 years:

First, Australian real wage growth had remained stillborn for nearly 10 years:

Australia’s labour underutilisation rate had been stuck at stubbornly high levels:

Whereas average monthly hours worked had collapsed to record lows:

All three indicators pointed to an Australian labour market that has been chronically oversupplied, driven by the tidal wave of migrants, both temporary and permanent.

When combined with the negative impacts on housing affordability, congestion and overall amenity in our major cities, it is clear that Australia’s mass immigration experiment has unambiguously reduced living standards for the typical Australian household.

The situation is obviously far more fragile now with the economy devastated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Real unemployment has risen to levels not seen since the 1930s Great Depression and Australian households are facing heavy income losses once emergency income support is wound back.

Thus, the absolute last thing Australian workers need is to be competing for scarce jobs with hundreds of thousands of migrant workers arriving every year.

Yesterday, Labor’s opposition leader, Anthony Albanese, flagged a new immigration platform aimed at protecting Australian workers:

The draft platform says Labor would favour permanent ­migration over temporary migration.

“Labor will restore public confidence in Australia’s temporary migration program and ensure that temporary migration does not adversely affect the employment and training opportunities for Australians, particularly young people who suffer from higher rates of unemployment and ­underemployment,” the draft platform says.

“Labor’s priority is to ensure that job opportunities are offered to local workers first and that temporary migration will never be used as a means to undercut local wages, conditions and training ­opportunities.”

The document also says Labor would encourage skilled migrants to move to regional and rural areas where there are skills shortages…

“Labor aspires to progressively increase Australia’s government-funded humanitarian intake to 27,000 places per year,” the document states. “Labor aspires to ­progressively increase the community-sponsored refugee program intake to 5000 places per year…

The document says Labor’s ­humanitarian program would ­accommodate LGBTIQ people who fear persecution.

This is a great start by Labor. But it needs to go much further to restore integrity to the immigration program and maximise living standards.

Below are suggestions on how to practically reduce Australia’s immigration intake, both temporary and permanent, to sustainable levels.

Temporary migration:

The number of temporary visas outstanding reached absurd levels at the end of 2019, at nearly 2.5 million people:

The first step to lowering the number of temporary migrants should be to significantly lift the Temporary Skilled Migration Income Threshold (TSMIT) from $53,900, which is well below the median Australian wage of $1,100 per week ($57,200 p.a.), according to the ABS:

This TSMIT wage floor has now fallen $3,300 (6%) below the median income of all Australians ($57,200), which includes unskilled workers. Thus, the TSMIT has incentivised employers to hire cheap migrants instead of local workers, as well as abrogated the need to provide training.

The wage floor for all skilled migrants (both permanent and temporary) should be set at least at the 75th percentile of earnings (preferably higher).

This would ensure that the temporary migration scheme is used sparingly by businesses to employ only high skilled migrants, not as a general labour market tool for undercutting local workers and eliminating the need for training.

Second, the federal government should lift English-language and financial requirements for international students, alongside limiting work opportunities.

Raising entry standards would ensure a smaller number of high quality international students, while also ensuring they are financially independent and not reliant on work for income.

In turn, this would lift export revenue per student and reduce competition in the workplace. It would also ensure that students come to Australia to study, not for ulterior motives, such as to work and/or to gain permanent residency.

These measures alone would dramatically reduce temporary migration into Australia.

Permanent migration:

The permanent migrant program is dominated by the ‘skilled stream’, which has set aside 108,000 places for so-called ‘skilled’ workers:

Even before the COVID-19 pandemic hit, this skilled stream was highly dubious. There was no evidence that Australia was experiencing ‘skills shortages’ that warranted such a strong intake.

We also know that Australia’s skilled migrant program has been widely rorted, attracting migrants to areas already heavily oversupplied with workers (e.g. accounting, engineering and IT), with most of these migrants employed at levels well below their claimed skills set.

‘Skilled’ migrants generally also have significantly higher unemployment and underemployment than the Australian born population, and are paid less. This is evidenced by the Department of Home Affairs’ Continuous Survey of Migrants. This survey shows that migrants have significantly worse labour market outcomes than the general population:

In particular:

  • The median annual full-time earnings of migrants was $16,500 (22%) below the general population in 2017;
  • The median annual earnings of migrants was $5,900 (10.2%) below the general population in 2017; and
  • The unemployment rate of surveyed migrants (12.6%) was more than double the general population (5.5%) in 2017.

Even if we focus on the skilled stream only, both median earnings and unemployment is far worse than the general population:

These are shocking results. Skilled migrants should be paid well above the general population, which comprises both skilled and unskilled workers, as well as have very low unemployment.

Thus, like the temporary skilled visa system, the permanent program has unambiguously undercut workers and contributed to Australia’s poor wage growth, in addition to crush-loading the major cities and making housing less affordable.

With Australians now facing mass unemployment, and skills shortages virtually non existent across the economy, there is zero rationale for maintaining such a strong permanent migrant program.

Instead, the ‘skilled’ program should be phased back to historical levels of around 35,000, and be reserved only for truly world-class leaders in their field that Australia cannot foster internally.

Moreover, these highly skilled migrants should have an income pay floor set at least at the 75th percentile of earnings (preferably higher), as for temporary ‘skilled’ migrants.

No longer should Australian employers be allowed to simply ‘grab a migrant’ to fill ordinary positions in the labour market cheaply. Instead, they would have to lift wages to attract workers (thus countering anaemic wages growth), as well as commit to training local workers.

Let’s also not forget that many migrants come to Australia on temporary visas with the hope of transitioning to a ‘skilled’ permanent visa.

Therefore, if Australia was to remove the carrot of permanent residency by slashing the ‘skilled’ intake, it would also reduce the flow of temporary migrants, since the two areas are intrinsically linked.

An easy ‘sell’ for Labor:

Cutting immigration in this way is an easy sell for Labor. All it needs to argue is:

  1. That an excessive flow of migrant workers are displacing locals, reducing employment opportunities and lowering wage growth.
  2. That excessive immigration is driving up demand for housing, pushing prices and rents beyond the reach of locals, especially in Sydney and Melbourne.
  3. That excessive immigration is overrunning infrastructure, reducing amenity and liveability, and pushing up the cost of living.

Most Australians know these to be true and would resonate with these common-sense arguments.

Labor should also state that it is merely seeking to lower immigration back toward the historical (pre-2004) average, and that the new lower intake would still be at the higher end of developed nations.

Moreover, progressively lifting the humanitarian intake by around 10,000 is smart, provided it is accompanied by large reductions in other categories of immigration, since it automatically counters faux arguments of “racism” and “xenophobia” that are likely to emerge from the fake left.

If Labor wants any chance of winning the next election, it must return to its working class roots and represent the interests of regular Australians over inner-city progressives. Otherwise it will remain in the political wilderness.

Leith van Onselen
Latest posts by Leith van Onselen (see all)

Comments

  1. “Labor aspires to progressively increase Australia’s government-funded humanitarian intake to 27,000 places per year,” the document states. “Labor aspires to ­progressively increase the community-sponsored refugee program intake to 5000 places per year”

    Another 3 years of LNP in government it is then.

    • Neither poltical party wants to actually stop the number of immigrants – they just want to change the mix.

      Liberal – They want people who are either cashed up to boost spending (i.e. Chinese) or will be willing to work for slave wages without complaining (i.e. Indians)

      Labor – They want more refugees and people who are lower income – as they will be more likely to vote Labor in the future. Labor needs more voters to be sustainable, the LNP does not (at least not for the next decade). Labor policy on immigration is all about importing “the right type of immigrant” that will be more likely to vote Labor in the future.

    • Because the ALP has identified that Australia has skills a shortage of LGBTQI people.

      Note:
      I wrote this being facetious but then after I wrote it I realised that such research and government policy could entirely be true and factual in the current buffoonery that Australia has become.

      • Haywood JablomyMEMBER

        If these people are to form a separately defined segment of our humanitarian intake, there could be some interesting choices being made. Where do you draw the line? Seems like little more than virtue signalling if I assume that sexual preference does not currently exclude one from being accepted in the humanitarian intake.

        And they wonder why people are tuning out.

      • Yes. Virtue signalling.

        LGBTQI is already a legitimate grounds for seeking asylum. Which is fair enough. It’s irrelevant to the issue at hand.

        But, the ALP is so PC that they’re off the reservation. They just can’t help themselves.. focusing on some minority PC woke issue (albeit important).. who knows why..? they must think it’ll get them votes or something on the basis of the whole G marriage popularity from a while ago. In any case; the party is, at worst, extremely dangerous to Australia and it’s citizens; and, at best, useless.

        • They lost the last election and all those votes in Qld etc. (that basically went to Clive Palmer’s party) not because all those voters thought the ALP was not focused enough on issues of G refugees or the like.

          The main issue in the last election was immigration has reached destructive levels. And more broadly that the party is not putting Australia or Australians first. Palmer knew it and pounced on it.

          But, they just don’t get it. They will never get it. Prepare for a ty.ran.ny of LNP for the next 20 years unless the ALP is destroyed and replaced with something completely different.

        • They haven’t learnt a single thing since the last election. They’re as bad as the US Democrats – an honest self-appraisal is the last thing on their minds. We should just be thankful Labor didn’t blame their defeat on the Russians.

    • It’s a laudable proposal given many countries are openly hostile to homosexual or transgender individuals.

      In saying that, it could quite easily be exploited by piss-takers so sorting out your genuinely at risk people from your sudden “oh yeah, I’m gay Australia, let me in” types will be mighty difficult. I believe Canada may have dug themselves into a hole over this very issue

      I don’t even know why he mentioned it to be honest as I’m sure they’d qualify for humanitarian intake anyway, so I guess he’s just letting everyone know that Labor is more Rainbow than the Libs………………

  2. No job offer, no migration visa.

    It’s not rocket science.

    Charge the businesses a 20k bond for each worker they want to bring in, throw in a few big fines if they try to rort the system and make them pay for the cost of deporting any worker if it comes to that.

  3. Claude BradingMEMBER

    I know it’s been noted before, but it’s amusing that the ABS measure of unemployment has evolved to give the lowest possible way of measuring it, with other measures giving much higher figures. There has been similar manipulation of inflation figures.

    In physics, the observer effect is: “That the observation of a phenomenon changes the phenomenon.”

    I hereby declare Brading’s infallible law of government statistics: “That the observation of a phenomenon changes the observation”

    • The ABS has been reporting the same unemployment statistics for decades.

      The problem, is that the one everyone focuses on is the least useful, but most politically attractive.

      Yet another failure of journalism.

  4. rural areas where there are skills shortages

    Balderdash.

    $2.50 an hour

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-09-15/backpacker-farm-workers-speak-of-wage-exploitation/12545294?nw=0

    she slept and washed alongside animals, with the toilet doubling up as a hen coop.

    there was a soiled mattress on the floor and a bathroom that didn’t work and a kitchen that had no running water.

    she did not have enough money to buy a bus ticket to Melbourne.

    Working Holiday Visa program must be axed to end worker exploitation

    The concept that Australians don’t want to do this work isn’t just wrong, it’s offensive.

    If they actually started paying people decent wages, there’s a willing workforce already out there in rural and remote Australia

    https://www.awu.net.au/news/2020/08/12541/working-holiday-visa-program-must-be-axed/

  5. Haywood JablomyMEMBER

    I can’t read the paywalled article, but I fail to see how this is “a great start by Labor”. Wishy washy statements of vague intent with no specifics. Add a dash of unnecessary virtue signalling and a liberal dose of oft repeated ad nauseum bullsh!t about encouraging skilled migrants to move to the regions.

    I suppose the fact that they are speaking about it at all is a minor positive, but this is the same party that wanted to open the floodgates to elderly grandparents etc last election.

    Besides, it would only take a few well placed inferences that their thinking is [email protected] to send them scurrying back to their permanent home on the opposition benches. Which is where I think they are quite comfortable anyway, even if they have to stick their heads above the parapet once in a while to give the impression that they are interested.

  6. You’d think that they’d care about workers but they don’t.

    People like Dan Andrews have never had dirt or grease under his nails in his life. Wouldn’t even know how to change the spark plug on the lawnmower – although I guess he now has an electric one…

    Unless it’s public sector employment, an environmental crusade or some sort of social justice war on our values or our historical identity they’re not interested.

    You watch what a mess the socialists are going to make over in NZ after they secure a new mandate and don’t have the nationalist NZF party as a constraint… a real 21st century workers paradise.

    • It’s okay – when the revolution comes, the most egregious of the virtue signaling crew are going to be hanging from scaffold along with the rest. It’s quite surreal how ‘being seen to be virtuous’ has now superseded almost every basic human need or concern. They deserve what’s coming.

    • The labour party in NZ are not socialists, and neither is the ALP. They are globalists with economic policies that would make Ludwig von Mises happy. However, it is all hidden from the public with a thick camouflage of ultra PC identity politics.

  7. “Labor immigration reform”. Yeah right. In other news just to hand, Santa Claus and Tooth Fairy are real.

    Heck, LVO, what part of the factory reset of Kristina Keneally are you not following? Morrison has made it very clear he will restart mass migration (net migration > 160K) as soon as he dares. Albanese (the butler) has made it equally clear that he will wave it through. This is simply the KK of old. She’ll be parroting Rizvi again before you know it.

    Just to rub it in, Home Affairs is already saying openly that the permanent “ceiling” for 2020-21 is an insanely high 160K. A figure unknown before Rudd/Gillard. What does the re-programmed KK say about that? Nothing.

    • Agree.

      ALP would never consider the solution as proffered in the article. They’d view every point as “ demonising the other “. Any ability to seperate discussion on immigration and racism are now entirely beyond them.

  8. reusachtigeMEMBER

    LOLOLOL. Nope. They gonna go broke

    coz… “The document says Labor’s ­humanitarian program would ­accommodate LGBTIQ people who fear persecution”

    This is why Labor will always be farkt!

    • Stop it! It’s a surefire vote winner. The LNP are ruined.

      People are struggling to feed themselves and pay the rent but addressing LGBTIQ issues is still a priority!

      • reusachtigeMEMBER

        It could have been so easy for them if they just said something like “with preference for struggling young families that demonstrate that they really want to make a go of it in Australia”. Nope. They’re farkt!

        • “with preference for struggling young families that demonstrate that they really want to make a go of it in Australia”

          And by “making a go of it” you of course mean “want to become successful and sexually attractive property investors. 😀

  9. ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

    “If Labor wants any chance of winning the next election, it must return to its working class roots and represent the interests of regular Australians over inner-city progressives”

    Fcuken Oath mate!

    • Both major parties are rooted mate

      I reckon even Menzies, the godfather of Aussie conservatives wouldn’t recognise either side, so far have they drifted from our socialist democratic roots.

      In saying that, if we no longer collectively see ourselves as working class and caught in a class war that is killing us off slowly, can you blame Labor for giving up on their foundational principles?

    • Jumping jack flash

      “… represent the interests of regular Australians…”

      Which is what exactly? Being able to obtain the debt they need to afford the lifestyle they think they deserve?
      Libs have that covered.

      Hawke’s “Noble Worker” is dead, replaced by Scotty’s “Quiet Australian” who lives for debt.

      So ALP continues to become Lib-Lite? How does that make them at all relevant? If I wanted the Libs to be in power, the party that is known for bargains with the banks and bringeth me all the debt I need, I would vote Libs, not Lib-Lite who calls for Royal Commissions and rubs the banks up the wrong way!

  10. How about Australians to the regions? I hear that’s going quite well with covid-19. They’ll be putting a stop to that if it means city house prices dropping without any options to backfill demand.

    • Haha. Yeah can’t have that. Only migrants to the regions allowed. Can’t have thelocals taking away a justification to allow more migrants in. But it doesn’t matter, no master how many Strayans who go to theregions, there’ll NEVER be enough labour cheap enough and amenable to exploitation so it’s all good, those that need to can ALWAYS beg for more slave labour

  11. “That excessive immigration is driving up demand for housing, pushing prices and rents beyond the reach of locals, especially in Sydney and Melbourne.”

    Ehhhh … this is not a vote winner. It’s the opposite. Didn’t you notice how Shorten was crucified on policies that would wind back the housing bubble?

  12. Labor needs to win back my trust before evening listening to policy. I will not be listening to the Albo-slug ever.

    I hope ALP get crushed at the next election.

  13. Scarce Jobs? Not in WA. Job ad on Seek for two weeks. 5 applications, 3 named Abdul and 2 named Mohammed with only 1 being in the state.
    3 clients through the office yesterday with all having the same issue.
    Once again WA carries the nation.

  14. The UNHCR says that there are 79.5 million (yes million) refugees as at the end of 2019. Up from about 40 million in 2010.
    https://www.unhcr.org/en-au/figures-at-a-glance.html

    So we will never “solve” the refugee issue as there are too many people in the world. Why do we therefore persist in effectively running a “Refugee Powerball” program where the 27,000 souls that get to come to Australia win the lottery whilst millions of others remain where they are?

    I am still undecided about this, but pulling out of the refugee program and spending more on foreign aid (including population sustainability measures) is something we should consider. Go look at the Burmese population in 1950 and in 2020 – you can work out why the Rohingya are now unwelcome – too many people. Mostly refugees should be a temporary issue due to war where eventually they should be encouraged to return home (e.g. Syria). The fact you don’t get along with the ruling regime in your country of citizenship when it is at peace (e.g. Kurds in Iran) isn’t really a ‘refugee’ issue – there’s never been an independent kurdish homeland.

    • Totes BeWokeMEMBER

      Exactly. Imagine how much further the money could go, and how many more people could be helped!!!

      Without fail, show me a leftist, and I’ll show you an utterly illogical person dealing with half the facts.

      Sadly they seem to be gaining strength worldwide, so it’s not looking good for Western countries.

    • So we will never “solve” the refugee issue as there are too many people in the world. Why do we therefore persist in effectively running a “Refugee Powerball” program where the 27,000 souls that get to come to Australia win the lottery whilst millions of others remain where they are?

      Buying indulgences.

      The best way to solve the refugee problem would be to try and address the situations that create them.

      I am still undecided about this, but pulling out of the refugee program and spending more on foreign aid (including population sustainability measures) is something we should consider.

      In reality, we would pull out of the Refugee Convention and then also cut foreign aid (as we’ve been doing steadily for decades), because the rationale that drives one (“I’m alright, Jack, that’s not my problem”), drives the other, and has become dominant across our entire society.

      Go look at the Burmese population in 1950 and in 2020 – you can work out why the Rohingya are now unwelcome – too many people.

      Their persecution started in the ’60s. So, no.

      Mostly refugees should be a temporary issue due to war where eventually they should be encouraged to return home (e.g. Syria).

      Except we keep starting new ones.

      Plus most future refugees are probably going to be victims of climate change.

      The fact you don’t get along with the ruling regime in your country of citizenship when it is at peace (e.g. Kurds in Iran) isn’t really a ‘refugee’ issue – there’s never been an independent kurdish homeland.

      https://theconversation.com/why-there-is-no-kurdish-nation-126243

          • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

            Well “We” the Citizens of this Country have been Given Fk all say on the matter,…no say on any matter at all really. Except [email protected] marriage of course. Something completely irrelevant to the vast majority of the population I might add.

            So to those that say to My children, my community and I, that “We” need to carry some kind of Negative burden or Punishment, a Drop in our standard of living, simply because of Decisions made by others who dont give a Fk about “we” the citizens they are supposed to be serving, are completely out of control pursuing their own interests and are frequently proven through polling to make decisions not supported by the majority of the population, well to those people I say Get Fked.

          • Well “We” the Citizens of this Country have been Given Fk all say on the matter,…no say on any matter at all really.

            Not true at all. “We” have spent thirty years voting mostly for politicians and Government of ever increasing enthusiasm for following the USA wherever it goes.

            Except [email protected] marriage of course. Something completely irrelevant to the vast majority of the population I might add.

            Uh huh, and how is that relevant ? The only reason the stupid plebiscite was necessary was because the ALP helped make (and keep) it illegal in the first place.

            So to those that say to My children, my community and I that “We” need to carry some kind of Negative burden or Punishment, a Drop in their standard of living, simply because of Decisions made that are completely out of their control can, well those people can Get Fked.

            I get it. You either think there’s a moral and ethical obligation to try and help people who need assistance, or you don’t.

            Like I said, “Jack Philosophy” is how most people in this country seem to live life, these days. And with the leaders we have, that’s hardly surprising.

          • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

            Funny how them “moral and ethical obligations” embraced by them Privileged, virtue signaling, inner city green types never seems to extend to the Working class and Poor within their own country.
            One might even go as far to say these elitist clearly loath the Working class in this country and actively work to undermine any kind of democratic power they should be able to wield if we were any kind of real Democracy.
            I might add, IMHO, the way this inner city #FakeLeft has claimed the “Moral High Ground” for themselves seems EXACTLY the same as how the Conservative Christians did so in the 50s.
            A moral High ground used to exclude ANY Views not in alignment with their own, often minority, positions.
            A “Moral High ground” used as an anti-Democratic tool of ideological submission.
            This #FakeLeft is no better than they were.

          • Funny how them “moral and ethical obligations” embraced by them Privileged, virtue signaling, inner city green types never seems to extend to the Working class and Poor within their own country.

            Well the Greens and SAP are about the only parties still fighting for workers rights, more extensive public services, more public asset ownership, liveable social security, social housing, job guarantees, so…?

            One might even go as far to say these elitist clearly loath the Working class in this country and actively work to undermine any kind of democratic power they should be able to wield if we were any kind of real Democracy.

            One might, but it would be wrong since, as above, the Greens and SAP are about the only parties trying to make the country more democratic.

            The way the inner city #FakeLeft has claimed the “Moral High Ground” for themselves in EXACTLY the same way Conservative Christians did in the 50s and earlier is particularly odious.

            All the Libertarian and alt-right dross you listen to is rotting your brain. All your complaining is based on their projections and straw men.

          • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

            The way you associate “Libertarian” with being a solely Right wing phenomenon is a bit of a tell with you Smithy.
            You clearly have a more Authoritarian bent than me. Nearly everyone like you who supports “their” establishment in a partisan way, whether its the Left or Right wing establishment, always seem to have this “entitled to rule mentality” based on them having the “Better” moral and ethical ideological belief.
            The Plebs have no Idea in your View and they, like their opinions, needs to be Controlled.
            I disagree with you.
            https://youtu.be/Oh_Zk6Da9fU

          • The way you associate “Libertarian” with being a solely Right wing phenomenon is a bit of a tell with you Smithy.

            That’s because in mainstream usage, it is a right-wing phenomenon.

            Only a vanishingly small group of people – especially in the Anglosphere – thinks of anarchy, communism or other esoteric uses of “Libertarian” when they hear the word. Including most people who would call themselves “Libertarians”.

            But you know that as well as I do.

            You clearly have a more Authoritarian bent than me.

            Really ? Because I’d say giving special legal status and powers to Unions is at least as Authoritarian as anything I’ve ever suggested.

            Nearly everyone like you who supports “their” establishment in a partisan way, whether its the Left or Right wing establishment, always seem to have this “entitled to rule mentality” based on them having the “Better” moral and ethical ideological belief.

            So you don’t think you have a moral and ethical obligation to help people if you can ? You know this is pretty much diametrically opposed to the ideas behind Unionism and social democracy, right ?

            The Plebs have no Idea in your View and they, like their opinions, needs to be Controlled.
            I disagree with you.

            No you don’t (broadly speaking), you’re just picking semantics and slaying straw men to be argumentative, as usual.

          • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

            “Social Libertarianism” is what has been fighting Christian social conservatism for generations.
            It synonymous with progressivism, something your lot claims ownership of and yet now it has become the dominant ideology now wishes to cast aside its Democratic aspects.
            Todays #FakeLeft leadership has become a fking Clergy

            “Left-libertarianism, also known as egalitarian libertarianism, left-wing libertarianism or social libertarianism, is a political philosophy and type of libertarianism that stresses both individual freedom and social equality”
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-libertarianism

          • I know what Left-Libertarianism is.

            But nobody thinks of Left-Libertarianism when they hear “Libertarianism”. They think of free market fundamentalists (who are generally at best indifferent to things like “Christian Conservativism”, so long as it doesn’t involve overtly coercive physical violence).

            Keep pummelling those straw men.

          • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

            “So you don’t think you have a moral and ethical obligation to help people if you can”

            I think “we” do have Moral and ethical obligations.
            But I think the Policies, actions and agendas taken in relation to those Obligations should be Democratically proposed and decided.
            Modern Politics of the left and right have no such input and control by the Pleb majority.
            As for Unions! there leadership needs to be put on a Rank and file democratic leash Just as much as our Political parties and Governments do in my view.
            The lack of Democratic control over decision making is THE source of ALL Corruption in ALL our societal institutions,…yet all we get from your lot is some BS white Privilege/Colonialism narrative that doesn’t challenge institutional or economic structure at all and that in another Generation will be completely put to bed by an Authoritarian China that will increasingly impose its (socially conservative) will and mono-culture on us all.

          • The lack of Democratic control of decision making is the source of Corruption in ALL our societal institutions,…yet all we get from your lot is some BS white Privilege/Colonialism narrative that doesn’t challenge the economic structure at all and that in another Generation will be completely put to bed by an Authoritarian China that will increasingly impose its (socially conservative) will on us all.

            Like I said above, all that alt-right dross you’re listening to is rotting your brain.

            The threat from resurgent fascism, authoritarianism and conservatism within our own countries (and allies) is vastly more dangerous to our society and “democracy” than anything “China”. In no small part because “China” will be (/is being) used as a smokescreen to further advance it.

          • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

            And yet you don’t see increased Democracy as any kind of solution to the issues you lament.
            Your hatred of democracy and right to rule mentality is so clearly a product of your intoxication by your own self righteousness.

          • And yet you don’t see increased Democracy as any kind of solution to the issues you lament.

            LOLwut ?

            Keep pummelling those straw men.

    • The bulk of these problems are caused by Western nations (primarily the US) intervening militarily in countries they have no business being in as well as selling arms to tyrants who then use them against their own people (and perhaps their neighbours).

      Stop all that and your refugee problem boils down to a group of economic aspirants.

  15. Totes BeWokeMEMBER

    There’d be a handful of jobs Australia wide that can’t be filled by Australians.

    It’s just a big scam no matter how it’s framed.

    My bet is Australia will never trust Labor with government again. Meaning we end up with LNP until Labor are gone.

    • Jumping jack flash

      “There’d be a handful of jobs Australia wide that can’t be filled by Australians.”

      More than you think.

      Its not as if Australians can’t work those jobs or don’t want to, its because those jobs simply don’t pay enough to allow workers to take on the required amounts of debt to be successful. Australians who aspire for the gargantuan piles of debt would need to work 2 or 3 of these jobs to become eligible, and that’s not always possible.

      However, if employers were to pay their workers the required amounts for them to become eligible, what do you think that would do to prices? Prices pay wages.

      But because everyone is against the wall with servicing their colossal piles of debt that are absolutely essential to own, so much so that retail is already collapsing since 2017 or before, how can debt-laden consumers possibly pay higher prices that would allow employers to raise the wages of their workers so they could become eligible for the enormous piles of debt that are essential, allowing Quiet Australians to work those positions?

      Also consider that employers are people and people need colossal piles of debt, so even if prices could rise, employers would more than likely take it all for themselves to obtain the debt, and employ cheap 3rd world slaves instead anyway.

  16. TailorTrashMEMBER

    Jeez Albo must have had two spoons of coco
    in his hot chocolate to make those utterances.

    Along with KK the whole ALP must know that immigration is the bull they need to take by the horns ….but lack the courage or conviction to do it .

    Expect more fuzzy words and backtracking as they slide into evermore irrelevance.

    The day will come when they will be overtaken by the Indian congress of Australia party .

  17. Jumping jack flash

    Good luck.

    Promising to cut immigration is like promising “affordable housing”, its a good way to fail. The only way out after promising it is to promptly shut up and wait a couple of weeks while everyone forgets you promised it.

    If our leaders with planet-sized brains are stupid enough to actually go through with it and cut back immigration, they will learn the hard way when everything falls over that much faster.

    Immigration is a key component of the New Economy for a number of reasons:
    * There must be a steady stream of new arrivals without debt and who are eligible for the correct amounts of debt, to take on the colossal piles of debt that are absolutely essential, and also are required to simulate economic growth in the New Economy
    * There must be a sufficient supply of eager 3rd-world slaves who are willing to work for ridiculously low rates so their employers can steal their wages and become eligible for larger and larger piles of debt that are absolutely essential for personal success, and also are required to simulate economic growth in the New Economy. Students can substitute here too.

    However, there is no harm in cutting back immigration so long as the benefits that immigration brings – larger and larger piles of debt to simulate economic growth in the New Economy, is taken up by the government.

    If the debt stops growing then the effects are absolutely disastrous, as we experience right now, because we have nothing else that actually generates income and has growth potential now except debt and its continued growth forever.

    Essentially, the lack of debt growth caused from cutting immigration must be mitigated by immense government borrowing and distribution to the people. So if the government is happy to [continue to] do that, then by all means cut back immigration.

Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in now