Apart from the Age trying to run at least one derogatory sort about Abbott every day, the silence is wonderful. Abbot has taken Politics off the front page and the nightly news, to the background where it belongs. Politicians are paid public servants not media stars and if the Labor Party ever want to get back in to power they should take note of this.

Fortunately the elevation of "Pants Man" to the leadership of the Labor Party will give them plenty of time to reflect; meanwhile we can focus on who will actually lead them to the next election and just who it will be that will knife Bull in the back.

  On 02/11/2013 at 11:38, RobbieF said:

Apart from the Age trying to run at least one derogatory sort about Abbott every day, the silence is wonderful. Abbot has taken Politics off the front page and the nightly news, to the background where it belongs. Politicians are paid public servants not media stars and if the Labor Party ever want to get back in to power they should take note of this.

Fortunately the elevation of "Pants Man" to the leadership of the Labor Party will give them plenty of time to reflect; meanwhile we can focus on who will actually lead them to the next election and just who it will be that will knife Bull in the back.

The silence is courtesy of News Limited Robbie; oh and add to that the Singleton Shock Jocks in Sydney. Their frothing at the mouth outrage at every Government initiative has suddenly disappeared. But strangely the new Government has not changed much as yet. Budget crisis? Well no not really we will just carry on as usual really; fairwork Australia, BAU. The Boats, well no new changes really just a three star general and a new monica "operation sovereign borders,oh and a new minister who tells us nothing. But suddenly Alan Jones and co are calm.

Actually I find it laughable that for nearly 3 to 4 years the captains of industry and heir acolytes, the various industry groups spent a lot of their time trashing our prospects and the Gillard Goverment to such an extent that economic growth was slow at best. Why has that achieved? Answer zero.

  On 02/11/2013 at 11:38, RobbieF said:

Apart from the Age trying to run at least one derogatory sort about Abbott every day, the silence is wonderful. Abbot has taken Politics off the front page and the nightly news, to the background where it belongs. Politicians are paid public servants not media stars and if the Labor Party ever want to get back in to power they should take note of this.

Fortunately the elevation of "Pants Man" to the leadership of the Labor Party will give them plenty of time to reflect; meanwhile we can focus on who will actually lead them to the next election and just who it will be that will knife Bull in the back.

Staggering.

Abbott loves people like you Rob. People who are content being kept in the dark on exactly what is happening on our borders, or how the new NBN rollout will affect you (I did enjoy the irony of the website people being referred to being down for extended periods, and containing no useful information at all).

I say thank god for the Age, CT, ABC etc, for actually REPORTING on what the government is doing, like handing the RBA $8b it didn't need or ask for, after an entire election campaign based on a budget "emergency".

I won't even begin on the circus around the climate change debate with the recent bushfires. We have a Minister who is, quite literally, an international embarrassment. Not to mention a complete [censored] idiot.

You stay content with your eyes and ears covered mate. I prefer to keep mine open.

  On 02/11/2013 at 13:08, P-man said:

Staggering.

Abbott loves people like you Rob. People who are content being kept in the dark on exactly what is happening on our borders, or how the new NBN rollout will affect you (I did enjoy the irony of the website people being referred to being down for extended periods, and containing no useful information at all).

I say thank god for the Age, CT, ABC etc, for actually REPORTING on what the government is doing, like handing the RBA $8b it didn't need or ask for, after an entire election campaign based on a budget "emergency".

I won't even begin on the circus around the climate change debate with the recent bushfires. We have a Minister who is, quite literally, an international embarrassment. Not to mention a complete [censored] [censored].

You stay content with your eyes and ears covered mate. I prefer to keep mine open.

You really only want to read what you want to hear and then criticise others for doing exactly the same. We all have our bias but you just don't like to admit it, you think of it as clear relevant reporting; mind you if the Age stopped supporting the ALP you'd probably stop reading it.

the NBN is a debacle and it was before the Libs were voted in; did you read where Conroy accepted that they bit off more than they could chew; I guess your bias doesn't allow you to accept that either.

If you kept your eyes and ears open you would have read that Glen Stevens was reported to have requested the $8b; it was reported in the papers along with his criticism of the previous Government for stripping the RBA of funds.

I'm sure that you would be among the climate change screamers who think that Australia can change the World by bankrupting itself to bring in a Carbon Tax.

I'm happy I don't have to see Rudd Poncing about on all the leftie TV programs and all over the front pages of the newspapers, with his idiotic band of supporters hanging on behind. And fortunately I'll never have to listen to Gilard on the morning radio news.

Perhaps it's not me who should keep their eyes and ears open and maybe before you accuse anyone of bias, you should take a close look at yourself. You obviously think that your opinion is right and have closed your mind to accepting that it could be wrong

Do you ever consider that maybe your opinion, is not the right one?

BTW you are being a bit selective there, you can do what you want to try and take my comments to of context, but any reasonable person would understand what I meant by taking politics off the front page of every newspaper every day. I'm talking about your hero, Kevin Gunston.

Before the election he was just a national embarrassment.

When he became PM and flew to Jakarta he went international.

Took him less than a week.

At least he has Robbie behind him!!!!

Great work on this thread BTW mate.

Awesome bile.

Keep it up!

  On 02/11/2013 at 11:59, The Hood said:

The silence is courtesy of News Limited Robbie; oh and add to that the Singleton Shock Jocks in Sydney. Their frothing at the mouth outrage at every Government initiative has suddenly disappeared. But strangely the new Government has not changed much as yet. Budget crisis? Well no not really we will just carry on as usual really; fairwork Australia, BAU. The Boats, well no new changes really just a three star general and a new monica "operation sovereign borders,oh and a new minister who tells us nothing. But suddenly Alan Jones and co are calm.

Actually I find it laughable that for nearly 3 to 4 years the captains of industry and heir acolytes, the various industry groups spent a lot of their time trashing our prospects and the Gillard Goverment to such an extent that economic growth was slow at best. Why has that achieved? Answer zero.

Did you ever consider the fact that the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd Governments were the worst in History; I lived through Gough and thought that he was the benchmark for incompetence, but they raised it to a new level.

My highlight was a $3B National Disability Scheme where $2B went on administration.

John Faine, Bary Cassidy, Media Watch, ABC, Age/Fairfax Newspapers, all the mouth frothers of the Labor Party; you know that don't you?

I assume you inadvertently left that out when you were seeking balance to your post.

We need more injection rooms for left wing artists and dole bludgers.

Tax anyone over 50 at 50% and put a massive tax on property.

Slice the mega rich up into small pieces and feed them to the poor.

Ban American media ownership in Australia.

[censored - unnecessary]

House all the reffos in Brighton.

Give them bikes to clog up beach rd.

Hang all corporate lycra wearers from the trees.

Tax Religion and sell their unused assets .

  On 02/11/2013 at 21:23, Biffen said:

We need more injection rooms for left wing artists and dole bludgers.

Tax anyone over 50 at 50% and put a massive tax on property.

Slice the mega rich up into small pieces and feed them to the poor.

Ban American media ownership in Australia.

censored - unnecessary]

House all the reffos in Brighton.

Give them bikes to clog up beach rd.

Hang all corporate lycra wearers from the trees.

Tax Religion and sell their unused assets .

Biffen for PM

LOL

  On 02/11/2013 at 20:53, RobbieF said:

You really only want to read what you want to hear and then criticise others for doing exactly the same. We all have our bias but you just don't like to admit it, you think of it as clear relevant reporting; mind you if the Age stopped supporting the ALP you'd probably stop reading it.

the NBN is a debacle and it was before the Libs were voted in; did you read where Conroy accepted that they bit off more than they could chew; I guess your bias doesn't allow you to accept that either.

If you kept your eyes and ears open you would have read that Glen Stevens was reported to have requested the $8b; it was reported in the papers along with his criticism of the previous Government for stripping the RBA of funds.

I'm sure that you would be among the climate change screamers who think that Australia can change the World by bankrupting itself to bring in a Carbon Tax.

I'm happy I don't have to see Rudd Poncing about on all the leftie TV programs and all over the front pages of the newspapers, with his idiotic band of supporters hanging on behind. And fortunately I'll never have to listen to Gilard on the morning radio news.

Perhaps it's not me who should keep their eyes and ears open and maybe before you accuse anyone of bias, you should take a close look at yourself. You obviously think that your opinion is right and have closed your mind to accepting that it could be wrong

Do you ever consider that maybe your opinion, is not the right one?

BTW you are being a bit selective there, you can do what you want to try and take my comments to of context, but any reasonable person would understand what I meant by taking politics off the front page of every newspaper every day. I'm talking about your hero, Kevin Gunston.

In my discussions with you Robbie, I am 100% certain of one thing and that is I am more open minded than you. You are as rusted on a Lib supporter as they come. The very fact you think opinions must necessarily be wrong or right is a statement about how open minded you are. Plus you continue to be hung up on personalities with your fixation on Rudd's public persona, even now that he is gone, which is largely irrelevant. Actually it's entirely irrelevant.

Kevin Rudd isn't my hero, not even close. I've stated more than once I do not have any allegiance to any party or person, but I am certainly opposed to Abbott. Pretty much every action he has taken thus far has confirmed my opinion of him, which as you can tell is very low.

Hockey has come out and said the RBA requested the payment, whilst providing no evidence to confirm the specific nature of this request or how it was initiated. What is on the public record however is advice from Treasury in April which stated there was no particular imperative to return the Reserve Fund to a particular level, and even if the RBA's capital position turned negative, it would not impede its capacity to do its job. It's a political move by Hockey, not an economic one. Nothing more. It does however provide a fair whack to the debt level, although that's okay cause he's just raised the debt ceiling. You know, after slamming the previous government on the very issue of debt and borrowing and providing grandiose statements about how they will rescue us from the "budget crisis". A crock of [censored] it would seem..who'd have thunk it?

"bankrupting itself to bring in a carbon tax" - I'm not going to bother delving into this subject with you if that's your ridiculous starting point. There's thread for that anyhow.

  On 03/11/2013 at 01:06, P-man said:

1 ) In my discussions with you Robbie, I am 100% certain of one thing and that is I am more open minded than you. You are as rusted on a Lib supporter as they come. The very fact you think opinions must necessarily be wrong or right is a statement about how open minded you are. Plus you continue to be hung up on personalities with your fixation on Rudd's public persona, even now that he is gone, which is largely irrelevant. Actually it's entirely irrelevant.

2 ) Kevin Rudd isn't my hero, not even close. I've stated more than once I do not have any allegiance to any party or person, but I am certainly opposed to Abbott. Pretty much every action he has taken thus far has confirmed my opinion of him, which as you can tell is very low.

3 ) Hockey has come out and said the RBA requested the payment, whilst providing no evidence to confirm the specific nature of this request or how it was initiated. What is on the public record however is advice from Treasury in April which stated there was no particular imperative to return the Reserve Fund to a particular level, and even if the RBA's capital position turned negative, it would not impede its capacity to do its job. It's a political move by Hockey, not an economic one. Nothing more. It does however provide a fair whack to the debt level, although that's okay cause he's just raised the debt ceiling. You know, after slamming the previous government on the very issue of debt and borrowing and providing grandiose statements about how they will rescue us from the "budget crisis". A crock of [censored] it would seem..who'd have thunk it?

"bankrupting itself to bring in a carbon tax" - I'm not going to bother delving into this subject with you if that's your ridiculous starting point. There's thread for that anyhow.

1 ) You don't have to be a mentaL giant to work out I'm rusted on Liberal and have a hatred of the ALP, I thought that was fairly obvious. I stopped listening to the Labor Party when I realised it was run by a bunch of self serving crooks and power hungry individuals.

2 ) You say I have a closed mind but aren't prepared to even listen or accept that Abbot may have got it right. He disagrees with you therefore he's wrong; have I got that right? Rather hypocritical don't you think?

3 ) Glen Stevens in a recent interview in your paper of choice said the $8B injection was needed and had a swipe at Swan for stripping the RBA of funds needed to fund its operation. You must have missed that days compulsory reading.

Mate I don't care who you support, I don't care who you hate, that's up to you, but don't be a hypocrite, that I do dislike.

Rudd made a mockery of the process of Government with his hair brained schemes and he was ably supported by Gillard.

1) I don't give a rat's about personalities or even motivations if I think their policies are the best thing for the country's future. This seems to be where we differ. You are hung up on personalities, I am not. I do however find it kind of funny that you would spurn them as "power hungry", yet you support Tony Abbott.

2) I do think you have a closed mind. You paint every Labor person with the same brush. I don't paint every Liberal, or Labor, or even Green with the same brush. I am talking about an individual and his government.

You are convinced that every media outlet that is critical of Abbott or his government is a Labor affiliate or mouthpiece which is frankly delusional. I am critical of the Murdoch press because his links with Abbott and what he stood to gain from his being in office are known and documented. You do a blanket sweep of anyone who is critical (which to be honest is just pointing out the blatantly obvious most of the time) as having some sort of motivation. Perhaps you'd feel more at ease if we had Joe Goebbels orchestrating what the media can and can't say. If it wasn't for the publications you are dismissing, we would be completely in the dark. But apparently you'd be happier that way?

And why would I concede Abbott has "got it right"? What am I meant to be admitting he's got right?

The lies about the budget emergency? The media blackout on boat arrivals? The farcical NBN that even Turnbull struggles to defend and will inevitably have to be overhauled? The total disregard about his and his colleagues' personal expenses coming out of the taxpayer's pocket, despite the unrelenting scrutiny regarding the same issue during his time in opposition? The scoffing at links between climate change and increased fire risk? The less than subtle attempts to silence the climate scientists in this country?

If you expect me to admit he was right with any of these you'll be waiting a while.

3) The RBA is hardly gong to say no to an injection of funds are they?? C'mon. The question is whether it was requested, and/or was an urgent need. if you can provide me with a quote from Glen Stevens which confirms that he requested the $8 billion, and that it was a necessary move, I'll reconsider. Everything I have read, including the April memo from Treasury, suggests that it was unnecessary, and likely done for political gains.

4) Rudd and Gillard both made mistakes during their time, no-one would deny that, but my concerns are genuine with regard to their significant investments into education, health, a world class NBN, and a clean energy future being all but completely undone. We can debate about a single female in Cabinet, or Hunt making a dick of himself every time he opens his mouth, or Hockey's lies. They are issues, but they are side issues. It is the future of the country that really matters, and that is why I oppose Abbott and his government. I don't think it is in safe hands at present.

A CABINET briefing document obtained by The Weekend Australian confirms the Rudd government was aware of significant risks to the National Broadband Network rollout and that delays would strip $1.4 billion in revenues throughout the election campaign. -

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/in-depth/labor-knew-of-nbn-rollout-risk/story-e6frgaif-1226751590262

THE federal government has booked a massive $740 million windfall after seizing control of 730,000 "unclaimed" superannuation accounts. - See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/policy/atos-740m-windfall-after-730000-unclaimed-super-accounts-seized

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/policy/atos-740m-windfall-after-730000-unclaimed-super-accounts-seized/story-fn59nsif-1226750842242

  On 03/11/2013 at 02:32, P-man said:

1) I don't give a rat's about personalities or even motivations if I think their policies are the best thing for the country's future. This seems to be where we differ. You are hung up on personalities, I am not. I do however find it kind of funny that you would spurn them as "power hungry", yet you support Tony Abbott. Graham Richardson summed the Labor Party up - " Whatever it takes"

2) I do think you have a closed mind. You paint every Labor person with the same brush. I don't paint every Liberal, or Labor, or even Green with the same brush. I am talking about an individual and his government. How many times do I have to do trough this dance with you - I don't trust Labor Politicians, most of them are self serving and have power and their own interested at heart; they proved tis when the sacked Gilard and reinstated Rudd even though they hated him and thought he was hopelessly incompetent, just to try and retain power. No scruples just power for power's sake.

You are convinced that every media outlet that is critical of Abbott or his government is a Labor affiliate or mouthpiece which is frankly delusional. I am critical of the Murdoch press because his links with Abbott and what he stood to gain from his being in office are known and documented. You do a blanket sweep of anyone who is critical (which to be honest is just pointing out the blatantly obvious most of the time) as having some sort of motivation. Perhaps you'd feel more at ease if we had Joe Goebbels orchestrating what the media can and can't say. If it wasn't for the publications you are dismissing, we would be completely in the dark. But apparently you'd be happier that way? And they are? I'll put that down as a lapse in judgement on your part.

What amazes me is you can be critical of certain aspects of the media and that's just fair comment but if any righty criticises the media it's just rubbish. You know what, you should do, you should sit down and read your posts as if you are coming from the other side and maybe you will then see the obvious flaws in your comments. Some of your criticisms are laughable and I'm glad I don't take any notice of them.

And why would I concede Abbott has "got it right"? What am I meant to be admitting he's got right? Case in point you can't see one thing he's done right. How can you advice an argument if you are so closed minded, remember look at it from both sides.

The lies about the budget emergency? The media blackout on boat arrivals? The farcical NBN that even Turnbull struggles to defend and will inevitably have to be overhauled? The total disregard about his and his colleagues' personal expenses coming out of the taxpayer's pocket, despite the unrelenting scrutiny regarding the same issue during his time in opposition? The scoffing at links between climate change and increased fire risk? The less than subtle attempts to silence the climate scientists in this country? The Climate screamers have had a god enough run under the Labor Party and anyone that disagreed with them was shouted down, perhaps they are now having a say.

If you expect me to admit he was right with any of these you'll be waiting a while.

3) The RBA is hardly gong to say no to an injection of funds are they?? C'mon. The question is whether it was requested, and/or was an urgent need. if you can provide me with a quote from Glen Stevens which confirms that he requested the $8 billion, and that it was a necessary move, I'll reconsider. Everything I have read, including the April memo from Treasury, suggests that it was unnecessary, and likely done for political gains. There was an article in the paper a couple of weeks ago and Glen Stevens was quoted, I'm sure that supersedes the April Document; look it up.

4) Rudd and Gillard both made mistakes during their time, no-one would deny that, but my concerns are genuine with regard to their significant investments into education, health, a world class NBN, and a clean energy future being all but completely undone. We can debate about a single female in Cabinet, or Hunt making a [censored] of himself every time he opens his mouth, or Hockey's lies. They are issues, but they are side issues. It is the future of the country that really matters, and that is why I oppose Abbott and his government. I don't think it is in safe hands at present. My god are you seriously going to admit that? The sky isn't falling down it's being repaired.

See my previous post aBout the deception of the Labor Party and their NBN.

Oh and here it is.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/economics/glenn-stevens-says-treasurers-88bn-grant-to-rba-is-prudent/story-e6frg926-1226748931124

What an absolute debacle of a Government; they and their faithful followers have zero credibility.

http://www.theage.com.au/comment/navelgazing-with-team-kevin-the-inside-story-20131102-2wtjl.html

Instead, it feeds the real sense that many senior Labor figures haven't quite grasped the fact that the election is over, the caravan has moved on, and people were sick to the back teeth of Labor talking about itself even when the party was in government.

For Labor to continue talking about itself now in this way does the party no favours.

Rather than acting like an opposition and holding the government to account, the party is seemingly stuck, like a broken record, on indulging itself and with doing itself damage in the public eye.

Hawker describes how on July 30, Team Rudd's ''biggest challenge'' was the economic statement due to be released that week.

''There is a $30 billion gap that will need to be filled if we are going to balance the budget,'' he writes. ''Right now the thinking is to do this in part by increasing the price of cigarettes.''

Hawker asked his pollsters to test the popularity of the proposal in two marginal seats, got a good response, and the team decided to raise the price of cigarettes by $1 a year for four years, which would raise more than $5 billion. Just three days later Rudd released the economic statement.

I believe I wrote a quite detailed post about Murdoch's ties with Abbott, I'm not going to go through that again. Educate yourself.

Yes you keep banging on about the "climate screamers", and I can't say I'm bowled over to discover that you're a climate skeptic. As I said, I have no interest in discussing that with you. I'm sure you have a solid foundation for your views on the subject.

Yes I saw those comments from Stevens about it being "prudent". Until I see evidence that he a) requested the $8 billion and b) believes it was a NECESSARY move, it's just hot air. There was no necessity to do it all in one year. And no, it doesn't supersede advice from Treasury as recently as April that no such move was necessary and that it could be staggered over several years. Hockey's actions are in direct conflict with that advice. I hardly would think you would fork out $8 BILLION in the middle of a supposed budget crisis unless it was necessary, and simply could not wait.

You say my criticisms are laughable yet you continually fail to address any of them with any merit. You just ramble on about "climate screamers" and say that a carbon price is going to bankrupt the economy, and I'm the one not to be taken seriously..

For the very last time, I don't care about personal politics or the inner workings of the ALP. Clearly they were a circus in that regard, and it is what cost them the election. I believe their policy achievements deserve greater acknowledgement than you, but I'm not saying they were or are a well oiled machine. Certainly, they are the lesser of two evils right now.

Anyhow, it's all come flooding back to me what a complete waste of time this is. Abbott can do no wrong in your mind, and good luck to you. I'll grit my teeth through this one and wait for the next PM to bring us back from the 1950s.

  On 03/11/2013 at 05:14, P-man said:

I believe I wrote a quite detailed post about Murdoch's ties with Abbott, I'm not going to go through that again. Educate yourself.

Yes you keep banging on about the "climate screamers", and I can't say I'm bowled over to discover that you're a climate skeptic. As I said, I have no interest in discussing that with you. I'm sure you have a solid foundation for your views on the subject.

Yes I saw those comments from Stevens about it being "prudent". Until I see evidence that he a) requested the $8 billion and b) believes it was a NECESSARY move, it's just hot air. There was no necessity to do it all in one year. And no, it doesn't supersede advice from Treasury as recently as April that no such move was necessary and that it could be staggered over several years. Hockey's actions are in direct conflict with that advice. I hardly would think you would fork out $8 BILLION in the middle of a supposed budget crisis unless it was necessary, and simply could not wait.

You say my criticisms are laughable yet you continually fail to address any of them with any merit. You just ramble on about "climate screamers" and say that a carbon price is going to bankrupt the economy, and I'm the one not to be taken seriously..

For the very last time, I don't care about personal politics or the inner workings of the ALP. Clearly they were a circus in that regard, and it is what cost them the election. I believe their policy achievements deserve greater acknowledgement than you, but I'm not saying they were or are a well oiled machine. Certainly, they are the lesser of two evils right now.

Anyhow, it's all come flooding back to me what a complete waste of time this is. Abbott can do no wrong in your mind, and good luck to you. I'll grit my teeth through this one and wait for the next PM to bring us back from the 1950s.

Just because you say it, it doesn't make it true.

Where did I say this

"You just ramble on about "climate screamers" and say that a carbon price is going to bankrupt the economy, and I'm the one not to be taken seriously.."

I think we've reached the end of this discussion you are just making things up now.

​As I say look at your posts objectively and tell me that you don't do exactly what you accuse me of.

"Educate yourself", what a cop out.

​You dropped off the NBN after I put that article up I see.

  On 02/11/2013 at 09:52, The Hood said:

We need to be a country to embrace emigrants to be the most diverse and open society in the world, just don't come in a boat!

How do supposedly sane people form such hopelessly inept views ?

It's reasonable for a country to protect its borders. It's reasonable for a country to determine who its residents are. It's reasonable for a country to dissuade people from embarking on treacherous journeys across the ocean where thousands have already died. It's reasonable to stop those that traffic in human misery - smugglers. It's reasonable to stop people that have deliberately thrown away their identification papers.

A large proportion of the people that have arrived here by boat were not fleeing persecution. Their lives were not in immediate danger. They were simply wanting a chance at a better life. And who can blame them ? But doing it by boat isn't the answer.

You have to love lefties. All compassion, but zero thought to the consequences, which are usually worse than what concerns them.

  On 03/11/2013 at 05:45, Ben-Hur said:

How do supposedly sane people form such hopelessly inept views ?

It's reasonable for a country to protect its borders. It's reasonable for a country to determine who its residents are. It's reasonable for a country to dissuade people from embarking on treacherous journeys across the ocean where thousands have already died. It's reasonable to stop those that traffic in human misery - smugglers. It's reasonable to stop people that have deliberately thrown away their identification papers.

A large proportion of the people that have arrived here by boat were not fleeing persecution. Their lives were not in immediate danger. They were simply wanting a chance at a better life. And who can blame them ? But doing it by boat isn't the answer.

You have to love lefties. All compassion, but zero thought to the consequences, which are usually worse than what concerns them.

Take your blinkers off BH. Since when is compassion the domain of lefties only? Many of the people are fleeing life threatening situations and are prepared to risk their lives doing it... it's a flip of the coin... die trying or die not trying. Yeah BH, maybe you're completely lacking in any form of compassion, but don't for one moment think that all of your ultra-conservative, far right compatriots are the same as you.

Interesting that the vast majority of genuine illegals are not seeking asylum and flew in by plane on tourist or student visas. In 2011 the stats indicated there were something like 13 times more illegal immigrants than there were asylum seekers in detention who had arrived by boat. This is according to a report in the Adelaide Advertiser:

"Figures obtained by The Advertiser from the Immigration Department and under the Freedom of Information Act show plane arrivals from the United States (5080) and Britain (3610) are near the top of the list of those in the country without a valid visa. China (8070), and Malaysia (4200) round out the top four."

You can read the rest at here at adelaidenow.

  On 03/11/2013 at 06:03, hardtack said:

Take your blinkers off BH. Since when is compassion the domain of lefties only? Many of the people are fleeing life threatening situations and are prepared to risk their lives doing it... it's a flip of the coin... die trying or die not trying. Yeah BH, maybe you're completely lacking in any form of compassion, but don't for one moment think that all of your ultra-conservative, far right compatriots are the same as you.

Interesting that the vast majority of genuine illegals are not seeking asylum and flew in by plane on tourist or student visas. In 2011 the stats indicated there were something like 13 times more illegal immigrants than there were asylum seekers in detention who had arrived by boat. This is according to a report in the Adelaide Advertiser:

"Figures obtained by The Advertiser from the Immigration Department and under the Freedom of Information Act show plane arrivals from the United States (5080) and Britain (3610) are near the top of the list of those in the country without a valid visa. China (8070), and Malaysia (4200) round out the top four."

You can read the rest at here at adelaidenow.

I think most conservatives are compassionate, but compassionate with a brain.

Yes, I know about plane arrivals. Who doesn't ?

There are to many people in the World, that's the problem; most of the Third World Countries continue to produce more children than they can sustain, so they look elsewhere and we are seen as a land of opportunity.

The problem is you take 10,000 out of a Country and they are replaced within weeks, so you have another 10,000 in the queue as well as those already there, looking for somewhere to go and for someone to look after them.

This is not an issue of 1,000,000 displaced persons looking for assistance and once that's solved all will be ok, it's an ongoing problem and it just gets bigger every day.

  On 03/11/2013 at 06:11, Ben-Hur said:

I think most conservatives are compassionate, but compassionate with a brain.

Yes, I know about plane arrivals. Who doesn't ?

Yeah, seems like you just like to single out those who are in genuine need of asylum to be treated with little or no compassion. I'm sure some are compassionate with a brain, but that still doesn't explain your stance.

The employment rate after 5 years of those that come here as refugees is diabolical ? Close to 9 out of 10 are on Centrelink payments. The impost on taxpayers is enormous.

  On 03/11/2013 at 06:19, hardtack said:

Yeah, seems like you just like to single out those who are in genuine need of asylum to be treated with little or no compassion. I'm sure some are compassionate with a brain, but that still doesn't explain your stance.

I've explained my stance.

Here it is again:

It's reasonable for a country to protect its borders. It's reasonable for a country to determine who its residents are. It's reasonable for a country to dissuade people from embarking on treacherous journeys across the ocean where thousands have already died. It's reasonable to stop those that traffic in human misery - smugglers. It's reasonable to stop people that have deliberately thrown away their identification papers.

A large proportion of the people that have arrived here by boat were not fleeing persecution. Their lives were not in immediate danger. They were simply wanting a chance at a better life. And who can blame them ? But doing it by boat isn't the answer.

Specifically with what do you disagree ?

  On 03/11/2013 at 06:26, Ben-Hur said:

I've explained my stance.

Here it is again:

It's reasonable for a country to protect its borders. It's reasonable for a country to determine who its residents are. It's reasonable for a country to dissuade people from embarking on treacherous journeys across the ocean where thousands have already died. It's reasonable to stop those that traffic in human misery - smugglers. It's reasonable to stop people that have deliberately thrown away their identification papers.

A large proportion of the people that have arrived here by boat were not fleeing persecution. Their lives were not in immediate danger. They were simply wanting a chance at a better life. And who can blame them ? But doing it by boat isn't the answer.

Specifically with what do you disagree ?

You state that a large proportion of people arriving were not fleeing persecution, yet you provide absolutely no substantive evidence of this. In the figures I cited above from the Adelaide Advertiser, if you followed the link, you would have seen that of the almost 4500 in detention at that time, over a third were from Afghanistan and it could reasonable be assumed that they were indeed fleeing persecution and possible life threatening situations. Many from Sri Lanka were and are no doubt in a similar situation.

Yes, the smugglers must be stopped, but at the same time the asylum seekers must not be abandoned. Yes our borders must be protected, but in what way are these asylum seekers posing a threat? Yes we should determine who our residents are, so why do you ignore the fact that the vast majority of our illegals enter legally and then stay illegally?

  On 03/11/2013 at 06:46, hardtack said:

You state that a large proportion of people arriving were not fleeing persecution, yet you provide absolutely no substantive evidence of this. In the figures I cited above from the Adelaide Advertiser, if you followed the link, you would have seen that of the almost 4500 in detention at that time, over a third were from Afghanistan and it could reasonable be assumed that they were indeed fleeing persecution and possible life threatening situations. Many from Sri Lanka were and are no doubt in a similar situation.

Yes, the smugglers must be stopped, but at the same time the asylum seekers must not be abandoned. Yes our borders must be protected, but in what way are these asylum seekers posing a threat? Yes we should determine who our residents are, so why do you ignore the fact that the vast majority of our illegals enter legally and then stay illegally?

There are safe havens on the way before they get to Australia. If they were merely fleeing for their lives they don't need to travel all of the way to Australia to be safe.

Either way, boats must be stopped for their own protection. You agree ?