And the boats keep coming

[Hallo Alfie]

Name the logical fallacy. This is why people get pissed off with you.

I am making the simple point that if the boats didn't leave, there would not be deaths - I assume you follow this line of thought - and if they do not arrive, there is no need for detention. It's pretty simple I'd have thought. Cart before the horse and all that.

You wanted to play the appeal to emotion card, I simply played one back.

BTW, pissing people off has never bothered me much and never will. My grandfather taught me something that was very important and it holds true for me today: "What other people think of me is none of my business". It gives me total freedom, you should try it sometime.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

what was the cost of the old system with those camps on those islands?

I think a drop in the ocean compared to today. But by all means, bring in some numbers for us for us to discuss.

 

[Sideroxylon]

I am making the simple point that if the boats didn't leave, there would not be deaths - I assume you follow this line of thought - and if they do not arrive, there is no need for detention. It's pretty simple I'd have thought. Cart before the horse and all that.

You wanted to play the appeal to emotion card, I simply played one back.

BTW, pissing people off has never bothered me much and never will. My grandfather taught me something that was very important and it holds true for me today: "What other people think of me is none of my business". It gives me total freedom, you should try it sometime.

I prefer to reflect on criticism directed at me so I will pass on your advice and any further exchanges with you.

 

[DC]

I think a drop in the ocean compared to today. But by all means, bring in some numbers for us for us to discuss.

so you want a solution to be implemented without knowing the cost of it?

 

[Wildy]

...and must do psychological harm...

I'll just leave these positions from the AMA and APS here.

 

[Dcdrac]

When I read threads like this I think of the people who, although it is born out of desperation, have the sheer guts, drive and courage to allow themselves to put their lives on the line by getting on a ricekty boat and launching themselves across the ocean.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

When I read threads like this I think of the people who, although it is born out of desperation, have the sheer guts, drive and courage to allow themselves to put their lives on the line by getting on a ricekty boat and launching themselves across the ocean.

I assume you have evidence to support the work ethic and drive you mention?

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/publications/research/_pdf/settlement-outcomes-new-arrivals.pdf

Of the migration streams represented in this survey, Humanitarian entrants are most likely to be unemployed, even after five years of settlement

The problem is that they also put their children on boats also. People die.

And who's to say those that miss out on coming here would not be even better citizens?

 

[bit_pattern]

what was the cost of the old system with those camps on those islands?

A cool billion or so

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/pacific-solution-cost-1b/2007/08/24/1187462523594.html

The report, prepared by Oxfam and A Just Australia, which oppose the offshore-processing scheme, calculated it cost more than $500,000 per person to process fewer than 1700 asylum seekers in Nauru, Manus and Christmas Island. By comparison, the cost of holding asylum seekers in a mainland centre, based on Department of Immigration estimates, was 3.5 per cent of the running costs of the Pacific solution.

The report found it cost $1830 a day to keep someone on Christmas Island compared with $238 a day at Sydney's Villawood detention centre.

 

[uvar]

Of the migration streams represented in this survey, Humanitarian entrants are most likely to be unemployed, even after five years of settlement

I think the section introduction is more useful than its one line summary:

While Humanitarian entrants are less likely to be working compared with other streams, they are far more likely to be studying full-time, studying and working or studying and looking after their families. Given that we are exploring only the first five years of settlement in this study, this is not a surprising result as many Humanitarian entrants are strongly focused on creating a new life, and studying for a qualification is an important step in this journey. As outlined in chart 11 earlier, after 4 years living in Australia, around 40% of Humanitarian entrants have a job of some type. (p. 27)

About 50% are doing at least some study, while 3.3% claimed to be unemployed and not looking for work (not including retirees, etc) which doesn't seem too bad personally.

Speaking of study,

In total 34.8% (n=1874) Humanitarian entrants have a technical or university qualification, either before or after arriving in Australia. This compares favourably with the ABS 2006 Census which indicates that 39.4% of the Australian population 15 years and older has a technical or university (p. 18)

albeit those 18yo+ with less than high school education are very unlikely to have any further education (Table 5, p. 18).

Do you have any thoughts about Chart 52? Only 38% of humanitarian migrants rated themselves "happy most of the time" versus ~75% for the other groups.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Welcome, uvar. Nice first post.

 

[Akhenaten]

I think the section introduction is more useful than its one line summary:

<polite snip>

Gosh, I wonder why Alfie didn't post that information. It does seem rather important.


Welcome to the discussion, uvar.

 

[Dcdrac]

I wander what the aborigines thought when they first saw the ships from Europe appear..

And the boats keep coming maybe....

 

[Akhenaten]

I wonder what the aborigines thought when they first saw the ships from Europe appear.

And the boats keep coming maybe....

The first documented words said by an indigenous Australian to a European were shouted from the shore at Cape Solander to a ship commanded by Captain John Hunter, RN on 25 January 1788.

The words were ''Warra, Warra!", which means "Go away!"

 

[Akhenaten]

When I read threads like this I think of the people who, although it is born out of desperation, have the sheer guts, drive and courage to allow themselves to put their lives on the line by getting on a ricekty boat and launching themselves across the ocean.

I assume you have evidence to support the work ethic and drive you mention?

Perhaps you should start basing your opinions on the things people actually say.

We've already seen you misspeaking, misreading and misinterpreting things and it's unlikey that the addition of misquoting to the mix will help your arguments.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

I actually have little stomach for a debate about the work ethic, guts, drive etc of any of our arrivals - this topic was brought in by someone else. I have no doubt they have guts and drive, so do many others. I was however curious around any evidence that suggests our boat arrivals had more than others, I (and I think not unnaturally) extended that to the workplace.

Ultimately, it is their safe arrival that concerns me and the fairness around same.

That said, my question around boat arrivals being better citizens than others (which I understood to be the thrust of the point made) remains unanswered and unsupported.

 

[Akhenaten]

I actually have little stomach for a debate about the work ethic, guts, drive etc of any of our arrivals - this topic was brought in by someone else.

<snip>

No, the topic was introduced by your misattribution of a phrase - work ethic - to a poster who didn't use it and your following it up with a cherry-picked statement about employment rates for humanitarian entrants which, as cherry-picked statements so often do, failed to reflect the true state of affairs - the whole then rounded off with yet another appeal to emotion.

Little wonder that you now find yourself with little stomach to continue with that line of 'debate'.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

No, the topic was introduced by your misattribution of a phrase -

Incorrect.
And if I have misunderstood the thrust of the post by Dcdrac, I will happily be corrected by him/her with an expansion on their thoughts. I will leave that to Dcdrac rather than we, who are simply now guessing.

 

[Akhenaten]

No, the topic was introduced by your misattribution of a phrase - work ethic - to a poster who didn't use it

Incorrect.

<snip>

Why was the text (coloured red in my restored version above) in my post redacted? To make your claim that I was incorrect seem more believable?

I don't think it will work.

And pretending that my claim that you misattributed that phrase to another poster is "guessing" is pretty unlikely to fly either. It's right there on the page where everyone can see it.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

Yawn.

If I have misunderstood the thrust of Dcdrac's post I will happily be corrected by him/her.

 

[Akhenaten]

Yawn.

If I have misunderstood the thrust of Dcdrac's post I will happily be corrected by him/her.

By all means, discuss possible misunderstandings with whomever you wish, but the issue of your misattributing words to people who didn't use them was raised by me, and it is I who will pursue the matter, regardless of your handwaving.

You might like to start with an honest response to this post:

When I read threads like this I think of the people who, although it is born out of desperation, have the sheer guts, drive and courage to allow themselves to put their lives on the line by getting on a ricekty boat and launching themselves across the ocean.

I assume you have evidence to support the work ethic and drive you mention?

Perhaps you should start basing your opinions on the things people actually say.

We've already seen you misspeaking, misreading and misinterpreting things and it's unlikey that the addition of misquoting to the mix will help your arguments.

And if you can stifle the yawns for long enough you might like to have a crack at answering the highlighted part of this post that you snipped out last time you pretended to address it:

No, the topic was introduced by your misattribution of a phrase - work ethic - to a poster who didn't use it and your following it up with a cherry-picked statement about employment rates for humanitarian entrants which, as cherry-picked statements so often do, failed to reflect the true state of affairs - the whole then rounded off with yet another appeal to emotion.

Little wonder that you now find yourself with little stomach to continue with that line of 'debate'.

We can save dealing with your hackneyed use of appeals to emotion until you've rested, if you wish.