Coronavirus update

Coronavirus update: Formula One Grand Prix called off, Trump announces travel ban, Tom Hanks tests positive

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-12/coronavirus-live-updates-mclaren-lewis-hamilton-travel-ban/12...

Message 1 of 3,689
Latest reply
3,688 REPLIES 3,688

Coronavirus update


@Anonymous wrote:

@chameleon54 wrote:

@*kazumi* wrote:

@chameleon54 wrote:

 

Again, governments know that high immigration numbers suppress wage growth and support increasing consumption as well as endless construction industry jobs and corporate profits ( Victoria's largest industry ) . What they don't tell you is they also reduce the living standards and quality of life for individuals already resident in the country.


That is NOT supported by any evidence.  Quite on contrary, every migrant creates 2 plus new jobs. 

Lies, Damn lies and statistics.  The real evidence is clearly there for anyone to see if they bother to open their own eyes rather than simply regurgitating the twaddle trotted out by leftist spokespeople. 

 

Real wages and living standards falling for many years now. ( and plenty of people here on the forums have grizzled about this ) Social security payments lagging behind increases in living costs such as utilities costs and rents. ( and plenty of people here on the forums have also rightly grizzled about this ) A continuing decline in people owning their own homes. New home buyers struggling more over time to enter the market as real estate prices in our major capital cities increase dramatically in real terms. This forces both parents into the workforce and results in high demand for expensive child care, further placing pressure on young families. Ever increasing commute times for workers as roads become more clogged due to increases in population and people forced further from business centres.

 

Few entry level jobs available for young people as these are taken by new arrivals who may be well educated, but their qualifications are not recognised here. Fewer training positions available in the professions as these jobs are taken by migrants. The police and health care sectors have very high percentages of staffing filled by migrant workers. These are prime examples of professions where new migrants are taking skilled jobs that our young people could be training for. etc. etc.

 

These are the real impacts of our very high immigration intakes, lowering living standards for existing residents and increasing incomes for the elites who benefit from corporate profits.

 



Some of your comments I agree with entirely, others are fallacies promoted by the pro immigration lobby that simply don't stand up to any sort of rational scrutiny.

 

 

All that has absolutely NOTHING to do with emigration.

 

Sorry - the evidence experienced by regular citizens in our large cities clearly shows otherwise.

 

  Living standards are falling because of greed of the top 1%. 

 

That is true to an extent, but one of the main tools adopted by the top 1 % to increase profits is to bring in excessive numbers of migrants. This places downward pressure on wages and living standards for ordinary people as they have to compete with the migrants for work and increases the costs ( and profits ) from housing again pushed up by the huge numbers of migrants competing for housing.

 

You don't have to take my word for it, the evidence is there for all to see in the outer suburbs of Melbourne and Sydney, which just happen to be the preferred destinations for most new migrant arrivals..

 

The wealth has been concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, as the unions are slowly made irrelevant, and workers cannot alone make sure they get fair wages. 

 

Totally agree with this bit.

 

After WW2 when Australia greeted large number of migrants the country was booming. 

 

Its true that the Chifley government instituted a migration programme with the intent of bringing in an extra 1% of total Australian population as migrants each year ( as opposed to the approximate 2% of population brought in as migrants in 2019, double the post war Chifley programme  ). But to compare Australia and its natural resources in the post WW2 global economic boom to our current situation is frankly quite absurd. Our major cities did not cover the land mass areas they do today, our natural resources of water and arible land where not exploited and degraded to the extent they are today and there was not the same environmental and pollution pressures we have today.

 

And did some-one mention global warming ? We live in one of the driest and hottest continents on the planet and the challenges global warming presents have been clearly on display for anyone who cares to look. The idea that you can just keep on stacking ever increasing numbers of people into this fragile environment is frankly unconscionably reckless and dangerous.

 

 

It is NOT left or right opinion; while the right side of Australian politics keeps attacking asylum seekers, and keeps them imprisoned, they are quietly letting large numbers of migrants in.  Why? 

 

It's true the right side of politics supports high migration numbers  Why ? Because as already stated it drives down wages and ensures a steady pool of cheap workers to support industry profits. Its capitalism " one o one ".

 

 

because that way they keep all the racists happy, but they also know that with Australia's low birth rate we need more people to keep out economy going.  

 

Yep ... its all about the money and corporate profits........... nothing to do with whats best for existing Australian residents or our fragile environment  I,m surprised you would even think there was any other reason. 

 

 

Getting young adult migrants is very economical way to grow the country; every Australian child born here will cost hundreds of thousands dollars to bring them to the tax paying stage.  Migrants, on the other hand, are ready made and after the little initial cost of getting them settled in, they  immediately start being productive members of the society. 

 

That's all correct, but it ignores the very simple truth that continuous economic growth through continuous population growth is nothing but a giant Pontzi scheme. It trashes our environment and trashes living standards for existing residents all in the name of continuous growth in corporate profits and continuous growth in GDP to make our politicians feel good.

 

Eventually we will have to pay the piper for our stupidity and it could come in many forms. The fires of last Summer are just the start of the tribulations we are bringing upon ourselves by believing in the fairy story of ever increasing population growth in a country with such a fragile environment as Australia..

 

 


 


There are still a lot of employers who can't get unskilled workers so a lot of the migrants obviously think they're too good for those jobs, same as the Aussies.

 

Before I read all your posts I couldn't help thinking that bringing more and more people in is just  like a gigantic Ponzi scheme, so we agree there.  It reminds me of when companies talk about growth - but what they call growth isn't growth at all.  Just because they get bigger by taking over another company or business doesn't mean they've grown.  They acquire more shareholders so each person's portion is no different to before.

 

In the post-war years there was a lot more Australian manufacturing and our economy was more self-sustaining.  People used more natural products too and sheep farming was profitable as a result and families could live on smaller farms.  Now bigger corporations are taking over because the average family can't afford a house, let alone a farm.  Now we have a throw-away society and we rely on cheap imports because we've priced ourselves out of the market when it comes to imports.  The govt wants a throw-away society because spending money on things that last doesn't fit their idea of 'growth'.

 

Politicians aren't remotely interested in the long-term future of Australia.  They do whatever it takes to get re-elected and they can't see any further than that.  They manipulate figures to suit them, like when they started pushing kids to stay at school longer so that they were sitting at school instead of being counted in the unemployment figures.  I did year 12 but only because I had a Commonwealth scholarship for years 11 & 12 (form 5 & 6 back then) but it was a complete waste of time, just as it is for most of the kids today.  Many of them get absolutely no benefit from staying at school that long.  In fact, it probably makes them feel more useless because they can't keep up.  Of course, they've drastically lowered the standards so more can pass, but that does nothing for as a nation.

 

After they leave school they push them to go to uni so they don't get counted in the unemployment figures for a few more years, but many never get work related to their uni qualifications so it's just wasted money - all to make the figures look better.  Just like a Ponzi scheme, you can't keep people at school and uni longer and longer just to make the figures look better.  There's always a day of reckoning.  The billions of dollars the govt pays out on university educations that never get repaid would be better spent elsewhere but they're only interested in making the figures look good.


So now we have the working poor and middle class welfare .....

Message 2462 of 3,689
Latest reply

Coronavirus update

i came across this today; something to ponder:

"Truth 
Another 6 weeks of lockdown and technically bar the 2 weeks of relaxed restrictions we had in July, by the end of this one we would’ve been in lockdown for 6 months.  
  Before we get too hung up on blaming the state govt, or the federal govt for our covid situation let’s review some facts :
1. We had to bring in mandatory quarantining in hotels, because we couldn’t trust people to stay home after returning from overseas.
2. We then had to bring in security, because we couldn’t trust people to stay in those hotels.
3. We then had to bring in ADF, because we couldn’t trust the security guards not to have sex with those in quarantine in the hotels.
4. We had to get police to door knock and check up on people, because we couldn't trust those who were meant to be self-isolating to actually stay at home.
5. We also have to have police and ADF reinforce the metropolitan Melbourne zone and state borders, because we can’t trust people to follow the restrictions.
6. We are now being asked to use masks, because we cannot trust people to social distance when they are in public.
7. Through it all, our supermarkets have had to introduce shopping restrictions because we couldn’t trust people to not to take more than what they needed.
So we can get as mad as we want at politicians or health officials for imposing restrictions, or the country where the virus originated, but essentially it’s our own fault that we find ourselves here.
Selfishness and lack of empathy seems to be as much of a disease as covid itself.
The quicker people start following directions, the quicker this situation will improve.
Copied and pasted. Please feel free to do the same."

Message 2463 of 3,689
Latest reply

Coronavirus update

Yes, that's it in a nutshell.  

 

Message 2464 of 3,689
Latest reply

Coronavirus update


 

@Anonymous wrote:

Its true that the Chifley government instituted a migration programme with the intent of bringing in an extra 1% of total Australian population as migrants each year ( as opposed to the approximate 2% of population brought in as migrants in 2019, double the post war Chifley programme  ).


 


Except that Australians back then had large number of kids, 4 plus was not unusual.  Now, many people do not want any and many have only one or two.  In any case the 2019 year has brought in more than previous years; usually it is under 200 000.  And this year it will be down sharply.  Countries that have population growth near 0 stagnate. 

Housing inaccessibility is mainly due to the fact that people are encouraged to buy investment properties.  When some people own 20, 30, 40 or more investment properties, then of course the prices will be high and 1st home buyers have no chance bidding against investors.  And yet, when Labor promised to abolish/reduce perks for people with investment properties they lost the election.  People do not seem to understand how it all works; I remember  this woman complaining that she cannot  access her superannuation and buy more investment properties, she said something like this " If everybody was able to buy investment property, they would be set for old age and would not need superannuation" .  Right, and I imagine it did not occur to her that if everybody would buy a house and then investment property, there would be nobody left to rent their investment property. 

Message 2465 of 3,689
Latest reply

Coronavirus update


@bright.ton42 wrote:

Yes, that's it in a nutshell.  

 

 


 But of course, there is also bad luck greatly in play.  Thousands people returned from o/s and only handful turned out positive; it was a very bad luck that one of those infected could not survive 2 weeks without sex.  Hope both, the guard and the tourist will be charged with something and fined. 

Message 2466 of 3,689
Latest reply

Coronavirus update


@*kazumi* wrote:

@bright.ton42 wrote:

Yes, that's it in a nutshell.  

 

 


 But of course, there is also bad luck greatly in play.  Thousands people returned from o/s and only handful turned out positive; it was a very bad luck that one of those infected could not survive 2 weeks without sex.  Hope both, the guard and the tourist will be charged with something and fined. 


I'm also waiting for news on that.   Will it happen?

Message 2467 of 3,689
Latest reply

Coronavirus update

I missed this news report and it has me very worried, because a lot of people in Melbourne are just not doing the right thing.

 

Stage 5?

 

Further tightening could include:

• Closing all construction

• Further narrowing the definition of essential workers

• Closing bottle shops

• Shutting bakeries

• All takeaways shut

• Restricting shopping to once a week, not once a day

• Residents not allowed outside for one-hour of exercise

• Road blocks at all exits from metropolitan Melbourne

• Hard regional grid lockdown

• Random road blocks between suburbs

• Shut down all taxis, with only skeletal public transport available

• Compulsory mask wearing in homes.

 

But Prof Blakely said he didn’t think measures such as forcing people to wear masks in their homes would be likely even though it would probably help to bring down infections.

 

 

https://www.news.com.au/finance/business/is-there-a-stage-5-what-happens-if-melbournes-stage-4-lockd...

Message 2468 of 3,689
Latest reply

Coronavirus update

Anonymous
Not applicable

@*kazumi* wrote:

 

@Anonymous wrote:

Its true that the Chifley government instituted a migration programme with the intent of bringing in an extra 1% of total Australian population as migrants each year ( as opposed to the approximate 2% of population brought in as migrants in 2019, double the post war Chifley programme  ).


 


Except that Australians back then had large number of kids, 4 plus was not unusual.  Now, many people do not want any and many have only one or two.  In any case the 2019 year has brought in more than previous years; usually it is under 200 000.  And this year it will be down sharply.  Countries that have population growth near 0 stagnate. 

Housing inaccessibility is mainly due to the fact that people are encouraged to buy investment properties.  When some people own 20, 30, 40 or more investment properties, then of course the prices will be high and 1st home buyers have no chance bidding against investors.  And yet, when Labor promised to abolish/reduce perks for people with investment properties they lost the election.  People do not seem to understand how it all works; I remember  this woman complaining that she cannot  access her superannuation and buy more investment properties, she said something like this " If everybody was able to buy investment property, they would be set for old age and would not need superannuation" .  Right, and I imagine it did not occur to her that if everybody would buy a house and then investment property, there would be nobody left to rent their investment property. 


The woman complaining that she couldn't spend her super on an investment property should read up on the super rules.  Plenty of people have investment properties as part of their superannuation portfolio.  They just need to set up their own super fund instead of letting someone else manage it for them.

 

A lot of people aren't interested in buying their own house and a lot more don't have the discipline to stop over-spending so that they can save a deposit.  I've known people who admit straight out that everything they buy is rubbish and they'd be better off saving the money but they just don't have the discipline to do it. 

 

Most people who buy their first house aren't able to do it simply because they're on a high wage or filthy rich, they do it because they prioritise what they spend their money on.

 

I don't know why people think it's a 'perk' to offset expenses against revenue from an investment property.  That's the way it works for any sort of business.  Just imagine a manufacturer having to pay tax on their revenue without first being allowed to take off the expenses - it's unheard of. If people couldn't claim their expenses on investment properties there'd be a lot fewer houses available for rent.  Even if the prices came down, a lot of people still wouldn't be able to buy one.  How far do you want the price to come down - to way below what it costs to build?  That's one way of ensuring no new houses are built.

Message 2469 of 3,689
Latest reply

Coronavirus update

Victoria records 394 new coronavirus cases and 17 deaths on Australia's deadliest day

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-09/coronavirus-victoria-394-new-cases-record-17-deaths/12539010

Message 2470 of 3,689
Latest reply