It's a BS waste of time and effort in most cases to shut the bleeding hearts up.

Interesting you raise this as I don't think I've ever seen you post in any of the football forums. Do you use a different account for that (don't need to know which one) or are you actually not that interested in football?

Don't really have an issue with your posts, I think they're pretty on the money most of the time but curious what would drive someone to join a football forum only to post in a couple of threads in Extra Time when there are other forums more appropriate.

I see that Tony has announced they will be taking 12,000 refugees from Syria and Iraq, 2,000 more than Labor were suggesting, which makes the LNP about 20% more compassionate and humane than Labor. Looking forward to the refugee advocates whinging it's still not enough.

:lol: I believe Labor said an immediate 10,000 with a plan to look at bringing more.

And yes it's still not enough.

"Labor is calling today for a one-off increase in our humanitarian intake of refugees from 13,750 — for an additional 10,000 refugees caught up in a conflict not of their making," he said.

That's 2,000 innocent lives Labor just swept under the carpet. Cruel bastards.:lol:

So in your opinion what would quantify as enough, Mcjules? Give me a number. Do we take in millions like Lebanon and Pakistan? They take in millions and those countries are pov compares to ours, surely we can take in more than they do. You get a lot of lefties say things like "we need to take in more, we need to do more", but they never cough up any numbers, I guess if they do they run the risk of someone else suggesting a higher number and appearing more moral and humane them, which is the lefties biggest nightmare. I heard a person suggest that anything less than a million for a country as big as ours would be shameful.

We need to worry about what the hell we do with this first 12,000 before we worry about more.

Shame on you. Shaaaaaaaaaaaaaame.:lol:

I still think we should be looking after the people who are already here and need our help such as the homeless.

-PB

Its possible to walk and chew gum at the same time.

Edited by AzzaMarch: 9/9/2015 03:05:37 PM

I dunno man, I don't think most of our politicians could do that :lol:

-PB

12,000 in a population of 23 million is not much.

Germany has come out and said they (population 80 million) could sustain 400,000 per year for a number of years. In terms of population, that would be the equivalent of us taking in 115,000 people.

I agree that it is easy to be critical if you aren't prepared to put out a number. My opinion is that 12,000 is more generous than I expected, and is good. I think realistically we could easily accommodate 30-50,000. But I recognise there is little political appetite for that.

I am disturbed by the various MPs calling for us to take Christians only though.

We permanently resettling these chaps though, whereas Germany is providing them with evil TPVs

The number should be whatever makes you and benelsmore the most scared. :lol:

Seriously, I think 3x as much would still be pretty comfortable.


:lol: Instead we should take as few as possible and because all "righties" are racist

Is that all? There's about 50 million displaced people and all you wanna take in are a few thousand? Like less than 1% of our population. We have massive land mass surely we can squeeze a few million more in? What about those silly arguments about bringing them all in, putting them to work and building utopia together. Bring em in , teach em English, put them into jobs and voila, a magic booming economy, right?

Is it the case that Germany are only issuing TPVs?

I rarely use this term but have to call a strawman when I see it. No one here is saying we should bring everyone in. The FUD that some have posted in the past that their culture is incompatible with our own and that because they don't speak english none will get a job if frankly bullshit.

Now I agree with you that we are doing this for humanitarian reasons and that if you look at it from a purely economic point of view there are better "candidates" for migration but there's little to fear from having reasonably vetted refugees come to our country and settle.

Rusty is going balls deep in this bitch

If I understand the measures in place, upon arrival they are first taken to an office to be identified. Without ID this is difficult and obviously some are lying but they seem to be accepted.

They are then allocated to a German state according to the agreement on allotment per state. They are transported to that state to the specific refugee accommodation. They then file their asylum application, perhaps with assistance, and it gets sent away to the appropriate authorities. Meanwhile they're supposed to get a health check but current backlogs mean a 3-6 month average waiting period.

Their case is reviewed and processing time is estimated at 6 to 9 months. Obviously a lot have come from real danger and will be granted asylum. Others who get rejected can possibly be allowed to remain temporarily. These things typically get extended all the time and the government is quite unwilling to deport. They're looking at new laws which will allow these people to stay permanently if they have integrated themselves enough.

After that they start going to language or integration courses. Whether they have permission to work I'm not sure but eventually they end up completing their integration phase and get more rights. The period of when they can receive an increased level of financial assistance has been reduced by about 7 months recently.


Edited by johnszasz: 9/9/2015 08:06:38 PM

He stopped the boats, m8.

His response was hysterical.

-PB

Well according to those in the know leigh sales showed her true colours by asking those questions. Saying she is a card carrying labour member. Those same people when prodded say andrew bolt is the bastion of fair and balanced :lol:

We stopped the boats

"We all know that facts have a well known left wing bias." - Stephen Colbert

Never fear, rusty will go "balls deep in this bitch" too :lol:

said by a comedian who satirizes right wing pundits for a living. Sure, I'm sure his views are dead centre.](*,)

When have I been against these people coming here? I'm against bringing people here with no framework to support and integrate them. I'm against creating problems because refugees have no support and become disenfranchised.

What scares me is bringing anyone here without a plan to get them culturally educated and trained to do a job.

I want to avoid creating ghettos and extending welfare lines because these people have been left to their own devices. Most of these Syrians probably have skills, Syria is not a poor country. We need to give them a platform to use them.

I do f*cking love getting put in the same frame as Rusty for not being a bleeding heart and ignoring the obvious issues.

Syrians are more likely to bring skills with them, until recently they lived in a stable country. Hell they have basic services now in most parts of the country in the middle of a war.

We have nothing in place to help these people get on their feet when they get here. If we did, it would be a huge political play to advertise our investment in these people for the betterment of them and Australia.

:lol:

It was a joke, the counter strawman to "bleeding hearts" is "scared of brown people".