@LBGreenwood That is the typical liberal point of view in which bad ideas are rationalized into good ideas against all good common sense. Yes of course, everything was build by non-Whites we all know that, the history of Whites just does not count for anything. Let's just bring in another one Billion Negros from Africa and then we will have all of the brainpower necessary to solve all of the World's problems just like they have in Africa. Add to that more race mixing so Whites disappear entirely
dont give me population explosion crap! Australia has a birth rate at 1.2% that means Australia just like most of the west is dying! the government brings in huge amounts of third world country's to Australia! to bring down our living standards and then tax us at a higher rate! the governments answer we need less not more! that means less service more taxes! just like they have done in the USA, with the Mexicans! Australia wake up! both parties are bought and paid for new world order thugs
The political doctrine of Multiculturalism enjoys its current supremacy due to the confluence of commercial interests and those of the transnational governing oligarchy. Large Corporations benefit from cheap immigrant labor and from the downward push on regional wage rates caused by the influx of poor immigrants to wealthier countries.The transnational oligarchy benefit from the shifting and churning of populations, which tends to dilute national identities and atomize the population.
@Celtic450, please put a cork in it already. The entire country is made of immigrants. US has never been a homogeneous country, it is a multicultural, multiracial country from the beginning. Forget it, you're helpless, I'm not going to respond to you anymore.
@Celtic450 aye, the same's happening here in Britain.
particularly in England, the English are losing their sense of identity, becoming socially and politically withdrawn.
over a thousand years of cultural evolution is being destroyed and with the population less inclined to go out and vote due to political disillusion, a downward spiral of culture loss is near at hand
i only know 2 people who voted in the last elections, and 1 was me.
forced multiculturalism fails and has failed here already.
@Oxstayne no mate they are far worse than mexicans.....they are greasy filthy muslims....boatloads of them....they just show up live off tax payer money, burn the flag, spit on our culture and generally cause nothing but trouble.
@14sJakeB190 I know they should start with you and your family because your ancestors stole that country from Aborigines. So send your ass back and take your worthless family with you.
@moniequa Fucking Bullshit. Our ancestors were sent here by the POMS and we built the place up from nothing and then we let all these other freeloaders in to reduce our standard of living and play by different rules to make us their serfs. Aussies are NOT ALLOWED TO LIVE IN EUROPE. Get that through your thick lefty head.
@adamkow3166 speaking like a true idiot, how the fuck are you going to be over populated? Australia is bigger than Europe and you only have 21 something millions, how in the hell are you going to be over populated? That damn country can hold at least 3 billion. What an idiot.
know how many billions of tonnes of non essential foodstuffs that are chucked in the garbage each year? out of date potatochips, crisps, mayo, meat gone off, sweets, speciality food, etc. how many tonnes of the food calories and proteins in any given Lies.. supermarket is thrown away? just reducing the meat intake by 10 %, growing vegetables instead of cow feed would increase food protein production 100 fold. 99% is lost between vegetables and the cow.And.. BILLIONS of TONS of PET FOOD.
When the "baby boom" was announced I thought they'd lower not RAISE the number of immigrants. Just goes to show the "aging population" is not the reason for record immigration levels.
Austraila needs to kill all those immigrants whether they are afghanistani, pakistani etc. And only allow people from New Zealand, Europe, Ameria etc. Otherwise there country will be overun face mass poverty and there way of life will end.
I dont care what they do with immigration but I sure am tired of those white saxon minority with blonde hair demanding this that and the other. Most of us Aussies are celtic - I haave black hair, olive skin, brown eyes, I look like a Native American but I am a full blood Welsh. I am not white and frankly I dont want Australia run in the interests of rthose Nazi pricks.
i am a full blood Welsh - we are not Germans and we are not English - we have our own languages and culture and we dont owe your white national socialism anything. Genetics shows the Welsh and the Irish to be the most homogeneous peoples in Europe, we are related to the Basque people in Northern Spain and South France, we are related to the American Indians and descend from the Kets people in Siberia - so don't try to tell us who we are and what our identity is.
Why you are white is because people in northern Europe have less melanin because of less exposure to the sun. Wales in in northern Europe, therefore, Welsh people are as white as English people. Wales isn't in Southern Europe so full blood welsh people dont look like southern europeans. You (personally) must be descended from other southern Europeans, not only welsh.
You are as much related to the native americans as I am to the native americans.
...it took me 2 seconds to go to Wikipedia and it told me that wales is 97% white. Go to any bar in wales and you find white British people.
By the way, I looked at pictures of tom Jones and he looks pretty white to me. Just because you have dark hair doesn't mean you're not white and more related to native Americans.
White is defined by the colour of your skin , not what colour hair you have haha. Catherine zeta Jones is still white. She just isn't Aryan.
Now look here you dont get to accuse our people of being North African and Moorish on the one hand and white on the other when it suits you. Fuck that white is an Anglo Saxon Teutonic identity, not a European one. Europe is waking up to its Celtic/Basque roots. Up the RA!
iskandar all europeans are white even some middle easterners and north africans also ,white is a term that is synonymous with Caucasian or Caucasoid..people got to stop with the white hi-jack no need white is just an umbrella term
White and Caucasian is used interchangeably to mean the same thing ,Europeans are white "some" Middle easterners and North Africans are white also,but all these people are caucasian !!How is that!! sheesh!
When I say Caucasian, I am obviously talking about the three main scientific racial classifications: Caucasian, Mongoloid and Negroid. So 'Asian' doesn't come into the equation.
Are you trying to be an idiot or were you born that way?
Some Indians are classified as Mongoloid and allot of Indians are classified as Caucasian.
Caucasian has nothing to do with being white. Similarly, Mongoloid has nothing to do with being yellow.
"Caucasian has nothing to do with being white. Similarly, Mongoloid has nothing to do with being yellow."
You seem to be of the misunderstanding that these racial classifications reflect some biological reality.
Race exists only in the minds of human beings and classification has changed dramatically .
The actual genetic disparity between every human being on earth is minuscule - approximately 0.0037%. Culture is a FAR more salient, potent and rational criteria for measuring human difference.
One result of debates over the meaning and validity of the concept of race is that the current literature across different disciplines regarding human variation lacks consensus. Some academic disciplines use the word "race" in its early essentialist taxonomic sense. Many others still use the term race, but use it to mean a population, clade, or haplogroup. Others eschew the concept of race altogether, and use the concept of "population" as a far less problematical unit of analysis.
Of course race exists in the minds of humans, we invented race. but I am saying that if we are to classify people by biological and physical characteristics, 'Asian' can't be a classification.
Furthermore, humans have invented the term Caucasian, and by definition, it is defined less by skin colour and more by bone structure.
Indians are geographically classified as Asian because India is in the continent of Asia. They are Asians in the same regard that people in Siberia are Asians even though they are white.
'Asian' isn't a racial classification, because of you haven't noticed, there are many different races within Asia, including East Asians, Arabs, Indians and Whites.
" 'Asian' isn't a racial classification, because of you haven't noticed, there are many different races within Asia, including East Asians, Arabs, Indians and Whites."
First you classify race within the categories of "East Asians, Arabs, Indians and Whites". Then you classify race in terms of "Caucasian, Mongoloid and Negroid".
So what of "Australoid"?
Which is it?
Are you trying to be an idiot or were you born that way?
What exactly ARE you basing your racial classificatory schema on?
Australoid are generally seen as people in the far south of south East Asia, into the continent of australia and the pacific islands.
I understand how you could see I was being a but hypocritical before when i mentioned race as the 3 types, then I went on to talk about the East Asians, Arabs and Indians as 'races'. Although I said this because this are the more common uses of 'race', when really they are sub-races and subcategories.
I was saying this to explain my point about Asian not being a race, because you have whites (Caucasian), Indians (Caucasian), East Asians (mongoloid) and Arabs (Caucasian) all living in Asia.
The three races of human are Caucasoid, Negroid and Mongoloid. Australoid people and some smaller ones fit in there somewhere but they are not as widely mentioned.
So you agree that race is an arbitrary distinction?
And perhaps not a very meaningful category at the end of the day?
Your "face-bone variation" seems to fit the essentialist view (Hooton 1926):
"A great division of mankind, characterized as a group by the sharing of a certain combination of features, which have been derived from their common descent, and constitute a vague physical background, usually more or less obscured by individual variations, and realized best in a composite picture."
"A Caucasian is something defined by bone structure and facial structure"
Sorry, I have NEVER heard of THAT criteria for race classification in my life...
I have heard of the Taxonomic (Mayr, 1969), Population (Dobzhansky, 1970) and Lineage(Templeton, 1998) classificatory concepts - but never a bone/facial structure system of classification.
Perhaps this is some "essentialist" schema from the 19th century?
You can understand what I mean by bone structure by looking at the ridged noses of European people and Indian people. You can contrast it to the people that inhabit the far east with much flatter and broader noses.
it seems like you are being racist trying to define celts as Nordics when we are a Southern European race - thats a fact mate and most Welsh people are dark haired. Catherine Zeta Jones, Charlotte Church and Tom Jones are the quintessential Welsh people - do not lie to me on my race. Your doctrine - of National Socialism is Nazi - pan Aryanism is Nazism any way you want to slice it. Welsh people are not White they are Welsh People - always have been for hundreds of thousands of years.
Why? we don't have enough fresh water or arable land to support the people who are here now. More people will erode our lifestyle until it's like bangladesh. Immigration causes disfunction in society by creating division along ethnic/racial lines. One people = unity.
That's stupid, if we get rid of that 56% of immigration, we get an aging population. Then who will pay for all the current 40+ year olds with their eroding superannuation. It will be that remaining 44% who will have to pay double just because of the cessation of immigration.
im from america and your right in some way but its not the race of people that matter its the class. our problem in america isnt too many blacks or arabs its that when they come their used to getting 5 cents a day for work now when a normal working here gets like 9$ an hour, companies hire these people illegally for like 300$ a week and their happy, companies happy but the average worker is now out of a job. but austailia has good allies i dont think we would let u starve we have lots of food
In movie Artificial Intelligence, my take on it, was that robotic gigalos destroyed the human race. As humans could have more sex without babies, pop declined and plummeted. Humans disappeared, and that's why the ice age came. As if nature was sad and "crying" at disappearance of humans, and no longer had any reason to maintain a human-friendly environment. Strange movie. Like Pinnochio. I liked the street preacher scolding for pretend children to replace God's children.
To build a robot requires knowledge and skills from scientists, when there is a lack of scientists to build such robots than they hire people from overseas who posess the skills required. Automtaed machines can increase efficiency but cannot replace Human Resource.
eg. A prostitute cannot be replaced by a robot(Although Im not sure about how it works in USA).
Make every job a robot job reduces employment, reducing income, if one has no income how will he afford robot driven cars?
A prostitute can't be replaced by a robot? How can you be so sure? You must not have seen the movie, Artificial Intelligence, about a robot boy, made too much like an actual human boy. That movie had robot gigalos, robots that have sex with humans. I detest dildos and robots to have sex, because it perverts the procreative aspect of sex and makes it base and profane. With human sexual intercourse, there should long remain a very serious prospect of possible pregnancy. Welcome life.
If there aren't enough cab drivers, we don't have to wait for babies to grow up and decide to take job of cab driver. As computers are improved to more safely drive cars, the computer can BE the cab driver. Haven't you seen futuristic sci-fi movies? Didn't Total Recall have a robot cab driver? Or while traveling, maybe just rent a car, the car drives itself, knows all area road maps, and when finished, the car drives itself to a proper car return drop-off point.
here is the problem with futuristic robot cab drivers, they don't exist currently? Just as how having a baby doesn't mean the baby starts working the day its born?
Futuristic cab machines don't exist, neither do time machines or anything else you might have been impressed by while watching Star Trek.
Lets say if robots were to drive cabs, this means there is no jobs vacant for cab drivers anymore as robots are doing the work?
An Aussie wants to spend little amount on cab fare, the cabbie is happy working for the wage he is receiving, Goverment and its people are happy from the tax they collect, economy grows creating more jobs and facilities for its people so everyone is happy, Goverment see's this as a good substitute for filling the job gap while boosting the economy and creating greater employment as they currently don't have access to technology like robot cab drivers or time machines or voice prescrpitions etc
IF however you feel people around you are changing the way they live or 'may' change the way they live, well is it not their choice how they want to live their lives? Weather one wants to be a rock star or a rap star is his/her choice, weather one wants to eat italian or japanese cuisine is their choice, if you tell them "Look, dont eat that food, only eat American food" than you are limiting their choice and their way of life?
Yes, immigration and "huge" world pop, make the world so much more rich and diverse in possible experiences. I am not so much into "adventure" nor travel, but at least more choices are there, especially in the big city. One huge plus of big cities, is broader range of better-paying jobs. So many cool stores, even sometimes shopping malls.
Yes, more reasons why I am so big on encouraging large families, and welcoming huge human pops to go on enjoying growing naturally.
USA has a problem with illegal immigrants crossing the border, Australia is a huge island which has good border control security so illegal immigration can't happen in Australia to the scale of what you see in USA or Canada, illegal immigrants in Australia r constantly on the run n r almost invisible. USA may have a gang problem of blacks and latinos in LA, but a greater amount of them are also put into the USA army to serve in Iraq or Afghanistan to serve the nation in battle
I am very conservative, and I believe in personal responsibility and self-control, not in Big Brother government breathing down everybody's necks, making all our decisions for us.
But I don't fit the stereotype in being overly hostile to immigration. I believe in the natural flow of human life, encourage people everywhere to let their families grow possibly large without use of unnatural birth control. Immigrants are people too. Don't charge taxpayers for welfare.
1 form of immigration filling skill shortage happens from overseas students who come here to study, if Australia has a shortage of accountants they bring in accountant students,
each student has to pay around $150,000 AUD for their total corse fees and living expenses, thouse who go onto get jobs with their qualification are granted citizenship, majority go back to their countries or are unable to get jobs which means they cant get citizenship. Either way Australia benefits
Lot of immigrants are brought here to do lower standard jobs like dishwashing.. an european decent australian would wash dishes for a higher wage, meaning resturant would have to charge higher for food to make up for the extra wage. Every country needs growth weather it be from making babies or it be by bringing in immigrants to fill the skill shortage.. it has to be done.. ull see the benefits will overwhelmingly outweigh the negatives
While I am willing to accept immigration as one of many useful global population management tools, immigration obviously isn't my 1st choice. Often it is easier, for people to stay and multiply their children, near where they live already. I would rather see nations grow more by the natural increase of people already there. A reason to promote freedom and prosperity worldwide, to reduce the #s of refugees
But I would much rather live in an crowded world, than one afraid of babies
Perhaps you failed to understand what I have previously told you earlier about the babies.
A baby born in 2008 doesnt mean the baby will start working in 2008, it will be 2030 by the time the baby grows up and starts working, until than what is a Nation sopposed to do if there isin't enough qualified doctors for the ever increasing patients? If there is no doctore to treat them, their condition will worsen and it will cost Australia greater in the long run, u get me?
Come on, immigrants aren't the magic solution to everything, although they can often be quite useful.
We don't invite immigrants merely because our society is just begging for more people to clutter everything up. The best reason to invite immigrants, is out of care for our fellow human being, respect for freedom and human dignity, and expectation for personal responsibility and decision-making.
It's not that I want more immigrants, but can say Okay, if they really want to come.
Supply and Demand does create more doctors, there is a greater demand for doctors but not enough supply. What you mentioned about a person changing jobs/profession to become a qualified GP, not only will it take more time but there is a little possibility of that happening, say if a lawyer or a builder choose to change profession, by doing so they are leaving a gap in the lawyer and builder sections which causes more problems, if they change profession to a massive extent to fill the doctors gap
Without Immigration, An Australian has to pay a greater amount for goods/services, this will create a huge division between rich and poor. Goverment imports immigrants to work for lower wage jobs, immigrants are satisfied with the wage and cost of production decreases and more aussies can afford the good/service and they can all afford to have a lifestyle of their choice, which is the Goverment's main aim for its people.
When you say that Australia encourages people to have babies, I fear that they do it, maybe for the wrong reasons. If it's only for certain perceived social engineering purposes, then the reason basis becomes flimsy and unstable, and could shift in wrong direction with a new political administration. It shouldn't be because of perceived need of more workers like us, but out of more universal family purposes, that would also encourage more babies in China and India and everywhere.
This is how it works, you see as population continues to grow, weather in Asia, Africa, Europe or USA, so does the demand. Nike makes shoes, with population growth so does the demnad for their shoes, with greater demand their prices go higher. Now a nation with little population has little demand, but little demand still has to pay a high price just to buy thouse Nike shoes, little growth with High prices means Enormous gap between the rich and poor.
To demand short line at doctor's office, why is that enough? Demand short lines at every amusement park? Why do we ever have to wait? Come on, robots, workers, whoever, build us some more roller coasters NOW
Maybe some people just can't see the doctor. Why must I answer this question? Lots of poor people never had a doctor. Wild animals have no doctor. I have no doctor. I gave up on the corrupt American medical ripoff system. Be our own doctors
Talking about China and India, their growth has benefited not only them, but countries around the world. Australia which is rich in minerals and coal, sell it to China which has a HUGE demand for it, Australia exports Uranium to India, recently USA sold neuclear to India which created around 2500jobs in the USA economy, all this was possible from growth, but if growth becomes too large and unbalanced than it also gives rise to poverty.
While liberals whine about what humans are supposedly doing to the planet, and conspire to jack up our gasoline prices further, I am confident that nature isn't so fragile, and will most likely adjust to continually heavier presense of ENLARGING human race upon the earth. I say OKAY to China building 1 or 3 more coal-fired electricity plants per week. Let humans start to alter ecology of the planet? Who says we can't? China has huge human pop, and they need to develop energy!
If pop growth becomes too large and unbalanced then it also gives rise to poverty? Not really. Pops can be swollen and youthful, without it causing poverty. How can there be really any such thing as "too many" people? That's a values judgment that implies that some people are expendible or just not worth having around. But which people are the "surplus" people? Not much any way to define, and those people and their parents, would most likely disagree.
Immigration is needed and is enivitable if a person wants to sustain their lifestyle and standards of living. People are still free to choose their lifestyle even with 50% immigration population, one can choose weather he wants to be a surfer or weather he wants to be a rock star??Its the individual's chose how he wants to live and immigration dosn't prevent them from living the chosen lifestyle but due to immigration and other factors the person can still mantain their lifestyle choices..
Naturally making cute adorable babies who are cuter than refugees,providing the baby has to start work from a VERY early age and has ambitions of becoming a doctor or cab driver?
Building robots so they can replace every job from cab drivers to doctors, but robots replacing doctors meaning no one can be doctors as there is no jobs avaliable, as its all being done by robots?
Also kill rich people in other countries as to reduce high prices here?
It's not either-or immigration or making babies. Freedom suggests doing both. Making babies is far easier to defend than immigration, as presumably, can't people keep living in their "own" countries? Babies not conceived can't live at all, a reason that adoption for people to have large families, is no excuse for not procreating more babies, if parents are able. The child not adopted, survives another day to be adopted by somebody else.
See, for example.. a baby has NEEDS like dypers. If the dypers are 'too expensive' than the parents are unable to afford for their baby and this creates even greater problems. How does one produce good quality dypers while keeping the price affordable? By keeping the production cost down, lower wages are a part of cutting production costs, however Australia has introduced laws for minimum wage payable meaning wages cannot get lower below the legally set limit.
If diapers are too expensive, parents can still have more babies. People are supposed to have options. Diapers can be disposable for convenience, or cloth to save money. Poor people in developing countries can't afford diapers, and yet have the most babies of all. Because they say of poor people, that children are their only wealth. Another option, is that there are ways to spend more time with babies, and help potty train them younger.
You can make babies, but keep in mind if the family cannot afford the baby than this will cause problems for the nation aswell.
Australia has a baby boomer age which is comming near retirement and they make up almost 30% of the working population, when they retire there will be a MASSIVE gap in the job industry which has to be filled which may b filled up by robots
To build robots would also mean we would have to build them ourshelves instead of relying on Japan,to prevent immigration that is.
In a properly free society, more than 1 way is often used. It's not either-or have babies or immigration, but both. It's not either-or have jobs or robots, it's both. A proper natural mix, as individual decisions lead up to. Not all electricity should be made by burning coal, but by wind energy turbines, hydro-electric dams, nuclear power. Maybe burning trash and wastes too. Ideas are supposed to compete, and those best suited by affordability and regional resources, win out.
One's lifestyle isin't restricted due to immigration either but quiet the opposite. One is free to choose what they do. If one has a preference for japanese food he can go to a japanese resturant, or an italian resturant of his liking, we all have preferences, eg some of us may want BIG screen TVs and mayb japan provides better quality TVs than the ones made in USA? So the consumer wants better quality and trade occurs, with trade naturally occurs immigration.
We wouldn't have these huge bulges of everybody wanting to retire at once, if we were still having enough babies. Possibly, the robots won't be ready to fill the worker gap, so either we get busy real quick and have lots more babies, or bring in the immigrants, or both.
Right now, robots are nothing like in the movies. Robot computer software is extremely limited in scope, so robots are but arms that do same task all day. Software will have to get SMARTER to be like in the movies.
Wow, we humans are so "civilized," or so we think? We "progress" from cruel holding of slaves, to immigrant labor, to machine labor.
One reason I am so pro-development and so pro-energy for the cheap, abundant, reliable energy needed to run machines, what's the alternative? Revert backwards to cruel slavery and slow animal labor?
Yes, one big pro of immigration, is how "they" do the jobs for less money, that we don't want. Sure, swell the pop with immigrants, since we benefit?
Australia has a controlled immigration policy unlike USA, as Australia is an island not sharing its borders with any nation so illegal immigration doesn't occur in Australia and illegals are constantly on the run, as I mentioned before as generations pass the immigrants lose their culture and inherit the Australian culture, dress to standards acceptable in Australian society and as generations pass the connection is merely genetic but culture and attitude is more Australian.
Remember what I said about "pop competition?" It would make sense, for Australia to encourage much baby-making, within proper marriage and families but of course. To long remain nearly empty of pop, with huge pop giants like China, India, Asia, all in the same hemisphere, might that make Australia eventually, maybe, under certain political climate, "inviting" to invasion by populating hordes? But if Australia is similarly "crowded," the invitation fades and there's more people power
Australia has a controlled population growth, if anything it needs to increase its population. 1.5% of Australia is inhabited, if over 50% was inhabited by a larger population you would see a much stronger/influential nation capable of greater things like space exploration for example
50% inhabited? Wouldn't that be a bit dangerously close to the country being "full?" But certainly Australia could be 5 or 10% inhabited, and not just 1.5%. If there was 50%, there's still no moral nor practical way to pick-and-choose who gets to live and have children, and who doesn't, other than leave it to parents and God. Still encourage the natural flow of human life unhindered.
If schools became overcrowded, build more, home-school, use Churches as schools. School outside.
Yeah you are right about cross breeding and mixing, as it is bringing the world together. European countries all share the same currency the "Euro" to increase trade efficiency, this could be followed by Asia and other continents, until there becomes a single currency thus reducing the gap of purchasing power between diffirent countries.
I don't like the sort of "globalism" in which the world comes together to share common currency, too much international trade and such, because that sort too much concentrates all the political power in the evil hands of the unaccountable few.
When all computers run only MyCrudSoft Windoze, then some computer virus can wipe them all out in a single day?
But countries populating into each other and interbreeding, is good, because "us and them" fades, and we are much the same.
Unlike plants, humans don't have firm roots holding us to a fixed plot of ground. We have legs. We can move elsewhere. We don't even need our own plot of land, if food can be obtained reliably, and we can substitute a predictable safe housing unit, up high in some building.
Immigrants do assimulate, and become Americans or Australians, and so we are far more "transplantable" than plants, especially since the dual citizenship of Christians, is both national and of God's kingdom.
This "natural growth" of the population you talk about doesn't exist. USA was built on british immigrants who came to the land and inhabited it, now they have a population of 200million+ because of immigration, same situation with Australia. Also have a think about the 'babies' whn they grow up to work, they will STILL refuse to work as cabbie for $10 n hour, he would prefer a office job, so thus immigrants are brought in to fill the gaps.
Putting it in simple terms, If an Old lady goes to the hospital and waits to get treated, then the staff tell her that she can't be treated due to insufficient doctors, she asks them when a doctor will be avaliable n they tell her that there have been new babies which were born and they are wating for the babies to grow up and become doctors so they can treat her, problem is the lady wants to get treated now but she has to make a sacrafice by staying ill as long as immigration doesnt occur?
I think you misunderstood. When I say that babies are very good for the economy, I don't mean that they pop out of the womb and become instant doctors. No, babies are very needy, born naked, and need everything. That naturally stimulates the economy, far better than war can, without all the chaos and damage, because soon comes jobs manufacturing diapers, toys, more schools, more housing, roads, electricity power plants, attracting more science and innovation. Potent indirect effect.
Ok, you have mentioned that along with babies comes more housing, and that a baby is born naked and is needy, than what is the diffirence between a baby and a refugee who is just as needy? they both need n both don't have the capicity to earn the actual money, you have to keep in mind that you are going by a baby's need to consume, a grown man has greater need to consume.
Oh, there's a huge difference between babies and refugees, for how babies are so wonderful for the economy, although yeah, there's some similarities.
Babies are much easier to welcome, because we don't have to provide any housing for them, right away. They will live with the family of the parents. Parents "sponsor" their babies. Babies automatically assimulate and speak the language. Babies are so cute and adorable. Babies ENLARGE the entire human race, without depop any regions.
You'll find that immigration just doesn't happen because the country feels sorry for the immigrant wants to give them a better life just for the sake, you'll find in today's world the Goverment is reluctant to even spend money on their own people, i dont know any goverment that takes the approach "lets not spend money on our own people, but instead spend it on foreigners", this means they will lose the vote from majority of the country.
Yes, I know a country feeling sorry for immigrants, isn't the only reason why they accept immigrants. One reason, as I posit as to why to encourage more people to not use any "birth control" at all, is that it's so much easier to just leave the door open to life, and not bother with locking or regulating it. If babies "happen," then maybe some level of immigration similarly happens? Do we want the immigrants to come? No, maybe, who cares? If no good reason for refusal, that =s Yes?
Im not sure what you exactly mean, if population growth doesn't occur than a nation will be 'overwhelmed', only 1.5% of australia's land is occupied by civilians, if 80% of the land was occupied we would be on par with USA, everytime you see builders building houses, they are employed because many immigrants come and build new living areas in new suberbs expanding it.
I mean it's not so good, to have "tiny" pop, in a world increasingly "bursting at the seams" with people most everywhere. There's a saying that nature abhors a vacuum. If some nation doesn't want to fill up their land more with people, maybe foreigners want to come more, and "help them out" with that? Sure, invite foreigners to come, but maybe, not one big rush, all at the same time?
USA is nowhere near close to 80% of land occupied. Most land is mostly empty
See, this is how it works. You pay the robot money for driving you to a destination, what will the robot do with this money? buy food?
A cab driver earns the money, goes to the local grocery shop and buys daily living needs, the grocery store owner gets more business and his living standard increases, the cab driver pays tax and so does the grocery shop owner, tax is collected by Goverment who than spends it on fixing roads or building infrastructure or engange in bail out plans to save economy
eg. Lets say a nation builds automated robots just because they dont like immigrants, to build robots would require diffirent mechanical parts being put together and they may need resources from China and Japan to build the robot, thus causing trade which enables immigration.
eg. USA didn't have the technology for neuclear weapon, Germany wanted to exterminate its jews thus Einstien ran from Germany to migrate in USA and thus gave USA the formulae for Neuclear weapon
This "Rush of Immigrants" you talk about can also be healthy for an economy and its people. USA was originally occupied by Red Indians when a rush of British migrants came and occupied it, that big rush of migrants created a healthy and strong economy and made itself into the country called USA.
Eg. Japan produces brilliant scientists and USA says "Hey we need scientists, come work for us instead and in return we will pay you bigger amount of income"
Yes, correct... expanding suberbs creates jobs for the economy and increases overall income for the nation, this can be done by immigration. However immigrants comming to the land doesn't stop one from choosing their way of lifestyle.. unless the immigrant conquers the land, in the case of USA the red Indians were not able to continue with their lifestyle as their land was conqured and they had to abide by new laws and new way of life.
USA may have a problem with 'illegal immigrants', which is totally diffirent to legal immigrants, illegal immigrants means Goverment losing control of the growth of a nation, keeping in mind the 'illegal alien' doesn't pay tax either, this problem doesn't exist in Australia as we don't share borders with any other nation or continent like USA does with South America.
50% of Australia being immigrants means 50% more income for the nation.
Government losing control of the growth of a nation? I don't believe government nor society has any right to "control" the natural growth of a nation. Human life is way too immensely valuable and sacred to be so "controlled." It should be natural flow, up to parents, or up to God ideally to determine.
So I oppose immigrant pop quotas. No, rejection of applicants should be for good quality-based reason.
Immigrants should not get gov welfare, but earn their own way, or have sponsor.
Perhaps your need for ideas like 'making babies, creating robots to drive cabs, or automated prescriptions doctors can use' may come from ur resistance to immigration and the scale it is taking place, perhaps you feel you cannot sustain your way of life or you may feel threatned by something? Fact still remains no one is stopping you from leading a lifestyle of your choice, if you have income to support the life style than by all means live the life.
My resistance to immigration and the scale it is taking place? Huh? Are you talking to me? I much more accepting of apparent huge or growing need for immigration, than most conservatives who I otherwise tend to agree with on most issues.
I am for the natural flow of human life unhindered. However, in a now populous world adding another 4 or 5 births per second, 1 possible implication is growing migration flows of people. Maybe some region "overflows" with people or attracts people?
It has a population of 200million+, a person starting up a business has a domestic customer base of 200million people, so he is likely to earn a huge amount, meaning he has to hire employee to a huge amount aswell, creater greater amount of jobs, the huge income that he earns means a huge amount of Tax for Goverment, the USA goverment can afford to have a bail out plan which is worth 800billion, however Australia can't afford that due to lack of population
I'm on dial-up, so it's difficult for me to post more than 4 comments per video at once.
The U.S. officially has just over 300 million people. But all these people aren't necessarily potential customers of a new LOCAL business. Especially if it isn't noticed or in a good location. Some business opportunities blossom, more workers are needed, workers spend money, more offspring jobs sprout up. Win-win for everybody.
Huge pops can absorb disasters assistance easier than small pops.
You perhaps have the idea that goverment brings in immigrants on a huge scale just to give them a good life? lol
Reality is, it raises the standard of living for the immigrant aswell as the country. Babies are a good idea,but what are you willing to tell the sick lady who is wating in line to be treated and cant because there is insufficient doctors?
Or a drinker who not only has to pay big amounts for the drink, as the person cleaning the glass wants high wage,he has to pay outragous cab fare
You say that allowing immigration, helps the nation, and the immigrants. That's yet another example of the many win-win mutual benefits of free trade. When government or greedy corporations don't gum up the works, in theory, a trade by mutual consent, is almost always mutually beneficial to both parties. I part with my money at a store for some item I want. Why was I willing to give up my money? Because I perceive the item greater value to me than the money. Store rather have the $s
Here we are trying to solve the world's problems, don't you know, most people aren't going to listen anyway to yours and mine solutions, and yet you whine that I can't quite seem to guarantee, that the sick lady at the doctor's office won't face a ridiculously long line? What shall I do about it? We decide to be wise, turn more pronatalist hypothetically. "Unlimited" babies. Can we guarantee for sure, the world never grows too crowded? Take a chance. Who but God has all the answers?
If USA didn't have immigrants they would not have access to 800billion. Due to their population and the average person's ability to income, they have a huge earning base and their companies are thus powerful and influential and can spread their influence overseas for even greater income. Population is vital for growth and to keep up with world competition, babies are good and currently the Austalian goverment has put in incentives for producing more babies.
$800 billion? That's obscene! I am against this corporate welfare "bailout" ripoff of the American taxpayer. Appears a huge enlargement of Big Brother government to me
However, a hugely populous country, is in a much better position to fund expensive endevors, say like expanding an outer space exploration program, than a tiny pop could. The costs tend to run up so high, that on a per person basis, only a very pop country could afford it. A reason why USA is big in space exploration
Weather you agree/support the bail out plan is a diffirent issue, Im talking about immigration and having a population of 300million, which enables a nation to have bail out plans of 800 billion USD.
If we make better decisions, we find ourselves, or future generations, largely with more/better options. World turns wildly pronatalist, wave after wave of pop growth "consumes" the earth. Villages grow into towns, towns into cities, cities coelesce. Side effects from contraceptives drops to nearly zero, as in the future, who bothers to regulate birthrates? Every human greatly prized. Better working conditions.
Doctor shortage? Medical system is sick. Still some waiting lines?
An Aussie going down to the pub for a drink,if he doesn't want immigration to occur all he has to do is not catch a cab home,or pay outragous high price for a cab fare,problem is the general aussie wants to pay cheap price for the drink and for the cab,if these demands are not met he will vote for the other goverment? Will making babies solve the problem of insufficient cab drivers? Is there a gurantee that the baby will grow up with ambitions of wanting to become a cab driver?
The main problem making babies immediately solves, is the altruistic notion that more and more people would be glad to live. That's why I am inclined to agree with commie chairman Mao, when he said that a large and growing pop would make China strong. Maybe, maybe not. Might make them more needy. But at least far more people could then experience life. That's a pretty good reason to let human numbers naturally accumulate and clutter up the landscape
You may have an idea that immigrants are taking up jobs, but its due to the lack of jobs that immigrants are brought in. A lack of a doctor, or a cab driver.
An australian would refuse to pay $50 for travelling 5kms in a cab and an australian cab driver will demand $40 in wage for driving a cab, so very few rich would be able to afford cabs, but due to immigration nealy whole of Australia can afford cabs and uneployment still remains in record low's in Australia.
A country does not "own" its people. The sovereignity of the individual should also be respected. If Nazi Germany becomes a menace to the world leading to WW2, they deserve the "brain drain" of their scientists fleeing the country. If a country fails to produce adequate jobs, they deserve their best and brightest leaving the country for better opportunity elsewhere.
Too much the balance has been pushed towards state and powerful corps, although in a pop world, duty to group too.
Immigration doesn't solve problems but it is vital to an economy's growth, without immigration a country's people would be sick from lack of doctors, poverty would rise due to unaffordability the people of the nation would suffer and this kind of situation creaters overthrowing of goverment or chaos, people have demand and its Goverment's responsibility to supply and reduce the gap between rich and poor to where everyone has the ability to afford goods/services.
In a world populating itself more densely together, with countries more populating into each other, and people marrying and breeding across national lines, I see that as the better form of natural "globalism," that brings the world back together again.
But that makes the human race more "fluid," meaning as national boundaries fade, they can less and less "contain" the people away from where they want to go. Such fluidity should serve people, not serve to lower wages to lowest level
Aren't you overrating immigration just a bit here? How exactly is immigration vital to an economy's growth, when God started the entire world with but just 2 people, and didn't add any more outside "immigrants?" Jesus technically wasn't completely an "outsider" due to the virgin birth, as Jesus was the "offspring" of Mary, but not of Joseph. So to Joseph, Jesus would have been more like an "adopted" son.
Immigration is needed, what if emmigration was allowed only? Nowhere to go!
I always thought Australia had their immigration situation under control. I had no idea that your government gave the country away to the third world. It is really sad to hear that. Hear in Canada our government is actually stripping all white people of their freedom of speech, as more and more people ae starting to express their views on how excessive immigration has destroyed our quality of life. Who eve thought the Canadian government would turn to communism to control the people?
Huh? Gave the country away to the third world? I must have missed that memo?
But actually, the thought had occurred to me, that with the beauty of a naturally blossoming world population, more and more people coming alive, and the size of the planet not growing at all, Australia seems a hugely underpopulated huge land mass that could help absorb quite much of third world ballooning populations. Although most people seem happy to multiply babies where they live already.
Hi pronatalist - I read your letter three times, but can't understand what you are trying to say. Maybe I'm getting to old to comprehend? Here in Canada the massive numbers of third world people entering the country has most of us in a state of shock, and our social systems are going bankrupt. Just the cost of supporting Jamaican welfare mamas and their fatherless children is enormous. I do not think Canada will ever recover from this terrible mistake.
When I consider the powerful reproductive urges most people continually feel, plus the many compelling reasons why people have as many children as they do, I get a global goal and natural desire to ENLARGE the entire human race. For the greater good of the many.
Of course if more people were to have large families most everywhere, underpopulated places like Australia or Canada may look attractive destinations for human migration flows.
When you talk about welfare supporting immigrants you should think about this, for every immigrant on welfare there is another 10 immigrants who pay greater tax to the Goverment, the money thouse on welfare spend is for food n daily living needs, which means the tax eventually also returns to the goverment and more businessess like shops are opened to serve thouse on welfare meaning more employment.
Yes, I am quite willing to acknowledge the many contributions immigrants make to their new country of choice. And I believe more civilized people should be able to choose to change their country of residence, provided they reasonably respect various nations' sovereignity. That means no Mexican immigrants to the U.S., protesting flying Mexican flags. Better fly a U.S. flag, or none at all
As world pop naturally grows, there comes to be fewer places far from people. Let people migrate
Mexicans flying mexico flags in USA?? Keeping in mind, money used to buy a mexican flag in USA, there must be some portion of that which is collected as Tax by USA, rest assure that Tax dollor will be used by USA to fund a 'bail out plan' or fund new wars or increase protection for its citizens. The greater tax the Goverment receives.. it means a greater amount can be spent on its people.
Additional doctors will come from either, people changing professions, immigrants, or from babies growing up and becoming doctors. In a free society, it works out. Supply and demand can attract more doctors. Or people can choose healthier lifestyles, maybe more self-treat, or doctors can become computerized somehow
Immigrants shouldn't fly Mexican flags, because a world pop densifying, should promote social graces, and flying foreign flags is rude, disrespects national sovereignity
Well, lets go by the current year of 2008. A baby cannot solve the problem of skilled doctors if she/he is born in 2008. People changing profession just cannot happen by their desrire/wish, they have to be properly trained and qualified, training and qualification takes time. A sick person waiting in line at the hospital isin't going to wait for the baby to grow and become doctor, sick person cannot afford to wait for someone to change profession anytime soon either. You get what I mean
Human pop growth already contains within it, the seeds of its own accomodation. Yeah, a rapidly growing pop tends to develop a high dependency proportion, huge swollen youthful pop not yet ready to do much work. But in a free society, such "pressures" have a way of naturally working themselves out. If labor thus becomes scarce, then more machines are brought into the process to boost worker efficiency. Employers bid wages up, add perks to jobs, and workers feed needed and valued.
Labour becomming more scarce and being replaced by machines isn't even a solution?
Let me explain to you how this works, there is a shortage of doctors in a hospital, meaning there isin't enough doctors to treat all the patients and hospitals becomming over crowded. Saying that replacing the doctor with machines.. isin't a solution at all, replacing a cab driver with a machine isin't much of a solution either, permenantly replacing the labour with machines will mean no jobs?
Bringing in machines to assist us in doing our work, isn't an all-or-nothing proposition. If the doctor has the right tools, and machines do whatever he doesn't want to or have to do, then he can work more efficiently and see more patients. What if doctors computers with voice-recognition, to record and maintain all medical records. Doctor doesn't have to lift a pen to write. Computers can locate medical records, look up symptoms, diseases, help recommend prescriptions.
Yes, you can have 'automated voice recognition' machines that recoknize a doctor's voice, but there is no doctor to give a voice order in the first place, u get what i mean?
Eg. Going to an old lady and telling her that she cannot be treated as there is no doctors but however the good news is IF there were doctors she would be able to recive voice recoknized prescriptions? Voice recoknized prescriptions doesn't solve the issue of lack of doctors in a hospital?
Australian goverment has a points system where by a Doctor has to show experience and qualification in their field of work, than they are let to live in Australia, what happnes then is the lines in the hospitals get smaller,people are treated, doctor gets income which he spends on his family and well being,unlike a baby's inability to produce income, a doctor has income which creaters greater income for economy and greater Tax revenue for Australian Goverment which they spend on fixing roads etc
Regarding the mexicans flying mexican flags, studies have shown when migration occurs and as generations pass, the more the migrants lose their culture and their way of life and adapt to the new sorroundings. eg. Blacks of America spoke african tribal language when they were brought in as slaves but their decendents now speak english and their only affiliation with Africa is mearly genetic n now these blacks who wud have once flown the african flags are proudly flying the American flag
Unlike many conservatives, I wish not to deport "illegal" immigrants, and I don't mind that immigrants come, and that they have babies in their own country, and in my country, plus our people in my country also have babies.
People are not plants, and should be free to spread their growing populations to anywhere they think can hold more people.
World pop growth is a global phenonomen, not just of family or nation.
But immigrant "guests" have greater duty to be polite and fit in.
An African runner representing USA in track n field means The runner has an income from running, also USA has a potential Gold Medalist who will add to their Medals tally, eg a Maurice Greene. If Maurice Greene was not allowed to run for USA and he instead ran for Japan, pretty soon Japan would lead the medals tally and USA would be completly out of the picture. You get what I mean?
Keep up with world competition. I wish more people were more on the right track like you. A world pop supposedly soaring somewhat "out of control," is all the more reason why we similarly should not "control" our rising #s either.
Pop phobics deliberately ignore the real factor of "pop competition?" Depop adenda isn't working in India, as groups don't want to be swamped politically by other growing groups. If we want to be world superpower, we should keep up with world pop growth.
Well what's the use of all the "environmental" garbage, baggage, fearmongering industry pushing junk-science as a means of fundraising, without increasing human population to have some reason for feigned "concern" for environment?
Yes, "the more the merrier." Many people rather like having possibly big families, so that all the more people may experience life. Many don't believe in polluting the body directly with contraceptive potions and poisons, contary to nature or "the way of things."
I heard somewhere that the so-called "scientists" did some experiment in which they put more and more apes into a confines, supplying them with "unlimited" food. They took to grooming one another and sought to avoid conflict. Whoops! Where's the propaganda value in that? Even dumb apes could ADAPT. Of course they likely "tainted" the experiment, the apes thinking humans expected them to get along. But then morality/God "taints" us to ADAPT similarly.
See, more immigrants means more people paying tax to the Australian goverment, tax which the goverment can use to fund its wars, or fund infrastructure.. like libraries or fix their roads and build new ones. If one wants to start a business n yet has to pay $100,000 per employee, the final product he sells to people would reach $120,000 to cover costs and make a profit. With immigration you can pay them $60,000 and still be able to sell the good to the aussie public for $80,000
Not just the economic benefits, but I like to see the population grow more by natural increase. Immigration involves welcoming other people, who sometimes are slow to properly assimulate or learn the language, while babies seem to do such things quite well. Immigration is also like a children's game of musical chairs or something, moving the people and chairs around, while natural increase helps ENLARGE the human race so more people can experience life
immigration does involve assimulating into society, but the ones that don't are usually 'refugees', most immigrants from 3rd world countries come in via a 'point system' where they have to earn their experience and qualification and ones with the highest points are brought in to fill the skill shortage thats happening in australia.. so its anything but a game of 'musical chairs'.
eg. More doctors brought in means more people can be treated in hospital
I only ask that there be some reasonable quality standard for welcoming immigrants and refugees, not at all that there be any population quotas on immigration levels. Another advantage to baby-making, is that it effectively dillutes the influx of immigrants and refugees, making it easier for nations to absorb greater numbers.
I'm looking for proper attitude. Immigrants should have money already, or be willing to work for it, or have a sponsor. Help get them properly documented.
Yeh babies are good for the economy and its growth, but the problem is if Australia has a skill shortage in 2008 and they make babies, by the time the baby grows up to be properly skilled and qualified it will be 2030? n ther is no saying that the baby would necessaraly find work in the feld which has a skill shortage? meaning 'no doctors' to fill the over populated hospitals
@LBGreenwood That is the typical liberal point of view in which bad ideas are rationalized into good ideas against all good common sense. Yes of course, everything was build by non-Whites we all know that, the history of Whites just does not count for anything. Let's just bring in another one Billion Negros from Africa and then we will have all of the brainpower necessary to solve all of the World's problems just like they have in Africa. Add to that more race mixing so Whites disappear entirely
MrBEB123 5 months ago
dont give me population explosion crap! Australia has a birth rate at 1.2% that means Australia just like most of the west is dying! the government brings in huge amounts of third world country's to Australia! to bring down our living standards and then tax us at a higher rate! the governments answer we need less not more! that means less service more taxes! just like they have done in the USA, with the Mexicans! Australia wake up! both parties are bought and paid for new world order thugs
esther19741974 1 year ago
it's merrier for our economy..
mystarmach 1 year ago
mystarmach: Yeah — more and more liability, how merry that is!!
CanberraUser 1 year ago
@CanberraUser oh i meant in terms of job creation and new businesses
mystarmach 1 year ago
The political doctrine of Multiculturalism enjoys its current supremacy due to the confluence of commercial interests and those of the transnational governing oligarchy. Large Corporations benefit from cheap immigrant labor and from the downward push on regional wage rates caused by the influx of poor immigrants to wealthier countries.The transnational oligarchy benefit from the shifting and churning of populations, which tends to dilute national identities and atomize the population.
Celtic450 1 year ago
Comment removed
moniequa 1 year ago
@moniequa Yes. The US has a declining standard of living and is weaker then when it was more homogenous before the 1965 immigration laws there.
Celtic450 1 year ago
@Celtic450, please put a cork in it already. The entire country is made of immigrants. US has never been a homogeneous country, it is a multicultural, multiracial country from the beginning. Forget it, you're helpless, I'm not going to respond to you anymore.
moniequa 1 year ago
@Celtic450 aye, the same's happening here in Britain.
particularly in England, the English are losing their sense of identity, becoming socially and politically withdrawn.
over a thousand years of cultural evolution is being destroyed and with the population less inclined to go out and vote due to political disillusion, a downward spiral of culture loss is near at hand
i only know 2 people who voted in the last elections, and 1 was me.
forced multiculturalism fails and has failed here already.
godkingRoss 1 year ago
I wonder if you go any illeagals down there...? (Mexicans)
Oxstayne 1 year ago
@Oxstayne no mate they are far worse than mexicans.....they are greasy filthy muslims....boatloads of them....they just show up live off tax payer money, burn the flag, spit on our culture and generally cause nothing but trouble.
southperth22 1 year ago
@southperth22 who are the illeagals?
Oxstayne 1 year ago
@Oxstayne it doesnt work like that in australia we have different conditions as we are an island so its harder to get in illegally than in u.s.
southperth22 1 year ago
Its really economic necessity. . . If your a nationalist then its a little genocidal. If your a universalist then it wouldnt much bother you..
Tuphut 1 year ago
Time to send them back home!
14sJakeB190 2 years ago
@14sJakeB190 I know they should start with you and your family because your ancestors stole that country from Aborigines. So send your ass back and take your worthless family with you.
moniequa 1 year ago
@moniequa Fucking Bullshit. Our ancestors were sent here by the POMS and we built the place up from nothing and then we let all these other freeloaders in to reduce our standard of living and play by different rules to make us their serfs. Aussies are NOT ALLOWED TO LIVE IN EUROPE. Get that through your thick lefty head.
Celtic450 1 year ago
there goes the quality of life in australia, thanks prime minister, now were going to be over populated salad bowl of the world.
adamkow3166 2 years ago 6
@adamkow3166 speaking like a true idiot, how the fuck are you going to be over populated? Australia is bigger than Europe and you only have 21 something millions, how in the hell are you going to be over populated? That damn country can hold at least 3 billion. What an idiot.
moniequa 1 year ago
@moniequa problem is that every one wants to live near CBD or major city. Have you experienced the traffic lately?
adamkow3166 1 year ago
Comment removed
moniequa 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
know how many billions of tonnes of non essential foodstuffs that are chucked in the garbage each year? out of date potatochips, crisps, mayo, meat gone off, sweets, speciality food, etc. how many tonnes of the food calories and proteins in any given Lies.. supermarket is thrown away? just reducing the meat intake by 10 %, growing vegetables instead of cow feed would increase food protein production 100 fold. 99% is lost between vegetables and the cow.And.. BILLIONS of TONS of PET FOOD.
gunthaarz 3 years ago
When the "baby boom" was announced I thought they'd lower not RAISE the number of immigrants. Just goes to show the "aging population" is not the reason for record immigration levels.
hikerzb 3 years ago
i like how he says immigration in a quiet shameful way
Aro2220 3 years ago
Austraila needs to kill all those immigrants whether they are afghanistani, pakistani etc. And only allow people from New Zealand, Europe, Ameria etc. Otherwise there country will be overun face mass poverty and there way of life will end.
Dream27WP 3 years ago
I dont care what they do with immigration but I sure am tired of those white saxon minority with blonde hair demanding this that and the other. Most of us Aussies are celtic - I haave black hair, olive skin, brown eyes, I look like a Native American but I am a full blood Welsh. I am not white and frankly I dont want Australia run in the interests of rthose Nazi pricks.
cranyonrye 2 years ago
lol you moron.
If you're full blood welsh then you're white. If you have dark skin dark hair, brown eyes then you're probably not full blood welsh.
iskandar1111 2 years ago
i am a full blood Welsh - we are not Germans and we are not English - we have our own languages and culture and we dont owe your white national socialism anything. Genetics shows the Welsh and the Irish to be the most homogeneous peoples in Europe, we are related to the Basque people in Northern Spain and South France, we are related to the American Indians and descend from the Kets people in Siberia - so don't try to tell us who we are and what our identity is.
cranyonrye 2 years ago
If you're welsh, you're white...
Why you are white is because people in northern Europe have less melanin because of less exposure to the sun. Wales in in northern Europe, therefore, Welsh people are as white as English people. Wales isn't in Southern Europe so full blood welsh people dont look like southern europeans. You (personally) must be descended from other southern Europeans, not only welsh.
You are as much related to the native americans as I am to the native americans.
iskandar1111 2 years ago
How do you explain the Sami Finns who are closer cousins to Welsh people than Germans are?
cranyonrye 2 years ago
...it took me 2 seconds to go to Wikipedia and it told me that wales is 97% white. Go to any bar in wales and you find white British people.
By the way, I looked at pictures of tom Jones and he looks pretty white to me. Just because you have dark hair doesn't mean you're not white and more related to native Americans.
White is defined by the colour of your skin , not what colour hair you have haha. Catherine zeta Jones is still white. She just isn't Aryan.
iskandar1111 2 years ago
Do you not know the difference between white and aryan?
I am aryan white, you are not. But you are still white even though you may look like Tom Jones. Welsh people are white.
Why do you keep calling me a Nazi? I don't get it.
iskandar1111 2 years ago
Now look here you dont get to accuse our people of being North African and Moorish on the one hand and white on the other when it suits you. Fuck that white is an Anglo Saxon Teutonic identity, not a European one. Europe is waking up to its Celtic/Basque roots. Up the RA!
cranyonrye 2 years ago
iskandar all europeans are white even some middle easterners and north africans also ,white is a term that is synonymous with Caucasian or Caucasoid..people got to stop with the white hi-jack no need white is just an umbrella term
0TheSeeker 2 years ago
no it's not.
A Caucasian is something defined by bone structure and facial structure, even Indians are Caucasian and they are not white.
I think us whites need to stop hijacking Caucasian because white =/= Caucasian. All whites are Caucasian but not all Caucasians are white.
iskandar1111 2 years ago
White and Caucasian is used interchangeably to mean the same thing ,Europeans are white "some" Middle easterners and North Africans are white also,but all these people are caucasian !!How is that!! sheesh!
0TheSeeker 2 years ago
Yes Arabs are Caucasian, but they certainly are not white.
iskandar1111 2 years ago 3
"A Caucasian is something defined by bone structure and facial structure, even Indians are Caucasian and they are not white."
Indians are racially classified as Asian...
Hammersley1967 2 years ago
When I say Caucasian, I am obviously talking about the three main scientific racial classifications: Caucasian, Mongoloid and Negroid. So 'Asian' doesn't come into the equation.
Are you trying to be an idiot or were you born that way?
Some Indians are classified as Mongoloid and allot of Indians are classified as Caucasian.
Caucasian has nothing to do with being white. Similarly, Mongoloid has nothing to do with being yellow.
iskandar1111 2 years ago
"Caucasian has nothing to do with being white. Similarly, Mongoloid has nothing to do with being yellow."
You seem to be of the misunderstanding that these racial classifications reflect some biological reality.
Race exists only in the minds of human beings and classification has changed dramatically .
The actual genetic disparity between every human being on earth is minuscule - approximately 0.0037%. Culture is a FAR more salient, potent and rational criteria for measuring human difference.
Hammersley1967 2 years ago
One result of debates over the meaning and validity of the concept of race is that the current literature across different disciplines regarding human variation lacks consensus. Some academic disciplines use the word "race" in its early essentialist taxonomic sense. Many others still use the term race, but use it to mean a population, clade, or haplogroup. Others eschew the concept of race altogether, and use the concept of "population" as a far less problematical unit of analysis.
Hammersley1967 2 years ago
Of course race exists in the minds of humans, we invented race. but I am saying that if we are to classify people by biological and physical characteristics, 'Asian' can't be a classification.
Furthermore, humans have invented the term Caucasian, and by definition, it is defined less by skin colour and more by bone structure.
iskandar1111 2 years ago
Indians are geographically classified as Asian because India is in the continent of Asia. They are Asians in the same regard that people in Siberia are Asians even though they are white.
'Asian' isn't a racial classification, because of you haven't noticed, there are many different races within Asia, including East Asians, Arabs, Indians and Whites.
iskandar1111 2 years ago
" 'Asian' isn't a racial classification, because of you haven't noticed, there are many different races within Asia, including East Asians, Arabs, Indians and Whites."
First you classify race within the categories of "East Asians, Arabs, Indians and Whites". Then you classify race in terms of "Caucasian, Mongoloid and Negroid".
So what of "Australoid"?
Which is it?
Are you trying to be an idiot or were you born that way?
What exactly ARE you basing your racial classificatory schema on?
Hammersley1967 2 years ago
Australoid are generally seen as people in the far south of south East Asia, into the continent of australia and the pacific islands.
I understand how you could see I was being a but hypocritical before when i mentioned race as the 3 types, then I went on to talk about the East Asians, Arabs and Indians as 'races'. Although I said this because this are the more common uses of 'race', when really they are sub-races and subcategories.
iskandar1111 2 years ago
I was saying this to explain my point about Asian not being a race, because you have whites (Caucasian), Indians (Caucasian), East Asians (mongoloid) and Arabs (Caucasian) all living in Asia.
The three races of human are Caucasoid, Negroid and Mongoloid. Australoid people and some smaller ones fit in there somewhere but they are not as widely mentioned.
iskandar1111 2 years ago
So you agree that race is an arbitrary distinction?
And perhaps not a very meaningful category at the end of the day?
Your "face-bone variation" seems to fit the essentialist view (Hooton 1926):
"A great division of mankind, characterized as a group by the sharing of a certain combination of features, which have been derived from their common descent, and constitute a vague physical background, usually more or less obscured by individual variations, and realized best in a composite picture."
Hammersley1967 2 years ago
Australoid are completely different. Many Indians are also Australoid, and many Asians are also Caucasian, as with Negroids.
Logicbeatslies 2 years ago
"A Caucasian is something defined by bone structure and facial structure"
Sorry, I have NEVER heard of THAT criteria for race classification in my life...
I have heard of the Taxonomic (Mayr, 1969), Population (Dobzhansky, 1970) and Lineage(Templeton, 1998) classificatory concepts - but never a bone/facial structure system of classification.
Perhaps this is some "essentialist" schema from the 19th century?
Hammersley1967 2 years ago
You can understand what I mean by bone structure by looking at the ridged noses of European people and Indian people. You can contrast it to the people that inhabit the far east with much flatter and broader noses.
Just one example.
iskandar1111 2 years ago
Wales is just across the border from England, a couple of kilometers, and you're telling me that full blood welsh people look like Greeks?
I a not disputing the fact that you look like a southern European, I am just saying that you mustn't be full blood welsh.
Furthermore, if I am white, why am I a Nazi according to you? Seems like you're being a bit racist there.
iskandar1111 2 years ago
it seems like you are being racist trying to define celts as Nordics when we are a Southern European race - thats a fact mate and most Welsh people are dark haired. Catherine Zeta Jones, Charlotte Church and Tom Jones are the quintessential Welsh people - do not lie to me on my race. Your doctrine - of National Socialism is Nazi - pan Aryanism is Nazism any way you want to slice it. Welsh people are not White they are Welsh People - always have been for hundreds of thousands of years.
cranyonrye 2 years ago
go on go and have a look at a pic of Tom Jones them have a look at my pic on my profile - we are both typical handsome Welshmen.
cranyonrye 2 years ago
"I dont care what they do with immigration but I sure am tired of those white saxon minority with blonde hair demanding this that and the other"
you mean blonde haired saxons like vicky beckham and ron wood LOL
0TheSeeker 2 years ago
Australia must stop ALL IMMIGRATION immediately.
Why? we don't have enough fresh water or arable land to support the people who are here now. More people will erode our lifestyle until it's like bangladesh. Immigration causes disfunction in society by creating division along ethnic/racial lines. One people = unity.
paspax 3 years ago 2
That's stupid, if we get rid of that 56% of immigration, we get an aging population. Then who will pay for all the current 40+ year olds with their eroding superannuation. It will be that remaining 44% who will have to pay double just because of the cessation of immigration.
yedrellow 3 years ago
fail
paspax 3 years ago
im from america and your right in some way but its not the race of people that matter its the class. our problem in america isnt too many blacks or arabs its that when they come their used to getting 5 cents a day for work now when a normal working here gets like 9$ an hour, companies hire these people illegally for like 300$ a week and their happy, companies happy but the average worker is now out of a job. but austailia has good allies i dont think we would let u starve we have lots of food
pat44123 3 years ago
It is also about levels of education. Having an uneducated underclass leads to economic trouble and violence.
dangerouslytalented 3 years ago
To rioo108 (continued):
In movie Artificial Intelligence, my take on it, was that robotic gigalos destroyed the human race. As humans could have more sex without babies, pop declined and plummeted. Humans disappeared, and that's why the ice age came. As if nature was sad and "crying" at disappearance of humans, and no longer had any reason to maintain a human-friendly environment. Strange movie. Like Pinnochio. I liked the street preacher scolding for pretend children to replace God's children.
pronatalist 3 years ago
To build a robot requires knowledge and skills from scientists, when there is a lack of scientists to build such robots than they hire people from overseas who posess the skills required. Automtaed machines can increase efficiency but cannot replace Human Resource.
eg. A prostitute cannot be replaced by a robot(Although Im not sure about how it works in USA).
Make every job a robot job reduces employment, reducing income, if one has no income how will he afford robot driven cars?
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
A prostitute can't be replaced by a robot? How can you be so sure? You must not have seen the movie, Artificial Intelligence, about a robot boy, made too much like an actual human boy. That movie had robot gigalos, robots that have sex with humans. I detest dildos and robots to have sex, because it perverts the procreative aspect of sex and makes it base and profane. With human sexual intercourse, there should long remain a very serious prospect of possible pregnancy. Welcome life.
pronatalist 3 years ago
To rioo108:
If there aren't enough cab drivers, we don't have to wait for babies to grow up and decide to take job of cab driver. As computers are improved to more safely drive cars, the computer can BE the cab driver. Haven't you seen futuristic sci-fi movies? Didn't Total Recall have a robot cab driver? Or while traveling, maybe just rent a car, the car drives itself, knows all area road maps, and when finished, the car drives itself to a proper car return drop-off point.
pronatalist 3 years ago
To pronatalist:
here is the problem with futuristic robot cab drivers, they don't exist currently? Just as how having a baby doesn't mean the baby starts working the day its born?
Futuristic cab machines don't exist, neither do time machines or anything else you might have been impressed by while watching Star Trek.
Lets say if robots were to drive cabs, this means there is no jobs vacant for cab drivers anymore as robots are doing the work?
rioo108 3 years ago
An Aussie wants to spend little amount on cab fare, the cabbie is happy working for the wage he is receiving, Goverment and its people are happy from the tax they collect, economy grows creating more jobs and facilities for its people so everyone is happy, Goverment see's this as a good substitute for filling the job gap while boosting the economy and creating greater employment as they currently don't have access to technology like robot cab drivers or time machines or voice prescrpitions etc
rioo108 3 years ago
IF however you feel people around you are changing the way they live or 'may' change the way they live, well is it not their choice how they want to live their lives? Weather one wants to be a rock star or a rap star is his/her choice, weather one wants to eat italian or japanese cuisine is their choice, if you tell them "Look, dont eat that food, only eat American food" than you are limiting their choice and their way of life?
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
Yes, immigration and "huge" world pop, make the world so much more rich and diverse in possible experiences. I am not so much into "adventure" nor travel, but at least more choices are there, especially in the big city. One huge plus of big cities, is broader range of better-paying jobs. So many cool stores, even sometimes shopping malls.
Yes, more reasons why I am so big on encouraging large families, and welcoming huge human pops to go on enjoying growing naturally.
pronatalist 3 years ago
USA has a problem with illegal immigrants crossing the border, Australia is a huge island which has good border control security so illegal immigration can't happen in Australia to the scale of what you see in USA or Canada, illegal immigrants in Australia r constantly on the run n r almost invisible. USA may have a gang problem of blacks and latinos in LA, but a greater amount of them are also put into the USA army to serve in Iraq or Afghanistan to serve the nation in battle
rioo108 3 years ago
To Normalman50 (continued):
I am very conservative, and I believe in personal responsibility and self-control, not in Big Brother government breathing down everybody's necks, making all our decisions for us.
But I don't fit the stereotype in being overly hostile to immigration. I believe in the natural flow of human life, encourage people everywhere to let their families grow possibly large without use of unnatural birth control. Immigrants are people too. Don't charge taxpayers for welfare.
pronatalist 3 years ago
Hi pro - I am not sure what you said, but I guess it meant something to you.. LOL
Keep up the good work.
Normalman50 3 years ago
1 form of immigration filling skill shortage happens from overseas students who come here to study, if Australia has a shortage of accountants they bring in accountant students,
each student has to pay around $150,000 AUD for their total corse fees and living expenses, thouse who go onto get jobs with their qualification are granted citizenship, majority go back to their countries or are unable to get jobs which means they cant get citizenship. Either way Australia benefits
rioo108 3 years ago
Lot of immigrants are brought here to do lower standard jobs like dishwashing.. an european decent australian would wash dishes for a higher wage, meaning resturant would have to charge higher for food to make up for the extra wage. Every country needs growth weather it be from making babies or it be by bringing in immigrants to fill the skill shortage.. it has to be done.. ull see the benefits will overwhelmingly outweigh the negatives
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
While I am willing to accept immigration as one of many useful global population management tools, immigration obviously isn't my 1st choice. Often it is easier, for people to stay and multiply their children, near where they live already. I would rather see nations grow more by the natural increase of people already there. A reason to promote freedom and prosperity worldwide, to reduce the #s of refugees
But I would much rather live in an crowded world, than one afraid of babies
pronatalist 3 years ago
Perhaps you failed to understand what I have previously told you earlier about the babies.
A baby born in 2008 doesnt mean the baby will start working in 2008, it will be 2030 by the time the baby grows up and starts working, until than what is a Nation sopposed to do if there isin't enough qualified doctors for the ever increasing patients? If there is no doctore to treat them, their condition will worsen and it will cost Australia greater in the long run, u get me?
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
Come on, immigrants aren't the magic solution to everything, although they can often be quite useful.
We don't invite immigrants merely because our society is just begging for more people to clutter everything up. The best reason to invite immigrants, is out of care for our fellow human being, respect for freedom and human dignity, and expectation for personal responsibility and decision-making.
It's not that I want more immigrants, but can say Okay, if they really want to come.
pronatalist 3 years ago
Supply and Demand does create more doctors, there is a greater demand for doctors but not enough supply. What you mentioned about a person changing jobs/profession to become a qualified GP, not only will it take more time but there is a little possibility of that happening, say if a lawyer or a builder choose to change profession, by doing so they are leaving a gap in the lawyer and builder sections which causes more problems, if they change profession to a massive extent to fill the doctors gap
rioo108 3 years ago
Without Immigration, An Australian has to pay a greater amount for goods/services, this will create a huge division between rich and poor. Goverment imports immigrants to work for lower wage jobs, immigrants are satisfied with the wage and cost of production decreases and more aussies can afford the good/service and they can all afford to have a lifestyle of their choice, which is the Goverment's main aim for its people.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
When you say that Australia encourages people to have babies, I fear that they do it, maybe for the wrong reasons. If it's only for certain perceived social engineering purposes, then the reason basis becomes flimsy and unstable, and could shift in wrong direction with a new political administration. It shouldn't be because of perceived need of more workers like us, but out of more universal family purposes, that would also encourage more babies in China and India and everywhere.
pronatalist 3 years ago
This is how it works, you see as population continues to grow, weather in Asia, Africa, Europe or USA, so does the demand. Nike makes shoes, with population growth so does the demnad for their shoes, with greater demand their prices go higher. Now a nation with little population has little demand, but little demand still has to pay a high price just to buy thouse Nike shoes, little growth with High prices means Enormous gap between the rich and poor.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
To demand short line at doctor's office, why is that enough? Demand short lines at every amusement park? Why do we ever have to wait? Come on, robots, workers, whoever, build us some more roller coasters NOW
Maybe some people just can't see the doctor. Why must I answer this question? Lots of poor people never had a doctor. Wild animals have no doctor. I have no doctor. I gave up on the corrupt American medical ripoff system. Be our own doctors
Shortage of shoes? Try another brand
pronatalist 3 years ago
Talking about China and India, their growth has benefited not only them, but countries around the world. Australia which is rich in minerals and coal, sell it to China which has a HUGE demand for it, Australia exports Uranium to India, recently USA sold neuclear to India which created around 2500jobs in the USA economy, all this was possible from growth, but if growth becomes too large and unbalanced than it also gives rise to poverty.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
While liberals whine about what humans are supposedly doing to the planet, and conspire to jack up our gasoline prices further, I am confident that nature isn't so fragile, and will most likely adjust to continually heavier presense of ENLARGING human race upon the earth. I say OKAY to China building 1 or 3 more coal-fired electricity plants per week. Let humans start to alter ecology of the planet? Who says we can't? China has huge human pop, and they need to develop energy!
pronatalist 3 years ago
To rioo108:
If pop growth becomes too large and unbalanced then it also gives rise to poverty? Not really. Pops can be swollen and youthful, without it causing poverty. How can there be really any such thing as "too many" people? That's a values judgment that implies that some people are expendible or just not worth having around. But which people are the "surplus" people? Not much any way to define, and those people and their parents, would most likely disagree.
Even crowded isn't so bad.
pronatalist 3 years ago
Immigration is needed and is enivitable if a person wants to sustain their lifestyle and standards of living. People are still free to choose their lifestyle even with 50% immigration population, one can choose weather he wants to be a surfer or weather he wants to be a rock star??Its the individual's chose how he wants to live and immigration dosn't prevent them from living the chosen lifestyle but due to immigration and other factors the person can still mantain their lifestyle choices..
rioo108 3 years ago
To prevent immigration, following has to occur.
Naturally making cute adorable babies who are cuter than refugees,providing the baby has to start work from a VERY early age and has ambitions of becoming a doctor or cab driver?
Building robots so they can replace every job from cab drivers to doctors, but robots replacing doctors meaning no one can be doctors as there is no jobs avaliable, as its all being done by robots?
Also kill rich people in other countries as to reduce high prices here?
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
It's not either-or immigration or making babies. Freedom suggests doing both. Making babies is far easier to defend than immigration, as presumably, can't people keep living in their "own" countries? Babies not conceived can't live at all, a reason that adoption for people to have large families, is no excuse for not procreating more babies, if parents are able. The child not adopted, survives another day to be adopted by somebody else.
Work crews would have both humans and robots.
pronatalist 3 years ago
See, for example.. a baby has NEEDS like dypers. If the dypers are 'too expensive' than the parents are unable to afford for their baby and this creates even greater problems. How does one produce good quality dypers while keeping the price affordable? By keeping the production cost down, lower wages are a part of cutting production costs, however Australia has introduced laws for minimum wage payable meaning wages cannot get lower below the legally set limit.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
If diapers are too expensive, parents can still have more babies. People are supposed to have options. Diapers can be disposable for convenience, or cloth to save money. Poor people in developing countries can't afford diapers, and yet have the most babies of all. Because they say of poor people, that children are their only wealth. Another option, is that there are ways to spend more time with babies, and help potty train them younger.
Diapers need to be cheap, so machines used.
pronatalist 3 years ago
You can make babies, but keep in mind if the family cannot afford the baby than this will cause problems for the nation aswell.
Australia has a baby boomer age which is comming near retirement and they make up almost 30% of the working population, when they retire there will be a MASSIVE gap in the job industry which has to be filled which may b filled up by robots
To build robots would also mean we would have to build them ourshelves instead of relying on Japan,to prevent immigration that is.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
In a properly free society, more than 1 way is often used. It's not either-or have babies or immigration, but both. It's not either-or have jobs or robots, it's both. A proper natural mix, as individual decisions lead up to. Not all electricity should be made by burning coal, but by wind energy turbines, hydro-electric dams, nuclear power. Maybe burning trash and wastes too. Ideas are supposed to compete, and those best suited by affordability and regional resources, win out.
pronatalist 3 years ago
One's lifestyle isin't restricted due to immigration either but quiet the opposite. One is free to choose what they do. If one has a preference for japanese food he can go to a japanese resturant, or an italian resturant of his liking, we all have preferences, eg some of us may want BIG screen TVs and mayb japan provides better quality TVs than the ones made in USA? So the consumer wants better quality and trade occurs, with trade naturally occurs immigration.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
We wouldn't have these huge bulges of everybody wanting to retire at once, if we were still having enough babies. Possibly, the robots won't be ready to fill the worker gap, so either we get busy real quick and have lots more babies, or bring in the immigrants, or both.
Right now, robots are nothing like in the movies. Robot computer software is extremely limited in scope, so robots are but arms that do same task all day. Software will have to get SMARTER to be like in the movies.
pronatalist 3 years ago
To rioo108:
Wow, we humans are so "civilized," or so we think? We "progress" from cruel holding of slaves, to immigrant labor, to machine labor.
One reason I am so pro-development and so pro-energy for the cheap, abundant, reliable energy needed to run machines, what's the alternative? Revert backwards to cruel slavery and slow animal labor?
Yes, one big pro of immigration, is how "they" do the jobs for less money, that we don't want. Sure, swell the pop with immigrants, since we benefit?
pronatalist 3 years ago
Australia has a controlled immigration policy unlike USA, as Australia is an island not sharing its borders with any nation so illegal immigration doesn't occur in Australia and illegals are constantly on the run, as I mentioned before as generations pass the immigrants lose their culture and inherit the Australian culture, dress to standards acceptable in Australian society and as generations pass the connection is merely genetic but culture and attitude is more Australian.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
Remember what I said about "pop competition?" It would make sense, for Australia to encourage much baby-making, within proper marriage and families but of course. To long remain nearly empty of pop, with huge pop giants like China, India, Asia, all in the same hemisphere, might that make Australia eventually, maybe, under certain political climate, "inviting" to invasion by populating hordes? But if Australia is similarly "crowded," the invitation fades and there's more people power
pronatalist 3 years ago
Australia has a controlled population growth, if anything it needs to increase its population. 1.5% of Australia is inhabited, if over 50% was inhabited by a larger population you would see a much stronger/influential nation capable of greater things like space exploration for example
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
50% inhabited? Wouldn't that be a bit dangerously close to the country being "full?" But certainly Australia could be 5 or 10% inhabited, and not just 1.5%. If there was 50%, there's still no moral nor practical way to pick-and-choose who gets to live and have children, and who doesn't, other than leave it to parents and God. Still encourage the natural flow of human life unhindered.
If schools became overcrowded, build more, home-school, use Churches as schools. School outside.
pronatalist 3 years ago
Yeah you are right about cross breeding and mixing, as it is bringing the world together. European countries all share the same currency the "Euro" to increase trade efficiency, this could be followed by Asia and other continents, until there becomes a single currency thus reducing the gap of purchasing power between diffirent countries.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rio108:
I don't like the sort of "globalism" in which the world comes together to share common currency, too much international trade and such, because that sort too much concentrates all the political power in the evil hands of the unaccountable few.
When all computers run only MyCrudSoft Windoze, then some computer virus can wipe them all out in a single day?
But countries populating into each other and interbreeding, is good, because "us and them" fades, and we are much the same.
pronatalist 3 years ago
To rioo108:
Unlike plants, humans don't have firm roots holding us to a fixed plot of ground. We have legs. We can move elsewhere. We don't even need our own plot of land, if food can be obtained reliably, and we can substitute a predictable safe housing unit, up high in some building.
Immigrants do assimulate, and become Americans or Australians, and so we are far more "transplantable" than plants, especially since the dual citizenship of Christians, is both national and of God's kingdom.
pronatalist 3 years ago
This "natural growth" of the population you talk about doesn't exist. USA was built on british immigrants who came to the land and inhabited it, now they have a population of 200million+ because of immigration, same situation with Australia. Also have a think about the 'babies' whn they grow up to work, they will STILL refuse to work as cabbie for $10 n hour, he would prefer a office job, so thus immigrants are brought in to fill the gaps.
rioo108 3 years ago
Putting it in simple terms, If an Old lady goes to the hospital and waits to get treated, then the staff tell her that she can't be treated due to insufficient doctors, she asks them when a doctor will be avaliable n they tell her that there have been new babies which were born and they are wating for the babies to grow up and become doctors so they can treat her, problem is the lady wants to get treated now but she has to make a sacrafice by staying ill as long as immigration doesnt occur?
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
I think you misunderstood. When I say that babies are very good for the economy, I don't mean that they pop out of the womb and become instant doctors. No, babies are very needy, born naked, and need everything. That naturally stimulates the economy, far better than war can, without all the chaos and damage, because soon comes jobs manufacturing diapers, toys, more schools, more housing, roads, electricity power plants, attracting more science and innovation. Potent indirect effect.
pronatalist 3 years ago
Ok, you have mentioned that along with babies comes more housing, and that a baby is born naked and is needy, than what is the diffirence between a baby and a refugee who is just as needy? they both need n both don't have the capicity to earn the actual money, you have to keep in mind that you are going by a baby's need to consume, a grown man has greater need to consume.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
Oh, there's a huge difference between babies and refugees, for how babies are so wonderful for the economy, although yeah, there's some similarities.
Babies are much easier to welcome, because we don't have to provide any housing for them, right away. They will live with the family of the parents. Parents "sponsor" their babies. Babies automatically assimulate and speak the language. Babies are so cute and adorable. Babies ENLARGE the entire human race, without depop any regions.
pronatalist 3 years ago
To pronatalist
You'll find that immigration just doesn't happen because the country feels sorry for the immigrant wants to give them a better life just for the sake, you'll find in today's world the Goverment is reluctant to even spend money on their own people, i dont know any goverment that takes the approach "lets not spend money on our own people, but instead spend it on foreigners", this means they will lose the vote from majority of the country.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
Yes, I know a country feeling sorry for immigrants, isn't the only reason why they accept immigrants. One reason, as I posit as to why to encourage more people to not use any "birth control" at all, is that it's so much easier to just leave the door open to life, and not bother with locking or regulating it. If babies "happen," then maybe some level of immigration similarly happens? Do we want the immigrants to come? No, maybe, who cares? If no good reason for refusal, that =s Yes?
pronatalist 3 years ago
Im not sure what you exactly mean, if population growth doesn't occur than a nation will be 'overwhelmed', only 1.5% of australia's land is occupied by civilians, if 80% of the land was occupied we would be on par with USA, everytime you see builders building houses, they are employed because many immigrants come and build new living areas in new suberbs expanding it.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108
I mean it's not so good, to have "tiny" pop, in a world increasingly "bursting at the seams" with people most everywhere. There's a saying that nature abhors a vacuum. If some nation doesn't want to fill up their land more with people, maybe foreigners want to come more, and "help them out" with that? Sure, invite foreigners to come, but maybe, not one big rush, all at the same time?
USA is nowhere near close to 80% of land occupied. Most land is mostly empty
Expanding suburbs=jobs
pronatalist 3 years ago
See, this is how it works. You pay the robot money for driving you to a destination, what will the robot do with this money? buy food?
A cab driver earns the money, goes to the local grocery shop and buys daily living needs, the grocery store owner gets more business and his living standard increases, the cab driver pays tax and so does the grocery shop owner, tax is collected by Goverment who than spends it on fixing roads or building infrastructure or engange in bail out plans to save economy
rioo108 3 years ago
eg. Lets say a nation builds automated robots just because they dont like immigrants, to build robots would require diffirent mechanical parts being put together and they may need resources from China and Japan to build the robot, thus causing trade which enables immigration.
eg. USA didn't have the technology for neuclear weapon, Germany wanted to exterminate its jews thus Einstien ran from Germany to migrate in USA and thus gave USA the formulae for Neuclear weapon
rioo108 3 years ago
This "Rush of Immigrants" you talk about can also be healthy for an economy and its people. USA was originally occupied by Red Indians when a rush of British migrants came and occupied it, that big rush of migrants created a healthy and strong economy and made itself into the country called USA.
Eg. Japan produces brilliant scientists and USA says "Hey we need scientists, come work for us instead and in return we will pay you bigger amount of income"
rioo108 3 years ago
Yes, correct... expanding suberbs creates jobs for the economy and increases overall income for the nation, this can be done by immigration. However immigrants comming to the land doesn't stop one from choosing their way of lifestyle.. unless the immigrant conquers the land, in the case of USA the red Indians were not able to continue with their lifestyle as their land was conqured and they had to abide by new laws and new way of life.
rioo108 3 years ago
USA may have a problem with 'illegal immigrants', which is totally diffirent to legal immigrants, illegal immigrants means Goverment losing control of the growth of a nation, keeping in mind the 'illegal alien' doesn't pay tax either, this problem doesn't exist in Australia as we don't share borders with any other nation or continent like USA does with South America.
50% of Australia being immigrants means 50% more income for the nation.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
Government losing control of the growth of a nation? I don't believe government nor society has any right to "control" the natural growth of a nation. Human life is way too immensely valuable and sacred to be so "controlled." It should be natural flow, up to parents, or up to God ideally to determine.
So I oppose immigrant pop quotas. No, rejection of applicants should be for good quality-based reason.
Immigrants should not get gov welfare, but earn their own way, or have sponsor.
pronatalist 3 years ago
Perhaps your need for ideas like 'making babies, creating robots to drive cabs, or automated prescriptions doctors can use' may come from ur resistance to immigration and the scale it is taking place, perhaps you feel you cannot sustain your way of life or you may feel threatned by something? Fact still remains no one is stopping you from leading a lifestyle of your choice, if you have income to support the life style than by all means live the life.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
My resistance to immigration and the scale it is taking place? Huh? Are you talking to me? I much more accepting of apparent huge or growing need for immigration, than most conservatives who I otherwise tend to agree with on most issues.
I am for the natural flow of human life unhindered. However, in a now populous world adding another 4 or 5 births per second, 1 possible implication is growing migration flows of people. Maybe some region "overflows" with people or attracts people?
pronatalist 3 years ago
Take your nation USA for example.
It has a population of 200million+, a person starting up a business has a domestic customer base of 200million people, so he is likely to earn a huge amount, meaning he has to hire employee to a huge amount aswell, creater greater amount of jobs, the huge income that he earns means a huge amount of Tax for Goverment, the USA goverment can afford to have a bail out plan which is worth 800billion, however Australia can't afford that due to lack of population
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
I'm on dial-up, so it's difficult for me to post more than 4 comments per video at once.
The U.S. officially has just over 300 million people. But all these people aren't necessarily potential customers of a new LOCAL business. Especially if it isn't noticed or in a good location. Some business opportunities blossom, more workers are needed, workers spend money, more offspring jobs sprout up. Win-win for everybody.
Huge pops can absorb disasters assistance easier than small pops.
pronatalist 3 years ago
You perhaps have the idea that goverment brings in immigrants on a huge scale just to give them a good life? lol
Reality is, it raises the standard of living for the immigrant aswell as the country. Babies are a good idea,but what are you willing to tell the sick lady who is wating in line to be treated and cant because there is insufficient doctors?
Or a drinker who not only has to pay big amounts for the drink, as the person cleaning the glass wants high wage,he has to pay outragous cab fare
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
You say that allowing immigration, helps the nation, and the immigrants. That's yet another example of the many win-win mutual benefits of free trade. When government or greedy corporations don't gum up the works, in theory, a trade by mutual consent, is almost always mutually beneficial to both parties. I part with my money at a store for some item I want. Why was I willing to give up my money? Because I perceive the item greater value to me than the money. Store rather have the $s
pronatalist 3 years ago
To rioo108:
Here we are trying to solve the world's problems, don't you know, most people aren't going to listen anyway to yours and mine solutions, and yet you whine that I can't quite seem to guarantee, that the sick lady at the doctor's office won't face a ridiculously long line? What shall I do about it? We decide to be wise, turn more pronatalist hypothetically. "Unlimited" babies. Can we guarantee for sure, the world never grows too crowded? Take a chance. Who but God has all the answers?
pronatalist 3 years ago
To pronatalist.
If USA didn't have immigrants they would not have access to 800billion. Due to their population and the average person's ability to income, they have a huge earning base and their companies are thus powerful and influential and can spread their influence overseas for even greater income. Population is vital for growth and to keep up with world competition, babies are good and currently the Austalian goverment has put in incentives for producing more babies.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
$800 billion? That's obscene! I am against this corporate welfare "bailout" ripoff of the American taxpayer. Appears a huge enlargement of Big Brother government to me
However, a hugely populous country, is in a much better position to fund expensive endevors, say like expanding an outer space exploration program, than a tiny pop could. The costs tend to run up so high, that on a per person basis, only a very pop country could afford it. A reason why USA is big in space exploration
pronatalist 3 years ago
Weather you agree/support the bail out plan is a diffirent issue, Im talking about immigration and having a population of 300million, which enables a nation to have bail out plans of 800 billion USD.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
If we make better decisions, we find ourselves, or future generations, largely with more/better options. World turns wildly pronatalist, wave after wave of pop growth "consumes" the earth. Villages grow into towns, towns into cities, cities coelesce. Side effects from contraceptives drops to nearly zero, as in the future, who bothers to regulate birthrates? Every human greatly prized. Better working conditions.
Doctor shortage? Medical system is sick. Still some waiting lines?
pronatalist 3 years ago
An Aussie going down to the pub for a drink,if he doesn't want immigration to occur all he has to do is not catch a cab home,or pay outragous high price for a cab fare,problem is the general aussie wants to pay cheap price for the drink and for the cab,if these demands are not met he will vote for the other goverment? Will making babies solve the problem of insufficient cab drivers? Is there a gurantee that the baby will grow up with ambitions of wanting to become a cab driver?
rioo108 3 years ago
The rioo108
The main problem making babies immediately solves, is the altruistic notion that more and more people would be glad to live. That's why I am inclined to agree with commie chairman Mao, when he said that a large and growing pop would make China strong. Maybe, maybe not. Might make them more needy. But at least far more people could then experience life. That's a pretty good reason to let human numbers naturally accumulate and clutter up the landscape
Powers that be have more reasons
pronatalist 3 years ago
You may have an idea that immigrants are taking up jobs, but its due to the lack of jobs that immigrants are brought in. A lack of a doctor, or a cab driver.
An australian would refuse to pay $50 for travelling 5kms in a cab and an australian cab driver will demand $40 in wage for driving a cab, so very few rich would be able to afford cabs, but due to immigration nealy whole of Australia can afford cabs and uneployment still remains in record low's in Australia.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
A country does not "own" its people. The sovereignity of the individual should also be respected. If Nazi Germany becomes a menace to the world leading to WW2, they deserve the "brain drain" of their scientists fleeing the country. If a country fails to produce adequate jobs, they deserve their best and brightest leaving the country for better opportunity elsewhere.
Too much the balance has been pushed towards state and powerful corps, although in a pop world, duty to group too.
pronatalist 3 years ago
Immigration doesn't solve problems but it is vital to an economy's growth, without immigration a country's people would be sick from lack of doctors, poverty would rise due to unaffordability the people of the nation would suffer and this kind of situation creaters overthrowing of goverment or chaos, people have demand and its Goverment's responsibility to supply and reduce the gap between rich and poor to where everyone has the ability to afford goods/services.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
In a world populating itself more densely together, with countries more populating into each other, and people marrying and breeding across national lines, I see that as the better form of natural "globalism," that brings the world back together again.
But that makes the human race more "fluid," meaning as national boundaries fade, they can less and less "contain" the people away from where they want to go. Such fluidity should serve people, not serve to lower wages to lowest level
pronatalist 3 years ago
To rioo108:
Aren't you overrating immigration just a bit here? How exactly is immigration vital to an economy's growth, when God started the entire world with but just 2 people, and didn't add any more outside "immigrants?" Jesus technically wasn't completely an "outsider" due to the virgin birth, as Jesus was the "offspring" of Mary, but not of Joseph. So to Joseph, Jesus would have been more like an "adopted" son.
Immigration is needed, what if emmigration was allowed only? Nowhere to go!
pronatalist 3 years ago
I always thought Australia had their immigration situation under control. I had no idea that your government gave the country away to the third world. It is really sad to hear that. Hear in Canada our government is actually stripping all white people of their freedom of speech, as more and more people ae starting to express their views on how excessive immigration has destroyed our quality of life. Who eve thought the Canadian government would turn to communism to control the people?
Normalman50 3 years ago
To Normalman50:
Huh? Gave the country away to the third world? I must have missed that memo?
But actually, the thought had occurred to me, that with the beauty of a naturally blossoming world population, more and more people coming alive, and the size of the planet not growing at all, Australia seems a hugely underpopulated huge land mass that could help absorb quite much of third world ballooning populations. Although most people seem happy to multiply babies where they live already.
pronatalist 3 years ago
Hi pronatalist - I read your letter three times, but can't understand what you are trying to say. Maybe I'm getting to old to comprehend? Here in Canada the massive numbers of third world people entering the country has most of us in a state of shock, and our social systems are going bankrupt. Just the cost of supporting Jamaican welfare mamas and their fatherless children is enormous. I do not think Canada will ever recover from this terrible mistake.
Normalman50 3 years ago
Normalman50:
When I consider the powerful reproductive urges most people continually feel, plus the many compelling reasons why people have as many children as they do, I get a global goal and natural desire to ENLARGE the entire human race. For the greater good of the many.
Of course if more people were to have large families most everywhere, underpopulated places like Australia or Canada may look attractive destinations for human migration flows.
But immigrants should have $, or seek work
pronatalist 3 years ago
When you talk about welfare supporting immigrants you should think about this, for every immigrant on welfare there is another 10 immigrants who pay greater tax to the Goverment, the money thouse on welfare spend is for food n daily living needs, which means the tax eventually also returns to the goverment and more businessess like shops are opened to serve thouse on welfare meaning more employment.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108
Yes, I am quite willing to acknowledge the many contributions immigrants make to their new country of choice. And I believe more civilized people should be able to choose to change their country of residence, provided they reasonably respect various nations' sovereignity. That means no Mexican immigrants to the U.S., protesting flying Mexican flags. Better fly a U.S. flag, or none at all
As world pop naturally grows, there comes to be fewer places far from people. Let people migrate
pronatalist 3 years ago
Mexicans flying mexico flags in USA?? Keeping in mind, money used to buy a mexican flag in USA, there must be some portion of that which is collected as Tax by USA, rest assure that Tax dollor will be used by USA to fund a 'bail out plan' or fund new wars or increase protection for its citizens. The greater tax the Goverment receives.. it means a greater amount can be spent on its people.
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
Additional doctors will come from either, people changing professions, immigrants, or from babies growing up and becoming doctors. In a free society, it works out. Supply and demand can attract more doctors. Or people can choose healthier lifestyles, maybe more self-treat, or doctors can become computerized somehow
Immigrants shouldn't fly Mexican flags, because a world pop densifying, should promote social graces, and flying foreign flags is rude, disrespects national sovereignity
pronatalist 3 years ago
Well, lets go by the current year of 2008. A baby cannot solve the problem of skilled doctors if she/he is born in 2008. People changing profession just cannot happen by their desrire/wish, they have to be properly trained and qualified, training and qualification takes time. A sick person waiting in line at the hospital isin't going to wait for the baby to grow and become doctor, sick person cannot afford to wait for someone to change profession anytime soon either. You get what I mean
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
Human pop growth already contains within it, the seeds of its own accomodation. Yeah, a rapidly growing pop tends to develop a high dependency proportion, huge swollen youthful pop not yet ready to do much work. But in a free society, such "pressures" have a way of naturally working themselves out. If labor thus becomes scarce, then more machines are brought into the process to boost worker efficiency. Employers bid wages up, add perks to jobs, and workers feed needed and valued.
pronatalist 3 years ago
To pronatalist:
Labour becomming more scarce and being replaced by machines isn't even a solution?
Let me explain to you how this works, there is a shortage of doctors in a hospital, meaning there isin't enough doctors to treat all the patients and hospitals becomming over crowded. Saying that replacing the doctor with machines.. isin't a solution at all, replacing a cab driver with a machine isin't much of a solution either, permenantly replacing the labour with machines will mean no jobs?
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
Bringing in machines to assist us in doing our work, isn't an all-or-nothing proposition. If the doctor has the right tools, and machines do whatever he doesn't want to or have to do, then he can work more efficiently and see more patients. What if doctors computers with voice-recognition, to record and maintain all medical records. Doctor doesn't have to lift a pen to write. Computers can locate medical records, look up symptoms, diseases, help recommend prescriptions.
pronatalist 3 years ago
Yes, you can have 'automated voice recognition' machines that recoknize a doctor's voice, but there is no doctor to give a voice order in the first place, u get what i mean?
Eg. Going to an old lady and telling her that she cannot be treated as there is no doctors but however the good news is IF there were doctors she would be able to recive voice recoknized prescriptions? Voice recoknized prescriptions doesn't solve the issue of lack of doctors in a hospital?
rioo108 3 years ago
Australian goverment has a points system where by a Doctor has to show experience and qualification in their field of work, than they are let to live in Australia, what happnes then is the lines in the hospitals get smaller,people are treated, doctor gets income which he spends on his family and well being,unlike a baby's inability to produce income, a doctor has income which creaters greater income for economy and greater Tax revenue for Australian Goverment which they spend on fixing roads etc
rioo108 3 years ago
Regarding the mexicans flying mexican flags, studies have shown when migration occurs and as generations pass, the more the migrants lose their culture and their way of life and adapt to the new sorroundings. eg. Blacks of America spoke african tribal language when they were brought in as slaves but their decendents now speak english and their only affiliation with Africa is mearly genetic n now these blacks who wud have once flown the african flags are proudly flying the American flag
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
Unlike many conservatives, I wish not to deport "illegal" immigrants, and I don't mind that immigrants come, and that they have babies in their own country, and in my country, plus our people in my country also have babies.
People are not plants, and should be free to spread their growing populations to anywhere they think can hold more people.
World pop growth is a global phenonomen, not just of family or nation.
But immigrant "guests" have greater duty to be polite and fit in.
pronatalist 3 years ago
To pronatalist
An African runner representing USA in track n field means The runner has an income from running, also USA has a potential Gold Medalist who will add to their Medals tally, eg a Maurice Greene. If Maurice Greene was not allowed to run for USA and he instead ran for Japan, pretty soon Japan would lead the medals tally and USA would be completly out of the picture. You get what I mean?
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
Keep up with world competition. I wish more people were more on the right track like you. A world pop supposedly soaring somewhat "out of control," is all the more reason why we similarly should not "control" our rising #s either.
Pop phobics deliberately ignore the real factor of "pop competition?" Depop adenda isn't working in India, as groups don't want to be swamped politically by other growing groups. If we want to be world superpower, we should keep up with world pop growth.
pronatalist 3 years ago
Well what's the use of all the "environmental" garbage, baggage, fearmongering industry pushing junk-science as a means of fundraising, without increasing human population to have some reason for feigned "concern" for environment?
Yes, "the more the merrier." Many people rather like having possibly big families, so that all the more people may experience life. Many don't believe in polluting the body directly with contraceptive potions and poisons, contary to nature or "the way of things."
pronatalist 3 years ago
Yeah, it'd be good if the world had infinite supplies of food, water, air, shelter, land, etc. etc., wouldn't it!
Unfortunately, the reality is otherwise!
The looming food crisis is a sure warning sign can no longer afford to multiply like rabbits!!!
CanberraUser 3 years ago
To CanberraUser:
I heard somewhere that the so-called "scientists" did some experiment in which they put more and more apes into a confines, supplying them with "unlimited" food. They took to grooming one another and sought to avoid conflict. Whoops! Where's the propaganda value in that? Even dumb apes could ADAPT. Of course they likely "tainted" the experiment, the apes thinking humans expected them to get along. But then morality/God "taints" us to ADAPT similarly.
Food's growing "unlimited"
pronatalist 3 years ago
See, more immigrants means more people paying tax to the Australian goverment, tax which the goverment can use to fund its wars, or fund infrastructure.. like libraries or fix their roads and build new ones. If one wants to start a business n yet has to pay $100,000 per employee, the final product he sells to people would reach $120,000 to cover costs and make a profit. With immigration you can pay them $60,000 and still be able to sell the good to the aussie public for $80,000
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
Not just the economic benefits, but I like to see the population grow more by natural increase. Immigration involves welcoming other people, who sometimes are slow to properly assimulate or learn the language, while babies seem to do such things quite well. Immigration is also like a children's game of musical chairs or something, moving the people and chairs around, while natural increase helps ENLARGE the human race so more people can experience life
Babies R good for economy
pronatalist 3 years ago
To pronatalist:
immigration does involve assimulating into society, but the ones that don't are usually 'refugees', most immigrants from 3rd world countries come in via a 'point system' where they have to earn their experience and qualification and ones with the highest points are brought in to fill the skill shortage thats happening in australia.. so its anything but a game of 'musical chairs'.
eg. More doctors brought in means more people can be treated in hospital
rioo108 3 years ago
To rioo108:
I only ask that there be some reasonable quality standard for welcoming immigrants and refugees, not at all that there be any population quotas on immigration levels. Another advantage to baby-making, is that it effectively dillutes the influx of immigrants and refugees, making it easier for nations to absorb greater numbers.
I'm looking for proper attitude. Immigrants should have money already, or be willing to work for it, or have a sponsor. Help get them properly documented.
pronatalist 3 years ago
Yeh babies are good for the economy and its growth, but the problem is if Australia has a skill shortage in 2008 and they make babies, by the time the baby grows up to be properly skilled and qualified it will be 2030? n ther is no saying that the baby would necessaraly find work in the feld which has a skill shortage? meaning 'no doctors' to fill the over populated hospitals