Remember that time we had that years-long national conversation about immigration level to Australia, followed by a referendum, in which the native British people of Australia overwhelmingly voted to let in hundreds of thousands of people every year from every country on the planet?
What I do remember is someone warning back in the 1990’s that we were going to be swamped by Asians. Then she went to jail. Then we got swamped by Asians. Then she came back, and ordinary people seem to be talking about the fact that we have been swamped by Asians. Word is, the elites in Australia don’t care about ordinary people, they only care about power, and they will happily replace the entire population to keep it.
Crazy talk, I know.
Wait a minute…
From the Australian:
“Big business has joined forces with the ACTU in an unprecedented compact to back a Big Australia, calling on the federal government to maintain current levels of permanent migration amid calls for the rate to be cut.
“The historic coalition of peak unions, employer groups and the ethnic lobby will release a united policy document today warning of the economic and social consequences of dropping the annual migration rate.”
Can’t possibly let housing become more affordable. That would be an economic disaster.
“The first migration document of its kind in the nation’s history calls for the current goal of an annual intake of 190,000 to be retained, with long-term levels set proportionally to the population.”
What “proportionally” means is that the annual intake will increase.
“…But the unified stance is designed as a circuit-breaker to the increasingly heated immigration debate, which the signatories believe has become toxic, xenophobic and at risk of ignoring the economic benefits that underpin skilled migration.”
Here is some footage of skilled migrants enriching Melbourne.
And here is some footage of a man of skilled migrant background driving a car in Melbourne.
Ironically, the Australian union movement was founded on xenophobia.
Also, “xenophobia” is a word invented by Marxists to demonise the natural and healthy in-group preference that used to exist in European culture, and still exists in every other culture. In-group preference ensures the survival of a people, which is why Marxists are so keen to undermine it amongst Europeans. The unions are full of Marxists….
“The document, spearheaded by the Migration Council, signals the first time unions and employer groups have reached general agreement on temporary skilled migration but based on stricter policing of the program.
“Signatories to the compact — announced today in an advertisement in The Australian — include the Migration Council of Australia, the Australian Council of Social Service, the Federation of Ethnic Communities Councils of Australia, the Settlement Council of Australia and migration lobby group Welcome to Australia.
“It will also involve the Business Council of Australia in what the compact’s signatories claim is a “historic” agreement between business and the trade unions for the economic good of the country.”
The unholy union/big business collusion on Big Australia is now out in the open. The globalist powers of unions and corporations are in lockstep when it comes to demographic replacement – just as we’ve been aware of for a long time, but now it’s out in the normiesphere.
It’s no longer just the ethno-nationalists saying it. This article in Macrobusiness counters some of the arguments made on the fake right in favour of immigration. It references an article written by Robert Skidelsky, Professor Emeritus of Political Economy at Warwick University, explaining the link between continual immigration and wage depreciation:
“Standard economic theory tells us that net inward migration, like free trade, benefits the native population only after a lag. The argument here is that if you increase the quantity of labor, its price (wages) falls. This will increase profits. The increase in profits leads to more investment, which will increase demand for labor, thereby reversing the initial fall in wages. Immigration thus enables a larger population to enjoy the same standard of living as the smaller population did before – a clear improvement in total welfare.
“A recent study by Cambridge University economist Robert Rowthorn, however, has shown that this argument is full of holes. The so-called temporary effects in terms of displaced native workers and lower wages may last five or ten years, while the beneficial effects assume an absence of recession. And, even with no recession, if there is a continuing inflow of migrants, rather than a one-off increase in the size of the labor force, demand for labor may constantly lag behind growth in supply.”
Greg Sheridan, you are wrong.
One last snippet, from an empirical study by the Bank of England:
“Our results also reveal that the biggest impact of immigration on wages is within the semi/unskilled services occupational group… where a 10 percentage point rise in the proportion of immigrants is associated with a 2 percent reduction in pay.”
Didn’t we need infinity immigration because we need skilled migrants? Must be a lot of brain surgeons from Dhaka working at Maccas.