The totally off-topic thread

[Walter_Plinge]

Mmm. I have found that young people are much more polite to me than men in their mid sixties - present company excepted of course. .

When I catch the bus into Melbourne if there are no seats a young Chinese man or woman often offers his or her seat to me. Same on the tram in the city. Same in Taiwan and Hong Kong.

Non-Chinese, however, don't seem to give a toss (not that I'm decrepit and need a seat) but letting an 8 year old take up a disabled or older person's seat is indicative of bad upbringing and worse manners.

 

[medhead]

It isn't relevant to the original comment which was basically that Europe and Australia should not take any Syrian refugees.
And while it is true that the refugee convention doesn't provide a right for asylum seekers to choose their ultimate country of resettlement, it doesn't force them to stop at any particular point either.
In any event, where should they stop?
In Jordan or Lebanon or Turkey which are overrun and where conditions are intolerable and unsafe?
On the first tiny Greek island they encounter, which can't possibly accomodate them?
In Hungary which doesn't want them?
It's all very well to criticise them for wanting to go to Germany but Hungary has only allowed them into their country because they will continue on through Austria and Germany will accept them.
If I was fleeing a brutal, savage civil war and inhumane conditions in refugee camps and desperately seeking safety for my children I wouldn't stop until I actually felt safe.
It would be hypocritical of me to expect them to do otherwise.

Interestingly I love strong black coffee and dark chocolate, though I prefer wine to beer.
Research which asks stupid questions often finds stupid answers.

which raises an interesting point - Germany has agreed to accept the Syrians. None of those other countries in between have agreed to accept them. How does stopping in a country that hasn't agreed to accept you sit with the UNHCR.

Here are some perfectly acceptable destinations. Saudi Arabia, China, Japan.

See what I did there? Not good is it?

Right so Christians from Syria should go to Saudi Arabia?
In fact, there are 3 main factions of Islam. In fighting between those factions creates many of the current problems. So people who aren't part of the dominate Saudi faction should go to Saudi Arabia? Interesting view. Perhaps you should give a lecture series on geopolitics.

 

[whatmeworry]

Saudi Arabia hasn't accepted one refugee. They have 3 million air-conditioned tents free for 11 months of the year. Saudi's have no problem accepting Catholic Filipino maids.

 

[OATEK]

which raises an interesting point - Germany has agreed to accept the Syrians. <SNIP>

My understanding is that Germany has agreed to settle some of those who have entered their borders from Syria (and several other countries in the recent wave of arrivals), but is trying to push other EU states to take a share. Last I heard they were trying to keep the German share below about 15% of those who have arrived. Perhaps I haven't kept up to date on this, now that it is not getting any real headlines.

 

[esseeeayeenn]

Saudi Arabia hasn't accepted one refugee. They have 3 million air-conditioned tents free for 11 months of the year. Saudi's have no problem accepting Catholic Filipino maids.

I absolutely agree that is appalling. Same with the UAE, Bahrain, Qatar and Kuwait.
However, even if Saudi welcomed them, i wouldn't send my worst enemy there.

 

[whatmeworry]

When I catch the bus into Melbourne if there are no seats a young Chinese man or woman often offers his or her seat to me. Same on the tram in the city. Same in Taiwan and Hong Kong.

Non-Chinese, however, don't seem to give a toss (not that I'm decrepit and need a seat) but letting an 8 year old take up a disabled or older person's seat is indicative of bad upbringing and worse manners.

My mother also says people of an Subcontinent, African and Asian background will move for her on a bus and they also help her get up.

 

[JohnK]

Actually I have no idea what you did there as those three have nothing in common.
China and Japan are inaccessible from Syria so they're irrelevant as transit countries.
Although they might - and should - take some by way of resettlement.
If they don't then that will be lamentable - but no reason for us to copy them.
As for Saudi Arabia, I wouldn't send my worst enemy to live there.
They're as bad as Daesh but with international recognition and western support.

Those 3 nations are 3 of the richest nations on earth yet do nothing for refugees. And we say it is OK.

Refugees go where they are wanted and accepted not where they want to go. Demand for housing and money is a joke. There are others on the queue that should be accommodated first. And what about local homeless? No one is giving them anything for free.

And if we don't agree on a certain matter it doesn't make me wrong. I do not believe that stretching countries like Germany to the limit with refugees is a good thing. If Germany collapses then Europe collapses.

I also don't believe we should become poorer by taking on more refugees/migrants than we can afford to take on. I have worked my @rse off and I am tired. I am struggling to help myself. I am a selfish cough.

 

[medhead]

Saudi Arabia hasn't accepted one refugee. They have 3 million air-conditioned tents free for 11 months of the year. Saudi's have no problem accepting Catholic Filipino maids.

I don't know, do catholic filipino maids have a good life in Saudi? Or are they treated as sub-human possessions?

My understanding is that Germany has agreed to settle some of those who have entered their borders from Syria (and several other countries in the recent wave of arrivals), but is trying to push other EU states to take a share. Last I heard they were trying to keep the German share below about 15% of those who have arrived. Perhaps I haven't kept up to date on this, now that it is not getting any real headlines.

Still if we go back to the post that castigated refugees for daring to demand housing, a criticism that was general in nature, should those 15% that have been accepted be asked to sleep rough?

 

[RAM]

Actually I have no idea what you did there as those three have nothing in common.
China and Japan are inaccessible from Syria so they're irrelevant as transit countries.
Although they might - and should - take some by way of resettlement.
If they don't then that will be lamentable - but no reason for us to copy them.
As for Saudi Arabia, I wouldn't send my worst enemy to live there.
They're as bad as Daesh but with international recognition and western support.

Well not true. The bulk of refugees (Syrian et al) arriving at Lesbos have transited from Turkey. Just as many Afghani and Iraqi boat people previously transited Turkey to fly to Malaysia, Indonesia or Singapore - this time around the Syrians could have chosen to fly to the 3 above named countries.

For some reason they did not?

What I find interesting is what Angela Merkel really said vs what's being reported by some sections of the media.

She did not say that Germany would re-settle hundreds of thousands of refugees in Germany - only that that could be housed in Germany while awaiting being sent to OTHER countries SOMEWHERE ELSE.

From the UNHCR 2014 Resettlement Report - Germany only started accepting refugees in 2014 FOR THE FIRST TIME.

"The number of regular resettlement States has grown to twenty-seven since June 2012, as Belgium and Switzerland announced the establishment of formal resettlement programmes. Germany, Hungary and Spain received the first arrivals under their recently established regular resettlement programmes. Meanwhile Japan has announced the shift from a pilot to a full-fledged resettlement programme as of March 2015, and Australia temporarily doubled the number of resettlement places offered for the period July 2012 to June 2013. A number of countries have also provided resettlement places on an ad hoc basis."

South America is hardly contributing either:

"In Latin America, more than 150 refugees were resettled since 2012 to Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Uruguay under the Solidarity Resettlement Programme"

If you look at Australia's intake vs the rest of the world - we are punching more than 80 times above our per capita weight! BTW - that was before the 12,000 extras were announced.

"Including the Syrian refugees, it is estimated that more than 950,000 refugees globally are in need of resettlement. Yet, at present, approximately 80,000 regular places are made available on an annual basis, and 21 countries have offered places towards meeting the goal of providing resettlement or other forms of admission to 30,000 Syrian refugees by the end of 2014."

 

[esseeeayeenn]

Those 3 nations are 3 of the richest nations on earth yet do nothing for refugees. And we say it is OK.

Refugees go where they are wanted and accepted not where they want to go. Demand for housing and money is a joke. There are others on the queue that should be accommodated first. And what about local homeless? No one is giving them anything for free.

And if we don't agree on a certain matter it doesn't make me wrong. I do not believe that stretching countries like Germany to the limit with refugees is a good thing. If Germany collapses then Europe collapses.

I also don't believe we should become poorer by taking on more refugees/migrants than we can afford to take on. I have worked my @rse off and I am tired. I am struggling to help myself. I am a selfish cough.

I never said anything that Saudi, China or Japan has done is okay. That's just a straw man.
Your assertion that accepting refugees would make us poorer is also factuallly incorrect.
The Vietnamese refugees we accepted in the 1970s and 1980s have been of immense economic , social and cultural benefit to Australia.

 

[medhead]

Those 3 nations are 3 of the richest nations on earth yet do nothing for refugees. And we say it is OK.

Refugees go where they are wanted and accepted not where they want to go. Demand for housing and money is a joke. There are others on the queue that should be accommodated first. And what about local homeless? No one is giving them anything for free.

And if we don't agree on a certain matter it doesn't make me wrong. I do not believe that stretching countries like Germany to the limit with refugees is a good thing. If Germany collapses then Europe collapses.

I also don't believe we should become poorer by taking on more refugees/migrants than we can afford to take on. I have worked my @rse off and I am tired. I am struggling to help myself. I am a selfish cough.

It's being wrong that makes you wrong.

No one here has claimed those countries are doing a good job. In fact, you seem to be the only person who is suggesting such an idea.

Homeless people do get something.

As outlined refugees have been accepted, is it a joke that they don't want to sleep in the street?

There IS NO QUEUE! Stop spreading this lie.

Anything to back up your opinion that germany is being stretched to the point of collapse. You know, those pesky things called actual facts.

Immigration makes a massive boost to the economy of a country. Australia benefited massive from the post war immigration from southern european countries. Thank you to your family for coming here to help us. There was also the same xenophobic rantings going on about this post war immigration. There were even riots and assaults and battles in the street. (funny how the last mob of immigrants are the ones who want to slam the door behind them.

Here is a brief summary of the benefits of immigration. I can't be bothered finding the full page spread from the last few weeks that was in the Weekend Australian or somewhere like that, no point providing facts to a fact free zone. Immigrants and the economy are inextricably linked in the story of Australia

 

[medhead]

I never said anything that Saudi, China or Japan has done is okay. That's just a straw man.
Your assertion that accepting refugees would make us poorer is also factuallly incorrect.
The Vietnamese refugees we accepted in the 1970s and 1980s have been of immense economic , social and cultural benefit to Australia.

not just Vietnamese. All migrant intakes going back to the 1800s.

 

[esseeeayeenn]

not just Vietnamese. All migrant intakes going back to the 1800s.

Yes but I deliberately restricted my example to refugees.

 

[Flashback]

not just Vietnamese. All migrant intakes going back to the 1800s.

Irish/England convicts? :mrgreen:

 

[RAM]

Those 3 nations are 3 of the richest nations on earth yet do nothing for refugees. And we say it is OK.

Refugees go where they are wanted and accepted not where they want to go. Demand for housing and money is a joke. There are others on the queue that should be accommodated first. And what about local homeless? No one is giving them anything for free.

And if we don't agree on a certain matter it doesn't make me wrong. I do not believe that stretching countries like Germany to the limit with refugees is a good thing. If Germany collapses then Europe collapses.

I also don't believe we should become poorer by taking on more refugees/migrants than we can afford to take on. I have worked my @rse off and I am tired. I am struggling to help myself. I am a selfish cough.

## Here is the UNHCR description of what Germany was offering in 2013/2014 - not resettlement but the equivalent of Australia's temporary protection visas - they get sent back to Syria when judged safe NOT become German citizens. I wonder what the refugees will say about this when they find out?

"Germany and Austria have committed places for humanitarian admission (5,000 and 500 respectively) – whereas a number of other countries have come forward with offers of resettlement places."

"At the end of the two week period, the refugees will leave for locations across Germany. They will live in small centres or apartments and will have full access to medical, educational and other social services. During their stay, the refugees will have the right to work.
Under Germany’s Humanitarian Assistance Programme, announced in March, the refugees will be issued with a permit to stay for two years, with the option to extend if the situation in Syria remains unchanged."

##The UNHCR say refugees SHOULD go where they are offered a place and NOT refuse resettlement. Trouble is in all regions nearly 95% refuse unless they get the country of their choosing.

For some reason (perhaps due to so few European countries resettling UNHCR refugees) the report did not provide the break-up for refugee resettlement from European registration.

Refugees:
Registered in Asia (but from anywhere in the world such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Colombia etc:

• Submissions by refugees were made to 18 different resettlement countries with the main five countries of resettlement being: the USA 74%, Australia 16%, Canada 4%, New Zealand 2% and Sweden 1%. Less than 3% for the then other countries offering resettlement. (47% of total world resettlements were from Asia)

Registered in Africa

• Submissions were made to 15 resettlement countries. The USA 70%, Canada 12%, Australia 6%, Sweden 3% and Norway 3%. Less than 6% for the rest of world countries.

Summary of major trends

Submissions: In 2013, UNHCR submitted 93,226 refugees for resettlement

Resettlement: The three major countries of resettlement were: the United States of America (47,875 persons departed), Australia (11,117) and Canada (5140). These figures include non-UNHCR registered refugees that UNHCR facilitated transfer to UNHCR resettlement countries.



[h=3]UNHCR Projected Global Resettlement Needs 2015[/h]www.unhcr.org/543408...


United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees


Jun 2, 2014 - UNHCR.resettlement.submissions.and.departures.2013-2014. ..... Protracted Refugee Situations Where Resettlement Takes Place 2011-2013 .

 

[medhead]

Irish/England convicts? :mrgreen:

Pretty much, yes

 

[RAM]

2014 was a shocker with all of the European Union taking fewer UNHCR resettlements than Australia. Germany provided the equivalent of protection visas for all but a few % - just a few dozen resettled.

Australia took about 3 times as many for resettlement as all of the European Union as a whole in 2014.

On a per capita basis - Australia resettled 63 fold what the EU did.

Strange that fact has not been reported anywhere?

Resettlement Fact Sheet 2014



Time to do what I was supposed to do this afternoon...

 

[JohnK]

I never said anything that Saudi, China or Japan has done is okay. That's just a straw man.
Your assertion that accepting refugees would make us poorer is also factuallly incorrect.
The Vietnamese refugees we accepted in the 1970s and 1980s have been of immense economic , social and cultural benefit to Australia.

Yes they have. And they have also taken over the drug, gambling and prostitution trade sharing (or is that waring) with another group of refugees from the 1970s and 1980s.

Go and see the money that is laundered through the Leagues clubs and casinos.

And by the way I don't appreciate living a street away from where an execution takes place. With my luck I could be an innocent bystander.

If we turn a blind eye to it then we will be OK. And if it wasn't them it would be someone else?

 

[esseeeayeenn]

Spend a day in any criminal court in any city in Australia.
That will disabuse you of any notion that crime is somehow the province of any particular ethnic group.

 

[penegal]

Spend a day in any criminal court in any city in Australia.
That will disabuse you of any notion that crime is somehow the province of any particular ethnic group.

Spend a day in a magistrates court in any city in Australia, and the frequency of some of the offences and penalties will surprise you.