When people say, "If you don't like this country, get out," what do you think?

[Deactivated] on 16/11/2017 - 07:29

Hi.

So a discussion turned into something else yesterday at my workplace. Where a colleague come up with his observations on Australia immigration system though he also came here few years ago on a student visa, said govt still inviting skilled workers from overseas in hundreds of professions when there is hardly any shortage. He gave an example by quoting an accounting body's statement that says there is no shortage of accountanta but immigration dept. Thinks australia still need 2000-4000 accountants every year where as locals are loosing interest in this field and pverseas grads are not getting any work. So the other person, replied that it was your choice to come here if you dont like the things you can always move back.

Is it not ok to discuss or share your views about something you think is not right and needs change?

Education & Work

Comments

        • syousef on 18/11/2017 - 14:00

          @Frugal Rock:

          Do you honestly think the computer wouldn't have been invented by other people if these particular people hadn't lived or the world hadn't gone to war? At best you could argue it would have taken longer.

          The logic of your accusation of hypocrisy is absolutely circular and broken. No one can live a life where they only use tools that were built according to their own ethics. Therefore you state that anyone (including me) that does not allow bad people free reign that they may build machines is a hypocrite? You've pre-supposed your conclusion. You haven't considered the idea that machines can be built by people with decent ethics. And that building a society that allows evil filth to do their thing gets in the way of those decent people doing it instead.

          By the way, reciting excerpts of the history of IBM and the computer was much more impressive before you could Google it. Across the pond, Turing didn't fare so well either. But in that case his crime was being a decent guy and very gay.

          Holy crap this place is full of TROLLS!

        • syousef on 18/11/2017 - 14:01

          @luciferaust:

          You really can't tell the difference between inventing a machine with the sole purpose of killing people more quickly and efficiently, and the guy who's feeding people? If your moral compass is so completely broken you need much more than I can give you in a debate on a message board.

        • Other on 19/11/2017 - 18:21
          +2

          @syousef: Actually many inventions have come through the military - including the internet - decentralisation of network so that a nuclear strike could not disable the US response - which if worked, would result in millions killed in the counter response.

          Even inventions that are the sole purpose of killing people can be used for security and defence and even saving lives (police responding to terrorists before they detonate suicide vests, etc).

          I take a realistic view of the world. Things get invented that cause harm (like military lasers that blind solders)- so we as a international community take steps to reduce harm (ban on them). You cannot stop people inventing stuff, so my focus would be to reduce the harm as much as possible…. I guess my moral compass is off.

        • syousef on 19/11/2017 - 19:27

          @luciferaust:

          Many inventions have come through the military and through war.

          That doesn't mean they couldn't have been invented otherwise or that war is required for invention.

          The irony of you calling my views unrealistic is just mind blowing.

        • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2017 - 12:44
          +1

          @syousef:

          There is a yawning chasm between thinking something and understanding it. A wise person will know something, understand how knowledge is constructed and have the intellectual nous and inquisitive nature to ask why. The ignoramus will invent or adopt a falsehood from a personally biased misunderstanding, they then form a flawed construction that reinforces and amplifies the initial error, and they will never seek a basis of true understanding due to their ego and raw hubris.

          The term 'free rein' is a good example of eggcorn imbecility. An ignoramus will invent the fictional term 'free reign' and incorporate it into their lexicon to pretentiously elevate their social standing. They will then create a false construction that it derives from empirical or royal 'reign', rather than the simple horse 'reins' that even medieval peasants were all too aware of. The obvious was sitting right there in front of them all along, but they were blinded by their own ignorance and logically corrupted by ostentation.

          The ignoramus doesn't have the intelligent curiosity to understand why things are the way they are, instead they mire themself in a self-satisfied feedback cycle of inward facing, self-perpetuating ignorance, fortifying falsehood. There is no chance for intelligent truth to prevail, because insight is never sought by them. They could have unfettered access to a limitless infobahn, yet they still would not know because they simply refuse to see beyond their own reflection.

        • syousef on 21/11/2017 - 15:20

          @Frugal Rock:

          That has got to be the most long winded poorly worded insult I've read in some time.

          And what does "free reign" have to do with the price of fish exactly?

          I didn't miss the self aggrandizement either.

          You presented a very shaky description of historical facts which you may or may not have googled. Either way, my point is that impresses no one these days. The information is a short search away. Reading some books, watching the History channel, even doing some classes on warfare doesn't make you right. You haven't refuted anything and you've missed the point of all those popularisations. War can speed up tech development because people are highly motivated to find new, more efficient, sneaky and destructive ways of not just killing but wiping out the enemy. That doesn't mean those changes can't come a little slower during peace time. The Germans produced the V2. It took peacetime USA (Vietnam conflict not withstanding) to get to the moon.

        • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2017 - 15:32
          +2

          @syousef:
          "That has got to be the most long winded poorly insult I've read in some time."

          Love your work.

        • syousef on 21/11/2017 - 15:33

          @Frugal Rock:

          Fixed it for you. Happy? Some of us have other things to do with our life than repeatedly proof read replies to drivel.

        • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2017 - 15:39
          +1

          @syousef:
          People who can't handle the basics of a primary school education can't be trusted with higher abstract thought. Learn to walk before you can run. You have demonstrated a preparedness to construct a fantasy around a clear fault, an inability to recognise it, and no interest in learning scientific methods for removing clouded conscious and unconscious bias from your decision-making. Enshrining yourself is the opposite of clear thinking. It exacerbates mistakes.

        • syousef on 21/11/2017 - 15:45

          @Frugal Rock:

          People who can't understand the difference between a primary school education and missing a word due to typing out a sentence too quickly shouldn't open their mouths lest they remove any doubt regarding how foolish they are.

          You've presented no proof that my point of view is a fantasy. None. Just insults.

          As for "enshrining yourself" please show me where you've taken onboard anything said that opposes your own point of view. Blatant hypocrisy.

          Rambling sentences full of large uncommon words clumsily cobbled together don't make you wise. This is a mode of thinking that you should have outgrown in your own education, sometime during your adolescence, but clearly haven't. The aim when using any set of words in a discussion - whether specialist in nature or general - is clarity. Your butchery of the English language does the exact opposite. In other words your ability to use a word or turn of phrase, doesn't mean that you should.

          People talk such utter and complete garbage and expect it to stand unchallenged. Mind boggling.

        • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2017 - 15:46
          +1

          @syousef:
          "Therefore you state that anyone (including me) that does not allow bad people free reign that they may build machines is a hypocrite?"

          You're welcome, Boggles.

        • syousef on 21/11/2017 - 15:48

          @Frugal Rock:

          Welcome for what? Fixating on and taking a single phrase I've written days ago out of context? That's just pathetic.

          "Free reign" in that context means not putting people in prison for war crimes.

        • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2017 - 15:51
          +1

          @syousef:
          Better organise a coronation!

        • syousef on 21/11/2017 - 15:55

          @Frugal Rock:

          Oh now I see. 'rein' instead of 'reign'. So the irony here is you're a grammar Nazi. Well then clearly you're too clever for me and a mistake like that totally invalidates everything I've said. Beyond pathetic. But thanks anyway for correcting me. A common error I can eliminate from my writing is a welcome thing. I've written several thousand replies here. Would you mind proof-reading them all for me?

          Unfortunately I have neither the time nor inclination to do the same for your prose.

        • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2017 - 15:58
          +1

          @syousef:
          Is it as ironic as rain on your wedding day?

        • syousef on 21/11/2017 - 15:59

          @Frugal Rock:

          Actually I'm told that's just unfortunate. I'd like to see "eggcorn" used in a song though, so I'd encourage you to write one.

        • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2017 - 16:11

          @syousef:
          The 'rain' part was ironic.

          My malappropriate song would be: "Ain't know mondegreen hi enough" or "Hugh let the dogberryisms out."

        • syousef on 21/11/2017 - 16:56

          @Frugal Rock:

          Doberry was my favourite character.

          Though you haven't read MacBeth until you've read it in a class where they mixed the best kids with the troublemakers as an experiment. MacDuff was MacDuck, and MacBeth was Big Mac and the teacher allowed this.

      • MrTweek on 17/11/2017 - 14:39
        +2

        Then again Hitler wasn't even German.
        This always goes both ways, so not really a valid point.

        You always get good AND bad people. And you always have good AND bad locals.

    • Cusack on 17/11/2017 - 15:52

      Brilliant

    • Quantumcat on 16/11/2017 - 08:15
      +64

      Or on the flipside, maybe they should complain about the government. They have had first-hand experience of other governments and can make a comparison.

      • myusername on 16/11/2017 - 09:05
        +6

        great reply

      • HighAndDry on 16/11/2017 - 09:50
        +33

        As an immigrant then, let me say this: People in this country complain too much and have no idea how good they have it.

        • loropy9 on 16/11/2017 - 09:56
          -1

          You must be a white immigrant from the UK then…

        • HighAndDry on 16/11/2017 - 10:46
          +4

          @angre:

          Bzzzt wrong. Try again.

        • Munki on 16/11/2017 - 16:35
          +7

          This is a great country, yes, but there are plenty of things that need fixing. The only way things will get fixed is by identifying the issues and creating dialogue. Burying your head in the sand and telling people if they don't like it they should leave is ignorant - granted the complaints are valid.

        • HighAndDry on 16/11/2017 - 16:38
          +2

          @Munki: Can I just point out that people are using the word "ignorant" like people use words like "racist" and "sexist" these days?

          "Ignorant" means to "not know something".

          What ignorance is being shown by someone saying "If you don't like you, get out"? To me, that just means "I don't agree that that's a problem, quit complaining so much."

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 16/11/2017 - 16:47
          +3

          @angre: Do you have a problem with white people from the UK pal?

        • Munki on 16/11/2017 - 16:48
          +4

          @0blivion: Because they're attempting to shutdown any dialogue that could come from that complaint. I'm not saying all complaints warrant further discussion, but there are benefits to them that could assist with improving this country. It does start with identifying and addressing issues the people of Australia may have. By not engaging in discussions and simply telling people to leave if they didn't like it is ignorant. I mean, if you didn't want to engage, why bother responding? Edit: the you isn't directed at you specifically, but the person in OP's scenario who said to leave if they didn't like it.

          There are a few definitions of ignorant, and lacking knowledge is only one of them.

        • HighAndDry on 16/11/2017 - 16:50

          @Munki:

          Because they're attempting to shutdown any dialogue that could come from that complaint.

          I think you misunderstand how dialogue works.

          1. Short of someone literally muzzling you, you're still free to reply or say whatever you want. It also doesn't prevent others from replying.

          2. Nothing entitles you to have others listen to you. If someone wanted to, they can not say anything, and still just ignore you.

          People act like speech has so much power - really, speech has very little power in and of itself. You don't like what they say? Ignore it. Likewise, I'd give them the same advice if I were talking to them.

        • Munki on 16/11/2017 - 17:23
          +3

          @0blivion: I know exactly how dialogue works. You seem to be misunderstanding what I'm saying.

          If the person has no desire to participate in dialogue, then they could simply ignore it. Telling someone to leave if they do not like it adds nothing to the discussion and only stunts any further dialogue.

        • TheRealCher on 16/11/2017 - 19:17

          @GetOffMyUnicorn: two thirds of the world after colonisation: um…

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 16/11/2017 - 19:18
          +2

          @TheRealCher: Throughout history many nations have been the 'superpower' of the world. History is so interesting.

          I'm reading about the Barbary slave trade at the moment, I had no idea that so many white people were taken as slaves and tortured. I suppose 'it takes 2 to tango'

        • MITM on 16/11/2017 - 20:34

          @GetOffMyUnicorn: if I’m white then Scandinavians must be anemic.
          I prefer to be called “beigesian” which better describes my skin colour and geographic roots. Or perhaps I’m an Oceanic. Better still, I’m Aussie.
          Identifying people as Black or White is so wrong.

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 16/11/2017 - 20:38
          +3

          @MITM: I have white skin and call myself white. In fact I'm very proud to be white. My best mate classes himself as brown and he's very proud to be brown.
          I also don't tend to tell people what they can and can't say.

        • smuggler on 16/11/2017 - 20:52

          What the hell do you know about how 'good' people have it in this country?

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 16/11/2017 - 20:58
          +2

          @smuggler: Because they reside here? Just a stab in the dark mate.

        • ChubbyMastiff on 17/11/2017 - 09:53

          @0blivion: white immigrant from China?

        • GregRust on 17/11/2017 - 10:17

          @angre:

          I am and I agree with the sentiment.

        • [Deactivated] on 17/11/2017 - 20:45

          @ChubbyMastiff: The Chinese are white, whiter than white people especially the gals, love the chicks.

        • shadowangel on 19/11/2017 - 08:01

          An immigrant has just as much right to be here then us that where born here. The amount of raciest comments my partner gets for being Asian is unreal.

        • syousef on 21/11/2017 - 15:36

          @0blivion:

          Outer space? Somewhere they don't understand the first law of thermodynamics?

      • Other on 17/11/2017 - 21:02
        +1

        Perhaps they should understand that Australians want a high bar process, and its a deliberate policy that the majority agree with.

    • MrTweek on 16/11/2017 - 18:20
      -2

      Foreigners can't vote, yet are subject to the outcome of it.
      I'd say they have even more reason to complain about a government than someone who can vote and has at least a theoretical way of changing things.

  • TheBilly on 16/11/2017 - 08:13
    +16

    Most people Ive met with those opinions cant actually handle it when you give it back to them. I.e. an anglo saxon Australian I know loves making these kinds of remarks but in a much more crude manner but jokingly, I then purposely make racists remarks back jokingly, he gets all hot and bothered and angry when I do. I do it to test a persons integrity - 90% of them are hypocritical.

    • mmd on 16/11/2017 - 09:44
      +1

      So true!

    • HighAndDry on 16/11/2017 - 09:50
      +3

      Maybe because the statement "if you don't like it get out" isn't racist, but you immediately infer racism and respond with explicitly racist comments back?

      • TheBilly on 16/11/2017 - 10:12
        +4

        Maybe your making very specific assumptions off my very vague statement.

        • HighAndDry on 16/11/2017 - 10:44
          +10

          I then purposely make racists remarks back

          This wasn't vague at all.

        • [Deactivated] on 16/11/2017 - 12:10
          -2

          I want to test those self-assessed comeback skills! I told the funniest joke once. Had people in absolute stitches. I started well, like a boss really, powered through the middle section with the audience in a mesmerised trance and then when I delivered the knockout punchline there were peristaltic snot bubbles for minutes. People couldn't even tell whose belonged to whom, but the petty details didn't matter. I absolutely heart macro.

          "You're" is the correct contraction for "you are" and taught to children. Insert your comeback to me highlighting your intellectual deficiency below, and make it extra witty!

        • TheBilly on 16/11/2017 - 12:24
          +1

          @0blivion:

          You must've been there, how do you know he said EXACTLY this?

          "Maybe because the statement "if you don't like it get out" isn't racist".

          It's a simple concept … If you put your opinions out in public. You are fair game to be scrutinised and responded too. If you're so concerned about how the responses are going to make you feel, keep it to yourself to begin with and don't take the risk. It's not hard to grasp this.

        • HighAndDry on 16/11/2017 - 12:26

          @TheBilly:

          Because the title of this thread says ""If you don't like this country, get out,"" I mean, if you're talking about something else, maybe you're in the wrong thread.

          I also can't actually make sense of the rest of your comment.

        • TheBilly on 16/11/2017 - 12:26
          +4

          @Frugal Rock:

          "your" a penis … he he he

        • TheBilly on 16/11/2017 - 12:27

          @0blivion:

          Oh so your responding to the thread in general and not my original comment …

        • HighAndDry on 16/11/2017 - 12:27

          @TheBilly:

          I figured your original comment had something to do with the thread in general.

        • TheBilly on 16/11/2017 - 12:29
          +1

          @0blivion:

          You figured wrong.

          My comment was specifically this;

          "I.e. an Anglo Saxon Australian I know loves making these kinds of remarks but in a much more crude manner but jokingly"

          Try not to confuse yourself by drawing similarities all over the place.

        • HighAndDry on 16/11/2017 - 12:31
          +1

          @TheBilly:

          these kinds of remarks

          So which one is it? The remarks like in the title of this thread, or different remarks?

        • TheBilly on 16/11/2017 - 12:32

          @0blivion:

          Well that's why I said in my first response to you, "Maybe your making very specific assumptions off my very vague statement" … It's undefined.

        • [Deactivated] on 16/11/2017 - 12:45

          @TheBilly:
          It's really interesting that Australia's greatest intolerance is not racism or homophobia, it's the tall poppy syndrome against the intelligence emburdened, like 'someone I know'. Very, very well. So much hatred against the smart. I, I mean the person I know, tries to closet my, I mean their genius, but sometimes it's just hard. For that other person who is not me. Some basic won't understand a multisyllabic word I, sorry, they say and then, bam, I'm, no, scratch that, they are exposed as different. The bigoted basics need to learn more tolerance of those gifted in the brains department, and that starts with a good attitude.

        • TheBilly on 16/11/2017 - 12:59

          @Frugal Rock:

          "The bigoted basics need to learn more tolerance of those gifted in the brains department, and that starts with a good attitude."

          I'd have to agree with you here.

        • [Deactivated] on 16/11/2017 - 13:05

          @TheBilly:
          There's a 12 step Basics Ubiquitous program I can divert you to. Don't worry, I'll draw picture directions. Two steps are admitting you have a problem and apologising to me, I mean all the smart people you have wronged or thought nasty, resentful and jealous things about, and/or those who found your simpleton thinking annoying.

        • TheBilly on 16/11/2017 - 13:35
          +1

          @Frugal Rock:

          A 12 step process to effectively just apologies, I was starting to think "your" an intelligent person Frugal Rock, however intelligent people relay messages/ideas/instructions effectively and efficiently. Only a spastic would go about something so simple in such an convoluted and elongated fashion. Contrary to your written text, please convince me "your" not a spastic frugal rock, that would be devastating to me, I was actually going to apologise as well, after I started perceive how intelligent you were.

        • [Deactivated] on 16/11/2017 - 13:41
          +2

          @TheBilly:
          Convince you? Haven't you heard? I'm the originator of the mnemonic for 'an':

          "not before c"

          It's part of a set. (You sounded dead posh, though!)

          I accept your 'apologise, apologies, apalojies oh fudge it, whatever, sorry things' in advance.

        • TheBilly on 16/11/2017 - 13:52

          @Frugal Rock:

          All "your" doing is convincing me you can only focus on one thing at a time, that being grammar and/or spelling mistakes. This isn't a reflection of intelligence, I'm sorry. More like a mental disability. Yes, I'd say you probably are. It's ok though, I'd give you a hug if I met you. Be on your merry way now Frugal Rock.

          Hey, look, I even apologised.

        • [Deactivated] on 16/11/2017 - 14:01
          +1

          @TheBilly:
          I feel like Louis Theroux on a weird weekend in Basicsville shaking the hand of a grand dragon of an illiteracy cult.

          "OK. Nice to meet you, TheBilly. Thank you."

        • boo hoo on 17/11/2017 - 09:57

          Hi FR ,
          whats the joke….need to clear my nose.

        • [Deactivated] on 17/11/2017 - 10:56
          -1

          @boo hoo:
          No joke. Count your pencils.

        • boo hoo on 17/11/2017 - 10:58

          @Frugal Rock:
          I have 12 1/2 pencils various colours.

          please tell us this ripping yarn.

        • [Deactivated] on 17/11/2017 - 11:09
          +1

          @boo hoo:
          You'll notice, as with the earlier commenter's recollection of rip-snorting comebacks, it's all about the metadata. The quantitative guffaw spectral analysis. Raconteuring about raconteuring. The anecdotal Fourier transform. In this case, the scene was a shimmering melange of stringy, non-Newtonian dilatant green, slayed people in the aisles and split sides. You had to be there.

        • boo hoo on 17/11/2017 - 11:28

          @Frugal Rock:
          thought as much,,,wish I could time travel.

        • [Deactivated] on 17/11/2017 - 11:30

          @boo hoo:
          The left say they can see the moral future. Their crayon/papyrus quantitative mechanics equations are iffy, at best, though.

          Keep practising those tricky ellipses. Keep up the thinking resolution. It gets easier. Make thinking a habit!

        • iDroid on 17/11/2017 - 12:32

          @Frugal Rock:

          “Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.”

          ― Ernest Hemingway, The Garden of Eden

        • iDroid on 17/11/2017 - 12:35
          +1

          @Frugal Rock: I'm actually more concerned about how entitled, selfish and inconsiderate our society has become.

          I'm not referring to the typical "Oh gen Y are so entitled", I mean everyone (young and old) seems to be entitled, selfish and inconsiderate now.

          I'm not religious, but it seems that since religion has vanished from our society (which I think is a good thing) that now we have nothing to pass on the message to be considerate to others (but not a good thing) - in fact it seems like everything left is about pushing your self forward at any expense.

        • [Deactivated] on 17/11/2017 - 12:52

          @iDroid:
          See, I like you already. There's a condescending, self-enlightenment by proxy tone, but under the circumstances, it's warranted. You're not preachy, can deal in abstraction and you can separate ego from intelligence. If I told you that I get happiness via stratification, am I happy?

        • iDroid on 17/11/2017 - 13:47

          @Frugal Rock: I'm not sure. Happiness is hard to measure or quantify. I think that stratification gives one an elevated feeling of worth (societal) and we all get some form of enjoyment from that. If other's are worse off than we are (position/wealth/etc) then we're in an elevated position. Will that make me a happier person? Unlikely.

          Happiness? How can we really define if someone is happy - it's such a relative thing.

          The things that make me feel happy are feeling like I'm contributing, feeling valued by my peers, doing activities that give me excitement, building/making things that give me a sense of achievement, seeing my children grow and develop.

          My position in the wealth/status ladder? Naa, that's too superficial and doesn't give me any real lasting joy - other than something to boast about or have others be envious of.

      • TheRealCher on 16/11/2017 - 19:19

        Its presence amongst so many who are often of the racist persuasion can lead one to smell and see a duck that instead is just a quacker

      • syousef on 17/11/2017 - 13:07

        Of course "if you don't like it get out" is racist. You can't tell where someone was born by the colour of their skin or ethnic features.

  • Nugs on 16/11/2017 - 08:19
    +7

    "like it or leave" is pretty much the same sentiment as "like it or lump it".

    if you don't like something be it country/job/sportsclub/relationship, then I see it that you have a few 'basic' choices; leave being one, changing things is another that is often overlooked. but always remember, why did you immigrate/join/date in the first place. Just because you have tried something and realise it's not what you thought, or you no longer like it then don't expect others to also want the same changes.

    just my 2c.

    • TheBilly on 16/11/2017 - 09:58
      +4

      The term like it or leave, is relative though. Thats what the people who regularly use it, fail to understand. An example; I love Australia, I voted 'no' the result was 'yes' and I dont like it. Does that now mean I leave? Up root my life, sell everything I own and move to Saudi Arabia because one thing didnt happen how I want it.

      Like it or leave is such a stupid statement in any form no matter what the intention or scenario is. It was a statement made by and made for "simple minded" retards that can only compute two scenarios in their minds only and not actually determine or figure out that there are more than 2 factors that contribute to decision making.

      • Euphemistic on 16/11/2017 - 10:29
        +4

        The term like it or leave, is relative though. Thats what the people who regularly use it, fail to understand. An example; I love Australia, I voted 'no' the result was 'yes' and I dont like it. Does that now mean I leave? Up root my life, sell everything I own and move to Saudi Arabia because one thing didnt happen how I want it.

        But it still holds true. If you really don't like it, you have the option to leave. If there are other benefits that outweigh the negatives, you'll probably end up staying. You can't really apply 'love it or leave' to one particular aspect (like a yes/no vote). You need to look at the whole picture. On relationships, you either love (warts and all) or leave. It's a fairly simple concept.

        There's a reason the numbers of people entering Canada fro mthe US increased after Trump was elected.

        • TheBilly on 16/11/2017 - 12:31
          +1

          Exactly, those people probably weighed up everything in their life. Factored in multiple variables and the decision to leave far out weighed the decision to stay, so they moved to Canada. The statement, "if you don't like it, ;eave" is used in singularity. Nobody ever says, "If you don't like this, and the many other things that may affect your life, you should collectively assess this and make the decision to leave" … hence, simple minded retards.

        • Kangal on 17/11/2017 - 17:18
          +1

          @TheBilly:

          I think 90% of commenters are wrong in this thread, simply because:
          "love it or leave" is not practically possible.

          Back a hundred years ago, immigrating between borders/countries was a standard fare.
          And if you roll back another 200 years, we didn't have any (unnatural) borders at all.
          People used to flock from one city to another, depending on harvest and war.
          Now you can't do that. Not freely anyway.

          Practically all countries have the Passport and Citizenship System.
          The governments have the ability to control who moves in to their borders.
          So essentially you are "stuck" in the country of citizenship, unless you obtain the "right" to be a resident in another.
          Sure, its easy enough for someone from Australia to obtain permission to New Zealand, however, the majority of cases/combinations, it is not.

          A counter-argument to these would be the Syrian Refugee crisis.
          There's figures such as ~1 Million have migrated to Europe, and another ~5 Million have migrated to other nations.
          Well, the truth is there's a much greater number of refugees, close to ~15 Million who have tried to migrate but were not successful. And those who were successful in illegally migrating, haven't "really moved" since they cannot work legally, get a drivers license, rent a home, go to the hospital, or send their kids to school, etc etc. They basically enter the poverty line, and are at the mercy/hospitality of the government of the country in which they snuck into. They never know which day/week could be their last in that country, should someone report-deport them.

          To make matters even worse, in China you have to live in a City you were born/registered in.
          You're allowed to be a tourist to other cities in China, but you cannot move.
          Again, you have to make a formal application and get approval to move to another city in your same country.
          The government uses mandate this to keep the poor village population in the smaller cities, so that the major cities are not bogged down by an unsustainable population boom.

  • JimmyF on 16/11/2017 - 09:03
    +12

    So the other person, replied that it was your choice to come here if you dont like the things you can always move back.

    They have chosen to move here if they are not happy with the place/laws/conditions. They do have a choice in where they can live.

    Unlike the 'locals' who are born here. We're stuck.

    I do find it funny, that people want to change our conditions to meet their home countries when they left their home country for a better one.

    Its also funny that certain countries have no flexibility in rules and thats ok, but when Australia try to flex a rule, people are up in arms.

    • BuyoTheCat on 16/11/2017 - 13:31
      +5

      Yup. They move to a new place and they try to make the new place into the place where they came from.
      Make the most of a fresh start.

      • JimmyF on 16/11/2017 - 22:06
        +2

        or they fleed to a new place and they try to make the new place into the place where they came from…. Ummm why? You didn't want to stay there in the first place!

    • freakatronic on 16/11/2017 - 14:00
      +3

      "I just got here and now things had better start suiting my preferences!"

      • iDroid on 17/11/2017 - 12:47
        +1

        Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

        The number of days/weeks/years you've been here has no barring on the value of one's opinion. That's just an elitist ideology.

        • freakatronic on 17/11/2017 - 15:39

          …except if the opinion belongs to an aboriginal.

    • MrTweek on 16/11/2017 - 22:58
      +5

      No matter where you live and how you live, there will always be things you love and things you hate.
      And that's why it's pretty stupid to say "if you don't like it, leave" to someone who says anything negative about your country.

      Pretty unlikely that one of the only 200 countries in the world is 100% to your personal taste and has absolutely no single negative thing.

      They do have a choice in where they can live.
      Unlike the 'locals' who are born here. We're stuck.

      Rubbish. It's a lot easier for Australians to move somewhere else than for the majority of the world population.

      • JimmyF on 17/11/2017 - 13:56
        +1

        Rubbish. It's a lot easier for Australians to move somewhere else than for the majority of the world population.

        Really? As a 30 something year old, tell me how easy it is for me to move to the USA or the UK then or Germany or Sweeden?

        NZ is the only choice we have straight up.

        Pretty unlikely that one of the only 200 countries in the world is 100% to your personal taste and has absolutely no single negative thing.

        I'm pretty happy with Australia how it WAS, no changes needed.

        • MrTweek on 17/11/2017 - 14:28
          +7

          Really? As a 30 something year old, tell me how easy it is for me to move to the USA or the UK then or Germany or Sweeden?

          How easy do you think it is for someone from the USA or the UK, or Germany or Sweden to move somewhere else?
          And how easy do you think it is for someone from China, India, Somalia or Kenya?

          The rules are the same for everyone in the world, but here's a list of things that can make it easier:
          * Speaking a widely understood language.
          * Passport from a first world country
          * Having a couple of $1000 to spare.
          * Good education and some valuable skills or a degree from a reputable university.

          Every Aussie has 1 & 2 automatically.
          3 isn't really a big hurdle if you have a job in Australia.
          4 is the only thing you'd need to put some effort it.

          Guess how hard achieving any of these is for someone from rural Turkey/Nigeria/India/China/Bolivia?

          That's why it's a hell lot easier for you.

          Yes, there are still many hurdles, but they are the same for everyone. Almost all migrants (or their parents) to Australia went through this.

        • JimmyF on 17/11/2017 - 16:49

          @MrTweek:

          The rules are the same for everyone in the world, but here's a list of things that can make it easier:

          You clearly have no idea how hard it is to get a greencard then and you failed to answer the question, as those 'things' won't get your in to the countries I listed.

        • MrTweek on 17/11/2017 - 20:22
          +1

          You clearly have no idea how hard it is to get a greencard then

          That's true, I don't much about that. But I'm pretty sure it is that hard for everyone, not only for Australians.

          you failed to answer the question, as those 'things' won't get your in to the countries I listed

          I didn't this will get you in, I said it makes it easier.
          Let me explain this in more detail:

          • Speaking a widely understood language.

          Being able to speak English is a requirement to get into the UK or USA. It will also make it possible (although not super easy) to find work in Germany or Sweden.
          Migrants from a non-English speaking country need to pass an English exam to be allowed to live in Australia and it's not even an easy one. This means they have to study English for at least a couple of years to get fluent enough to pass.

          1-0 for Australia.

          • Passport from a first world country

          An Australian (or any first world) passport let's you travel to the USA, UK, Germany AND Sweden on a tourist visa. So you could just go there, explore some options, learn about the culture, even attend job interviews. For some countries you could even get a working holiday visa and actually get local work experience with very little paperwork.
          This is quite hard and expensive if you are from a country like China or India. In third world countries, if you are not upper class, you'll find it close to impossible to even get a tourist visa for anywhere.

          2-0 for Australia.

          • Having a couple of $1000 to spare.

          Well, migrating costs money (visas, flights, accommodation, surviving until you find a job).
          Australia has the highest minimum wage in the world. In a country where every legal full time job makes you more than $2500 after tax per month, most people are able to save up few grand within a couple of months time. Heck, even on the dole this is probably achievable in a year or two if you really want to.
          How long do you reckon this takes if you income is $500 a month? How long if it's $100?

          3-0 for Australia.

          • Good education and some valuable skills or a degree from a reputable university.

          This one is actually a bit more even, as university degrees here are super expensive. Still not unachievable though, but I admit that this is possible in many countries. Let's call it a draw.
          4-1 for Australia.

          Maybe you just underestimate how hard it is to get to Australia for most people ;)

          The processes are in fact kinda similar in most of the world. If you are young, healthy and have some money and a degree in Engineering or IT or something like that, most countries in the world will welcome you with open arms.
          The older you are, the less professional skills you have, the harder it is.

  • myusername on 16/11/2017 - 09:04
    +8

    people who make these sort of remarks are totally un-australian.

    we live in a multicultural society, our country was conquered by the original boat people.

    previously i would become extremely aggressive or pissed off towards people whom make these remarks, but now i only feel sadness and sympathy for such uneducated bigoted people.

    i am not right or left, i am a human being simple as that.

    we all breathe the same air.

    this is 2017 move forward or be left in the past with your medieval views

    • HighAndDry on 16/11/2017 - 10:42
      +1

      we live in a multicultural society, our country was conquered by the original boat people.

      You might have to refresh your history. This country was first colonized by people sent here against their will. Y'know, convicts?

      • myusername on 16/11/2017 - 10:57
        +1

        colonized yeah but really they took what wasn't theirs so i refer to the term conquered

        • HighAndDry on 16/11/2017 - 11:01
          +2

          What did you expect them to do - swim into the harbour and tread water?

    • [Deactivated] on 16/11/2017 - 23:06

      Why are the views medieval. Australia wasn't even colonised then. You talk about education, so where is there any evidence of this term being said during medieval times, even in medieval Europe? I think that education of yours is severely lacking in the history department and your sadness is self-loathing. There is plenty of evidence of neanderthal/homo sapiens interbreeding and coexisting. Does that make inclusion neanderthal thinking? You are just attempting to smear with anachronistic twaddle.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join