+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    6,095
    Thanks
    395
    Thanked
    738
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts

    Default Stop the Boats - Radical idea

    Edit - based on responses received, this is an unfeasible plan.

    It would fail due to:
    * administration costs,
    * public sentiment and likely persecution and maltreatment, and
    * violation of international human rights.

    Sorry for being naive.



    I decided to do a bit of poking around about political parties today, and noticed a lot have agendas to reduce assylum seekers by making things harder for them.

    I've been thinking about this for awhile, and I've come up with a radical solution that I believe would have a good chance of reducing the number of assylum seekers arriving on our shores in unsafe vessels.

    Make it easier for them to migrate here.

    My solution is simple - subject to a criminal history check, and complying with the mandatory requirement to take out medical insurance, anyone can get a "potential migrant visa category A" (a new class of visa that I just invented).

    This visa gives the individual the right to enter and work in Australia for three months. During that time they will not be eligible for any benefits, nor tax free threshold, and will be subject to a stringent 60% tax rate.

    After two months, they can apply for an extension of their visa for a second three month period, but to do so need to prove how they have supported themselves, or prove how they have been supported by another individual (likely a family member or partner).

    After five months, they can then apply to be upraded to "potential migrant visa category B" which will last a further six months. Again they have to prove their method of support during their first two three-month category A visa periods. As a holder of a category B visa, they only have to pay the highest standard tax rate (currently 45%) but still have no tax free threshold.

    They can apply for two extensions to a category B visa - bringing them up to the two year mark. At which point they can apply for an upgrade to a category C visa - which will last twelve months. With a category C visa, they are entitled to a tax free threshold and pay normal tax rates. At this point they would be eligible for the same benefits as a migrant from New Zealand (which includes Medicare, Family Payment, public schooling, etc, but not Newstart).

    After two renewals of the category C visa (so the five year mark) they become eligible to apply for citizenship. If they have no major health concerns and can prove self-support, then this will be granted at this time. If not granted, then they will be issued a permanent resident visa for a period of five years instead.

    After a further five years (so the ten year mark), then an application of citizenship will be approved automatically.

    Note: all the above is assuming continual residence in Australia for the majority of the above periods. I would suggest that up to six weeks per year (but no more than three months in one block) could be spent in another country, to still be classed as continual residence in Australia.

    -----------

    Surely such a legal path, even though rather difficult, would be much preferable to the dangerous "people smuggler" option. And having to suffer through a prohibitive 60% tax rate for the first six months, and 45% tax rate for the next 18 months, really should limit the numbers of people wishing to undergo the ordeal.
    Last edited by sweetseven; 30-08-2013 at 18:34.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    6,095
    Thanks
    395
    Thanked
    738
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Disclaimer - I am not a politician, nor do I have any special knowledge about immigration affairs. I have just been thinking about the issue for awhile and just came up with a solution today.

    I would welcome comments from people, both positive and negative. I am of the opinion this could be a viable solution and of great benefit to the country because it would encourage productive people.
    Last edited by sweetseven; 30-08-2013 at 18:35.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    181
    Thanks
    25
    Thanked
    100
    Reviews
    0
    How do you propose they get to Australia? Many of them don't have passports and certainly could not afford to fly.

    "anyone can get a "potential migrant visa category A" "

    If anything that is going to encourage more and more people seeking asylum to jump on a rickety boat to try and get here.
    Last edited by unsullied; 30-08-2013 at 16:22.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    6,095
    Thanks
    395
    Thanked
    738
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Well, I thought if they could afford to pay people smugglers, then they could afford to fly.

    But your point about lack of passports is valid. If they are fleeing a dangerous political situation, they likely wont have the option of getting passports. The logical solution there would be for them to apply from the mass overseas refuge camps that we've heard about, but likely once they reach them they wouldn't have the money for airfares or private health insurance.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,800
    Thanks
    7,289
    Thanked
    9,726
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    So... They have to come here and work, pay 60% tax...And are entitled to no benefits... while I see where youre coming from it's pretty impractical and IMO unreasonable to expect possibly traumatised people who may not even speak english to be able to get suitable work and then live in poverty with no assistance. Just a thought.

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Atropos For This Useful Post:

    BlissedOut (30-08-2013),Busy-Bee (30-08-2013),Starfish30 (30-08-2013),sweetseven (30-08-2013)

  7. #6
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    6,095
    Thanks
    395
    Thanked
    738
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    The idea is that if they can handle the short term hardship, then they are proving they are productive members of society, and entitled to full rights after that point. After the two year mark, things get much easier, and after the 5-10 year mark they get citizenship and consequently full rights.

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,118
    Thanks
    69
    Thanked
    663
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    A lot of them wouldn't speak English, a lot of them would only be able to get minimum wage jobs and paying 60% tax out of minimum wage would have them living on the streets with nothing. If they can endure the short term hardship? Do you realise what some of these people have been through? Seriously? You go and work MINIMUM WAGE with 60% tax and tell me how you can afford to live because I seriously doubt you'd be able to do it. And just so you understand that's $249 a week after tax.
    Last edited by Renesme; 30-08-2013 at 16:50.

  9. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Renesme For This Useful Post:

    Atropos (30-08-2013),JungleMum (30-08-2013),sweetseven (30-08-2013)

  10. #8
    Busy-Bee's Avatar
    Busy-Bee is offline Offending people since before Del :D
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    11,208
    Thanks
    3,685
    Thanked
    4,755
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by sweetseven View Post
    The idea is that if they can handle the short term hardship, then they are proving they are productive members of society, and entitled to full rights after that point. After the two year mark, things get much easier, and after the 5-10 year mark they get citizenship and consequently full rights.
    I think most of them would be endured quite enough hardship before they get here. If they can't speak English they are not likely to get a job that pays enough that they can lose 60% of it and still not live in dire poverty (and possibly support a family).

    How about we just process people faster and then provide them with work permits, access to English classes and other training that will make the transition into Australian society easier.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Busy-Bee For This Useful Post:

    Atropos (30-08-2013),sweetseven (30-08-2013)

  12. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,800
    Thanks
    7,289
    Thanked
    9,726
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by sweetseven View Post
    The idea is that if they can handle the short term hardship, then they are proving they are productive members of society, and entitled to full rights after that point. After the two year mark, things get much easier, and after the 5-10 year mark they get citizenship and consequently full rights.
    You'd be setting them up to fail. They would have to get jobs that didn't require them to speak, severely limiting them in what they could even do. And lets not forget, such jobs are usually very low paid- which you then want to tax at 60%- so you'd be forcing them to live well below the poverty line to somehow "prove" that they have endured enough hardship to be worthy of living here. You're effectively saying that a person exercising their legal right to seek asylum should be punished, treated as a second class citizen- for YEARS- before enjoying full human rights that you and I enjoy through no more than the happy accident of being born here. Sorry, I see way too many problems with your "solution"

  13. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Atropos For This Useful Post:

    Benji (30-08-2013),JungleMum (30-08-2013),sweetseven (30-08-2013)

  14. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,800
    Thanks
    7,289
    Thanked
    9,726
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Renesme View Post
    A lot of them wouldn't speak English, a lot of them would only be able to get minimum wage jobs and paying 60% tax out of minimum wage would have them living on the streets with nothing. If they can endure the short term hardship? Do you realise what some of these people have been through? Seriously? You go and work MINIMUM WAGE with 60% tax and tell me how you can afford to live because I seriously doubt you'd be able to do it. And just so you understand that's $249 a week after tax.
    $249 a week is less than half what I pay in rent a week.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Atropos For This Useful Post:

    sweetseven (30-08-2013)


 

Similar Threads

  1. Refugee Boats
    By babycake in forum General Chat
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-06-2013, 15:54
  2. Navy would have role in turning asylum boats around under LNP.
    By Busy-Bee in forum General Election Discussion
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 05-02-2013, 20:11

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

FEATURED SUPPORTER
Impressionable KidsImpressionable Kids are Australia's leader in framed children's memorabilia and specialise in framed baby hand and feet ...
FORUMS - chatting now ...
How to feel less stressed and actually enjoy parentingGeneral Parenting Tips, Advice & Chat
Ttc 2021Conception & Fertility General Chat
Birth Support Person GiftGeneral Parenting Tips, Advice & Chat
Alcohol and caffeine?Pregnancy & Birth General Chat
Strassman MetroplastyConception & Fertility General Chat

ADVERTISEMENT