Australia Catches Another Boatload Of Asylum Seekers Off Its Coast

[Colin Yai]

*Deleted quote edited out*

As for multiculturalism - well there is a big island a bit to the south of you. It is called Australia. Multiculturalism has worked pretty well there over the past 60 years or so. But seeing you are a paid up member of the tin-foil hat brigade where your day isn't complete without a good conspiracy theory, I guess we will have to disagree on that one.

Rather funny and ironic that you are slavishly holding onto the legal wording of your visa. But given that legal wording is what you find acceptable to rely on - from governments no less - lets look at what the Australian governments legal obligations are in this case:

Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, as amended by its 1967 Protocol (the Refugee Convention), a refugee is a person who is outside their own country and is unable or unwilling to return due to a well-founded fear of being persecuted because of their:

• race
  
• religion
  
• nationality
  
• membership of a particular social group or
  
• political opinion.
  

Refugee Convention, Australia has agreed to ensure that people who meet the United Nations definition of refugee are not sent back to a country where their life or freedom would be threatened. This is known as the principle of non-refoulement.

Australia also has obligations not to return people who face a real risk of violation of certain human rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention Against Torture and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.These obligations also apply to people who have not been found to be refugees.

In addition, while asylum seekers and refugees are in Australian territory (or otherwise subject to Australian law), the Australian Government has obligations under various international treaties to ensure that their human rights are respected and protected. These treaties include the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention Against Torture and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. These rights include the right not to be arbitrarily detained.

http://www.hreoc.gov...um_seekers.html

No doubt, you will have issues with this.

Any chance of producing a link which states multiculturalism has been a success over the last night 10 years in relation to Muslims which are predominately the % of "Asylum seekers" thanks in advance for complying with my request

[samran]

*Deleted quote edited out*

As for multiculturalism - well there is a big island a bit to the south of you. It is called Australia. Multiculturalism has worked pretty well there over the past 60 years or so. But seeing you are a paid up member of the tin-foil hat brigade where your day isn't complete without a good conspiracy theory, I guess we will have to disagree on that one.

Rather funny and ironic that you are slavishly holding onto the legal wording of your visa. But given that legal wording is what you find acceptable to rely on - from governments no less - lets look at what the Australian governments legal obligations are in this case:

Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, as amended by its 1967 Protocol (the Refugee Convention), a refugee is a person who is outside their own country and is unable or unwilling to return due to a well-founded fear of being persecuted because of their:

• race
  
• religion
  
• nationality
  
• membership of a particular social group or
  
• political opinion.
  

Refugee Convention, Australia has agreed to ensure that people who meet the United Nations definition of refugee are not sent back to a country where their life or freedom would be threatened. This is known as the principle of non-refoulement.

Australia also has obligations not to return people who face a real risk of violation of certain human rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention Against Torture and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.These obligations also apply to people who have not been found to be refugees.

In addition, while asylum seekers and refugees are in Australian territory (or otherwise subject to Australian law), the Australian Government has obligations under various international treaties to ensure that their human rights are respected and protected. These treaties include the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention Against Torture and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. These rights include the right not to be arbitrarily detained.

http://www.hreoc.gov...um_seekers.html

No doubt, you will have issues with this.

Any chance of producing a link which states multiculturalism has been a success over the last night 10 years in relation to Muslims which are predominately the % of "Asylum seekers" thanks in advance for complying with my request

You seem to be a bright chap with plenty of time on your hands. Knock yourself out.

[samran]

You don't really believe they flock to OZZ to work do you? ,in the UK its called DHSS in OZZ its known as "Centerlink"

Some food for thought.

“A regional community in New South Wales has learnt that a group of Afghan asylum seekers have contributed more than $2 million to the local economy in just over a year.”

http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/stories/s795214.htm

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/11/14/1068674382734.html?from=storyrhs

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Opinion/Refugees-a-wasted-resource/2005/04/19/1113854197734.html

http://www.eurekastreet.com.au/articles/0207browne.html

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2004/s1027998.htm

Bags to pack.

[samran]

Ahh yes claiming the old "Fifth Amendment " AGAIN I see

Not really, I am a product of it. I live it. So does my family. Perhaps you like to blame all your problems in life on immigrants. I don't.

[Scott]

This topic is about asylum seekers and Australia. It is not about multiculturalism.

Further attempts to derail the topic will result in formal warnings.

Please stick to the parameters of the thread.

[simple1]

Colin et al here are some URLs for some facts and figures. As you will see the refugees / asylum seekers coming to Australia are insignificant compared to other much poorer (Islamic) countries. The cost to the Australian government is currently around A$800 million a year.

http://www.heraldsun...w-1226053645343

To put it in perspective, Labor government gave away A$40 billion to Centrelink recipients in their first year of office Let's see your more enlightened response or are you going to just continue the anti Muslim stance

Global refugee statistics – 43.7 million people now displaced worldwide - Pakistan, Iran, and Syria have the largest refugee populations at 1.9 million, 1.1 million and 1 million, respectively.

http://www.guardian....tics-unhcr-data

Australian asylum and refugee statistics

http://www.refugeeco...sylum/stats.php

Refugees in Malaysia

http://www.unhcr.org.../49e4884c6.html

Refugees in Indonesia

http://www.thejakart...-refugees-unhcr

Edited June 17, 2012 by simple1

[softgeorge]

You blokes sure have a love for the ominous turn of phrase! Bullet in the head (thanks for that Chooka - it was rolled gold that one) and 'check mate'.

As someone who works in oil and gas, I've been called a few things, but raving lefty is a new one. Had a great chuckle at that. Might print it out and stick it up in the pool room.

Colin - given my suggestion at watching that SBS doco has been pooh poohed, it isn't going to do me much use in giving you other sources of info is it?

Anyhoo, I must be off. Jumping on a 20hr flight to Texas in a little bit. Amongst other things while there, having dinner with one of the Bush clan, you know THOSE Bush's, a political family hardly known for their lefty views.

While I am away I'm sure you fellas will keep the home fire's burning, keeping Australian shores safe from the marauding hordes from the North.

Raving lefty - funny.

As a caring considerate American who believes that Australia should open up it's borders to all the refuge of the world, could you possibly take a couple of boatloads home to your family in the U.S to care for, you could build a couple of extra rooms on your house and get 3 or 4 families in. Maybe you don't want them in your backyard either.

[samran]

You blokes sure have a love for the ominous turn of phrase! Bullet in the head (thanks for that Chooka - it was rolled gold that one) and 'check mate'.

As someone who works in oil and gas, I've been called a few things, but raving lefty is a new one. Had a great chuckle at that. Might print it out and stick it up in the pool room.

Colin - given my suggestion at watching that SBS doco has been pooh poohed, it isn't going to do me much use in giving you other sources of info is it?

Anyhoo, I must be off. Jumping on a 20hr flight to Texas in a little bit. Amongst other things while there, having dinner with one of the Bush clan, you know THOSE Bush's, a political family hardly known for their lefty views.

While I am away I'm sure you fellas will keep the home fire's burning, keeping Australian shores safe from the marauding hordes from the North.

Raving lefty - funny.

As a caring considerate American who believes that Australia should open up it's borders to all the refuge of the world, could you possibly take a couple of boatloads home to your family in the U.S to care for, you could build a couple of extra rooms on your house and get 3 or 4 families in. Maybe you don't want them in your backyard either.

I'm Australian. Not a yank. And yes, my family has been taking peope in for years.

[simple1]

Colin et al here are some URLs for some facts and figures. As you will see the refugees / asylum seekers coming to Australia are insignificant compared to other much poorer (Islamic) countries. The cost to the Australian government is currently around A$800 million a year.

http://www.heraldsun...w-1226053645343

To put it in perspective, Labor government gave away A$40 billion to Centrelink recipients in their first year of office Let's see your more enlightened response or are you going to just continue the anti Muslim stance

Global refugee statistics – 43.7 million people now displaced worldwide - Pakistan, Iran, and Syria have the largest refugee populations at 1.9 million, 1.1 million and 1 million, respectively.

http://www.guardian....tics-unhcr-data

Australian asylum and refugee statistics

http://www.refugeeco...sylum/stats.php

Refugees in Malaysia

http://www.unhcr.org.../49e4884c6.html

Refugees in Indonesia

http://www.thejakart...-refugees-unhcr

40 billion to centrelink receipients which comprise of old age pensioners, medical pensions, homeless people, Family support payments, baby bonus and asylum seeking parasites. As the boats continue to arrive these centrelink payments will increase along with other welfare payments.

No, the A$40 billion I provided as an cost comparison was spent/wasted as two payments for Centrelink recipients against the backdrop of the GFC. However, there are currently 7 million Australians receiving some form of Centrelink payments. But never mind you are firmed fixed in your attitude so no matter what people say to balance opinions you're not interested. If you are interested the detail on total Centrelink payments go to:

http://www.centreblog.com.au/2012/04/05/centrelink-payment-data/

[Scott]

Baiting and off-topic posts have been removed.

[koheesti]

I guess if you say "I am not an immigrant" enough times, then you can make yourself believe anything. Lordy knows you'd want to classed the same as the hoarding masses that you so like to vilify.

One follows the rules and pays his own way, while the other breaks the rules and wants taxpayers to pay their way for them. Ask the Bush clan you will dine with which one they think is preferred.

[koheesti]

As a caring considerate American who believes that Australia should open up it's borders to all the refuge of the world, could you possibly take a couple of boatloads home to your family in the U.S to care for, you could build a couple of extra rooms on your house and get 3 or 4 families in. Maybe you don't want them in your backyard either.

I'm Australian. Not a yank. And yes, my family has been taking peope in for years.

By any chance these people your family has been taking in for years - did you have any idea who they were first? Or did you just accept anyone into your home who claimed to be a refugee without any documentation?

[samran]

As a caring considerate American who believes that Australia should open up it's borders to all the refuge of the world, could you possibly take a couple of boatloads home to your family in the U.S to care for, you could build a couple of extra rooms on your house and get 3 or 4 families in. Maybe you don't want them in your backyard either.

I'm Australian. Not a yank. And yes, my family has been taking peope in for years.

By any chance these people your family has been taking in for years - did you have any idea who they were first? Or did you just accept anyone into your home who claimed to be a refugee without any documentation?

such a profound analogy you draw there. Did you think that up all by yourself?

[simple1]

As a caring considerate American who believes that Australia should open up it's borders to all the refuge of the world, could you possibly take a couple of boatloads home to your family in the U.S to care for, you could build a couple of extra rooms on your house and get 3 or 4 families in. Maybe you don't want them in your backyard either.

I'm Australian. Not a yank. And yes, my family has been taking peope in for years.

By any chance these people your family has been taking in for years - did you have any idea who they were first? Or did you just accept anyone into your home who claimed to be a refugee without any documentation?

The circumstance that you refer to does not exist in Australia. All refugees/asylum seekers are detained and vetted prior to being permitted entry into Australian society i.e. his home

[thaibeachlovers]

As you know Australia is a signatory to the UN Conventions covering asylum seekers and refugees, as such it is obligated to assess and process people arriving by boat no matter the circumstances. As you know the vast majority of so called illegals actually arrive by air, not by sea. If Australian citizens do not like the current situation, he only option is to lobby their MP's and good luck with that. Every thing else is a waste of breath.

It is completely inappropriate to riot and destroy infrastructure in the detention centres. On the other side of the coin some have been waiting years in detention for their application process to be completed so you can understand the frustration. Perhaps there should be a change in the legislation that anyone arriving in Australia without identity papers be returned to their port of departure. Again there would real difficulties for say the Indonesians to accept these people back into their country. Really never ending merry go round

While it is indeed an obligation to asses and process people arriving illegally, it should not be an obligation to allow them access to taxpayer funded benefits. So what if they are held for years, if they are genuine refugees thay are safe and in no danger of being killed till the situation in their own country improves and they can go home.

Incidentally, other than wringing of do gooder hands, the Bangladeshis returning refugee boats to Burma has not raised anything like the uproar that would ensue should Oz return the boats to Indonesia!

[ripstanley]

What is new about this news story. Before 2007 very few. Since labor government HEAPS Wake up Australia

[Scott]

Neither Burma nor Bangladesh are signatories to the UN Conventions on Refugees. Indonesia is also not a signatory. If Indonesia was a signatory, it would be in a bit of a pickle, since it would be considered the Country of First Asylum and would be obligated to screen them.

[thaibeachlovers]

You don't really believe they flock to OZZ to work do you? ,in the UK its called DHSS in OZZ its known as "Centerlink"

You seem to believe that they are destinted to be dole bludging islamites out to convert a nation while at the same time not fitting in. All hard to acheive if you are a social outcast with limted means I would have thought.

My experience of people who escape persection, is that they are hungry and want to work. And most of the time they'll do anything.

Do I begrudge them welfare? No.

As said, my default position in life isn't to be Chief Prick no. 1. That role has sufficently been filled by others.

Actually they are out to convert their host nations. It's part of their religion to convert non Muslims whether by desire or force. Just like the Christians used to do in the "bad old days".

IMO it's the fault of past governments for allowing them to live in ghettos, instead of living among the previous inhabitants and being subsumed into the predominant culture.

I don't think anyone is saying that Oz shouldn't protect genuine refugees.

[thaibeachlovers]

Neither Burma nor Bangladesh are signatories to the UN Conventions on Refugees. Indonesia is also not a signatory. If Indonesia was a signatory, it would be in a bit of a pickle, since it would be considered the Country of First Asylum and would be obligated to screen them.

If Oz was also not a signatory, does anyone believe that they would get away with pushing the boats back? I don't.

[BookMan]

I would recommend that all posters here watch the SBS series 'Go Back To Where You Came From'.

It does not provide answers to the situation but it does give another perspective to the situation.

You can call boat people illegal immigrants or Queue jumpers, or whatever term you want.

The fact is they are a minuscule proportion of the illegals who stay in Australia. Most illegals come on tourist or work visas and simply overstay.

Where as Australians has your sense of a fair go gone to, condemning people for simply wanting a better life for themselves?

Australia needs more people who want to come here. More than just skilled migrants and business migrants and those that can buy their way into Australia. We need a variety of people who want to work hard and want to make a better life for themselves. It is the way most of us or our forebears came here, through migration of some type.

So some people take a different route to get here than the official channels? More power to their courage and determination I say.

I saw that program and what a load of rubbish, just another reality show like the great race, the block, farmer wants a wife or dancing with the stars. A carefully hand picked cast who follow a script. It was a reality T.V series. Have you ever seen Kath & Kim a T.V show that makes fun of the reality T.V shows. Kath & Kim was far more crieditable.

Chooka, I am surprised at your assertion. It makes me think that you didn't watch the show with an open mind. Doesn't seem like you at all.

Obviously the cast was hand picked. I don't see a problem with that at all. The fact is they picked sensibly, they picked people who previously refused to change their closed minded opinions

What you did see from that was the reactions of people who were vehemently opposed to boat refugees starting to think about the very complicated issues more.

They realised it was not simply a black and white issue, which so many people make it out to be.

While parts of the 'experience' were planned, the actual events were real and confronting. They didn't need to sensationalise anything, and they did not.

If anything, we, the viewer got the sanitised version of life as a refugee.

[Colin Yai]

http://www.liberal.o...nder-Labor.aspx It would appear by this link that Under Howards Govt the problem was handled legally and correctly ,so unlike the sheer shambles we have now under this administration , Shadow Minister for justice,customs and border protection Micheal Keenan appears to suggest that most are Illegals ( and I quote "Illegal boat arrivals") ,what the bloody hell would he know about the subject when we have so many "experts " on Thai Visa Edited June 17, 2012 by Colin Yai

[BookMan]

I would recommend that all posters here watch the SBS series 'Go Back To Where You Came From'.

It does not provide answers to the situation but it does give another perspective to the situation.

You can call boat people illegal immigrants or Queue jumpers, or whatever term you want.

The fact is they are a minuscule proportion of the illegals who stay in Australia. Most illegals come on tourist or work visas and simply overstay.

Where as Australians has your sense of a fair go gone to, condemning people for simply wanting a better life for themselves?

Australia needs more people who want to come here. More than just skilled migrants and business migrants and those that can buy their way into Australia. We need a variety of people who want to work hard and want to make a better life for themselves. It is the way most of us or our forebears came here, through migration of some type.

So some people take a different route to get here than the official channels? More power to their courage and determination I say.

I fully applaud what you are saying in many respects .. I agree totally with the UN refugee convention...

but as a migrant to your shores along with thousands annually we have had to go through the hoops to get here and quite rightly so.

It can be a lengthy and expensive process, the actual visa, the numerous AFP and overseas police checks, medicals, references etc. Apart from Medicare we are not able to access any benefits other than child benefit for the first two years, in other words , we are not to be a drain on the Australian system and rightly so!

Obtaining PR and eventually citizenship still required further checks and to be frank it is pretty galling to see the likes of Captain Ahmed and his ilk descend on Australia and basically take the "michael" out of the system... In fact it makes me wonder what exactly ASIO are doing to protecting Australia's borders!

The very fact that that Four Corners were interviewing PR relatives on shore who were awaiting news of their nearest and dearest coming in through dubious channels would in my book place them into the conspiracy of "people smuggling"!

Yet again how has this situation managed to occur .. http://www.abc.net.a...12/s3501264.htm

Yes I do have a problem with economic migrants coming through, likewise with Vietnamese children being sent unaccompanied. The latter will have to safeguarded by the tax payer until they reach of age when a decision is made! Didnt the Vietnam war finish in 1975?

I enjoy and am very proud seeing the genuine cases arrive in Australia, the Black Hmongs, the Bhutanese etc etc who have integrated well into the various communities but I think every case has to be proven rather than a "given right"!

I still advocate for off shore processing with stringent controls on the conditions and processing times.

I take your points EC, and I agree with many of them.

Lets face it, most of Australia's population are recent immigrants of some type, maybe second or third generation.

There are hoops and regulations etc to go through and there are conditions attached to the processes and it can be a long process and expensive, as you say, to get certain residency visas. I really don't pretend to be an expert on those matters. Yourself having been through hit, you would feel much more passionate about anyone perceived to be taking shortcuts

I am actually in favour of there being a system that is followed and that there is a 'queue' so to speak.

I personally don't like offshore processing schemes: I find them to be an underhanded way to circumvent Australian laws and as such they send the wrong moral message to everyday Australians. This is my personal view.

It is a very complex issue and I don't pretend that I have any solid solutions.

[BookMan]

It all boils down to identification of the refugee does it not. Hence the "non refoulement" principle is hard to determine initially is it not?

Do you think that off shore processing in say Malaysia could be more of a deterrent to destroying your ID?.. in terms of the length of stay within a detention centre?

That is the problem though isn't it? None of this is simple, and it certainly isn't as clear cut as the tin-foil hatters seem to think.

My family helped employ loads of VN and Cambodian refugee's through the 80's. None of them arrived with any papers. Refugees don't simply have a passport and are ready to go. That isn't to say they weren't genuine refugees.

In the case of the current lot, it is pretty common knowledge that given they don't have the correct papers from their government (I mean they ARE being persecuted by them) they do get false documents to make it into Indo or Malaysia. Indo and Malaysia's interest is simply to have these people pass through as quickly as possible. Though they can claim asylum in these countries, they have no access to work rights, so there is little wonder they don't want to hang around there.

If there was a government somewhere between Australia and the source of the refugees that did offer work rights, you'd want to assume that the more genuine of the refugees stopped there. But there isn't, so they won't. (Though if you again believe the tin-foil hatters, they are all one caliphite so they'd be happy as in those places given they are all the same...towel heads you know.....)

On the way to OZ, they are pretty much advised by the smugglers to destroy their documents. It isn't as if they are getting offical advice from an Dept of Immigration person are they?

I'd much prefer Australia bite the bullet and say 'look we are a sucessful country, we are a safe country and people are going to want to come here over nearly all other places'. And set up, in say Malaysia and Indo offshore processing, so you can actually establish a 'queue' which so many people get their panties wet over. It would stop people risking the boat ride, but would open it up to the conservative side of politics making scare campaigns of laying out a welcome mat. Also, you might find Indo and Malaysia have problems with setting up these camps on their territories...a fact convientely overlooked by most.

At the end of the day, I am pragmatic. I don't choose to go through life where my default position is to treat someone like a prick, especially if prima face, they are in need. Added to this pragmatism is that places like Australia are crying out for labour, so why not get these people out in the community as quickly as possible to pay their way?

If these guys truely are economic refugees, then logic would dictate that if the economy goes belly up, then the flow of boat people and refugees would stop. According to the doomsayers, that will happen next month when the mining tax and the carbon price kick in.

You don't really believe they flock to OZZ to work do you? ,in the UK its called DHSS in OZZ its known as "Centerlink"

Must have been a long while since you saw the queue at Centrelink. They all look very Australianised to me.

As a business owner for many years (10) and in a management role before that for many years (7) I can attest that new immigrants to Australia were/are nearly always incredibly motivated and hard working. They would do the difficult shifts, the overtime, the long hours. It was the young uneducated Australians who were/are the incredibly lazy and unreliable workers

I can only think you are very out of touch with the Australian way of life colinyai

[BookMan]

You don't really believe they flock to OZZ to work do you? ,in the UK its called DHSS in OZZ its known as "Centerlink"

You seem to believe that they are destinted to be dole bludging islamites out to convert a nation while at the same time not fitting in. All hard to acheive if you are a social outcast with limted means I would have thought.

My experience of people who escape persection, is that they are hungry and want to work. And most of the time they'll do anything.

Do I begrudge them welfare? No.

As said, my default position in life isn't to be Chief Prick no. 1. That role has sufficently been filled by others.

+1

[edwinclapham]

Thanks Mr Bookman, sorry I have no more "likes" left for the day .

The Immigration process as you say is so complicated and to be honest, I dont think any government gets it right.

Sham student & marriage visas have contributed to the changing of laws and someone always suffers along the line.

Further education and Universities badly need overseas students for the financial aspect, so I would imagine they have been hard hit also.

But I digress ..when one sees hospitals like the National Temperance Hospital in London which is the Foundation for the care of Victims of Torture I strongly hold the views that we must comply with the 1951 Convention. The refugee situation is miniscule compared with Europe for example... but this can change rapidly and I seriously think we should be processing in a speedier fashion than what is happening now.

Long term detention is not the solution for either the refugees or the employees and a speedier processing facility should be implemented particularly for the children which I feel most uncomfortable about.

"Likes" resume normal service I see lol)

Edited June 17, 2012 by edwinclapham

[koheesti]

As a caring considerate American who believes that Australia should open up it's borders to all the refuge of the world, could you possibly take a couple of boatloads home to your family in the U.S to care for, you could build a couple of extra rooms on your house and get 3 or 4 families in. Maybe you don't want them in your backyard either.

I'm Australian. Not a yank. And yes, my family has been taking peope in for years.

By any chance these people your family has been taking in for years - did you have any idea who they were first? Or did you just accept anyone into your home who claimed to be a refugee without any documentation?

such a profound analogy you draw there. Did you think that up all by yourself?

I made no analogy. I asked a simple question about a claim you made. Maybe you should have thought it through more before making the claim in the first place.

[simple1]

Neither Burma nor Bangladesh are signatories to the UN Conventions on Refugees. Indonesia is also not a signatory. If Indonesia was a signatory, it would be in a bit of a pickle, since it would be considered the Country of First Asylum and would be obligated to screen them.

If Oz was also not a signatory, does anyone believe that they would get away with pushing the boats back? I don't.

Nor do I. But it looks like a number of people contributing to this topic would do so. It would be a very sad day for Australia to take a backward step on human rights. I would be ashamed to call myself an Australian

[Scott]

There are a number of other international rules/laws also in play. One big one has to do with putting people out to sea in unseaworthy boats.

I very much doubt that Australia or any other civilized country would jeopardize the lives of people unnecessarily. If Australia was not a signatory, it would mean no need to screen people and would make repatriation easier and quicker. My guess is that if Australia wasn't a signatory, it would be under enormous pressure and scrutiny both inside and outside of the country.

[jamescollister]

Can't be bothered to read the pages and pages that have been posted here. Simple truth prisons are full of alleged refugees. drive by shootings and gang wars on ethic [ drug ] turf are on going. The country has not gained by ethnic diversity in the last 20 years. Standard joke a bus with an Abo, a muslim and a islander is driving down the road. Who's driving the prison service. It's not the country of my youth.

Someone who posted earlier about tax rates in OECD counties, stats, figures and dam lies. PAYE pay over 72 cents in the dollar in one form of tax or other. You can't just use Fed income tax as a base, there are taxes on taxes, everything from dog licenses up. Jim

[Steely Dan]

Here is some useful background reading on the resettlement issue.

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2009/11/toward-sustainable-immigration-policy.html