Sign in or 
Location: Immigration
Discussion: Immigration Tariffs
Category:
Discussion Forum /
General Discussion
Share this
Showing 10 posts
|
Posted Anonymously |
Immigration Tariffs
Feb 26 2008, 8:24 AM EST
Australia should let anybody in the world come here and reside as a permanent resident so long as they:-a) Pass a basic medical check. b) Pass a basic criminal check. c) Pay an entry fee. (eg $75000) - the immigration tariff d) Behave themselves once they get here. This would be better than making people wait in queues. It would also allow people who can make an economic contribution to Australia to self select because the immigration tariff would be like an investment that needs to pay a return. It would also allow humanitarian groups to buy a place for really worth cases. And it would help pay for infrastructure. Political reality means that Australia is going to ration entry into this fine land. It is better to ration access to Australia with a simple transparent user pays fee rather than with a long queue and a bureaucrat with a clipboard. 56 out of 80 found this valuable. Do you?
Keyword tags:
boat people
immigration
Tampa
|
|
Posted Anonymously |
1. RE: Immigration Tariffs
Feb 26 2008, 10:57 PM EST
I agree entirely. I think, however, that the raw 'tariff' should be at least $150,000 and inflation-adjusted, whilst there should be a concessional rate for humanitarian immigrants that could either be paid upfront (if they have the cash themselves or some humanitarian charity stumps it up) or deducted from future tax like HECS.Even better might be to have a set number of humanitarian places much as we do now, at the concessional rate (bearing in mind that the HECs deal is basically a free lunch since a humanitarian refugee would generally not even know what are basic tax rates are anyway), and a set number for family reunion etc at the full rate, and then auction the rest. That we will know that we are getting the skills our country actually 'wants' in the sense of being willing to pay for them. 4 out of 6 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Posted Anonymously |
2. RE: Immigration Tariffs
Feb 27 2008, 12:37 AM EST
The actual rate of the tariff might need to be varied initially to normalise around a politically tolerable immigration rate but otherwise I'm happy with the idea as formulated.
4
out of
4 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
|
Posted Anonymously |
3. RE: Immigration Tariffs
Feb 28 2008, 2:01 AM EST
This idea does not imply any increase or decrease in immigration. It is the size of the tariff and global demand for residency in Australia that would determine the number of immigrants. So long as the size of the tariff can be reviewed then Australia could with this approach choose to have high immigration or low immigration. The reality is we moderate immigration at the moment using far less transparent means.
1
out of
3 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
|
pyno |
4. RE: Immigration Tariffs
Mar 3 2008, 6:27 AM EST
I disagree. Australia shouldn't be for the wealthy alone. Individuals shouldn't be able to buy their way to the front of the line and sample over the poor simply because they have money. I understand the principle of the idea, but solution seems highly immoral and promotes a negative global image.
1
out of
7 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
|
Posted Anonymously |
5. RE: Immigration Tariffs
Mar 5 2008, 10:17 PM EST
"Individuals shouldn't be able to buy their way to the front of the line and sample over the poor simply because they have money. "At the moment people can buy their way to the front of the queue by having government preferred skills. If the government thinks carpenters are earning too much they let foreign carpenters move forward in the queue. So the idea that this proposed reform is somehow immoral and the existing scheme is pure is just silly. 6 out of 6 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Posted Anonymously |
6. RE: Immigration Tariffs
Apr 3 2008, 9:10 PM EDT
$75000 at current rates of interest would suggest that people would only come if the net benefit of migration was around $6500 per annum. The idea is good but the fee would need fine tuning.
1
out of
2 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
|
Posted Anonymously |
7. RE: Immigration Tariffs
Apr 7 2008, 4:07 AM EDT
Hard to determine what the fee should be... perhaps an auction style system?
3
out of
3 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
|
Posted Anonymously |
8. RE: Immigration Tariffs
Apr 7 2008, 9:03 AM EDT
"Hard to determine what the fee should be... perhaps an auction style system?"Perhaps an auction would be a good way to determine the fee initially. However trial and error would also get the job done. 3 out of 3 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Posted Anonymously |
9. RE: Immigration Tariffs
Apr 18 2008, 7:44 PM EDT
You seem to forget that immigration is also there to help individuals who are being persecuted in their own country. A lot of these people could never afford that kind of money. Australia can not just bomb Iraq and make the living conditions hell for Iraqis and then turn around and say you cant come and live in a safe haven in Australia. Most people do not want to uproot their family and live in a foreign country they would much rather stay in their own country but if it is a matter of life and death then they will move. By encouraging and supporting other countries to prosper and respect human rights means that people will not need to emigrate to a better life.
0
out of
2 found this valuable.
Do you?
|
