Hi Tim, Did you see the links I posted? Eliminating the welfare state is the alternative, otherwise immigration must be controlled by some means or other. That's the fundamental point. So if we accept there is going to be a welfare state, it becomes a question of how to achieve effective immigration control. It seems to me that Temporary Protection Visas would be the most effective measure. I believe they are now being reintroduced as of last week. The wikipedia page for TPVs is not too bad if you are unfamiliar with them and the reasons why Labor removed them. Cheers, Alex On 18/08/2012 10:44 PM, "tim josling" <tej@melbpc.org.au> wrote:

Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 10:47:51 +1000 From: Rohan McLeod <rhn@jeack.com.au> Subject: Re: [luv-talk] What rights do refugees have under the 1951 convention? Cc: luv-talk <luv-talk@luv.asn.au> Message-ID: <502EE637.5010002@jeack.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Russell Coker wrote:

...

On Fri, 17 Aug 2012, tim josling<tej@melbpc.org.au> wrote: .......s...

Yes. Thank you Rohan. All I am asking for is "Here is my proposed policy, and here is the evidence I have seriously thought through the consequences, including indirect consequences". Not "It is obvious that accepting anyone who shows up is the RIGHT THING TO DO and therefore the consequences must be OK". Not "Here is evidence Tony Abbott is a hypocrite and a liar!!!!!!!!!!". I am 57 years old. I am well aware that the vast majority of politicians are talented and experienced liars and thieves. Russel Coker said: "As previous analysis on this list has shown the cost would be less than the current policy no matter what you do." Can you point me at this "previous analysis"? I could not readily find it. As I said in my first post I did search in vain for evidence of a well-thought out alternative policy. As regards immigration as a solution to the so-called demographic time bomb, the studies I have seen suggest that the level of immigration required to substantially change this situation are extremely high and is not in prospect. Our current policies based on paying pensions using high population growth are basically a Ponzi scheme that must come to an end. I included the material by Charlie Munger as an *example* of second order effects. [Munger has made billions of dollars by understanding them. Whatever you might say about him, he is not silly and he is a lot smarted than most of the people on this list but that is not relevant to the issue of refugees]. Tim Josling _______________________________________________ luv-talk mailing list luv-talk@lists.luv.asn.au ht...