Newspaper spruiks mass immigration, gets whacked by readers

Caption: All this could be yours, for the bargain price of 0.1% of GDP

The Australian used its front page today to spruik for big Australia and continued mass migration. Readers were not impressed. Quote:

a landmark report released by Treasury and the Department of Home Affairs makes the case for a big Australia […] the report found that skilled migrants were delivering an economic dividend, lifting the standard of living by 0.1 per cent of G.D.P. per capita. End of quote.

Wow. 0.1 percent of annual G.D.P.? That means a grand total of 1.2 billion dollars per year. For that, we get choked cities, collapsing infrastructure, environmental degradation and massive cultural and social upheaval. Bargain!

Buried in the report is the concession that: Quote:

The report also came with a warning […] that while the economic benefits of migration are well documented, a solution will need to be found to prevent existing pressures on infrastructure, housing, congestion and the environment intensifying. End of quote.

Readers were quick to pick up the sophistry. Watching a major newspaper get well and truly shellacked by its readers was a glory to behold.

Reader Thomas appeared to sum up the reaction best, with his top-rated comment: Quote:

It needs to be stated again and again – this debate is not about GDP. If the reason for pursuing mass immigration is simply to increase the size of our economy then we have truly lost the plot. Have our lives lost all meaning? Do we consider ourselves a distinct nation with a unique culture worth preserving? Or are we more akin to an airport departure lounge where people come and go while sharing almost nothing in common with each other? Our culture matters. Our language matters. Our traditions matter. Our history matters. And most of all our future matters. If the trade-off for gaining 0.1% GPD per capita each year is that my grandchildren no longer have a country to call their own, then count me out. End of quote.

Reader Liberty commented: Quote:

The globalists (left and right) always justify mass immigration by saying it is good for the economy. That is a barefaced lie. We are not widgets. We are people. We are Australians whose economy has a purpose – it is meant to serve and improve our culture and society – our quality of life – the lives of everyone not just those who profit from immigration at the expense of others. End of quote.

Reader Peter pulled apart the impressive-seeming maths: Quote:

0.1% increase per capita. So if I am on 100k, I’m better off by 100 dollars per year. That’s great, thanks government for delivering such a bonus and all I have to pay for that is congestion and crazy house prices. Genius. End of quote.

Activist Avi Yemini recently commented that the issues the political elite prefer to talk to each other about are not what ordinary Australians are interested in. The overwhelmingly negative reaction to a front-page article in Australia’s biggest newspaper showed that he is right. In the words of reader Donald T.: Quote:

What I still don’t understand is that nearly everyone I talk with wants the immigration rate cut dramatically, yet our politicians are resisting the will of the people. End of quote.

Too often the political and media elite simply assume that they are the philosopher-kings who just know best how to run the world. Floating on a cloud of smug they ignore the protests of the hoi polloi. But the election of President Trump and the subsequent collapse of the standing of the American mainstream media have shown that they do so at their peril.


Do you want:

  • Ad-free access?
  • Access to our very popular daily crossword?
  • Access to daily sudoku?
  • Access to Incite Politics magazine articles?
  • Access to podcasts?
  • Access to political polls?

Our subscribers’ financial support is the reason why we have been able to offer our latest service; Audio blogs. 

Click Here  to support us and watch the number of services grow.

Who is Lushington D. Brady?

Well, a pseudonym. Obviously.

But the name Lushington Dalrymple Brady has been chosen carefully. Not only for the sum of its overall mien of seedy gentility, reminiscent perhaps of a slightly disreputable gentlemen of letters, but also for its parts, each of which borrows from the name of a Vandemonian of more-or-less fame (or notoriety) who represents some admirable quality which will hopefully animate the persona of Lushington D. Brady.

Listen to this post:
29%