POLL: Catch-up migration - good or bad?

457 is not the one that helps with anything, apart from (as you mentioned) quite cheap workforce.

I reckon this thread is about Skilled independent visa (189), which is a PR based on skills.
Much harder to get but if you get it - you've basically became an Aussie (minus the mullet)

We all been there.
Every migrant need to know they will have to compromise on their first job due to the "no local experience".
I came here after being in a position of CTO in my home country and applied for sys admin jobs for 1/3 of the salary I was used to.
End up as technical manager for a startup, mainly cause the founder realise he can get the skills for 1/3 of the price.

Didn't feel any resentment.
A year after we, very amicably, decided to part ways. He was pushing me to stop renting and buy my own PPoR (which I did) and when I came and told him I need a raise to pay the loan, he told me he cannot afford me.
Fair enough.
Next job was about 300% higher salary.

It is what it is.
You play with the cards you've been handled.

 

Not sure what you meant, but I do hope you know that not all migrants in Australia are coming from war-torn countries....
Not everyone was through torture. Nor their home country is less advanced then Australia.

Some of us actually came from totally Western countries, we had good stable life back there, but we chose Australia for different reasons.

 

Immigration has been running disgustingly high since the mid 2000s, 3 times higher than long term avg and oecd avg. Its main purpose is to achieve dumb aggregate growth, lower wages and pump up house prices for the banking and ppty industry. There is is no tech skills shortage, otherwise why have rates dropped the past 15 years? As for medecine, surely we could broaden the intake beyoud the top .00011 pct of vce grads to plug the gap?

 

Yep, "jobs and growth"
(Immigration causes demand for housing/food/consumables, but then these people need jobs, its like chasing your tail )

Sure it probably got us through a few worldwide economic downturns

What happened to working smarter not harder ?

Immigration is not the tool we as a country should be using to prop up or grow our economy

 

You seem proud, not in just this post but overall. Mind if I ask which country you are originally from? I'm a migrant too btw.

 

Have you been to Hong Kong or Singapore and hung out with the kids there? Comparing them to Aussie kids with similar background (i.e. middle class, uni educated parents), I would take those Aussie kid any day.

 

Jobs aren't finite resources that migrants just consume. Don't you think bringing in migrants also create more jobs?
Australia currently has the same population as Taiwan's. It's ridiculous, isn't it?
Working smarter means increasing productivity. You'd need to reach certain critical mass, i.e. density, to do it.

 

There's a misconception (media driven for whatever reason) kids aren't pushed to their limits in Australia. Through the private system at least, kids are absolutely driven to achieve, whether academically, through sport or the arts.

 

Thanx.
Since I'm an immigrant that came after 2000, I guess I should take that personally...

I'm not sure my family would be considered "dumb aggregation" or "lower wage" in any pub test.
We're on the top 2% of combined salaries in Australia.
We paid more taxes in our mere 15 years here then most "beard and born Aussies" will pay in their entire life.
Not to mention I personally, working for a US company, bring US money into Australia.
My wife has her own business, providing care for the most vulnerable in our society, saving families life. Her waiting list is full and she's getting desperate calls every day (today she got 3 calls from families looking for her services).

In my books - we're some good investment Australia did.
Paid jacks**t for our education, and got instance tax and services providers.

We did pump up the housing prices tho, since we've purchased few properties.
So you're definitely on the ball.

I guess if there was no gap, I wouldn't be headhunted for my job, after a year that the company looked for someone with the skillset around Australia (not only Melbourne).
And I guess my wife wouldn't be fully booked with constant requests to book more in.
Nor Australia would bribe health professionals to come over.

Or.... You have no idea what you're talking about and should probably educate yourself or ask those who do.

Why not?
Australia has a lot going for it.
One of the things is life style. Why it's ok to sell cars, TVs, phones or whatever and not life style?
If skilled migration is a win-win - why not?

The only losing side is the home country, and between you and me: I don't give rat's a**se.
If my home country was better, I wouldn't leave. Would I?

Yeah. I'm not the shy person.... One of my many faults.
I'm originally from Israel.

^^^ This

Exactly!
Migration creates job and increase Australia production, both for internal consumption and exports.

We're in the public system and yeah, the kids are not "pushed" - they have to want to be pushed.
As my kids go there and ask to be pushed, they are getting most of the teachers to happily challenge them more then the rest of the class.
I always tell my kids "no one is going to make you succeed, whatever you consider success. It's all you and only you".

It's quite clear that some peers are driven to get somewhere and there are many others who are happy to just cruise. Some are just waiting to get to year 11 and drop out of school, to work in dad's plumbing business.
Nothing work with it. If they set on being plumbers, they should go start doing apprenticeship rather then waste 2 more years writing English assays.

 

I had lived in both HK and Singapore. I recall seeing regular "Migration to Australia" seminars, and they were always packed!

 

Im also an immigrant, not against immigration per se, just the volume which was ramped up under Howard and continued unabated till covid. Melb took 22 years to go from 3 to 4 mill, 8 years from 4 to 5, and they want to hit 8 mill by 2050. Longer commutes, prohibitive house prices and low wage growth. Win win for the big end of town. Not for most.

 

The only way, unfortunately, to keep steady economic growth for a country is to increase population growth.

People live too long. Being 90 is no longer world record, but almost a norm.
That means that humanity has a very thick layer of non-working, non-tax-paying people who need ever increasing resources, to support the 3rd age.
Coupled with another layer of 0-20 years old, you left with increasing burden on the working layer.

It's a neverending cycle, that the plant seems to try to break (climate changes, nature disasters, COVIDs), but it seems we're quite a resilient pest. Mother Earth has to work harder.
But until it does, if we want to keep our standard of living - we have to boost our population.
One, very cheap and effective way to so is skill migration.
It's all the benefits of working layer instantly, without spending all those resources on the early years layer.
Granted, it'll make the 3rd layer thicker and thicker, which is why we need to keep pumping new blood in the system.

I hear that quite often, but it's always comes as a buzz word.
Why longer commute? Most people work around their community / suburb.
How many people have to "drive to the CBD" every morning?
Most of the working people are service providers, who provide services around where they live.

Do we need to have policies based on minority of office workers who has to work in the CBD?
Not to mention, COVID taught all those commuters that there is another way. When you're WFH who cares how far "home" is from the CBD?

Urban centres are getting bigger and bigger. Around the globe. It's a trend that is common for all humanity. Australia is not different.

 

Australia (and nz and canada) are different than most oecd countries as we have far higher immigration rates. The others seem to manage. We just dont need it, but greedy vested interests want it. Big difference

 

Yes, but it's a ponzi scheme.

Bringing in people creates demand for more food, electricity, water, consumables but in turn those migrants then fill those jobs, next thing you know someone is saying "we need skilled migrants" ........

It does nothing for wage growth, in fact employer's/higher paid management want to pay less because they see many of the bottom end jobs as worthless (until they can't get people to do those jobs !).

I can go broke just as easily sitting at home/beach as opppsed to going broke at work !
(Think running a car to travel 45 min paying road tolls there and back to work your shift to be told it's only 3hours today, so you lose money that day !).

 

No it's not.
Growth in population creates demand for far more jobs then the amount of migrants coming in.

A doctor and engineer migrants parents would need: teachers, bakers, sellers, delivery drivers, food growers, police officers, amobs, dentists, restaurants owners, cinema workers, kmart staff, pool life savers, car mechanics.... And the list goes on and on.

It's a well know fact that in order to create economic growth, you need population growth.
Your GDP will increase if your population is highly skills (as oppose to low-skilled, low-educated population growth that leads to poverty).

 

Right up until resources run out and

 

We all die.
Yeah... We kinda doing our best as a species to get there as fast as we can...

 

That's exactly what I meant. However, I can't figure out what you couldn't understand.

What I don't want is to see is to get people tortured mentally during their academics.

 

The difference is that Australia, NZ and Canada are countries with relatively short histories and the native peoples (i.e. Indigenous Australians and Canadians + Maoris) only form a minority. The other OECD countries, Spain, Italy, Japan, Korea etc are countries with a majority of people having the ethnicity belonging to their home land. It's a lot easier, from a policy and public support perspective, to bring a load of migrants into a country where most people don't have a connection with the ancestors of the country such as Australia vs. one where there is a strong national identity developed over hundreds of years which is also linked to a group of people and ethnicity.

 

Not sure why that should make a difference to the need for large scale migration, and isnt the usa also a "new" country. We were also running much lower immigration levels pre howard when we were a "newer" country.