51 thoughts on “Sandpit

  1. It is difficult to give an overview of my attempted “ontology of everything” in a short space. Nevertheless, I will try it. People will either be nonplussed completely or might, from studies of their own, see what I am attempting to drive at. All of this below may be derivative. I do not know if there is any originality to it. I hold that to attempt to “solve” economics, or any social science, we first must return to Metaphysics (Ontology and Epistemology) and thence to Moral Philosophy. This post does not deal with Moral Philosophy.

    COMPLEX SYSTEM MONISM (CSM)

    The key interdependent concepts of Complex System Monism (CSM) as a coherent metaphysical system within empirical philosophy are;

    A. POSITING THE WHOLE (COMPLEX) REAL SYSTEM

    All-existence (the cosmos) is a single complex system and thus the “concrete whole” in the priority monism sense. Parts of the cosmos are sub-systems, sub-systems of sub-systems and so on. The cosmos is a real system. All sub-systems of a real system are real systems.

    Standard Definitions.

    System: A regularly interacting or interdependent group of items forming an integrated whole. Every system is delineated by its spatial and temporal boundaries, surrounded and influenced by its environment, described by its structure and purpose and expressed in its functioning.

    Real System: Any system which obeys the discovered fundamental Laws of physics.

    B. THE CENTRALITY OF MODELS IN EPISTEMOLOGY

    The entirety of human perception and understanding is achieved by modelling. Brain-internal coalesced perception as perceived perception, is a virtual model of sensed external reality. Higher level ideations, concepts and explicit models themselves are also all models. Human understanding (and misunderstanding) is comprised entirely of models and nothing but models.

    C. TRUTH CORRESPONDENCE AS THE LINK BETWEEN MODELS AND REAL SYSTEMS

    Truth correspondence exists as the connection of valid congruences or isomorphisms between our brain models and all realities external to the brain.

    D. EVOLUTIONARY JUSTIFICATION FOR STATING THE NECESSITY AND (SOMETIME) EFFICACY OF MODELLING

    We experience our brain-internal picture(s) or virtual model(s) of real externality as the real thing, which in survival and evolutionary terms is perfectly apt and functional, when the picture is good enough for those purposes. If this system did not work, complex organisms with complex senses and brain-internal modelling capabilities would not survive. The energy costs of complex modelling capacity (IN large brains) are high physiologically speaking. There must be a payback (covered in section F.)

    E. THE SITUATION OF FORMAL SYSTEMS

    Standard Definitions.

    Formal System: Any system of signs based on or forming a language, including mathematics.

    Formal Systems are a sub-set of real systems. They are a special subset of real systems where information as patterns is encoded, transmitted, received and interpreted in and via real system media comprised of matter and energy. Each formal system is instantiated in real system media (in brains, books, computer media etc.). Formal systems are ontologically speaking, real systems, but epistemologically speaking, formal systems. In epistemology, knowledge of real systems comes only from experience and experiment (empiricism). In formal systems knowledge (rational knowledge) comes from the interpretable formal content of the sign system and thence from further logical deductions made within the sign system. These logical deductions must then be tested empirically against against the real world (if possible) or else remain wholly as metaphysical suppositions.

    F. MATTER, ENERGY AND INFORMATION

    Matter, energy and information can pass between real systems. For many open systems, the transfers of all three are important. In the case of human formal systems (instantiated in real systems of course), the transfer of information is usually the most important component. The transfers of matter and energy are often minimal and even deliberately minimised to achieve a high information transfer rate to energy use and/or matter “use”. These matter and energy savings are the reason, along with isomorphic congruence of course, that all models (concepts, formulas, virtual models, crafted physical models), are of pragmatic use as tools for investigating reality. While brain processing and modelling is costly in physiological terms, the overall energy savings compared to the energy costs of blind seeking and blind avoidance are still considerable. This is where its evolutionary viability (as one of many possible solutions to the survival problem for organisms) comes from.

    G. SYSTEM BOUNDARIES

    Matter, energy and information can pass through system boundaries depending on permeability or penetrability.

    A system boundary is a boundary which separates the internal components of a system from external systems. A system boundary can be an interface for the transfer of matter, energy and information.
    The processes of all empirical detection by humans rely on matter, energy and information (in any combination) coming through a system boundary from the detected existent system and passing in through the system boundary of the detecting system (a human or human instrument when taking an anthropocentric view).

    Thence, the “depths” or internals of any system can only be inferred or deduced (as the case may be) by system boundary phenomena or more correctly by system-boundary transferred phenomena. This is an “epistemology of the boundary” thesis. We can detect only boundary phenomena and thence must infer or deduce the internals of the system, as aforesaid.

    H. THE HUMAN AGENT (A HUMAN BEING)

    A broad definition of human agency (not to be confused with the definition of an economic agent) is given below.

    Human Agency is the capacity of human actors to act in a given environment.

    The (or each) living human agent is a connection between formal systems and real systems.

    We can represent this process very simply as:
    Real Systems Human Agency Formal Systems

    What is it that is shown as passing from Real Systems, through Humans exercising agency, to Formal Systems and vice versa? The simplest, physicalist answer is mass, energy and information (as interpretable patterns). This is a correct and complete physicalist description according to modern physics and a relational system model of the cosmos.

    NOTE:

    In this short overview, the human agent (not an economic agent) is perforce left as a black box. The greater part of philosophy is devoted to what is in that “black box”. Clearly, I can’t deal with that in a short overview, although some sections above certainly assert some things fundamental about humans.

    Full Appendix of Simple Definitions;

    Model: A simplified representation of a more complex original.
    Monism: Attribution of oneness or singleness to a concept or system, e.g. existence.
    Ontology: The study of existence, and emergence, in terms of categories and relations.
    Process: A set of transformations over a period of time.

    System: A regularly interacting or interdependent group of items forming an integrated whole. Every system is delineated by its spatial and temporal boundaries, surrounded and influenced by its environment, described by its structure and purpose and expressed in its functioning.

    Real System: Any system which obeys the discovered Laws of hard science.
    Formal System: Any system of signs based on or forming a language, including mathematics.

  2. Ikon… initial thoughts and serendipitous links:-

    Ikon, I had a search for “isomorphic congruence ” and did so in quotes. Logic. Maaaaths… lattices… grätzer… and then…

    Embodied Cognition & Enactivism: Implications for Education … • There doesn’t have to be a one-to-one spatially isomorphic congruence between the action and the …”
    https://www.slideshare.net/mobile/edtechdev/embodied-cognition-enactivism-implications-for-education
    By:
    http://erau.academia.edu/DougHolton

    And then!
    “Interval, Sexual Difference: Luce Irigaray and Henri Bergson”
    Rebecca Hill
    Published in Hypatia Journal

    “Abstract
    “Henri Bergson’s philosophy has attracted increasing feminist attention in recent years as a fruitful locus for re-theorizing temporality. Drawing on Luce Irigaray’s well-known critical description of metaphysics as phallocentrism, Hill argues that Bergson’s deduction of duration is predicated upon the disavowal of a sexed hierarchy. She concludes the article by proposing a way to move beyond Bergson’s phallocentrism to articulate duration as a sensible and transcendental difference that articulates a nonhierarchical qualitative relation between the sexes.”… ”
    …”She identifies an isomorphic congruence between the solidity of philosophical concepts and phallic masculinity and, at the same time, she contends that metaphysics exhibits repulsion toward fluidity. Irigaray suggests also that this abhorrence is analogous to the horror of the female sex (1991, 64).”.

    Hypatia Journal
    “Hypatia is the only journal for scholarly research at the intersection of philosophy and women’s studies and is a leader in reclaiming the work of women philosophers. It is an indispensable tool for anyone interested in the rapidly expanding and developing scholarship in feminist philosophy and provides the best single access to the latest research.”

    And a diagram for you – me – which I think has it incorrect unless “computer science” is central to your world view, compared to your “cosmic” world view. I use this diagram as a dicussion example only; ( hope it loads – or go here: freethesaurus.com/ontologically )


    .cc,.cc1,.cc2,.cc3,.cc4{stroke:#000;stroke-width:1}.cc1{fill:#fff}.cc2{fill:#238b68}.cc3{fill:red}.cc4{stroke-dasharray:5,3;fill:gray}.cc{fill:#fff}.vt-link{cursor:pointer;fill:#2484c6}
    //img.tfd.com/thes/vt-min.js
    var vtDt = {“name”:”ontology”,”type”:0,”children”:[{“name”:”(computer science) a rigorous and exhaustive organization of some knowledge domain that is usually hierarchical and contains all the relevant entities and their relations”,”type”:1,”children”:[{“name”:”organization”,”type”:4},{“name”:”arrangement”,”type”:4},{“name”:”organisation”,”type”:4},{“name”:”system”,”type”:4},{“name”:”computer science”,”type”:4},{“name”:”computing”,”type”:4}],”end”:true},{“name”:”the metaphysical study of the nature of being and existence”,”type”:1,”children”:[{“name”:”metaphysics”,”type”:4}],”end”:true}]}

    Graphic Thesaurus for "ontologically" provided by FreeThesaurus.com
     

     Do I have it correct that your diagram would have “cosmos ” as”the monism” entity sole parent  “at the top / centre” ( top / centre / parent poor decriptors – the cosmos is everywhere -4d ) with “system/s” flowing from cosmos as bi flow linked child and then all others hanging from cosmos / system linked entities?

    “Every system is delineated by its spatial and temporal boundaries, surrounded and influenced by its environment, described by its structure and purpose and expressed in its functioning.”. This epistomalogical flow thru decription of ‘every systems” makes “Real System” and “Formal System: ” imho need a new descriptor other than “system” to avoid brain meltdown. I do not think your glossary is wrong at all, but the scope of subject matter seems to reveal a need for other descriptors /concept words, so specific language used to convey “systems” in all it’s myriad emergences is able to flow from ontological to epistemological meanings of system.

    Letters words meanings descriptors philosophy are to me crying out for a diagram/s and or visualisations. 

    That is why causal diags and stock and flow diags allowed me to breakout of the wordy confines of text only “papers”. I discovered intelligent diagrams at 29 yrs old. 

    The fourth D -needs a clock, yes? Good vibrations:-

    “When I came to understand what I was seeing in the graphics, I didn’t really believe it,” Strogatz said.
    “What was so weird,” he explained, “was that the universe looks the same from every place” in the system. And yet the oscillators responded differently to identical conditions, some ganging together while the rest went their own way, as if not coupled to anything at all. The symmetry of the system “was broken,” Strogatz said, in a way that “had never been seen before.”

    https://www.wired.com/story/the-math-of-how-crickets-starlings-and-neurons-sync-up/

  3. K2T,

    1. Don’t get hung up on the term “isomorphic congruence”. It’s an early term I used and discarded. I should not have let it slip back into this post. Firstly, I simply should have used the term “correspondence” to line up with the correspondence theory of truth. Secondly, “isomorphism” is technically wrong when the basic concept I intended to name was really more like “morphism” anyway. Thirdly, to say “morphic congruence” could be getting uncomfortably close to a tautology. I wish could edit out that slip-up . Read it as “correspondence”. Something in the model corresponds to something in the object or process being modeled. Something “maps” across in a usable manner.

    2. I use ontology in the philosophical sense, not the computer science sense. However, the interesting thing is that their philosophy definition “the metaphysical study of the nature of being and existence” is descriptive of the field BUT their computer science definition of “a rigorous and exhaustive organization of some knowledge domain that is usually hierarchical and contains all the relevant entities and their relations” is prescriptive of method. The latter method prescription does in fact describe what one has to do in practice in any attempt to create a philosophical ontology as well as a computer science ontology.

    I do use a computer science analogy when I talk about the human brain creating virtual re-creations of external reality from sense impressions. One does not see one’s room when one looks at it. One apprehends the qualia or experiences one has in one’s brain when the virtual re-creation of the room in the pre-conscious visual cortex is transmitted to part of the conscious nervous system.

    3. As an a priori justification for my metaphysics I posit: “All that exists is best understood as a single, complex system.”

    As epistemic justification I add:

    “Modern physics interprets the cosmos as a single physical system and this understanding informs its entire research program. Progress continues in discovering further dependable laws and relationships within the posited single system. Confirmation of the existence of the Higgs boson , as postulated, and the detection of gravitational waves from a distant cosmological event are recent demonstrations of the predictive power and experimental reach of modern physics. The overarching and clearly monist principle in modern physics is that of Relational Theory. The position and properties of any object, process or field can be determined only in relation to the positions and properties of other objects, processes or fields.

    Metaphysics can take this lead from the Relational System monism of modern physics and employ the thesis of a single, connected system to resolve the central philosophical problems of ontology and epistemology; the problems of being and knowledge. The relational system monism of physics yields successful theoretical and applied results in much of its investigative domain. By extension, this relational system monism may be used in metaphysics as an Occam’s Razor (simplest consistent explanation) to generate solutions for some of the most difficult problems in metaphysics and to dismiss certain philosophical “non-problems”, which are controversies arising solely from poorly justified suppositions.”

    Further:

    “The Whole and the Parts.

    Complex System Monism (CSM) does not assert “no parts”. It asserts connection of all parts in one system. Any “part” turns out to be a sub-system of the whole system. Monism as an ontological concept declares the oneness or singleness of all existence; a oneness or singleness which consists, under human empirical observation, followed by philosophical induction of hypotheses and scientific detection of essential consistencies, in the universality of certain fundamental laws across our known and observed cosmos. These laws are observed to connect the whole in the form of relational system parts (sub-systems). “The core tenet of historical monism is not that the whole has no parts, but rather that the whole is prior to its parts.”[3] The whole means “the entire cosmos, the ultimate concrete whole.” [4]

    Positing the whole as prior to the parts is consistent with theorised events in early cosmological emergence (e.g. the emergence of atoms) and also consistent with observations of biological evolution (the emergence of new species). New “parts” of priority monist existence arise (emerge or evolve) from the processual operations of the whole. This does not exclude, in theory at least, the emergence of new forms of the fundamental physical laws in very early cosmos evolution. “Even fundamental laws evidently changed form as the big bang cosmos cooled.” [5] However, these fundamental laws now manifest as consistent and durable laws in the universe broadly contemporaneous with human investigation, including signs or information from spacetime distant cosmological events, excepting those before the end of the hypothesised cosmic inflationary epoch. In summary, new parts, new complex sub-systems arise as “radical novelty” [6].”

    Notes:

    [3] “Monism: The Priority of the Whole” – Jonathan Schaffer
    [4] Ibid.
    [5] “Introduction to Philosophy of Complex Systems” – Cliff Hooker.
    [6] “Understanding emergence along the lines of self-organization has become so ubiquitous the two terms have just about become synonymous. However, the usual connotations of self-organization result in a misleading account of emergence by downplaying the radical novelty characterizing emergent phenomena. It is this radical novelty which generates the necessary explanatory gap between the antecedent, lower level properties of emergent substrates and the consequent, higher level properties of emergent phenomena. Without this explanatory gap, emergent phenomena are not unpredictable, are not non-deducible, are not irreducible, and thus are not truly emergent. For emergent phenomena to be genuinely emergent, processes of emergence must accomplish the seemingly paradoxical feat of producing an explanatory gap while simultaneously maintaining some degree of continuity with the substrate level.” – Professor Jeffrey A. Goldstein.

  4. I am responding here to remarks by Svante elsewhere.

    we’ve heard only recently yet again from government ministers, government officials, and economists that the alleged reason for the lengthy period sustained without recession is the boost to GDP and commensurate government revenue due to sky high migration numbers.

    I don’t know where you’ve heard that; I haven’t heard that. In the usual phrase at Wikipedia, ‘citation needed’; or, as it’s phrased elsewhere on the Web, ‘pics or it didn’t happen’.

    Apparently spending/borrowing is paid from revenue, no?

    In a word, no.

    ‘mike mb’ comments on posts concerning population/immigration issues at Macrobusiness. Those comments often consist of an updated listing of numbers pertinent to the OP. I suggest as far as it goes for me that validity for mike mb’s numbers can be claimed as they are frequently posted publicly in a largish open forum where they could be utterly shredded but quite apparently have not been.

    No, the fact that an assertion has been posted online and not contradicted is an inadequate basis for treating it as a reliable source of information.

    Sorry J-D if you wound your way through fist part of reply above. I still don’t get why 2/5 of 1/4 of population total is where guest worker cohort number lies.

    I don’t know what you mean by ‘guest worker’. I don’t know what mike mb means by ‘guest worker’ either. I can’t be sure, but it seems possible from mike mb’s comment, at the URL you cited, that ‘guest worker’ is being used in a way that means some citizens are counted as ‘guest workers’. That seems odd to me, so if that is the case, then I would like to have it explicitly confirmed (or, if it’s not the case and I’m wrong in thinking that’s a possible interpretation, I’d like to have that clearly stated). I’m working on the assumption that whatever ‘guest worker’ means, it doesn’t include citizens. Therefore, a rough estimate of the number of non-citizens in Australia represents an absolute maximum which the number of guest workers cannot exceed, and at the same time it’s not too hard to get a figure for it. The census collects information on country of birth. It’s true that not every single individual born in Australia is an Australian citizen, but I’m reasonably confident that the number of exceptions is small enough that it can be ignored if I’m only trying for an estimate to the nearest tenth of a million (but by all means let me know if you disagree; also, by all means let me know if you have reason to doubt the census figures for country of birth). On the other hand, many people not born in Australia either are or (statistically more significantly) become Australian citizens; it turns out that the ABS also reports figures on the percentage of people not born in Australia who have become citizens (which, again, you can give reasons for doubting if you have any).

    If you have a better idea about how to estimate the number of non-citizens in Australia (or some other way to estimate the number of ‘guest workers’, however you define that), by all means describe it.

    Your source mike mb has added up figures for the number of temporary residents, tourists/visitors, and overstayers. I don’t know where those figures came from, but it’s interesting to me that they add up to 2.7m, because if we’re only estimating to the nearest tenth of a million then it’s possible that the difference between 2.5m and 2.7m is only or mostly rounding error in the calculations. Anyway, 2.5m or 2.7m, neither way is it ‘millions and millions’, in your previous phrase. Millions, yes; millions and millions, no. Also, just as I think my calculation gives only a maximum, because I’ m not assuming all non-citizens count as ‘guest workers’, likewise I assume that not all temporary residents, tourist/visitors, and overstayers count as ‘guest workers’ (until I’m informed more explicitly of the definition), and so mike mb’s figure of 2.7m can be at best a ceiling, with the actual figure for ‘guest workers’ somewhere below it.

    Thankyou, but it is not a subject just I engage with, apparently. Your comment certainly leads to ideas as to what personal preoccupation/idee fixe may motivate your disregard and timing for such a highly topical, widely interlinked, and central politico-economic and environmental issue, one that attracts recurrent wide coverage and engagement at varying quality levels.

    It is rude to burst into other people’s discussions with a different topic of your own just because you think your topic is more important, and it’s still rude even if your topic actually is more important.

    In this case, John Quiggin hasn’t declared that your topic can’t be discussed. John Quiggin has made available this Sandpit specifically so that you can use it to discuss whatever you like.

  5. Language is the future…

    …”made me realise the power and complexity of how language is used, publicly and then privately. To revisit the past and outline what gave me certainty that we all take part in shaping the future of language, and thus, the future itself.”

    “I suddenly saw this person clearly. A person coming from a world, in 2016, with no clear rules of speech, again. Quite simply, he was suspicious of me, the liability, and unsure whether we could possibly show charity of interpretation — clarity, mutual understanding — to one another.”

    “I stopped in amazement in the middle of the street. I understood that again a problematised public discourse had entered private conversation, that of normal people, friends, and undid the trust on which we could build open cooperation. I knew at once that while my work focuses on the individual, the node, I should never lose sight of the wider system, and should continue to aim to provide private solutions that can contribute to the repairing of public language too.”

    “Allowing for language to be clear, understood and risk-free, I learnt, is of indispensable necessity for both the happiness and fulfillment — the productivity, health and relatability —of the individual, and the wider system in which they, we, all play our parts. Cooperation with self, with another, with everyone is established through and sustained with language.”
    View story at Medium.com

  6. Ikon… time is needed.

    J-D. A plea to our host would see your slip of the finger edited from history.

  7. Free speech!?

    Here is a neat paragraph better than my year 10 worthy prose ‘on isegoria’.

    This blog is sometimes, as JQ politely says: ” derailed the thread.”… and he provides here for speech imo as in “isegoria” curtailing “parrhesia”.
    Thanks JQ.

    “The Two Clashing Meanings of ‘Free Speech’

    “Greeks called isegoria, on the one hand, and parrhesia, on the other, is as old as democracy itself. Today, both terms are often translated as “freedom of speech,” but their meanings were and are importantly distinct. In ancient Athens, isegoria described the equal right of citizens to participate in public debate in the democratic assembly; parrhesia, the license to say what one pleased, how and when one pleased, and to whom.”

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/12/two-concepts-of-freedom-of-speech/546791/

    I note also Nic Gruen is using isegoria wildly relating to participative democracy.

    Isegoria by day, parrhesia when just “shooting the breeze”.

  8. J-D, you’ve yet again got rather much of nothing to give here other than more captious cavilling. Get a grip, please, and on reality. Any attempted kicking of sand in the eyes of observers of a very very bad large elephant observed in a room now sited elsewhere might best be done downwind, one would think. Diversionary ruminations, lack of sourcing of claims amid claims for sources easily found… not the least of it. And rude? Rude times two even? A reply directed to a comment by the blog owner backing a prior comment bringing a whopping great elephant they will not speak of into a room is rude? Got a grip on disingenuous capricious censoring much? Though few would claim so, a blog owner may have entitlement to be entirely arbitrary, but you J-D?

    Your last netiquette nazi point first…

    In fact an increasingly apparent disregard of said elephant was on show… Go check – for on this you readily can – no need for even a little googling effort. Recall precisely where that thread was supposedly ‘derailed’, and significantly how and by whom. It occurred here:

    johnquiggin.com/2019/04/06/the-average-median-worker-does-not-earn-the-arithmetic-average-wage/comment-page-1/#comment-208248
    mamikie says April 7, 2019 at 4:01 am
    The infamous NYT, infamous at least to that man in the oval office, has this story: https ://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/06/upshot/australia-lessons-economic-miracle.html
    It would be interesting to read your comments.

    Followed by this:

    johnquiggin.com/2019/04/06/the-average-median-worker-does-not-earn-the-arithmetic-average-wage/comment-page-1/#comment-208259
    John Quiggin says April 7, 2019 at 5:36 am
    @mamikie That’s a very good piece, thanks for pointing it out.

    I’ve no idea of mamikie’s competence in economics, do you?

    However it was the blog owner, John Quiggin, academic, UQ Professor in Economics, prominent public intellectual, who highly rated the NYT article despite it clearly being unbalanced gloss served up on behalf of Australian Government economic management credentials, the Australian banking industry, and the Australian banking regulators. The article clearly was pitched at the money markets of New York, the spin meant to prevent loss of, or attract funds for banks here, particularly any cheaper loan funds now become so necessary to sustain precariously situated Australian 4-pillar and other banking and finance, and the economy generally. A dodgy used car yard would find it hard to better lie by omission or gild any lily than the NYT article.

    As the article presented was so much sales tosh, and upon JQ’s following lauding of said rubbish, I replied making more or less the above points in my reply to mamikie and by implication to JQ here:

    johnquiggin.com/2019/04/06/the-average-median-worker-does-not-earn-the-arithmetic-average-wage/comment-page-1/#comment-208316
    Svante says April 7, 2019 at 12:24 pm
    Re: mamikie says April 7, 2019 at 4:01 am

    Further, in that reply I drew attention to the last resort great big migration economic and financial Elephant In The Room that was completely and no doubt deliberately omitted from the article. Don’t mention the elephant, indeed! That JQ would pass the article, and highly! without qualification, fail to see the ELEPHANT, or stick with a sorry occluding convention based on what can only be surmised, and not mention the elephant nor its supposed economic functions and knock-on effects rather amazed! More omission then, a twist in the rails deserving of comment and straightening correction, and additionally so, for the elephant is not just in the room. Australia no longer rides on the sheep’s back, but is now said to be mostly carried on the back of this migrating ponzi elephant, an unmentionable ponzi in some quarters beholden to the ultimate powers that be, and it follows that beneath such economic assumption asserted there may be elephants upon elephants beneath elephants upon elephants… all the way down.

    There it is. I did not ‘derail’ any thread. I responded to earlier ‘derailment’, if such, by conspicuously inconspicuous pachyderm at close quarters. Others followed suit.

    Second from last points second…
    For crying out loud, protect me from grammar nazi pathetics! 2.7m may be expressed as 2.7 millions as may, say, 1.4m plus 1.3m be expressed as millions and millions just as we have in this 2.7m category or grouping consisting of subcategories or groupings – wiktionary.org/wiki/millions – dictionary.com/browse/millions But, wait for it, there’s actually more! And I expect there may be yet more critiques in train on the ‘proper’ use of exclamation marks!!

    J-D “I assume that not all temporary residents, tourist/visitors, and overstayers count as ‘guest workers’”

    Why? Why not anyone of working age not a citizen or permanent resident? Your reasons are, what?

    TR visas? TRWIs? TVWIs/Tourist visa holders working illegally? Have you included, for example, those legally working such as the many hundreds of thousands of overseas students? I think not. Spouse entrants working legally but themselves not counted as visa entrants with work rights? You also rely from the top on misgovernment agency ABS figuring based on census data? How many of those “440,000 (TVWI) Tourist/Visitors Working Illegally plus 60,000 or more Overstayers onshore” plus 220,000 NZ SCV (of 650,000) non NZ born via the NZ back door (per mike mb 2.8m total in another link, see below) do you reckon the census would capture? How many is it actually when the ABS census fail consistently can’t capture me or mine and who knows how many more like us wary of Big Gov yet otherwise law abiding, gainfully employed, and nth+ generation resident stock citizens residing at the same suburban address for twenty-some years?

    The 2.5m / 2.7m figures seem near enough for argument sake to being 10% of the total population estimate. However, 2.7m is what percentage of the working age population? ‘Working age’ should be inclusive to some considerable extent of 15 to 64 year olds in addition to the 25 to 65 year olds to catch, for example, working students. Would it be around 17% (~2.7/~16.5) given that the 2.7m cohort would consist of more people of working age than the broader population?

    ABS Labour Force figures for February last http ://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6202.0 show: Seasonally Adjusted Employed persons 12763400, Unemployed persons 664300, Total 13427700, and participation rate of 65.6% of 20469000 rounded. The 2.7m guest workers alone may thereby comprise some 13% of the labour force (2.7m/20469000).

    Guest workers by that calculation unnecessarily displace up to around one in eight Australians from work!

    Ascending now towards your furthest from last point…

    J-D “I don’t know what you mean by ‘guest worker’. I don’t know what mike mb means by ‘guest worker’ either. I can’t be sure, but it seems possible from mike mb’s comment, at the URL you cited, that ‘guest worker’ is being used in a way that means some citizens are counted as ‘guest workers’.”

    The meaning is clear in any number of dictionary definitions. I’d be astonished if you can show that mike mb has stretched the definition in such a way. Are you able to indicate which particular part of which comment of mike mb’s has you worried?

    Really though, the question ought be: why don’t the misgovernment agencies nail the definition and the numbers? What stops them? Why do they so obviously fluff it deliberately, at least for public consumption, and attempt to cover the growing public concern with that with govspeak, eg., abc.net.au/news/2018-03-27/fact-check-one-in-ten-workers-temporary-visas/9572062 – sbs.com.au/news/unions-to-step-up-fight-on-guest-worker-system-of-temporary-migration (Wow! The ACTU and Migration Council exposed once again as allies there on the ponzi migration front.)

    J-D “No, the fact that an assertion has been posted online and not contradicted is an inadequate basis for treating it as a reliable source of information.”

    Not any online forum, one with many competent and eager to dispute, so very unlike unreliable government sites. Posted not once but often, as I said previously… Another day, another migration post, another list from mike mb, 2.8m guest workers here, DHA stats cited:
    https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2018/10/migrant-workers-robbed-1-billion-amid-endless-rorting/
    You could go check with DHA, or more reliable Hansard for various committee submissions/answers from DHA. or just ask mike mb for the reference location. What’s a hundred thou there, a rounding error, or product of cumulative government deceit?

    J-D “‘Apparently spending/borrowing is paid from revenue, no?’
    In a word, no.”

    What are you offering here, a trip on the side to MMT? Rather than the plain old as ordinarily understood tax and spend?

    J-D “…alleged reason for the lengthy period sustained without recession is the boost to GDP and commensurate government revenue due to sky high migration numbers.
    I don’t know where you’ve heard that; I haven’t heard that.”

    Well I heard it on the radio
    And I saw it on the television
    Back (repeatedly), all those talking politicians

    Words are easy, words are cheap
    Much cheaper than our priceless land
    But promises can disappear
    Just like writing in the sand (Apologies to Yothu Yindi)

    Where have you been, J-D? What do you think could be wrong with your hearing?

    “The Morrison government has pledged to reduce the migration rate but figures released on Wednesday show that without migrants fuelling consumption, Australia’s economic growth would be going backwards.”- smh.com.au/business/the-economy/australia-falls-into-per-capita-recession-as-growth-tumbles-20190306-p5122r.html

    “The majority of Australia’s population growth comes from immigration. In turn, Australia’s so-called economic miracle is based on immigration, too.”- foreignpolicy.com/2018/10/03/australia-the-worlds-first-immigration-economy/ ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bitstream/2123/18869/2/The%20World%E2%80%99s%20First%20Immigration%20Economy.pdf

    “George Tharenou, Economist at UBS. “Strong population growth is a key driver of Australia’s world record of 26-plus years of GDP growth without recession,” … “The strength of population growth has supported real GDP to grow by a solid annual pace of 2.5% to 3% in recent years, which is around most estimates of ‘trend’. … rather than an improvement in productivity, much of the headline growth has come through population growth, especially immigration from both permanent and temporary migrants… “Many migrants on temporary visas will likely not yet be counted in the NOM/population data. …”- businessinsider.com.au/australia-recession-gdp-economic-growth-population-immigration-2018-7

    “Australia’s GDP enhancing high population growth is coming at a cost of things not well captured, if at all, in the GDP data or measures of individual well-being.”- businessinsider.com.au/immigration-and-economic-growth-stephen-koukoulas-2018-8
    .
    “Australia is standing firm amid growing calls for immigration curbs, even as the U.S. and Europe succumb to rising populism. It has little choice if it’s to continue a period of record economic expansion.
    A flood of arrivals that’s swelled the population by 50 percent over the past three decades has underpinned economic growth and allowed a succession of governments to boast of avoiding recession since 1991. Populists are blaming immigrants for over-burdened infrastructure, soaring housing prices and low wage growth.”- bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-12/the-secret-to-avoiding-recession-in-australia-mass-immigration

    “Yet what anti-immigration proponents ignore is the fact that our immigration policy is a key factor keeping Australia out of recession today…
    The point is, Australia’s booming population, at 25 million, is one of the few things keeping us out of recession.
    The simple reason for this is that the more people there are, the more spending there is in the economy. That applies to both the public and private sector.”- dailyreckoning.com.au/australias-secret-to-dodging-a-recession/2018/07/24/

    “Australian Government Acknowledges Immigrants Are Boon to Economy… “This suggests that migration helped the economy successfully weather the Global Financial Crisis and the slow global growth and poor economic conditions that followed.””- nytimes.com/2018/04/17/world/australia/immigration-economy-report.html

    “If there is one big thing that is keeping the economy from officially going backwards, it is population growth. Take out the impact of the population, GDP growth is a very line ball call.”- abc.net.au/news/2019-03-03/households-living-standards-drop-on-gdp-per-capita-recession/10858812

    “There is little doubt that population growth is good for the federal budget; more workers equals more taxpayers… Prime Minister Scott Morrison, who as treasurer only four months ago defended Australia’s high immigration levels as crucial for the economy and the federal budget, has conceded trimming immigration is now on the agenda… And as Bill Shorten and Abbott have both pointed out, there are 1.6 million people in Australia on temporary work visas. Shorten, with the backing of the unions, wants to cut that number… the underlying point is immigration has been very good for this country,” Lowe (RBA) said… There is no doubt anxiety about population and immigration is running high. But the dilemma for Australia is that it has become addicted to population growth to expand the economy.”- https://www.afr.com/news/politics/national/australia-pop-50-million-migration-congestion-fears-also-growing-fast-20181122-h187ze

    …The foregoing an indicative sample of results for a lazily googled: australia gdp migration recession. I trust you’ll try improving on search terms as you see fit, if you care. I wish you well in digging up clips/sound bites from broadcast news items.

    Further guestworker elementary elephants in the room disection?
    https ://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2018/08/bill-shorten-backs-big-australia/ October 2018
    https ://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2018/10/migrant-workers-robbed-1-billion-amid-endless-rorting/ August 2018
    https ://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2018/04/australia-running-de-facto-low-skilled-immigration-policy/
    https ://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/saturdayextra/australias-default-immigration-policies/9777058
    https ://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2018/03/new-apri-report-australias-skilled-migration-con/
    https ://www.loc.gov/law/help/guestworker/australia.php USA Library of Congress Guest Worker Programs Australia

  9. Svante, is the above comment in the spirit of isegoria or parrhesia?

    Really c’mon – it is a tanty isn’t it.

    As I say to little people ” when you srop crying and throwing things it will be time fir a nap”.

    We accept mea culpas – in the sandpit.

  10. J-D “I assume that not all temporary residents, tourist/visitors, and overstayers count as ‘guest workers’”

    Why? Why not anyone of working age not a citizen or permanent resident? Your reasons are, what?

    Well, you’ve just given one of them yourself: not every non-citizen in the country is of working age. There are other reasons as well.

    The meaning is clear in any number of dictionary definitions.

    The dictionary definitions I looked at indicated that ‘guest worker’ means a person from one country with temporary permission to work in another country. By that definition, not all non-citizens in the country are guest workers, because not all non-citizens in the country have temporary permission to work here.

    What are you offering here, a trip on the side to MMT? Rather than the plain old as ordinarily understood tax and spend?

    No, that’s not what I’m offering.

    Where have you been, J-D?

    Australia. Why, where do you think I’ve been?

    What do you think could be wrong with your hearing?

    What do you think could be wrong with your hearing?

    smh.com.au/business/the-economy/australia-falls-into-per-capita-recession-as-growth-tumbles-20190306-p5122r.html

    According to that story, it was reported that GDP per capita decreased over the second half of 2018. Mathematically, there are onlly two possibilities: either that report is false, and GDP per capita did not decrease over the second half of 2018, or any increase in GDP over the second half of 2018 was a result of increase in population. It’s got to be one or the other, by a necessary mathematical identity. Do you have any view on which it was?

    More generally, it’s a necessary mathematical identity that if GDP per capita remains constant but population increases then total GDP increases. GDP per capita equals GDP divided by population, by definition, so GDP equals population multiplied by GDP per capita.

  11. J-D, you’ve yet again got nothing to give here other than captious cavilling and increasing nonsense.

    J-D – “Well, you’ve just given one of them yourself: not every non-citizen in the country is of working age. There are other reasons as well.”

    Most are of working age. You aren’t counting in genuine tourist kids and touring geriatrics are you? If you claim otherwise show why. For example, how many of the relevant temp entrants that have visas permitting some limited work for some limited time, or those exceeding such limits illegally, or the outright illegal working entrants are children or elderly here to work and displacing around one in eight Australian workers from employment.

    J-D – “The dictionary definitions I looked at indicated that ‘guest worker’ means a person from one country with temporary permission to work in another country. By that definition, not all non-citizens in the country are guest workers, because not all non-citizens in the country have temporary permission to work here.”

    More contortions! Not all non-citizens in the country not having temp work visas don’t work.

    J-D “‘What are you offering here, a trip on the side to MMT? Rather than the plain old as ordinarily understood tax and spend?’
    “No, that’s not what I’m offering.””

    A retreat into vagueness, again. Recall: “J-D “‘Apparently spending/borrowing is paid from revenue, no? ’In a word, no.””
    Clearly you would have an alternative in mind to ‘tax and spend’, so what are you offering then, if not dodging?

    J-D – “‘Where have you been, J-D?’ “Australia. Why, where do you think I’ve been?””

    Somewhere way out of the loop here.

    J-D “According to that story, it was reported that GDP per capita decreased over the second half of 2018. Mathematically, there are onlly two possibilities: either that report is false, and GDP per capita did not decrease over the second half of 2018, or any increase in GDP over the second half of 2018 was a result of increase in population. It’s got to be one or the other, by a necessary mathematical identity. Do you have any view on which it was?”

    Perhaps on your planet where in simple arithmatic two plus two may equal five for some values of two or because you like number five, maybe! You pick one reference of nine with excerpts and others I’ve listed that I lazily provided and you can’t even read and comprehend that one media article correctly. And you lazily bring nothing further to make your ‘case’.

    Of course GDP can grow whilst GDP per capita falls. This has been happening here for some time. But please show how you work the numbers where a population growing faster than GDP growth, as here, doesn’t result in decreasing GDP per capita, or disclose yourself as a troll and be done.

    J-D – “More generally, it’s a necessary mathematical identity that if GDP per capita remains constant but population increases then total GDP increases.”

    Sure, in some other period at some other place, but that is not what has been occurring here and lately where it has been a case of population growth faster than GDP growth. I ask again: where have you been? I get it that simple arithmatic is not your strong suit, but neither are rational argument, comprehension, nor humour.

    J-D – “GDP per capita equals GDP divided by population, by definition, so GDP equals population multiplied by GDP per capita.”

    Sure, but year on year in the real world here and now neither are static, nor have they been so. More generally I look forward to your advanced theory on different growth rates actually being the same rate. The graphing of such should be a real hoot. Perhaps you are leading the way to a new number law or to wholesale dumping of the old?

  12. KT2 – No such animal as a guest worker, just a colloquially made up.

    There’s no such thing as a dictionary nor multitudes of dictionaries either is there KT2?

    – J-D here is good start to answer…

    More lols

  13. There is a correlation between the number of people in a country and the number of people in jobs in that country. If the number of people in country X is about a hundred times the number of people in country Y, then country X will probably have something like a hundred times the number of people in jobs that country Y has; if the number of people in country X is about a million times the number of people in country Y, then country X will probably have something like a million times the number of people in jobs that country Y has. The correlation isn’t a perfect 100%, because employment rates and unemployment rates vary; but employment rates and unemployment rates are not correlated at all with population size. There’s no pattern of countries with more people having higher unemployment rates (and no patter of their having lower unemployment rates, either). When the number of people in a country goes up (or down) it has no general tendency to make the employment rate (or the unemployment rate) go up (or down); it might just as easily do either (or it might do neither).

    Of course GDP can grow whilst GDP per capita falls. This has been happening here for some time. But please show how you work the numbers where a population growing faster than GDP growth, as here, doesn’t result in decreasing GDP per capita, or disclose yourself as a troll and be done.

    Obviously if population increases while GDP decreases, by definition GDP per capita decreases. Indeed, if population increases while GDP remains the same, then GDP per capita decreases; or, if population remains the same while GDP decreases, then GDP per capita decreases. But a change in population size has no general tendency to cause a change in GDP per capita: it might go either way, or neither.

  14. Ha ha a flurry of grimy sand as the word jousting and finessing of the size of the migrant guestworker elephant in the sand pit is debated.

    It doesn’t exist. Or it’s actually a benevolent dolphin. Oh dear..

    ‘Migrant guestworker’ is a term used globally – adult working non citizen / non permanent resident in Australia. Migrant, guest, worker.
    Bangladeshi in Arab countries. Myanmar (Burmese) in Thailand. Nepalese in Japan, Indians in Europe or the US.

    Or even internally in China (migrant guestworker or ‘illegals’ – hukou pass system – 105 million of them).

    A non citizen or non permanent resident working, legally or illegally.

    We have over 2.561 million and that’s just the 1.892 million TR (temporary residents) and 669,000 SCV (NZ / Aust Special Category Visa.

    We had 2.431 million in March 2018. Plenty of reporting.

    VisaSure last March 2018 gives a nice summary plus links to DHA.

    https://www.vsure.com.au/many-temporary-residents-working-australia/

    And the DHA quarterly reports show a 5.3% overall growth in the last year.

    So in March 2019 (current) we now have 2,561,000 non resident migrant guestworkers based on the DHA quarterly updates & growth trend.

    That is an extra 130,000 non resident migrant guestworkers.
    Getting close to the PR intake numbers.

    The DHA reports lag – but you will find this correct.

    2.561 million migrant guestworkers. 10% of people in Australia. 15% or more of the workforce.

    That the vast majority are of third world origin is fact – the DHA statistical tables in the link show this (non OECD poor countries with low or very low gdp per Capita).
    That the vast majority are unskilled adults again is also indicated by the visa category & if primary or secondary.

    So a very conservative number is that 93% are third world origin / adult and unskilled – say 2.35 million.

    Their duration ranges from permanent stay (NZ SCV 90% one way intake flow & stay in Australia after their NZ transit stop) or very long stay visa durations – up to 9 years as a ‘student’ with visa extension & churn is not uncommon & 3 to 5 years for most other visa groups.

    Basically until they get the PR or continual visa churn & extension & they exit & re-enter..

    During that time here, they work both legally & illegally depending on their visa category.
    The simple test is that if work rights were removed on all TR & SCV visa categories – they would not be here – they do not bring in enough declared funds (only $2.4 billion) yearly & they could not afford to repay their foreign agent procurer debt, send back remittances or survive for more than a matter of months in our high cost economy. Most foreign students barely have enough funds to pay for their first semester and there is widespread fraud in the self declared or declared funds, once off check, the money whisked out and the student working illegally almost from arrival is the norm not the exception. The rich & selective high achieving foreign students do not come to Australia for an education, the standards and reputation of Australian education is debased globally now.

    What does come in is third world slum or rural poor (most Chinese for example are from the hukou misfit & petty criminal underclass), and if you travel to their countries of origin, say India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Korea, Thailand, Malaysia, Brazil etc – and see the agent procurers at work or spent time with what actually comes into Australia then that’s easily validated.
    Third world slum & rural poor clearance, along with the attendant misfits, undesirables, vice workers & mules laundering money for the foreign criminal syndicates.

    As one example 75% of the foreign students (now 722,000 – 660,000 are on a primary visa and 62,000 are so called ‘partners’ on secondary visas with full work rights & zero assimilation requirements) work both legally & illegally – 75% is the ratio according to UTS & Syd Uni studies.

    That the foreign students along with the illegally working tourists (covered later) are the epi-centre of the foreign run vice industry in Australia is no suprise.

    The other visa categories are also riddled with fraud & corruption.

    NZ SCV are now over 669,000 in Australia with 260,000 being non NZ born third world unskilled who used NZ as a transit stop – the genuine NZ born are actually going back. NZ has another 290,000 third world unskilled stacked up ready to enter Australia once they get the passport stamp.

    We then have 196,000 third world mostly petty criminals & misfits on the protection / bridging racket rorting the AAT process, a 90% rejection rate but only after 5 years of full work rights.
    We have a 170,000 (it varies by season) in systemic foreign run working holiday backpacker farmer bribes & labor ring fraud & so on, right down thru all the visa categories to the 64k or so overstayers no one ever seems to be able to find.

    It’s all broken, corrupted & it’s a laughing stock globally.

    On gdp per Capita – the average migrant guestworker income (TR / NZ SCV) is estimated at $43.7k by treasury, way below the Australian average. The net effect is to degrade Australian gdp per Capita by some 6.7%.

    They also degrade:

    Jobs 1.3 million Australians including PR unemployed, 1.1 million Australians including PR seeking work.

    The taxation base, fake ID, cash in hand as media reports indicate.

    Housing, illegal high density cash in hand subletting,

    Create mass homelessness- 116,000 Australians & PR permanent homeless & 340,000 without affordable housing.

    Overload on our Public infrastructure, trains roads buses.

    And our Education has fallen 10 places globally.

    And our environment, electricity, water and other capacity constraints are all degraded.

    -/-
    We also have 8.8 million tourist visitors yearly. The majority are from China, south East Asia & India. They do not stay in hotels or spend money on ‘holidays’ or ‘tourist activities’. They are typically aged, adult & stay with ‘Family’ or ‘friends’. Many enter on very long stay and repeat stay visas.
    5% of these tourist visitors are estimated to work illegally (the parliamentary task force 2015, extensive media reports).
    That is a very conservative estimate – but that is another another 440,000 (and you can assume all adult) migrant guestworkers working illegally.

    So totals…
    2.35 million adult third world migrant guestworkers of the 2.561 million total TR / SCV as above.

    Plus the 440,000 illegally working tourist adult migrant guestworkers.

    That’s 2.75 million Adult migrant guestworkers of the 3.0 million total.

    And so yes, that is ‘millions’ – plural.

    And btw it’s an 87% concentration in Sydney & Melbourne. ABS even admits the TR concentration is even worse than the 1.9 million PR at 84%.

    That’s 1.45 million TR / SCV in Sydney.
    🔻1 in 4 people a migrant guestworker.

    That’s 1.15 million TR / SCV in Melbourne.
    🔻1 in 5 people a migrant guestworker.

    And 400k elsewhere.

    Now you can all deny the ‘elephant in the sandpit’.
    Yep – use all the word sophistry or contorted logic you wish – but I don’t care, nor does the migrant guestworker elephant.

    It’s still a ‘third world migrant guestworker elephant’ in any common use of plain English.

    The answer:
    A Royal Commission on migration.

    Neither major political party will call a Royal Commission on this as both are beholden to increasing GDP by migrant intake even if it decimates the gdp per Capita & standards of living of Australians (including the PR).

    So it has to be forced by a controlling minority party, or the people themselves forcing this on the Government of the day.

    The outcome is simple:

    Remove migration setting powers (numbers & visa categories & controls) from the federal government.
    Have these settings on intake, quality, volume, settlement patterns & visa categories controlled by a representative independent authority.

    Then enforced by the government of the day as a directive from this authority.

    The very first directive needed is to exit at least 1.5 million migrant guestworkers in visa breach – who should never have been allowed in.

  15. …it’s a laughing stock globally.

    As they say on Wikipedia, ‘citation needed’; or, as they say elsewhere on the Web, ‘pics or it didn’t happen’.

    Remove migration setting powers (numbers & visa categories & controls) from the federal government.
    Have these settings on intake, quality, volume, settlement patterns & visa categories controlled by a representative independent authority.

    I have unrealistic fantasies too.

  16. It’s not unrealistic.
    And ‘“Australia education has fallen 10 places globally” is a good starting point. You do know that many courses ‘studied’ such as certificates & diplomas have no international accreditation and the progression of a foreign student in Australia into a professional high income vocation in their home country or here is under 4%.
    96% remain a useless third world unskilled burden.
    There is no reason to come to Australia for education – these ‘courses’ are available online or in their home country. They only come to work & work illegally.

    But back to the topic.
    Firstly – you are now clear on the fact that we have at least 3 million non citizen or PR migrants in Australia, with at least 2.7 million (millions) as adult third world migrant guestworkers.

    You also understand the common terms used “migrant guest worker” what it means, who it defines and that the numbers are real.

    You also can see that an extremely high proportion of these are in visa breach working illegally or on a visa pretext – lets do the sums again just for you and confirm it’s over 1.7 million that should be exited.

    🔻722,000 foreign students (primary & non primary partners as outlined) with over 550,000 working illegally (studies of this as proof are quoted). It was 672,000 last March 2018.
    That foreign students & the so called international student industry are a massive economic & social loss to Australia and not an ‘export’ at all can be the subject for another discussion.

    🔻669,000 NZ SCV with 260,000 non NZ born via the back door who could not get in front door.
    Why the average wage in this category has plummeted to even below the very low migrant guestworker average.

    🔻196,000 bridging & protection visas – the majority (90%) found invalid but working for up to 5 years as their category A-E etc is rorted thru the AAT.

    🔻170,000 or so (it varies seasonally) in endemic backpacker & working holiday visa fraud with farmer & labor ring bribes paid & over 90% as a FTE in the two major cities only venturing to rural & remote areas (or paying the bribe) for the visa extension.

    🔻155,000 so called skilled visas but only 71,000 the primary & of that less than 7,000 genuinely & uniquely skilled with an above average Australian income.

    🔻440,000 tourist visa holders (5% of 8.8 million) working illegally.
    Conservative.

    🔻43,000 so called DFAT, trade & special visas handed out like lollies to the corrupt elites of the third world or as trade deal grease.

    🔻64,000 overstayers.
    And so on. The visa category links, reference to DHA tables are posted in the original comment.

    It’s not just that we have a shockingly poor quality migrant PR intake (1.9 million in the last decade of which 78% were unskilled or dependent).

    We then have on top of that the equivalent of 14.5 years of PR intake in addition. 3 million plus onshore. 2.75 million as TR / SCV and the Tourist Visitors Working Illegaly (TVWI) as listed.

    Non tax paying / cash in hand / ABN fraud / fake ID / unskilled / third world migrant guestworkers.

    -/-

    A Royal Commission is the highest authority we have in our political structure.

    It’s function along with the Governor General is to act on a government request (or to dismiss a government) in the people’s interests when the political process fails.
    (Can’t govern, or fails to act in the security, social or economic interest of the Australian people)

    The majority of Australian people (citizen and PR) wish to see the migrant intake reduced.

    Neither political party has acted to that majority view.

    Our current migrant intake particularly the TR / SCV & TVWI intake creates major social and economic harm to Australians.

    This harm includes:
    🔹Massive scale visa fraud as outlined.
    🔹Both government’s flooding Australia with selective third world unskilled migrant guestworkers in visa alibis to create a gdp boost & underpin the housing & other debt bubbles – at the expense of lowering gdp per Capita & Australian/PR well being.

    The impacts include:
    🔹 Jobs loss & job theft. Record high structural unemployment especially in our youth, mature age & most vulnerable.
    🔹Wages loss & wages theft.
    🔹Falling wages.
    🔹Employment tenure loss. Cash & gig economy.
    🔹Housing / illegal use. Tens of billions of dirty foreign criminal syndicate money washed into modest low level Australian established residential dwellings to house the 2.7 million plus adult migrant guestworkers – sublet bunk share cash in hand goldmines.
    Where do you think they all live & how? Have you ever even been to Sydney western suburbs? Do you have any clue at all?

    The resulting property bubble & debt entrapment destroying Australian home ownership & also ‘normal use tenancy’

    🔹Mass Australian homelessness.
    🔹Congestion.
    🔹Bio security / health issues.
    🔹Non assimilation / issues in social cohesion.
    🔹Environmental degradation.
    🔹Cost of living impacts to Australians & PR.
    🔹Lowered productivity.
    🔹Tax avoidance & tax burden shifted onto Australians.
    🔹Crime & vice.
    🔹Degraded education.
    🔹Lowered standard of living.
    And much more.

    So there is plenty of fact & evidence for the people to demand a Royal Commission on this.

  17. There are some very interesting young philosophers on youtube. I’m really impressed with 19 year old Alex O’Connor. In this video he makes a case for veganism, although he is not currently a vegan. I’m not a vegan/vegetarian either and I have no plans to become one, but this video challenged me to justify my position.

  18. From a vegetarianism site:

    “Humans are classic examples of omnivores in all relevant anatomical traits. There is no basis in anatomy or physiology for the assumption that humans are pre-adapted to the vegetarian diet. For that reason, the best arguments in support of a meat-free diet remain ecological, ethical, and health concerns.” – Vegetarianism in a nutshell.

    The first two sentences are scientifically correct. The entirety of the third sentence does not follow. Certainly, there are some ecological and ethical reasons for adopting a vegetarian diet. However, the issue of health concerns is double-edged. Too much meat and animal fat is unhealthy for sure. But there are also challenges in ensuring a healthy vegetarian diet, especially for children. One has to make sure that all nutritional and trace element requirements are included in the diet. Oftentimes, the easiest way to ensure a balanced omnivorous diet with plenty of vegetables, fruit, pulses (legumes) and grains plus some milk, eggs, fish and red meats. Certainly, we in the West need to back off on red meats and even on fish, eggs and milk. The reasons are mainly ecological and human health reasons. We would have a lower ecological footprint with less of these in our diets and perhaps less of other health concerns. Some over-refined plant products cause huge health problems when over-consumed. Sugar is a case in point.

    Being an omnivore makes one a food generalist. In survival situations or economic depressions this can make a survival or health difference. Ultimately, I don’t see it as ethically wrong for an evolved omnivore to eat some meat. But certainly, we should end factory farming of animals and live exports (as examples). This in itself would entail eating less meat and causing less ecological damage.

  19. Ikonoclast:

    But there are also challenges in ensuring a healthy vegetarian diet, especially for children. One has to make sure that all nutritional and trace element requirements are included in the diet.

    The challenge is even greater if you are a poor person living in a poor country. In India it is a caste issue: ***www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/07/14/422592127/egg-wars-india-s-vegetarian-elite-are-accused-of-keeping-kids-hungry

    Ultimately, I don’t see it as ethically wrong for an evolved omnivore to eat some meat.

    A counter-argument is that humans are not obligate omnivores. We don’t need to eat meat. In fact, one of the world’s Blue Zones (long lived communities) is Loma Linda California, where vegetarianism is common. If meat isn’t necessary, how is killing of animals, in particular the more sentient ones like pigs, justified?

  20. !!! Populists like Svante. Would you point out Svante where you have – in a reasonable manner because you are bordering on racism — provided succinct non threatening solutions to your all encompassing (paraphrasing here) – “it’s guest workers wot done it!’ (-worth of the sun or news of the world.)

    You are just treating us and “others” like punching bags now, with your diatribe called “last resort great big migration economic and financial Elephant In The Room that was completely and no doubt deliberately omitted from the article”.

    As you said – “and upon JQ’s following lauding of said rubbish, I replied making more or less the above points in my reply to mamikie and by implication to JQ”. But you slag others and seem to be trying to rebutt an as yet unwritten piece by JQ! 

    To which JQ replied “Thanks, Svante, I’ll write about this when I feel the time is right.”.

    Do you always bully people into answering such an important point NOW, as J-D pointed out about you rudeness of doing in JQ’s blog.

    Svante,  it is ok to apologise to us and JQ, as you have shown abuse in need of an apology, by your gishgallops bordering on racism. See below for your own words. Nazi 2x as a minor example.

    Svante, it is ok to admit “it was omitted from the article” is obviously a trigger for your your populist stand. We get it. Write your own article. Get it published. Sky after dark or fox will be receptive.

    On this page of sandpit there are 47+ “guest” word mentions but your referece to guest seems light on hospitality Svante.

    Over to J-D… J-D says:
    APRIL 9, 2019 AT 11:56 AM
    “I don’t know what you mean by ‘guest worker’. I don’t know what mike mb means by ‘guest worker’ either.”
    Thanks J-D. I didn’t either until Svante outed himself. See below.

    As I said, guest worker ( ok for white collar?) now just a colloquially used and abused / abusive term as you ably demonstrate. 

    J-D says also; “whatever ‘guest worker’ means, it doesn’t include citizens”. We could come up with another set of humans not counted – “others” or euphemistically guest workers.

    Svante, “guest worker” is now used as a dog whistle in Australia and “elephant in the room” term, unhelpful in this ongoing diatribe. You out yourself as a populist the Bloomberg quote “Populists are blaming immigrants for over-burdened infrastructure, soaring housing prices and low wage growth.”. And worse later on.

    There IS NO Australian government visa or demographic definition of guest worker so therefore ANY figures about numbers of humans in Australia which use “guest worker”, as quote below implies imo, are from opinions and prejudices before or around ww2. Are you that old Svante?

    “IMPACT OF AUSTRALIA’S TEMPORARY WORK VISA PROGRAMS ON THE AUSTRALIAN LABOUR MARKET AND ON THE TEMPORARY WORK VISA HOLDERS
    “Committee view
    “2.103         Australia’s migration program, particularly since the end of World War Two, has resulted in a citizenship-based multicultural society that stands in stark contrast to the guest-worker model in many other societies.”
    https://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_business/committees/senate/education_and_employment/temporary_work_visa/Report/c02

    Such a loose term. Library of Congress has titles containing the “useless for winning an argument” words “guest worker” but zero mention in the text. This LoCongress page below is, svante, for people who don’t know the correct definition or term “guest worker” allowing “others” to find REAL detail. Something needed in your responses. I guess sky after dark or fox would lap it up.

    Here is a major source and magnifier for the colloquial term guest worker…
    “Guest Worker Programs: Australia”
    https://www.loc.gov/law/help/guestworker/australia.php

    Svante non isegoria quotes:-
     a couple of fixes below:
    atop a dirty great iceberg,
    lame
    ponzi migration scam numbers

    ‘plus of course the additional crushing weight of millions upon millions of ‘guest’ workers). ‘

    “they left out any old reliable NYT references to WMDs,”

    “a look at the numbers of 457…n work visa entrants, students!, backpackers, bridging visa holders, Pacific Islanders, Kiwi extended families, permanent resident entrants, family reunion entries, illegals, all the associated uncounted additional spouses also having right to work, …”

    “our ‘guest’ workers and used to bugger the wages, conditions, lifestyles, and environment” [ 2.5 M elephants trampling mdbasin? ]

    “can be claimed as they are frequently posted publicly in a largish open forum” [ like this largish now closed once open forum? stormfront – ‘ as of 2009, it had over 120,000 active members.”Wikipedia ] 

    ” I still don’t get why 2/5 of 1/4 of population total is where guest worker cohort number lies”

    “again shutting the issue down? [ Yet here you are Svante. ]

    “your disregard and timing for such a highly topical, widely interlinked, and central politico-economic and environmental issue, one that attracts recurrent wide coverage and engagement at varying quality levels. Adieu.” [ imho you needed to leave it there Svante. Literal or original – to god? ]

    “captious cavilling. Get a grip, please, and on reality. ”

    “very bad large elephant observed in a room now sited elsewhere might best be done downwind, ”

    “bringing a whopping great elephant they will not speak of into a room is rude?” [ MY fave ]

    “netiquette nazi ”

    “much sales tosh, and upon JQ’s following lauding of said rubbish,”

    “economic assumption asserted there may be elephants upon elephants beneath elephants upon elephants… all the way down.”

    “I did not ‘derail’ any thread. I responded to earlier ‘derailment’, if such, by conspicuously inconspicuous pachyderm at close quarters” [ the Bill Clinton defence ]

    “protect me from grammar nazi pathetics! ” [ 2nd use of nazi ]

    “u also rely from the top on misgovernment agency ABS figuring based on census data? ” [ a new trump miss universe – miss government agency! Sensa huma eh, svante ]

    “can’t capture me or mine and who knows how many more like us wary of Big Gov yet otherwise law abiding, gainfully employed, and nth+ generation resident stock citizens residing at the same suburban address for twenty-some years?”
    [ mirror Svante – “like us”. R word maybe? ]

    “unnecessarily displace up to around one in eight Australians from work!” [ Was that YOU I saw Svante, cleaning up vomit the other day at the old folks home Svante? ]

    “nail the definition and the numbers? What stops them? Why do they so obviously fluff it deliberately,” [ another standout ]

    “Posted not once but often, as I said previously… Another day, another migration post, another list from mike mb, ”
    “just ask mike mb for the reference location. ” [ mike mb would know! ]
    “Words are easy, words are cheap
    Much cheaper than our priceless land”
     “J-D? What do you think could be wrong with your hearing?”
    “Further guestworker elementary elephants in the room disection?”
    “KT2 – Yet again you’re showing that you have no idea.” [ my doe’s name! I was trying to point out how vague guest worker is! And next comment by you Svante ] “A retreat into vagueness, again”
    “Perhaps on your planet where in simple arithmatic two plus two may equal five”
    “you can’t even read and comprehend that one ”
    “simple arithmatic is not your strong suit, but neither are rational argument, comprehension, nor humour.” [ ah. The scoundrel – humour ]
    “There’s no such thing as a dictionary nor multitudes of dictionaries either is there KT2?” [ See above – now a dog whistle as I believe you reveal. Dictionaries are for definitions not compassion or philosophy ]

    It is irrelevant now to me Svante any words numbers or opinions you sprout re guest workers as you are abusive blaming and authoritarian bordering on racist. 

    Svante, please suggest a workable solution that provides for whatever you want,  without increasing populism and polarisation, nor using blanket people policies with little nuance. So as not to include the example below. Such a dna ledger would allow you to sort ” who knows how many more like us wary” people as opposed others not like us”.

    Example;
    First you’ll need a dictionary re “blanket”, and an economic, philosophical AND BIOLOIGAL AND LEGAL “dictionary definitions” too.

    “Towards the blanket coverage DNA profiling and sampling of citizens [ insert Svante’s “Further guestworker elementary elephants in the room disection” ] England, Wales, and Northern Ireland

    …”the UK Government has come under fire for its blanket-style coverage of the DNA sampling of its populace. Figures indicate that the UK Government retains a highly disproportionate number of samples when compared to other nation states in the Council of Europe (Co E), and indeed anywhere else in the world. In addition, the UK Government also retains a disproportionate number of DNA profiles and samples of specific ethnic minority groups such as the Black Ethnic Minority group (BEM). ”
    https://ro.uow.edu.au/eispapers/4135/

  21. Here is how to “put in the fix”:
    (The dicrionary didn’t have this definition )…

    …” In addition to AI’s significance for economic growth and military security, the Chinese government sees AI as a tool to improve social governance, which makes public security applications a large driver of China’s AI development. This also means that some Chinese AI companies are complicit with China’s mass surveillance of Xinjiang, an effort that disproportionately targets ethnic Uyghurs.”

    “Two of China’s most successful facial recognition startups, Sensetime, and Megvii (Face++), are involved in China’s efforts to securitize Xinjiang. At the 2017 China-Eurasia Security Expo, Megvii (Face++) was announced as an official technical support unit of the Public Security Video Laboratory in Xinjiang. Under the backdrop of the “Silk Road Economic Belt,” expos like these enable the export of China’s surveillance technology to Central Asian countries and beyond, as nearly 100 government agencies, experts, and procurement companies attended. The 2018 edition of expo featured the announcement of a joint venture company called Tang Li Technology by Sensetime and Leon Technology, a security systems integrator company that claims it is responsible for 50% of “safe city” projects in Urumqi, the capital of Xinjiang, as well as the maintenance of surveillance infrastructure for the border between Xinjiang and neighboring countries. It is also important to be precise about the technical capabilities of the security systems actually in implementation, as there are limits to continuous real-time location tracking due to limitations of facial recognition technology, camera costs, and constraints to compute power.
    https://chinai.substack.com/

  22. It’s not unrealistic.

    So there is plenty of fact & evidence for the people to demand a Royal Commission on this.

    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur:Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s