The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
"The End of the Australian Dream?"
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

From the NYT Op-Ed page:

The End of the Australian Dream?
Lisa Pryor MAY 1, 2017

SYDNEY, Australia — … In the past 20 years, Australia has become a nation where getting ahead is a national obsession, partly because we have come to expect a world where the natural course of events is to become a little bit richer each year. The winnings of our repeated economic booms have been squandered on inflationary policies that fuel the rat race.

What we are discovering is that when you have a nation full of people trying to get to the top, eventually most of the population is forced to run just to keep up. Our enviable quality of life is at risk.

Consider what has happened with the housing market, Australia being a country where real estate is not just a place to live but a ticket to prosperity and a statement of taste and values.

Generous tax breaks for homeowners and real estate investors have fueled the market to the point where the median price of a house in Sydney, our largest metropolis, is $1.1 million Australian dollars, or about $824,000.

An entire genre of newspaper writing is dedicated to telling Australians what they could buy for the same money in other parts of the world — a small chateau in the South of France, even an apartment in Manhattan, for the price of an ugly brick house 40 minutes’ drive from the center of the city. We watch shows like “Million Dollar Listing Los Angeles” and laugh.

… Australia has some of the highest household debt in the world, especially if you compare our debt to our incomes and G.D.P. We are poised for disaster if there is a serious economic downturn.

Even for those lucky enough to own their own home, there is a fool’s-gold feel to this property boom. After all, if you own a three-bedroom house five miles from the city and it increases in value by 50 percent, that means you still have only enough money to buy a three-bedroom house five miles from the city. This is not so much rising wealth as glorified inflation.

And for those who are not owners? The property boom is dividing the nation along lines of age and class. For young people, property prices represent dashed hopes and a looming intergenerational battle.

… Many middle-class parents have become anxious about sending children to the local public high school out of fear that they will lag behind their peers at schools that are expensive or academically selective.

We need to rediscover our egalitarian roots. It is true that Australian culture can be anti-intellectual. We can deride achievement and cut down those who succeed, in a phenomenon we call tall poppy syndrome. But the egalitarian values of our society should not be discounted. In fact, it is on the matter of egalitarianism that Australia has made some of its most important intellectual contributions to the world.

Australia was one of the first countries to institute a living minimum wage, in a famous court case back in 1907 regarding the employees of the Sunshine Harvester Works. The court decided that an unskilled worker should be paid enough to meet the needs of “a human being living in a civilized community,” which included keeping his family in “frugal comfort.” …

Of course, that was during the Completely Evil “White Australia” days. Wait a minute … do you think there might have been a connection between Australian egalitarianism and Australian anti-immigrationism?

… Nah!

You see, one thing is Good and the other thing is Bad.

We need to remember what makes Australia a fairy tale and protect it.

Of course, the text string “migra” doesn’t appear anywhere in this piece.

Australia has a policy against low-skilled immigration, so it still has a more prosperous native blue collar class than the U.S., but it encourages high skill immigration. This is less self-destructive than the U.S. policy, but it has obvious effects like squeezing younger natives out of the home-buying class.

 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Does Australia have a lot of foreigners parking their money in Aussie real estate for fun and profit?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Does Australia have a lot of foreigners parking their money in Aussie real estate for fun and profit?
     
    Is this a serious question?

    Of course, this whole phenomenon does not have a single causation hinted by Mr. Sailer (i.e. immigration). Back in the good ol' 70's the only non-Westerners with money were Gulf "oil sheikhs" or Hong Kong tycoons who also bought up luxury real estate in the West. But because there were so few of them, they were a rare oddity or two in most places.

    But, now, because of the economic rise of China, there is just so much more excess capital globally. And that capital can't just sit in the equities market or under mattresses. The main commonality among these disparate grouops of moneyed foreigners over time is that 1) they have excess capital AND 2) there is a high degree of uncertainty in their own domestic politics... this naturally leads to capital flight to the West. The difference between the past and today is the "democratization of millionaires" in the rapidly developing economies.
    , @anon
    Mainland Chinese are driving prices to the moon in the 5 mainland Capitals, and Canberra.
    Australian's standard of living was pretty ordinary until the MidSixties.
    The Whitlam socialist Government elected in 1972 removed protective Tariffs without warning or consultation, destroying the local Textile, Footwear and Clothing industries, and Britain's entry into the ECM devastated farming.
    Since Capital Gains Tax is exempted on one's ''principal place of residence'', Australians' main Insustry, unless you're either Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton, or Xstrata, is buying and selling houses in the capital cities for profit.
    , @PiltdownMan
    http://theconversation.com/why-chinese-investors-find-australian-real-estate-so-alluring-76310
    , @mantle of hate
    Does Australia have a lot of foreigners parking their money in Aussie real estate for fun and profit?

    Yes. Chinese especially are driving up Sydney prices
    , @Gladio
    Yes - Chinese buyers mostly, looking to park their ill-gotten gains in a country with the rule of law, good schools and clean air.
    , @Johann Ricke

    Does Australia have a lot of foreigners parking their money in Aussie real estate for fun and profit?
     
    My impression is that this is more for safety than anything else. The investors are from countries where government confiscation of private property for political reasons or just because isn't unheard of. Take Indonesia. A huge US multinational like Freeport McMoran has had the value of its mineral concession, developed and maintained at the cost of billions of dollars in investment, take a huge dive because the government decided it couldn't export any more copper until Freeport built a new smelter at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. Now this is a major company generating annual profits in the billions (in the good years), with substantial financial and legal resources and the US State Department in its corner.

    A millionaire local entrepreneur who has his assets taken by some greedy bureaucrat or pol is basically screwed. So he parks some of his money outside the country. And those who are tired of living in fear simply take their money and their families to the West, and cut the cord.
    , @22pp22
    New Zealand does - big time. Auckland is out of most Kiwis' price range.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/isteve/the-end-of-the-australian-dream/#comment-1856313
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Australia has a policy against low-skilled immigration, so it still has a more prosperous native blue collar class than the U.S., but it encourages high skill immigration. This is less self-destructive than the U.S. policy, but it has obvious effects like squeezing younger natives out of the home-buying class.

    It is actually more destructive, inasmuch as it more effectively wrests control of the country from the native people and places it into the hands of a hostile elite. It much more akin to an overthrow or to conquest. (And hostile elites are more likely to open the flood gates to low-skilled immigration anyway.)

    Read More
    • Agree: ben tillman
    • Replies: @Altai
    I'm always nervous of the already high and growing numbers of Han Chinese in Australia and New Zealand even more so with a resurgent China. Given their high numbers they will dominate in universities and universities push the social agenda. New Zealand is even worse because there is comparatively fewer ethnic groups there, making the Chinese more prominent. Could there be a prominent ethnic Chinese party one day? Or maybe a lot of Han MPs in one or the other. Then there is the question of a popular revolt or CCP purge leading to a mass exodus of Han oligarchs (Above what we're already seeing) to those countries establishing significant wealth and political influence.

    You could imagine large amounts of state assets being privatised or agricultural land being sold to China. If and when the sun sets on American military hegemony, Australia and New Zealand are a long way from the core of the West.

  3. Too bad we don’t require people to work and at least keep their family in “frugal comfort.” Ask any lib if they want their house to be worth more or less in ten years. Then ask them what’s the best way for their choice to happen.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivy
    Always worth asking the question but don't be surprised if they can't grasp the concept or formulate a coherent response. Oz isn't the only place with fairy tale thinking.
  4. We need to remember what makes Australia a fairy tale and protect it.

    Two words: White Australia

    Read More
    • Replies: @George Strong
    "Just desserts" demands that all white countries that give up being white be destroyed for their ignorance and political correctness. Australia is well on their way, as is the US and much of Europe.
  5. @Joe Schmoe
    Does Australia have a lot of foreigners parking their money in Aussie real estate for fun and profit?

    Does Australia have a lot of foreigners parking their money in Aussie real estate for fun and profit?

    Is this a serious question?

    Of course, this whole phenomenon does not have a single causation hinted by Mr. Sailer (i.e. immigration). Back in the good ol’ 70′s the only non-Westerners with money were Gulf “oil sheikhs” or Hong Kong tycoons who also bought up luxury real estate in the West. But because there were so few of them, they were a rare oddity or two in most places.

    But, now, because of the economic rise of China, there is just so much more excess capital globally. And that capital can’t just sit in the equities market or under mattresses. The main commonality among these disparate grouops of moneyed foreigners over time is that 1) they have excess capital AND 2) there is a high degree of uncertainty in their own domestic politics… this naturally leads to capital flight to the West. The difference between the past and today is the “democratization of millionaires” in the rapidly developing economies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    Is this response serious?

    Everyone with a pulse knew all of the things you list before you typed them.

    Joe Schmoe's rhetorical and somewhat sarcastic point (I implore him to correct me if I am wrong) is that the behaviour is unacceptable, and the traitorous governments in European nations ought to stop enabling, and, indeed, encouraging it. We are all well aware of the invaders' and interlopers' motivations, and we bloody well don't give a hoot in Hell.

    If a man rapes my wife it is no answer to bloviate about his motivations. Was he misogynistic? Merely horny? Did he have it in for her, or for me? Both of us? Was it a happenstance crime of opportunity or was he an obsessed stalker? What other opportunities for sexual release were available? After all, didn't he have to inevitably park his sexual capital somewhere? Not one of these questions would cross my mind, not even fleetingly, as I methodically broke every bone in the monster's body.

    I am reminded of an earlier post someone made to the effect of "Whatever shall impoverished Mexicans do if they cannot invade the U.S.A.? Farm with sticks? One cannot expect them to be subsistence farmers." Well, I can and I do. If they can do something else, good for them, but they may not do it at my expense. May every lonely man find a date – but my lady is off limits, and if violating her is his only opportunity, he had good and well better think twice and reach for a box of tissues instead.

    China and India, to name two of the most egregious examples, effectively forbid any foreigner from owning realty. The former effectively forbids immigration as well. But old Trumplestiltskin, the traitorous clown, thinks it is just swell he sells so much realty to them.

    World War Four may or may not be fought with sticks and stones, but World War Three will be intranational and interracial, you may depend upon it.
    , @Lurker

    The main commonality among these disparate grouops of moneyed foreigners over time is that 1) they have excess capital AND 2) there is a high degree of uncertainty in their own domestic politics
     
    I wonder why money from booming China flees to boring whitebread Oz/NZ/US/Europe and not the other way around?

    No, I got nothing.
  6. When is the average Westerner going to realize that mass immigration only benefits the wealthiest few while making life worse on average for everybody else? Australia was doing great before nonwhite immigration. Why did the population let those in power start to ruin such a nice and pleasant country.

    Read More
  7. Chuck Woolery says it’s alive and well:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Boyle
    Yes it's true. Australian Dream did indeed relive my arthritis pain in the shoulder. And all the other things he said are also true - it doesn't smell or stain. It is in fact a mystery. Most of the other topical arthritis creams are full of menthol which really stinks up the joint (pun intended). But Australian Dream has no odor at all.

    So I looked into its ingredients. But they don't publish their ingredients. I couldn't discover how it worked on my arthritis.

    PUNCH LINE

    But I don't have arthritis. I thought I did but I don't. My shoulder hurts because of a rotator cuff injury I acquired in my youth. The doctor gave me a shot of cortisone and I'm largely pain free.

    Australian Dream seems to succeed by the Placebo Effect. It does nothing because it contains nothing - except hope.

  8. Pence says US will honor Obama-era refugee deal with Australia

    Under the arrangement, agreed by former US President Barack Obama and Turnbull in November within days of Trump’s election, Australia would transfer up to 1,250 refugees currently held in offshore detention centers on the Pacific Island nation of Nauru and Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island to the United States. Many are from Iran.

    In return, Australia would resettle refugees from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, according to Reuters news agency, as part of a US-led program in Central America.

    http://www.wcvb.com/article/pence-says-us-will-honor-obama-era-refugee-deal-with-australia/9544240

    Read More
  9. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Joe Schmoe
    Does Australia have a lot of foreigners parking their money in Aussie real estate for fun and profit?

    Mainland Chinese are driving prices to the moon in the 5 mainland Capitals, and Canberra.
    Australian’s standard of living was pretty ordinary until the MidSixties.
    The Whitlam socialist Government elected in 1972 removed protective Tariffs without warning or consultation, destroying the local Textile, Footwear and Clothing industries, and Britain’s entry into the ECM devastated farming.
    Since Capital Gains Tax is exempted on one’s ”principal place of residence”, Australians’ main Insustry, unless you’re either Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton, or Xstrata, is buying and selling houses in the capital cities for profit.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Richard of Melbourne
    "Mainland Chinese are driving prices to the moon in the 5 mainland Capitals, and Canberra." - Definitely true for Sydney and Melbourne, but not the case for other cities (Perth house prices have been falling in recent times).

    "Australian’s standard of living was pretty ordinary until the MidSixties." - From the 1850s to the 1890s Australians' standard of living (per capita GDP) was the highest in the world (few people, a lot of gold, wool and wheat).

    It then declined modestly and for nearly the whole of the 20th century was around 80 per cent of the US level. On the back of strong Chinese demand for raw materials (we export massive amounts of iron ore and coal to them) it recovered from the 1990s and has been quite close to the US level (occasionally higher, mostly a little lower) since the early 21st century.
    , @Tacitus
    Australia was doing fine before the Replace-the-Bogan Immigration Policy. It's still a great place.

    https://youtu.be/vR1CU8NjGW0
    , @cynthia curran
    Yes, but the other culprit is low interest rates, it drives up housing cost even if you don't have a lot of cash buyers to drive it up. The Aussies did the Obama thing basically grew the economically through low interest rates.
  10. @Opinionator

    Australia has a policy against low-skilled immigration, so it still has a more prosperous native blue collar class than the U.S., but it encourages high skill immigration. This is less self-destructive than the U.S. policy, but it has obvious effects like squeezing younger natives out of the home-buying class.
     
    It is actually more destructive, inasmuch as it more effectively wrests control of the country from the native people and places it into the hands of a hostile elite. It much more akin to an overthrow or to conquest. (And hostile elites are more likely to open the flood gates to low-skilled immigration anyway.)

    I’m always nervous of the already high and growing numbers of Han Chinese in Australia and New Zealand even more so with a resurgent China. Given their high numbers they will dominate in universities and universities push the social agenda. New Zealand is even worse because there is comparatively fewer ethnic groups there, making the Chinese more prominent. Could there be a prominent ethnic Chinese party one day? Or maybe a lot of Han MPs in one or the other. Then there is the question of a popular revolt or CCP purge leading to a mass exodus of Han oligarchs (Above what we’re already seeing) to those countries establishing significant wealth and political influence.

    You could imagine large amounts of state assets being privatised or agricultural land being sold to China. If and when the sun sets on American military hegemony, Australia and New Zealand are a long way from the core of the West.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dr. X

    You could imagine large amounts of state assets being privatised or agricultural land being sold to China. If and when the sun sets on American military hegemony, Australia and New Zealand are a long way from the core of the West.
     
    ...and when the SHTF Down Under, the disarmed white Australians will be powerless to do anything about it.
    , @Je Suis Charlie Martel
    Didn't Kevin MacDonald first write about the "overseas Chinese" -how they as merchants came to dominate larger ethic groups in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines etc.? Why not Australia next?
    , @CrunchybutRealistCon
    If AUS/NZ want to get a glimpse of the future, they would do well to study the regions of San Francisco, Seattle, Vancouver. Those cities are choc full of Asian money causing real estate speculative bubbles likely far worse than in Sydney. The problem with allowing Asia's elite to squirrel its money into getaway homes in North America is that this same elite won't stay behind in Asia to fight for a civil society there, or help with general quality of life issues for the middle class. These fleeing Asian elites are either profiting from their homeland government's corruption, and are simply quasi-fugitives, or they are devoid of noblesse oblige - with no regard for giving back to their lessers & societies. It simply looks like Universal altruism, or even regional altruism is a quaint outdated western notion. The winners from Globalism are increasingly just locusts. While many of these Asian expats may be 'proud of their heritage' - that is a just pose to conceal their raw materialism.
    , @anon
    "..when the sun sets on American military hegemony.."

    I have always felt that Australia should and could develop nuclear weapons as the ultimate guarantee of its safety as Israel has done. And unlike Israel it has all that space in the outback too. It is as foolish for Australia to believe America can/will always protect it as earlier generations of Aussies naively believed that Great Britain would. Where was the British navy, army and air force to protect Australia from Japan in 1941-42? John Curtin knew the truth in his famous speech. But Australia can go and America can still hold on too.
  11. Mental As Anything. Sydney in the early 80′s

    Read More
    • Replies: @academic gossip
    Australia in those years was like a 1950's USA made whiter and more Anglo-Saxon/ Irish, with better technology and greater sexual freedom.
  12. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Real estate price inflation has more to do with the lack of capital controls than immigration. And the ultimate cause is the lack of or insufficient land value taxation coupled with higher taxation on other things.

    Domestic elites are wealthy people who own lots of real estate and other assets, and thus have an incentive to promote capital inflows that inflate their portfolios.

    If the right-wing really wants to shut down immigration and capital flows, they should organize and push for land value taxation. Domestic elites will never tolerate significant land value taxation, as the lack of significant land value taxation is the ultimate source of their wealth and power over the rest of society. But if faced with the prospect of land value taxation, domestic elites will allow for immigration and capital controls to placate the populace and to prevent the land value tax and thus protect their rents and wealth.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/byron-wien-on-why-inequality-has-gotten-worse-in-the-us-2017-5

    He argues that it has something to do with the fact that the wealthy own homes and stocks, while the less affluent do not.

    “How did [the widening inequality gap] happen? Wealthy people own the expensive real estate where they live, and may have other expensive properties as well. They are also more likely to own common stocks. Both the real estate and the equities have appreciated,” he wrote.

    “The less affluent tend to be renters with limited equity holdings. Many live paycheck to paycheck and their personal wealth has not appreciated significantly,” he added.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seth Largo
    Any "land value taxation" will end up so riddled full of loop-holes that it won't hurt the rich but will actively hurt 50 and 60 year old middle-class types who thought they could retire comfortably but now can't.
    , @AnotherDad

    If the right-wing really wants to shut down immigration and capital flows, they should organize and push for land value taxation.
     
    This is going at it sideways. Why do i want to push for "land value taxation"? Most people want to own a patch--consider it part of a middle class lifestyle. And the rich actually own *less* real estate per their wealth than middle class people--whose main asset often is their home.

    If i "want to shut down immigration and capital flows" the easy way to do that is to ... *shut down immigration and capital flows*.

    Capital controls is the easy way to tackle the trade issue, without kicking off a trade war. Just force the balance--you want to send money "out" to buy imports, then you need to grab money that came "in" to buy our exports. And even easier than that there's absolutely no reason foreigners need to be buying passive real-estate in the US. If BMW wants to build a new plant--fine. But we don't need Chinese buying houses in Seattle. (And i say this as someone whose house has inflated by at least a couple hundred thousand in the last few years--of course, absolutely useless to me unless i'm going to sell and move and actively harmful to my kids and other young people). Nor do we need Saudis buying Iowa farmland.

    And the way to tackle immigration is to just stop it. Mass immigration is utterly useless and actively destructive. Once the conquest\settlement of a territory is complete and you have an economy up and running--as the US and Australia did over a 100 years ago--there's no need for more people. And there's particularly no need for anyone who is foreign in background. And doubly no need for anyone who by racial, religious or cultural background will tend not to integrate and create division and conflict.

    Fixing immigration is easy--just *stop*.
  13. The article seemed full of implied references to the C-word….
    Yet ‘Chinese’ never appeared.

    Read More
  14. OT:

    The rich-kid college eruptions continue.

    http://www.startribune.com/st-olaf-students-boycott-classes-in-protest-of-latest-racial-incident/420895163/

    NORTHFIELD, MINN. — Hundreds of students, some wearing pajamas, others carrying pillows and blankets, gathered on the St. Olaf College campus Monday morning to protest a string of racist incidents over the past school year, the latest being a threatening note that was left on the windshield of a black student’s car demanding that she “shut up or I will shut you up.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @interesting
    hoax, i'll bet you $1.....be sure to follow up on this. The majority of these turn out to be hoaxes.
    , @Pericles
    The note was deemed white because not misspelled?
    , @AnotherDad

    The rich-kid college eruptions continue.
     
    You can judge the power of PC, but the fact that there is definitely "market failure" in the college market. Even small colleges that are struggling, absolutely refuse to grab the opportunity--for which i think there's clearly a market--to just cater to the white middle classes with a school that isn't constantly pushing "diversity uber alles", is free of the continual racial mau-mauing and offers a no-excuses traditional education.

    St. Olaf is an example. It's a decently regarded liberal arts college. (One of my scouts--very sharp, high-quality kid--went there back in 2010.) Probably averages around 50th for liberal arts colleges on the various national lists. It's core appeal is essentially to midwestern Lutherans--i.e. white people. And it could just go with that, and be a great place for midwestern Lutherans to get a solid education and meet high-quality midwestern Lutheran marriage partners. But no! It feels the need to go out, find and drag onto campus a few blacks, and create all the diversity drama that makes colleges look like outposts of PC stupidity and Maoist reeducation rather than "higher learning". Of course, in St.Olaf's case a good bit of this is related to the insanity rolling through the Evangelical Lutheran Church.

    But it's telling that *no* college seems to be able to grab this opportunity, even though there clearly must be a good tranche of white parents who lean conservative and would rather see their kids on a campus that has a traditional curriculum and orientation and would be a place where their children might meet a like minded mate. Obviously the existing faculty is one of the barriers, but it doesn't seem like one that couldn't be overcome. Yet this market opportunity seems to be essentially ignored. Hillsdale is the only example i can think of and it is very explicitly Christian. It seems like there's room for way more than Hillsdale, including ones whose orientations are more secular "western-civ".

  15. Speaking of housing prices:

    Pittsford homeowners among the least overleveraged


    Pittsford residents have a median mortgage debt of $137,728, while their median home value is $234,400. With a median income of $53,056 annually, Pittsford homeowners have a mortgage debt-to-income ratio of 260 percent. Their mortgage debt-to-house value ratio is 59 percent.

    Pittsford tied for the No. 1 ranking with 37 other towns.
    ……
    The most overleveraged area nationwide is San Luis Obispo, Calif., where the median mortgage debt is $333,641 and residents average just $16,565 in wages annually. Homeowners there have a mortgage debt-to-income ratio of 2,014 percent.

    That’s just insanity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Grumpy
    I hope it's the Cal Poly students who account for the low average income in SLO.
    , @Opinionator
    That’s just insanity.

    What do you consider a reasonable ratio and why?

    , @FPD72
    It would be insane if it were true. There is nothing in the body of your comment to support your penultimate sentence. What evidence is there that HOMEOWNERS have an average income of only $16,565? You are assuming that homeowners have the same average income as the city average. I'm betting that isn't the case. As others have noted, SLO is the home of a large university, Cal Poly, which no doubt brings down the average income. Plus, I would hazard a guess that in most cities that homeowners have a higher average income than the general population. I'm also guessing that SLO has a lower than average percentage of residents who are homeowners.
  16. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    We need to rediscover our egalitarian roots. It is true that Australian culture can be anti-intellectual. We can deride achievement and cut down those who succeed, in a phenomenon we call tall poppy syndrome. But the egalitarian values of our society should not be discounted. In fact, it is on the matter of egalitarianism that Australia has made some of its most important intellectual contributions to the world.

    What do you mean “we”, paleface? Wander through Melbourne and Sydney, the incipient Chinese colonies. Where does one find “tall poppy syndrome”? Where is the “mateship”? The media has had us sell our posterity for among other things, ethnic restaurants, aka a mess of pottage.

    Australia has a policy against low-skilled immigration, so it still has a more prosperous native blue collar class than the U.S., but it encourages high skill immigration. This is less self-destructive than the U.S. policy, but it has obvious effects like squeezing younger natives out of the home-buying class.

    Go to a capital city and try to catch a taxi with white Australia driver. Taxi driving is obviously an extremely highly skilled position.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde

    What do you mean “we”, paleface? Wander through Melbourne and Sydney, the incipient Chinese colonies.
     
    30 years ago New York City had one Chinatown in lower Manhattan. Now it has five with (iirc) two in Brooklyn, two in Queens plus the old one in Manhattan.
  17. I recently moved from Wolli Creek, a suburb of Sydney about ten kilometres from the Sydney CBD. It is not completely representative of Sydney suburbia, being mostly built on reclaimed industrial land and largely comprising modern high-rise apartments. Two bedroom apartments sell for around $A800,000. There are several real estate agents in the immediate area and most of their marketing efforts are in Chinese. Marketing in English is very limited. My estimate of the ethnic make up of the area is that maybe ten percent of the residents are native Australians and probably sixty percent Asians, mostly Chinese, with some Thais and Japanese. The balance seem to be mainly younger white renters from England, Ireland and Eastern Europe. I think apartment owners would skew more heavily Chinese with most of the apartments being sold off the plan in Shanghai before anyone in Australia even knows about them.
    From time to time the mainstream press raises the heretical thought that maybe allowing the richest twenty million Chinese to outbid young Aussies for Australian houses isn’t good for social harmony, but this never gets much traction, maybe because real estate advertising seems to be all that’s saving most newspapers from going broke.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TheJester
    A quick glance at geography makes it clear that Australia's future as a Western nation has always turned on borders closed to Asian immigration ... with the closure enforced by military alliances with the Anglo-American Empire. Since colonization, to the north and west of Australia there are and always have been billions of Asians clamoring to get in on the material, social, and technological benefits of Western Civilization and its high-trust social order. Now, it appears that wealthy Chinese, as in Canada and the United States, are being given an opportunity to buy their way around borders to hide their ill-gotten wealth in real estate and other ventures in anticipation of the eventual end of the Chinese social experiment in predatory capitalism.

    It's sad ... but it seems that the crack in Australia's closed borders will only get wider until it results in, at the least, progressive Chinese control of the economy, and, at the worst, massive Asian immigration. But the worldwide, Western disposition for national suicide via immigration by alien cultures and religions is not unique to the Australians ... cf. Western Europe, Canada, and the United States. RIP!
  18. @Anon87
    Speaking of housing prices:

    Pittsford homeowners among the least overleveraged


    Pittsford residents have a median mortgage debt of $137,728, while their median home value is $234,400. With a median income of $53,056 annually, Pittsford homeowners have a mortgage debt-to-income ratio of 260 percent. Their mortgage debt-to-house value ratio is 59 percent.

    Pittsford tied for the No. 1 ranking with 37 other towns.
    ......
    The most overleveraged area nationwide is San Luis Obispo, Calif., where the median mortgage debt is $333,641 and residents average just $16,565 in wages annually. Homeowners there have a mortgage debt-to-income ratio of 2,014 percent.


    That's just insanity.

    I hope it’s the Cal Poly students who account for the low average income in SLO.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivy
    SLO has ag lands nearby with field and crop workers, too.
  19. @Anon87
    Speaking of housing prices:

    Pittsford homeowners among the least overleveraged


    Pittsford residents have a median mortgage debt of $137,728, while their median home value is $234,400. With a median income of $53,056 annually, Pittsford homeowners have a mortgage debt-to-income ratio of 260 percent. Their mortgage debt-to-house value ratio is 59 percent.

    Pittsford tied for the No. 1 ranking with 37 other towns.
    ......
    The most overleveraged area nationwide is San Luis Obispo, Calif., where the median mortgage debt is $333,641 and residents average just $16,565 in wages annually. Homeowners there have a mortgage debt-to-income ratio of 2,014 percent.


    That's just insanity.

    That’s just insanity.

    What do you consider a reasonable ratio and why?

    Read More
    • Replies: @PiltdownMan

    What do you consider a reasonable ratio and why?
     
    Back in the 1980s, underwriting guidelines for mortgages required that the monthly payment not exceed 28% of income. That was pretty much an iron rule in those times in the industry, before the go-go era of innovation in home mortgages that followed in the next two decades. I cannot recall if that was driven by the underwriting criteria for off-take by Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
  20. @anon
    Mainland Chinese are driving prices to the moon in the 5 mainland Capitals, and Canberra.
    Australian's standard of living was pretty ordinary until the MidSixties.
    The Whitlam socialist Government elected in 1972 removed protective Tariffs without warning or consultation, destroying the local Textile, Footwear and Clothing industries, and Britain's entry into the ECM devastated farming.
    Since Capital Gains Tax is exempted on one's ''principal place of residence'', Australians' main Insustry, unless you're either Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton, or Xstrata, is buying and selling houses in the capital cities for profit.

    “Mainland Chinese are driving prices to the moon in the 5 mainland Capitals, and Canberra.” – Definitely true for Sydney and Melbourne, but not the case for other cities (Perth house prices have been falling in recent times).

    “Australian’s standard of living was pretty ordinary until the MidSixties.” – From the 1850s to the 1890s Australians’ standard of living (per capita GDP) was the highest in the world (few people, a lot of gold, wool and wheat).

    It then declined modestly and for nearly the whole of the 20th century was around 80 per cent of the US level. On the back of strong Chinese demand for raw materials (we export massive amounts of iron ore and coal to them) it recovered from the 1990s and has been quite close to the US level (occasionally higher, mostly a little lower) since the early 21st century.

    Read More
  21. @Altai
    I'm always nervous of the already high and growing numbers of Han Chinese in Australia and New Zealand even more so with a resurgent China. Given their high numbers they will dominate in universities and universities push the social agenda. New Zealand is even worse because there is comparatively fewer ethnic groups there, making the Chinese more prominent. Could there be a prominent ethnic Chinese party one day? Or maybe a lot of Han MPs in one or the other. Then there is the question of a popular revolt or CCP purge leading to a mass exodus of Han oligarchs (Above what we're already seeing) to those countries establishing significant wealth and political influence.

    You could imagine large amounts of state assets being privatised or agricultural land being sold to China. If and when the sun sets on American military hegemony, Australia and New Zealand are a long way from the core of the West.

    You could imagine large amounts of state assets being privatised or agricultural land being sold to China. If and when the sun sets on American military hegemony, Australia and New Zealand are a long way from the core of the West.

    …and when the SHTF Down Under, the disarmed white Australians will be powerless to do anything about it.

    Read More
    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @Clyde

    …and when the SHTF Down Under, the disarmed white Australians will be powerless to do anything about it.
     
    Afraid of Han Chinese domination within 35 years? What I find interesting is Chinese have to cross the equator to accomplish this.

    The air travel (bird fly) shortest distance between Australia and China is 7,448 km= 4,628 miles.
     
  22. @Joe Schmoe
    Does Australia have a lot of foreigners parking their money in Aussie real estate for fun and profit?

    Does Australia have a lot of foreigners parking their money in Aussie real estate for fun and profit?

    Yes. Chinese especially are driving up Sydney prices

    Read More
  23. @Joe Schmoe
    Does Australia have a lot of foreigners parking their money in Aussie real estate for fun and profit?

    Yes – Chinese buyers mostly, looking to park their ill-gotten gains in a country with the rule of law, good schools and clean air.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bomag
    If they are indeed, "ill-gotten gains", do we really need or want them around?
  24. @Twinkie

    Does Australia have a lot of foreigners parking their money in Aussie real estate for fun and profit?
     
    Is this a serious question?

    Of course, this whole phenomenon does not have a single causation hinted by Mr. Sailer (i.e. immigration). Back in the good ol' 70's the only non-Westerners with money were Gulf "oil sheikhs" or Hong Kong tycoons who also bought up luxury real estate in the West. But because there were so few of them, they were a rare oddity or two in most places.

    But, now, because of the economic rise of China, there is just so much more excess capital globally. And that capital can't just sit in the equities market or under mattresses. The main commonality among these disparate grouops of moneyed foreigners over time is that 1) they have excess capital AND 2) there is a high degree of uncertainty in their own domestic politics... this naturally leads to capital flight to the West. The difference between the past and today is the "democratization of millionaires" in the rapidly developing economies.

    Is this response serious?

    Everyone with a pulse knew all of the things you list before you typed them.

    Joe Schmoe’s rhetorical and somewhat sarcastic point (I implore him to correct me if I am wrong) is that the behaviour is unacceptable, and the traitorous governments in European nations ought to stop enabling, and, indeed, encouraging it. We are all well aware of the invaders’ and interlopers’ motivations, and we bloody well don’t give a hoot in Hell.

    If a man rapes my wife it is no answer to bloviate about his motivations. Was he misogynistic? Merely horny? Did he have it in for her, or for me? Both of us? Was it a happenstance crime of opportunity or was he an obsessed stalker? What other opportunities for sexual release were available? After all, didn’t he have to inevitably park his sexual capital somewhere? Not one of these questions would cross my mind, not even fleetingly, as I methodically broke every bone in the monster’s body.

    I am reminded of an earlier post someone made to the effect of “Whatever shall impoverished Mexicans do if they cannot invade the U.S.A.? Farm with sticks? One cannot expect them to be subsistence farmers.” Well, I can and I do. If they can do something else, good for them, but they may not do it at my expense. May every lonely man find a date – but my lady is off limits, and if violating her is his only opportunity, he had good and well better think twice and reach for a box of tissues instead.

    China and India, to name two of the most egregious examples, effectively forbid any foreigner from owning realty. The former effectively forbids immigration as well. But old Trumplestiltskin, the traitorous clown, thinks it is just swell he sells so much realty to them.

    World War Four may or may not be fought with sticks and stones, but World War Three will be intranational and interracial, you may depend upon it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Everyone with a pulse knew all of the things you list before you typed them.
     
    Stop with the posturing.

    the traitorous governments in European nations
     
    The country under discussion is Australia.

    If a man rapes my wife it is no answer to bloviate about his motivations.
     
    Someone with legal training ought to know the difference beween a violent crime and a voluntary real estate transaction between two private parties. Now, certainly polities can and should have a debate about regulating foreign ownership of property within them, but that's not nearly the same thing as something like rape. After all, is it rape if your wife freely, on her own accord, took money for another man's "sexual capital"? It seems to me that your analogy needs some work.

    World War Three will be intranational and interracial, you may depend upon it.
     
    Sounds like your own desire for civil and race wars is making you believe that you can foresee the future.

    Oh, and we already fought the Third World War. It was against Islamic terrorists, and I participated.

  25. Australia is by far the wealthiest real country I have visited, not in GDP, but in net wealth, probably the best measure we have of actual prosperity. Not long ago, Greek immigrants were considered Asians and Irish were undesirables. I recommend watching some episodes of “Border Security: Australia’s Front Line” to get a sense of what’s happening these days.

    Read More
  26. @Joe Schmoe
    Does Australia have a lot of foreigners parking their money in Aussie real estate for fun and profit?

    Does Australia have a lot of foreigners parking their money in Aussie real estate for fun and profit?

    My impression is that this is more for safety than anything else. The investors are from countries where government confiscation of private property for political reasons or just because isn’t unheard of. Take Indonesia. A huge US multinational like Freeport McMoran has had the value of its mineral concession, developed and maintained at the cost of billions of dollars in investment, take a huge dive because the government decided it couldn’t export any more copper until Freeport built a new smelter at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. Now this is a major company generating annual profits in the billions (in the good years), with substantial financial and legal resources and the US State Department in its corner.

    A millionaire local entrepreneur who has his assets taken by some greedy bureaucrat or pol is basically screwed. So he parks some of his money outside the country. And those who are tired of living in fear simply take their money and their families to the West, and cut the cord.

    Read More
  27. I’m told by a resident of Sydney that it’s in the same boat as Vancouver: it’s a magnet for rich Chinese.

    The situation is every bit as bad in Vancouver as Sydney.

    The Chinese, to their credit, don’t cause obvious problems, like becoming an underclass. Or being Muslims who drive cars into crowds.

    But all this Chinese money has distorted the economy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    As Europe's leaders want to replace the population with Arab and Black Muslims, Australia's want to replace it with South Asian Muslims and a Chinese ruling class.
    , @Buck Turgidson
    I know it's wild and crazy, but how about the Chinese just STAY HOME and invest their money in ... be sitting down for this ..... CHINA.

    Let them work w the Chinese government to change the investment climate and all the other reasons why of course they look to get out of China and invest elsewhere. Not our problem here in the US. I want my damned country back.
  28. @Altai
    I'm always nervous of the already high and growing numbers of Han Chinese in Australia and New Zealand even more so with a resurgent China. Given their high numbers they will dominate in universities and universities push the social agenda. New Zealand is even worse because there is comparatively fewer ethnic groups there, making the Chinese more prominent. Could there be a prominent ethnic Chinese party one day? Or maybe a lot of Han MPs in one or the other. Then there is the question of a popular revolt or CCP purge leading to a mass exodus of Han oligarchs (Above what we're already seeing) to those countries establishing significant wealth and political influence.

    You could imagine large amounts of state assets being privatised or agricultural land being sold to China. If and when the sun sets on American military hegemony, Australia and New Zealand are a long way from the core of the West.

    Didn’t Kevin MacDonald first write about the “overseas Chinese” -how they as merchants came to dominate larger ethic groups in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines etc.? Why not Australia next?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitchell Porter
    '“overseas Chinese” ... Why not Australia next?'

    As an Australian I thank you for this comment.

    For some time I have been trying to imagine what the next stage of Australia could be like. There was black Australia; then there was white Australia; now we have globalized immigration and voter dissatisfaction, but that's not a new paradigm. I had imagined partition of the continent among the big Asian powers, and that could happen if the world has a serious ecological crisis, but for now that's just me trying to fill the void left by a cultural elite who are against the old Australia and who are busy dissolving it, but have no image of what they are creating.

    But this makes absolute sense. We will end up like our neighbors in South-east Asia, with the nation economically dominated by our "overseas Chinese". It won't be perfect, it will have all sorts of troubles, but certainly much worse fates are possible.
  29. @Opinionator
    That’s just insanity.

    What do you consider a reasonable ratio and why?

    What do you consider a reasonable ratio and why?

    Back in the 1980s, underwriting guidelines for mortgages required that the monthly payment not exceed 28% of income. That was pretty much an iron rule in those times in the industry, before the go-go era of innovation in home mortgages that followed in the next two decades. I cannot recall if that was driven by the underwriting criteria for off-take by Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Thanks. I'm not sure how to make the comparison of that guideline to the numbers in the other post but I appreciate the response.
  30. @Altai
    I'm always nervous of the already high and growing numbers of Han Chinese in Australia and New Zealand even more so with a resurgent China. Given their high numbers they will dominate in universities and universities push the social agenda. New Zealand is even worse because there is comparatively fewer ethnic groups there, making the Chinese more prominent. Could there be a prominent ethnic Chinese party one day? Or maybe a lot of Han MPs in one or the other. Then there is the question of a popular revolt or CCP purge leading to a mass exodus of Han oligarchs (Above what we're already seeing) to those countries establishing significant wealth and political influence.

    You could imagine large amounts of state assets being privatised or agricultural land being sold to China. If and when the sun sets on American military hegemony, Australia and New Zealand are a long way from the core of the West.

    If AUS/NZ want to get a glimpse of the future, they would do well to study the regions of San Francisco, Seattle, Vancouver. Those cities are choc full of Asian money causing real estate speculative bubbles likely far worse than in Sydney. The problem with allowing Asia’s elite to squirrel its money into getaway homes in North America is that this same elite won’t stay behind in Asia to fight for a civil society there, or help with general quality of life issues for the middle class. These fleeing Asian elites are either profiting from their homeland government’s corruption, and are simply quasi-fugitives, or they are devoid of noblesse oblige – with no regard for giving back to their lessers & societies. It simply looks like Universal altruism, or even regional altruism is a quaint outdated western notion. The winners from Globalism are increasingly just locusts. While many of these Asian expats may be ‘proud of their heritage’ – that is a just pose to conceal their raw materialism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    The problem with allowing Asia’s elite to squirrel its money into getaway homes in North America is that this same elite won’t stay behind in Asia to fight for a civil society there

    "The problem"? Shouldn't we be far more concerned with the rising cost of living in our great cities, the dilution of citizenship, the competition of their children against ours, the lack of assimilation, the loss of social cohesion, the rootlessness of local property owners?
    , @anon
    San Francisco, Seattle, Vancouver

    Rather those than Detroit, Chicago or Baltimore?
  31. I don’t realistically you can stop people from giving you money. The market ultimately will prevail against attempts to control capital.

    Read More
    • Replies: @donut
    "I don’t realistically you can stop people from giving you money" WTF ? I thought Chinnaman was so so smart and love me long time .
    , @Anon
    No, but you can refuse to honor the obligations accompanying the "gift", which if enforced will quickly dry up the supply of such gifts.
    , @Wilkey
    I don’t realistically you can stop people from giving you money. The market ultimately will prevail against attempts to control capital.

    If what you are referring to is foreigners buying homes in Western countries, then true, you probably can't stop them. But, as I already posted above, you can stop them from living in or even visiting those homes. If the Chinese or others want to funnel oodles of money into the real estate markets in Australia, Canada, the US, and elsewhere then left them, if we have to. Maybe we even want to. But let them know that those homes will never be anything more than rental properties or mere vacation homes for no more than a few weeks per year.

    Banning foreigners from investing in Australian or American residential properties might violate various trade agreements, but you can unquestionably use federal, state, and local tax policy to favor primary residences over second homes and investment properties. Combined with more sane immigration policy - a significant reduction in legal immigration and stricter limitations on visitors visas - you could "encourage" foreigners to unload a lot of the homes they've purchased.

  32. @Daniel Chieh
    I don't realistically you can stop people from giving you money. The market ultimately will prevail against attempts to control capital.

    “I don’t realistically you can stop people from giving you money” WTF ? I thought Chinnaman was so so smart and love me long time .

    Read More
  33. @PiltdownMan

    What do you consider a reasonable ratio and why?
     
    Back in the 1980s, underwriting guidelines for mortgages required that the monthly payment not exceed 28% of income. That was pretty much an iron rule in those times in the industry, before the go-go era of innovation in home mortgages that followed in the next two decades. I cannot recall if that was driven by the underwriting criteria for off-take by Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

    Thanks. I’m not sure how to make the comparison of that guideline to the numbers in the other post but I appreciate the response.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Let's go through a hypothetical case. Perhaps someone with more business background can generalize this.

    Assume a $500k mortgage (also assuming a near zero down payment for the problem cases) with a $100k annual income (this is a 5x ratio per your earlier comment). It looks like 4% is a decent estimate for a 30 year fixed mortgage rate now (note how important interest rate is in payment to income ratio calculations, i.e. affordability!, and remember how much higher interest was in the 1980s). Using a payment calculator http://www.calculator.net/payment-calculator.html?ctype=fixterm&cloanamount=500000&cloanterm=30&cmonthlypay=1000&cinterestrate=4&printit=0&x=59&y=12
    we find the monthly payment is $2,387.08 which is $28,645 annually (i.e. just over PiltdownMan's 28% criterion). This gives an example of someone who just bought a house and has a 100% LTV (loan to value ratio), a 500% loan to income ratio, and a 28.6% payment to income ratio.

    When thinking about mortgage risk it is important to realize the direct effect down payment has on LTV (e.g. 20% down means you start with a 80% LTV rather than 100%). Another way of expressing this is the homeowner has 20% rather than 0% skin in the game when considering a default. Still another way of expressing this is 5x financial leverage rather than infinite leverage. Understanding financial leverage is critical to understanding financial risk, and a home/mortgage is the only substantial leveraged financial investment (i.e. possibly appreciating, contrasted with car loans, etc.) the average person will ever make. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leverage_(finance)

    Now let's look at the original comment.

    Pittsford residents have a median mortgage debt of $137,728, while their median home value is $234,400. With a median income of $53,056 annually, Pittsford homeowners have a mortgage debt-to-income ratio of 260 percent. Their mortgage debt-to-house value ratio is 59 percent.

    Pittsford tied for the No. 1 ranking with 37 other towns.

     

    His "mortgage debt-to-house value ratio" is the same as my LTV. It is a key measure of mortgage risk: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loan-to-value_ratio
    Arguably one of the main drivers of the housing crisis was high LTVs because of low/no down payment loans. This allowed people to walk away from loans without much financial consequence spurring a vicious cycle. 59% sounds good (and it is for a single somewhat recent loan) until we start thinking about where in the mortgage life cycle the average loan is.

    His "mortgage debt-to-income ratio" is the same as my " loan to income ratio". At 260% it is about half of my example, which should result in a ~14-15% payment to income ratio. Again, sounds low, but remember it is an average (actually, a calculation based on medians).

    The most overleveraged area nationwide is San Luis Obispo, Calif., where the median mortgage debt is $333,641 and residents average just $16,565 in wages annually. Homeowners there have a mortgage debt-to-income ratio of 2,014 percent.

    That’s just insanity.
     
    That IS insanity. As another commenter noted, it probably has something to do with SLO being a college town. What we are probably looking at is a housing market that is disproportionately rentals with high occupancy (e.g. 4+ in a single family house). Roughly (2,014 / 500 * 28.6) that gives a payment to income ratio of over 100% (compared to 28% guideline mentioned, so all income would go to mortgage payment). I don't really know SLO, but similar cities might have some grad students and lower income workers paying 50% or more of income for rent of a single room.

    CA real estate has some special features that are worth considering. Prop 13 caps assessed value at the original purchase price (or 1978 value) with a 2% increase per year. You can literally have identical houses next door to each other with one assessed at $50k and the other assessed at $1M. Property tax is about 1% annually so one person is paying $500/year and the other is paying $10,000/year. The average income in SLO probably can't afford the average property tax payment (not to mention house payment) for recent transactions.

    That combined with incredible appreciation and refinancing based on those much higher values results in a wide variety of specific circumstances which IMHO makes it hard to interpret averages.
  34. I realised a some years ago, returning to Sydney after having lived and worked elsewhere, that the local property market was for two-income couples who weren’t afraid of taking on a mountain of debt.

    Being single, and a person for whom debt is a four-letter word, I had neither the chance nor the desire to buy into the market.

    It was a shock to see the average price of houses in Earlwood, where while I was an undergrad I used to visit a girlfriend at her parents’ house, pass $1 million. Then the average valuation for houses in my parents’ suburb, not far away and in a seriously unloved part of Sydney, surpassed $1 million.

    While at my job in Sydney about four years ago, I was asked to write a research piece on Australian property prices. In my research, I read somewhere that a contemporaneous survey taken in China revealed that something like 400 million of China’s new middle class would like to come and live in Australia.

    It’s very real, and it’s a tremendously sobering statistic, given that our total population is about 5 per cent of that. The demand for Australian housing out of China is immense, the buyers are price-insensitive – they just want to get their money, and if possible their kids, out of the world-historical ponzi scheme and political prison camp that is modern China – and the Australian elite, both politicians and developers, realise that, at current prices, the money flowing in from China is the only thing holding the insanely-leveraged price structure up. All the powerful interest groups have an interest in keeping the inflation game going. Only the kids are appalled at it, but they don’t have voice.

    Other causes of the catastrophe are government land-release policies aimed at minimising land-release for housing development, in order to maximise government revenues (massive moral hazard here), and the Reserve Bank’s having taken house prices out of the measure of consumer prices in 1998 in favour of a more theoretically-pure measure of cost of housing services, so that for 19 years massive rises in house prices have occasioned no tightening response from monetary policy.

    Australia has a policy against low-skilled immigration, so it still has a more prosperous native blue collar class than the U.S., but it encourages high skill immigration. This is less self-destructive than the U.S. policy, but it has obvious effects like squeezing younger natives out of the home-buying class.

    The anger about this among young people is white hot. Having been required to pay many thousands for their university educations, they are thrown into competition in the job market and the housing market with what looks like an endless supply of foreign workers brought to Australia by the elite to keep effective demand up and wages down. They are really, really pissed off, and yet the elite are refusing to change course. This should sound familiar!

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Its not just Chinese. I lived in Indonesia and I would estimate that a full 100% of the population would move to Australia if chanced .
  35. The US & Europe have immigration policy akin to jumping behind the wheel of a car and putting your foot to the floor driving as fast possible towards a cliff. Probably while knocking back copious amounts of vodka.

    Australian immigration policy is more like getting behind the wheel, wearing a seatbelt and sipping low alcohol beer and driving at a sedate 50 mph – towards a cliff.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Australian immigration policy is more like getting behind the wheel, wearing a seatbelt and sipping low alcohol beer and driving at a sedate 50 mph – towards a cliff.

    I don't know where you've been lurking, but I suggest it's under a rock. Australia's net migration per capita rate is among the highest in the world. There are few countries that exceed Australia's net migration per capita and they don't include the USA or most countries in Europe. Australia's rate is three times that of the USA's.

    To use your analogy, what Australia is doing is like strapping JATO rockets to your car and aiming it at a cliff. "What is it like to be a Tibetan in Tibet, or Dutch in Formosa (Taiwan), deep in the orbit of China? Well hop in, why don't we find out!" - Australia's politicians maniacally cackle out the window.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate
  36. Are we in a US housing bubble again?

    https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2017/04/25/home-prices-rose-5-8-year-over-year-in-february-32-month-high-nsa

    With an inflation correction to the Schiller house price index I don’t think it’s yet indicated. We’re at about 2003 house price levels. We’ve probably got a couple years to go before they peak. In the end, a the prices now depend on very low interest rates, and it will take a while for the fed to jack those up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lugash
    Bill McBride at Calculated Risk adjusts the indexes for inflation:

    https://4.bp.blogspot.com/---ox6h7syUI/WP-5OmCcs1I/AAAAAAAAq6Y/ZFbbhzuy9WwGwAbSf22JztQcueR-ZpkFwCLcB/s1600/RealFeb2017.PNG

    I'd say we're in a mini bubble. The government would be risking an economic slow down increasing interest rates. They could use other things in the toolbox to deflate it, but I don't think they'll risk it.
    , @MarcB.
    "Are we in a US housing bubble again?"

    Yes and no. Yes, because the cost of a single family home (in a desirable neighborhood) in many major markets outstrips the recommended 3x annual income. No, because it's the new normal in a country with stagnant wages/salaries and an increasing population. People are more accepting of expensive housing costs as the cost of entry. The next recession will not crash the domestic housing market.

    The relief valve in the bubble markets of the early 2000's were affordable rents. My ex rented a huge 17oo sq ft apartment in West Hollywood off of Sunset for $1500. The mortgage on a comparably sized home in the same neighborhood would have been over $4,000. NYC and other major cities had similar correlations. Rents all over are now closer to parity with the mortgage of a comparably priced home, and are no longer the deals they once were. The housing collapse contributed to a rental boom. While housing prices in a post-2008 economic collapse economy are severely over-valued, they can be sustained unless the job market gets much worse.
  37. @Ellis Bell
    Mental As Anything. Sydney in the early 80's

    https://youtu.be/Mwx8YDlrjK4

    Australia in those years was like a 1950′s USA made whiter and more Anglo-Saxon/ Irish, with better technology and greater sexual freedom.

    Read More
  38. @Twinkie

    Does Australia have a lot of foreigners parking their money in Aussie real estate for fun and profit?
     
    Is this a serious question?

    Of course, this whole phenomenon does not have a single causation hinted by Mr. Sailer (i.e. immigration). Back in the good ol' 70's the only non-Westerners with money were Gulf "oil sheikhs" or Hong Kong tycoons who also bought up luxury real estate in the West. But because there were so few of them, they were a rare oddity or two in most places.

    But, now, because of the economic rise of China, there is just so much more excess capital globally. And that capital can't just sit in the equities market or under mattresses. The main commonality among these disparate grouops of moneyed foreigners over time is that 1) they have excess capital AND 2) there is a high degree of uncertainty in their own domestic politics... this naturally leads to capital flight to the West. The difference between the past and today is the "democratization of millionaires" in the rapidly developing economies.

    The main commonality among these disparate grouops of moneyed foreigners over time is that 1) they have excess capital AND 2) there is a high degree of uncertainty in their own domestic politics

    I wonder why money from booming China flees to boring whitebread Oz/NZ/US/Europe and not the other way around?

    No, I got nothing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    In no small part, its money laundering. Even when it isn't, its still an effort to exchange capital for real estate similar to what Japan was doing when Japan was cash-rich and land-poor. However, while the Japanese aimed for corporate buyouts(which didn't seem like it worked out), the Chinese focus almost entirely on property for a variety of reasons including the cultural.
    , @Twinkie

    I wonder why money from booming China flees to boring whitebread Oz/NZ/US/Europe and not the other way around?

    No, I got nothing.
     
    What's unusual about this trend is just how widespread it is.

    Back in the day when Saudi or Hong Kong money was buying up Western real estate, there just weren't enough of these Saudi or Hong Kong rich folks affect the larger market.

    What's different about China today is that it combines the rather unusual situation of "democratization of millionaires" (or billionaires) with a high degree of political repression/instability.
  39. @Lurker

    The main commonality among these disparate grouops of moneyed foreigners over time is that 1) they have excess capital AND 2) there is a high degree of uncertainty in their own domestic politics
     
    I wonder why money from booming China flees to boring whitebread Oz/NZ/US/Europe and not the other way around?

    No, I got nothing.

    In no small part, its money laundering. Even when it isn’t, its still an effort to exchange capital for real estate similar to what Japan was doing when Japan was cash-rich and land-poor. However, while the Japanese aimed for corporate buyouts(which didn’t seem like it worked out), the Chinese focus almost entirely on property for a variety of reasons including the cultural.

    Read More
  40. @CrunchybutRealistCon
    If AUS/NZ want to get a glimpse of the future, they would do well to study the regions of San Francisco, Seattle, Vancouver. Those cities are choc full of Asian money causing real estate speculative bubbles likely far worse than in Sydney. The problem with allowing Asia's elite to squirrel its money into getaway homes in North America is that this same elite won't stay behind in Asia to fight for a civil society there, or help with general quality of life issues for the middle class. These fleeing Asian elites are either profiting from their homeland government's corruption, and are simply quasi-fugitives, or they are devoid of noblesse oblige - with no regard for giving back to their lessers & societies. It simply looks like Universal altruism, or even regional altruism is a quaint outdated western notion. The winners from Globalism are increasingly just locusts. While many of these Asian expats may be 'proud of their heritage' - that is a just pose to conceal their raw materialism.

    The problem with allowing Asia’s elite to squirrel its money into getaway homes in North America is that this same elite won’t stay behind in Asia to fight for a civil society there

    “The problem”? Shouldn’t we be far more concerned with the rising cost of living in our great cities, the dilution of citizenship, the competition of their children against ours, the lack of assimilation, the loss of social cohesion, the rootlessness of local property owners?

    Read More
    • Replies: @CrunchybutRealistCon

    Shouldn’t we be far more concerned with the rising cost of living in our great cities, the dilution of citizenship, the competition of their children against ours, the lack of assimilation, the loss of social cohesion, the rootlessness of local property owners?
     
    These issues are usually well addressed by others on this board. What is often ignored is that the West is often not absorbing the "cream" of the developing world w/ investor class immigrants. We are simply absorbing the fugitive beneficiaries of a Globalist sweat shop orgy. These folks are just fleeing a nest they fouled in an industrialization free of pollution controls or labor standards . The negative externalities of China's denuded landscape, poisoned rivers & smog are simply left to the plebs to choke on. We will see a lot more of this as the plutocrat veneers of other 3rd world countries try to bail out & take refuge in little Western pockets they will try to colonize. The lack of noblesse oblige in the 3rd world ruling elite, leads to even more migratory pressure into the 1st world later. Bottom line: immigration should be restricted across the board.
  41. “the natural course of events is to become a little bit richer each year”

    My natural course of events for me here in the states is too hold on for dear life and hope that i don’t keep getting poorer ever year………my income peaked in 1997. I have zero bargaining power as the work will just go to China. As a matter of fact the ONLY obvious explanation is the purposeful destruction of American industry.

    Read More
  42. @George
    Pence says US will honor Obama-era refugee deal with Australia

    Under the arrangement, agreed by former US President Barack Obama and Turnbull in November within days of Trump's election, Australia would transfer up to 1,250 refugees currently held in offshore detention centers on the Pacific Island nation of Nauru and Papua New Guinea's Manus Island to the United States. Many are from Iran.

    In return, Australia would resettle refugees from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, according to Reuters news agency, as part of a US-led program in Central America.

    http://www.wcvb.com/article/pence-says-us-will-honor-obama-era-refugee-deal-with-australia/9544240

    So yet another Trump sell out.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Boyle
    Apparently this commenter expected Trump to win every negotiation without having to give up anything his side wanted.
  43. @Grumpy
    OT:

    The rich-kid college eruptions continue.

    http://www.startribune.com/st-olaf-students-boycott-classes-in-protest-of-latest-racial-incident/420895163/

    NORTHFIELD, MINN. — Hundreds of students, some wearing pajamas, others carrying pillows and blankets, gathered on the St. Olaf College campus Monday morning to protest a string of racist incidents over the past school year, the latest being a threatening note that was left on the windshield of a black student’s car demanding that she “shut up or I will shut you up.”
     

    hoax, i’ll bet you $1…..be sure to follow up on this. The majority of these turn out to be hoaxes.

    Read More
  44. Many middle-class parents have become anxious about sending children to the local public high school out of fear that they will lag behind their peers at schools that are expensive or academically selective

    Dog whistle for Asian.

    Which is key to understanding the whole problem. All the Asian money bidding Australian real estate to sky high levels.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Which is key to understanding the whole problem. All the Asian money bidding Australian real estate to sky high levels.

    I don't understand. Please explain.
  45. I remember reading in one of Jim Rogers’ travel books that foreign ownership of Australian real estate was not allowed. This law must have been changed at some point in the near past.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stebbing Heuer
    It was, in 2008, by a Mandarin-speaking clusterf**k of a prime minister.

    The aim was to support house prices, during the financial crisis of that year, by allowing cashed-up Chinese investors into the market.
    , @Travis
    Under Australian law, foreign investors can only purchase new homes or units — they are prohibited from buying existing dwellings....but they can buy vacant land and new construction.

    Certain categories of foreign nationals, who hold a visa that permits them to reside in Australia continuously for at least the next 12 months, may be given approval to purchase established residential real estate (that is, second hand dwellings) for use as their principal place of residence (that is, not for rental purposes) while in Australia. A condition of such purchases is that the dwelling must be sold when the foreign nationals’ temporary resident visas expire, they leave Australia, or the property is no longer used as their principal place of residence.
  46. @countenance
    Many middle-class parents have become anxious about sending children to the local public high school out of fear that they will lag behind their peers at schools that are expensive or academically selective

    Dog whistle for Asian.

    Which is key to understanding the whole problem. All the Asian money bidding Australian real estate to sky high levels.

    Which is key to understanding the whole problem. All the Asian money bidding Australian real estate to sky high levels.

    I don’t understand. Please explain.

    Read More
  47. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Lurker
    The US & Europe have immigration policy akin to jumping behind the wheel of a car and putting your foot to the floor driving as fast possible towards a cliff. Probably while knocking back copious amounts of vodka.

    Australian immigration policy is more like getting behind the wheel, wearing a seatbelt and sipping low alcohol beer and driving at a sedate 50 mph - towards a cliff.

    Australian immigration policy is more like getting behind the wheel, wearing a seatbelt and sipping low alcohol beer and driving at a sedate 50 mph – towards a cliff.

    I don’t know where you’ve been lurking, but I suggest it’s under a rock. Australia’s net migration per capita rate is among the highest in the world. There are few countries that exceed Australia’s net migration per capita and they don’t include the USA or most countries in Europe. Australia’s rate is three times that of the USA’s.

    To use your analogy, what Australia is doing is like strapping JATO rockets to your car and aiming it at a cliff. “What is it like to be a Tibetan in Tibet, or Dutch in Formosa (Taiwan), deep in the orbit of China? Well hop in, why don’t we find out!” – Australia’s politicians maniacally cackle out the window.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lurker
    Oh dear.

    I was attempting, clumsily, to allude to Australia's immigrant quality controls - perceived to keep out at least some undesirables.

    The problem is setting all sorts of barriers to entry that ignore race still spell doom in the end. It just means avoiding a few of the more obvious problems. But it won't necessarily mean lower immigration.

    The problem seems to fundamentally be the same as in the rest of the white world. Essentially one can immigrate and the host will try and find reasons to stop you. When of course the system should be - no one gets in but the host will make case-by-case exceptions that benefit the host. Superficially Australia seems to be doing the latter - but not really.

    Given that white folks only make up 10-12% of global population almost any immigration system that is not race based will probably kill us eventually.

  48. I thought all Australian men just came to America and hunted for a Yank wife. My SIL is one. Her hubby moved here with no job lined up, no real job skills or anything. I think they just like getting on planes for the hell of it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Altai
    The struggle is real...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzSROE_7Lv8
  49. @Boomstick
    Are we in a US housing bubble again?

    https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2017/04/25/home-prices-rose-5-8-year-over-year-in-february-32-month-high-nsa

    With an inflation correction to the Schiller house price index I don't think it's yet indicated. We're at about 2003 house price levels. We've probably got a couple years to go before they peak. In the end, a the prices now depend on very low interest rates, and it will take a while for the fed to jack those up.

    Bill McBride at Calculated Risk adjusts the indexes for inflation:

    https://4.bp.blogspot.com/—ox6h7syUI/WP-5OmCcs1I/AAAAAAAAq6Y/ZFbbhzuy9WwGwAbSf22JztQcueR-ZpkFwCLcB/s1600/RealFeb2017.PNG

    I’d say we’re in a mini bubble. The government would be risking an economic slow down increasing interest rates. They could use other things in the toolbox to deflate it, but I don’t think they’ll risk it.

    Read More
  50. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @CrunchybutRealistCon
    If AUS/NZ want to get a glimpse of the future, they would do well to study the regions of San Francisco, Seattle, Vancouver. Those cities are choc full of Asian money causing real estate speculative bubbles likely far worse than in Sydney. The problem with allowing Asia's elite to squirrel its money into getaway homes in North America is that this same elite won't stay behind in Asia to fight for a civil society there, or help with general quality of life issues for the middle class. These fleeing Asian elites are either profiting from their homeland government's corruption, and are simply quasi-fugitives, or they are devoid of noblesse oblige - with no regard for giving back to their lessers & societies. It simply looks like Universal altruism, or even regional altruism is a quaint outdated western notion. The winners from Globalism are increasingly just locusts. While many of these Asian expats may be 'proud of their heritage' - that is a just pose to conceal their raw materialism.

    San Francisco, Seattle, Vancouver

    Rather those than Detroit, Chicago or Baltimore?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    San Francisco, Seattle, Vancouver

    Rather those than Detroit, Chicago or Baltimore?
     
    How about neither?
  51. Off-topic,

    SJWs vs UK:

    But this week’s Doctor Who episode, “Thin Ice,” wasn’t just a good sci-fi story with a monster and fancy top hats. It was a pact with the audience, a renewal of faith. It was a reminder of the show’s philosophy toward life, even with the frequently murky moral space it occupies as a complicated piece of fiction.

    What’s more, “Thin Ice” is intent on reminding the audience of what true history looked like, with no excuses for homogeny.

    I think that she means “homogeneity”……

    Once outside the TARDIS in period-proper clothes, Bill notes that the people she sees in London are far less white than she was expecting,

    This is 1814 London, in case you were wondering.Usual estimates are that the Black population of London was approx 10,000 during this period. That’s out of a population of 1,197,673…..Oh, and the “Bill” being referred to is a Black Lesbian…..

    This bid toward being “less emotional” insists that people who cannot make a separation between their feelings and what they are fighting for are hurting their cause rather than helping it… and in this moment, it seems that the Doctor is saying something quite similar to Bill.

    That is, until they meet Lord Sutcliffe, and his flagrant racism toward Bill leads the Doctor to deck him across the face.

    Trying to take this seriously for a moment…..If the Doctor is this sensitive to racism, shouldn’t he be constantly punching people? You know, going door-to-door and punching people who own plantations in the West Indies?

    In effect, we live in the world that has lately been debating the moral correctness of punching Nazis, and Doctor Who has just answered that with a resounding Yes, Please Do.

    Man, SJWs really have a burning desire to sucker punch people………

    We are now standing in the midst of an era where white supremacy, nationalism, sexism, homophobia, and any other number of prejudices stand to become rule of law

    Wake up, people! Trump’s about to make The Handmaid’s Tale a reality…..

    because too many have embraced the type of thinking that Sutcliffe propagates: that having more makes a human worth more, and that progress is to be measured by power rather than empowering others.

    And empowering others means taking power away from certain kinds of people….You know, White Heterosexual Christians……

    “Human progress isn’t measured by industry. It’s measured by the value you place on a life. An unimportant life. A life without privilege. The boy who died on the river, that boy’s value is your value. That’s what defines an age. That’s what defines a species.”

    By uttering those words, Doctor Who is explicitly asking its viewers what currently defines us—you cannot hear those words and neglect taking stock of the world around you. Are we placing value on lives without privilege? Or are we continuing to base our progress on stuff and power and wealth? What age are we in? And if we’re on the wrong end of this… how do we turn and run in the other direction?

    Yeah, I mean what have “stuff and power and wealth” ever done for humanity?” Just stupid stuff like improved sanitation, clean drinking water, vaccines, ……

    http://www.tor.com/2017/05/01/the-value-of-a-life-thin-ice-was-one-of-the-best-doctor-who-episodes-in-years/

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    10,000 blacks in London in 1814? Seriously? SOURCES? I doubt there were 10,000 blacks in ALL of the British Isles at that time. The BBC is cultural Marxist to its very core.
    , @sb
    I recall the Opening Ceremony of the 2012 London Olympics showing scenes from pre industrial Britain with village greens maypoles and cricket having a fair share of blacks .

    Yeah right
  52. @Opinionator
    The problem with allowing Asia’s elite to squirrel its money into getaway homes in North America is that this same elite won’t stay behind in Asia to fight for a civil society there

    "The problem"? Shouldn't we be far more concerned with the rising cost of living in our great cities, the dilution of citizenship, the competition of their children against ours, the lack of assimilation, the loss of social cohesion, the rootlessness of local property owners?

    Shouldn’t we be far more concerned with the rising cost of living in our great cities, the dilution of citizenship, the competition of their children against ours, the lack of assimilation, the loss of social cohesion, the rootlessness of local property owners?

    These issues are usually well addressed by others on this board. What is often ignored is that the West is often not absorbing the “cream” of the developing world w/ investor class immigrants. We are simply absorbing the fugitive beneficiaries of a Globalist sweat shop orgy. These folks are just fleeing a nest they fouled in an industrialization free of pollution controls or labor standards . The negative externalities of China’s denuded landscape, poisoned rivers & smog are simply left to the plebs to choke on. We will see a lot more of this as the plutocrat veneers of other 3rd world countries try to bail out & take refuge in little Western pockets they will try to colonize. The lack of noblesse oblige in the 3rd world ruling elite, leads to even more migratory pressure into the 1st world later. Bottom line: immigration should be restricted across the board.

    Read More
  53. @anon
    San Francisco, Seattle, Vancouver

    Rather those than Detroit, Chicago or Baltimore?

    San Francisco, Seattle, Vancouver

    Rather those than Detroit, Chicago or Baltimore?

    How about neither?

    Read More
  54. @Lurker

    The main commonality among these disparate grouops of moneyed foreigners over time is that 1) they have excess capital AND 2) there is a high degree of uncertainty in their own domestic politics
     
    I wonder why money from booming China flees to boring whitebread Oz/NZ/US/Europe and not the other way around?

    No, I got nothing.

    I wonder why money from booming China flees to boring whitebread Oz/NZ/US/Europe and not the other way around?

    No, I got nothing.

    What’s unusual about this trend is just how widespread it is.

    Back in the day when Saudi or Hong Kong money was buying up Western real estate, there just weren’t enough of these Saudi or Hong Kong rich folks affect the larger market.

    What’s different about China today is that it combines the rather unusual situation of “democratization of millionaires” (or billionaires) with a high degree of political repression/instability.

    Read More
    • Agree: PiltdownMan
    • Replies: @Pittsburgh Thatcherite
    Siphoning off China’s wealth, as well as her most capable citizens, will slow the rise of China, without risking military confrontation.

    If done carefully, it could be profitable for nations that offer refuge to China’s wealthy, without causing social tensions.

    Immigrants could be confined to the remote Northern Territory, which is three times larger than California, but contains only 1% of Australia’s population.

    Then they would not affect Australian society.

    If Australia imported a hundred million immigrants and required each immigrant to pay $500 per month, every Australian could receive $2000 per month:

    $2000 = ($500 * 100 million Chinese) / (25 million Australians)
    , @anon
    "What's different about China today is that it combines the rather unusual situation of "democratization of millionaires (or billionaires) with a high degree of political repression/instability."

    Look at how the British never had any trouble running Hong Kong. There was never any Chinese demand for democracy or freedom or civil rights. It was all about running businesses and making money. That should tell you something about the Han character right there.
  55. @Twinkie

    I wonder why money from booming China flees to boring whitebread Oz/NZ/US/Europe and not the other way around?

    No, I got nothing.
     
    What's unusual about this trend is just how widespread it is.

    Back in the day when Saudi or Hong Kong money was buying up Western real estate, there just weren't enough of these Saudi or Hong Kong rich folks affect the larger market.

    What's different about China today is that it combines the rather unusual situation of "democratization of millionaires" (or billionaires) with a high degree of political repression/instability.

    Siphoning off China’s wealth, as well as her most capable citizens, will slow the rise of China, without risking military confrontation.

    If done carefully, it could be profitable for nations that offer refuge to China’s wealthy, without causing social tensions.

    Immigrants could be confined to the remote Northern Territory, which is three times larger than California, but contains only 1% of Australia’s population.

    Then they would not affect Australian society.

    If Australia imported a hundred million immigrants and required each immigrant to pay $500 per month, every Australian could receive $2000 per month:

    $2000 = ($500 * 100 million Chinese) / (25 million Australians)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Immigrants could be confined to the remote Northern Territory, which is three times larger than California, but contains only 1% of Australia’s population.
     
    1) No amount of money can compensate for social disruption and loss of social cohesion.

    2) Immigrants won't come if they are to be confined and forced to pay tribute in perpetuity. Why flee China in the first place, then?

    3) Creating a segregated enclave of unassimilated and unassimilating people within one's national border is a terrible idea.
    , @Wilkey
    If Australia imported a hundred million immigrants and required each immigrant to pay $500 per month, every Australian could receive $2000 per month

    Until the immigrants, now an overwhelming majority, outnumbering the natives 3-1, voted to make the native Australians pay *them* $3,000 per month. And if the natives really annoyed them they could ship them off to concentration camps.

    Turnabout's fair play, ain't it?
    , @Opinionator
    J U S T
    , @anon
    And exactly how long do you think those 100 million Chinese would honor such an agreement since they would outnumber the Australians four to one?

    And where would arid Australia get enough water for a 500% increase in population?

    And how exactly would you "confine" 100 million Chinese to the Northern Territories? Build a minefield? And would you deny them the vote and citizenship? How would you stop a Han takeover?
    , @Difference Maker
    Anything for the money, eh? Consider that more than a few may be justly reviled at home
    , @res

    Siphoning off China’s wealth, as well as her most capable citizens, will slow the rise of China, without risking military confrontation.
     
    What I find amazing about all of this is that China seems able to simultaneously fund high growth at home and all of this market distorting expatriate activity.

    China must be generating an astonishing amount of wealth right now.

    Here is a 2015 article about Chinese external investment surpassing their internal investment: http://www.businessinsider.com/statistics-on-chinas-investment-abroad-2015-2
  56. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    We are social animals. We are individuals, yes, but we are also social animals who are members of a group. And race and ethnicity has always been primary – for a good reason.

    Race and deafness city are our primal social groups. When we start exhibiting a lack of loyalty to our own people bad things happen to all of us.

    Read More
  57. @Pittsburgh Thatcherite
    Siphoning off China’s wealth, as well as her most capable citizens, will slow the rise of China, without risking military confrontation.

    If done carefully, it could be profitable for nations that offer refuge to China’s wealthy, without causing social tensions.

    Immigrants could be confined to the remote Northern Territory, which is three times larger than California, but contains only 1% of Australia’s population.

    Then they would not affect Australian society.

    If Australia imported a hundred million immigrants and required each immigrant to pay $500 per month, every Australian could receive $2000 per month:

    $2000 = ($500 * 100 million Chinese) / (25 million Australians)

    Immigrants could be confined to the remote Northern Territory, which is three times larger than California, but contains only 1% of Australia’s population.

    1) No amount of money can compensate for social disruption and loss of social cohesion.

    2) Immigrants won’t come if they are to be confined and forced to pay tribute in perpetuity. Why flee China in the first place, then?

    3) Creating a segregated enclave of unassimilated and unassimilating people within one’s national border is a terrible idea.

    Read More
  58. I suppose letting the Chinese *buy* housing in Western countries is a way to get them to send back some of their money to the West. There is no reason, however, why we have to let them move here. We don’t even have to give them tourist visas. They can keep the houses rental property investments and nothing more.

    China could send 40 million people to Australia and render white Australians a minority, and they wouldn’t ever miss those 40 million people. Australia would have to be insanely stupid to let them do that – which means they probably will.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Judah Benjamin Hur
    China doesn't have 40 million affluent citizens, let alone 40 million to spare.
    , @roger in florida
    There is a pattern here: Look at Chinese immigration into Canada, it is changing the demographics of Canada in a very significant way. With 1.5 billion people China can export 50 million to Canada and 40 million to Australia, this will inevitably result in the political dominance of those countries, this would be a fantastic strategic victory for Beijing.
  59. @Pittsburgh Thatcherite
    Siphoning off China’s wealth, as well as her most capable citizens, will slow the rise of China, without risking military confrontation.

    If done carefully, it could be profitable for nations that offer refuge to China’s wealthy, without causing social tensions.

    Immigrants could be confined to the remote Northern Territory, which is three times larger than California, but contains only 1% of Australia’s population.

    Then they would not affect Australian society.

    If Australia imported a hundred million immigrants and required each immigrant to pay $500 per month, every Australian could receive $2000 per month:

    $2000 = ($500 * 100 million Chinese) / (25 million Australians)

    If Australia imported a hundred million immigrants and required each immigrant to pay $500 per month, every Australian could receive $2000 per month

    Until the immigrants, now an overwhelming majority, outnumbering the natives 3-1, voted to make the native Australians pay *them* $3,000 per month. And if the natives really annoyed them they could ship them off to concentration camps.

    Turnabout’s fair play, ain’t it?

    Read More
  60. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Ending the ‘white Australia” policy was the root of all its problems.

    Read More
  61. @Pittsburgh Thatcherite
    Siphoning off China’s wealth, as well as her most capable citizens, will slow the rise of China, without risking military confrontation.

    If done carefully, it could be profitable for nations that offer refuge to China’s wealthy, without causing social tensions.

    Immigrants could be confined to the remote Northern Territory, which is three times larger than California, but contains only 1% of Australia’s population.

    Then they would not affect Australian society.

    If Australia imported a hundred million immigrants and required each immigrant to pay $500 per month, every Australian could receive $2000 per month:

    $2000 = ($500 * 100 million Chinese) / (25 million Australians)

    J U S T

    Read More
  62. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Altai
    I'm always nervous of the already high and growing numbers of Han Chinese in Australia and New Zealand even more so with a resurgent China. Given their high numbers they will dominate in universities and universities push the social agenda. New Zealand is even worse because there is comparatively fewer ethnic groups there, making the Chinese more prominent. Could there be a prominent ethnic Chinese party one day? Or maybe a lot of Han MPs in one or the other. Then there is the question of a popular revolt or CCP purge leading to a mass exodus of Han oligarchs (Above what we're already seeing) to those countries establishing significant wealth and political influence.

    You could imagine large amounts of state assets being privatised or agricultural land being sold to China. If and when the sun sets on American military hegemony, Australia and New Zealand are a long way from the core of the West.

    “..when the sun sets on American military hegemony..”

    I have always felt that Australia should and could develop nuclear weapons as the ultimate guarantee of its safety as Israel has done. And unlike Israel it has all that space in the outback too. It is as foolish for Australia to believe America can/will always protect it as earlier generations of Aussies naively believed that Great Britain would. Where was the British navy, army and air force to protect Australia from Japan in 1941-42? John Curtin knew the truth in his famous speech. But Australia can go and America can still hold on too.

    Read More
  63. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Pittsburgh Thatcherite
    Siphoning off China’s wealth, as well as her most capable citizens, will slow the rise of China, without risking military confrontation.

    If done carefully, it could be profitable for nations that offer refuge to China’s wealthy, without causing social tensions.

    Immigrants could be confined to the remote Northern Territory, which is three times larger than California, but contains only 1% of Australia’s population.

    Then they would not affect Australian society.

    If Australia imported a hundred million immigrants and required each immigrant to pay $500 per month, every Australian could receive $2000 per month:

    $2000 = ($500 * 100 million Chinese) / (25 million Australians)

    And exactly how long do you think those 100 million Chinese would honor such an agreement since they would outnumber the Australians four to one?

    And where would arid Australia get enough water for a 500% increase in population?

    And how exactly would you “confine” 100 million Chinese to the Northern Territories? Build a minefield? And would you deny them the vote and citizenship? How would you stop a Han takeover?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    And exactly how long do you think those 100 million Chinese would honor such an agreement since they would outnumber the Australians four to one?

    Precisely. Their idea of honoring agreements when they have the whip hand is to plonk down fortresses on manmade islands when they have no right under international law to do so.
  64. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Daniel Chieh
    I don't realistically you can stop people from giving you money. The market ultimately will prevail against attempts to control capital.

    No, but you can refuse to honor the obligations accompanying the “gift”, which if enforced will quickly dry up the supply of such gifts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Doesn't even need bribes. A colleague in VC Canada had his father-in-law "betray" him by selling his house to a Chinese speculator for $1 million dollars sight unseen. The actual value of the house was probably $800k at the time.

    I don't really think you can stop that kind of money without trying to regulate it as an illegal drug. And even then, the odds of success are poor. As you can see from the above, even family isn't "holding the line" for each other.

    I'll feel more bad if Canada wasn't turning into poz central. That said, my long theory is that the Chinese immigrants aren't actually stopping the poz. They'll just pick up the 52 genders and other crap, and then go back to China with it.

    In the end, high IQ had no survival value. Islam is the future. Allah akbar.

    , @Bill
    Yes, exactly right. The amazing, irresistible power of the free market is the slightest fig leaf for government power. Property doesn't protect itself. Contracts don't enforce themselves.
  65. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @syonredux
    Off-topic,

    SJWs vs UK:

    But this week’s Doctor Who episode, “Thin Ice,” wasn’t just a good sci-fi story with a monster and fancy top hats. It was a pact with the audience, a renewal of faith. It was a reminder of the show’s philosophy toward life, even with the frequently murky moral space it occupies as a complicated piece of fiction.
     


    What’s more, “Thin Ice” is intent on reminding the audience of what true history looked like, with no excuses for homogeny.
     
    I think that she means "homogeneity"......

    Once outside the TARDIS in period-proper clothes, Bill notes that the people she sees in London are far less white than she was expecting,
     
    This is 1814 London, in case you were wondering.Usual estimates are that the Black population of London was approx 10,000 during this period. That's out of a population of 1,197,673.....Oh, and the "Bill" being referred to is a Black Lesbian.....

    This bid toward being “less emotional” insists that people who cannot make a separation between their feelings and what they are fighting for are hurting their cause rather than helping it… and in this moment, it seems that the Doctor is saying something quite similar to Bill.

    That is, until they meet Lord Sutcliffe, and his flagrant racism toward Bill leads the Doctor to deck him across the face.
     
    Trying to take this seriously for a moment.....If the Doctor is this sensitive to racism, shouldn't he be constantly punching people? You know, going door-to-door and punching people who own plantations in the West Indies?

    In effect, we live in the world that has lately been debating the moral correctness of punching Nazis, and Doctor Who has just answered that with a resounding Yes, Please Do.
     
    Man, SJWs really have a burning desire to sucker punch people.........

    We are now standing in the midst of an era where white supremacy, nationalism, sexism, homophobia, and any other number of prejudices stand to become rule of law
     
    Wake up, people! Trump's about to make The Handmaid's Tale a reality.....

    because too many have embraced the type of thinking that Sutcliffe propagates: that having more makes a human worth more, and that progress is to be measured by power rather than empowering others.
     
    And empowering others means taking power away from certain kinds of people....You know, White Heterosexual Christians......

    “Human progress isn’t measured by industry. It’s measured by the value you place on a life. An unimportant life. A life without privilege. The boy who died on the river, that boy’s value is your value. That’s what defines an age. That’s what defines a species.”

    By uttering those words, Doctor Who is explicitly asking its viewers what currently defines us—you cannot hear those words and neglect taking stock of the world around you. Are we placing value on lives without privilege? Or are we continuing to base our progress on stuff and power and wealth? What age are we in? And if we’re on the wrong end of this… how do we turn and run in the other direction?

     

    Yeah, I mean what have "stuff and power and wealth" ever done for humanity?" Just stupid stuff like improved sanitation, clean drinking water, vaccines, ......

    http://www.tor.com/2017/05/01/the-value-of-a-life-thin-ice-was-one-of-the-best-doctor-who-episodes-in-years/

    10,000 blacks in London in 1814? Seriously? SOURCES? I doubt there were 10,000 blacks in ALL of the British Isles at that time. The BBC is cultural Marxist to its very core.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Peter Akuleyev
    Wikipedia is probably the source. It says in the late 18th century there were approximately 10,000 blacks in London, consisting of a mixture of slaves, runaways and some freemen. Doesn't seem that implausible to me considering Britain's role in the slave trade.
    , @LondonBob
    I doubt there were 10.

    Raising stamp duty on housing seems to have had an effect here in Britain, of course it would have been racist to have just imposed it on foreign 'investors' so we all pay a cost, but it has deterred some foreign money.
    , @Ivy
    Next time you are in London, visit the Docklands Museum. That shows many aspects of 18th, 19th and 20th century life including the flow of slaves and free blacks through the port.
  66. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Twinkie

    I wonder why money from booming China flees to boring whitebread Oz/NZ/US/Europe and not the other way around?

    No, I got nothing.
     
    What's unusual about this trend is just how widespread it is.

    Back in the day when Saudi or Hong Kong money was buying up Western real estate, there just weren't enough of these Saudi or Hong Kong rich folks affect the larger market.

    What's different about China today is that it combines the rather unusual situation of "democratization of millionaires" (or billionaires) with a high degree of political repression/instability.

    “What’s different about China today is that it combines the rather unusual situation of “democratization of millionaires (or billionaires) with a high degree of political repression/instability.”

    Look at how the British never had any trouble running Hong Kong. There was never any Chinese demand for democracy or freedom or civil rights. It was all about running businesses and making money. That should tell you something about the Han character right there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Look at how the British never had any trouble running Hong Kong. There was never any Chinese demand for democracy or freedom or civil rights. It was all about running businesses and making money. That should tell you something about the Han character right there.
     
    You should study the subject about which you make such confident assertions, Grasshopper: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/10/the-secret-history-of-hong-kongs-democratic-stalemate/381424/
    , @Twinkie

    That should tell you something about the Han character right there.
     
    I am not big on the "Hans," but I think this Han guy cared about "democracy or freedom or civil rights" or something: https://macaulay.cuny.edu/eportfolios/george11/files/2011/10/Tank-Man1.jpg

    Or was he holding up those tanks, so that he could "run businesses and make money"?

    Or maybe he has mixed white ancestry. Surely no pure Asian would do something silly and impractical - dare I say, spirited - as trying halt a column of tanks with a plastic shopping bag.

    Or maybe he saw something like that in a movie made by white people and was simply aping the behavior. Soulless copycat/grind.
    , @Anonymous
    The Chinese did have freedom and civil rights in Hong Kong. They didn't have democracy or autonomy, but the British took out a 99 year lease in 1898. So the expectation was that the British would return Hong Kong eventually, rather than try to dominate it forever like in other colonies. Also, many of the people in Hong Kong were refugees from the Chinese civil war and communist China, so the political freedom and civil rights of Hong Kong were relatively much higher.
  67. @Frau Katze
    I'm told by a resident of Sydney that it's in the same boat as Vancouver: it's a magnet for rich Chinese.

    The situation is every bit as bad in Vancouver as Sydney.

    The Chinese, to their credit, don't cause obvious problems, like becoming an underclass. Or being Muslims who drive cars into crowds.

    But all this Chinese money has distorted the economy.

    As Europe’s leaders want to replace the population with Arab and Black Muslims, Australia’s want to replace it with South Asian Muslims and a Chinese ruling class.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Frau Katze
    One thing I'm worried about is China interfering with our politics.

    They've already made one business deal suggesting some chumminess. This concerned a mine that was staffed by workers they were allowed to bring over from China. Why would a Canadian politician agree to that?

    It's a very bad sign.

    I honestly don't know what our leaders are thinking. Either they have sinister motives or they're extremely stupid. The latter cannot be discounted.

    They could be a combination of both.

    It's depressing overall for sure.
  68. @anon
    Mainland Chinese are driving prices to the moon in the 5 mainland Capitals, and Canberra.
    Australian's standard of living was pretty ordinary until the MidSixties.
    The Whitlam socialist Government elected in 1972 removed protective Tariffs without warning or consultation, destroying the local Textile, Footwear and Clothing industries, and Britain's entry into the ECM devastated farming.
    Since Capital Gains Tax is exempted on one's ''principal place of residence'', Australians' main Insustry, unless you're either Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton, or Xstrata, is buying and selling houses in the capital cities for profit.

    Australia was doing fine before the Replace-the-Bogan Immigration Policy. It’s still a great place.

    https://youtu.be/vR1CU8NjGW0

    Read More
  69. @Grumpy
    OT:

    The rich-kid college eruptions continue.

    http://www.startribune.com/st-olaf-students-boycott-classes-in-protest-of-latest-racial-incident/420895163/

    NORTHFIELD, MINN. — Hundreds of students, some wearing pajamas, others carrying pillows and blankets, gathered on the St. Olaf College campus Monday morning to protest a string of racist incidents over the past school year, the latest being a threatening note that was left on the windshield of a black student’s car demanding that she “shut up or I will shut you up.”
     

    The note was deemed white because not misspelled?

    Read More
  70. “Australia has a policy against low-skilled immigration”.
    Wrong. Bullshit. Crap. Australia has unskilled Bangladouches flooding in via 457 and student visas.
    Even the lefties in Australia are pissed off at the 200,000 annual turd world intake.
    https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2017/05/mass-immigration-grinds-big-cities-to-halt/

    https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2017/04/prostitutes-boom-457-visas/

    https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2017/04/mass-immigration-diluting-australias-skills-base/

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    The Chinese mostly vote for the Australian Labor Party and The Greens. Since those parties are now only 1 seat [out of 150] short of governing Australia again, the floodgates are likely to fall off the hinges shortly.
  71. I wish China could “ruin” the American dream where I live, near Jacksonville.

    Household wealth in Australia stalled this year, new figures reveal, although the nation’s per capita wealth still comes in second behind banking hotbed Switzerland.

    The Credit Suisse Research Institute published its seventh annual Global Wealth Report today, with Australia’s 0.2 per cent retreat in total household wealth to $US6.4 trillion ($8.7 trillion) trailing the modest global growth rate of 1.4 per cent.

    (…)
    The moniker of ‘the lucky country’ appears to still ring true, however, given the wealth of the average Australian — at $US375,600 — ranks in second place globally.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/news/australians-rank-second-in-global-percapita-wealth-table/news-story/06e23e9a23b9cfe9d60cba2b37f1b94e

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    You'd be crying Esau's tears soon enough.
    , @The Anti-Gnostic
    It's illiquid unless you cash in your house, and either pay tax on the proceeds or buy another inflated property (I assume AUS like US allows you to avoid taxation when you sell and put the proceeds into a primary residence).

    Sorry to hear about Jacksonville. Jax Beach was my old stomping grounds.
  72. @Maj. Kong
    As Europe's leaders want to replace the population with Arab and Black Muslims, Australia's want to replace it with South Asian Muslims and a Chinese ruling class.

    One thing I’m worried about is China interfering with our politics.

    They’ve already made one business deal suggesting some chumminess. This concerned a mine that was staffed by workers they were allowed to bring over from China. Why would a Canadian politician agree to that?

    It’s a very bad sign.

    I honestly don’t know what our leaders are thinking. Either they have sinister motives or they’re extremely stupid. The latter cannot be discounted.

    They could be a combination of both.

    It’s depressing overall for sure.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
    The potent combination of greed and stupidity.
    , @Daniel Chieh
    I think it'll be a great thing if they would silently nuke schools with 52 genders. "flavors of sexuality" and glorification of homomania. Unfortunately, they don't seem to be bringing that part of Beijing's agenda :(
  73. @Wilkey
    I suppose letting the Chinese *buy* housing in Western countries is a way to get them to send back some of their money to the West. There is no reason, however, why we have to let them move here. We don't even have to give them tourist visas. They can keep the houses rental property investments and nothing more.

    China could send 40 million people to Australia and render white Australians a minority, and they wouldn't ever miss those 40 million people. Australia would have to be insanely stupid to let them do that - which means they probably will.

    China doesn’t have 40 million affluent citizens, let alone 40 million to spare.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    China doesn’t have 40 million affluent citizens, let alone 40 million to spare.

    Are you serious? China would miss 3.3% of its population? To take over a continent? It would be one of the greatest strategic moves since Great Britain settled North America and Australia in the first place.
    , @Paul Walker - Most beautiful man ever...
    "China doesn’t have 40 million affluent citizens, let alone 40 million to spare."
    Rubbish. There's a billion of them and they want to go to the first world.
    For some (((reason))) Australia immigration favours chinese/indians over the Anglo sphere.
  74. @Je Suis Charlie Martel
    Didn't Kevin MacDonald first write about the "overseas Chinese" -how they as merchants came to dominate larger ethic groups in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines etc.? Why not Australia next?

    ‘“overseas Chinese” … Why not Australia next?’

    As an Australian I thank you for this comment.

    For some time I have been trying to imagine what the next stage of Australia could be like. There was black Australia; then there was white Australia; now we have globalized immigration and voter dissatisfaction, but that’s not a new paradigm. I had imagined partition of the continent among the big Asian powers, and that could happen if the world has a serious ecological crisis, but for now that’s just me trying to fill the void left by a cultural elite who are against the old Australia and who are busy dissolving it, but have no image of what they are creating.

    But this makes absolute sense. We will end up like our neighbors in South-east Asia, with the nation economically dominated by our “overseas Chinese”. It won’t be perfect, it will have all sorts of troubles, but certainly much worse fates are possible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    We will end up like our neighbors in South-east Asia, with the nation economically dominated by our “overseas Chinese”.
     
    I think white Australians, on average, have a substantially higher IQ score than Indonesians, for example. I doubt overseas Chinese will be dominating the former the way they have dominated SE Asians.

    By this, I am not suggesting you Aussies take in more Chinese.
    , @Anonymous
    But this makes absolute sense. We will end up like our neighbors in South-east Asia, with the nation economically dominated by our “overseas Chinese”. It won’t be perfect, it will have all sorts of troubles, but certainly much worse fates are possible.

    That's if we are lucky. Imagine if Muslims were intelligent, instead of following their holy text to the letter and provoking their host way too early in the piece. An intelligent Muslim-type conquest plan would have followers who peacefully wait until they have demographic majority before ethnically cleansing the population. The Chinese have this capacity.

    They are doing it now in Tibet. They have done it in the past to Europeans in Formosa. Their actions in the South China sea of saying "Hey, this is ours, we own it, try taking it back" are in indication of their nature when they have the upper hand.

    I don't know why we even entertain such softcock idiocy of "Oh gee, we have a democracy (constitutional monarchy but same diff), we'll just let our system come to be dominated by a people who are on average smarter than we are and for whom bribing politicians is a national sport, and hope when we no longer have the demographic majority and we are serfs, it works out ok for us."

  75. @anon
    10,000 blacks in London in 1814? Seriously? SOURCES? I doubt there were 10,000 blacks in ALL of the British Isles at that time. The BBC is cultural Marxist to its very core.

    Wikipedia is probably the source. It says in the late 18th century there were approximately 10,000 blacks in London, consisting of a mixture of slaves, runaways and some freemen. Doesn’t seem that implausible to me considering Britain’s role in the slave trade.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Wikipedia is probably the source. It says in the late 18th century there were approximately 10,000 blacks in London, consisting of a mixture of slaves, runaways and some freemen. Doesn’t seem that implausible to me considering Britain’s role in the slave trade.
     
    Yeah. And that's out of a total population that was approx 1 million (1811 London population:1,197,673)....which means that the Black population in London was extremely small.
  76. @anon
    "What's different about China today is that it combines the rather unusual situation of "democratization of millionaires (or billionaires) with a high degree of political repression/instability."

    Look at how the British never had any trouble running Hong Kong. There was never any Chinese demand for democracy or freedom or civil rights. It was all about running businesses and making money. That should tell you something about the Han character right there.

    Look at how the British never had any trouble running Hong Kong. There was never any Chinese demand for democracy or freedom or civil rights. It was all about running businesses and making money. That should tell you something about the Han character right there.

    You should study the subject about which you make such confident assertions, Grasshopper: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/10/the-secret-history-of-hong-kongs-democratic-stalemate/381424/

    Read More
  77. @anon
    "What's different about China today is that it combines the rather unusual situation of "democratization of millionaires (or billionaires) with a high degree of political repression/instability."

    Look at how the British never had any trouble running Hong Kong. There was never any Chinese demand for democracy or freedom or civil rights. It was all about running businesses and making money. That should tell you something about the Han character right there.

    That should tell you something about the Han character right there.

    I am not big on the “Hans,” but I think this Han guy cared about “democracy or freedom or civil rights” or something: https://macaulay.cuny.edu/eportfolios/george11/files/2011/10/Tank-Man1.jpg

    Or was he holding up those tanks, so that he could “run businesses and make money”?

    Or maybe he has mixed white ancestry. Surely no pure Asian would do something silly and impractical – dare I say, spirited – as trying halt a column of tanks with a plastic shopping bag.

    Or maybe he saw something like that in a movie made by white people and was simply aping the behavior. Soulless copycat/grind.

    Read More
    • LOL: PiltdownMan
    • Replies: @anon
    None of your smart-ass comments negate what I wrote. What demands for democracy, free speech, etc. were made by the Chinese in Hong Kong during the 99 years of British control? Virtually zilch.
  78. @Mitchell Porter
    '“overseas Chinese” ... Why not Australia next?'

    As an Australian I thank you for this comment.

    For some time I have been trying to imagine what the next stage of Australia could be like. There was black Australia; then there was white Australia; now we have globalized immigration and voter dissatisfaction, but that's not a new paradigm. I had imagined partition of the continent among the big Asian powers, and that could happen if the world has a serious ecological crisis, but for now that's just me trying to fill the void left by a cultural elite who are against the old Australia and who are busy dissolving it, but have no image of what they are creating.

    But this makes absolute sense. We will end up like our neighbors in South-east Asia, with the nation economically dominated by our "overseas Chinese". It won't be perfect, it will have all sorts of troubles, but certainly much worse fates are possible.

    We will end up like our neighbors in South-east Asia, with the nation economically dominated by our “overseas Chinese”.

    I think white Australians, on average, have a substantially higher IQ score than Indonesians, for example. I doubt overseas Chinese will be dominating the former the way they have dominated SE Asians.

    By this, I am not suggesting you Aussies take in more Chinese.

    Read More
  79. @Judah Benjamin Hur
    I wish China could "ruin" the American dream where I live, near Jacksonville.

    Household wealth in Australia stalled this year, new figures reveal, although the nation’s per capita wealth still comes in second behind banking hotbed Switzerland.

    The Credit Suisse Research Institute published its seventh annual Global Wealth Report today, with Australia’s 0.2 per cent retreat in total household wealth to $US6.4 trillion ($8.7 trillion) trailing the modest global growth rate of 1.4 per cent.

    (...)
    The moniker of ‘the lucky country’ appears to still ring true, however, given the wealth of the average Australian — at $US375,600 — ranks in second place globally.
     
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/news/australians-rank-second-in-global-percapita-wealth-table/news-story/06e23e9a23b9cfe9d60cba2b37f1b94e

    You’d be crying Esau’s tears soon enough.

    Read More
  80. @Judah Benjamin Hur
    China doesn't have 40 million affluent citizens, let alone 40 million to spare.

    China doesn’t have 40 million affluent citizens, let alone 40 million to spare.

    Are you serious? China would miss 3.3% of its population? To take over a continent? It would be one of the greatest strategic moves since Great Britain settled North America and Australia in the first place.

    Read More
  81. Many countries have a law against foreigners owning land. We need a law stating that if we cannot own land in your country, you cannot own land in ours.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Altai

    We need a law stating that if we cannot own land in your country, you cannot own land in ours.
     
    China Pop: 1.4 Billion
    Australia Pop: 24 Million

    I suspect the problems and outcomes would likely be the same, except some rich Australians might own a villa or two in China. Taxing foreign money on residential property, as in Canada, is just a salve, no reason to allow any avenue for speculation.

    Better idea, non-nationals or non-permanent visa holders can't purchase any residential property. Then you can make exceptions in special deals if necessary.
  82. @Judah Benjamin Hur
    China doesn't have 40 million affluent citizens, let alone 40 million to spare.

    “China doesn’t have 40 million affluent citizens, let alone 40 million to spare.”
    Rubbish. There’s a billion of them and they want to go to the first world.
    For some (((reason))) Australia immigration favours chinese/indians over the Anglo sphere.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Numinous

    For some (((reason))) Australia immigration favours chinese/indians over the Anglo sphere.
     
    There's no need to favor anyone. The number of people seeking to emigrate is not uniform across countries. Countries are vastly unequal in populations too. So complaining that more immigrants come from India and China than, say, Finland, is a non sequitor. A non-discrminatory immigration policy, by its very nature, will pull in a very skewed distribution of immigrants.
    , @Judah Benjamin Hur

    Rubbish. There’s a billion of them and they want to go to the first world.
    For some (((reason))) Australia immigration favours chinese/indians over the Anglo sphere.
     
    Gee, you can't walk two feet into the comments section without stepping into this kind of crap. If I thought a group was incredibly powerful, I wouldn't go out of my way to antagonize them at every turn.

    Most Chinese people don't have any money to buy Australian homes and would have no way of immigrating. We're talking about a comparatively small number of affluent Chinese.

  83. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Mitchell Porter
    '“overseas Chinese” ... Why not Australia next?'

    As an Australian I thank you for this comment.

    For some time I have been trying to imagine what the next stage of Australia could be like. There was black Australia; then there was white Australia; now we have globalized immigration and voter dissatisfaction, but that's not a new paradigm. I had imagined partition of the continent among the big Asian powers, and that could happen if the world has a serious ecological crisis, but for now that's just me trying to fill the void left by a cultural elite who are against the old Australia and who are busy dissolving it, but have no image of what they are creating.

    But this makes absolute sense. We will end up like our neighbors in South-east Asia, with the nation economically dominated by our "overseas Chinese". It won't be perfect, it will have all sorts of troubles, but certainly much worse fates are possible.

    But this makes absolute sense. We will end up like our neighbors in South-east Asia, with the nation economically dominated by our “overseas Chinese”. It won’t be perfect, it will have all sorts of troubles, but certainly much worse fates are possible.

    That’s if we are lucky. Imagine if Muslims were intelligent, instead of following their holy text to the letter and provoking their host way too early in the piece. An intelligent Muslim-type conquest plan would have followers who peacefully wait until they have demographic majority before ethnically cleansing the population. The Chinese have this capacity.

    They are doing it now in Tibet. They have done it in the past to Europeans in Formosa. Their actions in the South China sea of saying “Hey, this is ours, we own it, try taking it back” are in indication of their nature when they have the upper hand.

    I don’t know why we even entertain such softcock idiocy of “Oh gee, we have a democracy (constitutional monarchy but same diff), we’ll just let our system come to be dominated by a people who are on average smarter than we are and for whom bribing politicians is a national sport, and hope when we no longer have the demographic majority and we are serfs, it works out ok for us.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    So what should we do? Become like Indonesians and try to kill all of the Chinese, get isolated and poor, and end up being dominated anyway after twenty five years? The game is already set. We can try to mollify the changes, but there's no avoiding inevitability here.
  84. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @anon
    And exactly how long do you think those 100 million Chinese would honor such an agreement since they would outnumber the Australians four to one?

    And where would arid Australia get enough water for a 500% increase in population?

    And how exactly would you "confine" 100 million Chinese to the Northern Territories? Build a minefield? And would you deny them the vote and citizenship? How would you stop a Han takeover?

    And exactly how long do you think those 100 million Chinese would honor such an agreement since they would outnumber the Australians four to one?

    Precisely. Their idea of honoring agreements when they have the whip hand is to plonk down fortresses on manmade islands when they have no right under international law to do so.

    Read More
  85. @anon
    10,000 blacks in London in 1814? Seriously? SOURCES? I doubt there were 10,000 blacks in ALL of the British Isles at that time. The BBC is cultural Marxist to its very core.

    I doubt there were 10.

    Raising stamp duty on housing seems to have had an effect here in Britain, of course it would have been racist to have just imposed it on foreign ‘investors’ so we all pay a cost, but it has deterred some foreign money.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    I doubt there were 10.

     

    Approx 10,000 sounds about right to me. Remember, that's out of a London population totaling around 1 million (1811 London population:1,197,673). So 10,000 Blacks is a very small percentage.
  86. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    With these housing bubbles, all the big brains that wish they had another shot at ‘The Big Short’.

    The trouble is, its hard. You really need a bit of contagion and panic to pull it off.

    The thing is, the big one in the US ….. we all knew there was a bubble, but there was no obvious way to make money.

    So …. we know there is a bad ending. The big brains can go create their big short.

    Read More
  87. @Joe Schmoe
    Does Australia have a lot of foreigners parking their money in Aussie real estate for fun and profit?

    New Zealand does – big time. Auckland is out of most Kiwis’ price range.

    Read More
  88. Australia gave us :
    Melbourne to LHR non-stop.
    Just 19 hours.
    Sensational .

    Read More
  89. What?? No mention of ZeroHedge by anyone yet (if I can trust cntrl-F). Zerohedge writes about this stuff almost daily – not always about Australia, but if one were to look back through a month of ZeroHedge, there’d likely be 5 articles at least re the Australian housing “bubble”. “Bubble”, of course, means that it will end soon and badly. It needs to.

    That’s not to say that the ZeroHedge writers (the ones not taken from other sites are all written by one “Tyler Durden”) explains things as well as Mr. Sailer. They don’t get into the qualities of the types of people involved like Steve.

    However, the ZeroHedge commenters, in my opinion, are the best on the web. I don’t read them much anymore – it’s a BIG time sink, and it’s just as well those comments, along with DISQUS ones, don’t work on my browser at all now – but I’ve read a few last week, and it’s mostly the same great stuff in there. I’ve learned more from those commenters about big and small-picture financial stuff than I ever could have from reading books.

    Non Disclosure: No, I don’t have anything to do with that site, and I never registered to comment since I knew that would suck up even more of my time. PeakStupidity’s review of the site.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill

    However, the ZeroHedge commenters, in my opinion, are the best on the web. I don’t read them much anymore
     
    I've read that exact sentiment before. When was the golden age of ZH comments? I find them really bad, and I've been reading for 1.5 years or so (to be fair, I only read the comments about 10% of the time now because I never learn anything there).
  90. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    The White Australia policy was the greatest immigration policy ever. I have second hand experience of it. My uncle was much older than me (50s when I was born). He emigrated to Australia (from England) as a ‘ten bob pom’ – the amount was a token gesture subsidized largely by GB & AUS gvts. It was easy to get a job, the climate was srunning & there was none of the class snobbery rampant in Europe. Melbourne was an exception (I believe the running gag aming Aussies is that M isn’t a real aussie city but a snibbish suburb of London.

    From an HBD perspective it’s an interesting case study as the types of White settlers was totally different to the States, more blue collar & Celtic than the puritan Saxons that dominated the US. Less tribal influence because that’s not a niche easy to exploit. As a result, Aussies here in Europe have until recently had a reputation for political incorrectness, bluntness & being tough straight-talkers who see thru BS. That’s why theu were always so good at sport per capita – tennis, cricket, swimming. I was in awe of them. Yey recently that has all dipped and my theoru is that the various (((political manipulation))) has changed the demographics and hamstrung the rough-and_ready Aussie spirit. The last Anglophine country to succumb to PC – now even England beats them in the Ashes & finishes abive them in the medals table.

    Read More
  91. https://kakistocracyblog.wordpress.com/2015/10/22/i-said-do-you-speak-a-my-language/

    White Privilege is that moral turpitude that occurs when men attempt to secure the blessings of liberty for themselves and their posterity. And one of its most egregious elements may also be its least remarked upon. That is the privilege of enjoying modernity’s most expansive plural pronouns.

    Consider the modest “we.” No other people have this term deployed by others so often on their behalf. Whether yellow, black, brown, or AIPAC, pages blossom with those eager to advise on what we should do in our countries. It’s all very gratifying. Though sometimes the air fills with more WEs than a French porn shoot. And that’s what the royal we will discuss tonight.

    I was reading a piece recently by a man discussing the immense affection we Australians have for multiculturalism. The author’s name is Thinethavone Soutphommasane. He is a member of the Australian Multicultural Council and is presently serving as Australia’s Race Discrimination Commissioner at the Australian Human Rights Commission. Mr. Soutphommasane was born in France to Laotian boat parents who were subsequently resettled Down Under via reunification program. It’s curious how infrequently these reunions occur in native homelands, though the point I am trying to make is that when Thinethavone uses “we” in regard to Australians, you may be assured his bonafides are in perfect order.

    As Australians we typically think of ourselves as relaxed and welcoming people. On the whole, ours is a happy story, though we don’t always realise it. There is something revealing in how the majority of Australians endorse multiculturalism and mass immigration. [“Revealing” isn’t how you spell duplicitous] Now isn’t the time to be talking down our multicultural success [Success for whom is the question] It’s time for all good citizens to say that we choose tolerance and unity over bigotry and division.

    That’s inspirational really. To hear a Laotian take such an ecumenical view of Australian nationalism. I almost get verklempt just reflecting on it. It’s a perspective that humbles us Chinese by comparison.

    Read More
  92. I am not surprised the Chinese middle classes are trying to get out. They are generally intelligent, hard-working and productive and have to put up with a country where corruption is at Zaire levels, mild dissent can get you jailed and bankrupted, the rule of law is a fiction, property prices are far more insane then they are in the West and the country is run solely for the benefit of the Communist party elite. On top of that, the non-stop pursuit of growth has resulted in massive environmental damage, pollution is terrible and you can’t even trust the food you are eating is not toxic. Life in a jon-descript Australian suburb is heaven on Earth by comparison.

    Also Steve often talks about the overpopulation of Africa, but a bigger worry is the water crisis in Asia. Partly thanks to climate change and China damming every river it can get its hands on, 3.5 billion people across the Middle East, Central Asia, the Indian sub-continent and SE Asia are going to be facing drastic water shortages over the next 20 years. It will most likely be the cause of the next world war.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Numinous

    They are generally intelligent, hard-working and productive and have to put up with a country where corruption is at Zaire levels, mild dissent can get you jailed and bankrupted, the rule of law is a fiction, property prices are far more insane then they are in the West and the country is run solely for the benefit of the Communist party elite.
     
    Alt-right logic dictates that if a country is corrupt, it's because its people are corrupt (defective genes or whatever.) Hence Chinese should be barred from immigrating to countries that aren't so corrupt lest they reduce those countries to vile situations of the kind found in Middle China.
  93. @Pittsburgh Thatcherite
    Siphoning off China’s wealth, as well as her most capable citizens, will slow the rise of China, without risking military confrontation.

    If done carefully, it could be profitable for nations that offer refuge to China’s wealthy, without causing social tensions.

    Immigrants could be confined to the remote Northern Territory, which is three times larger than California, but contains only 1% of Australia’s population.

    Then they would not affect Australian society.

    If Australia imported a hundred million immigrants and required each immigrant to pay $500 per month, every Australian could receive $2000 per month:

    $2000 = ($500 * 100 million Chinese) / (25 million Australians)

    Anything for the money, eh? Consider that more than a few may be justly reviled at home

    Read More
  94. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Paul Walker - Most beautiful man ever...
    "Australia has a policy against low-skilled immigration".
    Wrong. Bullshit. Crap. Australia has unskilled Bangladouches flooding in via 457 and student visas.
    Even the lefties in Australia are pissed off at the 200,000 annual turd world intake.
    https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2017/05/mass-immigration-grinds-big-cities-to-halt/

    https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2017/04/prostitutes-boom-457-visas/

    https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2017/04/mass-immigration-diluting-australias-skills-base/

    The Chinese mostly vote for the Australian Labor Party and The Greens. Since those parties are now only 1 seat [out of 150] short of governing Australia again, the floodgates are likely to fall off the hinges shortly.

    Read More
    • Replies: @james n.s.w
    I’d say almost all Aussies are pretty cool with Chinese immigration these days – there is a high rate of inter-marriage and cultural assimilation; property price inflation is limited to 2 cities only: Sydney and Melbourne. The rest of the country would probably welcome foreign real estate investment.

    WTF. no. this is bull. you don't live in australia do you? i live in rural australia and house prices are inflated here as well. the whole gradient of australia's real estate market is severely distorted. it is worst in sydney and melbourne, but it is still bad in the rest of the country. seriously what the hell are you talking about?

  95. Boy oh boy, isn’t industrial-scale mass third world immigration just the best thing ever?!?!

    Read More
  96. @Frau Katze
    I'm told by a resident of Sydney that it's in the same boat as Vancouver: it's a magnet for rich Chinese.

    The situation is every bit as bad in Vancouver as Sydney.

    The Chinese, to their credit, don't cause obvious problems, like becoming an underclass. Or being Muslims who drive cars into crowds.

    But all this Chinese money has distorted the economy.

    I know it’s wild and crazy, but how about the Chinese just STAY HOME and invest their money in … be sitting down for this ….. CHINA.

    Let them work w the Chinese government to change the investment climate and all the other reasons why of course they look to get out of China and invest elsewhere. Not our problem here in the US. I want my damned country back.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Zzz
    Even though it has nothing to do with you personally it's extremely amusing to hear this from american.
    , @Frau Katze
    What they fear is becoming on the outs with current Chinese govt and losing their money.

    In Vancouver some have not come to live (yet). Instead, they park their money in real estate. But they cannot even be bothered to rent their house. They instead board them up.

    These boarded up places become magnets for criminals.

    My Sydney informant had not heard of boarded up houses in his city.

    Why let this continue? Because the previous owners of those houses made a big profit from selling. In other words whites happily sold their houses and it was a huge payday.

    So no complaints until the prices became so high no ordinary person could possibly afford to buy.
    , @Achmed E. Newman

    I know it’s wild and crazy, but how about the Chinese just STAY HOME and invest their money in … be sitting down for this ….. CHINA.
     
    That IS a wild and crazy idea, and I wish I knew some wild and crazy Chinaguys who would do just that. However, I'd agree with others that were this money to come pouring in without the residents being able to easily scam our system and come in to stay one way or another (without Buck and my permission), it might stop after a while. In the meantime, many young people wanting to live in the big city on/in their own property would still have a hard time until it crashed.

    ZeroHedge has reported numerous times on Vancouver, British Columbia, and the latest was some type of non-resident property or sales tax - I am a HUGE opponent of property tax to begin with, but large taxes on sales to non-citizens seems like a decent idea. I had read that the Vancouver housing bubble was already in the process of bursting. As has also said here already in the comments, the realtors and mortgage brokers and big banks want the big money and big churning over of properties to continue until they have enough money to bug out (they hope, before some pissed off people are onto their asses, such as the "white-hot" angry young Aussies described by a commenter way earlier on this thread.
  97. @Foreign Expert
    Many countries have a law against foreigners owning land. We need a law stating that if we cannot own land in your country, you cannot own land in ours.

    We need a law stating that if we cannot own land in your country, you cannot own land in ours.

    China Pop: 1.4 Billion
    Australia Pop: 24 Million

    I suspect the problems and outcomes would likely be the same, except some rich Australians might own a villa or two in China. Taxing foreign money on residential property, as in Canada, is just a salve, no reason to allow any avenue for speculation.

    Better idea, non-nationals or non-permanent visa holders can’t purchase any residential property. Then you can make exceptions in special deals if necessary.

    Read More
  98. The correlation between high (and ever-rising) real-estate prices and immigration is zero.

    The correlation between high real-estate prices and income inequality is pretty high.

    Real-estate prices have been sky-high in Indian cities like Delhi and Mumbai for a couple of decades now, if not longer. I don’t need to remind this audience that India has net-negative immigration. Real-estate is one place to park illicit money (gained through criminal activity or through tax-avoidance), and there’s more of it each year.

    Read More
  99. @Paul Walker - Most beautiful man ever...
    "China doesn’t have 40 million affluent citizens, let alone 40 million to spare."
    Rubbish. There's a billion of them and they want to go to the first world.
    For some (((reason))) Australia immigration favours chinese/indians over the Anglo sphere.

    For some (((reason))) Australia immigration favours chinese/indians over the Anglo sphere.

    There’s no need to favor anyone. The number of people seeking to emigrate is not uniform across countries. Countries are vastly unequal in populations too. So complaining that more immigrants come from India and China than, say, Finland, is a non sequitor. A non-discrminatory immigration policy, by its very nature, will pull in a very skewed distribution of immigrants.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Immigration is a privilege, not a right. So it can not be 'discriminatory', since you are only withholding privileges and not denying rights.
    , @Jenner Ickham Errican

    There’s no need to favor anyone. […] A non-discriminatory immigration policy, by its very nature, will pull in a very skewed distribution of immigrants.
     
    Your last sentence confirms Paul Walker’s point. If there’s to be immigration, it should be discriminatory. In the case of Greater Europe and the Anglosphere, this means discrimination in favor of whites (as in White Australia). The racial impact on the destination is what matters to most natives, not the desires of the self-selected invaders.

    As Paul implied, some citizens are traitors—and should be thwarted for the benefit of the white majority. Basically, who/whom all around.
  100. @Judah Benjamin Hur
    I wish China could "ruin" the American dream where I live, near Jacksonville.

    Household wealth in Australia stalled this year, new figures reveal, although the nation’s per capita wealth still comes in second behind banking hotbed Switzerland.

    The Credit Suisse Research Institute published its seventh annual Global Wealth Report today, with Australia’s 0.2 per cent retreat in total household wealth to $US6.4 trillion ($8.7 trillion) trailing the modest global growth rate of 1.4 per cent.

    (...)
    The moniker of ‘the lucky country’ appears to still ring true, however, given the wealth of the average Australian — at $US375,600 — ranks in second place globally.
     
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/news/australians-rank-second-in-global-percapita-wealth-table/news-story/06e23e9a23b9cfe9d60cba2b37f1b94e

    It’s illiquid unless you cash in your house, and either pay tax on the proceeds or buy another inflated property (I assume AUS like US allows you to avoid taxation when you sell and put the proceeds into a primary residence).

    Sorry to hear about Jacksonville. Jax Beach was my old stomping grounds.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Judah Benjamin Hur
    Aside from the ghetto areas, Jacksonville is a great place. Jax Beach is still really nice (and they now have a Trader Joe's!) and just south of Jacksonville, in St. Johns County, there are some of America's best public schools for non-millionaires. It's just nowhere nearly as well off as Melbourne or Sydney.
  101. @Frau Katze
    One thing I'm worried about is China interfering with our politics.

    They've already made one business deal suggesting some chumminess. This concerned a mine that was staffed by workers they were allowed to bring over from China. Why would a Canadian politician agree to that?

    It's a very bad sign.

    I honestly don't know what our leaders are thinking. Either they have sinister motives or they're extremely stupid. The latter cannot be discounted.

    They could be a combination of both.

    It's depressing overall for sure.

    The potent combination of greed and stupidity.

    Read More
  102. For those who don’t know > > > The Australian problem is not an illegal alien/refugee/migrant problem the way we/USA have it and Europe too. They are now sealed off from refugees trying to reach them by boat by virtue of being surrounded by water and serious enforcement. Australians are offended by these queue jumpers, while Euro-Eloi and Americans, Canadians allow it.

    No, the Australian way is to allow in and encourage a legal flood of educated and English speaking Asians, primarily Chinese and Indians, other SubCons. Cambodians, Vietnamese etc. So the white population is getting diluted at a fast rate. Some uneducated proles from Asia allowed in too. I think hoping they will engage in farm work and agriculture.

    Do they allow parents and grandparents (via chain migration) in to (in effect) retire via the Australian free medical and social security system that they never paid into? Curious for an answer from Australians here. This is exploited to a fare thee well in USA with Chinese and Russians being the geniuses at this.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Australia has a refugee intake of c. 16,000 p.a. Compared by head of population, that's about 3 times the U.S. intake. Every illegal arrival by boat results in the same number being subtracted from the 16,000 yearly intake, so it's a zero sum game for refugees, unless more than 16,000 a year sail here from Indonesia.
    The big problem in Australia, apart from the flood of Chinese ''students'', is the Family Reunion intake [chain migration], which is over 20o,000 per annum.
    Given that the U.S. has 23 times Australia's population [24m.], that translates to 5 million chain migrants to the U.S. p.a..
  103. @Ali Choudhury
    I am not surprised the Chinese middle classes are trying to get out. They are generally intelligent, hard-working and productive and have to put up with a country where corruption is at Zaire levels, mild dissent can get you jailed and bankrupted, the rule of law is a fiction, property prices are far more insane then they are in the West and the country is run solely for the benefit of the Communist party elite. On top of that, the non-stop pursuit of growth has resulted in massive environmental damage, pollution is terrible and you can't even trust the food you are eating is not toxic. Life in a jon-descript Australian suburb is heaven on Earth by comparison.

    Also Steve often talks about the overpopulation of Africa, but a bigger worry is the water crisis in Asia. Partly thanks to climate change and China damming every river it can get its hands on, 3.5 billion people across the Middle East, Central Asia, the Indian sub-continent and SE Asia are going to be facing drastic water shortages over the next 20 years. It will most likely be the cause of the next world war.

    They are generally intelligent, hard-working and productive and have to put up with a country where corruption is at Zaire levels, mild dissent can get you jailed and bankrupted, the rule of law is a fiction, property prices are far more insane then they are in the West and the country is run solely for the benefit of the Communist party elite.

    Alt-right logic dictates that if a country is corrupt, it’s because its people are corrupt (defective genes or whatever.) Hence Chinese should be barred from immigrating to countries that aren’t so corrupt lest they reduce those countries to vile situations of the kind found in Middle China.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    They are more or less right, whether its positive for myself or not.

    The nature of a people do indeed change the characteristic of the government, especially in a democracy and especially if they gain substantial power. You don't even need HBD - even from a purely cultural perspective, so as long as people are anything of a hyphenated-American and maintain their own culture at all, it'll distort the values of original country.

    Take, for example, the Chinese tendency toward guanxi. It has its positive values, associated with Confucianism, but at its heart, it can easily be an exchange of value for value, which is essentially soft corruption. My experience with Indians is that they are also clannish and nepotistic even beyond the Chinese.

    In both cases, it is a distortion from at least WASP values. Large importations of any other culture, whether Chinese, Italian or Russian, will distort and disturb the original country's personality and government and there's nothing wrong for natives who like the current system to maintain it as such. Its never wrong to fight for your own interests.
    , @Achmed E. Newman

    Alt-right logic dictates that if a country is corrupt, it’s because its people are corrupt (defective genes or whatever.) Hence Chinese should be barred from immigrating to countries that aren’t so corrupt lest they reduce those countries to vile situations of the kind found in Middle China.
     
    Great way to put this, Numinous! This is something that most Americans just don't understand. With very small numbers of people immigrating (say, the foreign population is less than 2 % of a country and spread out pretty well), assimilation can work, and the Chinese could learn the morals and customs of the host country. In large doses, it doesn't work at all.

    I can't reply to 2 at once, but I wanted to get in that once Ali there brought in the "Global Climate Disruption (TM)" crap, he lost me as a reader. Drop that crap, Ali - you know damn well that what's more important is how many people crowd up a land or the world. The world's climate changes this way and that way, and we don't have a damn thing to do with it.
  104. @Bragadocious
    I thought all Australian men just came to America and hunted for a Yank wife. My SIL is one. Her hubby moved here with no job lined up, no real job skills or anything. I think they just like getting on planes for the hell of it.
    Read More
  105. Australian from Perth here. The migration system here is loose, and its focus on ‘high skills’ is easily rorted. I could go a whole year without being served petrol at a Servo by anybody who wasn’t Indian; they also seem to drive all the taxis; backpackers from Europe and elsewhere pick all the fruit. A generous welfare system means that the Australian born aren’t interest in low-paid jobs on the whole.

    Australia’s isolation from other European countries means that there is a still a consensus in favour of an increasing population; if we don’t fill up this country, other people will. Populate or Perish!

    The one saving grace of Australia’s immigration programme is that it’s not all from one place – it’s not all Mexicans (USA), Moroccans (Netherlands) or Pakistanis (UK); so such urban ghettos as exist are relatively small and transitory. I say relatively; I wouldn’t want to be a scantily-clad white woman in Lakemba (suburb of Sydney) at night. But most immigration communities eventually seem to blend in.

    Plenty of migrants to Australia are also still from traditional sources such as the UK, NZ and Europe; and there are welcome new sources all the time. In the last year for instance, I’ve noticed a large number of middle-class South Americans in my city, particularly Brazilians.

    I’d say almost all Aussies are pretty cool with Chinese immigration these days – there is a high rate of inter-marriage and cultural assimilation; property price inflation is limited to 2 cities only: Sydney and Melbourne. The rest of the country would probably welcome foreign real estate investment.

    While Muslims are growing in number, they are a small minority of migrants. Of course they are grossly-over-represented in the media: no reality TV show is complete without a hijab-clad woman participant. This kind of tokenism is quite new; nobody in TV or the movies ever bothered for instance to ensure that the native Aboriginal population was similarly represented.

    Notwithstanding widespread misgivings about the growth of the Muslim community in Australia, I don’t foresee those misgivings being transformed into any large scale public opposition to the legal immigration system in the future.

    A return to White Australia (or some form of it) would be politically unpalatable, and Aussies wouldn’t welcome the international opprobrium that might bring.

    In a dangerous world, Australia is still gingerly trying to pursue the goal of an increased population, for its own economic advancement and political security, without surrendering its culture. There have been a few mistakes (the Lebanese Muslims in the 1970s; the Sudanese refugees in the 1990s) but on the whole, provided illegal immigration is kept in check, the public seem to trust the government to administer this programme. For the moment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    In a dangerous world, Australia is still gingerly trying to pursue the goal of an increased population, for its own . . . political security

    Insane.

    Australia’s isolation from other European countries means that there is a still a consensus in favour of an increasing population; if we don’t fill up this country, other people will. Populate or Perish!

    > "we"
    > "other people"

    , @anon
    "A return to white Australia (or some form of it) would be politically unpalatable, and Aussies wouldn't welcome the international opprobrium that might bring".

    Why should it be anybody's right or business to decide what - if any at all - immigration policy Australians want or decide upon OTHER then Australians?
    , @sb
    It's worth remembering that Australia's post WW2 immigration push was largely in response to a severe manpower shortage during the war .
    It was just impossible to get local labour to build ports ,airports and roads for the defence of Australia . (Actually much of the defense infrastructure was built by US servicemen )

    Nowadays and , as far as we can tell , in the future I rather doubt that lack of this kind of infrastructure will be an issue in any full on war .

    Of course in those days we were -more or less - one high trust tribe and viewed with disdain and dare I say a certain sense of superiority other countries with their pronounced race and class divisions

    Now governments ( well the Australian Government anyway ) have realised that a high population growth can disguise all kinds of otherwise dodgy economic data .eg GDP per capita can go down but national GDP goes up . Remember we have politicians who can't think beyond the next election ( and do we have lots of them )
  106. @Wilkey
    I suppose letting the Chinese *buy* housing in Western countries is a way to get them to send back some of their money to the West. There is no reason, however, why we have to let them move here. We don't even have to give them tourist visas. They can keep the houses rental property investments and nothing more.

    China could send 40 million people to Australia and render white Australians a minority, and they wouldn't ever miss those 40 million people. Australia would have to be insanely stupid to let them do that - which means they probably will.

    There is a pattern here: Look at Chinese immigration into Canada, it is changing the demographics of Canada in a very significant way. With 1.5 billion people China can export 50 million to Canada and 40 million to Australia, this will inevitably result in the political dominance of those countries, this would be a fantastic strategic victory for Beijing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Not exactly. The Chinese emigrants don't particularly support the policies of Beijing - after all, a not inconsiderable number of them fled because of Beijing cracking down on them for corruption. So that's the good news.

    The bad news is that you have a self-selected group of the wealthy and corrupt creating a new country in yours.
  107. @roger in florida
    There is a pattern here: Look at Chinese immigration into Canada, it is changing the demographics of Canada in a very significant way. With 1.5 billion people China can export 50 million to Canada and 40 million to Australia, this will inevitably result in the political dominance of those countries, this would be a fantastic strategic victory for Beijing.

    Not exactly. The Chinese emigrants don’t particularly support the policies of Beijing – after all, a not inconsiderable number of them fled because of Beijing cracking down on them for corruption. So that’s the good news.

    The bad news is that you have a self-selected group of the wealthy and corrupt creating a new country in yours.

    Read More
    • Replies: @roger in florida
    My experience of Chinese people in many different parts of the world is that there is a concept of "China" as an almost mystical entity. The communist govt. in Beijing has had quite incredible cooperation from overseas Chinese billionaires. However much these people may disagree with the Beijing regime they still have, after generations of separation, an attachment to "China" that is quite extraordinary.
    I have observed the growth of the ethnic vote in Canada for instance where, thanks to their insane immigration policies, ethnicity is becoming the most important issue in elections. This happens in all "multicultural" societies. If current trends continue there will be an ethnic Chinese govt. in power in Canada within a few decades. I don't say they will be a colony of Beijing just that Beijing will have profound influence on them. I also believe that this population movement is a deliberate policy of Beijing.
    , @anon
    The bad news is we are being race replaced and told we should "like" it.
  108. @Anon
    No, but you can refuse to honor the obligations accompanying the "gift", which if enforced will quickly dry up the supply of such gifts.

    Doesn’t even need bribes. A colleague in VC Canada had his father-in-law “betray” him by selling his house to a Chinese speculator for $1 million dollars sight unseen. The actual value of the house was probably $800k at the time.

    I don’t really think you can stop that kind of money without trying to regulate it as an illegal drug. And even then, the odds of success are poor. As you can see from the above, even family isn’t “holding the line” for each other.

    I’ll feel more bad if Canada wasn’t turning into poz central. That said, my long theory is that the Chinese immigrants aren’t actually stopping the poz. They’ll just pick up the 52 genders and other crap, and then go back to China with it.

    In the end, high IQ had no survival value. Islam is the future. Allah akbar.

    Read More
  109. Australia is under attack from financialization, globalization and mass immigration. When civil war breaks out in Australia, I hope the patriotic Australians will have the fighting spirit of the Australians who stopped the Japanese Empire in Papua New Guinea on the famous Kokoda trail.

    Historians will look back and say the Australian Civil War era started with the Battle of Cronulla in 2005. The Battle of Cronulla was started by the interloper immigrants who presumed to sully the honor of the Australian beach babes. The culture clash brought on by mass immigration and multiculturalism created the conditions for the Battle of Cronulla.

    Australian men had inculcated within themselves a method of superb nonchalance and stoic reserve while admiring their beautiful Australian females while at the beach. Pretty soon the beautiful Australian women were wearing next to nothing in the way of bathing suits. This was a wonderful thing that allowed the men to appreciate the gals and the ladies to show off in a highly civilized manner. Then the Muslims showed up. All was torn asunder. Darkness descended across the beach.

    Muslims brought to Australia by the destructive policy of mass immigration started to dishonor the beautiful Australian females at Cronulla Beach. The proud and brave Australian men would not tolerate for one second their beautiful women to be mistreated by the Muslim marauders just because they were wearing skimpy attire on the beach. Battles broke out between the patriotic Australian men and the Muslim Misogynists.

    The Battle of Cronulla will be refought again and again until such time that patriotic Australians can one day regain control of their beautiful country.

    GOD BLESS AUSTRALIA AND THE BEAUTIFUL WOMEN OF AUSTRALIA

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Is there any place in the world that has been IMPROVED by Muslim immigration?
  110. @Numinous

    They are generally intelligent, hard-working and productive and have to put up with a country where corruption is at Zaire levels, mild dissent can get you jailed and bankrupted, the rule of law is a fiction, property prices are far more insane then they are in the West and the country is run solely for the benefit of the Communist party elite.
     
    Alt-right logic dictates that if a country is corrupt, it's because its people are corrupt (defective genes or whatever.) Hence Chinese should be barred from immigrating to countries that aren't so corrupt lest they reduce those countries to vile situations of the kind found in Middle China.

    They are more or less right, whether its positive for myself or not.

    The nature of a people do indeed change the characteristic of the government, especially in a democracy and especially if they gain substantial power. You don’t even need HBD – even from a purely cultural perspective, so as long as people are anything of a hyphenated-American and maintain their own culture at all, it’ll distort the values of original country.

    Take, for example, the Chinese tendency toward guanxi. It has its positive values, associated with Confucianism, but at its heart, it can easily be an exchange of value for value, which is essentially soft corruption. My experience with Indians is that they are also clannish and nepotistic even beyond the Chinese.

    In both cases, it is a distortion from at least WASP values. Large importations of any other culture, whether Chinese, Italian or Russian, will distort and disturb the original country’s personality and government and there’s nothing wrong for natives who like the current system to maintain it as such. Its never wrong to fight for your own interests.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Numinous
    I can't find much to disagree with you. As for Indians (my people), you are right about their potential to be very clannish and nepotistic. But there's a wide variance in behavior; Indians can also be uber-SJW types. In any case, the lesson holds: too much immigration of one ethnic group concentrated in a particular area is bad. What I have observed is that when Indians migrate abroad, as long as they are in the minority, they tend to adopt the virtues of their "native" neighbors; cleanliness and hygiene seem to hold much higher priority than in the motherland.
  111. @Frau Katze
    One thing I'm worried about is China interfering with our politics.

    They've already made one business deal suggesting some chumminess. This concerned a mine that was staffed by workers they were allowed to bring over from China. Why would a Canadian politician agree to that?

    It's a very bad sign.

    I honestly don't know what our leaders are thinking. Either they have sinister motives or they're extremely stupid. The latter cannot be discounted.

    They could be a combination of both.

    It's depressing overall for sure.

    I think it’ll be a great thing if they would silently nuke schools with 52 genders. “flavors of sexuality” and glorification of homomania. Unfortunately, they don’t seem to be bringing that part of Beijing’s agenda :(

    Read More
  112. @Buck Turgidson
    I know it's wild and crazy, but how about the Chinese just STAY HOME and invest their money in ... be sitting down for this ..... CHINA.

    Let them work w the Chinese government to change the investment climate and all the other reasons why of course they look to get out of China and invest elsewhere. Not our problem here in the US. I want my damned country back.

    Even though it has nothing to do with you personally it’s extremely amusing to hear this from american.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buck Turgidson
    I know of people who think that if immigration does not result in measurable physical changes within the boundaries of their property line, that it does not affect them. As long as immigrants aren't moving into their front yard, they don't see any issues.

    If I wanted to visit Australia, but decided to change travel plans and stay home b/c I don't want to experience the diversity, does that have anything to do with me "personally"?
  113. @Daniel Chieh
    I don't realistically you can stop people from giving you money. The market ultimately will prevail against attempts to control capital.

    I don’t realistically you can stop people from giving you money. The market ultimately will prevail against attempts to control capital.

    If what you are referring to is foreigners buying homes in Western countries, then true, you probably can’t stop them. But, as I already posted above, you can stop them from living in or even visiting those homes. If the Chinese or others want to funnel oodles of money into the real estate markets in Australia, Canada, the US, and elsewhere then left them, if we have to. Maybe we even want to. But let them know that those homes will never be anything more than rental properties or mere vacation homes for no more than a few weeks per year.

    Banning foreigners from investing in Australian or American residential properties might violate various trade agreements, but you can unquestionably use federal, state, and local tax policy to favor primary residences over second homes and investment properties. Combined with more sane immigration policy – a significant reduction in legal immigration and stricter limitations on visitors visas – you could “encourage” foreigners to unload a lot of the homes they’ve purchased.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Sure. But large quantities of investment money distort the local economy even so, and in a significant way, you'll see that; many/much of the purchases aren't really an effort to immigrate, it is basically an effort to park money. At least a lot of the complaints in VC in my experience were not just Chinese immigrants, but Chinese ownership turning locals into eternal renters.

    Hell, in VC, the tendency to buy and board up houses is well known. No one's living in those.

    In the long run, rising Chinese affluence will affect the world. You can attempt to regulate its effects and perhaps should, but its an unavoidable issue.

    , @Travis
    China bans foreigners from buying property in China. Mexico also bans foreigners from buying property within 100 miles of the coast and all of Baja is off limits to foreigners. 10 years ago Australia banned foreigners from buying property. Even today foreigners can only purchase new construction, they cannot buy occupied homes in Australia. Foreigners must also pay a $10,000 fee to the Australian government when buying property and face higher property taxes than native australians. Nevertheless Foreign buyers are purchasing new housing in New South Wales and Victoria at a rate of $8 billion a year - a figure the equivalent of one in five new homes completed across the two states.
  114. @Daniel Chieh
    They are more or less right, whether its positive for myself or not.

    The nature of a people do indeed change the characteristic of the government, especially in a democracy and especially if they gain substantial power. You don't even need HBD - even from a purely cultural perspective, so as long as people are anything of a hyphenated-American and maintain their own culture at all, it'll distort the values of original country.

    Take, for example, the Chinese tendency toward guanxi. It has its positive values, associated with Confucianism, but at its heart, it can easily be an exchange of value for value, which is essentially soft corruption. My experience with Indians is that they are also clannish and nepotistic even beyond the Chinese.

    In both cases, it is a distortion from at least WASP values. Large importations of any other culture, whether Chinese, Italian or Russian, will distort and disturb the original country's personality and government and there's nothing wrong for natives who like the current system to maintain it as such. Its never wrong to fight for your own interests.

    I can’t find much to disagree with you. As for Indians (my people), you are right about their potential to be very clannish and nepotistic. But there’s a wide variance in behavior; Indians can also be uber-SJW types. In any case, the lesson holds: too much immigration of one ethnic group concentrated in a particular area is bad. What I have observed is that when Indians migrate abroad, as long as they are in the minority, they tend to adopt the virtues of their “native” neighbors; cleanliness and hygiene seem to hold much higher priority than in the motherland.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Alas, uber-SJW is not actually in contradiction with nepotistic attitudes as the BLACK LIVES MATTER! friend of ours has shown.
  115. @Boomstick
    Are we in a US housing bubble again?

    https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2017/04/25/home-prices-rose-5-8-year-over-year-in-february-32-month-high-nsa

    With an inflation correction to the Schiller house price index I don't think it's yet indicated. We're at about 2003 house price levels. We've probably got a couple years to go before they peak. In the end, a the prices now depend on very low interest rates, and it will take a while for the fed to jack those up.

    “Are we in a US housing bubble again?”

    Yes and no. Yes, because the cost of a single family home (in a desirable neighborhood) in many major markets outstrips the recommended 3x annual income. No, because it’s the new normal in a country with stagnant wages/salaries and an increasing population. People are more accepting of expensive housing costs as the cost of entry. The next recession will not crash the domestic housing market.

    The relief valve in the bubble markets of the early 2000′s were affordable rents. My ex rented a huge 17oo sq ft apartment in West Hollywood off of Sunset for $1500. The mortgage on a comparably sized home in the same neighborhood would have been over $4,000. NYC and other major cities had similar correlations. Rents all over are now closer to parity with the mortgage of a comparably priced home, and are no longer the deals they once were. The housing collapse contributed to a rental boom. While housing prices in a post-2008 economic collapse economy are severely over-valued, they can be sustained unless the job market gets much worse.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boomstick
    I think the house price = 3X income rule is a hangover from when interest rates were higher. Now that interest rates have gone much lower it's possible to pay a higher price but keep the same monthly payment. $300K house, $100K income, 6% interest has a bigger monthly payment than a $350K house, $100K income, and 4% interest.

    You're probably right that home prices are less likely to severely crash this time around.
  116. @Wilkey
    I don’t realistically you can stop people from giving you money. The market ultimately will prevail against attempts to control capital.

    If what you are referring to is foreigners buying homes in Western countries, then true, you probably can't stop them. But, as I already posted above, you can stop them from living in or even visiting those homes. If the Chinese or others want to funnel oodles of money into the real estate markets in Australia, Canada, the US, and elsewhere then left them, if we have to. Maybe we even want to. But let them know that those homes will never be anything more than rental properties or mere vacation homes for no more than a few weeks per year.

    Banning foreigners from investing in Australian or American residential properties might violate various trade agreements, but you can unquestionably use federal, state, and local tax policy to favor primary residences over second homes and investment properties. Combined with more sane immigration policy - a significant reduction in legal immigration and stricter limitations on visitors visas - you could "encourage" foreigners to unload a lot of the homes they've purchased.

    Sure. But large quantities of investment money distort the local economy even so, and in a significant way, you’ll see that; many/much of the purchases aren’t really an effort to immigrate, it is basically an effort to park money. At least a lot of the complaints in VC in my experience were not just Chinese immigrants, but Chinese ownership turning locals into eternal renters.

    Hell, in VC, the tendency to buy and board up houses is well known. No one’s living in those.

    In the long run, rising Chinese affluence will affect the world. You can attempt to regulate its effects and perhaps should, but its an unavoidable issue.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Perspective
    One thing to point out as well is that at least in the case of Canada, Chinese immigration has actually been ebbing for the last ten years or so. It's the influx of capital that is pouring in now and it may or may not be accompanied by permanent residents. The 2011 census showed a slight dip in the Chinese percentage in Toronto compared with the previous census 5 years prior, with mostly South Asians, Arabs and Filipinos filling the void.
  117. @Flip
    I remember reading in one of Jim Rogers' travel books that foreign ownership of Australian real estate was not allowed. This law must have been changed at some point in the near past.

    It was, in 2008, by a Mandarin-speaking clusterf**k of a prime minister.

    The aim was to support house prices, during the financial crisis of that year, by allowing cashed-up Chinese investors into the market.

    Read More
  118. @Gladio
    Yes - Chinese buyers mostly, looking to park their ill-gotten gains in a country with the rule of law, good schools and clean air.

    If they are indeed, “ill-gotten gains”, do we really need or want them around?

    Read More
  119. @anon
    Mainland Chinese are driving prices to the moon in the 5 mainland Capitals, and Canberra.
    Australian's standard of living was pretty ordinary until the MidSixties.
    The Whitlam socialist Government elected in 1972 removed protective Tariffs without warning or consultation, destroying the local Textile, Footwear and Clothing industries, and Britain's entry into the ECM devastated farming.
    Since Capital Gains Tax is exempted on one's ''principal place of residence'', Australians' main Insustry, unless you're either Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton, or Xstrata, is buying and selling houses in the capital cities for profit.

    Yes, but the other culprit is low interest rates, it drives up housing cost even if you don’t have a lot of cash buyers to drive it up. The Aussies did the Obama thing basically grew the economically through low interest rates.

    Read More
  120. I used to remark that Australia reminds me of California but without all the drive-by shootings. Seems even that distinction is fading demographically away.

    Read More
  121. @Opinionator
    Thanks. I'm not sure how to make the comparison of that guideline to the numbers in the other post but I appreciate the response.

    Let’s go through a hypothetical case. Perhaps someone with more business background can generalize this.

    Assume a $500k mortgage (also assuming a near zero down payment for the problem cases) with a $100k annual income (this is a 5x ratio per your earlier comment). It looks like 4% is a decent estimate for a 30 year fixed mortgage rate now (note how important interest rate is in payment to income ratio calculations, i.e. affordability!, and remember how much higher interest was in the 1980s). Using a payment calculator http://www.calculator.net/payment-calculator.html?ctype=fixterm&cloanamount=500000&cloanterm=30&cmonthlypay=1000&cinterestrate=4&printit=0&x=59&y=12
    we find the monthly payment is $2,387.08 which is $28,645 annually (i.e. just over PiltdownMan’s 28% criterion). This gives an example of someone who just bought a house and has a 100% LTV (loan to value ratio), a 500% loan to income ratio, and a 28.6% payment to income ratio.

    When thinking about mortgage risk it is important to realize the direct effect down payment has on LTV (e.g. 20% down means you start with a 80% LTV rather than 100%). Another way of expressing this is the homeowner has 20% rather than 0% skin in the game when considering a default. Still another way of expressing this is 5x financial leverage rather than infinite leverage. Understanding financial leverage is critical to understanding financial risk, and a home/mortgage is the only substantial leveraged financial investment (i.e. possibly appreciating, contrasted with car loans, etc.) the average person will ever make. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leverage_(finance)

    Now let’s look at the original comment.

    Pittsford residents have a median mortgage debt of $137,728, while their median home value is $234,400. With a median income of $53,056 annually, Pittsford homeowners have a mortgage debt-to-income ratio of 260 percent. Their mortgage debt-to-house value ratio is 59 percent.

    Pittsford tied for the No. 1 ranking with 37 other towns.

    His “mortgage debt-to-house value ratio” is the same as my LTV. It is a key measure of mortgage risk: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loan-to-value_ratio
    Arguably one of the main drivers of the housing crisis was high LTVs because of low/no down payment loans. This allowed people to walk away from loans without much financial consequence spurring a vicious cycle. 59% sounds good (and it is for a single somewhat recent loan) until we start thinking about where in the mortgage life cycle the average loan is.

    His “mortgage debt-to-income ratio” is the same as my ” loan to income ratio”. At 260% it is about half of my example, which should result in a ~14-15% payment to income ratio. Again, sounds low, but remember it is an average (actually, a calculation based on medians).

    The most overleveraged area nationwide is San Luis Obispo, Calif., where the median mortgage debt is $333,641 and residents average just $16,565 in wages annually. Homeowners there have a mortgage debt-to-income ratio of 2,014 percent.

    That’s just insanity.

    That IS insanity. As another commenter noted, it probably has something to do with SLO being a college town. What we are probably looking at is a housing market that is disproportionately rentals with high occupancy (e.g. 4+ in a single family house). Roughly (2,014 / 500 * 28.6) that gives a payment to income ratio of over 100% (compared to 28% guideline mentioned, so all income would go to mortgage payment). I don’t really know SLO, but similar cities might have some grad students and lower income workers paying 50% or more of income for rent of a single room.

    CA real estate has some special features that are worth considering. Prop 13 caps assessed value at the original purchase price (or 1978 value) with a 2% increase per year. You can literally have identical houses next door to each other with one assessed at $50k and the other assessed at $1M. Property tax is about 1% annually so one person is paying $500/year and the other is paying $10,000/year. The average income in SLO probably can’t afford the average property tax payment (not to mention house payment) for recent transactions.

    That combined with incredible appreciation and refinancing based on those much higher values results in a wide variety of specific circumstances which IMHO makes it hard to interpret averages.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    SLO is probably students and retirees from rich families buying. Maybe it's Silicon Valley millionaires buying their moms a retirement cottage.

    It's a nice place.

    , @gda
    You assume GROSS income rather than NET income is the figure to use. Presumably that's because of the mortgage interest deductibility in the US. But other countries do not have mortgage interest deductibility (e.g. Canada).

    In Canada the real estate fever (Chinese induced) started with Vancouver. Eventually (in 2016) they imposed restriction and penalties on foreign ownership, which seems to have cooled off the real estate market somewhat.

    In Toronto (and the Greater Toronto Area) they have just (2017) done the same thing. Prices went up 33% in the last year, not only in Toronto itself, but in surrounding cities and towns within commuting distance. Here the issue is both Chinese and ME (Iranian etc.) money.
  122. @res
    Let's go through a hypothetical case. Perhaps someone with more business background can generalize this.

    Assume a $500k mortgage (also assuming a near zero down payment for the problem cases) with a $100k annual income (this is a 5x ratio per your earlier comment). It looks like 4% is a decent estimate for a 30 year fixed mortgage rate now (note how important interest rate is in payment to income ratio calculations, i.e. affordability!, and remember how much higher interest was in the 1980s). Using a payment calculator http://www.calculator.net/payment-calculator.html?ctype=fixterm&cloanamount=500000&cloanterm=30&cmonthlypay=1000&cinterestrate=4&printit=0&x=59&y=12
    we find the monthly payment is $2,387.08 which is $28,645 annually (i.e. just over PiltdownMan's 28% criterion). This gives an example of someone who just bought a house and has a 100% LTV (loan to value ratio), a 500% loan to income ratio, and a 28.6% payment to income ratio.

    When thinking about mortgage risk it is important to realize the direct effect down payment has on LTV (e.g. 20% down means you start with a 80% LTV rather than 100%). Another way of expressing this is the homeowner has 20% rather than 0% skin in the game when considering a default. Still another way of expressing this is 5x financial leverage rather than infinite leverage. Understanding financial leverage is critical to understanding financial risk, and a home/mortgage is the only substantial leveraged financial investment (i.e. possibly appreciating, contrasted with car loans, etc.) the average person will ever make. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leverage_(finance)

    Now let's look at the original comment.

    Pittsford residents have a median mortgage debt of $137,728, while their median home value is $234,400. With a median income of $53,056 annually, Pittsford homeowners have a mortgage debt-to-income ratio of 260 percent. Their mortgage debt-to-house value ratio is 59 percent.

    Pittsford tied for the No. 1 ranking with 37 other towns.

     

    His "mortgage debt-to-house value ratio" is the same as my LTV. It is a key measure of mortgage risk: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loan-to-value_ratio
    Arguably one of the main drivers of the housing crisis was high LTVs because of low/no down payment loans. This allowed people to walk away from loans without much financial consequence spurring a vicious cycle. 59% sounds good (and it is for a single somewhat recent loan) until we start thinking about where in the mortgage life cycle the average loan is.

    His "mortgage debt-to-income ratio" is the same as my " loan to income ratio". At 260% it is about half of my example, which should result in a ~14-15% payment to income ratio. Again, sounds low, but remember it is an average (actually, a calculation based on medians).

    The most overleveraged area nationwide is San Luis Obispo, Calif., where the median mortgage debt is $333,641 and residents average just $16,565 in wages annually. Homeowners there have a mortgage debt-to-income ratio of 2,014 percent.

    That’s just insanity.
     
    That IS insanity. As another commenter noted, it probably has something to do with SLO being a college town. What we are probably looking at is a housing market that is disproportionately rentals with high occupancy (e.g. 4+ in a single family house). Roughly (2,014 / 500 * 28.6) that gives a payment to income ratio of over 100% (compared to 28% guideline mentioned, so all income would go to mortgage payment). I don't really know SLO, but similar cities might have some grad students and lower income workers paying 50% or more of income for rent of a single room.

    CA real estate has some special features that are worth considering. Prop 13 caps assessed value at the original purchase price (or 1978 value) with a 2% increase per year. You can literally have identical houses next door to each other with one assessed at $50k and the other assessed at $1M. Property tax is about 1% annually so one person is paying $500/year and the other is paying $10,000/year. The average income in SLO probably can't afford the average property tax payment (not to mention house payment) for recent transactions.

    That combined with incredible appreciation and refinancing based on those much higher values results in a wide variety of specific circumstances which IMHO makes it hard to interpret averages.

    SLO is probably students and retirees from rich families buying. Maybe it’s Silicon Valley millionaires buying their moms a retirement cottage.

    It’s a nice place.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Thanks! I'm guessing it also has a substantial group of old timers with no mortgage and minimal property tax (it sounds like a great place to live and not move). It would be interesting to see a scatterplot matrix (with regression lines) of house price, mortgage balance, property tax, etc. for SLO. (actually, Zillow has that data, I wonder if someone there could do it, back to your Moneyball for real estate idea).

    I think it is hard to overestimate how much Prop 13 distorts the CA housing market. Young new buyers are incredibly screwed IMHO. Even if they have a high income and can afford the initial cost, the annual property taxes are ridiculous.

    P.S. I took a quick look at Zillow around SLO and it looks like a funky market. Everything from $100k trailer parks to $600k nice 1800sf new construction to multi-million dollar homes.
  123. @Pittsburgh Thatcherite
    Siphoning off China’s wealth, as well as her most capable citizens, will slow the rise of China, without risking military confrontation.

    If done carefully, it could be profitable for nations that offer refuge to China’s wealthy, without causing social tensions.

    Immigrants could be confined to the remote Northern Territory, which is three times larger than California, but contains only 1% of Australia’s population.

    Then they would not affect Australian society.

    If Australia imported a hundred million immigrants and required each immigrant to pay $500 per month, every Australian could receive $2000 per month:

    $2000 = ($500 * 100 million Chinese) / (25 million Australians)

    Siphoning off China’s wealth, as well as her most capable citizens, will slow the rise of China, without risking military confrontation.

    What I find amazing about all of this is that China seems able to simultaneously fund high growth at home and all of this market distorting expatriate activity.

    China must be generating an astonishing amount of wealth right now.

    Here is a 2015 article about Chinese external investment surpassing their internal investment: http://www.businessinsider.com/statistics-on-chinas-investment-abroad-2015-2

    Read More
    • Replies: @PiltdownMan

    China must be generating an astonishing amount of wealth right now.
     
    China outpaced, in terms of growth rate, all the previous fast-growth economies of the 20th century. In the early and mid-phases of its growth, it was often growing at 10% a year, which eclipsed the 7%ish growth rates of Korea and Taiwan three decades earlier, then considered astonishing by development economists.

    By contrast, Western countries industrialized and grew at much more leisurely rates over a long period in the 19th and 20th centuries.

    But now China is the world's second largest economy, considerably bigger than Japan and getting closer to the US in nominal dollar GDP and it is still growing at 6.9%, according to the latest numbers. This is still flat out astonishing. An economist who used to be the IMF's China research head remarked that he had to be honest-he didn't quite understand how the innards of the economic machine in China, with its weak system of commercial law, weak property rights and and extensive corruption was producing such growth. It would be like a baseball player with a secret crack habit amazing the world by consistently batting .500 every season.

  124. @Buffalo Joe
    Too bad we don't require people to work and at least keep their family in "frugal comfort." Ask any lib if they want their house to be worth more or less in ten years. Then ask them what's the best way for their choice to happen.

    Always worth asking the question but don’t be surprised if they can’t grasp the concept or formulate a coherent response. Oz isn’t the only place with fairy tale thinking.

    Read More
  125. @Grumpy
    I hope it's the Cal Poly students who account for the low average income in SLO.

    SLO has ag lands nearby with field and crop workers, too.

    Read More
  126. @Steve Sailer
    SLO is probably students and retirees from rich families buying. Maybe it's Silicon Valley millionaires buying their moms a retirement cottage.

    It's a nice place.

    Thanks! I’m guessing it also has a substantial group of old timers with no mortgage and minimal property tax (it sounds like a great place to live and not move). It would be interesting to see a scatterplot matrix (with regression lines) of house price, mortgage balance, property tax, etc. for SLO. (actually, Zillow has that data, I wonder if someone there could do it, back to your Moneyball for real estate idea).

    I think it is hard to overestimate how much Prop 13 distorts the CA housing market. Young new buyers are incredibly screwed IMHO. Even if they have a high income and can afford the initial cost, the annual property taxes are ridiculous.

    P.S. I took a quick look at Zillow around SLO and it looks like a funky market. Everything from $100k trailer parks to $600k nice 1800sf new construction to multi-million dollar homes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seth Largo
    I think it is hard to overestimate how much Prop 13 distorts the CA housing market. Young new buyers are incredibly screwed IMHO.

    Wrong. Young non-Californians who just recently moved to California are screwed. But young Californians (like moi) whose parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents lived in California are gonna be just fine because most anyone who lived in California pre-1960s owns a home by now and is gonna pass it down to the next generation (like moi!).

    Too bad so sad for the rest of you. If you wanted to own property in California, you should have been born to someone who already owns property in California. And we will make sure that no one ever touches Prop 13, one of the last great "for our posterity" laws in existence.
  127. @anon
    10,000 blacks in London in 1814? Seriously? SOURCES? I doubt there were 10,000 blacks in ALL of the British Isles at that time. The BBC is cultural Marxist to its very core.

    Next time you are in London, visit the Docklands Museum. That shows many aspects of 18th, 19th and 20th century life including the flow of slaves and free blacks through the port.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Juts because they were at the port doesn't mean they lived in London.
  128. “The property boom is dividing the nation along lines of age and class.”

    Or, to put it more informatively, the decision made by those old enough to own the country in 2000 that they would sell it to the highest bidder and spend the proceeds, is dividing the nation along the line separating them from those who lost their former birthright without participating in the gains.

    Read More
  129. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anonymous
    But this makes absolute sense. We will end up like our neighbors in South-east Asia, with the nation economically dominated by our “overseas Chinese”. It won’t be perfect, it will have all sorts of troubles, but certainly much worse fates are possible.

    That's if we are lucky. Imagine if Muslims were intelligent, instead of following their holy text to the letter and provoking their host way too early in the piece. An intelligent Muslim-type conquest plan would have followers who peacefully wait until they have demographic majority before ethnically cleansing the population. The Chinese have this capacity.

    They are doing it now in Tibet. They have done it in the past to Europeans in Formosa. Their actions in the South China sea of saying "Hey, this is ours, we own it, try taking it back" are in indication of their nature when they have the upper hand.

    I don't know why we even entertain such softcock idiocy of "Oh gee, we have a democracy (constitutional monarchy but same diff), we'll just let our system come to be dominated by a people who are on average smarter than we are and for whom bribing politicians is a national sport, and hope when we no longer have the demographic majority and we are serfs, it works out ok for us."

    So what should we do? Become like Indonesians and try to kill all of the Chinese, get isolated and poor, and end up being dominated anyway after twenty five years? The game is already set. We can try to mollify the changes, but there’s no avoiding inevitability here.

    Read More
  130. @Buck Turgidson
    I know it's wild and crazy, but how about the Chinese just STAY HOME and invest their money in ... be sitting down for this ..... CHINA.

    Let them work w the Chinese government to change the investment climate and all the other reasons why of course they look to get out of China and invest elsewhere. Not our problem here in the US. I want my damned country back.

    What they fear is becoming on the outs with current Chinese govt and losing their money.

    In Vancouver some have not come to live (yet). Instead, they park their money in real estate. But they cannot even be bothered to rent their house. They instead board them up.

    These boarded up places become magnets for criminals.

    My Sydney informant had not heard of boarded up houses in his city.

    Why let this continue? Because the previous owners of those houses made a big profit from selling. In other words whites happily sold their houses and it was a huge payday.

    So no complaints until the prices became so high no ordinary person could possibly afford to buy.

    Read More
  131. @Zzz
    Even though it has nothing to do with you personally it's extremely amusing to hear this from american.

    I know of people who think that if immigration does not result in measurable physical changes within the boundaries of their property line, that it does not affect them. As long as immigrants aren’t moving into their front yard, they don’t see any issues.

    If I wanted to visit Australia, but decided to change travel plans and stay home b/c I don’t want to experience the diversity, does that have anything to do with me “personally”?

    Read More
  132. @Peter Akuleyev
    Wikipedia is probably the source. It says in the late 18th century there were approximately 10,000 blacks in London, consisting of a mixture of slaves, runaways and some freemen. Doesn't seem that implausible to me considering Britain's role in the slave trade.

    Wikipedia is probably the source. It says in the late 18th century there were approximately 10,000 blacks in London, consisting of a mixture of slaves, runaways and some freemen. Doesn’t seem that implausible to me considering Britain’s role in the slave trade.

    Yeah. And that’s out of a total population that was approx 1 million (1811 London population:1,197,673)….which means that the Black population in London was extremely small.

    Read More
  133. @LondonBob
    I doubt there were 10.

    Raising stamp duty on housing seems to have had an effect here in Britain, of course it would have been racist to have just imposed it on foreign 'investors' so we all pay a cost, but it has deterred some foreign money.

    I doubt there were 10.

    Approx 10,000 sounds about right to me. Remember, that’s out of a London population totaling around 1 million (1811 London population:1,197,673). So 10,000 Blacks is a very small percentage.

    Read More
    • Replies: @PiltdownMan

    Approx 10,000 sounds about right to me. Remember, that’s out of a London population totaling around 1 million (1811 London population:1,197,673). So 10,000 Blacks is a very small percentage.

     

    I'm not sure why I'm quibbling, but an estimate of 10,000 blacks, or 1% of the population of London piques my curiosity, because it sounds high.

    Britain had not colonized Africa at that point, although it was actively involved in the slave trade, but that was almost entirely overseas. As far as I know, Britain did not actively import slaves.

    As a point of comparison, Indian-Americans today constitute about 1% of the US population— after a generation of sustained immigration. They are quite visible and talked about.

    A London population of 10,000 blacks would have been remarked upon in literature. I'm no expert on 19th century English literature, but I don't recall reading any books that mention even minor African characters in an English setting. For instance, offhand, I don't recall any blacks in any of the Dickens stories.
  134. @Alan in Perth
    Australian from Perth here. The migration system here is loose, and its focus on 'high skills' is easily rorted. I could go a whole year without being served petrol at a Servo by anybody who wasn't Indian; they also seem to drive all the taxis; backpackers from Europe and elsewhere pick all the fruit. A generous welfare system means that the Australian born aren't interest in low-paid jobs on the whole.

    Australia's isolation from other European countries means that there is a still a consensus in favour of an increasing population; if we don't fill up this country, other people will. Populate or Perish!

    The one saving grace of Australia's immigration programme is that it's not all from one place - it's not all Mexicans (USA), Moroccans (Netherlands) or Pakistanis (UK); so such urban ghettos as exist are relatively small and transitory. I say relatively; I wouldn't want to be a scantily-clad white woman in Lakemba (suburb of Sydney) at night. But most immigration communities eventually seem to blend in.

    Plenty of migrants to Australia are also still from traditional sources such as the UK, NZ and Europe; and there are welcome new sources all the time. In the last year for instance, I've noticed a large number of middle-class South Americans in my city, particularly Brazilians.

    I'd say almost all Aussies are pretty cool with Chinese immigration these days - there is a high rate of inter-marriage and cultural assimilation; property price inflation is limited to 2 cities only: Sydney and Melbourne. The rest of the country would probably welcome foreign real estate investment.

    While Muslims are growing in number, they are a small minority of migrants. Of course they are grossly-over-represented in the media: no reality TV show is complete without a hijab-clad woman participant. This kind of tokenism is quite new; nobody in TV or the movies ever bothered for instance to ensure that the native Aboriginal population was similarly represented.

    Notwithstanding widespread misgivings about the growth of the Muslim community in Australia, I don't foresee those misgivings being transformed into any large scale public opposition to the legal immigration system in the future.

    A return to White Australia (or some form of it) would be politically unpalatable, and Aussies wouldn't welcome the international opprobrium that might bring.

    In a dangerous world, Australia is still gingerly trying to pursue the goal of an increased population, for its own economic advancement and political security, without surrendering its culture. There have been a few mistakes (the Lebanese Muslims in the 1970s; the Sudanese refugees in the 1990s) but on the whole, provided illegal immigration is kept in check, the public seem to trust the government to administer this programme. For the moment.

    In a dangerous world, Australia is still gingerly trying to pursue the goal of an increased population, for its own . . . political security

    Insane.

    Australia’s isolation from other European countries means that there is a still a consensus in favour of an increasing population; if we don’t fill up this country, other people will. Populate or Perish!

    > “we”
    > “other people”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Why not build some nuclear bombs? South Africa built six. Australia ought to be able to build a few dozen.
    , @anon
    Australian Governments started pushing line in the 1940s.
    The problem is that Australia was invaded in 1788 by a few hundred sailors and convicts.
    The Indigenous population at the time has been estimated to have been at least 500,000 and possibly many more, divided amongst 600 tribes with hundreds of languages.
    Now, technology played a part, but the conquest was mostly due to the divided nature of the inhabitants versus the united nature of the invaders.
    It's a lesson modern day Australians refuse to acknowledge.
  135. @Flip
    I remember reading in one of Jim Rogers' travel books that foreign ownership of Australian real estate was not allowed. This law must have been changed at some point in the near past.

    Under Australian law, foreign investors can only purchase new homes or units — they are prohibited from buying existing dwellings….but they can buy vacant land and new construction.

    Certain categories of foreign nationals, who hold a visa that permits them to reside in Australia continuously for at least the next 12 months, may be given approval to purchase established residential real estate (that is, second hand dwellings) for use as their principal place of residence (that is, not for rental purposes) while in Australia. A condition of such purchases is that the dwelling must be sold when the foreign nationals’ temporary resident visas expire, they leave Australia, or the property is no longer used as their principal place of residence.

    Read More
  136. @Buzz Mohawk
    Chuck Woolery says it's alive and well:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJ3a94Ib3o0

    Yes it’s true. Australian Dream did indeed relive my arthritis pain in the shoulder. And all the other things he said are also true – it doesn’t smell or stain. It is in fact a mystery. Most of the other topical arthritis creams are full of menthol which really stinks up the joint (pun intended). But Australian Dream has no odor at all.

    So I looked into its ingredients. But they don’t publish their ingredients. I couldn’t discover how it worked on my arthritis.

    PUNCH LINE

    But I don’t have arthritis. I thought I did but I don’t. My shoulder hurts because of a rotator cuff injury I acquired in my youth. The doctor gave me a shot of cortisone and I’m largely pain free.

    Australian Dream seems to succeed by the Placebo Effect. It does nothing because it contains nothing – except hope.

    Read More
  137. @Wilkey
    I don’t realistically you can stop people from giving you money. The market ultimately will prevail against attempts to control capital.

    If what you are referring to is foreigners buying homes in Western countries, then true, you probably can't stop them. But, as I already posted above, you can stop them from living in or even visiting those homes. If the Chinese or others want to funnel oodles of money into the real estate markets in Australia, Canada, the US, and elsewhere then left them, if we have to. Maybe we even want to. But let them know that those homes will never be anything more than rental properties or mere vacation homes for no more than a few weeks per year.

    Banning foreigners from investing in Australian or American residential properties might violate various trade agreements, but you can unquestionably use federal, state, and local tax policy to favor primary residences over second homes and investment properties. Combined with more sane immigration policy - a significant reduction in legal immigration and stricter limitations on visitors visas - you could "encourage" foreigners to unload a lot of the homes they've purchased.

    China bans foreigners from buying property in China. Mexico also bans foreigners from buying property within 100 miles of the coast and all of Baja is off limits to foreigners. 10 years ago Australia banned foreigners from buying property. Even today foreigners can only purchase new construction, they cannot buy occupied homes in Australia. Foreigners must also pay a $10,000 fee to the Australian government when buying property and face higher property taxes than native australians. Nevertheless Foreign buyers are purchasing new housing in New South Wales and Victoria at a rate of $8 billion a year – a figure the equivalent of one in five new homes completed across the two states.

    Read More
  138. @Opinionator
    In a dangerous world, Australia is still gingerly trying to pursue the goal of an increased population, for its own . . . political security

    Insane.

    Australia’s isolation from other European countries means that there is a still a consensus in favour of an increasing population; if we don’t fill up this country, other people will. Populate or Perish!

    > "we"
    > "other people"

    Why not build some nuclear bombs? South Africa built six. Australia ought to be able to build a few dozen.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Appears to be a measure that would be reasonable to consider.

    The whole Populate or Perish concept and strategy seem faulty in so many ways.

    (1) How much would Australia's population have to increase in order to meaningfully change its population footing versus Asia? Even quadrupling it would not seem to provide much marginal benefit.

    (2) They are importing Asians in order to prevent an invasion by Asians?

    (3) They think that immigration brings "political security". What of political risk?

    (4) If they want their population to grow (the benefits of which are dubious imo), why don't they instead launch a strong pro-natal campaign and approve incentives for family formation and child bearing?

    It's all very perplexing.
    , @anon
    My point earlier Mr. Sailer. I would also mention that Australia has all that space in the outback to test and deploy them.
    , @JH73
    Yeah shouldn't be that hard considering Australia is a large exporter of uranium.
  139. @Anonymous
    Australian immigration policy is more like getting behind the wheel, wearing a seatbelt and sipping low alcohol beer and driving at a sedate 50 mph – towards a cliff.

    I don't know where you've been lurking, but I suggest it's under a rock. Australia's net migration per capita rate is among the highest in the world. There are few countries that exceed Australia's net migration per capita and they don't include the USA or most countries in Europe. Australia's rate is three times that of the USA's.

    To use your analogy, what Australia is doing is like strapping JATO rockets to your car and aiming it at a cliff. "What is it like to be a Tibetan in Tibet, or Dutch in Formosa (Taiwan), deep in the orbit of China? Well hop in, why don't we find out!" - Australia's politicians maniacally cackle out the window.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate

    Oh dear.

    I was attempting, clumsily, to allude to Australia’s immigrant quality controls – perceived to keep out at least some undesirables.

    The problem is setting all sorts of barriers to entry that ignore race still spell doom in the end. It just means avoiding a few of the more obvious problems. But it won’t necessarily mean lower immigration.

    The problem seems to fundamentally be the same as in the rest of the white world. Essentially one can immigrate and the host will try and find reasons to stop you. When of course the system should be – no one gets in but the host will make case-by-case exceptions that benefit the host. Superficially Australia seems to be doing the latter – but not really.

    Given that white folks only make up 10-12% of global population almost any immigration system that is not race based will probably kill us eventually.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Which is why any "universalist" immigration policy is suicide and crazy for a white or white-derived country. If whites were 90% of the world's population it wouldn't matter. But they are not. Immigration should be highly selective and ancestry should be a primary consideration to preserve the demographic balance.
  140. Ireland and Spain had some ruling class boobs who cooked up real estate bubbles using low interest rates and other forms of monetary extremism. The Anglo-Celtic countries of Australia, Canada, the United States, Britain and new Zealand ain’t run by Spaniards or Irish, so the proclivity towards real estate bubble creation can’t be entirely ascribed to WASP greed and lust for money. The Chinese may be the ones with the biggest real estate bubble of all, and they’re neither WASP nor Spaniard nor Irish.

    There is no doubt that there is a massive real estate bubble in the resource cartel which also goes by the name of Australia. There is also no doubt that it is close to popping. The young people of Australia would benefit from an implosion in real estate prices in Australia. After the smoke cleared from the popped real estate bubble and the subsequent mass deportation of foreigners, young people in Australia would be able to enjoy AFFORDABLE FAMILY FORMATION.

    The American Empire should give the Australians a nuclear deterrent and the means to deliver it to calm any hot tempers that might arise from the mass deportations. The Australians must explicitly go back to the White Australia Policy. Once the Australians have the means to deliver a nuclear strike they will be able to exist in their region in peace without being swamped by foreigners.

    Read More
  141. @Paul Walker - Most beautiful man ever...
    "China doesn’t have 40 million affluent citizens, let alone 40 million to spare."
    Rubbish. There's a billion of them and they want to go to the first world.
    For some (((reason))) Australia immigration favours chinese/indians over the Anglo sphere.

    Rubbish. There’s a billion of them and they want to go to the first world.
    For some (((reason))) Australia immigration favours chinese/indians over the Anglo sphere.

    Gee, you can’t walk two feet into the comments section without stepping into this kind of crap. If I thought a group was incredibly powerful, I wouldn’t go out of my way to antagonize them at every turn.

    Most Chinese people don’t have any money to buy Australian homes and would have no way of immigrating. We’re talking about a comparatively small number of affluent Chinese.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Boyle
    I'm sure everyone else here understand the code of the orthography. But I only learned of it this morning. The triple parentheses are a neo-Nazi code for Jew. So this little blurb is a part of an anti-Semitic screed. He seems to think the Jews and presumably Israel are somehow interested seeing Australia be filled with Chinese. Damn those Jews are tricky!
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    You've already had this explained to you once, Judah. A "small number" is a relative concept. 20,000,000 is a small number of Chinese people compared to the population of the Middle Kingdom itself. That is about 1.5 %. There are way more than 1.5 % of that countries populace that have some decent money to try to hang on to. There are many more than whatever that number is, that would like to live in a nicer and more beautiful and trusting and friendlier environment. That could be Australia, until a big chunk of that 20 million has arrived and starts to turn it into another piece of China. Then what's the plan, Stan?
  142. @The Anti-Gnostic
    It's illiquid unless you cash in your house, and either pay tax on the proceeds or buy another inflated property (I assume AUS like US allows you to avoid taxation when you sell and put the proceeds into a primary residence).

    Sorry to hear about Jacksonville. Jax Beach was my old stomping grounds.

    Aside from the ghetto areas, Jacksonville is a great place. Jax Beach is still really nice (and they now have a Trader Joe’s!) and just south of Jacksonville, in St. Johns County, there are some of America’s best public schools for non-millionaires. It’s just nowhere nearly as well off as Melbourne or Sydney.

    Read More
  143. @Simon in London
    The article seemed full of implied references to the C-word....
    Yet 'Chinese' never appeared.

    Of course not.

    They’re Minorities.

    Read More
  144. “Australia has a policy against low-skilled immigration”. The reality is Australia HAD a policy against low skilled immigration. Now, anyone at all can get into New Zealand or Australia. Australia has had very immigrant heavy cities for a long time but the effect is shocking in NZ. In Auckland you rarely hear a NZ accent. Even the school children have foreign accents. It has gone from a fairly homogeneous culture to immigration levels double that of the US in roughly a decade.

    Being a high trust culture NZ is uniquely ill equipped to handle the people that are moving in.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivy
    How long until ANZAC Day (just passed, April 25th) is pushed off the calendar for being the wrong type of commemoration? Given the pushback against wearing poppies (who ever thought that would occur?) in the UK, the rest of the Commonwealth might experience more of their PC contagion.
  145. @Lot
    So yet another Trump sell out.

    Apparently this commenter expected Trump to win every negotiation without having to give up anything his side wanted.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill
    What would you say are Trump's big victories so far?
  146. @Numinous

    They are generally intelligent, hard-working and productive and have to put up with a country where corruption is at Zaire levels, mild dissent can get you jailed and bankrupted, the rule of law is a fiction, property prices are far more insane then they are in the West and the country is run solely for the benefit of the Communist party elite.
     
    Alt-right logic dictates that if a country is corrupt, it's because its people are corrupt (defective genes or whatever.) Hence Chinese should be barred from immigrating to countries that aren't so corrupt lest they reduce those countries to vile situations of the kind found in Middle China.

    Alt-right logic dictates that if a country is corrupt, it’s because its people are corrupt (defective genes or whatever.) Hence Chinese should be barred from immigrating to countries that aren’t so corrupt lest they reduce those countries to vile situations of the kind found in Middle China.

    Great way to put this, Numinous! This is something that most Americans just don’t understand. With very small numbers of people immigrating (say, the foreign population is less than 2 % of a country and spread out pretty well), assimilation can work, and the Chinese could learn the morals and customs of the host country. In large doses, it doesn’t work at all.

    I can’t reply to 2 at once, but I wanted to get in that once Ali there brought in the “Global Climate Disruption (TM)” crap, he lost me as a reader. Drop that crap, Ali – you know damn well that what’s more important is how many people crowd up a land or the world. The world’s climate changes this way and that way, and we don’t have a damn thing to do with it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ali Choudhury
    Well, the climate has definitely warned whether it's anthropogenic or a natural occurrence (I'd wager the latter) doesn't particularly matter. I was in Pakistan for two weeks last month and the temperature then was akin to the temperature highs of an especially scorching summer twenty years ago. I mention that since water supplies are largely dependent on snow-melt from the Himalayas, if that declines over the next few decades then it will make a bad situation worse.

    In any case as you say, the greatest cause of water stress has been the ballooning population and industrialisation. The population of Asia just after WW2 was just over a billion, now its 4.4 billion. Some countries will feel the strain worse than others, Pakistan is already under significant water stress. At the time of independence in 1947, its population was 15m - about the same as Iran's. The Iranian population now is circa 80m (helps when the mullahs preach the virtue of family planning), whilst Pakistan's is approx. 220m.

    In future decades, Mao's annexation of Tibet (basically the source for all of Asia's major rivers) and his driving China to become a nuclear power will be seen as the smartest geopolitical moves of the 20th century. The future will become very interesting with India, Pakistan and China (all nuclear powers) contending over a scarce and vital resource.
  147. @Judah Benjamin Hur

    Rubbish. There’s a billion of them and they want to go to the first world.
    For some (((reason))) Australia immigration favours chinese/indians over the Anglo sphere.
     
    Gee, you can't walk two feet into the comments section without stepping into this kind of crap. If I thought a group was incredibly powerful, I wouldn't go out of my way to antagonize them at every turn.

    Most Chinese people don't have any money to buy Australian homes and would have no way of immigrating. We're talking about a comparatively small number of affluent Chinese.

    I’m sure everyone else here understand the code of the orthography. But I only learned of it this morning. The triple parentheses are a neo-Nazi code for Jew. So this little blurb is a part of an anti-Semitic screed. He seems to think the Jews and presumably Israel are somehow interested seeing Australia be filled with Chinese. Damn those Jews are tricky!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Jews: Africans should be sent to Australia

    http://m.jpost.com/#/app/article/227332
    , @Paul Walker - Most beautiful man ever...
    Nazis everywhere!
    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/08/the-war-on-white-australia-a-case-study-in-the-culture-of-critique-part-1-of-5/
    , @CrunchybutRealistCon
    Organized Jewry in AUS (while perhaps not the majority of individual Jews) are most certainly in favor of non-European mass immigration, and official multiculturalism. This is why they were & are in the forefront of AUS Anti-'Hate Speech' laws which prosecute criticisms or mockery of protected classes or the cultural practices of said classes (eg Africans, Asians, Muslims, Jews). It is also why they doxxed Pauline Hanson's immigration-restrictionist One Nation membership, exposing the entire party membership in the late 90s. They want Australians Whites to become a minority in their own country. By their deeds ye shall know their agenda. They do not want freedom of speech, and they want mass nontraditional immigration, and the wrecking ball of multiculturalism to be sacrosanct.
  148. @Steve Sailer
    Why not build some nuclear bombs? South Africa built six. Australia ought to be able to build a few dozen.

    Appears to be a measure that would be reasonable to consider.

    The whole Populate or Perish concept and strategy seem faulty in so many ways.

    (1) How much would Australia’s population have to increase in order to meaningfully change its population footing versus Asia? Even quadrupling it would not seem to provide much marginal benefit.

    (2) They are importing Asians in order to prevent an invasion by Asians?

    (3) They think that immigration brings “political security”. What of political risk?

    (4) If they want their population to grow (the benefits of which are dubious imo), why don’t they instead launch a strong pro-natal campaign and approve incentives for family formation and child bearing?

    It’s all very perplexing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Altai
    The other issue is what kind of carry capacity Australia realistically has. An entire continent and only ~50,000 people living there despite arriving 40-50kya some of them knowing how to conduct basic agriculture since at least 4kya, the reason is that most of Australia is not terribly lush and most of the parts that are have razor thin soil. The early European settlers discovered the answer to this paradox (Assuming that the Aborigines were just lazy in engaging in slash and burn.) when their attempts to introduce traditional European agriculture failed when the soil washed away. Much of the country has soil like this.

    Australia depends heavily on modern green revolution techniques to feed itself. Some of these methods are unsustainable and all of them require high levels of technology and means to transport food long distances. Cattle ranches being an exception but facing the problem of being highly distant and only securing a meat supply. It might be enough for the population now, but a big Australia policy might produce the most urbanised populace on Earth. If some kind of collapse of the international system of trade happens, like a war between China and the US, it could cause disaster and political and social strife that may not end with the cause of the trade disruption.

    I don't know much about fisheries in Australia, but there are a lot of fish farms now, maybe that will help the balance in future, but surely not enough to feed millions upon millions more people.

  149. @syonredux

    We need to remember what makes Australia a fairy tale and protect it.
     
    Two words: White Australia

    “Just desserts” demands that all white countries that give up being white be destroyed for their ignorance and political correctness. Australia is well on their way, as is the US and much of Europe.

    Read More
  150. @Daniel Chieh
    Not exactly. The Chinese emigrants don't particularly support the policies of Beijing - after all, a not inconsiderable number of them fled because of Beijing cracking down on them for corruption. So that's the good news.

    The bad news is that you have a self-selected group of the wealthy and corrupt creating a new country in yours.

    My experience of Chinese people in many different parts of the world is that there is a concept of “China” as an almost mystical entity. The communist govt. in Beijing has had quite incredible cooperation from overseas Chinese billionaires. However much these people may disagree with the Beijing regime they still have, after generations of separation, an attachment to “China” that is quite extraordinary.
    I have observed the growth of the ethnic vote in Canada for instance where, thanks to their insane immigration policies, ethnicity is becoming the most important issue in elections. This happens in all “multicultural” societies. If current trends continue there will be an ethnic Chinese govt. in power in Canada within a few decades. I don’t say they will be a colony of Beijing just that Beijing will have profound influence on them. I also believe that this population movement is a deliberate policy of Beijing.

    Read More
  151. @Anonymous
    Real estate price inflation has more to do with the lack of capital controls than immigration. And the ultimate cause is the lack of or insufficient land value taxation coupled with higher taxation on other things.

    Domestic elites are wealthy people who own lots of real estate and other assets, and thus have an incentive to promote capital inflows that inflate their portfolios.

    If the right-wing really wants to shut down immigration and capital flows, they should organize and push for land value taxation. Domestic elites will never tolerate significant land value taxation, as the lack of significant land value taxation is the ultimate source of their wealth and power over the rest of society. But if faced with the prospect of land value taxation, domestic elites will allow for immigration and capital controls to placate the populace and to prevent the land value tax and thus protect their rents and wealth.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/byron-wien-on-why-inequality-has-gotten-worse-in-the-us-2017-5


    He argues that it has something to do with the fact that the wealthy own homes and stocks, while the less affluent do not.

    "How did [the widening inequality gap] happen? Wealthy people own the expensive real estate where they live, and may have other expensive properties as well. They are also more likely to own common stocks. Both the real estate and the equities have appreciated," he wrote.

    "The less affluent tend to be renters with limited equity holdings. Many live paycheck to paycheck and their personal wealth has not appreciated significantly," he added.
     

    Any “land value taxation” will end up so riddled full of loop-holes that it won’t hurt the rich but will actively hurt 50 and 60 year old middle-class types who thought they could retire comfortably but now can’t.

    Read More
  152. @Anon
    No, but you can refuse to honor the obligations accompanying the "gift", which if enforced will quickly dry up the supply of such gifts.

    Yes, exactly right. The amazing, irresistible power of the free market is the slightest fig leaf for government power. Property doesn’t protect itself. Contracts don’t enforce themselves.

    Read More
  153. @anon
    The Chinese mostly vote for the Australian Labor Party and The Greens. Since those parties are now only 1 seat [out of 150] short of governing Australia again, the floodgates are likely to fall off the hinges shortly.

    I’d say almost all Aussies are pretty cool with Chinese immigration these days – there is a high rate of inter-marriage and cultural assimilation; property price inflation is limited to 2 cities only: Sydney and Melbourne. The rest of the country would probably welcome foreign real estate investment.

    WTF. no. this is bull. you don’t live in australia do you? i live in rural australia and house prices are inflated here as well. the whole gradient of australia’s real estate market is severely distorted. it is worst in sydney and melbourne, but it is still bad in the rest of the country. seriously what the hell are you talking about?

    Read More
  154. @Pat Boyle
    I'm sure everyone else here understand the code of the orthography. But I only learned of it this morning. The triple parentheses are a neo-Nazi code for Jew. So this little blurb is a part of an anti-Semitic screed. He seems to think the Jews and presumably Israel are somehow interested seeing Australia be filled with Chinese. Damn those Jews are tricky!

    Jews: Africans should be sent to Australia

    http://m.jpost.com/#/app/article/227332

    Read More
  155. @res
    Thanks! I'm guessing it also has a substantial group of old timers with no mortgage and minimal property tax (it sounds like a great place to live and not move). It would be interesting to see a scatterplot matrix (with regression lines) of house price, mortgage balance, property tax, etc. for SLO. (actually, Zillow has that data, I wonder if someone there could do it, back to your Moneyball for real estate idea).

    I think it is hard to overestimate how much Prop 13 distorts the CA housing market. Young new buyers are incredibly screwed IMHO. Even if they have a high income and can afford the initial cost, the annual property taxes are ridiculous.

    P.S. I took a quick look at Zillow around SLO and it looks like a funky market. Everything from $100k trailer parks to $600k nice 1800sf new construction to multi-million dollar homes.

    I think it is hard to overestimate how much Prop 13 distorts the CA housing market. Young new buyers are incredibly screwed IMHO.

    Wrong. Young non-Californians who just recently moved to California are screwed. But young Californians (like moi) whose parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents lived in California are gonna be just fine because most anyone who lived in California pre-1960s owns a home by now and is gonna pass it down to the next generation (like moi!).

    Too bad so sad for the rest of you. If you wanted to own property in California, you should have been born to someone who already owns property in California. And we will make sure that no one ever touches Prop 13, one of the last great “for our posterity” laws in existence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    But young Californians (like moi) whose parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents lived in California are gonna be just fine because most anyone who lived in California pre-1960s owns a home by now and is gonna pass it down to the next generation (like moi!).

    Do you not have any siblings?
    , @Boomstick
    The economics of the matter as you describe it may lead to a change in family structure. When it's cheap to form households, the children go off an buy their own homes and become a nuclear family. When it's expensive, houses turn into family compounds for an extended family. Grandparents, children, and grandchildren all live in one house.
    , @res

    Wrong. Young non-Californians who just recently moved to California are screwed.

     

    It's not quite that simple (but you know that). I'll also note that what I said was: "Young new buyers are incredibly screwed IMHO." You aren't talking about new buyers (i.e. I'm not wrong at all).

    because most anyone who lived in California pre-1960s owns a home by now and is gonna pass it down to the next generation (like moi!).
     
    It would be interesting to see numbers on that (and what the home purchase dates were). A big part of the reason for my "distorts" comment is virtually no long term CA homeowner wants to move because of Prop 13 (worth noting all the wrinkles though, for example: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-combine-1031-121-prop-13-trifecta-box-gregory-nnn-garver ).

    Situations are very variable by person, but there are other issues like siblings, or where do the parents (etc.) live while they are still alive and the children (like vous?) are in their child bearing years when the house buying desire typically is strongest. One approach I have seen is the "family complex" for people who have large lots. That seems to work well as long as everyone gets along.

    we will make sure that no one ever touches Prop 13, one of the last great “for our posterity” laws in existence.
     
    Lots of truth in that. Especially with the addition of this in 1986: http://articles.latimes.com/2005/sep/25/realestate/re-inheritside25

    I vacillate on how I feel about Prop 13. You describe part of the upside, also relevant is older people not being priced out of their long term homes by taxes. Measure 5 in Oregon makes an interesting comparison. I don't think OR has been as thorough about adding in all the perks like exchanges and inheritance though.

    I don't think anyone can argue about the negative impact on the schools in both CA and OR though.

    P.S. To get slightly back on topic, how does Australia deal with property taxes? Are they seeing any pressure for measures like Prop 13?
  156. @Buck Turgidson
    I know it's wild and crazy, but how about the Chinese just STAY HOME and invest their money in ... be sitting down for this ..... CHINA.

    Let them work w the Chinese government to change the investment climate and all the other reasons why of course they look to get out of China and invest elsewhere. Not our problem here in the US. I want my damned country back.

    I know it’s wild and crazy, but how about the Chinese just STAY HOME and invest their money in … be sitting down for this ….. CHINA.

    That IS a wild and crazy idea, and I wish I knew some wild and crazy Chinaguys who would do just that. However, I’d agree with others that were this money to come pouring in without the residents being able to easily scam our system and come in to stay one way or another (without Buck and my permission), it might stop after a while. In the meantime, many young people wanting to live in the big city on/in their own property would still have a hard time until it crashed.

    ZeroHedge has reported numerous times on Vancouver, British Columbia, and the latest was some type of non-resident property or sales tax – I am a HUGE opponent of property tax to begin with, but large taxes on sales to non-citizens seems like a decent idea. I had read that the Vancouver housing bubble was already in the process of bursting. As has also said here already in the comments, the realtors and mortgage brokers and big banks want the big money and big churning over of properties to continue until they have enough money to bug out (they hope, before some pissed off people are onto their asses, such as the “white-hot” angry young Aussies described by a commenter way earlier on this thread.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    I am a HUGE opponent of property tax to begin with, but large taxes on sales to non-citizens seems like a decent idea.

    Just limit property ownership to citizens dude.
  157. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Twinkie

    That should tell you something about the Han character right there.
     
    I am not big on the "Hans," but I think this Han guy cared about "democracy or freedom or civil rights" or something: https://macaulay.cuny.edu/eportfolios/george11/files/2011/10/Tank-Man1.jpg

    Or was he holding up those tanks, so that he could "run businesses and make money"?

    Or maybe he has mixed white ancestry. Surely no pure Asian would do something silly and impractical - dare I say, spirited - as trying halt a column of tanks with a plastic shopping bag.

    Or maybe he saw something like that in a movie made by white people and was simply aping the behavior. Soulless copycat/grind.

    None of your smart-ass comments negate what I wrote. What demands for democracy, free speech, etc. were made by the Chinese in Hong Kong during the 99 years of British control? Virtually zilch.

    Read More
    • Replies: @PiltdownMan

    What demands for democracy, free speech, etc. were made by the Chinese in Hong Kong during the 99 years of British control? Virtually zilch.
     
    Having actually lived in Hong Kong in the three years preceding the handover back to Beijing, I know that it is false to characterize the Chinese as having no desire for democracy.

    Demands for democracy by the indigenous Hong Kong Chinese were initially squelched by the British authorities in the decades following WWII because of heavy pressure and threats from Beijing.

    But the Brits couldn't keep a lid on popular demands and allowed limited forms of democracy and self-representation in Hong Kong starting in the 1980s, enraging Beijing and resulting in choice propaganda invective from the Communists in the years I lived there. Chris Patten, the last governor, was particularly independent minded and disregarded cautionary voices from Whitehall, listening instead to local Hong Kong Chinese demands, and instituted reforms.

    He was famously called "a serpent and a prostitute of a thousand years" by Beijing.

    To quote from the Wikipedia article on democracy in Hong Kong (no doubt a battleground of revisionism and redactions by Beijingbots)

    Democracy activists – pressure groups, religious groups and community organisations – attended a mass rally at Ko Shan Theatre in Hung Hom in November 1986. The rally is a milestone in Hong Kong's fledgling pro-democracy movement. One of the participating groups, calling themselves the 'group of 190', demanded direct elections for Legco in 1988, and a faster pace of democratic development after the handover.

    , @Johann Ricke

    What demands for democracy, free speech, etc. were made by the Chinese in Hong Kong during the 99 years of British control? Virtually zilch.
     
    As elsewhere among the Crown's overseas holdings, demand for self-government by the usual ambitious local would-be power-holders was fairly constant, but squelched by Whitehall, due to Chicom pressure. Hong Kong was indefensible against Chicom attack, and could obviously be made unlivable, even if not actually overrun. Given the choice between (1) liberal British administration* and (2) a flash of democracy followed by Chicom invasion and the complete destruction of the city, Hong Kong's would-be ethnic Chinese pols chose discretion as the better part of valor, and did not press their claims (i.e. via armed insurrection) to the point that the Crown would choose to abandon the territory even without direct Chicom pressure.

    Note that much of Hong Kong's population consists of refugees (and descendants thereof) from various Chinese regimes. A good chunk of them are presumably not particularly enamored of Chinese administration.

    * Where Hong Kong filmmakers could and did produce movies containing the crudest anti-British propaganda, including many by recent Oscar honoree Jackie Chan.

  158. @Judah Benjamin Hur

    Rubbish. There’s a billion of them and they want to go to the first world.
    For some (((reason))) Australia immigration favours chinese/indians over the Anglo sphere.
     
    Gee, you can't walk two feet into the comments section without stepping into this kind of crap. If I thought a group was incredibly powerful, I wouldn't go out of my way to antagonize them at every turn.

    Most Chinese people don't have any money to buy Australian homes and would have no way of immigrating. We're talking about a comparatively small number of affluent Chinese.

    You’ve already had this explained to you once, Judah. A “small number” is a relative concept. 20,000,000 is a small number of Chinese people compared to the population of the Middle Kingdom itself. That is about 1.5 %. There are way more than 1.5 % of that countries populace that have some decent money to try to hang on to. There are many more than whatever that number is, that would like to live in a nicer and more beautiful and trusting and friendlier environment. That could be Australia, until a big chunk of that 20 million has arrived and starts to turn it into another piece of China. Then what’s the plan, Stan?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Judah Benjamin Hur
    Congratulations on moving the goalposts. Maybe you're switching from American football to Aussie Rules? I explained that nowhere near 40 million Chinese are going to be able to move to Australia. So far, after all these years of immigration, the number is at around 1 million. And what percentage is marrying whites?
  159. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Numinous

    For some (((reason))) Australia immigration favours chinese/indians over the Anglo sphere.
     
    There's no need to favor anyone. The number of people seeking to emigrate is not uniform across countries. Countries are vastly unequal in populations too. So complaining that more immigrants come from India and China than, say, Finland, is a non sequitor. A non-discrminatory immigration policy, by its very nature, will pull in a very skewed distribution of immigrants.

    Immigration is a privilege, not a right. So it can not be ‘discriminatory’, since you are only withholding privileges and not denying rights.

    Read More
  160. @Dr. X

    You could imagine large amounts of state assets being privatised or agricultural land being sold to China. If and when the sun sets on American military hegemony, Australia and New Zealand are a long way from the core of the West.
     
    ...and when the SHTF Down Under, the disarmed white Australians will be powerless to do anything about it.

    …and when the SHTF Down Under, the disarmed white Australians will be powerless to do anything about it.

    Afraid of Han Chinese domination within 35 years? What I find interesting is Chinese have to cross the equator to accomplish this.

    The air travel (bird fly) shortest distance between Australia and China is 7,448 km= 4,628 miles.

    Read More
  161. @Numinous

    For some (((reason))) Australia immigration favours chinese/indians over the Anglo sphere.
     
    There's no need to favor anyone. The number of people seeking to emigrate is not uniform across countries. Countries are vastly unequal in populations too. So complaining that more immigrants come from India and China than, say, Finland, is a non sequitor. A non-discrminatory immigration policy, by its very nature, will pull in a very skewed distribution of immigrants.

    There’s no need to favor anyone. […] A non-discriminatory immigration policy, by its very nature, will pull in a very skewed distribution of immigrants.

    Your last sentence confirms Paul Walker’s point. If there’s to be immigration, it should be discriminatory. In the case of Greater Europe and the Anglosphere, this means discrimination in favor of whites (as in White Australia). The racial impact on the destination is what matters to most natives, not the desires of the self-selected invaders.

    As Paul implied, some citizens are traitors—and should be thwarted for the benefit of the white majority. Basically, who/whom all around.

    Read More
  162. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Alan in Perth
    Australian from Perth here. The migration system here is loose, and its focus on 'high skills' is easily rorted. I could go a whole year without being served petrol at a Servo by anybody who wasn't Indian; they also seem to drive all the taxis; backpackers from Europe and elsewhere pick all the fruit. A generous welfare system means that the Australian born aren't interest in low-paid jobs on the whole.

    Australia's isolation from other European countries means that there is a still a consensus in favour of an increasing population; if we don't fill up this country, other people will. Populate or Perish!

    The one saving grace of Australia's immigration programme is that it's not all from one place - it's not all Mexicans (USA), Moroccans (Netherlands) or Pakistanis (UK); so such urban ghettos as exist are relatively small and transitory. I say relatively; I wouldn't want to be a scantily-clad white woman in Lakemba (suburb of Sydney) at night. But most immigration communities eventually seem to blend in.

    Plenty of migrants to Australia are also still from traditional sources such as the UK, NZ and Europe; and there are welcome new sources all the time. In the last year for instance, I've noticed a large number of middle-class South Americans in my city, particularly Brazilians.

    I'd say almost all Aussies are pretty cool with Chinese immigration these days - there is a high rate of inter-marriage and cultural assimilation; property price inflation is limited to 2 cities only: Sydney and Melbourne. The rest of the country would probably welcome foreign real estate investment.

    While Muslims are growing in number, they are a small minority of migrants. Of course they are grossly-over-represented in the media: no reality TV show is complete without a hijab-clad woman participant. This kind of tokenism is quite new; nobody in TV or the movies ever bothered for instance to ensure that the native Aboriginal population was similarly represented.

    Notwithstanding widespread misgivings about the growth of the Muslim community in Australia, I don't foresee those misgivings being transformed into any large scale public opposition to the legal immigration system in the future.

    A return to White Australia (or some form of it) would be politically unpalatable, and Aussies wouldn't welcome the international opprobrium that might bring.

    In a dangerous world, Australia is still gingerly trying to pursue the goal of an increased population, for its own economic advancement and political security, without surrendering its culture. There have been a few mistakes (the Lebanese Muslims in the 1970s; the Sudanese refugees in the 1990s) but on the whole, provided illegal immigration is kept in check, the public seem to trust the government to administer this programme. For the moment.

    “A return to white Australia (or some form of it) would be politically unpalatable, and Aussies wouldn’t welcome the international opprobrium that might bring”.

    Why should it be anybody’s right or business to decide what – if any at all – immigration policy Australians want or decide upon OTHER then Australians?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Such a policy would be very popular in Australia, it won't happen, because the Australian Labor Party actively panders to ethnic voters, and the other main Party, the Liberal Party, depends on the cheap labour lobby for support.
    Clearly, the Liberal Party is headed for eventual Electoral suicide under this system, but are unable to change course.
  163. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Daniel Chieh
    Not exactly. The Chinese emigrants don't particularly support the policies of Beijing - after all, a not inconsiderable number of them fled because of Beijing cracking down on them for corruption. So that's the good news.

    The bad news is that you have a self-selected group of the wealthy and corrupt creating a new country in yours.

    The bad news is we are being race replaced and told we should “like” it.

    Read More
  164. @Anonymous
    We need to rediscover our egalitarian roots. It is true that Australian culture can be anti-intellectual. We can deride achievement and cut down those who succeed, in a phenomenon we call tall poppy syndrome. But the egalitarian values of our society should not be discounted. In fact, it is on the matter of egalitarianism that Australia has made some of its most important intellectual contributions to the world.

    What do you mean "we", paleface? Wander through Melbourne and Sydney, the incipient Chinese colonies. Where does one find "tall poppy syndrome"? Where is the "mateship"? The media has had us sell our posterity for among other things, ethnic restaurants, aka a mess of pottage.

    Australia has a policy against low-skilled immigration, so it still has a more prosperous native blue collar class than the U.S., but it encourages high skill immigration. This is less self-destructive than the U.S. policy, but it has obvious effects like squeezing younger natives out of the home-buying class.

    Go to a capital city and try to catch a taxi with white Australia driver. Taxi driving is obviously an extremely highly skilled position.

    What do you mean “we”, paleface? Wander through Melbourne and Sydney, the incipient Chinese colonies.

    30 years ago New York City had one Chinatown in lower Manhattan. Now it has five with (iirc) two in Brooklyn, two in Queens plus the old one in Manhattan.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivy
    Where are the activists demanding a Chinatown in the south Bronx? What is Staten Island, chopped liver?
  165. Two things:

    — Twenty years ago there were plenty of Australians in their twenties living in Europe (particularly the UK and Ireland) for years at a time, in part because that made financial sense. There are much fewer of them now. As far as I can see (and see next point!) this suggests Australia’s economy is doing very well for Australians.

    — The Republic of Ireland exported tens of thousands of people from the property bubble bust of 2008 onwards, including our best. Non-consultant (non-attending) doctors, in particular, left in huge numbers and are very happy there. Many construction workers left the bust here to join the boom there, and they have in general certainly not rushed back.

    Life is really good in Australia at the moment. No-one is leaving because of the house prices. The Chinese are smart people, and they are correct in wanting to move there. If Australians’ accent didn’t irritate me as much as it does (intolerably close to generic-south-of-England) I would probably be there myself. (I have a good life here in Ireland, I’m not ridiculous enough that it’s just that.)

    Read More
  166. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Ivy
    Next time you are in London, visit the Docklands Museum. That shows many aspects of 18th, 19th and 20th century life including the flow of slaves and free blacks through the port.

    Juts because they were at the port doesn’t mean they lived in London.

    Read More
  167. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Steve Sailer
    Why not build some nuclear bombs? South Africa built six. Australia ought to be able to build a few dozen.

    My point earlier Mr. Sailer. I would also mention that Australia has all that space in the outback to test and deploy them.

    Read More
  168. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Lurker
    Oh dear.

    I was attempting, clumsily, to allude to Australia's immigrant quality controls - perceived to keep out at least some undesirables.

    The problem is setting all sorts of barriers to entry that ignore race still spell doom in the end. It just means avoiding a few of the more obvious problems. But it won't necessarily mean lower immigration.

    The problem seems to fundamentally be the same as in the rest of the white world. Essentially one can immigrate and the host will try and find reasons to stop you. When of course the system should be - no one gets in but the host will make case-by-case exceptions that benefit the host. Superficially Australia seems to be doing the latter - but not really.

    Given that white folks only make up 10-12% of global population almost any immigration system that is not race based will probably kill us eventually.

    Which is why any “universalist” immigration policy is suicide and crazy for a white or white-derived country. If whites were 90% of the world’s population it wouldn’t matter. But they are not. Immigration should be highly selective and ancestry should be a primary consideration to preserve the demographic balance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lurker
    100% agree.

    We should be pointing this out all the time.
  169. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Charles Pewitt
    Australia is under attack from financialization, globalization and mass immigration. When civil war breaks out in Australia, I hope the patriotic Australians will have the fighting spirit of the Australians who stopped the Japanese Empire in Papua New Guinea on the famous Kokoda trail.

    Historians will look back and say the Australian Civil War era started with the Battle of Cronulla in 2005. The Battle of Cronulla was started by the interloper immigrants who presumed to sully the honor of the Australian beach babes. The culture clash brought on by mass immigration and multiculturalism created the conditions for the Battle of Cronulla.

    Australian men had inculcated within themselves a method of superb nonchalance and stoic reserve while admiring their beautiful Australian females while at the beach. Pretty soon the beautiful Australian women were wearing next to nothing in the way of bathing suits. This was a wonderful thing that allowed the men to appreciate the gals and the ladies to show off in a highly civilized manner. Then the Muslims showed up. All was torn asunder. Darkness descended across the beach.

    Muslims brought to Australia by the destructive policy of mass immigration started to dishonor the beautiful Australian females at Cronulla Beach. The proud and brave Australian men would not tolerate for one second their beautiful women to be mistreated by the Muslim marauders just because they were wearing skimpy attire on the beach. Battles broke out between the patriotic Australian men and the Muslim Misogynists.

    The Battle of Cronulla will be refought again and again until such time that patriotic Australians can one day regain control of their beautiful country.

    GOD BLESS AUSTRALIA AND THE BEAUTIFUL WOMEN OF AUSTRALIA

    Is there any place in the world that has been IMPROVED by Muslim immigration?

    Read More
  170. @Achmed E. Newman
    What?? No mention of ZeroHedge by anyone yet (if I can trust cntrl-F). Zerohedge writes about this stuff almost daily - not always about Australia, but if one were to look back through a month of ZeroHedge, there'd likely be 5 articles at least re the Australian housing "bubble". "Bubble", of course, means that it will end soon and badly. It needs to.

    That's not to say that the ZeroHedge writers (the ones not taken from other sites are all written by one "Tyler Durden") explains things as well as Mr. Sailer. They don't get into the qualities of the types of people involved like Steve.

    However, the ZeroHedge commenters, in my opinion, are the best on the web. I don't read them much anymore - it's a BIG time sink, and it's just as well those comments, along with DISQUS ones, don't work on my browser at all now - but I've read a few last week, and it's mostly the same great stuff in there. I've learned more from those commenters about big and small-picture financial stuff than I ever could have from reading books.

    Non Disclosure: No, I don't have anything to do with that site, and I never registered to comment since I knew that would suck up even more of my time. PeakStupidity's review of the site.

    However, the ZeroHedge commenters, in my opinion, are the best on the web. I don’t read them much anymore

    I’ve read that exact sentiment before. When was the golden age of ZH comments? I find them really bad, and I’ve been reading for 1.5 years or so (to be fair, I only read the comments about 10% of the time now because I never learn anything there).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    The last part of that long sentence of mine was about the comments not working at all (one character on each line!) in my browser. It wasn't due to the quality of the comments that I quit reading them. When I am able to view them nowadays (on a different computer somewhere), I still enjoy most of them - maybe 1/2 are the good people from way back, at least 3-5 years. It's definitely not as good as 3 years ago.

    I couldn't answer your question very well - I started reading ZH about 5 years back, Bill.

  171. @Steve Sailer
    Why not build some nuclear bombs? South Africa built six. Australia ought to be able to build a few dozen.

    Yeah shouldn’t be that hard considering Australia is a large exporter of uranium.

    Read More
  172. @Pat Boyle
    I'm sure everyone else here understand the code of the orthography. But I only learned of it this morning. The triple parentheses are a neo-Nazi code for Jew. So this little blurb is a part of an anti-Semitic screed. He seems to think the Jews and presumably Israel are somehow interested seeing Australia be filled with Chinese. Damn those Jews are tricky!
    Read More
    • Replies: @Judah Benjamin Hur
    The last time I looked at that site, Kevin McDonald was writing a multi-part essay on why the Jews were at fault for Hillary winning the election. I'll give him credit for not even waiting until November 2016 to write the magnum doofus.

    Why no links from Stormfront? I'm sure they can come up with something as well.
  173. @Anonymous
    So what should we do? Become like Indonesians and try to kill all of the Chinese, get isolated and poor, and end up being dominated anyway after twenty five years? The game is already set. We can try to mollify the changes, but there's no avoiding inevitability here.

    Close the borders. Problem solved, EZ

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Ah, so poor and isolated it is, and then dominated after twenty five years anyway. Good choice.

    So what? So we can claim that we managed to be like South Africa and get blockaded by the world? When we're not even dealing with people that are anywhere as low IQ or violent as SA was, giving us even less of an excuse.

    No. Not going to be the white version of North Korea, no matter how pure you think we should be. I'll rather have a foreign elite with a first world life than be second-third world with lots of people who look like me.

    Mollify the changes, but its pretty inevitable how things are going now.

  174. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Clyde
    For those who don't know > > > The Australian problem is not an illegal alien/refugee/migrant problem the way we/USA have it and Europe too. They are now sealed off from refugees trying to reach them by boat by virtue of being surrounded by water and serious enforcement. Australians are offended by these queue jumpers, while Euro-Eloi and Americans, Canadians allow it.

    No, the Australian way is to allow in and encourage a legal flood of educated and English speaking Asians, primarily Chinese and Indians, other SubCons. Cambodians, Vietnamese etc. So the white population is getting diluted at a fast rate. Some uneducated proles from Asia allowed in too. I think hoping they will engage in farm work and agriculture.

    Do they allow parents and grandparents (via chain migration) in to (in effect) retire via the Australian free medical and social security system that they never paid into? Curious for an answer from Australians here. This is exploited to a fare thee well in USA with Chinese and Russians being the geniuses at this.

    Australia has a refugee intake of c. 16,000 p.a. Compared by head of population, that’s about 3 times the U.S. intake. Every illegal arrival by boat results in the same number being subtracted from the 16,000 yearly intake, so it’s a zero sum game for refugees, unless more than 16,000 a year sail here from Indonesia.
    The big problem in Australia, apart from the flood of Chinese ”students”, is the Family Reunion intake [chain migration], which is over 20o,000 per annum.
    Given that the U.S. has 23 times Australia’s population [24m.], that translates to 5 million chain migrants to the U.S. p.a..

    Read More
  175. @Anonymous
    Real estate price inflation has more to do with the lack of capital controls than immigration. And the ultimate cause is the lack of or insufficient land value taxation coupled with higher taxation on other things.

    Domestic elites are wealthy people who own lots of real estate and other assets, and thus have an incentive to promote capital inflows that inflate their portfolios.

    If the right-wing really wants to shut down immigration and capital flows, they should organize and push for land value taxation. Domestic elites will never tolerate significant land value taxation, as the lack of significant land value taxation is the ultimate source of their wealth and power over the rest of society. But if faced with the prospect of land value taxation, domestic elites will allow for immigration and capital controls to placate the populace and to prevent the land value tax and thus protect their rents and wealth.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/byron-wien-on-why-inequality-has-gotten-worse-in-the-us-2017-5


    He argues that it has something to do with the fact that the wealthy own homes and stocks, while the less affluent do not.

    "How did [the widening inequality gap] happen? Wealthy people own the expensive real estate where they live, and may have other expensive properties as well. They are also more likely to own common stocks. Both the real estate and the equities have appreciated," he wrote.

    "The less affluent tend to be renters with limited equity holdings. Many live paycheck to paycheck and their personal wealth has not appreciated significantly," he added.
     

    If the right-wing really wants to shut down immigration and capital flows, they should organize and push for land value taxation.

    This is going at it sideways. Why do i want to push for “land value taxation”? Most people want to own a patch–consider it part of a middle class lifestyle. And the rich actually own *less* real estate per their wealth than middle class people–whose main asset often is their home.

    If i “want to shut down immigration and capital flows” the easy way to do that is to … *shut down immigration and capital flows*.

    Capital controls is the easy way to tackle the trade issue, without kicking off a trade war. Just force the balance–you want to send money “out” to buy imports, then you need to grab money that came “in” to buy our exports. And even easier than that there’s absolutely no reason foreigners need to be buying passive real-estate in the US. If BMW wants to build a new plant–fine. But we don’t need Chinese buying houses in Seattle. (And i say this as someone whose house has inflated by at least a couple hundred thousand in the last few years–of course, absolutely useless to me unless i’m going to sell and move and actively harmful to my kids and other young people). Nor do we need Saudis buying Iowa farmland.

    And the way to tackle immigration is to just stop it. Mass immigration is utterly useless and actively destructive. Once the conquest\settlement of a territory is complete and you have an economy up and running–as the US and Australia did over a 100 years ago–there’s no need for more people. And there’s particularly no need for anyone who is foreign in background. And doubly no need for anyone who by racial, religious or cultural background will tend not to integrate and create division and conflict.

    Fixing immigration is easy–just *stop*.

    Read More
    • Agree: Federalist, Opinionator
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    You should push for land value taxation because the threat of land value taxation will get elites to enact immigration and capital controls to quell the threat of land value taxation.

    The wealthy actually do own lots of real estate wealth, and the value of their other assets are significantly based on land value:

    http://blog.wallstreetsurvivor.com/2015/10/08/mcdonalds-beyond-the-burger/

    A lot of us don’t realize that McDonald’s isn’t really a burger-flipping restaurant chain. Well, it is, but not purely. Peel back the layers and you’ll find that the corporate entity is actually one hell of a real estate company. Former McDonald’s CFO, Harry J. Sonneborn, is even quoted as saying, “we are not technically in the food business. We are in the real estate business. The only reason we sell fifteen-cent hamburgers is because they are the greatest producer of revenue, from which our tenants can pay us our rent.”
     
    Furthermore, middle class people may own most of their wealth in their real estate, but they have mortgages, and where do you think those mortgage payments go every month? They're interest income for the wealthy, which is also used by the wealthy to leverage their holdings of other assets.

    It's precisely because the elite and much of the middle class are so addicted to land value that they're also addicted to the immigration and capital flows that bid up that land value. Being wealthy by definition means not having to earn a wage for a living and being able to live off rents. The elite will never give that up, but if you threaten to take away the cookie jar, they will make concessions in order to hold onto some cookies.

    Obviously stopping immigration and capital flows is not easy, and saying "stop" is not a strategy. If it were, there'd be no issue.
  176. @Grumpy
    OT:

    The rich-kid college eruptions continue.

    http://www.startribune.com/st-olaf-students-boycott-classes-in-protest-of-latest-racial-incident/420895163/

    NORTHFIELD, MINN. — Hundreds of students, some wearing pajamas, others carrying pillows and blankets, gathered on the St. Olaf College campus Monday morning to protest a string of racist incidents over the past school year, the latest being a threatening note that was left on the windshield of a black student’s car demanding that she “shut up or I will shut you up.”
     

    The rich-kid college eruptions continue.

    You can judge the power of PC, but the fact that there is definitely “market failure” in the college market. Even small colleges that are struggling, absolutely refuse to grab the opportunity–for which i think there’s clearly a market–to just cater to the white middle classes with a school that isn’t constantly pushing “diversity uber alles”, is free of the continual racial mau-mauing and offers a no-excuses traditional education.

    St. Olaf is an example. It’s a decently regarded liberal arts college. (One of my scouts–very sharp, high-quality kid–went there back in 2010.) Probably averages around 50th for liberal arts colleges on the various national lists. It’s core appeal is essentially to midwestern Lutherans–i.e. white people. And it could just go with that, and be a great place for midwestern Lutherans to get a solid education and meet high-quality midwestern Lutheran marriage partners. But no! It feels the need to go out, find and drag onto campus a few blacks, and create all the diversity drama that makes colleges look like outposts of PC stupidity and Maoist reeducation rather than “higher learning”. Of course, in St.Olaf’s case a good bit of this is related to the insanity rolling through the Evangelical Lutheran Church.

    But it’s telling that *no* college seems to be able to grab this opportunity, even though there clearly must be a good tranche of white parents who lean conservative and would rather see their kids on a campus that has a traditional curriculum and orientation and would be a place where their children might meet a like minded mate. Obviously the existing faculty is one of the barriers, but it doesn’t seem like one that couldn’t be overcome. Yet this market opportunity seems to be essentially ignored. Hillsdale is the only example i can think of and it is very explicitly Christian. It seems like there’s room for way more than Hillsdale, including ones whose orientations are more secular “western-civ”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    there clearly must be a good tranche of white parents who lean conservative and would rather see their kids on a campus that has a traditional curriculum and orientation
     
    Cite needed.

    The truth is that it is white parents who lean conservative who are in fact pushing this nonsense to give their kids an edge over the (racist, dontcha know) lower class competition.
    , @Twinkie

    Yet this market opportunity seems to be essentially ignored.
     
    I don't think you looked very hard.

    See: Thomas Aquinas College: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Aquinas_College


    Thomas Aquinas offers one degree, a bachelor of arts in liberals arts. This is an integrated liberal arts curriculum made up primarily of the Great Books of the Western Tradition, with order of learning emphasized in the structure of the curriculum. Much of the first two years of the four-year program is devoted to the Trivium (logic, rhetoric, and grammar) and the Quadrivium (geometry, astronomy, arithmetic, and music.)[7] Natural science, philosophy, and theology are studied all four years. Papers are assigned in the various subject areas throughout the year; fourth-year students produce a senior thesis and defend it before a panel of faculty members.
     

    Unmarried students are housed on-campus in six dormitories. Married students may live off-campus. Men's and women's residence halls are off-limits to members of the opposite sex.[9]

    The possession or use of alcohol or illegal drugs on campus or in the dormitories is not allowed and may entail expulsion from the college.[9]
     

    And see also University of Dallas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Dallas
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    Another Dad: I have wholeheartedly agreed with about every comment of yours since I started reading here. I hadn't had a reason to write before to you, since I'd had nothing to argue with.

    This university scam we have now is a highly distorted market, and nothing like the free market whose "invisible hand" would create the decent non-PC-BS colleges many parents would like to see, per your post. Because of originally state government involvement, but now much more Feral Gov't involvement, via backing of large amounts of loan money (causing sky-high tuition), things in this business work nothing like a free market that would respond to demand from customers.

    But, who are the customers? It used to be that, along with the students, the state where the college was, was one of the customers, as it benefited that state to have the educated people "produced" by the school. Now, who are the customers? The politicians that have a huge demand for more useful idiots under their control may be the main customers of the university at this point.

    Peak Stupidity has many posts, some with local first-hand knowledge of this "University Bubble", and here is a good starting point. I can't cover it all right here.

    Ron Paul's latest post here on unz again calls for abolishing the Dept. of Ed, along with most of the rest of the beast called the Fed. Gov. I'll say it again, and later some more times: Conservatives have something to learn from the Libertarians - but, of course, vice versa!

    Good morning, Dad.

  177. @MarcB.
    "Are we in a US housing bubble again?"

    Yes and no. Yes, because the cost of a single family home (in a desirable neighborhood) in many major markets outstrips the recommended 3x annual income. No, because it's the new normal in a country with stagnant wages/salaries and an increasing population. People are more accepting of expensive housing costs as the cost of entry. The next recession will not crash the domestic housing market.

    The relief valve in the bubble markets of the early 2000's were affordable rents. My ex rented a huge 17oo sq ft apartment in West Hollywood off of Sunset for $1500. The mortgage on a comparably sized home in the same neighborhood would have been over $4,000. NYC and other major cities had similar correlations. Rents all over are now closer to parity with the mortgage of a comparably priced home, and are no longer the deals they once were. The housing collapse contributed to a rental boom. While housing prices in a post-2008 economic collapse economy are severely over-valued, they can be sustained unless the job market gets much worse.

    I think the house price = 3X income rule is a hangover from when interest rates were higher. Now that interest rates have gone much lower it’s possible to pay a higher price but keep the same monthly payment. $300K house, $100K income, 6% interest has a bigger monthly payment than a $350K house, $100K income, and 4% interest.

    You’re probably right that home prices are less likely to severely crash this time around.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Interest rates will go back up to normal one day, Boomstick. The "Federal" "Reserve" can only force them down for so long. Inflation has seemed tame, but the US gov't numbers are complete BS (check out shadowstats).

    Rates will go up when the Fed tries to check inflation, but also, when other currencies are freed from connection to the US dollar, which will happen, other rates will go up, and the cheap dollar availability and creation won't be able to continue.

    BTW, the people being screwed the most by this decade-long (so far) cheap-money policy are the responsible old/retired people that had saved enough to be able to live on a decent amount of interest along with a paid-off house. (Example: a little old lady whose husband had saved away $300,000 or so - not rich by any means, but even what was a conservative 5% return gives $1250/month with along with another grand or so from SS - not defunct yet for her - and a paid off house results in a decent life style. At 0.8 % interest, that $1250 becomes only $200 each month).

    Back to housing, no it's all gonna crash down. You're not a realtor are you? (just saying, cause many of them keep the bright sunny outlook on them, at least on the outside, until they go bankrupt. Realtors seem to have the least understanding of the concepts of money and wealth of anyone besides politicians)

    The foreign money will pour in until the people get rightly and truly pissed, enough to actually do something besides sit in the coffee shop blogging about it over their frappicino grandes.
  178. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @AnotherDad

    If the right-wing really wants to shut down immigration and capital flows, they should organize and push for land value taxation.
     
    This is going at it sideways. Why do i want to push for "land value taxation"? Most people want to own a patch--consider it part of a middle class lifestyle. And the rich actually own *less* real estate per their wealth than middle class people--whose main asset often is their home.

    If i "want to shut down immigration and capital flows" the easy way to do that is to ... *shut down immigration and capital flows*.

    Capital controls is the easy way to tackle the trade issue, without kicking off a trade war. Just force the balance--you want to send money "out" to buy imports, then you need to grab money that came "in" to buy our exports. And even easier than that there's absolutely no reason foreigners need to be buying passive real-estate in the US. If BMW wants to build a new plant--fine. But we don't need Chinese buying houses in Seattle. (And i say this as someone whose house has inflated by at least a couple hundred thousand in the last few years--of course, absolutely useless to me unless i'm going to sell and move and actively harmful to my kids and other young people). Nor do we need Saudis buying Iowa farmland.

    And the way to tackle immigration is to just stop it. Mass immigration is utterly useless and actively destructive. Once the conquest\settlement of a territory is complete and you have an economy up and running--as the US and Australia did over a 100 years ago--there's no need for more people. And there's particularly no need for anyone who is foreign in background. And doubly no need for anyone who by racial, religious or cultural background will tend not to integrate and create division and conflict.

    Fixing immigration is easy--just *stop*.

    You should push for land value taxation because the threat of land value taxation will get elites to enact immigration and capital controls to quell the threat of land value taxation.

    The wealthy actually do own lots of real estate wealth, and the value of their other assets are significantly based on land value:

    http://blog.wallstreetsurvivor.com/2015/10/08/mcdonalds-beyond-the-burger/

    A lot of us don’t realize that McDonald’s isn’t really a burger-flipping restaurant chain. Well, it is, but not purely. Peel back the layers and you’ll find that the corporate entity is actually one hell of a real estate company. Former McDonald’s CFO, Harry J. Sonneborn, is even quoted as saying, “we are not technically in the food business. We are in the real estate business. The only reason we sell fifteen-cent hamburgers is because they are the greatest producer of revenue, from which our tenants can pay us our rent.”

    Furthermore, middle class people may own most of their wealth in their real estate, but they have mortgages, and where do you think those mortgage payments go every month? They’re interest income for the wealthy, which is also used by the wealthy to leverage their holdings of other assets.

    It’s precisely because the elite and much of the middle class are so addicted to land value that they’re also addicted to the immigration and capital flows that bid up that land value. Being wealthy by definition means not having to earn a wage for a living and being able to live off rents. The elite will never give that up, but if you threaten to take away the cookie jar, they will make concessions in order to hold onto some cookies.

    Obviously stopping immigration and capital flows is not easy, and saying “stop” is not a strategy. If it were, there’d be no issue.

    Read More
  179. I’d like to correct my (as yet still moderated, so I can’t link to it) post above, re: Vancouver, BC.

    ZeroHedge wrote today that the bubble is back on! Well, they do have a number of writers and articles from other sites, so really this is just contradicting some other articles I have read.

    The tax that the local or provincial gov’t put on is a 15% property tax. Again, I detest the whole idea of property tax renting one’s home from the government. I think a huge tax on sales to any foreigners would be the way to go, barring a complete ban on sales, which would be fine by me.

    What Travis wrote above: “China bans foreigners from buying property in China. Mexico also bans foreigners from buying property within 100 miles of the coast and all of Baja is off limits to foreigners. ” shows very clearly that when Trump says “we are making/getting bad deals”, he is correct about that. Why would governments make such extremely unfair deals on behalf of their subjects if they really had any stake in the outcome? Well, they don’t. It’s not that they are just stupid. (They are, but they also have much disdain for the common people).

    Read More
  180. @Daniel Chieh
    Sure. But large quantities of investment money distort the local economy even so, and in a significant way, you'll see that; many/much of the purchases aren't really an effort to immigrate, it is basically an effort to park money. At least a lot of the complaints in VC in my experience were not just Chinese immigrants, but Chinese ownership turning locals into eternal renters.

    Hell, in VC, the tendency to buy and board up houses is well known. No one's living in those.

    In the long run, rising Chinese affluence will affect the world. You can attempt to regulate its effects and perhaps should, but its an unavoidable issue.

    One thing to point out as well is that at least in the case of Canada, Chinese immigration has actually been ebbing for the last ten years or so. It’s the influx of capital that is pouring in now and it may or may not be accompanied by permanent residents. The 2011 census showed a slight dip in the Chinese percentage in Toronto compared with the previous census 5 years prior, with mostly South Asians, Arabs and Filipinos filling the void.

    Read More
  181. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @anon
    "What's different about China today is that it combines the rather unusual situation of "democratization of millionaires (or billionaires) with a high degree of political repression/instability."

    Look at how the British never had any trouble running Hong Kong. There was never any Chinese demand for democracy or freedom or civil rights. It was all about running businesses and making money. That should tell you something about the Han character right there.

    The Chinese did have freedom and civil rights in Hong Kong. They didn’t have democracy or autonomy, but the British took out a 99 year lease in 1898. So the expectation was that the British would return Hong Kong eventually, rather than try to dominate it forever like in other colonies. Also, many of the people in Hong Kong were refugees from the Chinese civil war and communist China, so the political freedom and civil rights of Hong Kong were relatively much higher.

    Read More
  182. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @anon
    "A return to white Australia (or some form of it) would be politically unpalatable, and Aussies wouldn't welcome the international opprobrium that might bring".

    Why should it be anybody's right or business to decide what - if any at all - immigration policy Australians want or decide upon OTHER then Australians?

    Such a policy would be very popular in Australia, it won’t happen, because the Australian Labor Party actively panders to ethnic voters, and the other main Party, the Liberal Party, depends on the cheap labour lobby for support.
    Clearly, the Liberal Party is headed for eventual Electoral suicide under this system, but are unable to change course.

    Read More
  183. @res

    Siphoning off China’s wealth, as well as her most capable citizens, will slow the rise of China, without risking military confrontation.
     
    What I find amazing about all of this is that China seems able to simultaneously fund high growth at home and all of this market distorting expatriate activity.

    China must be generating an astonishing amount of wealth right now.

    Here is a 2015 article about Chinese external investment surpassing their internal investment: http://www.businessinsider.com/statistics-on-chinas-investment-abroad-2015-2

    China must be generating an astonishing amount of wealth right now.

    China outpaced, in terms of growth rate, all the previous fast-growth economies of the 20th century. In the early and mid-phases of its growth, it was often growing at 10% a year, which eclipsed the 7%ish growth rates of Korea and Taiwan three decades earlier, then considered astonishing by development economists.

    By contrast, Western countries industrialized and grew at much more leisurely rates over a long period in the 19th and 20th centuries.

    But now China is the world’s second largest economy, considerably bigger than Japan and getting closer to the US in nominal dollar GDP and it is still growing at 6.9%, according to the latest numbers. This is still flat out astonishing. An economist who used to be the IMF’s China research head remarked that he had to be honest-he didn’t quite understand how the innards of the economic machine in China, with its weak system of commercial law, weak property rights and and extensive corruption was producing such growth. It would be like a baseball player with a secret crack habit amazing the world by consistently batting .500 every season.

    Read More
  184. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Opinionator
    In a dangerous world, Australia is still gingerly trying to pursue the goal of an increased population, for its own . . . political security

    Insane.

    Australia’s isolation from other European countries means that there is a still a consensus in favour of an increasing population; if we don’t fill up this country, other people will. Populate or Perish!

    > "we"
    > "other people"

    Australian Governments started pushing line in the 1940s.
    The problem is that Australia was invaded in 1788 by a few hundred sailors and convicts.
    The Indigenous population at the time has been estimated to have been at least 500,000 and possibly many more, divided amongst 600 tribes with hundreds of languages.
    Now, technology played a part, but the conquest was mostly due to the divided nature of the inhabitants versus the united nature of the invaders.
    It’s a lesson modern day Australians refuse to acknowledge.

    Read More
  185. @syonredux

    I doubt there were 10.

     

    Approx 10,000 sounds about right to me. Remember, that's out of a London population totaling around 1 million (1811 London population:1,197,673). So 10,000 Blacks is a very small percentage.

    Approx 10,000 sounds about right to me. Remember, that’s out of a London population totaling around 1 million (1811 London population:1,197,673). So 10,000 Blacks is a very small percentage.

    I’m not sure why I’m quibbling, but an estimate of 10,000 blacks, or 1% of the population of London piques my curiosity, because it sounds high.

    Britain had not colonized Africa at that point, although it was actively involved in the slave trade, but that was almost entirely overseas. As far as I know, Britain did not actively import slaves.

    As a point of comparison, Indian-Americans today constitute about 1% of the US population— after a generation of sustained immigration. They are quite visible and talked about.

    A London population of 10,000 blacks would have been remarked upon in literature. I’m no expert on 19th century English literature, but I don’t recall reading any books that mention even minor African characters in an English setting. For instance, offhand, I don’t recall any blacks in any of the Dickens stories.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Triumph104
    The novel Vanity Fair (serialized 1847-1848) has a character named Miss Swartz who is described as a “rich woolly-haired mulatto from St. Kitt's”.
    , @syonredux

    As a point of comparison, Indian-Americans today constitute about 1% of the US population— after a generation of sustained immigration. They are quite visible and talked about.
     
    Dunno if that's a good comparison. SJWs in America and Britain are obsessed with bringing attention to exotic minority populations.

    A London population of 10,000 blacks would have been remarked upon in literature. I’m no expert on 19th century English literature, but I don’t recall reading any books that mention even minor African characters in an English setting. For instance, offhand, I don’t recall any blacks in any of the Dickens stories.
     
    Offhand, can't recall any in Dickens, but Thackeray has one in Vanity Fair (the half-Jewish, half Black Rhoda Swartz):

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Vanity_Fair_D230.png/400px-Vanity_Fair_D230.png


    And Maria Edgeworth, in Belinda (1801), has an interracial romance between a Black character named Juba and an English girl. Juba, however, was written out of the 1810 edition of the novel.
    , @anon
    I still say 10,000 blacks in London England at that time seems unrealistically high. There would have been no plantation-style slavery in Britain at that time and there would already have been a huge pool of cheap labor, the native population of Britain. So what would all these black slaves supposedly be doing in Britain? What would they have been needed or used for? And by who?Wouldn't 10,000 blacks in any large European city at that time have stood out like a super-sore thumb and drawn a great deal of comment? Particularly from foreign sources? I just don't buy it. Too many people see Wikipedia as the fountain of all knowledge. I guess it is a sign of the internet age we are now living in. Finally don't forget all the Cultural Marxists in the U.K. and elsewhere you have an obsession with drawing attention to any trace of a non-white "past". This is pure historical revisionism.
  186. Some years ago, a Western private bank (I think it was either ABN-AMRO or HSBC) did a survey of clients whose net worth exceeded ten million dollars and asked them about their long term plans for where they wanted to live. The survey asked the clients whether they would buy a primary home outside their home country.

    About 5% of the very rich clients in India, Indonesia and the Middle East indicated that they would seek to permanently live overseas in the long run. About 40% of the rich Chinese clients expressed a desire to emigrate.

    [I've mentioned this study previously over here, but so far, I have been unable to find the link to it again. If anyone knows of it, I'd be grateful if they would post it here.]

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    The details are a bit different, but the numbers look similar. Is this it? https://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2014/09/15/almost-half-of-wealthy-chinese-want-to-leave/

    Searching for "barclays survey high net worth individuals chinese leave" shows a number of articles about the survey, but I did not see the survey itself.
    , @Romanian
    This might interest you. It's a 2016 report on millionaire migration in 2015. Leaving Paris, Chicago and other places in droves, in favor of Australia, Israel, Canada and the Upper West of the US.

    https://nebula.wsimg.com/6e5712bf40ffe85cc116a52402d5a7d7?AccessKeyId=70E2D0A589B97BD675FB&disposition=0&alloworigin=1

    It's very interesting and straightforward. I even wrote about it at the time.
  187. @PiltdownMan
    Some years ago, a Western private bank (I think it was either ABN-AMRO or HSBC) did a survey of clients whose net worth exceeded ten million dollars and asked them about their long term plans for where they wanted to live. The survey asked the clients whether they would buy a primary home outside their home country.

    About 5% of the very rich clients in India, Indonesia and the Middle East indicated that they would seek to permanently live overseas in the long run. About 40% of the rich Chinese clients expressed a desire to emigrate.

    [I've mentioned this study previously over here, but so far, I have been unable to find the link to it again. If anyone knows of it, I'd be grateful if they would post it here.]

    The details are a bit different, but the numbers look similar. Is this it? https://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2014/09/15/almost-half-of-wealthy-chinese-want-to-leave/

    Searching for “barclays survey high net worth individuals chinese leave” shows a number of articles about the survey, but I did not see the survey itself.

    Read More
    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
    The article is different from the one I remember, and the cutoff point for the survey sounds lower too, but a glance at the disparity between the China and India numbers confirms that it must be the very same survey as I vaguely remembered.

    Thanks a million!
  188. @res
    The details are a bit different, but the numbers look similar. Is this it? https://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2014/09/15/almost-half-of-wealthy-chinese-want-to-leave/

    Searching for "barclays survey high net worth individuals chinese leave" shows a number of articles about the survey, but I did not see the survey itself.

    The article is different from the one I remember, and the cutoff point for the survey sounds lower too, but a glance at the disparity between the China and India numbers confirms that it must be the very same survey as I vaguely remembered.

    Thanks a million!

    Read More
  189. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Stebbing Heuer
    I realised a some years ago, returning to Sydney after having lived and worked elsewhere, that the local property market was for two-income couples who weren't afraid of taking on a mountain of debt.

    Being single, and a person for whom debt is a four-letter word, I had neither the chance nor the desire to buy into the market.

    It was a shock to see the average price of houses in Earlwood, where while I was an undergrad I used to visit a girlfriend at her parents' house, pass $1 million. Then the average valuation for houses in my parents' suburb, not far away and in a seriously unloved part of Sydney, surpassed $1 million.

    While at my job in Sydney about four years ago, I was asked to write a research piece on Australian property prices. In my research, I read somewhere that a contemporaneous survey taken in China revealed that something like 400 million of China's new middle class would like to come and live in Australia.

    It's very real, and it's a tremendously sobering statistic, given that our total population is about 5 per cent of that. The demand for Australian housing out of China is immense, the buyers are price-insensitive - they just want to get their money, and if possible their kids, out of the world-historical ponzi scheme and political prison camp that is modern China - and the Australian elite, both politicians and developers, realise that, at current prices, the money flowing in from China is the only thing holding the insanely-leveraged price structure up. All the powerful interest groups have an interest in keeping the inflation game going. Only the kids are appalled at it, but they don't have voice.

    Other causes of the catastrophe are government land-release policies aimed at minimising land-release for housing development, in order to maximise government revenues (massive moral hazard here), and the Reserve Bank's having taken house prices out of the measure of consumer prices in 1998 in favour of a more theoretically-pure measure of cost of housing services, so that for 19 years massive rises in house prices have occasioned no tightening response from monetary policy.

    Australia has a policy against low-skilled immigration, so it still has a more prosperous native blue collar class than the U.S., but it encourages high skill immigration. This is less self-destructive than the U.S. policy, but it has obvious effects like squeezing younger natives out of the home-buying class.
     
    The anger about this among young people is white hot. Having been required to pay many thousands for their university educations, they are thrown into competition in the job market and the housing market with what looks like an endless supply of foreign workers brought to Australia by the elite to keep effective demand up and wages down. They are really, really pissed off, and yet the elite are refusing to change course. This should sound familiar!

    Its not just Chinese. I lived in Indonesia and I would estimate that a full 100% of the population would move to Australia if chanced .

    Read More
  190. This may well be it. It contains a lot of detailed information on how the wealthy are moving around from one place to another.

    Barclays Wealth Insight 18 – The Rise of the Global Citizen.

    https://wealth.barclays.com/en_gb/home/research/research-centre/wealth-insights/volume-18.html

    Thanks again, res!

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    You are welcome! Thanks for bringing it up and finding the full report!

    The report has some possibly useful references as well. It seems to offer some insights into "the globalizers." Chart 4 on page 13/15 was an interesting look at reasons for holding foreign assets (by continent). Africa showed 74% concerned about finding a safe haven, but I was surprised that <30% of Asians felt that way (what about the conventional wisdom of corrupt Chinese salting money away abroad?).

    P.S. Regarding the income threshold, is it possible you were remembering something like this (from page 2)? "survey of more than 2,000 high net worth individuals, all of whom had more than USD$1.5 million/GBP£1 million* (or equivalent) in total net worth and 200 with more than USD$15 million/GBP£10 million."

  191. @AnotherDad

    The rich-kid college eruptions continue.
     
    You can judge the power of PC, but the fact that there is definitely "market failure" in the college market. Even small colleges that are struggling, absolutely refuse to grab the opportunity--for which i think there's clearly a market--to just cater to the white middle classes with a school that isn't constantly pushing "diversity uber alles", is free of the continual racial mau-mauing and offers a no-excuses traditional education.

    St. Olaf is an example. It's a decently regarded liberal arts college. (One of my scouts--very sharp, high-quality kid--went there back in 2010.) Probably averages around 50th for liberal arts colleges on the various national lists. It's core appeal is essentially to midwestern Lutherans--i.e. white people. And it could just go with that, and be a great place for midwestern Lutherans to get a solid education and meet high-quality midwestern Lutheran marriage partners. But no! It feels the need to go out, find and drag onto campus a few blacks, and create all the diversity drama that makes colleges look like outposts of PC stupidity and Maoist reeducation rather than "higher learning". Of course, in St.Olaf's case a good bit of this is related to the insanity rolling through the Evangelical Lutheran Church.

    But it's telling that *no* college seems to be able to grab this opportunity, even though there clearly must be a good tranche of white parents who lean conservative and would rather see their kids on a campus that has a traditional curriculum and orientation and would be a place where their children might meet a like minded mate. Obviously the existing faculty is one of the barriers, but it doesn't seem like one that couldn't be overcome. Yet this market opportunity seems to be essentially ignored. Hillsdale is the only example i can think of and it is very explicitly Christian. It seems like there's room for way more than Hillsdale, including ones whose orientations are more secular "western-civ".

    there clearly must be a good tranche of white parents who lean conservative and would rather see their kids on a campus that has a traditional curriculum and orientation

    Cite needed.

    The truth is that it is white parents who lean conservative who are in fact pushing this nonsense to give their kids an edge over the (racist, dontcha know) lower class competition.

    Read More
  192. @PiltdownMan

    Approx 10,000 sounds about right to me. Remember, that’s out of a London population totaling around 1 million (1811 London population:1,197,673). So 10,000 Blacks is a very small percentage.

     

    I'm not sure why I'm quibbling, but an estimate of 10,000 blacks, or 1% of the population of London piques my curiosity, because it sounds high.

    Britain had not colonized Africa at that point, although it was actively involved in the slave trade, but that was almost entirely overseas. As far as I know, Britain did not actively import slaves.

    As a point of comparison, Indian-Americans today constitute about 1% of the US population— after a generation of sustained immigration. They are quite visible and talked about.

    A London population of 10,000 blacks would have been remarked upon in literature. I'm no expert on 19th century English literature, but I don't recall reading any books that mention even minor African characters in an English setting. For instance, offhand, I don't recall any blacks in any of the Dickens stories.

    The novel Vanity Fair (serialized 1847-1848) has a character named Miss Swartz who is described as a “rich woolly-haired mulatto from St. Kitt’s”.

    Read More
  193. @PiltdownMan
    This may well be it. It contains a lot of detailed information on how the wealthy are moving around from one place to another.

    Barclays Wealth Insight 18 - The Rise of the Global Citizen.

    https://wealth.barclays.com/en_gb/home/research/research-centre/wealth-insights/volume-18.html

    Thanks again, res!

    You are welcome! Thanks for bringing it up and finding the full report!

    The report has some possibly useful references as well. It seems to offer some insights into “the globalizers.” Chart 4 on page 13/15 was an interesting look at reasons for holding foreign assets (by continent). Africa showed 74% concerned about finding a safe haven, but I was surprised that <30% of Asians felt that way (what about the conventional wisdom of corrupt Chinese salting money away abroad?).

    P.S. Regarding the income threshold, is it possible you were remembering something like this (from page 2)? "survey of more than 2,000 high net worth individuals, all of whom had more than USD$1.5 million/GBP£1 million* (or equivalent) in total net worth and 200 with more than USD$15 million/GBP£10 million."

    Read More
  194. @PiltdownMan

    Approx 10,000 sounds about right to me. Remember, that’s out of a London population totaling around 1 million (1811 London population:1,197,673). So 10,000 Blacks is a very small percentage.

     

    I'm not sure why I'm quibbling, but an estimate of 10,000 blacks, or 1% of the population of London piques my curiosity, because it sounds high.

    Britain had not colonized Africa at that point, although it was actively involved in the slave trade, but that was almost entirely overseas. As far as I know, Britain did not actively import slaves.

    As a point of comparison, Indian-Americans today constitute about 1% of the US population— after a generation of sustained immigration. They are quite visible and talked about.

    A London population of 10,000 blacks would have been remarked upon in literature. I'm no expert on 19th century English literature, but I don't recall reading any books that mention even minor African characters in an English setting. For instance, offhand, I don't recall any blacks in any of the Dickens stories.

    As a point of comparison, Indian-Americans today constitute about 1% of the US population— after a generation of sustained immigration. They are quite visible and talked about.

    Dunno if that’s a good comparison. SJWs in America and Britain are obsessed with bringing attention to exotic minority populations.

    A London population of 10,000 blacks would have been remarked upon in literature. I’m no expert on 19th century English literature, but I don’t recall reading any books that mention even minor African characters in an English setting. For instance, offhand, I don’t recall any blacks in any of the Dickens stories.

    Offhand, can’t recall any in Dickens, but Thackeray has one in Vanity Fair (the half-Jewish, half Black Rhoda Swartz):

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Vanity_Fair_D230.png/400px-Vanity_Fair_D230.png

    And Maria Edgeworth, in Belinda (1801), has an interracial romance between a Black character named Juba and an English girl. Juba, however, was written out of the 1810 edition of the novel.

    Read More
  195. That dream ended 2 generations ago. Or maybe in 1942 when Singapore fell: it was based on the resilience of the British Empire.

    Then we let in the f’ing Lebanese, because Reuben F Scarf was Gough Whitlam’s closest friend (Reuben?).

    But the Chinese are almost as bad. If we weren’t being invaded by Muslim extremists we’d still have to deal with Asian cultural invasion.

    Who knew migrants are so tribal? We just emulated what we were told was US policy, and you guys seemed to be doing alright. Everyone just becomes individuals right?

    But the dream still exists for independent tradesmen who end up living a spectacularly good life by global standards if they make the right choices.

    If we want to survive we’ll have to emulate Israel in defence policy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde

    Who knew migrants are so tribal? We just emulated what we were told was US policy, and you guys seemed to be doing alright. Everyone just becomes individuals right?
     
    The White Austrialia immigration policy was ended in the same era as the 1965 United States immigration act. Interesting! Greeks and Portugese immigrants to Australia used to be exotic and as dusky as it got....

    The term White Australian policy comprises various historical policies that effectively barred people of non-European descent from immigrating to Australia. There was never any specific policy titled such, but the term was invented later to describe a collection of policies that were designed to exclude people from Asia and the Pacific Islands. These policies were progressively dismantled between 1949 and 1973.
     
    wikipedia
    , @sb
    I think I'd blame PM Malcolm Fraser for the Muslim Lebanese influx . Christian Lebanese had long been able to migrate ( and generally quite successfully so ).

    Whitlam for all his many faults never really campaigned for large non white immigration .
    There was no upturn in migrant numbers during his time in Government . He certainly opposed Vietnamese immigration
  196. @Pat Boyle
    I'm sure everyone else here understand the code of the orthography. But I only learned of it this morning. The triple parentheses are a neo-Nazi code for Jew. So this little blurb is a part of an anti-Semitic screed. He seems to think the Jews and presumably Israel are somehow interested seeing Australia be filled with Chinese. Damn those Jews are tricky!

    Organized Jewry in AUS (while perhaps not the majority of individual Jews) are most certainly in favor of non-European mass immigration, and official multiculturalism. This is why they were & are in the forefront of AUS Anti-’Hate Speech’ laws which prosecute criticisms or mockery of protected classes or the cultural practices of said classes (eg Africans, Asians, Muslims, Jews). It is also why they doxxed Pauline Hanson’s immigration-restrictionist One Nation membership, exposing the entire party membership in the late 90s. They want Australians Whites to become a minority in their own country. By their deeds ye shall know their agenda. They do not want freedom of speech, and they want mass nontraditional immigration, and the wrecking ball of multiculturalism to be sacrosanct.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde

    Organized Jewry in AUS (while perhaps not the majority of individual Jews) are most certainly in favor of non-European mass immigration, and official multiculturalism. This is why they were & are in the forefront of AUS Anti-’Hate Speech’ laws which prosecute criticisms or mockery of protected classes or the cultural practices of said classes (eg Africans, Asians, Muslims, Jews). It is also why they doxxed Pauline Hanson’s immigration-restrictionist One Nation membership, exposing the entire party membership in the late 90s. They want Australians Whites to become a minority in their own country. By their deeds ye shall know their agenda. They do not want freedom of speech, and they want mass nontraditional immigration, and the wrecking ball of multiculturalism to be sacrosanct.
     
    This is paranoia. How can Jews be so powerful? I cannot think of a single Jewish politician there. - There were 97,335 Australians who identified as Jewish in the 2011 census out of nearly 24 million Australians. (wikipedia) Jews have lots more impact in the US with Chuckie (SAT1600) Schumer leading lemming off cliffs.
  197. @Autochthon
    Is this response serious?

    Everyone with a pulse knew all of the things you list before you typed them.

    Joe Schmoe's rhetorical and somewhat sarcastic point (I implore him to correct me if I am wrong) is that the behaviour is unacceptable, and the traitorous governments in European nations ought to stop enabling, and, indeed, encouraging it. We are all well aware of the invaders' and interlopers' motivations, and we bloody well don't give a hoot in Hell.

    If a man rapes my wife it is no answer to bloviate about his motivations. Was he misogynistic? Merely horny? Did he have it in for her, or for me? Both of us? Was it a happenstance crime of opportunity or was he an obsessed stalker? What other opportunities for sexual release were available? After all, didn't he have to inevitably park his sexual capital somewhere? Not one of these questions would cross my mind, not even fleetingly, as I methodically broke every bone in the monster's body.

    I am reminded of an earlier post someone made to the effect of "Whatever shall impoverished Mexicans do if they cannot invade the U.S.A.? Farm with sticks? One cannot expect them to be subsistence farmers." Well, I can and I do. If they can do something else, good for them, but they may not do it at my expense. May every lonely man find a date – but my lady is off limits, and if violating her is his only opportunity, he had good and well better think twice and reach for a box of tissues instead.

    China and India, to name two of the most egregious examples, effectively forbid any foreigner from owning realty. The former effectively forbids immigration as well. But old Trumplestiltskin, the traitorous clown, thinks it is just swell he sells so much realty to them.

    World War Four may or may not be fought with sticks and stones, but World War Three will be intranational and interracial, you may depend upon it.

    Everyone with a pulse knew all of the things you list before you typed them.

    Stop with the posturing.

    the traitorous governments in European nations

    The country under discussion is Australia.

    If a man rapes my wife it is no answer to bloviate about his motivations.

    Someone with legal training ought to know the difference beween a violent crime and a voluntary real estate transaction between two private parties. Now, certainly polities can and should have a debate about regulating foreign ownership of property within them, but that’s not nearly the same thing as something like rape. After all, is it rape if your wife freely, on her own accord, took money for another man’s “sexual capital”? It seems to me that your analogy needs some work.

    World War Three will be intranational and interracial, you may depend upon it.

    Sounds like your own desire for civil and race wars is making you believe that you can foresee the future.

    Oh, and we already fought the Third World War. It was against Islamic terrorists, and I participated.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth

    Oh, and we already fought the Third World War. It was against Islamic terrorists, and I participated.
     
    No we did not. That was a Military Industrial Complex get-rich-quick scheme; but then of course so were WWI and WWII.

    But I thank you for your service.
  198. @AnotherDad

    The rich-kid college eruptions continue.
     
    You can judge the power of PC, but the fact that there is definitely "market failure" in the college market. Even small colleges that are struggling, absolutely refuse to grab the opportunity--for which i think there's clearly a market--to just cater to the white middle classes with a school that isn't constantly pushing "diversity uber alles", is free of the continual racial mau-mauing and offers a no-excuses traditional education.

    St. Olaf is an example. It's a decently regarded liberal arts college. (One of my scouts--very sharp, high-quality kid--went there back in 2010.) Probably averages around 50th for liberal arts colleges on the various national lists. It's core appeal is essentially to midwestern Lutherans--i.e. white people. And it could just go with that, and be a great place for midwestern Lutherans to get a solid education and meet high-quality midwestern Lutheran marriage partners. But no! It feels the need to go out, find and drag onto campus a few blacks, and create all the diversity drama that makes colleges look like outposts of PC stupidity and Maoist reeducation rather than "higher learning". Of course, in St.Olaf's case a good bit of this is related to the insanity rolling through the Evangelical Lutheran Church.

    But it's telling that *no* college seems to be able to grab this opportunity, even though there clearly must be a good tranche of white parents who lean conservative and would rather see their kids on a campus that has a traditional curriculum and orientation and would be a place where their children might meet a like minded mate. Obviously the existing faculty is one of the barriers, but it doesn't seem like one that couldn't be overcome. Yet this market opportunity seems to be essentially ignored. Hillsdale is the only example i can think of and it is very explicitly Christian. It seems like there's room for way more than Hillsdale, including ones whose orientations are more secular "western-civ".

    Yet this market opportunity seems to be essentially ignored.

    I don’t think you looked very hard.

    See: Thomas Aquinas College: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Aquinas_College

    Thomas Aquinas offers one degree, a bachelor of arts in liberals arts. This is an integrated liberal arts curriculum made up primarily of the Great Books of the Western Tradition, with order of learning emphasized in the structure of the curriculum. Much of the first two years of the four-year program is devoted to the Trivium (logic, rhetoric, and grammar) and the Quadrivium (geometry, astronomy, arithmetic, and music.)[7] Natural science, philosophy, and theology are studied all four years. Papers are assigned in the various subject areas throughout the year; fourth-year students produce a senior thesis and defend it before a panel of faculty members.

    Unmarried students are housed on-campus in six dormitories. Married students may live off-campus. Men’s and women’s residence halls are off-limits to members of the opposite sex.[9]

    The possession or use of alcohol or illegal drugs on campus or in the dormitories is not allowed and may entail expulsion from the college.[9]

    And see also University of Dallas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Dallas

    Read More
  199. @Chips
    That dream ended 2 generations ago. Or maybe in 1942 when Singapore fell: it was based on the resilience of the British Empire.

    Then we let in the f'ing Lebanese, because Reuben F Scarf was Gough Whitlam's closest friend (Reuben?).

    But the Chinese are almost as bad. If we weren't being invaded by Muslim extremists we'd still have to deal with Asian cultural invasion.

    Who knew migrants are so tribal? We just emulated what we were told was US policy, and you guys seemed to be doing alright. Everyone just becomes individuals right?

    But the dream still exists for independent tradesmen who end up living a spectacularly good life by global standards if they make the right choices.

    If we want to survive we'll have to emulate Israel in defence policy.

    Who knew migrants are so tribal? We just emulated what we were told was US policy, and you guys seemed to be doing alright. Everyone just becomes individuals right?

    The White Austrialia immigration policy was ended in the same era as the 1965 United States immigration act. Interesting! Greeks and Portugese immigrants to Australia used to be exotic and as dusky as it got….

    The term White Australian policy comprises various historical policies that effectively barred people of non-European descent from immigrating to Australia. There was never any specific policy titled such, but the term was invented later to describe a collection of policies that were designed to exclude people from Asia and the Pacific Islands. These policies were progressively dismantled between 1949 and 1973.

    wikipedia

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    It was a good policy and should have been maintained. The average white (non-Jewish) Australian gained nothing and lost much by the jettisoning of the policy. The people of Australia should alone have the ability to decide what - if any - immigrants they want.
  200. @Seth Largo
    I think it is hard to overestimate how much Prop 13 distorts the CA housing market. Young new buyers are incredibly screwed IMHO.

    Wrong. Young non-Californians who just recently moved to California are screwed. But young Californians (like moi) whose parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents lived in California are gonna be just fine because most anyone who lived in California pre-1960s owns a home by now and is gonna pass it down to the next generation (like moi!).

    Too bad so sad for the rest of you. If you wanted to own property in California, you should have been born to someone who already owns property in California. And we will make sure that no one ever touches Prop 13, one of the last great "for our posterity" laws in existence.

    But young Californians (like moi) whose parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents lived in California are gonna be just fine because most anyone who lived in California pre-1960s owns a home by now and is gonna pass it down to the next generation (like moi!).

    Do you not have any siblings?

    Read More
  201. @Achmed E. Newman

    I know it’s wild and crazy, but how about the Chinese just STAY HOME and invest their money in … be sitting down for this ….. CHINA.
     
    That IS a wild and crazy idea, and I wish I knew some wild and crazy Chinaguys who would do just that. However, I'd agree with others that were this money to come pouring in without the residents being able to easily scam our system and come in to stay one way or another (without Buck and my permission), it might stop after a while. In the meantime, many young people wanting to live in the big city on/in their own property would still have a hard time until it crashed.

    ZeroHedge has reported numerous times on Vancouver, British Columbia, and the latest was some type of non-resident property or sales tax - I am a HUGE opponent of property tax to begin with, but large taxes on sales to non-citizens seems like a decent idea. I had read that the Vancouver housing bubble was already in the process of bursting. As has also said here already in the comments, the realtors and mortgage brokers and big banks want the big money and big churning over of properties to continue until they have enough money to bug out (they hope, before some pissed off people are onto their asses, such as the "white-hot" angry young Aussies described by a commenter way earlier on this thread.

    I am a HUGE opponent of property tax to begin with, but large taxes on sales to non-citizens seems like a decent idea.

    Just limit property ownership to citizens dude.

    Read More
  202. @CrunchybutRealistCon
    Organized Jewry in AUS (while perhaps not the majority of individual Jews) are most certainly in favor of non-European mass immigration, and official multiculturalism. This is why they were & are in the forefront of AUS Anti-'Hate Speech' laws which prosecute criticisms or mockery of protected classes or the cultural practices of said classes (eg Africans, Asians, Muslims, Jews). It is also why they doxxed Pauline Hanson's immigration-restrictionist One Nation membership, exposing the entire party membership in the late 90s. They want Australians Whites to become a minority in their own country. By their deeds ye shall know their agenda. They do not want freedom of speech, and they want mass nontraditional immigration, and the wrecking ball of multiculturalism to be sacrosanct.

    Organized Jewry in AUS (while perhaps not the majority of individual Jews) are most certainly in favor of non-European mass immigration, and official multiculturalism. This is why they were & are in the forefront of AUS Anti-’Hate Speech’ laws which prosecute criticisms or mockery of protected classes or the cultural practices of said classes (eg Africans, Asians, Muslims, Jews). It is also why they doxxed Pauline Hanson’s immigration-restrictionist One Nation membership, exposing the entire party membership in the late 90s. They want Australians Whites to become a minority in their own country. By their deeds ye shall know their agenda. They do not want freedom of speech, and they want mass nontraditional immigration, and the wrecking ball of multiculturalism to be sacrosanct.

    This is paranoia. How can Jews be so powerful? I cannot think of a single Jewish politician there. – There were 97,335 Australians who identified as Jewish in the 2011 census out of nearly 24 million Australians. (wikipedia) Jews have lots more impact in the US with Chuckie (SAT1600) Schumer leading lemming off cliffs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Heres a list'from the last Federal election:
    http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Record-number-of-Jewish-lawmakers-sworn-in-to-Australian-Parliament-466399
    Out of 226 Representativesand Senators, there are listed Josh Frydenburg, Mark Dreyfus, Michael Danby, Julian Leeser, and Senators Michael Freelander and Stirling Griff.
    Not counted are Jason Falinski and Trent Zimmerman, from House of Representatives.
    Danby was the person who promised Israeli politician Danny Danon in 2011 that Australia would solve Israel's African refugee problem by flying the lot to Australia.
    Whether or not that ever happened is unknown.
    , @Paul Walker - Most beautiful man ever...
    "This is paranoia. How can Jews be so powerful?"
    Mazel tov! Please click on the following link.

    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/08/the-war-on-white-australia-a-case-study-in-the-culture-of-critique-part-1-of-5/
  203. @anon
    None of your smart-ass comments negate what I wrote. What demands for democracy, free speech, etc. were made by the Chinese in Hong Kong during the 99 years of British control? Virtually zilch.

    What demands for democracy, free speech, etc. were made by the Chinese in Hong Kong during the 99 years of British control? Virtually zilch.

    Having actually lived in Hong Kong in the three years preceding the handover back to Beijing, I know that it is false to characterize the Chinese as having no desire for democracy.

    Demands for democracy by the indigenous Hong Kong Chinese were initially squelched by the British authorities in the decades following WWII because of heavy pressure and threats from Beijing.

    But the Brits couldn’t keep a lid on popular demands and allowed limited forms of democracy and self-representation in Hong Kong starting in the 1980s, enraging Beijing and resulting in choice propaganda invective from the Communists in the years I lived there. Chris Patten, the last governor, was particularly independent minded and disregarded cautionary voices from Whitehall, listening instead to local Hong Kong Chinese demands, and instituted reforms.

    He was famously called “a serpent and a prostitute of a thousand years” by Beijing.

    To quote from the Wikipedia article on democracy in Hong Kong (no doubt a battleground of revisionism and redactions by Beijingbots)

    Democracy activists – pressure groups, religious groups and community organisations – attended a mass rally at Ko Shan Theatre in Hung Hom in November 1986. The rally is a milestone in Hong Kong’s fledgling pro-democracy movement. One of the participating groups, calling themselves the ‘group of 190′, demanded direct elections for Legco in 1988, and a faster pace of democratic development after the handover.

    Read More
  204. Yes Government selective high schools have become very Asian .
    It has got to the point that these schools cannot field competitive school teams in the traditional male team sports .
    They are very good at table tennis and badminton though

    Read More
  205. @syonredux
    Off-topic,

    SJWs vs UK:

    But this week’s Doctor Who episode, “Thin Ice,” wasn’t just a good sci-fi story with a monster and fancy top hats. It was a pact with the audience, a renewal of faith. It was a reminder of the show’s philosophy toward life, even with the frequently murky moral space it occupies as a complicated piece of fiction.
     


    What’s more, “Thin Ice” is intent on reminding the audience of what true history looked like, with no excuses for homogeny.
     
    I think that she means "homogeneity"......

    Once outside the TARDIS in period-proper clothes, Bill notes that the people she sees in London are far less white than she was expecting,
     
    This is 1814 London, in case you were wondering.Usual estimates are that the Black population of London was approx 10,000 during this period. That's out of a population of 1,197,673.....Oh, and the "Bill" being referred to is a Black Lesbian.....

    This bid toward being “less emotional” insists that people who cannot make a separation between their feelings and what they are fighting for are hurting their cause rather than helping it… and in this moment, it seems that the Doctor is saying something quite similar to Bill.

    That is, until they meet Lord Sutcliffe, and his flagrant racism toward Bill leads the Doctor to deck him across the face.
     
    Trying to take this seriously for a moment.....If the Doctor is this sensitive to racism, shouldn't he be constantly punching people? You know, going door-to-door and punching people who own plantations in the West Indies?

    In effect, we live in the world that has lately been debating the moral correctness of punching Nazis, and Doctor Who has just answered that with a resounding Yes, Please Do.
     
    Man, SJWs really have a burning desire to sucker punch people.........

    We are now standing in the midst of an era where white supremacy, nationalism, sexism, homophobia, and any other number of prejudices stand to become rule of law
     
    Wake up, people! Trump's about to make The Handmaid's Tale a reality.....

    because too many have embraced the type of thinking that Sutcliffe propagates: that having more makes a human worth more, and that progress is to be measured by power rather than empowering others.
     
    And empowering others means taking power away from certain kinds of people....You know, White Heterosexual Christians......

    “Human progress isn’t measured by industry. It’s measured by the value you place on a life. An unimportant life. A life without privilege. The boy who died on the river, that boy’s value is your value. That’s what defines an age. That’s what defines a species.”

    By uttering those words, Doctor Who is explicitly asking its viewers what currently defines us—you cannot hear those words and neglect taking stock of the world around you. Are we placing value on lives without privilege? Or are we continuing to base our progress on stuff and power and wealth? What age are we in? And if we’re on the wrong end of this… how do we turn and run in the other direction?

     

    Yeah, I mean what have "stuff and power and wealth" ever done for humanity?" Just stupid stuff like improved sanitation, clean drinking water, vaccines, ......

    http://www.tor.com/2017/05/01/the-value-of-a-life-thin-ice-was-one-of-the-best-doctor-who-episodes-in-years/

    I recall the Opening Ceremony of the 2012 London Olympics showing scenes from pre industrial Britain with village greens maypoles and cricket having a fair share of blacks .

    Yeah right

    Read More
  206. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Clyde

    Who knew migrants are so tribal? We just emulated what we were told was US policy, and you guys seemed to be doing alright. Everyone just becomes individuals right?
     
    The White Austrialia immigration policy was ended in the same era as the 1965 United States immigration act. Interesting! Greeks and Portugese immigrants to Australia used to be exotic and as dusky as it got....

    The term White Australian policy comprises various historical policies that effectively barred people of non-European descent from immigrating to Australia. There was never any specific policy titled such, but the term was invented later to describe a collection of policies that were designed to exclude people from Asia and the Pacific Islands. These policies were progressively dismantled between 1949 and 1973.
     
    wikipedia

    It was a good policy and should have been maintained. The average white (non-Jewish) Australian gained nothing and lost much by the jettisoning of the policy. The people of Australia should alone have the ability to decide what – if any – immigrants they want.

    Read More
  207. @Seth Largo
    I think it is hard to overestimate how much Prop 13 distorts the CA housing market. Young new buyers are incredibly screwed IMHO.

    Wrong. Young non-Californians who just recently moved to California are screwed. But young Californians (like moi) whose parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents lived in California are gonna be just fine because most anyone who lived in California pre-1960s owns a home by now and is gonna pass it down to the next generation (like moi!).

    Too bad so sad for the rest of you. If you wanted to own property in California, you should have been born to someone who already owns property in California. And we will make sure that no one ever touches Prop 13, one of the last great "for our posterity" laws in existence.

    The economics of the matter as you describe it may lead to a change in family structure. When it’s cheap to form households, the children go off an buy their own homes and become a nuclear family. When it’s expensive, houses turn into family compounds for an extended family. Grandparents, children, and grandchildren all live in one house.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seth Largo
    No. We go off and rent or (like my sister) buy a cheaper place in the distant exurbs, awaiting our late-stage careers and retirements with no trepidation, knowing we have a half-million dollar property waiting for us.

    And, anyway, the "every generation goes off at 18 and starts their own family" model has led to the hyper individualization driving the suicidal outbred altruism of Northern Europe and the coastal United States. If the Arabs err too far on the side of consanguinity (compounds full of first and second cousins), Northern Europeans have erred too far in the other direction with the nuclear family. Living, at least during certain times in life, with grandparents, elderly parents, or grandchildren seems like a happy medium.

    To an extent, this is still the norm in the midwest: you see two or three generations of a family all living within a few miles of one another, maybe not in the same house, but close enough that homes are shared as de facto communal space. One of my colleagues is actively trying to move closer to her parents . . . free babysitting on demand!
  208. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @PiltdownMan

    Approx 10,000 sounds about right to me. Remember, that’s out of a London population totaling around 1 million (1811 London population:1,197,673). So 10,000 Blacks is a very small percentage.

     

    I'm not sure why I'm quibbling, but an estimate of 10,000 blacks, or 1% of the population of London piques my curiosity, because it sounds high.

    Britain had not colonized Africa at that point, although it was actively involved in the slave trade, but that was almost entirely overseas. As far as I know, Britain did not actively import slaves.

    As a point of comparison, Indian-Americans today constitute about 1% of the US population— after a generation of sustained immigration. They are quite visible and talked about.

    A London population of 10,000 blacks would have been remarked upon in literature. I'm no expert on 19th century English literature, but I don't recall reading any books that mention even minor African characters in an English setting. For instance, offhand, I don't recall any blacks in any of the Dickens stories.

    I still say 10,000 blacks in London England at that time seems unrealistically high. There would have been no plantation-style slavery in Britain at that time and there would already have been a huge pool of cheap labor, the native population of Britain. So what would all these black slaves supposedly be doing in Britain? What would they have been needed or used for? And by who?Wouldn’t 10,000 blacks in any large European city at that time have stood out like a super-sore thumb and drawn a great deal of comment? Particularly from foreign sources? I just don’t buy it. Too many people see Wikipedia as the fountain of all knowledge. I guess it is a sign of the internet age we are now living in. Finally don’t forget all the Cultural Marxists in the U.K. and elsewhere you have an obsession with drawing attention to any trace of a non-white “past”. This is pure historical revisionism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Peter Lund
    Black loyalists, perhaps?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Loyalist
  209. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Clyde

    Organized Jewry in AUS (while perhaps not the majority of individual Jews) are most certainly in favor of non-European mass immigration, and official multiculturalism. This is why they were & are in the forefront of AUS Anti-’Hate Speech’ laws which prosecute criticisms or mockery of protected classes or the cultural practices of said classes (eg Africans, Asians, Muslims, Jews). It is also why they doxxed Pauline Hanson’s immigration-restrictionist One Nation membership, exposing the entire party membership in the late 90s. They want Australians Whites to become a minority in their own country. By their deeds ye shall know their agenda. They do not want freedom of speech, and they want mass nontraditional immigration, and the wrecking ball of multiculturalism to be sacrosanct.
     
    This is paranoia. How can Jews be so powerful? I cannot think of a single Jewish politician there. - There were 97,335 Australians who identified as Jewish in the 2011 census out of nearly 24 million Australians. (wikipedia) Jews have lots more impact in the US with Chuckie (SAT1600) Schumer leading lemming off cliffs.

    Heres a list’from the last Federal election:
    http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Record-number-of-Jewish-lawmakers-sworn-in-to-Australian-Parliament-466399
    Out of 226 Representativesand Senators, there are listed Josh Frydenburg, Mark Dreyfus, Michael Danby, Julian Leeser, and Senators Michael Freelander and Stirling Griff.
    Not counted are Jason Falinski and Trent Zimmerman, from House of Representatives.
    Danby was the person who promised Israeli politician Danny Danon in 2011 that Australia would solve Israel’s African refugee problem by flying the lot to Australia.
    Whether or not that ever happened is unknown.

    Read More
    • Replies: @sb
    yep 6 Jews and 3 Muslims in the Parliament .
    Watch the number of Muslims grow .
    Remember that there are many Labor politicians who have more constituents signed up for the Islamic State than signed up for the Australian Defence Force
    Labor is quickly moving away from supportting traditional white Christian families into being a party of identity politics
    , @Altai

    Danby was the person who promised Israeli politician Danny Danon in 2011 that Australia would solve Israel’s African refugee problem by flying the lot to Australia.
    Whether or not that ever happened is unknown.
     
    They certainly sent some of them to Sweden.
    http://www.jpost.com/National-News/Eritrean-migrants-resettled-from-Israel-to-Sweden-337414

    http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.567450

    With the wonderful line about them threatening the demographic balance of Israel, I suppose the Swedish people are allowed no such self-determination despite it not costing endless war in the middle east and the dispossession of the native people.
    , @anon
    Jason Falinski replaced Bronwyn Bisop, also a jew, in the seat of Mackellar at the 2016 Election.
    Bishop was Speaker of the House from 2013 to 2015.
    , @Clyde
    Thanks for filling me in on Jewish elected politicians in Australia.... me in USA never heard of any of them. I am pulling for you guys in Oz!
  210. @Clyde

    Organized Jewry in AUS (while perhaps not the majority of individual Jews) are most certainly in favor of non-European mass immigration, and official multiculturalism. This is why they were & are in the forefront of AUS Anti-’Hate Speech’ laws which prosecute criticisms or mockery of protected classes or the cultural practices of said classes (eg Africans, Asians, Muslims, Jews). It is also why they doxxed Pauline Hanson’s immigration-restrictionist One Nation membership, exposing the entire party membership in the late 90s. They want Australians Whites to become a minority in their own country. By their deeds ye shall know their agenda. They do not want freedom of speech, and they want mass nontraditional immigration, and the wrecking ball of multiculturalism to be sacrosanct.
     
    This is paranoia. How can Jews be so powerful? I cannot think of a single Jewish politician there. - There were 97,335 Australians who identified as Jewish in the 2011 census out of nearly 24 million Australians. (wikipedia) Jews have lots more impact in the US with Chuckie (SAT1600) Schumer leading lemming off cliffs.

    “This is paranoia. How can Jews be so powerful?”
    Mazel tov! Please click on the following link.

    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/08/the-war-on-white-australia-a-case-study-in-the-culture-of-critique-part-1-of-5/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde
    Movie star Paul Walker says your link conveys nothing important.
  211. @Alan in Perth
    Australian from Perth here. The migration system here is loose, and its focus on 'high skills' is easily rorted. I could go a whole year without being served petrol at a Servo by anybody who wasn't Indian; they also seem to drive all the taxis; backpackers from Europe and elsewhere pick all the fruit. A generous welfare system means that the Australian born aren't interest in low-paid jobs on the whole.

    Australia's isolation from other European countries means that there is a still a consensus in favour of an increasing population; if we don't fill up this country, other people will. Populate or Perish!

    The one saving grace of Australia's immigration programme is that it's not all from one place - it's not all Mexicans (USA), Moroccans (Netherlands) or Pakistanis (UK); so such urban ghettos as exist are relatively small and transitory. I say relatively; I wouldn't want to be a scantily-clad white woman in Lakemba (suburb of Sydney) at night. But most immigration communities eventually seem to blend in.

    Plenty of migrants to Australia are also still from traditional sources such as the UK, NZ and Europe; and there are welcome new sources all the time. In the last year for instance, I've noticed a large number of middle-class South Americans in my city, particularly Brazilians.

    I'd say almost all Aussies are pretty cool with Chinese immigration these days - there is a high rate of inter-marriage and cultural assimilation; property price inflation is limited to 2 cities only: Sydney and Melbourne. The rest of the country would probably welcome foreign real estate investment.

    While Muslims are growing in number, they are a small minority of migrants. Of course they are grossly-over-represented in the media: no reality TV show is complete without a hijab-clad woman participant. This kind of tokenism is quite new; nobody in TV or the movies ever bothered for instance to ensure that the native Aboriginal population was similarly represented.

    Notwithstanding widespread misgivings about the growth of the Muslim community in Australia, I don't foresee those misgivings being transformed into any large scale public opposition to the legal immigration system in the future.

    A return to White Australia (or some form of it) would be politically unpalatable, and Aussies wouldn't welcome the international opprobrium that might bring.

    In a dangerous world, Australia is still gingerly trying to pursue the goal of an increased population, for its own economic advancement and political security, without surrendering its culture. There have been a few mistakes (the Lebanese Muslims in the 1970s; the Sudanese refugees in the 1990s) but on the whole, provided illegal immigration is kept in check, the public seem to trust the government to administer this programme. For the moment.

    It’s worth remembering that Australia’s post WW2 immigration push was largely in response to a severe manpower shortage during the war .
    It was just impossible to get local labour to build ports ,airports and roads for the defence of Australia . (Actually much of the defense infrastructure was built by US servicemen )

    Nowadays and , as far as we can tell , in the future I rather doubt that lack of this kind of infrastructure will be an issue in any full on war .

    Of course in those days we were -more or less – one high trust tribe and viewed with disdain and dare I say a certain sense of superiority other countries with their pronounced race and class divisions

    Now governments ( well the Australian Government anyway ) have realised that a high population growth can disguise all kinds of otherwise dodgy economic data .eg GDP per capita can go down but national GDP goes up . Remember we have politicians who can’t think beyond the next election ( and do we have lots of them )

    Read More
  212. @anon
    Heres a list'from the last Federal election:
    http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Record-number-of-Jewish-lawmakers-sworn-in-to-Australian-Parliament-466399
    Out of 226 Representativesand Senators, there are listed Josh Frydenburg, Mark Dreyfus, Michael Danby, Julian Leeser, and Senators Michael Freelander and Stirling Griff.
    Not counted are Jason Falinski and Trent Zimmerman, from House of Representatives.
    Danby was the person who promised Israeli politician Danny Danon in 2011 that Australia would solve Israel's African refugee problem by flying the lot to Australia.
    Whether or not that ever happened is unknown.

    yep 6 Jews and 3 Muslims in the Parliament .
    Watch the number of Muslims grow .
    Remember that there are many Labor politicians who have more constituents signed up for the Islamic State than signed up for the Australian Defence Force
    Labor is quickly moving away from supportting traditional white Christian families into being a party of identity politics

    Read More
  213. @Chips
    That dream ended 2 generations ago. Or maybe in 1942 when Singapore fell: it was based on the resilience of the British Empire.

    Then we let in the f'ing Lebanese, because Reuben F Scarf was Gough Whitlam's closest friend (Reuben?).

    But the Chinese are almost as bad. If we weren't being invaded by Muslim extremists we'd still have to deal with Asian cultural invasion.

    Who knew migrants are so tribal? We just emulated what we were told was US policy, and you guys seemed to be doing alright. Everyone just becomes individuals right?

    But the dream still exists for independent tradesmen who end up living a spectacularly good life by global standards if they make the right choices.

    If we want to survive we'll have to emulate Israel in defence policy.

    I think I’d blame PM Malcolm Fraser for the Muslim Lebanese influx . Christian Lebanese had long been able to migrate ( and generally quite successfully so ).

    Whitlam for all his many faults never really campaigned for large non white immigration .
    There was no upturn in migrant numbers during his time in Government . He certainly opposed Vietnamese immigration

    Read More
  214. @anon
    Which is why any "universalist" immigration policy is suicide and crazy for a white or white-derived country. If whites were 90% of the world's population it wouldn't matter. But they are not. Immigration should be highly selective and ancestry should be a primary consideration to preserve the demographic balance.

    100% agree.

    We should be pointing