Tampilkan postingan dengan label asia. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label asia. Tampilkan semua postingan

Minggu, 08 Agustus 2010

Asylum Seeking Is Not a Major Problem for Australia

Asylum seekers aren't the problem, those coming to Australia by air are increasing the population. The Government has put the shutter up on these applicants and net arrivals have fallen from 60,000 to 32,700 in a year. A massive 81,440 have "spit the dummy" and left to live elsewhere. When the door was open for Indians studying here to easily gain residency the future looked bleak. New Indians arriving has slowed by a third. But only 5.45 percent of Indians who study here go home. In the long term, however, they will probably have to leave. Only those doing higher degrees will be in the "required labour" category. This is not a racist view. A loop hole had to be closed.

There seems to be a general downturn not related to the crackdown. Arrivals from New Zealand fell by 40 per cent and from Britain 23.5 per cent. It is notable that permanent migrants fell by 11 per cent. People are "human" if something they want is going to be difficult most give up. Antipodeans are keeping things to themselves: the main category of migrants are from New Zealand.

As time goes by there is not much doubt that Australia will become much more Asian than it is now. Despite India being a major source of permanent migrants, comprising 15,600 of total, immigration from China was 16,600. To put the whole thing into perspective 4,450 new settlers were Sri Lankans. This is the highest ever. Nonetheless, asylum seeking from that country is not a great problem for Australia.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Selasa, 02 Maret 2010

European Skull Found In New Zealand Dating before British Arrival

Captain Cook discovered Australia for Britain in 1770. If you believe this you are living in dreamland. The Portuguese took Malacca, a small Malaysian state, in 1511. Spain controlled part of the Philippines from 1521. Indonesia welcomed the Netherlands from 1596 and the Southeast Asian country was later ruled by the Dutch from 1825. France sent emissaries to Siam in 1600.

The question is did any of the sailors from these countries land in Australia before the British arrived in Singapore in 1819: note Britain had been around in India since 1612. It is obvious that Dutch sailors landed on the north coast of Australia because Indonesia is just next door. Why didn't they claim it? Why didn't Portugal claim it? The Portuguese colonized East Timor from 1613 and that is even closer. The truth is they didn't want it because they couldn't find any advanced societies there. No trade was on offer. In those days trade was everything. There was no welfare state in those days. You had to earn or starve. Seeing a few Aboriginals along the beaches and cliffs, they took on water and left.

What is surprising it that no real evidence of Europeans being in the Antipodes has been found - until now. The skull of a European woman has been found in Wellington, New Zealand. Carbon dating shows she was alive there in 1742. Dating is now very accurate. This settles the dispute about Aboriginals having genes for red hair. The gene definitely came from Europeans who landed in Australia, before the red-haired Aboriginals were discovered.

So Europeans had visited New Zealand before Captain Cook "discovered" it in 1769. It was claimed for Britain in 1839, first being ruled from New South Wales. Then the whole country was claimed by Britain in 1840.

Getting back to the skull. When first found police thought they had a murder on their hands when they saw puncture wounds. The woman must have arrived there by "independent' means, probably by a European ship sailing at the captain's whim. Abel Tasman saw the shore of New Zealand in 1642 but had no women aboard his ship. Why did it take Europeans another century to search for the great southern land again?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .