Australasia

[Bridie]

WA's future in Asia: Barnett tells UK

June 9, 2011, 7:47 am


Thanks for the memories Europe, but WA's financial and social future lies in Asia.

That's the line Premier Colin Barnett has delivered to a London audience overnight.

As the mineral-rich state embarks on a growth cycle comparable to the gold rush of the 1890s, a self-confessed parochial boaster Mr Barnett, has again refuted claims his state is "China's quarry".

"Western Australia is not China's quarry. It is the world's leading mining economy with a now rapidly growing petroleum sector," Mr Barnett told an audience at the Menzies Centre for Australian Studies at London's King's College where overnight he delivered the 2011 Menzies Lecture.

"The state is likely to account for over half of Australia's exports by the end of this decade. The once 'Cinderella State', is set to play a role few would have imagined possible just a generation ago."

Flagging some $A300 billion worth of emerging investment projects over the coming five years, Mr Barnett reminded those present that not only is WA the nation's leading exporter, but the world's top mining economy with its strong commodity stores including iron ore, alumina and tantalum.

"As premier, I am very much aware that the current growth cycle is a 'game changer', in the same way as the gold rush of the 1890s and the Pilbara projects of the 1960s," Mr Barnett continued.

"The gold rush connected the state to the rest of Australia and the Pilbara projects connected us to Asia. Both periods were associated with bold thinking and big projects. They have left a legacy of a 'can-do' state with a defiantly independent spirit.

"Today, Western Australians look to their future over the horizon to Asia rather than over the Nullarbor. This is not restricted to business. A Western Australian family is as likely to have a holiday in Bali as on Rottnest Island. We see ourselves as part of Asia."

However taking care not to separate himself too much from the rest of Australia, Mr Barnett pledged his allegiance to the nation in light of the upcoming Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Perth later this year.

"This will be the largest political gathering in Australian history ... The role of the Western Australian Government is to support the Australian Government - we know our place!"

Mr Barnett opened his speech saying he felt honoured and a little daunted to find himself behind the lectern from where former prime minister John Howard and 1990s Victorian premier Jeff Kennett have both given lectures.

His address closed with a look back and to the future.

"While our origins and early days will always connect us to Britain and Europe, and we are proud of that history, our recent past has been shaped by the Asia-Indian Ocean rim. It is here that our future lies."


http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/business/a/-/wa/9608717/was-future-in-asia-barnett-tells-uk/


I've read of unofficial plans for the creation of an Asian-Pacific Union. Basically the same concept as the European Union. I think the ball is well and truly rolling now, from all that I've read in the last couple of years. Interesting days ahead....

[Albion]

Barnett sounds up his own arse. But when it comes to the economy of WA he is probably right, however brown nosing East Asia will do him no favours, other East Asian nations don't give a fuck about other nations, only their own whereas the west is some sort of unspoken alliance.

I heard about this union idea, it may sound good on paper but I doubt it'll achieve half of what the EU has any time soon, there's too many poor areas in SE Asia to hold it back.

[Bridie]

The problem is that while we will benefit (and already are benefitting) in the short-term with such trade/economic relations with Asia (well, China really), the long-term consequence will be that China will own us.




Thanks for the memories Europe, but WA's financial and social future lies in Asia.
I find the reference to our "social future" in this context very disturbing.



"Western Australia is not China's quarry.Yes we are.

More and more China is able to demand low prices for our resources due to our financial dependence on their imports from us. Add to this that the Chinese are buying out a lot of our resource based companies (if not altogether, then (for now) just large proportions of shares) and its pretty obvious who will be in control of West Australia's economy in the future. (And by way of controlling our economy, they will be in a position to control all social and even political aspects of our society also.)


Barnett is a very short-sighted man.


I think good trade relations with Asia are imperative, but we should be very careful not to let the balance of power go to China (which is already happening). I cannot count one-sided trade relations as "good".

If we cannot release ourselves from the quagmire we are in with China, we should look at possibilities to establish closer trade relations with other regions of the world also.

[Mordid]

FUCK YEAH!

[Bridie]

FUCK YEAH!

Thanks for the support Mordid. :blink: :D

[BeerBaron]

Well I'd rather WA be chinas mine than Canada, we have a shit ton of resources that are being opened up too, hopefully ours go to Europe the States and Japan.

[Bridie]

Well I'd rather WA be chinas mine than Canada, we have a shit ton of resources that are being opened up too, hopefully ours go to Europe the States and Japan.You hope so, but demand from those regions is relatively poor (compared to China).

[BeerBaron]

You hope so, but demand from those regions is relatively poor (compared to China).

Ya, you're correct. Typically what happens is Canada will export then the US dollar will go down and the US will ramp up exports, and Canada cannot compete with things like wheat and timber vs the USA. They can just do it cheaper even though theres not a whole lot of timber left in the USA. But Canada is a huge Uranium exporter so that will likely stay with europe japan and usa. Right now, Canada is being held back by the USA, they won't allow much access to the US market for Canadian timber.

[AussieScott]

This is International Geo politics, and there are two paths open to Australia at the moment. The China path or the American path. I hope we choose the American path.

The Pacific Union is obviously following the EU Fabian Socialist agenda, which ultimately will turn Australia into a third world crapola. Bloody commies I tell ya. The American path keeps our national borders and forms an Alliance with USA, Canada, NZ, Japan, South Korea and some parts of South East Asia under a more capitalistic model.

The EU will break apart eventually as the natives get sick of being invaded by North African and Middle East 3rd worlders, if not earlier.

China has already sucked the USA dry, China has its aim set on Europe, so I expect the Euro to crash along with some of there banks eventually.

If Australia did not have what China wants, being minerals and energy, Australia would of been broken well before the USA. Thank the war gods for our minerals, energy and the fact we are on an Island.

I agree Australia has to be extremly careful with the Chinese, our current mob of politicians from the Labor and Liberal branches seem too trusting of China for my liking.

Then again you never know what will happen in China with the riots starting to break out.

[Albion]

This is International Geo politics, and there are two paths open to Australia at the moment. The China path or the American path. I hope we choose the American path.

Following one country isn't a very wise thing to do, don't follow either.


The Pacific Union is obviously following the EU Fabian Socialist agenda, which ultimately will turn Australia into a third world crapola.

That's because Europe has rich countries, Australasia / oceania has Australia and New Zealand as the only rich countries, with a handful more in Asia-Pacific.
But ultimately you would be tying yourselves to the third world.


The American path keeps our national borders and forms an Alliance with USA, Canada, NZ, Japan, South Korea and some parts of South East Asia under a more capitalistic model.

The American path is sitting on the fence. There is no "Amerian path", that so called path is keeping the status quo.


The EU will break apart eventually as the natives get sick of being invaded by North African and Middle East 3rd worlders, if not earlier.

That has little to do directly with the EU, more with the Schengen Treaty and Italy not being able to police their borders.


China has already sucked the USA dry,

All the less reason to follow a declining superpower.


China has its aim set on Europe, so I expect the Euro to crash along with some of there banks eventually.

The EU is their biggest export market, they need us more than we need them and their cheap exports. China could break America but props it up to maintain trade (America is the largest single country as a trade partner).


If Australia did not have what China wants, being minerals and energy, Australia would of been broken well before the USA. Thank the war gods for our minerals, energy and the fact we are on an Island.

I don't think they would have bothered with Australia to be honest.


Then again you never know what will happen in China with the riots starting to break out.

Not riots, economics. They have no chance of bringing their whole population upto a developed level of prosperity and add to this that their exports are getting more expensive, less competitive and that Western business will bugger off elsewhere, then you have a flaw in the logic of China's eternal growth.
However the large internal market will keep them at a decent level of development even if their exports trade collpases. Add to this that Chinese companies are investing around the world, they know what is coming in the next few decades.
A powerful country it will be and will remain, probably a superpower, but they can only maintain it for around 50 years tops.

[AussieScott]

Following one country isn't a very wise thing to do, don't follow either.

I was thinking more of the ANZUS in order to maintain USA military dominance of the South Pacific, not there economic models, particularly there Major Banks. Australia will be beefing up the military assets to make up for the US decline, as well Aus politics have already given the go a head for multiple US military bases up in the North, and a redeployment of our own bases up north, to protect our energy assets. China will have a blue water fleet probably before 2020. China has been rather aggressive lately, and not giving any justification for there military build up. Better to be safe then sorry. Look at the countries with the highest male populations between the ages of 15 and 45, they are the countries more likely to have civil wars or start wars.




That's because Europe has rich countries, Australasia / oceania has Australia and New Zealand as the only rich countries, with a handful more in Asia-Pacific.
But ultimately you would be tying yourselves to the third world.


Tying ourselves to China, and the rise of India will make up for China's stabilization over the next couple of decades. Indonesia will also play a role. Not only that there will probably be a trade alliance between USA, Japan, Australia and China.


The American path is sitting on the fence. There is no "Amerian path", that so called path is keeping the status quo.

Again I thinking more militarily as Australia may have different economic ties, our military is tied to the USA dominance. No doubt the US will be buying our Natural gas in 4 years as both our trucking fleets convert to gas from diesel. Both major trucking companies in the US and Australia have started this process.



That has little to do directly with the EU, more with the Schengen Treaty and Italy not being able to police their borders.

Military circles have been talking about life boat Britain for decades, just in case the world falls to shit. Thank the War gods you live on an Island, as I do.



All the less reason to follow a declining superpower.

They may be declining, yet our defense capabilities are tied together, research if you can the new military equipment that's coming out. The future of war is changing slightly.



The EU is their biggest export market, they need us more than we need them and their cheap exports. China could break America but props it up to maintain trade (America is the largest single country as a trade partner).

If the USA goes down the gurgle so does China and Australia. It's only the mining boom that has kept Australia afloat. I see why so many skilled Brits are migrating here now though. 50% of Brits are employed by your government, I hadn't realized how bad socialism was in the UK, EU.



I don't think they would have bothered with Australia to be honest.

Indonesia was very interested at one stage when the Islamists and communists were conspiring 50 odd years ago, not the land for settlement or agriculture, the vast resources was the main factor, you would be surprised what is in the ground here. The Yanks didn't believe us until they confirmed it with there spy planes 4 years ago. Magnetometers can find marvelous stuff in the ground.


Not riots, economics. They have no chance of bringing their whole population upto a developed level of prosperity and add to this that their exports are getting more expensive, less competitive and that Western business will bugger off elsewhere, then you have a flaw in the logic of China's eternal growth.
However the large internal market will keep them at a decent level of development even if their exports trade collpases. Add to this that Chinese companies are investing around the world, they know what is coming in the next few decades.
A powerful country it will be and will remain, probably a superpower, but they can only maintain it for around 50 years tops.

This is where India comes into the picture, play one off the other, keeps the satus qou.

[El Palleter]

This is International Geo politics, and there are two paths open to Australia at the moment. The China path or the American path. I hope we choose the American path.It is indeed Geopolitics and it is old ones.

It was first Germans who decided that Australia (and New Zealand) should go to Japan. You can find out about it in Haushofer's Dai Nihon ("Greater Japan") and Geopolitik des pazifischen Ozeans ("Geopolitics of the Pacific Ocean"). In fact it was him who motivated and encouraged the Japs to expand into the Ocean Pacific.


GEOPOLITIK: HAUSHOFER, HITLER AND LEBENSRAUM

[...]Haushofer's writings were full of contradictions and ambiguity, steeped in nineteenth-century German philosophy and mysticism, nebulosity instead of the rational scientific discipline that he aspired to create[...]

Haushofer's Career

To understand Haushofer as a theorist and activist, officer and professor, journalist and politician, it is necessary to delve in its multifaceted career. For, Haushofer was formed as much by his environment and activities as by his education and reading. His career spanned Germany history from the birth of the Second Reich to the Götterdämerun of the Third. Born at Munich on 27 August 1869, Haushofer died on 10 March 1946. On 8 August 1896 he had married Martha Mayer-Doss, daughter of Georg Ludwig Mayer, a baptized Sephardic Jew.

The military phase of Haushofer's life began in 1887. Frustrated in his ambition to become an artist or architect, Haushofer joined the Royal Bavarian Army. He graduated third in his class at the Prussian War Academy, in 1900 penning a critical analysis of the battle of Tannenberg (1410) for the General Count Alfred von Schlieffen, Chief of the General Staff. Seven years later, Hauhofer left the Catholic Church when a priest refused to bury his father for the latter's 'earlier liberal political activity'. From 1908 to 1910, Haushofer served as a military observer in Japan. He was so impressed by that island nation's rise as a great power status that, once back at Munich in 1913, he completed and published a book, Dai Nihon (Greater Japan), analyzing early twentieth-century Japan's 'military power potential and future'. The key to success lay in Japan's 'noble race' (Edelrasse), its appreciation of iron leaders, its veneration of the samurai warrior class, and its willingness to use 'just wars' to attain its goals (especially the annexation of Korea in 1910). The book was intended as a counterpoint to Norman Angell's The Great Illusion (1909). It led to a major Leitmotif: the creation of a grand alliance of Japan, Russia, and Germany to counterbalance the Anglo-Saxon maritime powers.

In 1914 Haushofer penned a second project. 'The German Share in the Geographical Opening-Up of Japan and the Sub-Japanese Earth Space, and its Advancement through the Influence of War and Defence Politics', which he submitted to Munich University for his PhD degree (summa cum laude).

Haushofer and Hitler

[...]
Next, Haushofer posited Mackinder's notion of Land Power vs. Sea Power. The land mass Eurasia-Africa –by far the largest, most populous, and richest of all possible combinations– was depicted as the 'pivot' or center of gravity of all human existence. This heartland alone provided the base sufficient for dominant land power and Autarky. On its western, southern and eastern fringes lay a crescent of sea powers –marginal lands with ready access to the oceans. The British Isles and the Japanese Archipelago for Haushofer constituted the two greatest sea powers; he would later add to the list what he termed the 'sluggish' American 'eagle'. The lesser Americas, Black Africa and Australia-New Zealand formed an outer crescent of 'continental islands' to this global geopolitical configuration. Still under the domination of the sea powers, the 'continental islands' could overtime come under the mastery of a heartland state with sufficient sea power to overwhelm the inner crescent. In Haushofer's view, a German-Russian combination –the 'pivotal heartland'– might be able, in conjunction with Japan, to control first the inner crescent of British sea power and finally the outer crescent of 'continental islands'.

Geopolitics, geography, and strategy
Colin S. Gray and Geoffrey Sloan

Haushofer's ideas are far from being creative. He borrows global strategy concepts and ideas from Mackinder (e.g. the German-Russian alliance as a danger was a warning of Mackinder, and so were the concepts of the 'heartland' and of the land and sea powers) and combines them with those of Ratzel (e.g. Lebensraum) continuing with his pan-germanism –ultimately ideologically derived from Hegel and Fichte–, and even Metternich's Mitteleuropa which, coincidentially –or not so– is also picked by the ideological father of the European Union, Coudenhove-Kalergi, the founder of the Pan-Europa. Incidentally also a lover of Japanese samurai nobility, through his aristocratic Japanese mother.

Of course in the XXIst century things have changed a little. Japan does no longer represent a danger, for now, but instead there is China which is of an initial size many times bigger than Japan and with a human force that many times larger.

At the same time, Britain is no longer a key player as a sea power, and its replacement are the U.S. of America...an already declining power only 60 years after its rise.

And there is another player to include today, of a complex geographical position, which is Islam.

As for Germany and Russia, I'd look out on those two big rogue nations. But that's a matter of concern for Europe and not for Australia. At least for now.


This is where India comes into the picture, play one off the other, keeps the satus qou.I am of a similar view with regards to Germany and Russia.

[Bridie]

If Australia did not have what China wants, being minerals and energy, Australia would of been broken well before the USA. Thank the war gods for our minerals, energy and the fact we are on an Island.


I don't think they would have bothered with Australia to be honest.
I'm not sure about that... China still has a problem with massive over-population... a vast, sparcely populated land with potential for farming and industry might be just what they need...

[Albion]

Military circles have been talking about life boat Britain for decades, just in case the world falls to shit. Thank the War gods you live on an Island, as I do.

I do, I only wish the channel was wider, about the distance Iceland is from Britain, a similar space between us and the continent would be nice. :D


I see why so many skilled Brits are migrating here now though. 50% of Brits are employed by your government, I hadn't realized how bad socialism was in the UK, EU.

Yes, its very bad - it is mainly in Scotland, Wales and some urban areas of Northern England.
Basically the areas that always vote Labour are the areas which rely on the public sector a lot, they vote Labour because Labour are the one's who allowed this to happen.
It is more a Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish than UK problem, the real public sector of the UK as a whole is around 20% to 25%, this becomes 25% in Scotland, 30% in Northern Ireland and 28% in Wales - now do you see why English Nationalists bang on about paying taxes that go straight to the Celts?

It was allowed to get so bad under Labour, the Tories especially believe in small government whereas Labour tends to be large, interfering government. Labour used it as a quick fix when these problem areas rates of unemployment went up, now it can't be sustained.
Northern England is fairly public sector dependent in areas too but England would be better if it only had it's own public sector workers to support, we make up 85% of the people and 90% of the economy and so fund the UK despite whatever crap Scottish Nationalists tell you about their country being "self sufficient".


This is where India comes into the picture, play one off the other, keeps the satus qou.

I don't think that'll work, India and China will be weary so as not to step on each other's toes.

[Albion]

I'm not sure about that... China still has a problem with massive over-population... a vast, sparcely populated land with potential for farming and industry might be just what they need...

I think they'll expand west into the interior of China and North into Mongolia and Russia before Australia. They are commencing massive irrigation projects to bring water all around the country, it is possible that one day they could settle Western China on a large scale.

[Bridie]

I think they'll expand west into the interior of China and North into Mongolia and Russia before Australia. They are commencing massive irrigation projects to bring water all around the country, it is possible that one day they could settle Western China on a large scale.I have to admit, on reflection, that would certainly would make more sense. :thumb001: :)

[El Palleter]

I'm not sure about that... China still has a problem with massive over-population... a vast, sparcely populated land with potential for farming and industry might be just what they need...It's not a problem for China but an asset for strategical deployment of human resources.

It's a problem for others though.

[Bridie]

It's not a problem for China but an asset for strategical deployment of human resources.

It's a problem for others though.I think it will become that, if it isn't on its way already... I guess those who came up with the One Child Policy of China weren't as forward thinking as they would have thought themselves to be at the time.

But here is where India, with its higher birthrate (still well above replacement level, unlike the whole of the first world and some of the developing world, of which China is a part), rapidly growing population and large proportion of young people over older people has the upper hand over China.


With an English-speaking culture and a commitment to higher ecucation, India is making the one product that will be in short supply globally - a well-educated, English-speaking, young workforce. In the next 40 years India alone will produce another 400 million workers and that, as Peter McDonald points out, is enough to satisfy the shortage of workers that will be experienced across the world.

India will be the nursery of the world. It will provide the world with workers for much of the 21st century.

Macken, Deirdre, Oh no, we forgot to have children : how declining birth rates are reshaping our society, Allen & Unwin, Australia.

[Albion]

I think it will become that, if it isn't on its way already... I guess those who came up with the One Child Policy of China weren't as forward thinking as they would have thought themselves to be at the time.

But here is where India, with its higher birthrate (still well above replacement level, unlike the whole of the first world and some of the developing world, of which China is a part), rapidly growing population and large proportion of young people over older people has the upper hand over China.



Macken, Deirdre, Oh no, we forgot to have children : how declining birth rates are reshaping our society, Allen & Unwin, Australia.

Don't worry about India too much. They're sustaining such a large population on self-sufficient agriculture dependent on a millennia old aquifer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquifer) which is being depleted at an alarming rate and far beyond what nature can refill.

They will continue to have a massive population, but thoughts that their population can overtake that of China aren't taking into account the limited carrying capacity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrying_capacity) of the land.

Soon their only option will be to harvest the Northern rivers and the Ganges but the glaciers aren't releasing as much water from the Himalayas as they used to.
The tropical North East of India could be a source of water but not much and Indian agriculture depends on abundant irrigation as does Australian.

[Logan]

I've read of unofficial plans for the creation of an Asian-Pacific Union. Basically the same concept as the European Union. I think the ball is well and truly rolling now, from all that I've read in the last couple of years. Interesting days ahead....

Right. And bloody oblivion.

Nice tune, but...

ejorQVy3m8E

Worse than the EU.

[Bridie]

Don't worry about India too much. They're sustaining such a large population on self-sufficient agriculture dependent on a millennia old aquifer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquifer) which is being depleted at an alarming rate and far beyond what nature can refill.

They will continue to have a massive population, but thoughts that their population can overtake that of China aren't taking into account the limited carrying capacity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrying_capacity) of the land.

Soon their only option will be to harvest the Northern rivers and the Ganges but the glaciers aren't releasing as much water from the Himalayas as they used to.
The tropical North East of India could be a source of water but not much and Indian agriculture depends on abundant irrigation as does Australian.
The point was that as the first world (with falling numbers of their own population and a growing number of elderly compared with youth - all due to prolonged sub-replacement birthrates) runs out of workers, it will be Indians who will migrate to their countries en masse to fill the gaps in their workforces.

In other words, India doesn't need to have land and resources to sustain a large population... they will simply spread themselves across the globe. In that case, it will follow that India will gain world dominance.

In regards to India being dependent on self-sufficient agriculture... well, increasingly they're reaping the financial benefits of foreign companies offshoring to India.

[Bridie]

Right. And bloody oblivion.

Nice tune, but...

ejorQVy3m8E

Worse than the EU.

Aboriginal rights are worse than the EU? :confused:

[Albion]

The point was that as the first world (with falling numbers of their own population and a growing number of elderly compared with youth - all due to prolonged sub-replacement birthrates) runs out of workers, it will be Indians who will migrate to their countries en masse to fill the gaps in their workforces.

In other words, India doesn't need to have land and resources to sustain a large population... they will simply spread themselves across the globe. In that case, it will follow that India will gain world dominance.

In regards to India being dependent on self-sufficient agriculture... well, increasingly they're reaping the financial benefits of foreign companies offshoring to India.

Yes, the West really needs to get birth rates up so that we have our own people to do the jobs and don't have to import rubbish.

[AussieScott]

I'm not sure about that... China still has a problem with massive over-population... a vast, sparcely populated land with potential for farming and industry might be just what they need...

Honestly I'd be more worried about India and Pakistan then China. China is more of a deflective excuse to prepare for what is probably coming. Problem is China hasn't picked a side yet. I'm confident China will pick the right side.

Australia had 8% arable land now it's down to 6% due to salinity, erosion, I bet in the years to come it will be less due to mining. At present we produce food for 70 million people. The main attractant is energy and mineral assets. The elite have some nasty ways of sorting out over population, particularly when the 15 to 45 male ratio is out of whack. Think about fighting men set and crafted for a purpose.

[Bridie]

Honestly I'd be more worried about India and Pakistan then China. I agree, for reasons I stated above. :p

[AussieScott]

I do, I only wish the channel was wider, about the distance Iceland is from Britain, a similar space between us and the continent would be nice. :D

It sure would be. It makes me wonder if SHTF, would the British elite have the balls to say no, and give the Bang, bang, bang, response? If you no what I mean.


Yes, its very bad - it is mainly in Scotland, Wales and some urban areas of Northern England.
Basically the areas that always vote Labour are the areas which rely on the public sector a lot, they vote Labour because Labour are the one's who allowed this to happen.
It is more a Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish than UK problem, the real public sector of the UK as a whole is around 20% to 25%, this becomes 25% in Scotland, 30% in Northern Ireland and 28% in Wales - now do you see why English Nationalists bang on about paying taxes that go straight to the Celts?



It was allowed to get so bad under Labour, the Tories especially believe in small government whereas Labour tends to be large, interfering government. Labour used it as a quick fix when these problem areas rates of unemployment went up, now it can't be sustained.
Northern England is fairly public sector dependent in areas too but England would be better if it only had it's own public sector workers to support, we make up 85% of the people and 90% of the economy and so fund the UK despite whatever crap Scottish Nationalists tell you about their country being "self sufficient".

We have the same rot in our government now, they waste money and grow bureaucracy and welfare state to keep the votes. It makes it very hard to dislodge the bastards until they have ruined the economy and social fabric of a nation.



I don't think that'll work, India and China will be weary so as not to step on each other's toes.

It already is in play my friend. India and China hate each other, a very ancient hate, not only that India has a distrust of us due to our commonwealth colonial past . They know they need us more than we need them, we can become self sufficient if we wish, yet Geo politically that is not wise. India has very little material resources left, they will never rise out of poverty with out us. Unless they invade, which I think is more of a possibility then China.

[AussieScott]

I think they'll expand west into the interior of China and North into Mongolia and Russia before Australia. They are commencing massive irrigation projects to bring water all around the country, it is possible that one day they could settle Western China on a large scale.

Agreed. I think when the west leaves the Middle East, and China and Russia then fills the vacuum, Middle Eastern countries may be begging for western countries to come back.

[AussieScott]

The point was that as the first world (with falling numbers of their own population and a growing number of elderly compared with youth - all due to prolonged sub-replacement birthrates) runs out of workers, it will be Indians who will migrate to their countries en masse to fill the gaps in their workforces.

In other words, India doesn't need to have land and resources to sustain a large population... they will simply spread themselves across the globe. In that case, it will follow that India will gain world dominance.

In regards to India being dependent on self-sufficient agriculture... well, increasingly they're reaping the financial benefits of foreign companies offshoring to India.


Oh they will try, but in reality the amount of people they want to export will back fire on them as there will not be enough jobs or economic growth for the first world to adopt them. They will be gutted having to go to Africa and other poorer nations of minor and major Asia.

Look at the mess Indian student immigration had in Australia, the government was forced into a back down, much to India's displeasure. Hence India's play of the Racist card, victim mentality, and bleating on for paying for past wrongs of colonialism. In the end two wrongs don't make a right. Is that two wong's don't make a white. :D (Couldn't think of appropriate Indian name)

[Bridie]

Oh they will try, but in reality the amount of people they want to export will back fire on them as there will not be enough jobs or economic growth for the first world to adopt them. There could be economic growth in the first world if industrious countries have enough of a cheap labour force to sustain it. (And since they won't be able to source a significant proportion of that labour force from their own nationals, cheap workers will be easy enough to come by and are likely to end up with more of a voice than local workers in the long-term, since economies will become dependent on them.)

[Logan]

Aboriginal rights are worse than the EU? :confused:

Aboriginal people ought to make their way as do any other people.

A union with Asia would be similar to Britian's within the EU. I care little for either, and much less for the first.

Better?

[Bridie]

A union with Asia would be similar to Britian's within the EU. I care little for either, and much less for the first.

Better?

Oh yes, agreed. An Asia-Pacific Union would no doubt be the same concept as the EU. One currency, no borders, one or two countries that dominate affairs and decision making processes for the entire Union... it's a scary thought! :eek:

[AussieScott]

There could be economic growth in the first world if industrious countries have enough of a cheap labour force to sustain it. (And since they won't be able to source a significant proportion of that labour force from their own nationals, cheap workers will be easy enough to come by and are likely to end up with more of a voice than local workers in the long-term, since economies will become dependent on them.)

Remember the birth of the Labor party and the so called "White Australia policy" it's pretty much a noticeable influx of cheap Chinese workers that cemented this into fruition. It's a real pity Pauline Hanson had not started her party today rather than the 90's, as she would probably win with in a landslide.

In my area Indians on student Visas were rocking up to small businesses offering to work for half the wages of the Aussies, and being arrogant enough to suggest firing the Aussies. This disease came up to Qld from Vic. By then the government was forced to tighten up on student visas, much to the fraudulent student colleges dismay.

Your right the more European hating immigrants that gain citizenship the more pull they will have.

Enoch Powell "Rivers of Blood".

[Albion]

Agreed. I think when the west leaves the Middle East, and China and Russia then fills the vacuum, Middle Eastern countries may be begging for western countries to come back.

I'd rather have East Asian nations bordering Greece than the current ones.

[Bridie]

I'd rather have East Asian nations bordering Greece than the current ones.
Why is that? (Oftentimes I think that Europeans are so far removed from East Asians (if only geographcially) that they are unrealistic about them.)

[Albion]

Why is that? (Oftentimes I think that Europeans are so far removed from East Asians (if only geographcially) that they are unrealistic about them.)

Because Europe and the Muslim nations have always been uneasy neighbours, East Asians are generally decent and with a similar level of development but not the same as Europeans.

[Bridie]

Because Europe and the Muslim nations have always been uneasy neighbours, East Asians are generally decent and with a similar level of development but not the same as Europeans.:eek: Similar level of development? :no000000:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/59/2010_UNDP_Human_Development_Report_Quartiles_.png/800px-2010_UNDP_Human_Development_Report_Quartiles_.png

(Throughout most areas of East Asia, sanitation is so poor that it is not safe to drink or wash food in water without boiling it first. Obviously, Japan is a big exception here. Hygiene standards there are immaculate.)

As for being decent... well, if you call an area where many countries have extraordinarily high levels of child slavery, sex slavery, prostitution, "organ harvesting" (people abducted and killed for their organs to sell) and other organised crime decent, then sure. They're pretty decent alrighty!!

And muslims well... you probably aren't aware that much of SE Asia has a muslim majority...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/15/Muslim_majority_countries2.png/800px-Muslim_majority_countries2.png
^ Map of muslim majority countries.


Islamist terror groups in some areas of SE Asia are a constant threat...

http://www.amazon.com/Islamism-Terrorist-Influence-Nations-Central/dp/1590848349

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Bali_bombings

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Bali_bombings

[Albion]

:eek: Similar level of development? :no000000:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/59/2010_UNDP_Human_Development_Report_Quartiles_.png/800px-2010_UNDP_Human_Development_Report_Quartiles_.png

(Throughout most areas of East Asia, sanitation is so poor that it is not safe to drink or wash food in water without boiling it first. Obviously, Japan is a big exception here. Hygiene standards there are immaculate.)

As for being decent... well, if you call an area where many countries have extraordinarily high levels of child slavery, sex slavery, prostitution, "organ harvesting" (people abducted and killed for their organs to sell) and other organised crime decent, then sure. They're pretty decent alrighty!!

And muslims well... you probably aren't aware that much of SE Asia has a muslim majority...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/15/Muslim_majority_countries2.png/800px-Muslim_majority_countries2.png
^ Map of muslim majority countries.


Islamist terror groups in some areas of SE Asia are a constant threat...

http://www.amazon.com/Islamism-Terrorist-Influence-Nations-Central/dp/1590848349

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Bali_bombings

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Bali_bombings

Maybe I phrased that wrong, what I meant was culture and civilisation. Civilisation is there in East Asia, it is obscured by the vast amounts of poverty stricken people. I doubt it exists in the Middle East any more, many nations there are rich from oil and other resources, otherwise they'd resemble East Asia. Yemen is a good example.

SE Asia is Muslim I know and is even home to the largest Muslim nation, but by East Asia a mean more China, Taiwan, Japan, the Koreas and the outpost of Singapore.