-
I'm not sure I quite follow the argument. I think more often than not, the idea is to create the opposite of a brain drain (which, after all, is generally recognised to be a bad thing when it comes to e.g. 3rd world countries) by letting only people with a certain skill level in.
The policy is designed to placate people who, amongst other things, think foreigners are stealing jobs from them. That particular score point means "It's ok for forrins to steal the good jobs, we're just protecting the shit jobs for you shit people".
The Kippers don't like Indian software consultants coming here any more than they like Indian schoolteachers. If they think it through, they shouldn't like that particular scoring mechanism. But since they mostly think non-white forrins aren't capable of the smart jobs, they probably won't think that far.
They only used points because for some reason people fetishize the idea of "Australian points based system".
@andyfallsoff But points means it's meritocratic!
-
The policy is likely based on the data Cummings and his cronies have pulled together. It’s a response to public opinion on the net cost of migrants (which varies across skill level).
I agree that ingrained xenophobia is a major motivation for Leavers but constantly presenting the least-charitable version of the Leaver argument is useless and turns this thread into a boring echo chamber.
I'm not sure I quite follow the argument. I think more often than not, the idea is to create the opposite of a brain drain (which, after all, is generally recognised to be a bad thing when it comes to e.g. 3rd world countries) by letting only people with a certain skill level in.
However, all they need to do is to designate something a 'shortage occupation' and that limit falls away anyway. And in actual fact, this is likely to happen for all the relevant types of 'occupation' anyway, no?
Not really making an argument either way here myself, I was just summarising what that 'point system' translates to.