
Australia hasn't had a recession for over 25 years - astdb
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-30/as-australia-eyes-victory-on-growth-its-spoils-look-bittersweet
======
spangry
There's a few reasons, and most of them don't bode well for the future:

\- Since the early 2000s, there has been an unprecedented spike in the price
of natural resources like iron ore ([http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2015/11/C...](http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2015/11/Capture185.png)). Australia is a resource rich country
and so has enjoyed a significant, but temporary, increase in national income
as a result.

\- The above has had a number of unfortunate (but avoidable) long-term effects
on the Australian economy: high demand for Australian natural resources meant
high demand for Australian dollars, so the dollar appreciated. This hollowed
out the economy as most non-mining export facing businesses were ruined by
this. Australia's car manufacturing industry is dead, for instance. This could
have been managed by taxing rents from natural resources and placing that
money in a sovereign wealth fund (i.e. a fund that invests in assets
denominated in non-Aus currencies). But we didn't do this because we're
idiots.

\- The government that presided over the majority of this 'mining boom' (i.e.
John Howard and co) acted as if those historically unprecedented prices were
the 'new normal'. Accordingly, they passed a number of budget measures that
placed the Commonwealth budget into permanent structural deficit. The IMF
conducted a cross-country study of fiscal spending for the last 200 years in
2013. In Australia's case it found that there have been 3 periods of 'fiscal
profligacy': 1 during Whitlam (in the 70s) and 2 during Howard.[0][1] However
many Australians continue to buy in to the myth that John Howard was a 'great
economic manager'.

\- Howard's government also changed how residential real estate is taxed for
property investors. Specifically, he made it more concessional for the rich,
and created stronger incentives to 'flip' houses after 1 year to maximise the
tax benefit.[2]

\- So Australians took all this new income, and sweet tax breaks, and poured
it all into speculative investment in residential real-estate. [3][4][5] Out
housing markets (especially in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane) are investment
bubbles just waiting for some external shock to pop them. The mining boom is
also winding down, so less national income to keep the ponzi going. In terms
of private debt, we are now one of the most indebted nations in the world.

\- We've also kept the housing / nominal GDP ponzi by having insanely high
immigration levels, unprecedented by historical standards. Of course, this had
to be sold carefully because Australia is a fairly racist country. So, our
previous Prime Minister John Howard made a big show of brutalising refugees,
while at the same time quietly opening the immigration floodgates [6][7][8].

\- With the mining boom ending and the continuation of high immigration, our
major cities are reaching crush capacity. Infrastructure and education
spending have not come even close to keeping up. This has kept house prices
levitating for the moment, but this can't last forever. It has also reduced
quality of life and employee wages and share of production surplus [9][10]

So that's how Australia has managed to avoid a nominal recession for the past
25 years: by running the world's most successful ponzi scheme. But as windfall
natural resource income dries up, international lenders stop lending to our
banks, and high immigration becomes a mass exodus, our enormous property
market bubble will explode leaving us with only a bunch of long dead
industries (like manufacturing) and piles of debt. Basically a replay of the
1890s recession in Australia, which was one of the main drivers of federation.

So I guess we'll be invading New Zealand soon.

[0]
[https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/cat/longres.aspx?sk=40222....](https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/cat/longres.aspx?sk=40222.0)

[1] [http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/hey-
bi...](http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/hey-big-spender-
howard-the-king-of-the-loose-purse-strings-20130110-2cj32.html)

[2] [http://i.imgur.com/4VUGfPz.png](http://i.imgur.com/4VUGfPz.png)

[3] [https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2017/03/...](https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2017/03/Australian-house-values-to-Income-660x504.jpg)

[4] [http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2016/12/S...](http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2016/12/ScreenHunter_16592-Dec.-09-11.46-660x463.jpg)

[5] [http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2016/11/S...](http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2016/11/ScreenHunter_16297-Nov.-23-17.16-660x427.jpg)

[6] [http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2017/02/S...](http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2017/02/ScreenHunter_17403-Feb.-13-11.51-660x465.jpg)

[7] [https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2017/03/...](https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2017/03/Australian-population-change.jpg)

[8] [http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2017/02/S...](http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2017/02/ScreenHunter_17401-Feb.-13-11.51-660x489.jpg)

[9] [https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2017/03/...](https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2017/03/Australian-workers-falling-share.jpg)

[10] [https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2016/11/...](https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2016/11/ScreenHunter_16336-Nov.-25-10.57.jpg)

~~~
contingencies
I would add to that the generally venture-hostile environment (relatively
small population, high overheads, few institutional VCs) has created a static
economy typified by the options available to young people even after tertiary
education: work for a big established company to get by in a large city
(though even with a professional partner you'll never afford a house in 30
years), go overseas, or go broke.

(Full disclosure: I left 20 years ago)

~~~
jacques_chester
I think the lack of venture is more complex than that; a mix of culture and
regulation.

There are only 23 million odd Australians, but there is well north of $2
_trillion_ AUD in our superannuation accounts.

Assuming they applied 0.5% of that towards VC, you'd be looking at $10bn AUD
of available capital. At least one order of magnitude more than is currently
present.

Also, last I checked, stock-based comp in Australia is tax-disadvantageous. I
can't recall if it was FBT or something else.

~~~
glenngillen
I'd say that from a pure opportunity cost perspective the performance of
property & mining alone is justification for the lack of VC in Australia.

If simple well understood businesses (dig up rocks or buy land and build) can
return > 10% YoY, why would any intelligent investor poor money into an asset
class that has underperformed that in the same period?

~~~
jacques_chester
Yet the VC lifecycle is very much like the mining lifecycle.

Exploration, drilling, construction, exploitation. The early stages cost
millions and often lead to failure, with the occasional profitable case and
rare super-profitable discoveries. Scaling up costs major capital, after
which, prices allowing, a mine can be a cash cow.

------
bootload
_" Australia’s banking regulator further tightened lending curbs Friday to try
to cool investor demand for residential property that’s helped drive up
prices. Data released hours later showed investor lending increased 6.7
percent in February from a year earlier, the fastest growth in 12 months."_

No mention of the ^Elephant in the room^ with respect to real-state and
housing: transparency in financing property. [0]

Reference

[0] _" Corruption and Property Laundering"_
[https://www.prosper.org.au/2017/03/30/corruption-and-
propert...](https://www.prosper.org.au/2017/03/30/corruption-and-property-
laundering/)

~~~
mmerlin
Australia is the world's worst (best?) country for laundering money through
property

[https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2017/03/report-australia-
wo...](https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2017/03/report-australia-worlds-worst-
money-laundering-property-market/)

------
partiallypro
Australia is a commodity driven economy with two neighbors that have had
explosive growth and an insatiable lust for commodities over the past 25 years
(India and China.)

~~~
cylinder
India has hardly come online as a trade partner, only recently. Before China
it was Japan. Before Japan it was the US and UK. Maybe next it's Outer
Space?!! There's been some new story, who knows how many more.

------
phillc73
> Australia’s last recession -- defined locally as two straight quarters of
> contraction -- occurred in 1991

Aah yes, the recession we had to have. [1]

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_1990s_recession_in_Austr...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_1990s_recession_in_Australia#.22The_recession_we_had_to_have.22)

~~~
nailer
Comments like this are why I left Australia: many Australians believe Paul
Keating caused the worldwide recession of the early 90s, or the hyperinflation
of the 80s, based on Keating pointing out that the recession was a necessary
correction. It is a _very_ inward looking country.

~~~
jacques_chester
It's hard to be sanguine if you're beggared or bankrupted.

Keating being right, and Keating phrasing it as he did, are different things.

------
perilunar
We need one soon though. The housing market is a massive bubble that needs
deflating.

~~~
2muchcoffeeman
What is the reasoning behind this sort of opinion?

If the economy keeps doing well, wouldn't salaries increase?

Couldn't the government invest more in less populated areas around the capital
cities so that living in those areas becomes more feasible?

Why have a recession?

~~~
cyberferret
I live in Northern Australia, one of the most expensive cities to live in
within the country (exceeding even Sydney in a lot of cases), and salaries
have absolutely NOT increased to match the rate of real estate pricing.

Sure in some niche jobs (mining sector etc.) there are positions paying
massive money ($100K+) to young kids just out of school or an apprenticeship,
but overall, in the government sector and small business, the disparity is
widening at an alarming rate.

I honestly have no idea how young couples starting out today even are able to
afford a small two bedroom unit without BOTH of them being in high paying
jobs. I think we will surely see population growth slowing as there is pretty
much no way young couples can have a baby and have one parent off work for up
to a year to care for the baby, AND own/rent a house/apartment.

Our city is seeing a massive exodus of people, heading south for cheaper
pastures - so much so that they (our state government) are holding crisis
community meetings to try and ascertain how they can get people to stay. We
are talking people who have been here for generations too, not just your
average 'fly in fly out' workers.

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
I used to live in Adelaide. There's no way I could afford to buy a house
anywhere I actually wanted to live.

Some out of the ordinary life circumstances arose, and I ended up moving to
Launceston in Tasmania. I was able to buy a house in an area I wanted to live
in here for $215,000. I can't fathom taking on twice that on, even on dual
incomes, that sort of loan would make me feel ill.

My job is in metal fabrication, the past 12 months have been _much_ slower
than the previous 10 years, things have slowed down a great deal.

~~~
cyberferret
I've visited Tasmania a few times and LOVE Launceston. Would move there in a
heartbeat, but the trick is, if things don't work out, we could never, EVER
afford to move back here. I have older parents etc. still living here, so can
see that we might have to either stay, or work out some sort of cunning plan
to try and share time between the two locations.

$215,000 wouldn't even buy you a 1 bedroom squat here. I could probably sell
my place and buy a BIG place in Launceston, but like I said, if it ever came
that we had to move back here to care for elders, it won't be possible at all.

~~~
gonzo41
Hey give it a go renting, I moved to Tassie for a year and that turned into 5.
Hobart is awesome and before I bought my place 7 minutes from the CBD for
330K, I used to rent a place for 250 a week. And now my mortgage payments are
still less than what I was paying for a townhouse in Canberra. Locals think
its expensive, but play the long game with Tassie and things are looking good.

------
cyphar
Not surprising, given that our economy is effectively backed by China. Of
course, that means the probability of us getting out of coal is not very high
in the short-term (mining is still a huge employer here, and we export >50% of
our coal to East Asia).

~~~
XorNot
It's fine we'll be set for when they want uranium too.

~~~
cyphar
China is heavily investing in solar, not fission (at least from what I've
heard). And I don't think that Australia has a strong edge on the iridium
market (it's already super-rare) or the silicon market (we already have
problems with beach erosion, so mining silicon = very bad for condos in
Sydney).

------
researcher11
I escaped that ponzi scheme 10 years ago and moved to way more affordable San
Francisco. It was cheaper then and still is.

~~~
ionwake
How are you finding living in sf compared to Sydney ?

~~~
researcher11
If I had $10M I'd move back to Sydney. It's a nicer city. I do data science /
machine learning and for work there is no comparison, SF is where it is at. I
had to leave SF because I wanted to be a contractor and none of the visa
options would allow it. I have recently moved on to a cheap tax haven (Boquete
Panama) where I work remotely and get paid the same. My margins are so good
here that I only have to work 1-2 days a month. I'm quazi retired at 31 and
could never go back to normal working. I get to be very picky about what I
work on and spend a lot of my time studying things that I'm interested in. I
highly recommend this lifestyle to others.

~~~
ionwake
What site do you use to find your remote contracts? Have you got a portfolio I
can look at?

~~~
researcher11
It's via friends I made in SF. If you want to do something similar I'd
recommend doing a long stint in SF first. Get any job you can and then switch
once you know some people. I try to keep anonomous in general so no portfolio.

~~~
ionwake
ok thx

------
jakozaur
The only other OECD developed country which has similar 20+ years period
without recession is Poland. Even more impressive Australia population
increases, while Poland population stays flat.

~~~
haihaibye
Why isn't it easier with population growth? GDP isn't adjusted by population,
so even if the amount per person goes down (as it has been recently), so long
as the total amount doesn't - no recession!

~~~
jakozaur
Excuse me, but I meant what you said. With population growth it's easier to
have GDP growth. If population is flat, you actually need to make ppl more
productive: wages need to increase, company profits, etc.

With newcomers, even if productivity per person decreases you still can have
GDP growth.

------
paulpauper
Surprised no one has noticed this: Australia' "boom" has less to do with
mining and organic growth and more to do with its falling currency . When
growth is converted back into US dollars, it shows contraction beginning in
2013 and again in 2009

[http://www.tradingeconomics.com/australia/gdp](http://www.tradingeconomics.com/australia/gdp)

------
chvid
Australia benefits enormously from migration from China (and nearby Asian
countries) which happens via investment, the job market and the higher
education system.

These immigrants are in general well-educated and wealthy.

This is unlike migration to Europe which happens thru the asylum system and
for most parts sends the immigrants directly into the welfare system.

------
nrki
Ah, but it's former powerhouse natural resources state - Western Australia -
is now in a recession.

------
joelthelion
Unfortunately that growth is unsustainable as it is based on very high
emissions.

~~~
catmanjan
Yep, international money in the housing market is forgivable, but there is no
way they should have allowed such massive investments in the new coal mines.

------
flukus
We've had recessions, we've had a few in the last decade. It's been masked by
immigration though, the economy has grown in absolute terms but that growth
has been spread thinner.

~~~
spangry
This is correct. Unfortunately neither of the two 'mainstream' political
parties in Australia want to even say the word 'immigration'. Even though it's
a perfectly legitimate concern that the electorate has. End result: Pauline
Hanson [0].

[0] For our American friends, Pauline Hanson is a famous racist politician in
Australia. She has recently made a political comeback.

~~~
flukus
It's greens (left wing ultra progressive) policy too, just way down their list
of priorities.

~~~
spangry
Indeed. The great irony there is that their main constituents (i.e. inner-city
young professionals) are the ones who are copping the worst effects of high,
unending immigration (e.g. congestion, lower public transport availability,
lowered housing affordability etc.)

If they don't stop listening to the Sarah-Hanson Youngs in their party, and
start listening to the more rational Scott Ludlams, then this issue will lead
to their 'democrats' moment very soon.

EDIT: I also can't understand why either Labor or the Greens don't take the
very obvious political opportunity right in front of them. They should
essentially pull a reverse John Howard by increasing our refugee intake, move
processing on-shore (or even start a community release program), and
drastically cut 'regular' immigration intake levels while they work with State
governments to stabilise infrastructure, energy and education.

Seems like a no-brainer to me. Good policy _and_ good politics combined is a
rare thing.

~~~
sien
Polls might help you understand why Australian politicians do what they do on
immigration.

Only 28% of Australians want more refugees:

[http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/05/17/most-
australia...](http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/05/17/most-australians-
against-boosting-refugee-intake-despite-eu-crisis-poll)

A clear majority of Australians 69% (up 11%) support immigration (of 210,000
in 2013/14) remaining the same 37% (down 10%) or increasing 32% (up 21%) while
26% (down 14%) want immigration levels reduced and 5% (up 3%) can’t say.

[http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/6507-australian-
immigratio...](http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/6507-australian-immigration-
population-october-2015-201510200401)

Given that the intersection of the groups who want more refugees and lower
immigration is likely to be small it's clear that what Australian politicians
are doing is pretty close to what Australians, when polled, would like.

~~~
flukus
Worth remembering is that Howard's magic stroke was to confuse the issue
between refugees and immigration. A lot of people were angry we had 300k "boat
people" a year, but never realised it was a handful of boat people and 290k
legal immigrants.

I despise the man but it was a political master stroke.

~~~
spangry
100% agreed. It was a stroke of Machiavellian genius (or 'rat cunning', as
others might put it). He managed to sell us down the river with nary a peep of
resistance. At the time it seemed that most were actually cheering him on.

------
dmix
The documentary they linked to about the Australian recession during the
Hawke-Keating years is very interesting:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iM35CXyPh7M](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iM35CXyPh7M)

I don't know much about Aussie politics but I found it interesting as someone
who reads a lot about economics.

The 80s/90s were a very interesting time for capitalism as globalism was just
beginning and the large role of the state in the economy was being solidified.

------
rukuu001
Hah, they said "property bubble."

Would like to know if that was from their own reading of the numbers or just
repeating one of the story's local sources.

~~~
cyberferret
Just curious - you don't think housing prices are too high in Australia? At
least when compared to local wages?

To me it seems like a giant house of cards, waiting for the just little breeze
to bring it toppling down. And I am not speaking from a point of chagrin here
- I own my own home and am glad that it is valued at what it is now, but I
also know that it is crazy, and really, should housing prices be going up at
something like $100,000 per year?? Because that is what is happening here...

~~~
tajen
Every city in the world believe they're in a housing bubble. People can't just
fathom the fact that there are many, many people richer than them, and the
fact they can't afford a house is just that they don't earn enough compared to
their neighbors.

It's especially good to say "housing bubble" because it sounds smart as a
market analysis from someone who has a lot of data, and it can only be proven
wrong years later (when the comment is long gone) when the bubble is not
burst, proving the new housing prices just reflect your neighbors' average
wealth. "but the bubble is around the corner", they'll still say. Every city
in the world.

Housing prices grow according to people's wealth; there are also more and more
people in every city, that increases the pressure on prices and it's rarely a
bubble.

~~~
falsedan
Downvoting for the massive sense of entitlement shown, which is high even for
HN!

Lots of global cities do have bubbles from foreign investment parking wealth
in property, driving up prices and squeezing out locals looking to buy. Here's
how it works:

Foreign investors buy luxury properties

Top-tier locals can't buy luxury properties, buy the next highest property
class

Second-tier etc.

Lower-rung locals have no properties to buy. Not: they don't have enough
money; but the property type they would traditionally occupy isn't available,
and no alternatives have been built since it's always in a developer's best
interest to aim at the top, in the abscesses of government incentives.

~~~
tajen
Ok, I understand and I reckon (Note that I belong to the people who can't
afford a property, btw, but I've lived in a few cities in the world).

What you describe doesn't sound like a bubble to me: It's not something that
blows then bursts. That's just that foreigners are richer than locals.

~~~
falsedan
The bubble pops when property is not as safe/lucrative of an investment as
other instruments, and the foreign investors sell up. House prices go down,
but no one can move because their mortgages are underwater (proceeds from
selling the house don't match the outstanding debt). Developers stop building
because no one will buy the new-builds at a price which will leave them with a
profit. The situation is as before the bubble pops, but now everyone is poorer
since their (inflated) home equity has vanished.

Usually this happens when interest rates go up, because then it's better to
keep your wealth in a more liquid investment like cash. Mortgage payments go
up as well, turning the (imaginary) loss of equity into concrete loss of
income.

~~~
XorNot
The bubble pops once the big development firms start going under. At some
point, the highly leveraged property developers will stop being able to clear
out the apartment blocks they're putting up presuming $1m+ sale prices. _They
're_ the ones who pop the bubble, since a few bankruptcies are very likely to
cascade into panic selling.

~~~
falsedan
They go under when buyers stop showing up. It's the buyers. Think: where does
their money come from? (from buyers)

------
panglott
The simplest reason is that Australia has a higher inflation target and is
willing to average that target over the business cycle. Whereas the US has a
lower inflation target and treats that target as an upper bound. So in the
2007 recession for example, the Fed was trying to figure out how to push
against the zero lower bound, and then despite a period of very low inflation,
has refused to allow any catch-up growth that might take the inflation rate
temporarily over 2%.

"So what is it that has kept Australia's economy from shrinking? ...It's that
Australia has been able to cut interest rates when it has needed to. Other
countries haven't, you see, because their interest rates are already as low as
they can go at zero or even slightly negative territory. ...[Australia]
doesn't have a 2 percent inflation target. It has a 2 to 3 percent inflation
target averaged over the business cycle. ...The result is that interest rates
have been much higher in Australia than in almost any other rich country."
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/09/15/how-a...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/09/15/how-
australia-has-avoided-a-recession-for-25-years/?utm_term=.969c5d023931)

------
ed_balls
>Australia is close to seizing the global crown for the longest streak of
economic growth thanks to a mixture of policy guile and outrageous fortune.

It's the same true for Poland and a few other countries.

------
retrogradeorbit
Some are calling it a "population ponzi".

------
jaimex2
Were the lucky country, "She'll be right" is the mentality of everyone here.

------
droithomme
Isn't most of the growth due to the mining industry there?

~~~
cyberferret
There was a spike due to mining and offshore gas in the past decade or two,
but the mining sector has pretty much stagnated now.

Also, it was somewhat of a 'false spike' due to mining companies using FIFO
(fly in fly out) workers from Asia etc. Those workers would come here, work
hard, collect their pay packets and the leave to go back to their home
countries and spend there rather than locally.

Our tourism market, which WAS a huge part of our GDP and employment, has
suffered. In my town, the FIFO workers book out entire streets of hotels for
their work schedules, meaning tourists have no chance getting a room year
round. Local shops and markets are shuttering at a fast clip because no
tourists are around the spend money with them.

Recent events with the cyclones in Queensland, and the general bleaching of
our Great Barrier reef also will have a huge impact on our tourism market,
with a reported 100,000 jobs likely to disappear over the coming years across
the Eastern seaboard.

------
rusk
Mining.

------
brilliantcode
how would you short Australia? Is there an index ETF?

------
manojlds
What about recession of the coral reef?

------
chrismealy
Recessions are almost always deliberately caused by central banks to control
inflation by increasing unemployment and decreasing wages. Occasionally they
are caused by financial crises.

~~~
cyberferret
Well, I am old enough to remember "The recession we _had_ to have" back in the
80's here in Australia. And yes, that was triggered by the federal government
and the reserve bank for what it was worth.

I think interest rates have been too low for too long. Yes, it has encouraged
spending, but methinks _too much_ spending as I have seen friends and family
totally overextend themselves on huge loans for huge houses just because they
could. Even interest rates move up even 1%, they will be pushed against the
wall to try and service those loans, and that in itself may trigger massive
sell offs and bring housing prices crashing down.

It's basically a tightrope walk across a windy gorge at the moment -
everything is precariously balanced, but for how much longer??

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
I can't understand what motivates people to borrow the highest amount the
banks will lend them. What do they think is going to happen when interest
rates go up two or three percent? What do the banks think is going to happen?

~~~
researcher11
The banks think they'll be bailed out. Maybe not in a US way with direct cash
injection but maybe in an EU way with the government creating a Bad Bank and
buying their mistakes at above market rates. Of course they'll lie about it
and say it's a good investment to sell it to the public.

Everyone who has money is beholden to the banks.

------
sametmax
Australia has huge lands, few people, a lot of local resources and not as much
immigration as the US or West Europe. It's not a surprise.

~~~
a_bonobo
Australia has _massive_ immigration -

in 2012, Australia had one of the highest net immigration rates, more than
twice that of the US.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migra...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate)

Here's an entire article on how Australia's high immigration may mask a
recession: [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-19/high-immigration-
masks...](http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-19/high-immigration-masks-
australian-economic-decline/8193628)

~~~
ptaipale
Moreover, Australia is able, and does, select who migrates to the country and
who does not.

The Wikipedia table about net migration to each country isn't the whole truth,
however. For instance, it shows a significant negative net migration for
Greece (-12.34 per 1000 pop) although in reality there are lots of migrants
all over in Greece.

~~~
vorg
> Australia is able, and does, select who migrates to the country

Australia selects its own immigrants through only _one_ of its two immigration
systems (its DIBP). Because they allow all New Zealand citizens (through a
reciprocal arrangement) to live and work in Australia, they don't select
immigrants who go in that other way. As the Chinese say "新西兰是澳大利亚的后门", i.e.
"New Zealand is the back door into Australia".

~~~
amatix
Typically takes at leat 7 years to get NZ citizenship (except for Peter Thiel)
-- 2 for Permanent Residency then another 5 years for citizenship. 6 years of
which you have to actually live in NZ . That's a fairly long-winded "back
door".

~~~
vorg
When I lived in New Zealand in the 1990's, I met many Chinese immigrants who
lived in NZ for 3 years then after becoming NZ citizens went straight to
Australia to become Australian citizens after a further 2 years there. That's
where I heard that expression.

~~~
ptaipale
That's still quite selective immigration. The cost and visa requirements of
travelling to NZ (legally) before immigrating to Australia from there is
already a factor that changes the migration pattern completely.

~~~
vorg
Around 2002, Australia stopped New Zealanders getting automatic Australian
citizenship after residency. Also then, New Zealand changed the residency time
to become a citizen from 3 years to 5 years. I haven't heard about the extra 2
years mentioned by amatix.

Until then, it was easier to get NZ permanent residency than Australian, and
many people, especially from China, took that "back door" to Australian
citizenship. During the 1990's, I met many who spent the 3 years in NZ
unemployed, learning conversational English. After becoming NZ citizens they'd
go to Australia and get a job within months.

