docboat

As said - citizenship or not is completely irrelevant.

Strange how tastes differ. I went to the UK to attend a wedding two years ago. Took the time to visit family members, and certainly that was very nice. Had a game of golf with my brother, loved seeing the ball drop smack in the middle of the fairway with a splash, as it discovered a new lake had been created by the rain. Fairly typical for Scotland I think, and all very well for making memories. Had a foray into England for the wedding, enjoyed the scenery and all, but I enjoyed it as a tourist. At the airport on the way home, it was clear that the UK was a foreign country, a place which, for me, holds no interest beyond that of the place where family members live. I miss not a sodding thing from the UK, and spend not a minute thinking about it. I do believe, however, that those who do think about what they are missing are consigning themselves to living a life less productive. Looking back at the past is a sure way of making the present less successful.

The warning to others is actually outlined on the DIAC website which states the purposes of a 457 visa, and should come as a surprise to those who have not checked the visa before applying for it.

Perth ticks those boxes too. Outdoors life is pretty much what Perth does. Beaches, of course, and they are stunning. But cycle on the paths beside the beaches, stop off in Freo for a coffee, and continue on. Or around the Swan river. Or up in the hills -challenging mountainbike teritory, not so much for the steep falls, which you can get, but for the rugged terrain up and down. Swimming - it is safe everywhere in the surf, but I would not do an unprotected swim much beyond the surf line. We have the annual swim from Cottesloe to Rottnest island - that would be a blast. You have safety troops accompanying you on the swim. Tiger sharks and great whites are out there to be found, so going alone is really not recommended. For family, I can recommend Trigg - pleasant beach, some rocks, reef to explore, nice ambience. Just a bit far north, biut worth a trip. Combine that with a nice lunch at Hillarys, and then the adventure playground. Tennis is everywhere, and it is big. Our kids take part in the pennants, and there is a wide range of social tennis, from relaxed hitting to serious state level league. Just about any amount of sport is good. Kayaking inland lakes or sea, challenging bush walks - the Bibbulman track is one to take a look at. Golf, of course, and some beautiful courses. Well, lots of beautiful courses. Horse riding. Hunting or simply shooting - from people using holsters and six-shooters, to serious rifle competition. Sailing - river or ocean. Heck, you could probably find competitive pogo jumping if you looked hard enough.

And this is the nub of it. Undoubtedly, life is better here. Undoubtedly, getting here by hook or by crook will give your children a better future. The desperation to ensure a better future for yourself is clear. But you are not necessarily a refugee. You may, however, call yourself a refugee and ensure that enough people swallow the lie to gain entrance the country. You can even smuggle yourself in large numbers with refugees, and pass yourself off as being in danger in your homeland.

And the problem with that is? Tamil state, for tamils right next door. If they want to create a fuss to get their rights, so it in their own state with their own people.

Human rights ... just across the water from Sri Lanka is a state FULL of tamils - it is called Tamil Nadu (sp? can't be bothered to fact check), is a state in India, and is a very short boat journey from the tamil areas of SL. So .... they have to board a boat, cross half the world to a place where there are very few tamils, and they explain this by saying they are seeking a place of safety ... complete nonsense. They are seeking a better economic environment. Nothing wrong with that at all, but do it legally please, like almost everyone on this forum. And do not lie about the motives. If it was safety they wanted, a few hours by boat, across the narrow strait, and there they are - in a tamil state.

Snap! But I think the mindset was there all along, right?

Absolutely spot on with that assertion. You need to be also looking at managing emotions rather than facts. Education system, for one. I went to school in both countries, and honestly can't see much benefit or detriment in either. It depends a lot on where you live. Grandparents - OK, there is an advantage in having family near you to help. Our children see their grandparents every year, when they come over to visit from China. They see each other every day for those 3 months. If we were to move to China, unless we were right next door to them, we would not see them from one month's end to the next. And when they pass on? So often we hear about the pull of family to drag you back 'home" but - pingpongers may relate - when you do settle back "home" the family goes back to the usual Christmas card and occasional telephone call. Whatever your choice, you need to make it from a perspective of freedom. Freedom from emotional blackmail, freedom from depression, freedom from fear etc etc. And make sure you plan freedom into your future - that you can do what you like, when you like, how you like, because you have laid the framework for your choices under your own control.

Some quite serious advice for you - has been said by others, but it is worth repeating: 1. Do not go to Melbourne 2. Do not immigrate into Australia - in fact, do not emigrate at all Immigrants do not do "easy". Emigration is hard. Yourcurrent life is comfortable, and you would be mad to swap comfortable for hard. Whether to Australia, or Canada, or France. Stay put. Do not move out until you have: 1. Decided what it is you seek, and you cannot obtain that want in your home country 2. Have prepared yourself for the hard grind, the tears, the fears and the despair - all of the troubles being made worthwhile by the gain you are seeking to obtain. The price you pay for emigrating

IgA is Immuneglobulin A Now what is your real question?

It is not "too hard" to raise a family on our own without close support of family. How do I know? Because we are doing it. There may be good reasons for going to the UK, but I would want to be really clear - I mean REALLY clear, about the true reasons. It is a big shift, and if your heart is not in it, your relationship will suffer.

I am not sure what you actually meant to say with this piece. AFAICS it is a short list containing some pretty accurate observations, but nothing to explain what an Australian view of an American actually might be?

You are using a Mercator projection - not to scale

In my experience, again, very little. I personally think the naltrexone program is better. YMMV

Utopia world - if you notice, the actions I recommend are all simple, easy to understand approaches for improving health and reducing the burden of chronic disease, and depend only on the individual accepting responsibility for making healthier choices. The savings that can be achieved from such simple - free - measures are huge. BUT - it depends on people making simple choices for a healthier life, so perhaps, yes, it is utopian. You might also note I did not recommend defunding drug and alcohol services. As a personal aside, I believe in decriminalising drugs - it would empty the jails, remove a lot of crime from society, and free up a huge amount of money for other services. On the other hand, if the people who currently abuse drugs took responsibility for the correct use of the drugs they obtain (they currently do not ...) then there would be a lot less overdoses in the first place. I am glad you also recognise that it is not a simple matter of mental illness causing drug or alcohol dependence, therefore by analogy ALL drug and alcohol abusers are mentally ill. Patently they are not. As for school chaplaincy programme - are you aware of how much good work is actually done by school chaplains to rescue young people from the catastrophes they are currently experiencing in society? We in our church are thankful that we have people who go into such schools, experience abuse from many children and their parents, and still persevere to reach out to the desperate, lonely, frightened abused kids who are suffering so terribly. Paid for by us, the congregation. No tax break either.

In my experience they are pretty poor.

OK! Drug prescribing - little saving there. Unnecessarily expensive drugs - that could be addressed, but the pharma response is that they need 15 years to fund research for new drugs, and if you cut those first profits, drug research stops. Statins - big debate there, but say your uncle drops dead of a heart attack and had not been given a statin, could the grieving family not make a case that he would be alive if the evil doctors had not deemed his cholesterol 6.5 not enough to merit a statin? Antibiotics - grossly overprescribed. Main issue there is the imminent catastrophe of multidrug resistant bacteria as a result of profligate prescribing. PPI - and said uncle drops dead of an upper GI bleed after a wedding binge-related gastric ulcer, and hey presto! Lawyer feeding frenzy. But valid points made. Savings CAN be made, but not that great. BTW, the pressure on GPs to prescribe said drugs comes from the population, which demands an antibiotic for a viral infection, and will travel to another doctor to get them. Losing revenue for the GP, of course - not a big deal, but the real issue is the word of mouth - "that bloody doctor didn't take my cold seriously, I'll never go back there ..." you get the picture. Medical certificate - AMEN brother. Ditto referral letters, but results - they can be given over the phone, and are, if all is normal (at least at my practice) - need to be discussed as a continuation of the conversation about WHY they were needed in the first place. OK - the cholesterol is perfect, and the sugar levels are almost acceptable, and are you now going to look at cigarettes as the next step on your path to improved health? Etc etc ... But what you are highlighting is a tinkering with the existing (failing) system. The gains are there, but minor. It is the system which is collapsing, and needs a radical overhaul. For example, if you need a higher dose of nexium for your ulcer, you need to get government approval from a person at the end of a phone - waiting time can be 5-10 minutes - for a box to be ticked by a non-medical office person. You pay for the consulting time lost, the salaries of the box-tickers and the administration of a system designed to save money but which costs money instead. And also implies that the doctor is not capable of knowing that the patient needs a higher dose of nexium in the first place. Any comments as to the points I made on the earlier much-maligned post?

ad hominem - as expected. Carry on

when I get an idiotic answer, and a rude one at that, downright insulting, I respond harshly. I have made some comments that bear close examination, and I see low level pushback and sheer ignorance. If you cannot take a robust response, rethink the answers

how true

Oh dear. Alcoholism is very different to alcohol abuse. Are you sure you are mentally alert?

mmm ... maybe simple answers are needed here 1. Policy makers? There are none. I put out some thoughts for mature cogitation. Perhaps I overestimate the audience? 2. Reinforce - you jump right in with sterotype, and manifest the response I expected as outlined in the last sentence. So yes, you do reinforce. 3. Challenge - I have yet to see any thoughts expressed as to the content of my first piece. I see you jump on the totem of mental illness in the hope that the whole argument collapses. If you read the first piece, you do not see an argument for defunding treatment of mental illness. But we should perhaps divert some funding from health and direct it to education.

Drug use - and overdoses - is not per se a mental illness. Drug use may lead to mental illness, so some are certainly self-inflicted in that sense Alcohol abuse per se is not a mental illness - or do you think the masses drunk and attending on fights in Northbridge and ED departments the country over are all mentally ill? Alcohol abuse may certainly lead to mental illness, so in that sense some mental illness is self-inflicted. Not every drug overdose is a result of mental illness, is it? Not every drunk in ED is mentally ill, right? Or are you suggesting that every drunk is suffering a mental illness?

The last line reads: And you have simply reinforced that the approach I outline is going to be distasteful for a majority of the population, even though it will, I believe. guarantee a health service into the future. The entrenched entitlement belief will be difficult to eradicate. Point 2. Content. You wrote: The service being paid for is collapsing. It is unsustainable. More of the same will not save it. Chuck more money at it, and it will still fail, just taking more of our money with it. You ask where the money goes, and it goes mostly in wastage and inefficiency. It needs a new system, new thinking. But you finish by seeking a simple blame. Government. They. Someone else has to be responsible just not me. And government is as good a body to blame as anyone else. Oh yes - also the rich. And the working man (implying the rich do not work ... more class-belief entrenched bias) is going to cop the fallout. This thinking merely serves to support a set of beliefs as we plunge headlong into the predictable demise of the service. My initial comments included this paragraph: Books could be written on the topic, and already have. What we need is a solution to a problem that is being perpetuated into the inevitable demise. The current budget from Tony Abbott is poor, but it does seek to bring about a seachange, to alter the way we as a society act, think. Rather than dig in and reinforce beliefs that lead to ruin, why not take the opportunity to reflect as a society on what might eventually result in improvement?