The thing I don't understand is the argument I am seeing on here about who pays the most tax. I was unaware that worthiness to citizenship was based on how much tax people pay. Surely there has to be more to a person's eligibility than how much tax they pay or have paid? My memory is a little hazy about the PR rules now as I originally got my PR back in 2003. I remember I got in due to my teaching qualifications and experience, I was fluent in English and I was under 30 years old. I remember they had a list of jobs and skills they needed, and if you had any of those skills, the right amount of experience, could speak English and were a certain age, then you were in and could apply.
To my knowledge, being a student does not equate to the skills needed for PR, but possibly the end product would be (ie... you become an engineer or doctor etc). To try to make out that a student has been paying more taxes and is therefore more worthy seems to be missing the point. Surely it is about skills and what you as an individual can bring to Australia as a whole? If you have what they need and/or want then you have a good chance of success.