The biggest expansion in Aussie history…

Monday, 26 February 2018
Melbourne, Australia
By Bernd Struben

  • Untarnishable
  • Gold’s ‘EP-6 signal’

Have you been following the Abbott immigration saga?

No, he’s not a dual citizen. But this has been almost as entertaining.

Last week Abbott ignited a political firestorm by suggesting Australia reduce its migration intake.

He listed housing costs and stagnant wages as two issues impacted by rapid population growth. And he mentioned social integration and urban infrastructure would both benefit from slowing the rate of growth.

Now I’d argue artificially low interest rates, negative gearing and foreign investors have had more of an impact on housing prices than migrants. And automation likely is playing a key role in keeping real wage growth in check.

But you’d think Abbott’s migration proposal would be worth a respectful discussion.

Not so.

The rebuttals from left, right and centre were fast and furious. How dare the former prime minister question the experts on long term population planning?

As if there is such a thing.

Liberal Senator Mathias Cormann seemed intent to plug his ears to dissenting opinions. Cormann said:

To criticise the experts and say that someone who is not an expert knows better is not the right approach.’

It brought to mind the fallout following Abbott’s previous bombshell in October last year.

You probably know the one I’m referring to. When he had the audacity to question the science behind climate change in a speech in London. And he made some mention of pagan sacrifices:

Primitive people once killed goats to appease the volcano gods, we are more sophisticated now but are still sacrificing our industries and our living standards to the climate gods to little more effect.’

Just as with his reduced migration proposal, the mainstream media united behind the mainstream politicians to discredit the former prime minister.

The science on global warming is in. 99% of all ‘experts’ agree.

Don’t question the experts!

The quantity of dismissive statements regarding Abbott’s latest migration proposal, eagerly reported by the mainstream media, raises a simple question.

If Abbott’s proposal is so genuinely stupid, why have so many pollies felt the need to refute it?

If he’d said the world is flat they would have laughed it off and left voters to make up their own minds. Instead they came out swinging. Though rather poorly.

Treasurer Scott Morrison, for example, said:

If you did what Tony Abbott suggests, then you would only reduce the proportion that was skilled migration, and you’d have a bigger proportion which was family migration, which ultimately gets more dependent on welfare.


Why would Abbott’s plan see more families migrate than skilled workers? Surely this is something the government could address if it considered reducing intake numbers.

Morrison also argued that reducing the migrant intake from 180,000 to 110,000 per year, as Abbott suggests, could cost the budget ‘as much as’ $5 billion over four years.

But he shoots his own argument in the foot by saying family migrants ultimately get ‘more dependent on welfare’.

Not that this has stopped the media from heaping more scorn onto Abbott.

Fairfax Media columnist Jessica Irvine added her two cents in today’s The Age. ‘It’s an open and shut case’ reads the headline.

Irvine writes:

Former prime minister Tony Abbott graduated with a bachelor’s degree in economics from the University of Sydney in 1979. But… it appears he may have snoozed off at crucial points in his lectures.’

The article notes that Australia’s natural birth rate exceeds the death rate by 392 per day. Meaning the country is already growing from within. The average net migrant intake works out to 617 per day. That adds up to 1,005 more people each day.

And the brilliant conclusion:

Without a program of mass sterilisation, euthanasia or a massive crackdown on migration, there’s no avoiding it.’

Mass sterilisation and euthanasia?

If only Abbott had proposed that. No one would have taken him seriously. Then the vested interests behind continued rapid growth wouldn’t have felt so threatened. And they wouldn’t have launched a week-long media campaign to undermine him.

Anyhow, it all got me to thinking about population growth. And how this is far from the first time Australia has dealt with a rapid influx of immigrants.

More after the markets.


Over the weekend, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed up 347.51 points, or 1.39%.

The S&P 500 gained 43.34 points, or 1.60%.

In Europe, the Euro Stoxx 50 index finished up 9.47 points, or 0.28%. Meanwhile, the FTSE 100 lost 0.11%, and Germany’s DAX climbed 21.88 points, or 0.18%.

In Asian markets, Japan’s Nikkei 225 is up 223.03 points, or 1.02%. China’s CSI 300 is up 0.70%.

In Australia, the S&P/ASX 200 is up 32.61 points, or 0.54%.

On the commodities markets, West Texas Intermediate crude oil is US$63.60 per barrel. Brent crude is US$67.28 per barrel.

Gold is trading for US$1,327.25 (AU$1,693.14) per troy ounce. Silver is US$16.50 (AU$21.05) per troy ounce.

One bitcoin is worth US$9,562.94.

The Aussie dollar is worth 78.39 US cents.


Australia, as the saying goes, is a nation built on immigration.

Although I believe the Aboriginal community has a rather different take. A position which likely wasn’t helped by the fact they weren’t even counted in the population census until 1967.

That’s when some 90% of Aussies voted to include Indigenous people in the census. Talk about a historic ‘yes’ vote.

Now turn back the clock another century and a bit. In 1851, there were about 430,000 people in Australia…minus the Aborigines.

If you’ve studied your history, you know what happened next.

That’s right, gold.

Lots and lots of gold was discovered. First in New South Wales and soon after in Victoria.

The ensuing gold rush saw people flock to Australia from all over the world. And the influx of wealth saw the first railways and telegraph lines built to link the growing populations.

By 1870, Australia’s official population had reached 1.7 million people. And gold replaced wool as the most valuable export commodity.

Gold pumped so much wealth into society that by 1890 Australians enjoyed some of the highest living standards in the world.

By the time Australia became a single nation in 1901, the population had soared to four million.

I’m not sure what Tony Abbott would have made of this back then. Or Scott Morrison, for that matter.

But the population was obviously growing off a much smaller base. And most of them were after one thing.


Gold’s ‘EP-6 signal’

More than century later, gold remains an important part of the Aussie economy. In 2016, Australia produced 298 tonnes of the yellow metal, second only to China.

And it’s still Australia’s third largest export. A figure helped by gold’s 14% price surge in 2017 (in US dollars). You can see the rebound — following a low of US$1,128 on 23 December, 2016 — below:

chart image

Source: Gold Price
Click to enlarge

Now you and I are unlikely to make our fortune by heading into the bush with a pick and shovel. Unless, of course, we take out a hefty life insurance policy first.

And while our in-house gold expert, Jason Stevenson forecasts the gold price will shortly pass US$1,400, investing in bullion itself is unlikely to offer 10-bagger type returns.

Investing in bullion should be seen as a relatively secure way to store your wealth over the long-term. Not as a road to riches on its own.

That’s why Jason keeps a keen eye on Australia’s junior gold miners over at Gold & Commodities Trader. These small-cap miners can see their share price double, or more, on a single positive drilling announcement.

And if they strike a rich vein, those gains can blow out to over 1,100% within months.

Of course, for every junior gold miner that strikes it rich — rewarding its shareholders with outsized gains — many others flounder. Australia’s a big place, if you hadn’t noticed. And they can only drill so many holes before their funding dries up, leaving their shareholders empty handed.

The trick then, is separating out the miners most likely to succeed from those that almost certainly won’t.

And Jason Stevenson has spent the past 14 months devising a system he’s convinced can do just that.

Not without fail, mind you. No man or system can do that.

But the back testing results I’ve seen are impressive. Really impressive.

Jason calls his secret indicator the ‘EP-6 signal’.

That’s all I can tell you today. But if all goes to plan, Jason will unveil the full details tomorrow.

Until then, check out the following from The Australian Tribune:

Trump’s Wall in Action — Mexican President Won’t Cross US Border

US President Donald Trump is sticking to his guns when it comes to constructing a border wall between the US and Mexico.

He also maintains that Mexico will pay for it.

When envisioning the border wall, though, it’s unlikely Trump intended it to keep Mexican dignitaries from entering the US. Yet, even before the wall is built, that’s just what’s happening…

If you’re fed up with sanitised, politically correct dogma cut and pasted from one mainstream source to another then The Australian Tribune is for you.

And it’s absolutely free.

Sign up here to get The Australian Tribune delivered free to your inbox five days per week.

You can visit our website at to read the complete article above now.