Marketing
Note that these figures do not include related services and value added industries. Given that our annual intake continues to increase, production capacity can be expected to grow in the short term. Prices will not decrease with volume as the product should be expected to increase in demand as consumers become more familiar with the availability and quality of the product through effective marketing strategies, potentially doubling revenue in the first 3 years.
Certainly there is a large market for the product, as wealthy nations have always, and now more than ever before, happily and insatiably consumed other nations. It is said that he who is ignorant of history is doomed to repeat it - so let us recognise that the natural condition of mankind is that the powerful put the weak to good use, as the Spartans did with the Helots, the Romans did with everyone they met, Genghis Khan did right across Europe and Asia, Belgium did in the Congo, the Spanish did the Indians, Britain did to all British subjects, the United States did with West Africans and Germany did with anyone who wasn't German or otherwise ethnically, politically or culturally correctly aligned. One might easily argue that the glory of a civilisation is proportional to how many people it consumes, acquiring their wealth, energy and power, in much the same manner as a savage slurps the life force in his enemies brains. Who can ignore the bald faced reality of the matter? There is an enormous mass market waiting to be served. Even if the cost of maintenance of these herds should remain unavoidably expensive, there is little doubt the meat could be sold as a delicacy, particularly if promoted through popular television cooking shows, and certain parts may be sold on the Asian market as high cost aphrodisiacs. But we need not selfishly keep the meat to ourselves. Perhaps the greatest benefit of this scheme is that it would please the just and charitable nature of our citizens, ensured through the support of popular rock bands, to provide the produce as food aid to the hungry nations from whence it came.
It is worth bearing in mind that cannibalism is the natural state of man and abhorrence of the practice is a prejudice of our culture. Individuals on either side of the fence must accept this necessary innovation - those who wish to follow the path of reason must acknowledge that any commandment or moral injunction not to eat children is a superstitious, outmoded tradition and that the hard economics of the situation must prevail. Those governed by emotion who wish to sympathise with cultures that have been destroyed and corrupted by Western civilisation must allow the rebuilding of the innocent, natural, traditional custom of cannibalism, no matter how alien it seems to us, for we have no right to judge the beliefs of others, or impose our beliefs on them - rather we should ourselves learn from them.
Logistical Considerations
Australia is a land of sweeping plains, so there would not be any difficulty in finding room for our new livestock even if they required a mile a piece for every inch they now take. Even so, the unlawful arrivals in this country can easily be maintained in high density accommodation, so long as it is well fenced, so there would be no burden of overcrowding in the continent or even discomfort from proximity.
Since fencing is for us a matter of national pride, having built a structure more impressive than the Great Wall of China, the fencing for this new industry will stand for us - a beacon of our great achievement, the symbol of our nation, it ethos, history and future prosperity.
There is plenty of room for them, since unlike other livestock they don't require fertile soil but may be kept in the middle of our vast deserts or on remote islands. For feeding stock, vegetables are cheap and, as has been demonstrated in previous establishments, meat need be little more than dog food to meet nutritional requirements. Further possibilities for fattening up the stock include the glut of kangaroo available and of course, since the stock is to be turned into food, there is always the option of feeding the stock to itself. This latter however has lead to diseases such as foot and mouth disease in cattle in less developed nations like the United Kingdom where cattle are fed to cattle, so should be done with caution and only after scientific research has determined it to be safe.
It can only be mismanagement that has seen such large bills in the upkeep of detention centres so far, which the privatisation of the industry would soon fix by achieving optimal efficiencies through free market competition.
Contribution To Employment Rate
There is often a concern among the populace that immigrants will either take citizens jobs or parasitically live off tax payer funded government payouts. If immigrants were to be a new food source, citizens would not have to work so hard, or attain such high marks in school to get gainful employment. Our luxury would be assured. Rather than competing with immigrants for positions requiring skill, intelligence or determination, we will be able to relax over a barbecue at the beach knowing that employers will have no choice but to employ us or send jobs overseas, an unlikely prospect given the low supply of cheap labour in other countries and the patriotism of so many Australian owned companies (the makers of Arnott biscuits, Vegemite, Cotties cordial, mining companies and the people who run the Melbourne cup spring to mind).
Furthermore jobs would be created in herding and slaughtering. No significant qualifications are required of those employed to herd them. Herders may be cheaply and easily obtained through work for the dole schemes and placed after a brief training and certification session, or even immigrant work placement schemes for those smart enough to know what side their bread is buttered on.
There are also some individuals already here, not migrants, who are so lacking in a work ethic, so unappreciative of all our advanced society has to offer, so selfish and lazy that they are unwilling to contribute to society. They expect everything to be handed to them on a silver platter without lifting their finger. They galavant around, shamelessly buying, selling and using drugs, stealing from their neighbours. They are no better than these newcomers as burdens on our society - if they still refuse to work as herders or in the slaughterhouses - if they will not be the producers and consumers, then let them too be the product of this brave new industry. No-one could deny the economy would be any the worse for their loss.
Addressing Several Objections
There are some bleeding hearts who may make the objection that what is here proposed would be cruel. But I myself am one who has oft bore the brunt of the 'bleeding heart' criticism (or, as it is called in my mother tongue, 'common bloody decency') and I certainly agree that cruelty must be the first objection to dispense with any proposal, that sympathy and empathy for others should be our first and foremost consideration and I assert that what is here proposed is far from cruel. It is sensible and of universal benefit, particularly to the economics of our proud nation, and none can deny that religion or national sentiment comes close to economics as the foundation on which all our well being and prosperity is built, in binding us together as a society and a nation going forward. Children would be slaughtered in the most humane way known, using our most advanced technology for the purpose, and adhering to strict government standards of hygiene, which would of course meet all cultural and religious sensitivities governing the preparation of meat.
As the most valuable and succulent meat is young, some may have concerns about parting children from their parents. But there is ample evidence that such people as arrive on our shores from other places do not have the same foibles over attachment to their children as we do. From this we can only assume that not only do they not care about being separated from their children, they would be happier without the burden of having to feed and support them. I have it on authority, from certain government functionaries, that there are parents who, only because they are a few pennies away from starvation, rather than found universities in their own town, have coldly surrendered their child to a better life, presumptuously hoping they will have the opportunity that through learning and hard work they might one day be doctors, scientists, lawyers or IT professionals.
With many not speaking English and w
earing unfamiliar hats there will be no need for farmers or consumers to interact on an emotional level with them, so there is little risk of popular disapproval beyond what already exists from vegetarians, a group already easily ignored. They can be moved here and there by poking and proding without need to engage in any sort of chit chat, let alone involve law courts. Indeed every effort should be made to avoid law courts due to their enormous expense. If any livestock should manage to appear before the court and demonstrate their status as a person, rather than their true nature of being illegal, the economics of the whole industry would be blown away in an instant. It is essential that livestock be kept indefinitely without legal proceedings to determine their status. One hopes that the government, in it's wisdom, would tacitly acknowledge that in the interests of the economy, which underpins everyone's wealth, and therefor liberty, and therefor the popularity of a democratically elected government, and to preserve it's own budget, that it is most expeditious to allow these arrivals to be farmed and slaughtered prior to any case coming to court. Such cooperation between government and business is after all the cornerstone of civilisation and the reason education, freedom and wealth has spread universally throughout the world, held in check only by the laziness and lack of personal pride and dignity of such people as those arriving on our shores, and who thereby may rightly be used in the service of liberty and wealth instead of allowing them to impinge on ours.
Ease Of Management
It is clear that anyone so weak as to be unable to defend themselves against tyrants or sustain a wealthy democracy, will make a most docile livestock, and present little difficulty in herding. I have heard of instances of children who have run away when police decapitated their older brothers, rather than single handedly defending and/or avenging their own family against a platoon of trained men armed with guns. I have also heard of women who, having seen their husbands and children murdered, and subsequently being raped, chose not to become leaders of pro-democracy opposition parties and gain enough popular support to overthrow the government. Instead, in the most cowardly way, these people have sought the easy way out, mustering by whatever means possible enough money to pay for passage in barely seaworthy vessels, callously exploiting our naive good will to make an easy living in our country.
I am encouraged through reading comments on news websites pertaining to the issue that there will be no difficulties in establishing abattoirs, as there is no apparent shortage of citizens keen to see the end of those arriving on our shores. At present they would see them die by sending them back where they came from, by allowing the navy to do target practice on their boats, or by any means necessary erasing these people from the Earth. In fact their zeal seems so great that the only problems we would face are, firstly, ensuring that the meat is put to good use rather than wasted, and secondly, that the slaughter is conducted humanely, without torture, torment, brow beating, abuse, bastardisation, buggery or any other form of needless suffering.
Additional Benefits
Further advantages are countless but among them some worthy of note are:
1. Those who are in possession of children, rather than being in dire straits would suddenly be rescued from poverty, deprivation and the consequent desperation in so far as they would now be in possession of something that has value. It is possible that some may rehabilitate themselves, themselves becoming producers and merchants of this once burdensome but now valuable consumable. They may find the means of their own survival and learn how to contribute to society through the practice of trade and commerce, a social interaction which benefits all mankind since it always involves two parties in an exchange of mutual consent to the benefit of both, each gaining from the other what they lack, and providing what they can provide. They could give up outmoded means of subsistence and, in the process, would learn useful and transferable commercial skills, so essential to success in the modern world, such as sales, marketing and accounting.
2. The addition of a whole new kind of fare to our tables and restaurants. There will be new opportunities for chefs and restaurantuers vieing for pre-eminance in the preparation of the new dish. There will be increased sales in cookbooks, more popular television cooking shows and the whole gamut of culinary and gourmet spin offs.
3. Family values would be enhanced as men and women seek to marry to ensure a successful partnership and men would remain faithful to the capital portion of their income stream. Familial felicity will be reinforced as husbands and wives will engage more readily and joyfully in connubial bliss and husbands will be more faithful and supportive of their wives in pregnancy and early infancy in appreciation and anticipation of the profits to come.
4. There would be no more debate over whether an unborn child or foetus is a human being or not, whether abortion is murder, and to what extent a woman has the right to control over her body, since no-one would abort any longer.
5. The government would no longer need to offer baby bonuses and tax breaks, as the value of children would become self evident to individuals. On the contrary, Goods and Services Tax on the sale of children would be a significant new government revenue stream.
6. Children themselves would benefit. They would not be required to go to school, but could spend the entirety of their time eating and lounging, and, if old enough to manipulate buttons, playing computer games. Their parents would lavish every indulgence on their most valuable possessions.
Proof Of The Proposal
Let the proof be in this: that even those who would be harvested for the table at age one would be agreeable to the proposition. You need only imagine that you were suddenly made conscious at age one, and could see your past and future, as in some Dickens' Christmas fable and could choose between the past or future. I dare say, that if you had in your past a whole year's worth of comfort at your mother's breast, suckling in peace till you were satisfied, being fawned over by all and could behold your fate before you, a future life of starvation and violent persecution concluding with year upon year of indefinitely prolonged imprisonment - would you not choose a life that is one year's bliss over countless years of uninterrupted suffering?
Inaction To Date And Lack Of Viable Alternatives
This is such an excellent and simple plan, humane, economically optimal and benefiting all concerned it should easily silence all debate: let no-one talk of expeditious processing of asylum seekers, of expensive offshore solutions, of assimilation, of cultural purity or multiculturalism, of national pride and racism, of queue jumping and due process, of zero tolerance or open doors. So far nothing has yet worked to that is practical or ideal, that has benefited everyone, that has been seen as right and just by all or that has not cost too much money, whereas this modest proposal will invert all those points.
There has been enough talk of taking the 'tough' stance of ignoring the mob, adhering to international law and upholding the corner stone of our civilisation that no one should be jailed, least of all children, indefinitely without trial; or that we should respect what our forefathers fought for in WWII and keep Nazi policies of racism, xenophobia, cultural purity and rule by fear out of this country.
If they were apractical solutions wouldn't we already have implemented much repeated proposals such as: prompt identification of asylum seekers; differentiation of humanitarian refugees as opposed to economic refugees and immigrants; more efficient security checks; less time in highly expensive prisons through expeditious acceptance or deportation; homestay with those who would welcome immigrants and asylum seekers; provision of English lessons to satisfy those citizens who wish foriegnors would speak English; providing access to courses in jobs that are in high demand because they are too hard, distasteful, or require too much skill, intelligence or diligence for the local inhabitants?
It is ridiculous, since nothing can be spared from defence, to rant on and on, suggesting that some small portion of the defence budget of $25.7 billion, might not be missed in expeditiously and conscientiously conducting security assess
ments and clearances, through the allocation of specialised background investigators with a sensible operating budget. A simpler way of avoiding turning people into security risks by imprisoning them indefinitely would be to adopt the proposal here put forward.
Some may argue that allowing immigrants to work in our country, since they contribute on average $47,000 per annum, in this example totalling $634,829,000 would be more economically sound, even if we had to train them at a cost of $1000 per annum in the first year - but if this were a viable option, would we not have instituted this approach already?
I am open to any reasonable suggestion, and would happily relinquish this plan for a better one, but I challenge anyone with a better plan to come forth. Otherwise let us proceed without delay.
Risk Of Not Proceeding
Given that our intake of illegal immigrants is so much less than many other countries, the greatest risk we face in this venture is that we may be easily overtaken by other nations' as market leaders unless we act fast. Other nations are well placed to gain market supremacy. Although our immigrant and asylum seeker intake is relatively high per capita, in terms of turnover we are clearly outnumbered and must increase capacity without delay while we have the chance:
OECD data*[Immigration statistics sourced through www.nationmaster.com] illustrates beyond doubt that not only are we pitifully poor in asylum seekers in relation to other nations, but we are already turning away the vast majority of this precious resource. Nations like the United Kingdom 92,000, Germany 88,400, and the United States 86,400 far outstrip our capacity in terms of head of stock. This may be unavoidable due to their much larger overall populations, but what is most startling is that other nations are already accepting a far greater proportion of this valuable resource than us.
In particular, Denmark, which has the same amount of asylum seekers as Australia, accepts %73.5 compared to our paltry %12.4. With it's already established reputation for small goods, this places Denmark in a position we will not be able to compete with unless we address this imbalance promptly. The following table makes clear the potential revenue we are losing through these discrepancies (Table 2):
If we are the first to implement such measures we will gain a significant advantage in the market place but will have to increase production if we are not to be overrun as market leaders by other nations with such superior intakes of migrants. There are several options with varying advantages and disadvantages:
1. increase immigration to reasonable levels in line with other world leaders;
2. introduce intensive breeding;
3. utilise cloning technology to spawn potentially unlimited amounts of stock, possibly even growing those most delicious and in demand parts separately without the encumbrance of a central nervous system. This would also be the least cruel of all options as the meat could be grown without feelings, such that there is no possibility of cruelty whatsoever. However this option would require extensive investment in research and technology, whereas our nations strength is as a primary producer;
4. open up the market to include the children of migrants or any who are descended from migrants.
Since the latter option would make almost the entire population of Australia available to the market, it would be the most effective and swiftest means of ensuring we are world leaders in what promises to be a multi-trillion dollar global industry. As world leaders in obesity we have no doubt fattened and softened ourselves sufficiently to be among the world’s prime herds. In fact, in the interests of maximising GDP, everyone should consider it their duty to proudly make themselves available to the national economy in this way. I for one would gladly offer up my rump to the first paying customer. I only regret it may be too lean.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Jonathan Twit is a leading economic analyst, political commentator and power broker. He currently holds the Chair in Ethics at the University of Slawkenbergius, Brisburb, Ozland.
A Modest Proposal Page 2