SPECIAL EDITION: WORLD on the MOVE : The Economic Argument : For Australia, Migrants Mostly a Gain, Not a Drain : A relatively new influx of Asians has fueled debate about immigration. Still, foreign workers pay taxes and buy goods and services, all in all good for the nation.

Once-quiet King Street bustles with immigrants these days, but it is more a mixing bowl than a melting pot.

On one side, Shunar Bangladesh Cuisine cooks curry near the Shanghai Chinese Smorgasbord. Efe’s Turkish Kebabs sizzle by the spicy Thailand Restaurant.

Across the street, Bali Indonesia gives gado-gado while Odyssia Greek Seafood offers ouzo. Old Saigon serves Vietnamese spring rolls between Antonio’s Italian Cafe and Rowda’s Lebanese Coffee Lounge.

“Someday I will open a restaurant here too,” says taxi driver Luis Rivero, 39, who also has dug ditches, sewn garments and sold leather jackets since emigrating from Uruguay 11 years ago. “That is my dream.”

The dream is unusual only because it is so new. Australia has been mostly a nation of immigrants since the first cargo of British convicts arrived in 1788. But until 1973, the country’s official policy was to exclude nonwhite and non-English-speaking immigrants.

“Australia for a very long time defined itself by its whiteness and by its sense of being a bit of Britain overseas,” explains Donald Horne, a noted writer and historian. “All that has changed.”

Last year 42% of Australia’s 126,000 immigrants arrived from Asia. That was twice the number that came from Britain and Ireland, the traditional sources of immigration.

The total, which was cut to 111,000 this year, is small by U.S. standards. But, with a total population of only 17 million, Australia’s per capita immigration rate is higher. Indeed, it is second only to Israel in the West.

Moreover, immigration has helped give Australia the highest rate of population growth in the industrialized world. One in three residents here in the country’s largest city are now foreign-born--a higher rate than in Los Angeles or New York City.

“Economically, it’s very valuable for Australia,” says John Gillespie, head of the Australian Migration Consultants Assn. “Because we’ve been an Anglo-Saxon country in the middle of Asia. So we need to Asianize ourselves.”

Not everyone agrees. Debate rages in Australia over the relative costs and benefits of immigration. Critics contend that immigration exacerbates the problems of pollution, housing and unemployment. The debate is especially sharp because the country is suffering from its worst recession in decades.

“The question is, can we afford to maintain high immigration when we have 9% and 10% unemployment?” asks Bob Birrell, a Monash University sociologist who wants immigration cut in half. “Migrants don’t have a stimulating effect on the economy if they’re unemployed.”

Unfortunately, many are. Recent government figures show 33% of migrants who have been in Australia for two years or less are unemployed. The rate is even worse for newly arrived groups that don’t speak English. Most receive costly government benefits and allowances.

“The situation in Australia is pretty grim,” Birrell says. “We’re awash in potential workers from domestic sources. So why bring in extra people when we don’t need them?”

Many migrants are “very frustrated” too, says Oscar Cortez, who arrived from El Salvador on a tourist visa in 1982 and never left. He now is deputy coordinator of the government’s migrant resource center in Blacktown, a sprawling, blue-collar ethnic Sydney suburb.

“If you’re an engineer or an electrician or plumber, maybe you can find a job,” he said. “But if you have an academic degree, or you’re a lawyer or accountant, you probably have to start from scratch and do five, six or seven years of study.”

It’s one reason government figures show 30,000 migrants returned home last year, the biggest population exodus in 15 years. “They can’t adjust or can’t find a job,” Cortez says.

Still, he and others say the short-term costs of immigration are more than covered by the long-term benefits. Most migrants pay taxes, and demand goods and services. Many have succeeded in business, politics, arts and other professions. They’ve helped a parochial country join the modern world.

“Migrants have contributed a lot more to Australia than they’ve ever taken out,” says Ross Tsannes, head of the Ethnic Communities Council for New South Wales, a major lobbying group. “Australia would be unrecognizable without them.”

Tsannes dismisses arguments that immigrants are an economic drain. “By that logic, we should go back to the original 100,000 aborigines who were here when Capt. Cook landed, and see how it goes,” he said.

Others say politicians use immigrants as scapegoats rather than making unpopular and expensive decisions to improve housing and public services.

“When the going gets tough, the society becomes more racist,” charges Kamal Dabboussy, who helps Arabic-speaking migrants in Blacktown. “So they sack the migrants first.”

Tensions are high in some areas, he said, and several white supremacist groups have surfaced. In the most serious case, three men were convicted last year of trying to drive Asians out of Australia by firebombing Chinese restaurants in Perth.

Today, a migrant can enter Australia by joining family, by investing capital or possessing skills, or on humanitarian grounds. The average migrant is 27, five years younger than the average Australian. His skills are usually higher than those of the average Australian.

But government policies are changing. Budget cuts have reduced English-language, job-placement and settlement programs.

And in July, the government scrapped a business migration program that enabled 10,000 mostly Asian businessmen, plus 30,000 family members, to immigrate. Migrants who agreed to invest an average of $400,000, depending on age, effectively jumped the visa line.

The program was similar to one recently announced in the United States. Starting today, the United States will issue 10,000 visas annually to migrants who plan to invest $1 million in American businesses that create jobs.

The problem here, federal police told a parliamentary committee, is that Asian triads and other organized crime groups may have used the scheme to launder drug money or enter the country.

Immigration spokeswoman Jenny Hoskin insists that “no proof or evidence” exists of such abuses. But future business migrants will be evaluated on the basis of age, education and character, not money, she said.