Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

True number of citizenship-tourists

Options
  • 26-04-2004 7:59am
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭


    The "No" side in the citizenship referendum are claiming that the true number of citizenship-tourists is only around 400. This is based on a narrow definition of the term as meaning those arriving in Ireland at 30 weeks into the term of pregnancy. However, official figures show that 58% of female asylum-seekers arriving in Ireland last year were pregnant, suggesting a number around 2,000, as this is the number that the 58% represents. I personally feel that as this figure (58%) has been constant for years, that this represents the true scale of babies-for-citizenship, especially as our pathetic deportation-rate is around 3% of asylum-seekers, even though the Dept. of Justice says that 90% of them are illegal. Which do you think is closer to the truth?

    Which is closest to the annual number of citizenship-tourists? 13 votes

    2,000
    0% 0 votes
    400
    100% 13 votes


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    I’ve never understood the logic behind polls like this one, where you ask people to vote as to what should be considered fact. Whether the figure is 400 or 2,000, it cannot realistically be decided by the whims of a vox pop, but by evidence and debate. It’s a bit like asking a mob to ask if someone is guilty or not of a crime - the decision will reflect public sentiment rather than actual fact.

    In short; dumbest poll ever.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭arcadegame2004


    The evidence is clearly available in the press. The Sunday Independent has a lot of statistics and I quoted the entire article yesterday on the previous Immigration post. Not dumb. The evidence is there for all who choose to examine it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭arcadegame2004


    I thought public-sentiment was democracy.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Originally posted by arcadegame2004
    The evidence is clearly available in the press. The Sunday Independent has a lot of statistics and I quoted the entire article yesterday on the previous Immigration post. Not dumb. The evidence is there for all who choose to examine it.
    And that evidence and debate is in that previous immigration thread, but you’re neither presenting nor debating it here - you’ve not even mentioned the thread in your initial post and can’t assume that people have waded through the thread or even seen it. You’ve simply asked for people to vote on what is a fact, following a leading comment by yourself (you’ve made no pretence at giving both sides of the argument).

    Arguing that it’s all there for all who choose who examine it is equally laughable as you’ve not even given a source in this thread for your evidence. So yes, really dumb.
    I thought public-sentiment was democracy.
    No, that would be mob rule you’re thinking of.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 772 ✭✭✭Chaos-Engine


    Originally posted by arcadegame2004
    I thought public-sentiment was democracy.


    Thats Populism old boy

    Democracy is for civilised folk ;)


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭arcadegame2004


    Corinthian ok heres the address of the page where my statistics quoting directly from the Sunday Independent can be found, under the JIM Cusack Article:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=152567&perpage=10&pagenumber=33


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    You’re missing the point of my original post.

    Just because people believe something does not make it a fact. If a majority of people voted that there were 400 rather than 2,000 citizenship-tourist cases it would not make it any more true than if they’d voted the other way around - That’s a nonsensical premise.

    Had the pole been on people’s opinion that more should be done to curb the citizenship-tourist issue or how they were likely to vote in the upcoming referendum, then that would have made more sense. Otherwise this pole is better suited to the After Hours board rather than Politics.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,882 ✭✭✭Mighty_Mouse


    I agree with corinthian


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭arcadegame2004


    Quote from Jim Cusacks article in yesterday's Sunday Independent:

    " Last year asylum applications were received from 1,893 pregnant women. "


  • Registered Users Posts: 21,264 ✭✭✭✭Hobbes


    Clearly more people should vote for 400 that way we can bring down this asylum seekers problem and help save the government once and for all!! Who's with me!


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Originally posted by arcadegame2004
    Quote from Jim Cusacks article in yesterday's Sunday Independent:

    " Last year asylum applications were received from 1,893 pregnant women. "
    And what's that got to do with what I pointed out about your poll?
    Originally posted by Hobbes
    Clearly more people should vote for 400 that way we can bring down this asylum seekers problem and help save the government once and for all!! Who's with me!
    Roffle :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭arcadegame2004


    Cheeky.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Originally posted by arcadegame2004
    Cheeky.
    Logic.


Advertisement