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
Are our 'hands tied' on immigration?
Options
Comments
-
Not everything about the CFR is bad. That migrant workers have equal pay and employment rights is correct, and the provisions on non-discrimination are fair but overall I am very disappointed at this CFR. I might have expected to get something for giving up my country's independence. The 'rights' unique to me as an EU citizen , which are not also extended to 'any natural or legal person residing in the EU' or to 'everyone' or 'migrants' or 'workers' [I'm a lazy sod] are:
15.2 right to seek employment in any EU state
39. right to vote and stand in European Parliament elections in the member state in which I reside
40. right to vote and stand in municipal elections
46 (when abroad in third countries) entitled to the diplomatic and consular services of any Member State.
That's it. Rights to non-nationals in my country impose considerable burdens (not always reciprocated) upon the civil service and state officials which I am paying for.
After it's adoption, can the Charter be criticised?
Art 54. 'Nothing in this Charter shall be interpreted as implying any right to engage in activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms recognised in this Charter or to their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for herein.'
Meaningless formulaic legalese? Perhaps. But I can foresee this Article being cited to suppress debate and intimidate local legislative initiative.
(I may be taking advantage of a temporary loophole of free speech.)0 -
cabinteelytom wrote: »It is a sorry document compared with the marvellous clarity and comprehensiveness of , for instance, the UN Declaration of Human Rights.cabinteelytom wrote: »After it's adoption, can the Charter be criticised?
Art 54. 'Nothing in this Charter shall be interpreted as implying any right to engage in activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms recognised in this Charter or to their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for herein.'
Meaningless formulaic legalese? Perhaps. But I can foresee this Article being cited to suppress debate and intimidate local legislative initiative.
(I may be taking advantage of a temporary loophole of free speech.)
But isn't that pretty much the same as Article 30 in th UN Declaration of Human Rights which you praised above?Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.0 -
It's perhaps useful to look at the free travel area between ourselves and the UK. There's a lot of history behind that, but how would people feel if the UK in a time of recession decided to restrict access to their labour market to the Irish?
There are three important differences between that and what's happening now. First of all, the differences in wage rates between Irish and British workers is not as great as the difference in wage rates between Irish and Polish workers. Although Irish labour is cheaper than British labour it's nowhere near as low as the cost of Polish labour. Because of this the Poles can more easily undercut Irish workers in the competition for jobs than Irish workers can undercut British workers in the competition for jobs in Britain.
Secondly, Britain's population is ten times the population of Ireland so restricting access to Irish workers at a time of recession is not likely to make much of a difference. It might ease things in sectors were the Irish have traditionally been dominant, such as construction, but overall the average low-wage British worker is unlikely to be greatly affected by a restriction on Irish immigration. It's the reverse with us and the Polish. The population of Poland is 40 million while our population is around 4.3 million (10% of which is non-Irish) and so there are far fewer jobs available than there are people to fill them.
And thirdly, migration between Britain and Ireland is a two-way process. Irish immigration may have always been high but so to has immigration of British people to Ireland. It's different with Ireland and eastern Europe.djpbarry wrote:Actually it is expected that net emigration will commence once again in the not-too-distant future due to the downturn in the economy
Who will be the people emigrating though? From the article you linked to:
The same article points out that we'll have around 76,000 this year and that around 45,000 people will return home. That means we'll have a net increase of 31,000 this year. So even if it we have a net reduction of 20,000 next year, that reduction will still not make up for this years increase. It means that we'll still have a net increase of 10,000 people over the the two years 2008 and 2009. That's assuming of course that it's only the foreigners who will emigrating next year.But the researchers admit that forecasts for migration are full of uncertainty, and it is impossible to know how many of the emigrants will be foreign and how many Irish.
The report also mentions we'll see a further 40,000 people arrive here next year. That means that even in the height of recession we'll still be getting twice as many immigrants, per head of population, as Britain takes in each year.djpbarry wrote:How much is too much?
Twice as many as our nearest neighbour would be too much.djpbarry wrote:What would be an acceptable level?
An acceptable level would be somewhere around the same level as our nearest neighbour. Immigration into Britain is running at around 200,000 people a year. As Ireland has a tenth of the population of Britain that means we should ideally be getting no more than 20,000 people a year.djpbarry wrote:I'm not sure what you mean; could you be a little more specific?
People such as myself are not happy about the fact that the indigenous Irish population has fallen below 90% of the total after just a few years of immigration and that that figure is set to continue falling further in the years ahead unless we take action to reduce the numbers coming in.
The president of Dublin City University has predicted that if current trends continue the indigenous Irish population could be an ethnic minority in their own country by the year 2050
http://www.gaelport.com/index.php?page=clippings&id=55&viewby=datedjpbarry wrote:It is restricted, is it not?
No, it isn't. We have allowed completely unrestricted access to tens of millions of eastern Europeans.djpbarry wrote:I could not disagree more. We're either in or we're out.
If that's the choice then I vote to get out.djpbarry wrote:We can't demand that we should have the right to restrict the number of EU citizens entering our country, while at the same demand that Irish citizens should have free access to all EU states.
I never said that we should demand different standards for us and for everyone else. The same rights would apply to all EU member states. If any EU state decided to restrict access to Irish citizens or the citizens of any other EU state then they should be given that right and we should respect it just as our right to restrict access to them should also be respected.nesf wrote:Cheap foreign labour is a much bigger threat to our workers from them working abroad where the cost of living is far lower than immigrants here.
I'm sure it is, but immigration in no way removes that threat. Foreign based jobs will always be a threat regardless of the level of immigration we get, but immigration will only be a threat if we allow it to become one. We don't have much control over the Chinese in China but we do have some control over the Chinese in Ireland.nesf wrote:If you immigrate here you have to live here and this means they have to work at a rate that they can live on at our cost of living which is quite high keeping a floor on wages essentially.
And what will that floor be? Will it not just be the bare minimum subsistence level required to get by? If we had far fewer people competing for jobs employers would be more inclined to charge above the minimum wage but as we have so many people and so few jobs they can get away with paying the bare minimum.nesf wrote:A guy who makes wheels in China is far more dangerous to an Irish worker who makes wheels than a Chinese worker who immigrates here.
What about jobs that can't be easily exported such as all the low-wage jobs in construction and retail? Around 40% of tourism staff are thought to be non-nationals. I don't see how those jobs could be threatened by having low-wage counterparts in China or Poland. They're servicing the domestic market and so the only threat to their jobs or their wages will come from people people working in that same domestic market.nesf wrote:The guy who stays in China can work for a small fraction of the wage that he'd have to earn here to have a comparable standard of living.
That's correct, and we have absolutely no control over that. We do (or we should) have control over people working in Ireland and competing with our workers for jobs in this country.
So it's back to the 80s then? If immigration ever causes problems we can just get back on the boat? Could there a better symbol of displacement than that?if wages go to crap here but are excellent in London we can hop on a ferry and move over without any legal barriers.0 -
If we had far fewer people competing for jobs employers would be more inclined to charge above the minimum wage but as we have so many people and so few jobs they can get away with paying the bare minimum.
Look, this would be a seriously bad thing. If few people are competing for jobs you are correct, employers need to offer higher wages than they would in a more competitive labour market. The problem with this is that this will push up inflation, which is a very bad thing especially for people in the lower wage brackets. Workers don't really benefit from a labour shortage, any increases in wage they get will just be eaten up by the inflation these increases will cause within a few years.0 -
People such as myself are not happy about the fact that the indigenous Irish population has fallen below 90% of the total after just a few years of immigration and that that figure is set to continue falling further in the years ahead unless we take action to reduce the numbers coming in.
I guess this is the fundamental part where we differ.
I don't care what portion of the population is indigenous (whatever that really means, given Ireland's history) and I can't see why any percentage could be inherently "good" or "bad". Provided everyone here contributes appropriately I don't give a toss where they were born.
I do get miffed at illegal immigrants who apply for asylum since I consider it (at the very least) to be the height of rudeness to break into someone's house to ask for help. The vast majority of immigrants (AFAIK) don't fall into this category and are decent, genuine, hard working people who contribute to Irish society the same as the rest of us.0 -
Advertisement
-
I guess this is the fundamental part where we differ.
I don't care what portion of the population is indigenous (whatever that really means, given Ireland's history) and I can't see why any percentage could be inherently "good" or "bad". Provided everyone here contributes appropriately I don't give a toss where they were born.
I do get miffed at illegal immigrants who apply for asylum since I consider it (at the very least) to be the height of rudeness to break into someone's house to ask for help. The vast majority of immigrants (AFAIK) don't fall into this category and are decent, genuine, hard working people who contribute to Irish society the same as the rest of us.
Communist USSR would be the ideal homeland for people like you.
Proper little do gooders, "we are all in this togeather...."
waken up. Everyone knows that masses of immigrant will cause massive unrest unless they adapt to the societal standards to their new country.0 -
Presumably the EU 7 year rule for the new accession states was intended to give them time to develop to EU standards of living and incomes, since otherwise those with very low labour rates could have a detrimental effect upon the economies of the existing member states? Movement of labour is a fine concept but it can cause serious imbalances. Therefore, in my view, the EU was entirely correct in it's thinking while Ireland and the UK (as usual) became afflicted with political correctness threw open their borders instead of helping the accession states up the ladder. Draining them of their labour resources is no long term help.0
-
petermcqueen wrote: »Communist USSR would be the ideal homeland for people like you.
I don't see what he said that would come accross as communist.petermcqueen wrote: »Proper little do gooders, "we are all in this togeather...."
waken up. Everyone knows that masses of immigrant will cause massive unrest unless they adapt to the societal standards to their new country.
Have we really seen massive unrest here?
I don't think so.0 -
petermcqueen wrote: »Communist USSR would be the ideal homeland for people like you.
I do not think it means what you think it means.
Really, the thought of me as a communist is quite amusing.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
Presumably the EU 7 year rule for the new accession states was intended to give them time to develop to EU standards of living and incomes, since otherwise those with very low labour rates could have a detrimental effect upon the economies of the existing member states? Movement of labour is a fine concept but it can cause serious imbalances. Therefore, in my view, the EU was entirely correct in it's thinking while Ireland and the UK (as usual) became afflicted with political correctness threw open their borders instead of helping the accession states up the ladder. Draining them of their labour resources is no long term help.
Ireland, the UK and Sweden threw open their labour market to the 10 Accession countries because they had an acute labour shortage, not out of political correctness. Inability to meet labour needs would at that point have damaged the growth of their economies. That Ireland's economy was built on the falsehood of house-building and rising property prices is a different discussion; they needed the labour to do it, and it wasn't coming from Ireland.
I think that people in this thread need to differentiate between freedom of movement and opening of labour markets; freedom of movement and freedom of trade are fundamental rights of the EU without which it becomes less useful. As an EU citizen you have the right (with certain caveats, such as the ability to support yourself financially) to live and do business in any other EU state other than your own.0 -
Look, this would be a seriously bad thing. If few people are competing for jobs you are correct, employers need to offer higher wages than they would in a more competitive labour market. The problem with this is that this will push up inflation, which is a very bad thing especially for people in the lower wage brackets. Workers don't really benefit from a labour shortage, any increases in wage they get will just be eaten up by the inflation these increases will cause within a few years.
It could even be argued that Irish employees (particularly in the public sector, but also in the private) have been overpaid in the last decade relative to other EU states; immigrant workers have been paid at more realistic levels in industries that couldn't function at higher wages levels.
Higher wages = higher costs to subsidise higher wages.
Workers from developing EU countries don't need to worry too much about overheads and financial commitments since they're prepared to sacrifice the former to subsidise the latter in their home country, which have better value for money by comparison. As an Irish worker, however, a low-wage guarantees that you'll never own property or your own car or any significant amount of luxury items; in other words, a situation that results in emigration.0 -
kevteljeur wrote: »It could even be argued that Irish employees (particularly in the public sector, but also in the private) have been overpaid in the last decade relative to other EU states; immigrant workers have been paid at more realistic levels in industries that couldn't function at higher wages levels.
Higher wages = higher costs to subsidise higher wages.
Essentially yes, and the transition to more "realistic wages" isn't going to be painless. The wages in the construction sector were as much a product of the relative scarcity of skilled workers in the area that anything else. They were an aberration caused by temporary market conditions rather than anything sustainable or reasonable for the country. Immigrants weren't the reason for the wage drop, they were just the process through which it happened.0 -
kevteljeur wrote: »Ireland, the UK and Sweden threw open their labour market to the 10 Accession countries because they had an acute labour shortage, not out of political correctness. Inability to meet labour needs would at that point have damaged the growth of their economies. That Ireland's economy was built on the falsehood of house-building and rising property prices is a different discussion; they needed the labour to do it, and it wasn't coming from Ireland.
I think that people in this thread need to differentiate between freedom of movement and opening of labour markets; freedom of movement and freedom of trade are fundamental rights of the EU without which it becomes less useful. As an EU citizen you have the right (with certain caveats, such as the ability to support yourself financially) to live and do business in any other EU state other than your own.
Agreed!0 -
Is it?Although Irish labour is cheaper than British labour...
The current unemployment rate in Ireland is similar to that in the UK....there are far fewer jobs available than there are people to fill them.
That is a relatively recent phenomenon; British people began to immigrate to Ireland as our economy was booming.Irish immigration may have always been high but so to has immigration of British people to Ireland.
It may not be for long. While it is unlikely that large numbers of Irish people will emigrate to Eastern Europe (because English-speaking people tend to be incredibly lazy when it comes to learning other languages) in the near future, there will certainly be some level of emigration to that part of the world. The point is, the option is there if people want to avail of it.It's different with Ireland and eastern Europe.
What difference does it make? Net emigration is not a good thing, regardless of the nationality of the emigrants.Who will be the people emigrating though?
Why? What makes that the "right" level? Unless you've just picked that number out of thin air? In which case, I could just as easily argue that the UK's rate of immigration is too low.An acceptable level would be somewhere around the same level as our nearest neighbour.
Ireland has been receiving immigrants for far longer than just a "few years".People such as myself are not happy about the fact that the indigenous Irish population has fallen below 90% of the total after just a few years of immigration...
As I have already pointed out, it is very unlikely that levels of immigration (anywhere) will not decline as job opportunities become fewer. The whole reason we had high levels of immigration in the first place was the large number of jobs available in this country; in fact the labour force reached a record size in recent years.... and that that figure is set to continue falling further in the years ahead unless we take action to reduce the numbers coming in.
Anyway, I, like many others, don’t really give a toss where people are born.
That article is 3 years old; trends that were current in 2005 are no longer current; as I have already said, the level of immigration is declining, so claims of Irish people being an ethnic minority within their own country is just scaremongering. One other thing; from the article you linked to:The president of Dublin City University has predicted that if current trends continue the indigenous Irish population could be an ethnic minority in their own country by the year 2050
“ Unpublished UK-based research, which he does not identify...”
I would not give such a source much credibility.
... and Central and Western Europeans too. In fact, the largest “ethnic minority” in Ireland is, by some distance, the British.We have allowed completely unrestricted access to tens of millions of eastern Europeans...
You think Irish people would happily accept that i.e. being refused access to other EU states?If any EU state decided to restrict access to Irish citizens or the citizens of any other EU state then they should be given that right and we should respect it just as our right to restrict access to them should also be respected.
As has already been pointed out, labour shortages benefit nobody.If we had far fewer people competing for jobs employers would be more inclined to charge above the minimum wage...
I don’t think that’s the point; I think a lot of Irish people, young Irish people in particular, gain a sense of security from the knowledge that they are free to emigrate to any country in Europe should things take a turn for the worst here.If immigration ever causes problems we can just get back on the boat?0 -
The president of Dublin City University has predicted that if current trends continue the indigenous Irish population could be an ethnic minority in their own country by the year 2050
http://www.gaelport.com/index.php?page=clippings&id=55&viewby=date
I'm highly dubious about predictions looking so far into the future. 2050 is 42 years away. 42 years ago was 1966. How accurate do you think the predictions made in 1966 would have been about the state of Ireland in 2008, or the 1976 predictions? or the 1986 predictions? Such predictions are really only theoretical since the trends which are used will never continue in the long term.
Having said that, if you believe this guy might be right then it's worth printing the next paragraphs which you didn't mention.
Prof von Prondzynski will also argue that any attempt to stop migration here will lead to a significant decline in the Irish economy, and a return to Ireland's peripheral status in Europe.
...
"People are nervous about immigration. But immigration is almost always a good thing. People think immigrants come here and take jobs, but the opposite is true. They will come and create jobs."
Ix0 -
People such as myself are not happy about the fact that the indigenous Irish population has fallen below 90% of the total after just a few years of immigration and that that figure is set to continue falling further in the years ahead unless we take action to reduce the numbers coming in.
The president of Dublin City University has predicted that if current trends continue the indigenous Irish population could be an ethnic minority in their own country by the year 2050
http://www.gaelport.com/index.php?page=clippings&id=55&viewby=date
Come on, seriously. That's in a linear situation where trends continue at the same rate in the same direction. That's like saying 'based on 2006 figures, by 2050 Ireland will be the wealthiest country in Europe, and have a population of 30 million'. Trends change, we are now in recession, and labour tourists will go home when the money to employ them runs out. That also means re-skilling for the indigenous population, and low-paid jobs being taken by Irish people who were previously being paid much more for skilled work.
So you'll get your wish by virtue of highly negative trends in the Irish economy; the money, and workers, will have gone elsewhere. Interestingly, when that happens, you'll see rising unemployment amongst the indigenous population.
Over-simplified logic would suggest that 'when it's good enough for the foreigners, it must be good enough for us'. Vice-versa must clearly also be true, and I think your desired ethnic purity of times past goes hand in hand with an ailing economy.0 -
Immigartion is out of control. Open boarders has been the biggest disaster for this country since the Brits came here hundreds of years ago. We should pull out of the EU and take back our independence before its too late.0
-
Open boarders has been the biggest disaster for this country since the Brits came here hundreds of years ago.
how exactly?
are they eating all our potatoes?0 -
Advertisement
-
Join Date:Posts: 9866
Immigartion is out of control. Open boarders has been the biggest disaster for this country since the Brits came here hundreds of years ago. We should pull out of the EU and take back our independence before its too late.
Nice summing up of the position of numerous posters on this thread. At least you are not making up fanciful theories as to how it would be to our economic benefit to withdraw from the EU.
Just plain old undisguised xenophobic fear about d'immigrants taking our wimmins and our jobs.
Well done sir you are indeed a credit to our nation.0 -
marco_polo wrote: »Nice summing up of the position of numerous posters on this thread. At least you are not making up fanciful theories as to how it would be to our economic benefit to withdraw from the EU.
Just plain old undisguised xenophobic fear about d'immigrants taking our wimmins and our jobs.
Well done sir you are indeed a credit to our nation.
I dont fear immigrants. I simply want some immigration control. People like you want open boarders and allow possibly millions of them in.
So thanks, I am a credit to our nation, you are not.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 9866
I dont fear immigrants. I simply want some immigration control. People like you want open boarders and allow possibly millions of them in.
So thanks, I am a credit to our nation, you are not.
Millions eh? :rolleyes: I don't have to want them, because we have them already and have had for the past 35 years or so. And we seem to be doing just fine thanks very much.
If you want go go back to live in the 1950s I suggest you build a time machine.0 -
I dont fear immigrants. I simply want some immigration control. People like you want open boarders and allow possibly millions of them in.
So thanks, I am a credit to our nation, you are not.
You should maybe get a posse together and patrol the borders.
They're bringing in diseases!
Won't somebody please think of the children????0 -
We do have immigration control; haven't you noticed those guys checking your passport when you get off a plane?I simply want some immigration control.
Yeah, that's what all anti-anti-immigration types are after :rolleyes:.People like you want open boarders and allow possibly millions of them in.
The arrogance of the anti-immigration crowd always astounds me; "sure everyone wants to come to Ireland - sure aren't we great?!? If we open the borders, we'll be swamped with all the people from all over the world who know how great we are. But they're not as great as we are, so we shouldn't let them in, unless of course they can somehow prove that they are as great as us, or even greater, in which case we may grace them with our welcome."0 -
nesf wrote:Look, this would be a seriously bad thing.
A seriously bad thing?nesf wrote:If few people are competing for jobs you are correct, employers need to offer higher wages than they would in a more competitive labour market. The problem with this is that this will push up inflation
Yes, prices usually rise in response to an across-the-board increase in wages but those increases will mostly be felt in those sectors which are most heavily dependent on immigrant labour. In Ireland's case that would mainly be construction and the hospitality sector. The retail sector would also be impacted but everyone knows they're overcharging as it is and so the consumer will be very sensitive to any further price rises.
As well as that, as David McWilliams has pointed out, a fall in immigration will lead to a fall in rent prices which will benefit Irish workers further. As rent accounts for much of the of the average low-wage worker's cost of living, the balance might just work out in their favour.
As inflation in Ireland has been up near the highest in the EU (despite having lower than average labour costs and higher than average immigration), maybe we should do something about getting inflation under control? Oh wait, I forgot, we can't. Being in the EU we don't have the power to set our own interest rates.nesf wrote:which is a very bad thing especially for people in the lower wage brackets.
Is an increase in inflation really worse than an increase in unemployment? How many recently unemployed Irish people will be unable to find a job this year and the next year because of the competition from immigrants? I'm sure if you were to offer them the choice most of those unemployed people would rather have a job. Even if meant an increase in inflation, in the long-term prices would stabilise and wages would then begin to rise in line with any further inflation.nesf wrote:Workers don't really benefit from a labour shortage, any increases in wage they get will just be eaten up by the inflation these increases will cause within a few years.
I don't know if that's correct. David McWilliams in his book the Generation Game mentions the case of black people in America to show how a more restrictive immigration policy can benefit low-wage native workers more than a liberal immigration policy.
Black Americans average income and standard of living increased steadily between the 1920s and the 1960 due to stricter immigration laws in America that protected them from cheaper foreign competition. It was only from the mid 1960s onwards when they decided to throw open the borders that things started to go downhill for the black people. The low-skilled jobs that they would normally have filled were instead taken by the low-cost Mexicans.djpbarry wrote:Is it?
Is Irish labour not cheaper than British labour? If it isn't, it only strengthens my argument that Britain would not have all that much to gain by imposing restrictions on Irish labour as the Irish are not as likely to undercut British workers. It's different with the Eastern Europeans in Ireland, they are used to working for a far lowerdjpbarry wrote:The current unemployment rate in Ireland is similar to that in the UK.
So are you saying there isn't a job shortage, that there will be enough jobs for everyone? Will there will be enough jobs created this year to make up for the ones that are lost as well as the jobs needed for the extra 30,000 immigrants?djpbarry wrote:While it is unlikely that large numbers of Irish people will emigrate to Eastern Europe (because English-speaking people tend to be incredibly lazy when it comes to learning other languages) in the near future, there will certainly be some level of emigration to that part of the world. The point is, the option is there if people want to avail of it.
Why didn't large numbers of Irish people avail of that opportunity back in the 1980s? Far more Irish people emigrated to America, a country that does have restrictions, than emigrated to France or Germany, countries that had no restrictions.djpbarry wrote:What difference does it make?
It makes a huge difference. Irish people leaving their country to find work in another country is not the same thing as a Polish immigrant returning home after a few years to find work back in his own country. In the first case, the Irish worker is doing something that he would not otherwise want to do. In the second case the Polish worker is doing something that he would have always intended to do.
I'm sure if you were ask people in this country, nearly everyone, both the natives and the immigrants would say that given the choice they would much rather work in their own country than work in a foreign country.djpbarry wrote:Net emigration is not a good thing, regardless of the nationality of the emigrants.
I disagree. I think it's a very good thing when there's a shortage of jobs and the people that are leaving are foreign immigrants. It eases the competition for the available jobs. It's a very bad thing when there's a shortage of jobs and the people emigrating are Irish people.djpbarry wrote:In which case, I could just as easily argue that the UK's rate of immigration is too low.
Yeah right! I'd like to see you telling the English that they don't have enough immigrants! Go on, just try it!djpbarry wrote:Ireland has been receiving immigrants for far longer than just a "few years".
Not really. Most of the growth in the non-national population has only occured in the last 3 or 4 years since we opened our borders to the East Europeans.djpbarry wrote:As I have already pointed out, it is very unlikely that levels of immigration (anywhere) will not decline as job opportunities become fewer.
I'm sure it will decline but will that decline neatly match the decline in the number of new jobs being created? And will the decline be enough to bring our immigration back to a level that most people would consider reasonable?
The ESRI have predicted that immigration will be as high as 40,000 next year. When you factor in the difference in population that works out as twice as many immigrants as Britain is getting each year. It would be the equivalent of Britain doubling their number of immigrants to 400,000. If we have twice as many immigrants as our nearest neighbour during the worst year of a recession what can we expect when the economy picks up again?djpbarry wrote:The whole reason we had high levels of immigration in the first place was the large number of jobs available in this country
Not true. The reason we have had high levels of immigration over the last few years was because of a decision made by our government to open our borders to hundreds of millions of low-wage Eastern Europeans. If the government hadn't made that decision we would not have as many immigrants entering the country. Any labour shortage could easily have been covered by issuing temporary work permits, a suggestion made a few years ago by the Labour leader Pat Rabitte.djpbarry wrote:That article is 3 years old;
And have things changed drastically since then?djpbarry wrote:trends that were current in 2005 are no longer current
One or two bad summers does not mean that global temperatures are not on an upward trend. Is there any reason to believe that immigration will continue to fall even after the economy recovers?djpbarry wrote:In fact, the largest “ethnic minority” in Ireland is, by some distance, the British.
I don't think so. According to wikipedia, British born people make up 2.7% of the population of the republic of Ireland.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_republic_of_ireland
That works out at about 116,000 people.
Although it's not the official figure contained in the census, the number of Polish is estimated at 200,000. If correct, that would mean that there are almost twice as many Polish people in Ireland than there are British people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_minority_in_Irelanddjpbarry wrote:You think Irish people would happily accept that i.e. being refused access to other EU states?
If any country in the EU ever experiences mass immigration of Irish people on the scale that we've experienced it over the last few years then I think we would be very understanding and we would respect their decision to try to reduce the number of people entering their country.djpbarry wrote:As has already been pointed out, labour shortages benefit nobody.
Yes they do. Low-wage workers benefit by having higher-than-minimum wages.0 -
kevteljeur wrote:Ireland, the UK and Sweden threw open their labour market to the 10 Accession countries because they had an acute labour shortage, not out of political correctness.
If the reason for throwing open our labour market at the time was because we had a labour shortage would it not make sense to reverse that decision now that things have changed? We don't have enough jobs for both the immigrants and for our own unemployed so wouldn't it be worth reconsidering our open-borders policy now that we're in a recession?kevteljeur wrote:Inability to meet labour needs would at that point have damaged the growth of their economies.
How come we didn't hear much about those labour needs back at the time the decision was made to lift the restrictions? It's funny how we only ever hear about the need for immigration in retrospect, we rarely hear about it in advance.
I don't remember hearing many politicians telling us that we needed hundreds of thousands of eastern Europeans to fill all those thousands of vacancies. I actually remember them saying the exact opposite, that we would have hardly any immigration at all. Was it Willie O'Dea or Dick Roche who said that we should only expect a few thousand and that anyone who suggested otherwise was just scare-mongering?kevteljeur wrote:That Ireland's economy was built on the falsehood of house-building and rising property prices is a different discussion; they needed the labour to do it
They needed the labour because they needed to build all those houses? I don't think so.0 -
Black Americans average income and standard of living increased steadily between the 1920s and the 1960 due to stricter immigration laws in America that protected them from cheaper foreign competition. It was only from the mid 1960s onwards when they decided to throw open the borders that things started to go downhill for the black people. The low-skilled jobs that they would normally have filled were instead taken by the low-cost Mexicans.
Real wages in the US have been poor since the 80s. Do you think middle class jobs are going downhill because of the low-cost Mexicans or do you think that the performance in the rest of the US economy can be ignored and we can just look at Black Americans? After the 1960's the entire economy started taking nosedives every so often. Real wages were crippled by the stagflation and inflation of the 70's and 80's. That Black American's average income and standard of living decreased during this time doesn't point to Mexican immigrants it points to serious problems across the entire economy. You can't hold everything constant as if it was the 1960's and then add some Mexicans, unless you can somehow control for the changes in the 70's and 80's you can't draw anything but spurious correlations which tell us nothing of use. It doesn't mean they are unrelated but it doesn't mean that they are related either. We can't draw anything useful from a decrease when the rest of the country was also decreasing unless we can somehow account for the rest of the economy and that's extremely tricky to do accurately! Ditto with the fall in immigration point you made above, what else is happening in the economy to cause a fall in immigration?0 -
Within the EU I am inclined to say yes.Do we have any power to limit immigration from other EU states? I've heard several people over the last few months saying that our hands are tied and we we just have to put up with it. I would be interested to know if that really is the case. Does anyone know if would cause problems if the government announced that they were extending the restrictions we already have on Bulgaria and Romania to the other eastern European countries?
Being an immigrant myself, (untill i can send my passport back to the place I once belonged) ah well I will remain an immigrant no matter what.
However I see immigration differntly here
Immigration is not the problem, integration is or rather assimilation, the lack of it I mean.
When I arrived here in '99 i remember a shopkeeper in Stephen Green import himself from Germany, who came to ireland because Ireland was white.
I tought this very racist, and it is in a certain way, however I herd two Nigerians and a Somalian guy say the same in different words.
When they came over respectively 14-22 and 24 years ago the only racism they encountered was kids wondering if they would rub off.
They worked their arses off and were repected and accepted as members of the comunity.
Now because of their coulour of skin they are asociated with the spungers that come in since Irelands wellfare system has dramatically improved.
Something I have to agree with in line with what that shopkeeper said.
If you immigrated because of your safety due to sexual orientation religion etc etc, you could have come to Ireland 20 years ago as well
If you emigrated because of financial gain the 90's were extremely good, however the safetynet/welfare system was crap here, but work a plenty, so who would really care if it was work you wanted.
Since 2002/2004 however there has been a huge influx in non EU immigrants.
The same immigrants who after holding their hands up to the taxpayers/state are going to make demands on schooling respect etc etc
Now respect is something you earn, not something you get for free.
Now back on topic.
The influx of EU immigrants in Ireland are mostly former east europeans
who work their respective balls or female equivalent off, more often than not below their education level due to limmited grasp on the english language.
99% of them are law abiding hardworking people, who are doing jobs the Irish could not be arsed doing anymore in the 90's. They came here to earn money save and most likely move back (Poles) however some of the younger ones grasped of the language and the oppportunities andare working themselves up into positions at their level.
I mention Poles because the area I am from in Holland has had them for years for seasonal jobs, theid work from dusk to dawn go home buy a house and pay a good education for their kids.
Same goes for the Romanians, read romanians not Roma's, for which togethjer with the romanians the gates have been opened as well. And this group, the Roma's, fits in with the same kind of spungers of Non-EU citizens I mentioned above: spungers and leeches.
Where the Polish blend in really well, ok their might be a tat to many polish shops but hooray there is some competittion for Dunnes they know what customer service is so what am i complaining about, there is an element Pole pretenders comming in which are/bring a criminal element. And like Nigerians ans Somalians, who is able to see the difference between East Europeans.
Damn you cant even tell them appart from Paddys these former commies.
OK you can hear it. Then again, gift of the gap or not, how many here can hear the difference between a Pole and a Russian?
And how can you see weather they are working or spunging.
The more southern Romanians get tarred with the Roma brush.
Sad but True
The only thing you can doe to avoid any future probblems (headscarfs in catholic schools , from spungers who hold another EU state passport mostly)
is make sure we dont create Polish Romanian NameYouCountryOfChoice Ghetto's where people get tarred with the same brush, and their chances of evolving are limmited.
That in combination with a demand that they assimilate to Irish culture and learn at least Bearla.
(Not attempting to buy booze on sunday before 12.00, bulk buying alcoholics the night before good friday, not handling your mobile phone while driving BUT blessing yourself at every church and or graveyard is completely roadsafe and your covered afterwards if you end up in a really bad crash, slag the English take up GAA or failing that Rugby (if you see the necks one some of the easteuropeans they are well suited)
No one stopped the Irish from going abroad, ok you wre not liked everywhere, but wow did you guys adept to where you "settled". If it was not in an English speaking nation you learned the language and integrated.
Immigration its not the problem
Immigrants are and or the government responsible for them is.
Tell them the rules learn them the language...if you dont like it you either go back or we send you back. That suits evrybody cause no immigrant will be asociated with misbehaving immigrants that look like sound like or foor all I care are really from the same village they are from.
Oh and before anyone gets smart...I have a list of cheeseheads that kan get a single Eindhoven Amsterdam or Rotterdam airport straigh away, cause my countrymen are not that well behaved and adapted either0 -
Advertisement
-
nesf wrote:You can't hold everything constant as if it was the 1960's and then add some Mexicans, unless you can somehow control for the changes in the 70's and 80's you can't draw anything but spurious correlations which tell us nothing of use
I'm willing to bet that the fall in wages was far greater for those low-skilled people who had to compete with the immigrants than it was for the middle-class people who didn't have to compete with lower-cost immigrants.nesf wrote:It doesn't mean they are unrelated but it doesn't mean that they are related either.
I would be very surprised if they weren't related.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement