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

50 Million Africans -EU

Options
2456

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    marco_polo
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭marco_polo


    PaulieD wrote: »
    Sure.

    Now this reliance upon the state for the accommodation of so many Nigerians reflects another rather uncomfortable truth which was revealed in the 2006 census, but which has never -- so far as I know -- been highlighted in the media. It is this contrary to almost all predictions about the impact of immigrants upon an economy, a majority of Nigerians are not economically active at all. For even at the height of the boom, in 2006, only 38pc over the age of 15 were at work.

    http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/risible-lies-about-immigrants-no-substitute-for-honest-debate-1456226.html

    Anyway, there are more countries than just Nigeria in africa.

    We do have problems with a large demographic of "dolers" in this country. Importing more to keep them company will not solve the problem.



    Dunno.



    Sorry?




    I thought you can apply after five years in the country(other than students and asylum seekers), but there is a three year back log? So unofficially, its eight years?



    I understood you the first time. So if we import 56 million africans by 2050, all of whom will have obtained citizenship. We will be in a much worse position than we are in now, as we will have to provide pensions for a larger population. Its a vicous circle, wont you agree?

    Is Paul McGrath Nigerian? Because in Kevin Myers world he is. :rolleyes:

    He is taking a figure of 16,300 Nigerian citizens and comparing it to figures for all people of African ethnicity, including Irish citizens and citizens of other countries with african origins as well as non nigerian africans.

    The total number of unemployed people of African ethnicity (Including Irish citzens ) is a whopping 6,689.


    http://www.cso.ie/census/census2006results/volume_5/vol_5_2006_complete.pdf

    Lies, damned lies and statistics.


  • Options
    #33
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    You didn't fix my post, you edited it.
    No, I fixed it, and you broke it again. You said something that wasn't true; I corrected it; and now you're making the same untrue assertion again.
    As for the reason why opening up of borders to immigration is a bad thing, well. I'll leave that for your logic.
    Why can't you explain it using your own logic? Is it supposed to be self-evident?


  • Options
    #34
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    You don't think Europe's population is getting old? You don't think we'll need immigrants to pay for our pensions?

    In 30 years time who pays for the 50 million immigrants? Or do they then bring in more, to pay for them and so on and so on......While I understand that this suits you and business leaders throughout Europe, it doesn't please a lot of people.

    I don't know where this 50 million figure has come from. All I know is that at the moment europe brings in 1.8 million immigrants a year. This obviously doesn't count the huge number of illegals who enter every year. But do the maths, the figures are huge.


  • Options
    #35
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    No, I fixed it, and you broke it again. You said something that wasn't true; I corrected it; and now you're making the same untrue assertion again. Why can't you explain it using your own logic? Is it supposed to be self-evident?

    You want to open borders to a political entity with 450 million people to a world with 6.8 billion people. A world that is adding 70 million people a year in natural increase. A world that will be over 9 billion in 40 years time.


  • Options
    #36
    meditraitor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,207 ✭✭✭meditraitor


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    In 30 years time who pays for the 50 million immigrants? Or do they then bring in more, to pay for them and so on and so on......While I understand that this suits you and business leaders throughout Europe, it doesn't please a lot of people.

    I don't know where this 50 million figure has come from. All I know is that at the moment europe brings in 1.8 million immigrants a year. This obviously doesn't count the huge number of illegals who enter every year. But do the maths, the figures are huge.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population
    Different regions have different rates of population growth. According to the above table, the growth in population of the different regions from 2000 to 2005 was:

    237.771 million in Asia
    92.293 million in Africa
    38.052 million in Latin America
    16.241 million in Northern America
    1.955 million in Oceania
    -3.264 million in Europe
    383.047 million in the whole world

    This is over 5 years and it shows a reduction in the number of people living in Europe.
    This to me says there is plenty of room for 50m africans over the next 50 years.

    :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    In 30 years time who pays for the 50 million immigrants? Or do they then bring in more, to pay for them and so on and so on......While I understand that this suits you and business leaders throughout Europe, it doesn't please a lot of people.
    Perhaps you, or some other of this "lot of people", could explain how we'll address the problems inherent in an aging population. So far, all I've seen is what looks like a bog-standard knee-jerk reaction to the idea of letting people with darker skin into the country.
    I don't know where this 50 million figure has come from.
    Neither do I, but it would be a lot easier to have a rational discussion on the topic without imaginary numbers being tossed around.
    All I know is that at the moment europe brings in 1.8 million immigrants a year. This obviously doesn't count the huge number of illegals who enter every year. But do the maths, the figures are huge.
    1.8 million, against an EU population of half a billion. My god, we'll be in the minority within months.

    As for illegal entry, the whole discussion about creating mechanisms for legal entry is geared towards addressing the problems of illegal immigration. Yes, I know: those problems are largely being suffered by the southern European countries, but the EU has an annoying habit of finding ways for its member states to co-operate on solving problems.


  • Options
    #38
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    You want to open borders to a political entity with 450 million people to a world with 6.8 billion people.
    Are you asking me what I want, or telling me? Because I certainly haven't said that.


  • Options
    #39
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Perhaps you, or some other of this "lot of people", could explain how we'll address the problems inherent in an aging population. So far, all I've seen is what looks like a bog-standard knee-jerk reaction to the idea of letting people with darker skin into the country. Neither do I, but it would be a lot easier to have a rational discussion on the topic without imaginary numbers being tossed around. 1.8 million, against an EU population of half a billion. My god, we'll be in the minority within months.

    Just couldn't help yourself mentioning skin colour. You like to play the race card to stifle debate, well done.

    Why won't you explain who pays for the 50 million people at the end of their working life? Another 50 million, or another 100 million and on and on. This is convienent if Europe is to turn into a giant workshop for European business men.

    What happens when there is no one left in the world to pay our pensions? Do we implode?


  • Options
    #40
    meditraitor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,207 ✭✭✭meditraitor


    bill_ashmount wrote: »

    What happens when there is no one left in the world to pay our pensions? Do we implode?


    I wonder what happend before the idea of pensions was thought up?


  • Options
    #41
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    meditraitor wrote: »
    I wonder what happend before the idea of pensions was thought up?

    Indeed


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    meditraitor wrote: »
    I wonder what happend before the idea of pensions was thought up?


    On a recent trip to Japan I visits on of tokyo's national parks. It happened to be one of the days were they feed the homeless. I saw hundreds, maybe thousands of people quietly queuing for rice. The vast majority of them didn't appear to be substance abusers. They where by and large all just old men who had reached an age whereby they could no longer work, had no support in the form of pensions, and simply ended up homeless. That's what happens.


  • Options
    #43
    O'Morris
    Closed Accounts Posts: 619 ✭✭✭O'Morris


    Anyone who thinks mass immigration will be a fix for Europe's demographic problems might find this to be of interest
    The idea has been discredited by every authority that has looked at it – from the UN, to the Council of Europe, the European Commission, the UK Government Immigration Advisory Service the Home Office, and the OECD. Browne quotes from a Home Office report of 2001. “The impact of immigration in mitigating population aging is widely acknowledged to be small because immigrants also age. For a substantial effect, net inflows of migrants would not only need to occur on an annual basis, but would have to rise continuously. Despite these and other findings, debate about the link between changing demography and a migration ‘fix’ refuses to go away.” The Council of Europe in a 2000 report argued: “Migration flows cannot in future be used to reverse trends in population ageing and decline in most Council of Europe countries. The flows required would be too large and it would be impossible to integrate them into the economy and society.”

    Even the UN report, Replacement Migration: Is It A Solution to Declining and Ageing Population?, often cited as proving the case for replacement migration, actually came to the completely opposite conclusion. The authors concluded that the scale of migration needed to change the demographic profile of a whole country is so large as to be “out of reach”. For example, to combat the effect of aging population in South Korea (a very rapidly aging society) almost the entire population of the earth would have to move there by 2050.


  • Options
    #44
    daiixi
    Registered Users Posts: 2,347 ✭✭✭daiixi


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    But it lets you stay in the country long enough to be entitled for citizenship.

    Taken from the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service website:
    Naturalisation is a process whereby a foreign national can apply to become an Irish citizen. An application for a certificate of naturalisation will be considered under the provisions of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act, 1956, as amended. The Act provides that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform may, in his absolute discretion, grant an application for a certificate of naturalisation provided certain statutory conditions are fulfilled. The granting of Irish Citizenship through naturalisation is a privilege and an honour and not an entitlement.

    Citizenship is NOT an entitlement.


  • Options
    #45
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    Just couldn't help yourself mentioning skin colour. You like to play the race card to stifle debate, well done.
    ...as opposed to you playing the "you want everyone in the world to move to Ireland" card?

    If you want to pretend that this "story" isn't about whipping up outrage at the idea of an increase in the number of Africans in Europe, feel free.
    Why won't you explain who pays for the 50 million people at the end of their working life? Another 50 million, or another 100 million and on and on. This is convienent if Europe is to turn into a giant workshop for European business men.

    What happens when there is no one left in the world to pay our pensions? Do we implode?
    If you're determined to reduce what could be an interesting discussion down to made-up numbers and hyperbole, you're free to continue it on your own.
    O'Morris wrote: »
    Anyone who thinks mass immigration will be a fix for Europe's demographic problems might find this to be of interest
    I just hovered over that link to see where it went, and I'm not even going to bother clicking it.


  • Options
    #46
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    If you're determined to reduce what could be an interesting discussion down to made-up numbers and hyperbole, you're free to continue it on your own.

    lol, yawn......

    If you bring in people to pay your pension, they in turn need to be paid for. This is a fact that european politicians and businessmen don't care about because they won't be around in 2 or 3 generations time. It is a never ending circle. Bring in more to pay for the others we have all ready brought in. Then bring in more to pay for them etc. etc.


  • Options
    #47
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    If you bring in people to pay your pension, they in turn need to be paid for. This is a fact that european politicians and businessmen don't care about because they won't be around in 2 or 3 generations time. It is a never ending circle. Bring in more to pay for the others we have all ready brought in. Then bring in more to pay for them etc. etc.
    OK, so you've dismissed out of hand the idea that allowing a certain amount of controlled immigration to compensate for the problems inherent in a shrinking, aging population could possibly have any merit. I don't know why you've dismissed that idea, but apparently it has nothing to do with xenophobia.

    I'm sure at some point you'll explain why migration is intrinsically a bad thing, but in the meantime: do you happen to have any ideas of your own as to how to handle the inherent problems of a shrinking, aging population?


  • Options
    #48
    meditraitor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,207 ✭✭✭meditraitor


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    lol, yawn......

    If you bring in people to pay your pension, they in turn need to be paid for. This is a fact that european politicians and businessmen don't care about because they won't be around in 2 or 3 generations time. It is a never ending circle. Bring in more to pay for the others we have all ready brought in. Then bring in more to pay for them etc. etc.

    What do you think all these people immigrating into ireland/europe will be doing untill they reach pensionable age?
    Working my good friend, making genuine contributions to their pensions.

    Unless you are one of the mad yokes who think all these africans will just arrive and sit around waiting for the "pot of gold" that is the irish/european state pension.

    The pensions shortfall is not all down to the state pension and aging population, we have made serious errors in PS pension agreements that add significantly to the burdon.
    Will most of these africans be looking for PS jobs?


  • Options
    #49
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    meditraitor wrote: »
    What do you think all these people immigrating into ireland/europe will be doing untill they reach pensionable age?
    Working my good friend, making genuine contributions to their pensions.

    And who pays for them when they are retired? The answer is very simple, more immigrants. And who pays for them, more immigrants again.


  • Options
    #50
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    OK, so you've dismissed out of hand the idea that allowing a certain amount of controlled immigration to compensate for the problems inherent in a shrinking, aging population could possibly have any merit. I don't know why you've dismissed that idea, but apparently it has nothing to do with xenophobia.

    I'm sure at some point you'll explain why migration is intrinsically a bad thing, but in the meantime: do you happen to have any ideas of your own as to how to handle the inherent problems of a shrinking, aging population?

    Why won't you answer the question, when does it stop? The answer is never because you will always need more people to pay for the other people you bring in.


  • Options
    #51
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    Why won't you answer the question, when does it stop? The answer is never because you will always need more people to pay for the other people you bring in.
    You're seriously throwing stones in the won't-answer-the-question glass house?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    And who pays for them when they are retired? The answer is very simple, more immigrants. And who pays for them, more immigrants again.

    nope.... technology..

    we live in a world where each barrel of oil does the same work as dozen thousand man hours before


  • Options
    #53
    asdasd
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,185 ✭✭✭asdasd


    I just hovered over that link to see where it went, and I'm not even going to bother clicking it.

    It went to an Irish Times article, reprinted in ICP. maybe the poster should link to the original article so the debate doesnt devolve into "That came from the Express Mail Conservatives so I dont have to argue against it on the merits".

    On the subject of immigration and the economy.

    1) it doesnt help pensions. What would help pensions would be more babies.
    2) There is a report in England by the Lords- and plenty of other literature - which proves that the economic "beneifts" of immigration are proportional to the number of immigrants. That means if - in a boom like ireland's boom - the increase in the working population of 2% added 2% to the boom. Which wasnt necessary anyway but left everybody per-capita the same, or worse off.
    3) Averages hide a multiple of sins - the average per-capita wealth in a poker game is the same before and after the game , but one person is richer and the others poorer. Capitalists support mass immigration because it lowers wages. Thus in all immigrant societies the proportion of national income going to profits increases, and the proportion going to wages decreases.

    4) And then there are the externalities. Like the environment.

    5) And then, housing. If housing doesnt keep up with immigration ( as it isnt in England/UK) then housing and rent goes higher - this is a transfer of income to rentiers, and banks.

    etc.


    Its not all rosy with immigration. Immigration should be seen as much a bad as inflation. Inflation is better than deflation but only if kept to a low level. Similarly net positive immigration is better than net negative ( the latter sympthomatic of a recession, or a brain drain). If immigration is needed to keep some industries alive, to get high skilled immigration, or to plug labour shortages in a boom then it should be limited per country, per year to the numbers needed. In fact this is what Australia does.

    The rest is ideology, not economics.


  • Options
    #54
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I don't know why you've dismissed that idea, but apparently it has nothing to do with xenophobia.

    Another snide reference from you alluding to racism.


  • Options
    #55
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    asdasd wrote: »


    Its not all rosy with immigration. Immigration should be seen as much a bad as inflation. Inflation is better than deflation but only if kept to a low level. Similarly net positive immigration is better than net negative ( the latter sympthomatic of a recession, or a brain drain). If immigration is needed to keep some industries alive, to get high skilled immigration, or to plug labour shortages in a boom then it should be limited per country, per year to the numbers needed. In fact this is what Australia does.

    The rest is ideology, not economics.

    Agreed.


  • Options
    #56
    meditraitor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,207 ✭✭✭meditraitor


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    Another snide reference from you alluding to racism.

    Godwins law coming up.

    I for one think you are the one avoiding the questions by using emotive nonsensicle comments like above


  • Options
    #57
    PaulieD
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 932 ✭✭✭PaulieD


    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    i hate (hmm the irony! :eek:) racists, nationalists and xenophobes,

    Love of ones country. Tis a terrible crime.
    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    articles like the above and similar tactics where used before in last century to stir up **** and we ended up with concentration camps and countless genocides

    Thats one hell of a claim to make. His article is factually correct. The majority of Nigerians were unemployed during the boom.


  • Options
    #58
    meditraitor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,207 ✭✭✭meditraitor


    PaulieD wrote: »
    The majority of Nigerians were unemployed during the boom.

    Not the majority, Just a higher percentage when compared to other immigrants communities

    I get what your saying and it does imply that the nigerians are not giving as much as others to our country.

    Although its not true of all the nigerians and it should be noted that a majority of Nigerians in this country are working/contributing


  • Options
    #59
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    asdasd wrote: »
    Its not all rosy with immigration.
    No, it's not. It's also not all bad. Immigration has benefits, and immigration has downsides. Open borders would be a disaster; closed borders would be a disaster.

    Therefore, what's required is a debate on the form that immigration should take, the levels that are appropriate, and so on. That debate should also consider externalities, such as the longer-term effects of migration on the development of African (and other) economies, with a view to eventually mitigating the problems that cause the problems of illegal migration.
    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    Another snide reference from you alluding to racism.
    Another post from you not answering any questions.


  • Options
    #60
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    nope.... technology..

    we live in a world where each barrel of oil does the same work as dozen thousand man hours before

    Pity the world will be running out of oil by the time we're retiring, eh?

    Mind you, it's true that that's an alternative route. That's why the Japanese are so heavily into robots - to avoid having to import foreigners.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    O'Morris
    Closed Accounts Posts: 619 ✭✭✭O'Morris


    oscarBravo wrote:
    OK, so you've dismissed out of hand the idea that allowing a certain amount of controlled immigration to compensate for the problems inherent in a shrinking, aging population could possibly have any merit.

    It's a pity you wouldn't read the article I linked because if you did you would see that controlled immigration would not even come close to solving Europe's ageing population problem. The numbers of people required each year to maintain the dependence ratio would be so high that the costs of the proposed solution would outweigh the benefits.

    From the article from that I linked to before:
    The UN calculates that to keep the UK ratio at 4.09:1 Britain would need 60 million immigrants by 2050, bringing the population to 136 Million. To continue the strategy another 130 million immigrants would be needed by 2100, doubling to about a quarter of a billion.

    oscarBravo wrote:
    I don't know why you've dismissed that idea, but apparently it has nothing to do with xenophobia.

    I think it might have something to do with wanting Europe to still be a European continent in a hundred years from now.


Advertisement