since 2002 State has paid out €1bn to Traveller projects (mod warning post 207)

Sand

@Welease

I am quite happy to talk about stats..

a) provide them
b) then provide information on why X amount of travellers breaking that law should stop ALL travellers getting the basic benefits the state provides...

That is what this thread is about... over to you...

I have, and included links to them to assist you forming your own view. Perhaps in your "frenzy" you missed them.

Youve also missed that no one is talking about removing "basic" benefits. They are talking about the additional, exceptional funding for Traveller projects which by definition are not available to the average poor person. Please justify this spending.

Oh and given youve posted just there,

70 million is spent by the Dept of Education, though they cant really account for what it is spent on.
The department employs 750 teachers dedicated to Traveller learning projects. Defined as Traveller learning projects by the department themselves, not as adult education schemes or illiteracy programs or so on. Specifically for travellers.

"€42m on Traveller projects, which is understood largely to consist of funding to local authorities who, under law, must provide housing and halting sites for Travellers. "

The funding of halting sites is perhaps the clearest example of funding of a lifestyle choice. Whats next, free holidays?

This is spending to sustain a lifestyle which results in 95% male unemployment. I dont see how subsidising this actually *helps* people.

But I am always amazed at the way people are happy to spend other peoples money. After all, who cares what the taxpayer thinks.

Flamed Diving

Sand wrote: »

@Flamed Diving



I suggest you start a thread about it, perhaps in a forum other than the Irish economy one.

It is entirely relevant to the post you made, which is in this thread and in this forum. Well dodged, though. Or would you care to answer my question?

Sand wrote: »

Hi, this is me. The poster you were responding to was julien05. Usernames are just there on the top left of the post.

I'm not an idiot. It seems that sarcasm doesn't register in your mind. Care to answer the question I put to you? Still dodging, much?

Sand

@Flamed Diving

I'm not an idiot. It seems that sarcasm doesn't register in your mind. Care to answer the question I put to you? Still dodging, much?

Nice try at a dodge there yourself.

It is entirely relevant to the post you made, which is in this thread and in this forum. Well dodged, though. Or would you care to answer my question?

No, its not. Its a tangent which you hope will yield some "point". African Americans are similarly over-represented in incarceration rates by race, but they are not substitutes for Irish travellers. This thread is about the excessive spending on sustaining a lifestyle which unsurprisingly results in high levels of poverty, poor health and education.

If you cant discuss it based on the facts relevant to the lifestyle and enviroment, then just admit that. Theres nothing to be gained by changing the field of play by about 3000 miles or so to the west to talk about some other people and their troubles.

Bigdeadlydave

SLUSK wrote: »

If people were less PC and actually said what they think about travellers here on boards they would probably be banned by the mods.

I agree.

For instance, who here wouldn't mind if a halting site was set up near their house?

Flamed Diving

julien05 wrote: »

@Flamed Diving



Nice try at a dodge there yourself.

Sarcasm, julien. Look it up. Back to your bigoted post.

Sand wrote: »

No, its not. Its a tangent which you hope will yield some "point". African Americans are similarly over-represented in incarceration rates by race, but they are not substitutes for Irish travellers. This thread is about the excessive spending on sustaining a lifestyle which unsurprisingly results in high levels of poverty, poor health and education.

If you cant discuss it based on the facts relevant to the lifestyle and enviroment, then just admit that. Theres nothing to be gained by changing the field of play by about 3000 miles or so to the west to talk about some other people and their troubles.

It is not a tangent. It is a direct comment related to a post you made, where you said:

julien05 wrote: »

That travellers have bad press associated with unusually high levels of criminality is not the fault of others.

Whose fault is it, then? And by that measure, whose fault is it that African-Americans are disproportionately represented in American prisons?

Welease

Sand wrote: »

@Welease


I have, and included links to them to assist you forming your own view. Perhaps in your "frenzy" you missed them.

Youve also missed that no one is talking about removing "basic" benefits. They are talking about the additional, exceptional funding for Traveller projects which by definition are not available to the average poor person. Please justify this spending.

Oh and given youve posted just there,

70 million is spent by the Dept of Education, though they cant really account for what it is spent on.
The department employs 750 teachers dedicated to Traveller learning projects. Defined as Traveller learning projects by the department themselves, not as adult education schemes or illiteracy programs or so on. Specifically for travellers.

"€42m on Traveller projects, which is understood largely to consist of funding to local authorities who, under law, must provide housing and halting sites for Travellers. "

The funding of halting sites is perhaps the clearest example of funding of a lifestyle choice. Whats next, free holidays?

This is spending to sustain a lifestyle which results in 95% male unemployment. I dont see how subsidising this actually *helps* people.

But I am always amazed at the way people are happy to spend other peoples money. After all, who cares what the taxpayer thinks.

ok lets take this point by point...

Sand wrote: »

70 million is spent by the Dept of Education, though they cant really account for what it is spent on.

ok so the government spend 70 million on something but they are not sure what they spent it on (LOL.. and please remember my initial post lay the blame at the governments door not attemping to scapegoat the travellers like others.).. and it's ok to blame the travellers? I can guarantee you this... not on single cent of that cash landed in the back pockets of travellers.... agree or disagree?

Sand wrote: »

The department employs 750 teachers dedicated to Traveller learning projects. Defined as Traveller learning projects by the department themselves, not as adult education schemes or illiteracy programs or so on. Specifically for travellers.

Your point being? The DOE also employs teachers for unemployed people (FAS), special needs groups (1:1 support in our local school), gives grants to non catholic schools, gaelic schools etc... Every teacher/support assistant is employed for a reason, some of those reasons are for travellers this is not unique or favouritism, especially when the ESRI has pointed out the failings in our current education system for travelling communities.

Sand wrote: »

"€42m on Traveller projects, which is understood largely to consist of funding to local authorities who, under law, must provide housing and halting sites for Travellers. "

The funding of halting sites is perhaps the clearest example of funding of a lifestyle choice. Whats next, free holidays?

And how much do we spend on funding houses for settled families? Are you trying to tell me we would save money if they stopped being travellers and all demanded 3-4 bed houses as opposed to concrete base and water?
The settled community demand bigger and bigger houses to house their increasing families with "boyfriends" only staying the odd night while we pay out multiple welfare checks, and the original father doesnt contribute a cent.

Sand wrote: »

This is spending to sustain a lifestyle which results in 95% male unemployment. I dont see how subsidising this actually *helps* people.

Well from an interview I listened to on Newstalk.. the figure is closer to 75%.. but lets not worry about the Indo actually checking any facts..
So do you wonder why it's 95%?... the ESRI and others believe its due to descrimination... The additional money (which again... is not unique to the travellign community) is to help fund project which drops this rate to benefit society... You and others seem to want to cut this, and magically assume we will gain more employment from that action. /boggle

Sand wrote: »

But I am always amazed at the way people are happy to spend other peoples money. After all, who cares what the taxpayer thinks.

I would like to see every cent spend correctly.. I have been a top rate tax payer for the last 20 years... I makes my blood boil to see Ennis CC spend 500K per house for travellers.. but I am also intelligent enough to see that travellers had nothing to do with that.. I am also shocked to see that the DOE can spend 70m on Traveller projects but really can't account for it.... but I am more shocked to see the bigotry on this forum of people who's prejudices allow them to blame travellers for that wastage...

Sand

@Flamed Diving

You seem to be getting a little grumpy and the whole trying to attribute my posts to other people (and vice versa) is a little silly. Theres probably something decent on TV.

Flamed Diving

Welease wrote: »

but I am more shocked to see the bigotry on this forum of people who's prejudices allow them to blame travellers for that wastage...

Do you think if a identical thread was started with the word 'blacks' substituted for 'travellers', that it would stay open for very long?

Flamed Diving

Sand wrote: »

@Flamed Diving

You seem to be getting a little grumpy and the whole trying to attribute my posts to other people is a little silly. Theres probably something decent on TV.

That travellers have bad press associated with unusually high levels of criminality is not the fault of others

- Sand

In other words, it is nobody's fault, but theirs.

cavedave

johnathan woss

YOUR OWN LINK says that the ROI had a cosanguinity rate of 0.5% which is lower than most of the other European countries surveyed !

Yes that is current rates. Other links give historical rates that are much higher. and you inbreed status builds up over time so looking just at this generation can miss things.

From here if you go to the Ireland section

"In the previous generation 1·12% of the marriages were between first cousins" from here. Which is lower than I was claiming. if 1st cousins were only 1% of marriages in around 1890 my claim that about 20% of all marriages prior to about 1900 were to 1st/second cousins is wrong.

Region Country Location (type) Collection period Study population Sample size Consanguinity Consanguinity type Coefficient of inbreeding (α) Reference
Europe Ireland All Irish Republic (General Population) 1959/68 RC dispensation 149029 0.5 UN,D1C,1C, 11/2C,D2C,2C 0.0002 Masterson (1970)
Europe Ireland Westmeath (Travellers) 1970/86 Household/ itinerant survey 141 71.6 1C,11/2C,2C 0.0312 Flynn (1986)
Asia India Karnataka (General Population) 1980/89 Obstetric inpatients 107518 31.4 UN,1C,2C 0.0299 Bittles et al. (1991)

Cousin marriage averages not much more than one percent in most European countries, and under 10% in the rest of the world outside that Morocco to Southern India corridor.

It seems Catholicism reduces the rate of cousin marriage so even back in the day Ireland was probably below the 10% world average.

Sand

@Welease

ok lets take this point by point...

No lets not, lets just do the highlights.

Are you trying to tell me we would save money if they stopped being travellers and all demanded 3-4 bed houses as opposed to concrete base and water?

You are focused on spending to sustain what is a pretty ****ty outcome - poverty, unemployment, poor health and poor education. I am not. I object to the funding of a lifestyle choice, especially given it results in poverty, unemployment, poor health and poor education.

So do you wonder why it's 95%?...

Poor education, lack of fixed abobe, incentives provided by state handouts? Plus peer pressure.

I am more shocked to see the bigotry on this forum of people who's prejudices allow them to blame travellers for that wastage...

Right, I am not blaming travellers though there are a variety of traveller advocacy groups who couldnt be considered completely blameless. I am objecting to the government funding a lifestyle choice, which results in poverty, unemployment, poor health and poor education.

Sand

@Flamed Diving

In other words, it is nobody's fault, but theirs.

Damn, thats a real zinger.

Flamed Diving

Sand wrote: »

@Flamed Diving



Damn, thats a real zinger.

Quite a bigoted statement, too. Unless I am mistaken in this inference? Feel free to defend yourself.

Bigdeadlydave

Quite a bigoted statement, too. Unless I am mistaken in this inference? Feel free to defend yourself.

To those that are calling other posters here bigots:
What would your opinion be on a halting site being set up across the road from you? (I asked this earlier but got lost in the shuffle)

irish_bob

i suspect welease is vincent browne in disguise , looking forward to seeing you back tonight , week earlier than pk on the frontline

Welease

Sand wrote: »

@Welease



No lets not, lets just do the highlights.



You are focused on spending to sustain what is a pretty ****ty outcome - poverty, unemployment, poor health and poor education. I am not. I object to the funding of a lifestyle choice, especially given it results in poverty, unemployment, poor health and poor education.

Poor education, lack of fixed abobe, incentives provided by state handouts? Plus peer pressure.

Right, I am not blaming travellers though there are a variety of traveller advocacy groups who couldnt be considered completely blameless. I am objecting to the government funding a lifestyle choice, which results in poverty, unemployment, poor health and poor education.

The government decides where to spend that resource.. not travellers.

The poor education, and unemployment some would argue comes from lack of investment and pure descrimination.
I understand the point you are making, and don't 100% disagree with it (once folks stop the demonising of all travellers)... but putting it all down to lack of a fixed abode is too simple a solution....

Poor education, peer pressure and government incentives form the backbone of issues in every city and deprived area in this country.. forcing people into a house won't fix that...I was born and raised on the northside of Dublin in the 70's/80's and emigrated to Liverpool in '88 .. settled communities have exactly the same issues.

(I am not trying to be an arse here, but again the amount of simple bigotry displayed in here is shocking.... it's the simple bigotry that a lot of Irish emigrants got in the past when seeking work abroad, and was based on exactly the same unsubstantiated "facts" reeled out here)

irish_bob

Bigdeadlydave wrote: »

To those that are calling other posters here bigots:
What would your opinion be on a halting site being set up across the road from you? (I asked this earlier but got lost in the shuffle)

shur they could ask pajoe ward to paint thier 3 bed detached , hopefully they wont mind having thier house painted with a 9 : 1 ratio of diesel to paint

irish_bob

Welease wrote: »

The government decides where to spend that resource.. not travellers.

The poor education, and unemployment some would argue comes from lack of investment and pure descrimination.
I understand the point you are making, and don't 100% disagree with it (once folks stop the demonising of all travellers)... but putting it all down to lack of a fixed abode is too simple a solution....

Poor education, peer pressure and government incentives form the backbone of issues in every city and deprived area in this country.. forcing people into a house won't fix that...I was born and raised on the northside of Dublin in the 70's/80's and emigrated to Liverpool in '88 .. settled communities have exactly the same issues.

(I am not trying to be an arse here, but again the amount of simple bigotry displayed in here is shocking.... it's the simple bigotry that a lot of Irish emigrants got in the past when seeking work abroad, and was based on exactly the same unsubstantiated "facts" reeled out here)

bigotry is when you view someone in a negative light or show prejudice towards them for no reason other than what makes them different than you , most irish people who emmigrated to the uk in the 70,s 80,s were decent law abiding people , no one with an ounce of sense could say the same about tinkers

Bigdeadlydave

irish_bob wrote: »

shur they could ask pajoe ward to paint thier 3 bed detached , hopefully they wont mind having thier house painted with a 9 : 1 ratio of diesel to paint

No its a serious question and would be very interested to read Welease opinion on this.

Welease

irish_bob wrote: »

i suspect welease is vincent browne in disguise , looking forward to seeing you back tonight , week earlier than pk on the frontline

lol not..

From my perspective, I am 39, was forced to emigrate during the 80's and have lived and worked around the world.. One of the things that has stuck with me most is how most countries demonise one particular race/social group irrespective of facts. I had to most wonderful time in the UK and owe a lot more to that country than Ireland, but had small pockets of bigotry there (and in the US etc.) based on my Irish descent.

Before I left Ireland I had the same view of "knackers" as the average Irish person and it wasn't positive. Then I walked into the exactly same response from idiots abroad... I was Irish therefore I was thick, uneducated and looking to defraud the dole first, then engage in illegal activities. Unsurprisingly, as an educated highly qualified professional hearing this from some unemployed scrubber in a bar started to annoy me :P

If someone has actual facts about a particular grouping then present them and we can discuss them. There have been no fact's presented in this discussion to back up the claims that the majority travellers are criminals as has been stated. In fact the only facts have been presented by Sand to determine that in fact the vast majority (94%) of prisoners in Ireland are from the settled community

Plus I am better looking that Vincent Browne (marginally )

Welease

irish_bob wrote: »

bigotry is when you view someone in a negative light or show prejudice towards them for no reason other than what makes them different than you , most irish people who emmigrated to the uk in the 70,s 80,s were decent law abiding people , no one with an ounce of sense could say the same about tinkers

Actually no one with an ounce of sense would say that without having some facts to hand to prove the point.... you fail again...

Flamed Diving

Bigdeadlydave wrote: »

To those that are calling other posters here bigots:
What would your opinion be on a halting site being set up across the road from you? (I asked this earlier but got lost in the shuffle)

Delightful non-sequitur, the Politics/IrishEcon forum never fails to deliver. Anyway, looking at the stats provided by my friend Sand (and the stats he provided) I wouldn't be too fond of the idea of a group of people who are, roughly statistically speaking, more likely to commit criminal acts than the average person, moving across the road. In addition, various reports suggest that halting sites are quite poorly kept and attract various pests. However, I am not so bigoted to tar everyone with the same brush, simply because of statistics. A "settled" group of people could just as easily reap the same mayhem, you simply never know. Nor am I so bigoted to assume that the blame for the actions of the criminal element of this travelling group lays entirely at their feet, as I am educated and intelligent enough to know that it isn't as simple as them "choosing their lifestyle" as it is often a case of simultaneous causality ("lifestyle choosing them"). You could go on and on about that, and it applies to every ethnic minority in every country in the world and yet every moron who gives out about them believes that it is unique to them, somehow, and that this group is somehow fully to blame and asking for a life in the gutter. Depressing.

But to close by answering your question again, no, I would not feel comfortable about it, for the reasons given. However, does it have to be travellers? It is simply a case of me using the information provided and my knowledge to make a call. It says nothing of my views on them as a people or how they found themselves to be in the position they are today, with a high probabilistic rate of crime. If I told you that a family (no ethnic description) were moving across from you who came from a background of crime and filth, how would you act upon such information? Would it really matter if they were Polish, Nigerian, Indian, African or Irish?

What has your question got to do with bigotry?

Welease

Bigdeadlydave wrote: »

No its a serious question and would be very interested to read Welease opinion on this.

I have absolutely no issue with this.. If laws are broken then I expect there to be repercussions. There are caravans within 200 yards of where i live, whether the occupants describe themselves as travellers is beyond me, they have the best kept gardens around.

Funnily enough, in the (wow must be early 80's) Jerome Westbrooke moved in two doors down from me when he moved from the US... blacks at the time were sadly viewed with much the same suspicion and bigotry... and sadly in a lot of cases that doesn't seem to have changed.

So no, I don;t... no more than i had when the council would relocate some scumbag family into our local area....

Given the stats provided by Sand, I am more likely to be robbed/assaulted by somone from a nearby estate than from a traveller..

Blackjack

cavedave wrote: »

and remember Irish people for years were inbreeding probably at a rate of about 20%.

where's your proof of this 20%?

EDIT: Just read your later quote confirming that your Claims were incorrect:

cavedave wrote: »

my claim that about 20% of all marriages prior to about 1900 were to 1st/second cousins is wrong.

cavedave wrote: »

so even back in the day Ireland was probably below the 10% world average.

tinofapples

It's well overdue time that the government cut these leaches outta society. How many of them on the dole have to prove they've been applying for work ?? They're probably the only members of society that couldn't care less about the state of the country i.e the recession where stuck in at the moment and no doubt will be for awhile.

It's not about been racist towards them, it's about fairness, plain and simple. If their parents take them out of schooling system at an early let the parents be responsible for the bloody future, not hard working taxpayers.

Welease

tinofapples wrote: »

It's well overdue time that the government cut these leaches outta society. How many of them on the dole have to prove they've been applying for work ?? .

Do they have special laws that apply to only them when claiming the dole?
Care to link to some info?

They have to provide exactly the same evidence as everyone else in society.

Welease

Bigdeadlydave wrote: »

To those that are calling other posters here bigots:
What would your opinion be on a halting site being set up across the road from you? (I asked this earlier but got lost in the shuffle)

So given, I have answered you, and you have "thanked" someone else without responding to me.. how about you answer

Given that the only information available is from the UK which states no increase in crime has occured with travellers, and the last available report I could find from the Garda also stated the travellers were not predisposed to crime..

Can you explain factually why you would not want travellers located near you?

MysticalRain

I've never been able to figure out exactly how the hell Irish Travelers are ethically distinct from the main Irish population.

Welease

tinofapples wrote: »

It's well overdue time that the government cut these leaches outta society. How many of them on the dole have to prove they've been applying for work ?? They're probably the only members of society that couldn't care less about the state of the country i.e the recession where stuck in at the moment and no doubt will be for awhile.

It's not about been racist towards them, it's about fairness, plain and simple. If their parents take them out of schooling system at an early let the parents be responsible for the bloody future, not hard working taxpayers.

Simple ... it's descrimation if that law only applies to travellers.. If you want to apply that law to everyone then I don't see that many would object... I personally would applaud such a law (irrespective of the quality of the education in Ireland)

Welease

MysticalRain wrote: »

I've never been able to figure out exactly how the hell Irish Travelers are ethically distinct from the main Irish population.

They are not.. they are considered socially distinct..

In the UK they are considered ethnically distinct.