Sorry But It Is Very Racist To Oppose Immigration

thebigbiffo

Gnobe wrote: »

I've been delving into some of these polls about immigration across Europe, and I'm particularly disturbed that virtually every european country supports some kind of restrictions on immigration (in Ireland it's 70% even before the recession).

I've always wondered why so many people support "restrictions" on immigration? Why? Why does it matter who or what lives next to you?

The world is getting smaller, the concept of nation states will disappear at some point and we'll probably merge together into single nation state. I also believe the world (or at least Europe and America) will be majority mixed race by sometime this century. I've never understood why people wont just live and let live.

We're all from the human race and we all share this planet god dammit. No one has a right to tell anyone else where to live. Tear down the borders and let humanity live together.

i bet you've long hair, smoke joints and wear a tie dye teeshirt.

damn hippy.

i could elaborate but hill billy has it pretty much down.

Sgt Hartman

thebigbiffo wrote: »

i bet you've long hair, smoke joints and wear a tie dye teeshirt.

damn hippy.

i could elaborate but hill billy has it pretty much down.

The OP complained in a previous thread that Ireland was "Too white":rolleyes:

UsernameInUse

Patriotism is psychopathic idiocy.

How one can be proud of the land in which they reside by random events is lunacy. Government and borders is very much like a religion. State's and their supporters are much like religious extremists - governments too, offer their deities, rules and psychological boundaries much like any other religious faith.

It is only when we break free from believing there is no God, can we truly appreciate ourselves - the invisible cage has been lifted from us. I believe the state is very much the same because we will reach a stateless society one day and looking back, it will be hard to comprehend how such evil existed in the first place. The same goes for immigration. I am in favour of the free movement of people. People are quick to go on the defensive - but what are you protecting? If the world really had any interest in ending poverty, it would have been done a long time ago. It's called the Free Market, and along with Free Immigration, poverty will be wiped out in one generation. If people can come here, then you are more than welcome to go over there - it works both ways.

thebigbiffo

Sgt Hartman wrote: »

The OP complained in a previous thread that Ireland was "Too white":rolleyes:

thank god i only read the first and last 2 pages then...

someone must have left the laptop running in pysc ward today with all the madness going around.

thebigbiffo

UsernameInUse wrote: »

If the world really had any interest in ending poverty, it would have been done a long time ago. It's called the Free Market, and along with Free Immigration, poverty will be wiped out in one generation. If people can come here, then you are more than welcome to go over there - it works both ways.

it's just that i have no interest in residing in nigeria...nigerian's however; the majority would love to reside here. get it?

we're humans (animals more or less) and we have to ensure that we protect our land...and land in the modern sense also covers monetary wealth. to be of any use to emerging countries, we need to have a stong country ourselves. and we can't have a strong country if we are overun by 'aliens' who have nothing in common with how we built this country.

UsernameInUse

thebigbiffo wrote: »

it's just that i have no interest in residing in nigeria...nigerian's however; the majority would love to reside here. get it?

we're humans (animals more or less) and we have to ensure that we protect our land...and land in the modern sense also covers monetary wealth. to be of any use to emerging countries, we need to have a stong country ourselves. and we can't have a strong country if we are overun by 'aliens' who have nothing in common with how we built this country.

We don't need to be overrun by "aliens" - our own kind are doing a very admirable job at running this country into the ground as is. As far as having a strong country - are you aware that in most democracies, ministers are not allowed to be members of parliament because the need to separate powers of the executive and legislative branches are actually taken seriously? There is nothing "strong" about Ireland at all.

And as far as living in Nigeria is concerned - I would have no problem with it provided the right people came to power. Africa is a corrupt continent for the most part - but then again, it's not wasteland. It's one of the most beautiful continents on Earth. The USA grew from nothing in a few hundred years - who is to say that Africa cannot be competitive on a global level in the same time frame?

You and I are only here for a short time - the world changes drastically. Look at Brazil, India and China for your next superpowers. What about Hong Kong and Singapore with their free economies? Are these not doing well? And who benefited from Free Immigration the most....was it not America? But you're forgetting that free immigration would not include Irish passports. People can come and go as they please without acquiring citizenship. I would welcome the diversity that would bring - I have no problems with living elsewhere if Ireland wasn't up to my standards of narrow-minded thinking, of course.

The Hill Billy

UsernameInUse wrote: »

Patriotism is psychopathic idiocy.

How one can be proud of the land in which they reside by random events is lunacy. Government and borders is very much like a religion. State's and their supporters are much like religious extremists - governments too, offer their deities, rules and psychological boundaries much like any other religious faith.

It is only when we break free from believing there is no God, can we truly appreciate ourselves - the invisible cage has been lifted from us. I believe the state is very much the same because we will reach a stateless society one day and looking back, it will be hard to comprehend how such evil existed in the first place. The same goes for immigration. I am in favour of the free movement of people. People are quick to go on the defensive - but what are you protecting? If the world really had any interest in ending poverty, it would have been done a long time ago. It's called the Free Market, and along with Free Immigration, poverty will be wiped out in one generation. If people can come here, then you are more than welcome to go over there - it works both ways.

Really? All I can say is LOL! & can I have some of what you're on?

UsernameInUse

Hill Billy wrote: »

Really? All I can say is LOL! & can I have some of what you're on?

Sure you can - it's called compassion and being open-minded.

Don't knock it until you've tried it.

Orando Broom

UsernameInUse wrote: »

Sure you can - it's called compassion and being open-minded.

Don't knock it until you've tried it.

Sorry but It breathless guff. Nigeria as an example is practically uninhabitable. The conditions of living in Ireland are far more favourable on every level. To attain fully free forms of living in open border-less societies is a pipe dream. An illogical pipe dream. People would, in droves, leave hostile environments in favour of perceived more hospitable environments rendering those areas uninhabitable due to over crowding and massive strain on resources. What you propose is that human kind take on the characteristics of a plague of locusts that move to an area use up all natural resources and then move on. Fully ridiculous. You assumption is based on the fallacy that if they want to come here we'd want to go there. It doesn't and never will work like that.

UsernameInUse

Orando Broom wrote: »

Sorry but It breathless guff. Nigeria as an example is practically uninhabitable. The conditions of living in Ireland are far more favourable on every level. To attain fully free forms of living in open border-less societies is a pipe dream. An illogical pipe dream. People would, in droves, leave hostile environments in favour of perceived more hospitable environments rendering those areas uninhabitable due to over crowding and massive strain on resources. What you propose is that human kind take on the characteristics of a plague of locusts that move to an area use up all natural resources and then move on. Fully ridiculous. You assumption is based on the fallacy that if they want to come here we'd want to go there. It doesn't and never will work like that.

Well obviously we wouldn't be leaving in our droves to move to Nigeria, but there are certainly other places in this world which are very "inhabitable". Having said that, I'm sure you didn't mean for your statement to sound kinda 'f*ck them - their place is not inhabitable, ours is so keep them out' - now that's kinda racist.

The reason why people can't fully get their head around it is because we're still an infantile species - we will reach that one day. Can you honestly say life wouldn't be much better if people could move all over the globe on their own time and expense? It's wonderful. Imagine you could move to Australia or any place of your choosing without need for visa's, regulations, how much hours you can work, how much time you can spend there....it would work both ways - it's not a one way street. It's only the xenophobes keeping them out. A sort of protectionism of this land where I randomly happened to be born. I couldn't give a damn about Ireland or patriotism - that assumes I recognise a "them" and an "us". I deplore such categorization.

Sending money to charities having seen a hungry child on TV is one thing, but for the same person to say "**** that foreign bastard in my country" is nothing short of hypocrisy in it's most deplorable form.

Orando Broom

UsernameInUse wrote: »

Well obviously we wouldn't be leaving in our droves to move to Nigeria, but there are certainly other places in this world which are very "inhabitable". Having said that, I'm sure you didn't mean for your statement to sound kinda 'f*ck them - their place is not inhabitable, ours is so keep them out' - now that's kinda racist.

The reason why people can't fully get their head around it is because we're still an infantile species - we will reach that one day. Can you honestly say life wouldn't be much better if people could move all over the globe on their own time and expense? It's wonderful. Imagine you could move to Australia or any place of your choosing without need for visa's, regulations, how much hours you can work, how much time you can spend there....it would work both ways - it's not a one way street. It's only the xenophobes keeping them out. A sort of protectionism of this land where I randomly happened to be born. I couldn't give a damn about Ireland or patriotism - that assumes I recognise a "them" and an "us". I deplore such categorization.

Sending money to charities having seen a hungry child on TV is one thing, but for the same person to say "**** that foreign bastard in my country" is nothing short of hypocrisy in it's most deplorable form.

Ah! so for example, Nigerians move to Ireland, a step up.

The Irish then move to Switzerland or Sweden, a step up. And the Swedes or Swiss move to Monte Carlo.

Essentially you want the entire planet to become upwardly mobile.

mikemac

UsernameInUse wrote: »

It's only the xenophobes keeping them out. A sort of protectionism of this land where I randomly happened to be born.

Well yes it is protectionism.
Irish workers in hotels or site labourers or other jobs don't want to be undercut by cheap labour. If you've experience and good at your job you don't want to go back to minimum wage
A labourer in Gort or packer in a meat factory doesn't want to compete hundreds or even thousands of Brazilians

Easy to call people xenophobe in a good job with little chance of being replaced.
Which is maybe why I hear very little from State organizations and quangos.

evercloserunion

I appreciate the sentiment of the OP but as others have said, it is unrealistic. Some national borders are necessary to prevent the economic catastrophe which could result from rapid overpopulation of what is, in our case, an already strained system.

What is racist is supporting the maintenance of border and restrictions on immigrations in circumstances where they are not absolutely necessary. In my view, the fact that a Polish guy got a job that you would have liked is not a valid reason to advocate kicking the Poles out. Also, if you complain about the use of the word "racist" or about the PC brigade, you are very likely a racist.

As I said, the OP is being unrealistic but come on people, you have to admit some people on here take the whole anti-immigration thing way beyond what is reasonable.

UsernameInUse

Orando Broom wrote: »

Ah! so for example, Nigerians move to Ireland, a step up.

The Irish then move to Switzerland or Sweden, a step up. And the Swedes or Swiss move to Monte Carlo.

Essentially you want the entire planet to become upwardly mobile.

I think you're going a little over the top with your assumptions of where people are going to find themselves. Organising people is, ironically, what I am against - so directing traffic where these people go there and these people go here is not my ideology - it's the opposite. I am against the categorization of people, hence me advocating for free immigration.

If Canada for example, opened a bi-lateral agreement with Ireland and they were welcomed over here if they so wished, what problem or grudge would or could we legitimately harbour if we could go there? The same with New Zealand, Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia ect ect. It will not be done overnight, of course. We need to determine our infrastructure capabilities but that's for another debate.

I also wouldn't call anywhere a "step-up". Referring to this assumes that one place is better than another when in actual fact, the problem between one prosperous place and another is a) government and b) laws restricting or barricading growth of some kind. But let's talk density - the state of Texas has enough land mass to hold all of the worlds population; each family in a family home with enough room for a garden. This is not my words - it has been well publicized and even on here, there was a thread going into all the particulars of it. Therefore, the problem or fear of over-crowding is a cul de sac.

Free immigration is not the organising of people into different countries or mass movement or upwardly mobile as you put it - it would be the free movement of people gradually, if they so wished, to another area of the world, again if they so wished and there, to be able to have the right to earn a living, to participate or not, to contribute or not.

The Hill Billy

UsernameInUse wrote: »

I'm sure you didn't mean for your statement to sound kinda 'f*ck them - their place is not inhabitable, ours is so keep them out' - now that's kinda racist.

No, it is not racist. It is economic & social protectionism. There is a big difference. That's the problem with this thread - posters are banging on about racism when it has nothing to do with race. Come back when ye know what ye are actually talking about.

PS - I live in Switzerland & it really is the mutt's nutts. Mind you - I am only here because I have proven means of income & the ability to support myself. Time for a fondue. Bis spaeter zaeme!

evercloserunion

No, it is not racist. It is economic & social protectionism. There is a big difference.

Eh... no. There is a difference, but it is one of degree. Restricting immigration to protect a society from social and economic catastrophe is one thing. Doing it to eliminate competition so that Irish people can make even more money doing jobs for which they aren't actually the best candidate is quite another.

You could exclude any group from society and justify it by saying "nothing against you guys, we're just trying to protect everyone else", that doesn't necessarily make it right.

UsernameInUse

Hill Billy wrote: »

No, it is not racist. It is economic & social protectionism. There is a big difference. That's the problem with this thread - posters are banging on about racism when it has nothing to do with race. Come back when ye know what ye are actually talking about.

PS - I live in Switzerland & it really is the mutt's nutts. Mind you - I am only here because I have proven means of income & the ability to support myself. Time for a fondue. Bis spaeter zaeme!

Yes it is economic and social protectionism - but it is also racist to say something along the lines of 'here is better so keep those out'. Depends on how you explain yourself. And as for the comment about 'Come back when ye know what ye are actually talking about' - well, I do. I believe in what I am speaking about because I am a Libertarian. Does this mean I call everyone else that doesn't subscribe to my beliefs in a demeaning fashion? Absolutely not. But I believe through and am open to ways in which we can improve the world. I just so happen to think that this one of them - I also believe in the Free Market, the abolition of the minimum wage and a quick and sharp end to bureaucracy so that everyone, not just the Irish benefits. Those who are willing to earn a living should not be kept down because of protectionism of people who are not willing to do half the work and live a more luxurious life at the expense of everyone else.

AckwelFoley

Sonics2k wrote: »

I do find it somewhat ironic how uppity the Irish get about Immigration, when you consider that for generations, the Irish themselves have been emigrating to various other countries, especially the U.S. and Australia.

But god forbid those job thieving Polski's should come here! Oh right.

Paddy didnt go to america and straight to the dole office

Nodin

snyper wrote: »

Paddy didnt go to america and straight to the dole office

...you can't arrive here and go straight to the dole office.

evercloserunion

snyper wrote: »

Paddy didnt go to america and straight to the dole office

No, but we went over there and took jobs which could have gone to locals.

Which is exactly why people complain about Eastern Europeans. It's both hilarious and depressing that people can't see the parallels.

Yahew

evercloserunion wrote: »

Eh... no. There is a difference, but it is one of degree. Restricting immigration to protect a society from social and economic catastrophe is one thing. Doing it to eliminate competition so that Irish people can make even more money doing jobs for which they aren't actually the best candidate is quite another.

You could exclude any group from society and justify it by saying "nothing against you guys, we're just trying to protect everyone else", that doesn't necessarily make it right.

lol, half of irish ( and European) jobs are protected. But for the right kind of people.

Why shouldnt lower class private sector workers try and protect their livelihood anyway.

Yahew

evercloserunion wrote: »

No, but we went over there and took jobs which could have gone to locals.

Which is exactly why people complain about Eastern Europeans. It's both hilarious and depressing that people can't see the parallels.

Its depressing I cant find a polish accountant when I need one. English accountants are a rip off.

AckwelFoley

Nodin wrote: »

...you can't arrive here and go straight to the dole office.

relatively speaking

evercloserunion wrote: »

No, but we went over there and took jobs which could have gone to locals.

Which is exactly why people complain about Eastern Europeans. It's both hilarious and depressing that people can't see the parallels.

Ive no problem with them, most of them did the less attactive jobs when we wouldnt do them - so thats not their fault and are entitled to keep them.

evercloserunion

Yahew wrote: »

lol, half of irish ( and European) jobs are protected. But for the right kind of people.

Why shouldnt lower class private sector workers try and protect their livelihood anyway.

Everyone has the right to try and protect their livelihood, within reason. I would say that protecting your livelihood by kicking your potential competitors out of the country is not within reason.

Maybe workers whose livelihoods are threatened by competition should consider being good at their jobs.

El Horseboxo

I hate that argument that Irish people should be tolerant to immigration because Irish people ended up all over the shop in the 1800's. What has that got to do with the Irish people living here now? Fúck all in my opinion.

Orando Broom

evercloserunion wrote: »

Everyone has the right to try and protect their livelihood, within reason. I would say that protecting your livelihood by kicking your potential competitors out of the country is not within reason.

Maybe workers whose livelihoods are threatened by competition should consider being good at their jobs.

Ignorant post. Good workers get shafted too.

Mike 1972

El Horseboxo wrote: »

I hate that argument that Irish people should be tolerant to immigration because Irish people ended up all over the shop in the 1800's. What has that got to do with the Irish people living here now? Fúck all in my opinion.

Because it helped the Irish economy develop to the level we enjoy today.

In any case large scale outward migration has been a feature of Irish life right up the the early 1990's (and is staging something of a comeback) so its pretty bloody relevant really.

Yahew

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Because it helped the Irish economy develop to the level we enjoy today.

In any case large scale outward migration has been a feature of Irish life right up the the early 1990's (and is staging something of a comeback) so its pretty bloody relevant really.

nope.

zimmermania

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

No there isn't

Until such time as all ILLEGAL immigrants are sent home from the USA we cannot talk and then all the irish in britain,what about them?.We need at least 1 million if not2 million more people here to develop a real vibrant economy.Many irish people were glad to go to the states on coffin ships to escape from poverty sricken ireland less than 200 years ago.I love the new multi-cultural ireland,the new languages we hear spoken,the clothes and above all the new people who are trying to build a new life for themselves just as the irish did.

Precious flower

It's simply not possible to just allow every one in because we only have a certain amount resources to go around and it would put a massive strain on the goverment to be providing for such a massive increase in population if there was one, so there has to be some where to draw the line.

UsernameInUse

Precious flower wrote: »

It's simply not possible to just allow every one in because we only have a certain amount resources to go around and it would put a massive strain on the goverment to be providing for such a massive increase in population if there was one, so there has to be some where to draw the line.

My sentiments exactly.

That's why government (small "g" - people give too much respect) has no legitimate functions specifically to be running a bus service. What you have described is essentially communism - immigration would not put a strain on government unless of course you happen to live in a communist country where everything from your work to production is planned by a central power. The market, supply and demand, private enterprise in the Free Market would take care of all the needs and wants of the people because there is a profit to be made by entrepreneurs.

And everything is included in this; education, medicine, courts and law enforcement to private charities, the right to earn a living to the extent of your own moral principles, transport will increase ten-fold with more regularity for the increasing numbers of consumers, retailers and wealth, private currencies in place of the government issued Euro.

You leave the Free Market to take care of immigration and remove government - everything else will fall into place.

Yahew

UsernameInUse wrote: »

My sentiments exactly.

That's why government (small "g" - people give too much respect) has no legitimate functions specifically to be running a bus service. What you have described is essentially communism - immigration would not put a strain on government unless of course you happen to live in a communist country where everything from your work to production is planned by a central power. The market, supply and demand, private enterprise in the Free Market would take care of all the needs and wants of the people because there is a profit to be made by entrepreneurs.

And everything is included in this; education, medicine, courts and law enforcement to private charities, the right to earn a living to the extent of your own moral principles, transport will increase ten-fold with more regularity for the increasing numbers of consumers, retailers and wealth, private currencies in place of the government issued Euro.

You leave the Free Market to take care of immigration and remove government - everything else will fall into place.

We leave the Free Market to take care of immigration and wage levels will fall to the world average and profits for capitalists increase exponentially.

Econimically wages will fall in the West until there is no economic incentive to immigrate here ( or to the West ) anymore - which wont happen until wages equalise across the world. Meanwhile with a near infinite supply of labour profits for capitalists will sky rocket, as will land values for the rentier class. And private healthcare which needs to make a profit wont deal with the sick, unless the sick are rich, or at least middle income. Like back in the day, when the poor sick died, or depended on the kindness of strangers.

Yahew

And where are the nuttier Randians coming from. I never meet guys like this in real life but they all over internet forums like a bad smell.

UsernameInUse

Yahew wrote: »

We leave the Free Market to take care of immigration and wage levels will fall to the world average and profits for capitalists increase exponentially.

Econimically wages will fall in the West until there is no economic incentive to immigrate here ( or to the West ) anymore - which wont happen until wages equalise across the world. Meanwhile with a near infinite supply of labour profits for capitalists will sky rocket, as will land values for the rentier class. And private healthcare which needs to make a profit wont deal with the sick, unless the sick are rich, or at least middle income. Like back in the day, when the poor sick died, or depended on the kindness of strangers.

You forget to mention the cost of living.

The reason your groceries are extraordinarily expensive here is because employers must pay employees one of the highest minimum wages in the world. Thus, production costs go up ten-fold increasing the retail price of the products. Secondly, I'm not sure what you mean by "capitalists"? In a way, you're referring to them indirectly as some kind of scum - but what is to stop you from becoming one of them? With less regulation and red-tape within the Free Market, you can excel in any area you please. The Free Market is the cure for poverty. People have a choice to do business or not, to work for whomever or not, to accept whatever pay or not.

Private charities are far more efficient at taking care of the disadvantaged than the state - for the charity to have a steady group of workers, the minimum wage is gone. Lastly, you're not taking into consideration the Free Market's final killer blow to poverty - pesky licences. If you're concerned about the poor, you shouldn't be. It's the current system that keeps people down.

sunflower27

Not read whole thread, but who the hell would choose to come here now? Am sure it has been said.

I've been here 10 years, and if I didn't have my mortgage, I'd be gone

Gnobe

Gnobe wrote: »

I've been delving into some of these polls about immigration across Europe, and I'm particularly disturbed that virtually every european country supports some kind of restrictions on immigration (in Ireland it's 70% even before the recession).

I've always wondered why so many people support "restrictions" on immigration? Why? Why does it matter who or what lives next to you?

The world is getting smaller, the concept of nation states will disappear at some point and we'll probably merge together into single nation state. I also believe the world (or at least Europe and America) will be majority mixed race by sometime this century. I've never understood why people wont just live and let live.

We're all from the human race and we all share this planet god dammit. No one has a right to tell anyone else where to live. Tear down the borders and let humanity live together.

Because some of us arent as spineless as you,trying to fit in with the "pc" masses.
I like Ireland and like our culture,I dont want it destroyed by mass immigration because people like you are on some immigration morality crusade.

UsernameInUse

Yahew wrote: »

And where are the nuttier Randians coming from. I never meet guys like this in real life but they all over internet forums like a bad smell.

You don't want to meet Libertarians in real life - if you did, they would only be too happy to meet up. It would certainly be an education for you. And I'm not sure about your reference to Ayn Rand - where does it fit in? Objectivism - she didn't agree with Libertarians. Comparing Ayn Rand with Ludwig Von Mises, Murray Rothbard, Hayek and Milton Friedman is quite a statement.

Von Mises was a utilitarian - he was an intelligent man. He would also have been a socialist if he accepted that it worked but it doesn't. I would also be a socialist if it worked but I know it does not. I believe that the greatest way to eliminate poverty is the Free Market. Ayn Rand held principles for the sake of it. That's the difference between Rand and Mises.

Yahew

UsernameInUse wrote: »

You forget to mention the cost of living.

The reason your groceries are extraordinarily expensive here is because employers must pay employees one of the highest minimum wages in the world.

A major reason is rent, of course. The cost of labour needed to produce the food will not be reduced by immigration, as it is already self-employed - that is farmer - and is not going to reduce its own labour cost. The cost of the shop labour is a small factor in the actual cost of the item on the shelf - when more people walk down the centre of Dublin, the rentier class counts footfall, and pushes up rent which pushes up costs. This is what happened in Ireland's boom. Immigration increased, and so did prices. Now immigration has decreased, and so has prices. Your link does no exist ( except you are correct that prices will fall for shop labour to subsistence level)

Secondly, I'm not sure what you mean by "capitalists"?

Owners of capital, although I should have said employers.

In a way, you're referring to them indirectly as some kind of scum -

Am i?

but what is to stop you from becoming one of them? With less regulation and red-tape within the Free Market, you can excel in any area you please.

can I be an Oprea singer? Firstly, I am self employed - but dont employ people - and I make good money. This isnt about me, some of us can have moral inclinations outside our own financial gains.

The Free Market is the cure for poverty.

Tell that to the 19th century.

Private charities are far more efficient at taking care of the disadvantaged than the state - for the charity to have a steady group of workers, the minimum wage is gone. Lastly, you're not taking into consideration the Free Market's final killer blow to poverty - pesky licences. If you're concerned about the poor, you shouldn't be. It's the current system that keeps people down.

Really, you need to look up the history of the 19th century - when charity was private, proselytising , and bullying ( you generally had to conform to religious precepts and/or be deserving poor). Millions died, or suffered.

I dont think that the present welfare State is perfect, but it is better.

Yahew

UsernameInUse wrote: »

You don't want to meet Libertarians in real life - if you did, they would only be too happy to meet up. It would certainly be an education for you. And I'm not sure about your reference to Ayn Rand - where does it fit in? Objectivism - she didn't agree with Libertarians. Comparing Ayn Rand with Ludwig Von Mises, Murray Rothbard, Hayek and Milton Friedman is quite a statement.

Von Mises was a utilitarian - he was an intelligent man. He would also have been a socialist if he accepted that it worked but it doesn't. I would also be a socialist if it worked but I know it does not. I believe that the greatest way to eliminate poverty is the Free Market. Ayn Rand held principles for the sake of it. That's the difference between Rand and Mises.

You assume that I care about the differences in your cult. I dont. Your total-free market position could be libertarian, or Objectionist, or whatever, but it is insane.

RichieC

You wont find poor libertardians but you'll meet rich socialists.

RGDATA!

snyper wrote: »

Paddy didnt go to america and straight to the dole office

you make that sound as if Paddy had a choice, but he didn't. You're hardly suggesting Paddy wouldn't have availed of the dole office had there been one?
And if there's any hint in there that "we paid our way wherever we went" then that would be misleading also. The Irish in america weren't all successfull, law abiding go-getters from the start, we had our share of bums and gangsters too.

UsernameInUse

Yahew wrote: »

A major reason is rent, of course. The cost of labour needed to produce the food will not be reduced by immigration, as it is already self-employed - that is farmer - and is not going to reduce its own labour cost. The cost of the shop labour is a small factor in the actual cost of the item on the shelf - when more people walk down the centre of Dublin, the rentier class counts footfall, and pushes up rent which pushes up costs. This is what happened in Ireland's boom. Immigration increased, and so did prices. Now immigration has decreased, and so has prices. Your link does no exist ( except you are correct that prices will fall for shop labour to subsistence level)

To come to the conclusion that less immigration = lower prices is very naive. Ireland is not competitive in the world market because our products are more expensive with our high production costs i.e - a huge minimum wage lead by bureaucratic lobbyists to protect their members and keep the disadvantaged on a continuous cycle of childlike dependence being one of them.

As for your comment towards farmers - look no further than the U.S - the government subsidises agriculture to grow extra corn, keeping prices cheap so in turn, McDonalds buy the crap and put it into their crappy and unhealthy food. Taxpayers who have subsidised these farmers may or may not have benefited from this. Is that equality in your mind? It certainly isn't in mine. Farmers would have long gone out of business if we didn't support them. Let them stand on their own two feet - the E.U's tariffs and regulations ensure that they control every tonne of beef like a traffic warden.

Let the Irish farmers produce meat, dairy products ect at their prices - but the Free Market will ensure that the poor people in Ireland will eat beef everyday from other countries. I've been to Brazil - trust me, it's delicious.

can I be an Oprea singer?

Whats stopping you?


Tell that to the 19th century.

If there was ever an argument in favour of the Free Market, you have just indirectly applied it. Was this the century of great progress in medicine and technology? Wherever Free Market principles have been applied, people have had a greater opportunity to escape poverty.

I dont think that the present welfare State is perfect, but it is better.

The welfare state keeps people down. They can't do anything else because there is too much red-tape cementing their place in society. You should read about the Free Market - I'm sure you'll finish feeling positive about it. There is nothing to be worried about, but there is everything to celebrate.

See bold.

Yahew wrote: »

You assume that I care about the differences in your cult. I dont. Your total-free market position could be libertarian, or Objectionist, or whatever, but it is insane.

Then why make such a wild and inaccurate statement about "Randians"? It's ignorant to be negative towards something if you don't understand the first thing about it. Neither is it a "cult". With that logic, Fine Gael, Labour, Sinn Fein or the ULA are cults. I honestly suggest you do some reading.

You may call like-minded individuals "insane" - I call opponents bureaucrats.

AckwelFoley

RGDATA! wrote: »

you make that sound as if Paddy had a choice, but he didn't. You're hardly suggesting Paddy wouldn't have availed of the dole office had there been one?
And if there's any hint in there that "we paid our way wherever we went" then that would be misleading also. The Irish in america weren't all successfull, law abiding go-getters from the start, we had our share of bums and gangsters too.

Thats a very good point, one that i would agree with, it doesnt however negate the fact that we cant afford to be the social welfare office for eastern europe and western africa

Lockstep

Out of interest, what welfare are immigrants entitled to?

When I was getting the Jobseeker's Allowance forms, you had to fulfill a 2 year habitual residency rule (living in Ireland or the UK) before you could claim it.



Then of course, there's direct provision for asylum seekers which makes no sense. Letting asylum seekers work while their claim is being processed at least allows them to be economically active.

Also, US immigration

KINGVictor

Lockstep wrote: »

Out of interest, what welfare are immigrants entitled to?

When I was getting the Jobseeker's Allowance forms, you had to fulfill a 2 year habitual residency rule (living in Ireland or the UK) before you could claim it.



Then of course, there's direct provision for asylum seekers which makes no sense. Letting asylum seekers work while their claim is being processed at least allows them to be economically active.

Also, US immigration

That is true, the habitual residence condition stipulates that the recipient of social welfare payments should have been resident in the common travel area for 2 years.

Like you also rightly mentioned, accepted refugees are not included for obvious reasons. Allowing them to work while they are been processed will lead to a lot of confusion, for e.g. when their application is refused and they have been issued a work permit or most probably they abscond ?

Terry

First off; the Irish only ever went to places offering work when there was no work here (basically most of our recent history).

Secondly; the following are racist: Nígger, Cracker, Paddy*, Yid, Abo, Chink, Hebe and so forth.

Opposition to mass immigration to this island?
Well that's just down to fear of the unknown more than anything else.

My taxes pay for people to do this and that, so I should have a say in the other. After all, I refused to vote because I'm awesome.

*Paddy. Doesn't really offend me. Couldn't give a flying fúck about it.


Problem solved.

Dwellingdweller

You had me lol'ing by the end of your first sentence. Seriously man? No.

The Hill Billy

Terry wrote: »

Opposition to mass immigration to this island?
Well that's just down to fear of the unknown more than anything else.

No it is not. It is because the Irish state could not cope with an influx of people who could not support themselves. FFS - there aren't enough jobs to go around as it is. That's why I'm living & working in Switzerland where there are 30000 IT jobs vacant (at the most recent count).

How in the name of Jaysus would Ireland support a huge influx of people that would ultimately need to rely on state benefits? 'Fear of the unknown'? - I think not. 'Fear of the complete & utter sh1t creek we would all be up' - most likely.

mikemac

Terry wrote: »

Opposition to mass immigration to this island?
Well that's just down to fear of the unknown more than anything else.

Didn't you work in teaching? Well of course you can't see the issue. Not many immigrants have Irish language skills and nobody is going to undercut your rates.

Come work a low paid private sector job and you'll be competing with the new arrivals

OPENROAD

feelingstressed wrote: »

Didn't you work in teaching? Well of course you can't see the issue. Not many immigrants have Irish language skills and nobody is going to undercut your rates.

Come work a low paid private sector job and you'll be competing with the new arrivals

Not many Irish have Irish language skills imo