Why is it wrong to oppose mass immigration?

Chicken Ryan

I discovered during the week that 20% of all social welfare recipients are non-Irish nationals. I also discovered that a disproportionately large amount of all social welfare fraud is committed by non-Irish nationals. One example is this guy who is a former Garda reserve who fraudulently obtained 30,000 euro social welfare payments. So why is it that I cannot oppose mass immigration on these grounds and not been branded a racist?
Every time I pass the dole office there are many times more immigrants there than Irish nationals. Some even appear to be outside the Eurozone which amazes me.

Cody Pomeray

Chicken Ryan wrote: »

Every time I pass the dole office there are many times more immigrants there than Irish nationals. Some even appear to be outside the Eurozone which amazes me.

Chicken Ryan wrote: »

Every time I pass the dole office there are many times more immigrants there than Irish nationals. Some even appear to be outside the Eurozone which amazes me.

Chicken Ryan wrote: »

Every time I pass the dole office there are many times more immigrants there than Irish nationals. Some even appear to be outside the Eurozone which amazes me.

Go on... say it...?

Chicken Ryan

Say what?

jacksie66

This post has been deleted.

Nodin

Chicken Ryan wrote: »

I also discovered that a disproportionately large amount of all social welfare fraud is committed by non-Irish nationals. . .........

Fascinating. You've a source for this, I trust?

clairefontaine

Its not immigration when the people are coming from within the EU.

OneOfThem Stumbled

You're asking three questions at once.

1. Why do (some?) people say that it's wrong to oppose mass immigration?

2. Is it wrong to oppose mass immigration?

3. Are immigrants more likely to be social welfare recipients or cheats?

You jump from 1. to 3. between the title and OP (mainly to provide a foundation to argue 2.)

However this thread has already got bogged down in the minute of 3. which is such a big and vague topic that, rather than providing evidence to back up a point, has opened an additional can of worms in what you already acknowledged might be a difficult subject.

And so a thread is stillborn.

Karl Stein

Is it wrong to oppose mass immigration?

It depends on what grounds.

Manassas61

It is the political agenda of the left wing contingent and political parties in the UK and the Irish Republic to use immigration for political reasons. The hope of building a vote base on it.

It's why Labour opened the doors to try and keep the Conservatives out. Too many of the UK parties are scared to debate the issue. Control is paramount. Flooding the country in harsh economic times for people is not only stupid but morally wrong.

Frank Grimes

Manassas61 wrote: »

It is the political agenda of the left wing contingent and political parties in the UK and the Irish Republic to use immigration for political reasons. The hope of building a vote base on it.

I assume you can expand upon this, particularly in relation to the Irish context?

Cody Pomeray

Chicken Ryan wrote: »

Say what?

In what way did they "appear to be [from] outside the Eurozone"?

Manassas61

Frank Grimes wrote: »

I assume you can expand upon this, particularly in relation to the Irish context?

I know there is many people critical of open immigration but too many people want to brush it under the carpet and forget about it and not even recognise it as an issue.

robertxxx

Would the world be a better place if everybody claimed dole in their own country and not here.

Frank Grimes

Manassas61 wrote: »

I know there is many people critical of open immigration but too many people want to brush it under the carpet and forget about it and not even recognise it as an issue.

So no then.

Geuze

It's not wrong to oppose mass immigration. Plenty of people do.

An opinion on an issue can't be wrong or right.

To be wrong, it would have to be a crime, or if not a crime, then morally wrong.

It's not a crime to oppose mass immigration.

So oppose away.

Geuze

Personally, I say we joined the EEC in 1973, free movement of labour, rules of the club, so we can't and shouldn't oppose EU people from coming and working here.

Plenty of Poles, etc. would have lost jobs in construction, etc., so you would expect them to be receiving JSB.



Now, non-EU workers should be severely restricted, as we have 13-14% unemployment. I can't understand how lots of shops in Dublin seem to employ Asians/Arabs. This should be explained.

I support very strong restrictions on non-EU workers.

jank

The people should always have the right to say who is entering the country and what visas are given out however to say such a thing will get one labelled a racist by most of the media and many other do gooders. We are in the EU so we must apply EU law towards all would be residents of Ireland. I think more could be done to cut down on welfare cheats as we'll but we should cut down on all cheats equally. We could start with the travelling community but again the do gooders will be out in force. Don't forget that 50,000 people entered the country to find work last year so there must be some jobs going. What was the deal with Roma's sending millions offshore? Or was that Nigerians? The amount was huge which would indicate large scale illegal activities or at best work done in the black economy.

jank

jank wrote: »

What was the deal with Roma's sending millions offshore? Or was that Nigerians?

Sure **** it, let's say it was all of them.


As for the dole queues, any time I'm down there's rarely more than 1 or 2 black people out of around 100 signing on (was over 150 one time) and not many other obviously "foreign" looking people.
It's odd now that believing completely in free movement and not having nationalist tendencies now makes someone a do-gooder but I guess that's just how things go.

FTA69

jank wrote: »

What was the deal with Roma's sending millions offshore? Or was that Nigerians?

Brilliant.

jank

Deleted User wrote: »

Sure **** it, let's say it was all of them.

.

My appolgies to the Romanians in the house.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/nigerians-send-nearly-500m-a-year-home-from-ireland-29278045.html

NIGERIAN migrants here are now sending nearly half-a-billion euro back home each year. World Bank figures reveal that €468m in 'remittances' was sent from Ireland to Nigeria in 2011.

That's an average of more than €26,000 for each of the 17,642 Nigerian nationals in Ireland, including children.

This is far in excess of the sums sent home by Poles from Ireland. They sent $224m (€174m), even though there are more than 122,000 Polish people in the country.

That is a lot of money with a questionable source to be fair.

Did you bother reading anything other than poor quality newspaper articles at the time?

Frank Grimes

jank wrote: »

My appolgies to the Romanians in the house.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/nigerians-send-nearly-500m-a-year-home-from-ireland-29278045.html


That is a lot of money with a questionable source to be fair.

This was done to death on a thread on AH about it, the figure is essentially guess work on the part of the World Bank - there is no accurate figure of the amount of money Nigerians send back to Nigeria from Ireland.

jank

Do you dispute the stats?

Frank Grimes

jank wrote: »

Do you dispute the stats?

If you're asking me if I think the figure is accurate, no I do not. Common sense alone would suggest that something is not right with that number, leaving that aside the methodology they used does not give a total based on verifiable data.

goose2005

Chicken Ryan wrote: »

I discovered during the week that 20% of all social welfare recipients are non-Irish nationals.

What's more surprising is that that's actually representative. One-fifth of the present population is foreign born. Which is really quite astonishing, Ireland went from having virtually no non-Irish to having 700,000 non-Irish

http://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/population/personsusuallyresidentandpresentinthestateoncensusnightclassifiedbyplaceofbirthandagegroup/

SoulandForm

There is nothing wrong with opposing mass immigration. Mass immigration often leads to a brain drain from so-called "third world countries" and lets remember how mass emmigration from Ireland allowed the ruling elites to by pass dealing with her structural problems. It also could be argued that mass immigration is used by capitalists to divide working class communities and drive down wages. That said a lot of people oppose immigration basically because they are racists.

SoulandForm

SoulandForm wrote: »

It also could be argued that mass immigration is used by capitalists to divide working class communities and drive down wages.

What isn't? Allowing low-skilled immigration apparently means a race to the bottom. Allowing high-skilled immigration displaces people further down the wage scale which is a race to the bottom. Outsourcing jobs is a race to the bottom. The only thing that isn't a race to the bottom is keeping the poorer countries "in their place".

woodoo

Yep it sure is a mystery why it is so unpopular to hold this view OP. I have said it many times i think there is far too much immigration into Europe.

Here is a link to an article on the subject. http://www.irishexaminer.com/archives/2013/1017/world/20-of-unemployment-benefit-claimants-are-non-irish-246581.html

This mind control and fear people have of being labeled a racist if they are in any way worried about immigration is a quite sad. Its a soft tyranny. The media love it though and are responsible for peddling it to help them sell papers. They will jump on people like they did with Roy Hodgson this week. Its hysteria. Roy was brow beaten in to coming out and apologising for what he said even though he knew and most sensible people knew he wasn't being racist.

Nodin

woodoo wrote: »

Yep it sure is a mystery why it is so unpopular to hold this view OP. I have said it many times i think there is far too much immigration into Europe.

Here is a link to an article on the subject. http://www.irishexaminer.com/archives/2013/1017/world/20-of-unemployment-benefit-claimants-are-non-irish-246581.html

.

Whats that article to do with immigration into Europe?

wexie

jank wrote: »

Don't forget that 50,000 people entered the country to find work last year so there must be some jobs going.

There was? Last year? Are you sure? This country? As in Ireland?

(I had to check the date on this post to make sure it wasn't 2007)

jank

Frank Grimes wrote: »

If you're asking me if I think the figure is accurate, no I do not. Common sense alone would suggest that something is not right with that number, leaving that aside the methodology they used does not give a total based on verifiable data.

Do we have other stats to prove this otherwise or is it just a gut feeling. I am not being obtuse but can you explain why its common sense dismiss the numbers?
Is it " I dont believe the numbers, * sticks head in sand *" or "the numbers are off because of x,y,z"

I admit the numbers are very very high which raised eyebrows but there must be a explanation for this. Think occam's razor.

SoulandForm

Deleted User wrote: »

What isn't? Allowing low-skilled immigration apparently means a race to the bottom. Allowing high-skilled immigration displaces people further down the wage scale which is a race to the bottom. Outsourcing jobs is a race to the bottom. The only thing that isn't a race to the bottom is keeping the poorer countries "in their place".

Or what about giving the third world back its own resources and giving it a chance to develop itself? Maybe its possible to have a race to the top?

Most immigrants dont want to be immigrants.

jank

wexie wrote: »

There was? Last year? Are you sure? This country? As in Ireland?

(I had to check the date on this post to make sure it wasn't 2007)

Yeap there sure was. Thing is you don't hear about it too much as we love to beat ourselves up about people leaving. Only about 20,000 of those are Irish people returning home which would conclude that 30,000 or more are non nationals. But but but .....da re na joabs!

As an immigrant myself I applaud anyone leaving their home and going off to better their lot. However, as an independent democratic state Ireland still has the right to let whomever they want into the country. EU nationals are a different matter of course.

http://www.irishtimes.com/blogs/generationemigration/2012/09/27/irish-emigration-rises-by-16-per-cent/

A total of 52,700 people immigrated into Ireland, a decrease of 65 per cent since 2007 when immigration was at its peak. Some 25,000 men immigrated last year, compared to 80,000 in 2007.

jank

SoulandForm wrote: »

Most immigrants dont want to be immigrants.

That isn't really true. Many people move to another country and stay out of their own free will. Remember the highest non national group living in Ireland are those from the UK.

SoulandForm

jank wrote: »

That isn't really true. Many people move to another country and stay out of their own free will. Remember the highest non national group living in Ireland are those from the UK.

Many people do- but we are talking about mass immigration. A lot of the Irish people who left Ireland in the past didnt want to leave Ireland. Probably most of them.

Part of Ireland is in the UK. In many was I would prefer to back in the north but the mess there doesnt give me space to be myself. I can in a lot of ways breathe more freely here than there. I can empathize strongly with immigrants but Im far from sure mass immigration is a good thing.

Frank Grimes

jank wrote: »

Do we have other stats to prove this otherwise or is it just a gut feeling.

No, there appears to be no other stats on the amounts of remittances sent from here - I cannot categorically state this as fact however.

I am not being obtuse but can you explain why its common sense dismiss the numbers?
Is it " I dont believe the numbers, * sticks head in sand *" or "the numbers are off because of x,y,z"

I did not say it is common sense to dismiss the numbers - what I meant was given the numbers of Nigerians here vs. amount allegedly sent every man, woman and child would have to be sending back tens of thousands. The main reason, as I stated, I have for thinking the numbers are inaccurate is due to the methodology used by the World Bank. As I said previously, this has been done to death on the AH thread (link); read the posts by southsiderosie (starts at post #118), they explain why the number given is essentially meaningless.

I admit the numbers are very very high which raised eyebrows but there must be a explanation for this. Think occam's razor.

Methodological issues, unreliable results.

Jonny7

Can someone explain to me the difference between immigration and "mass" immigration?

jank

SoulandForm wrote: »

Many people do- but we are talking about mass immigration. A lot of the Irish people who left Ireland in the past didnt want to leave Ireland. Probably most of them.

Part of Ireland is in the UK. In many was I would prefer to back in the north but the mess there doesnt give me space to be myself. I can in a lot of ways breathe more freely here than there. I can empathize strongly with immigrants but Im far from sure mass immigration is a good thing.

Most of the people leaving Ireland today will be back as they are going off to places like Australia and Canada on temporary visa's. I myself, 3 months away from my blue passport plan to be back in Ireland in the next 3-4 years. Emigration is a double edged sword it can be both good and bad for a country but we should not think of it like the days of the coffin ships when Mary and Paddy went off never to be heard off again. The world is changing all the time and the concept of the nation state of the 1920's is long gone.

SeanW

Jonny7 wrote: »

Can someone explain to me the difference between immigration and "mass" immigration?

"Immigration" is immigration on a sensible scale. "Mass immigration" is immigration on a dramatic scale that has the potential to fundamentally transform a society, in some cases beyond recognition.

fianna saor

jank wrote: »

The people should always have the right to say who is entering the country and what visas are given out however to say such a thing will get one labelled a racist by most of the media and many other do gooders. We are in the EU so we must apply EU law towards all would be residents of Ireland. I think more could be done to cut down on welfare cheats as we'll but we should cut down on all cheats equally. We could start with the travelling community but again the do gooders will be out in force. Don't forget that 50,000 people entered the country to find work last year so there must be some jobs going. What was the deal with Roma's sending millions offshore? Or was that Nigerians? The amount was huge which would indicate large scale illegal activities or at best work done in the black economy.

i dont remember being asked! why not hold a referendum on such items at least then the lefty tree huggers can have something to back up their ridiculous arguments.

Boulevardier

Does anybody know anyone who supports mass immigration? This thread is pretty meaningless from that point of view.

alastair

fianna saor wrote: »

i dont remember being asked! why not hold a referendum on such items at least then the lefty tree huggers can have something to back up their ridiculous arguments.

Which "ridiculous arguments" would those be?

The state continues to retain the right to say who can enter the country, and who requires a visa to do so - the only exception being the freedom of movement within the EU. And we voted on EU membership, so mandated that freedom of movement.

No-one needed to ask you btw - the state acts on behalf of the people through the mandate of the democratic process.

alastair

Boulevardier wrote: »

Does anybody know anyone who supports mass immigration? This thread is pretty meaningless from that point of view.

Mass immigration is a meaningless term to begin with. It's simply a notionally greater degree of immigration than someone's equally notional concept of what's 'sensible'. Society is constantly in flux, and transforms regardless of whether there's immigration at play or not. The notion that there's some stasis that can be preserved is a delusion.

fianna saor

alastair wrote: »

Which "ridiculous arguments" would those be?

The state continues to retain the right to say who can enter the country, and who requires a visa to do so - the only exception being the freedom of movement within the EU. And we voted on EU membership, so mandated that freedom of movement.

No-one needed to ask you btw - the state acts on behalf of the people through the mandate of the democratic process.

the arguments in favour of this ongoing invasion.

what has EU membership got to do with the welfare tourists coming from lets say nigeria?

alastair

fianna saor wrote: »

the arguments in favour of this ongoing invasion.

what has EU membership got to do with the welfare tourists coming from lets say nigeria?

Nigerians require a visa to enter the state. EU citizens do not.

And you seem rather vague on the nature of these supposedly "ridiculous arguments". Can you be more specific?

fianna saor

=alastair;87120970]Nigerians require a visa to enter the state. EU citizens do not.

so do you consider it acceptable the amount of illegal immigration coming in from nigeria?

And you seem rather vague on the nature of these supposedly "ridiculous arguments". Can you be more specific?

see the above post

Frank Grimes

fianna saor wrote: »

so do you consider it acceptable the amount of illegal immigration coming in from nigeria?

Can you quantify "the amount"?

alastair

fianna saor wrote: »

so do you consider it acceptable the amount of illegal immigration coming in from nigeria?



see the above post

I can see the posts - I'm asking for specifics.

By illegal immigrants you actually mean asylum applicants? There are very few successful asylum applicants coming through the system, and rather fewer actual illegal immigrants. Unless you believe an unsuccessful asylum applicant is the same thing as an illegal immigrant?

fianna saor

Frank Grimes wrote: »

Can you quantify "the amount"?

i dont think an exact figure could be put on it due to the illegal nature of their arrival.

Frank Grimes

fianna saor wrote: »

i dont think an exact figure could be put on it due to the illegal nature of their arrival.

And yet you can state that is occurring to the point of being an "invasion"? Not only that but you can also identify a specific nationality who are entering the state illegally?

alastair

fianna saor wrote: »

i dont think an exact figure could be put on it due to the illegal nature of their arrival.

You seem sure enough that it amounts to an 'invasion' though?

Given that you're concerned about Nigerian 'welfare tourism' and the the only route to accessing welfare, if you're a Nigerian immigrant here is the asylum process (less than €20 a week) - which had a grand total of 950 applicants from all counties last year (and is subject to a 90% rejection rate), then you've a pretty low bar for what constitutes an 'invasion'.