Will Britain ever just piss off and get on with Brexit? -mod warning in OP (21/12)

davedanon

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Not necessarily. Depending on their country of origin, immigrants may be net tax burdens. People from sub Saharan Africa have a pretty low IQ for various reasons (and I am not talking about race here, there are many ethnicity's in this region including but not limited to blacks and whites). We are talking an average IQ of 76-80 for sub Saharan Africans compared to Ireland's of 92-96 (https://brainstats.com/average-iq-by-country.html).


People of lower IQ tend not to be entrepreneurs, inventors or innovators. (https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fb87/509ce4c2019f6bee9fd6cc8dfc989d210acb.pdf).


People of lower IQ tend to consume more benefits, paid for by the tax payer https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5500358/


People with low IQ tend to be involved in more crime, creating even more of a burden that the tax payer must cover
https://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2017/01/07/race-iq-and-crime/


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/manchester/6364343.stm

So it is wrong to assume that every immigrant will produce profit for the economy. There are of course plenty of immigrants who do contribute and that is great, but we do take in people from low IQ areas and this may not be the best investment for the tax payer. Again, I am talking about all races here, I am not signaling any race out. It is a fact that the sub Saharan Africa zone has a tendency towards low IQ as has been cited above.

Wow, I'm amazed no-one has pushed back on this yet. As an aside, you do know that the pseudoscience known as 'race biology' has been thoroughly discredited, rejected, and disowned by mainstream science, don't you? Where to start with this mountain of unsupported assumptions?

Let's start at the top, as it were: "Sub-saharan Africans have low IQs, for various reasons". Yet you neglect to ponder what those reasons might be. Could I venture a guess that there might be a significant socio-economic factor? Possibly some cultural aspects too? I find it very easy to believe that an average Irish child would score better on an IQ test than some poorly-educated kid from a Sierra Leone shanty town - but possibly not for the same reasons as you.

Next, you assert that this is nothing to do with race. Really? You say there are lots of ethnicity's (sic), "including but not limited to blacks and whites". So, you're saying (I think) that in addition to rather a lot of black Africans (I assume you'll concede this) there are a significant amount of white people; and other colours too: maybe Asian? And furthermore, that this entire cohort are similarly IQ-deficient. Do I have that right?


Now, having established to your satisfaction that your racially-mixed yet still somehow African cohort are low-IQ, you go on to quote your dry academic studies showing that these people are sure to be 'a poor economic investment' for a given host population - more crime, more welfare dependence.

And so to your final paragraph:

"Again, I am talking about all races here, I am not signaling any race out. It is a fact that the sub Saharan Africa zone has a tendency towards low IQ as has been cited above."


I assume you meant 'singling'.

Unless you can prove that there really are large numbers of white and other non-black people in Africa that share this IQ-deficiency, your whole theory falls apart and reveals you as just another dog-whistle racist. And forgive me if I'm not citing scholarly-sounding research to back it up, although I'm pretty sure there's loads of it out there, but I think it's fairly-well established by now that immigration is by and large a good thing, and an economic and cultural benefit to host populations - even if every individual immigrant isn't making a 'profit' to validate his or her existence.

Experience_day

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Listen to David McWilliam's latest podcast. Even if we forget the mass starvation, brutality, and state terrorism, British rule in Ireland has been demonstrably woeful for the Irish people.

Agreed. Well apart from the language. Couldn't see me getting on well in the world without English.

davedanon

So apart from the language, what have the English ever done for us?

Peregrinus

quokula wrote: »

Looks like they're purposely leaking ideas to the press to see the reactions.

If they had to leak this particular idea to the press in order to know what the reaction would be, they are even bigger arsewits than I have given them credit for up to now.

El_Duderino 09

davedanon wrote: »

Wow, I'm amazed no-one has pushed back on this yet.

I'd say it's more that nobody wants to engage with the poster than nobody disagreeing with the point. Why bother? Your response was well thought out and they will almost certainly ignore it and say something else that's off the wall. It's just their way.

swampgas

Experience_day wrote: »

Agreed. Well apart from the language. Couldn't see me getting on well in the world without English.

Given the proximity of the UK, and the Irish connections to the US, had Irish not been suppressed we would probably be like the Dutch, speaking Irish as our first language and completely fluent in English as well.

It's all hypothetical of course, but it's a bit daft to assume that we would have been incapable of learning other languages simply because our native language was Irish.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

quokula wrote: »

I think it's to do with wilfully ignoring that immigrants are also consumers, entrepreneurs, wealth creators, and generally contribute to the economy.

It's not a case of there were 100 fruit picking jobs and 100 Irish people, now there are 100 jobs, 100 Irish people and 20 immigrants, so 20 Irish people go unemployed while the immigrants work for less. Actually, there are now 120 jobs, because those immigrants also need to buy and eat fruit just like the Irish people who were buying and eating the 100 fruit to begin with.

That's a gross oversimplification obviously and doesn't account for import / export, but on a large scale the economy works something like that - the number of jobs in a population will be equal to the amount of work that needs to be done to support that population, whether it's 4 million people or 100 million people. That's why the supply and demand argument that is used against migrants isn't used against babies being born.

The economy may increase in general but not to the benefit of the low paid worker.

It’s easy to pick apart this rhetoric with a thought experiment.

Imagine there’s a factory in NeoLiberalLand which employs a workforce of 10,000 on good wages. NeoLiberalLand has an at will employment laws so the companies can lay off people at will, and they do that by replacing them with 10,000 immigrants on minimum wages.

This has two effects.

1) 10,000 people now unemployed
2) 10,000 people on lower wages paying less tax and consuming less.

In no way will the immigration pay for itself in this admittedly artificial case.

Of course general immigration will include high waged workers doing jobs that the locals cannot do, and entrepreneurs. However my point here is that the idea that all immigration is beneficial economically and always will replace the jobs the immigrants take is false.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

declanflynn wrote: »

Yeah we have a long history with the UK alright

Yeh. I think that this is an example of where the British not knowing Irish history is blowing back on them.

quokula

Peregrinus wrote: »

If they had to leak this particular idea to the press in order to know what the reaction would be, they are even bigger arsewits than I have given them credit for up to now.

They care about the reactions among their target voters, who've already shown a lot of tolerance for stupid ideas.

They don't care about reactions here or across the EU.

Seth Brundle

davedanon wrote: »

So apart from the language, what have the English ever done for us?

Gave us Jack Charlton!

El_Duderino 09

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

The economy may increase in general but not to the benefit of the low paid worker.

It’s easy to pick apart this rhetoric with a thought experiment.

Imagine there’s a factory in NeoLiberalLand which employs a workforce of 10,000 on good wages. NeoLiberalLand has an at will employment laws so the companies can lay off people at will, and they do that by replacing them with 10,000 immigrants on minimum wages.

This has two effects.

1) 10,000 people now unemployed
2) 10,000 people on lower wages paying less tax and consuming less.

Those 10,000 workers on low wages will increase profits so shareholders and owners and the company are likely to make additional profits of the difference in wages. So it could easily be reported as a zero sum as the difference in wages goes to other people.

People who mix with wealthy peers will probably consider it a great move and consider the economy to be doing great. People who mix with poor peers will see a reduction in pay and conditions

LordBasil

davedanon wrote: »

So apart from the language, what have the English ever done for us?

They gave us a functioning Taxation and Legal system that we subsequently modified ourselves. Most of the best buildings in Ireland, especially Dublin, were built by the British. Look at the Customs House, Dublin Castle, Four Courts compared with all the monstrousities erected post-independence Liberty Hall, Hawkins Street Offices, Old Central Bank etc.

VinLieger

LordBasil wrote: »

They gave us a functioning Taxation and Legal system that we subsequently modified ourselves. Most of the best buildings in Ireland, especially Dublin, were built by the British. Look at the Customs House, Dublin Castle, Four Courts compared with all the monstrousities erected post-independence Liberty Hall, Hawkins Street Offices, Old Central Bank etc.

Ahh yes because a couple of nice buildings makes up for everything else.....Also they didn't "give" us a functioning Taxation and Legal system when we gained our independence it was simply easier to keep them both as they were instead of starting from scratch.

blanch152

davedanon wrote: »

I think it's fairly-well established by now that immigration is by and large a good thing, and an economic and cultural benefit to host populations - even if every individual immigrant isn't making a 'profit' to validate his or her existence.

Tell that to the indigenous populations of America, Australia and New Zealand.

The world isn't black and white, immigration isn't all good, and immigration isn't all bad. There is a balance somewhere in the middle, related to a heap of factors.

MadYaker

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

I have no idea why Ireland has so much loyalty to the EU, we have a long history with the UK and the USA.
We should join the UK and USA in a Union and tell the EU to take a jump.

The UK is busy flushing itself down the toilet why would we want to join them? You should move to the UK permanently.

LordBasil

VinLieger wrote: »

Ahh yes because a couple of nice buildings makes up for everything else.....Also they didn't "give" us a functioning Taxation and Legal system when we gained our independence it was simply easier to keep them both as they were instead of starting from scratch.

Well it was easier for the new state to begin because we had functioning Legal & Taxation systems in place. Of course nice buildings don't make up for everything else but they were/are something good that the Brits contributed to Ireland.

joseywhales

There are many abused husbands and wives who have a "long history" with their partner, I wouldn't use it as a justification for them to reunite.

We shouldn't get dragged into the desperate pangs of British sentimentalism. It is pretty simple, the EU gives us the greatest influence on global trade that we can hope for as a very small market, their processes are democratic, their obsession with being consensual leaves them both tediously beauraucratic and pretty fair.

There should be a border poll on the backstop for the people in NI, that would break the impasse and confront Boris's concern that it is undemocratic.

swampgas

LordBasil wrote: »

Well it was easier for the new state to begin because we had functioning Legal & Taxation systems in place. Of course nice buildings don't make up for everything else but they were/are something good that the Brits contributed to Ireland.

I think where that sentiment falls down is that the British built those buildings and introduced infrastructure *for themselves* in an Ireland that was a fully integrated part of the UK. It was never "contributed" to Ireland as though it were an act of selfless generosity to a fledgling nation.

Dytalus

swampgas wrote: »

I think where that sentiment falls down is that the British built those buildings and introduced infrastructure *for themselves* in an Ireland that was a fully integrated part of the UK. It was never "contributed" to Ireland as though it were an act of selfless generosity to a fledgling nation.

That's a bit much though. Words have multiple meanings, and I don't think anyone's suggested that their contributions were made as 'selfless donations'.

The UK, albeit selfishly, contributed a number of things to our island that we were then able to use as a framework to survive as a nation state. They also contribute to our air defence currently. It's entirely (or largely, anyway) for their own strategic benefit, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a good thing for us.

We can acknowledge the few helpful things provided (however unintentionally) by the UK without ignoring or whitewashing the sizable amount of horror they put us through. Good deeds do not wipe out the bad, and on balance the UK's history with us still...unkind to be gentle about it.

swampgas

Dytalus wrote: »

That's a bit much though. Words have multiple meanings, and I don't think anyone's suggested that their contributions were made as 'selfless donations'.

The UK, albeit selfishly, contributed a number of things to our island that we were then able to use as a framework to survive as a nation state. They also contribute to our air defence currently. It's entirely (or largely, anyway) for their own strategic benefit, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a good thing for us.

We can acknowledge the few helpful things provided (however unintentionally) by the UK without ignoring or whitewashing the sizable amount of horror they put us through. Good deeds do not wipe out the bad, and on balance the UK's history with us still...unkind to be gentle about it.

I agree completely, well put.

ChikiChiki

davedanon wrote: »

So apart from the language, what have the English ever done for us?

I've quite a few English friends. The mindset is definitely that we are the poor little neighbour. Little do they realise quality of life here whilst not perfect greatly surpasses their own. You'd pity them, it seems to be a collective mindset. Other than that many know absolutely **** all about the dark history.

ChikiChiki

davedanon wrote: »

So apart from the language, what have the English ever done for us?

I've quite a few English friends. The mindset is definitely that we are the poor little neighbour. Little do they realise quality of life here whilst not perfect greatly surpasses their own. You'd pity them, it seems to be a collective mindset. Other than that many know absolutely **** all about the dark history.

declanflynn

Everyone has an English friend but not every one likes the English as a race

kunst nugget

declanflynn wrote: »

Everyone has an English friend but not every one likes the English as a race

The English as a race?

LordBasil

LordBasil wrote: »

They gave us a functioning Taxation and Legal system that we subsequently modified ourselves. Most of the best buildings in Ireland, especially Dublin, were built by the British. Look at the Customs House, Dublin Castle, Four Courts compared with all the monstrousities erected post-independence Liberty Hall, Hawkins Street Offices, Old Central Bank etc.

Yeah, the idea that "taxation is theft" and that the British established the taxation system here has a quite felicitous historical continuity to it. It's almost as if after they dispossessed the natives from their land that the nice British colonialists had to come up with new ways to rob the Irish...

When can we expect your treatise on how much the Nazis benefitted Germany via investing in technology, stimulating employment, building thousands of km of autobahnen and the like?

RobMc59

Deleted User wrote: »

LordBasil wrote: »

They gave us a functioning Taxation and Legal system that we subsequently modified ourselves. Most of the best buildings in Ireland, especially Dublin, were built by the British. Look at the Customs House, Dublin Castle, Four Courts compared with all the monstrousities erected post-independence Liberty Hall, Hawkins Street Offices, Old Central Bank etc.

Yeah, the idea that "taxation is theft" and that the British established the taxation system here has a quite felicitous historical continuity to it. It's almost as if after they dispossessed the natives from their land that the nice British colonialists had to come up with new ways to rob the Irish...

When can we expect your treatise on how much the Nazis benefitted Germany via investing in technology, stimulating employment, building thousands of km of autobahnen and the like?

The US and Russia certainly benefited from nazi scientists after ww2 as shown in this link.
https://www.airspacemag.com/space/the-rest-of-the-rocket-scientists-4376617/

Larbre34

kunst nugget wrote: »

The English as a race?

I prefer to think of them as a species.

MadYaker

Larbre34 wrote: »

I prefer to think of them as a species.

An invasive one at that.

Kidchameleon

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I'd say it's more that nobody wants to engage with the poster than nobody disagreeing with the point. Why bother? Your response was well thought out and they will almost certainly ignore it and say something else that's off the wall. It's just their way.

The reason nobody wants to engage is that what I said is factual and backed up with sources. Low IQ people should not be let into this country as it is bad for the economy. Ignorance of this fact on the part of the EU is one of the reasons Brexit happened

Professor Moriarty

Kidchameleon wrote: »

The reason nobody wants to engage is that what I said is factual and backed up with sources. Low IQ people should not be let into this country as it is bad for the economy. Ignorance of this fact on the part of the EU is one of the reasons Brexit happened

An IQ test to get into the country? How about we test children born in the country and cull those below normal IQ?