Noel Grealish

MrMusician18

Homelander wrote: »

While in general it is a perfectly legit question, you have to question why last month, he asked the same question and was given more accurate figures, but chose, a month later, to use the world bank figure despite being informed it was incorrect.

So really find it hard to believe how Noel Grealish deserves to be treated with credibility in that context. I think he clearly and deliberately used the info to get exactly a response he predicted, that he was raising issues that were being 'shut down' by the Government.

He did the same thing with the spongers comment in Oughterard, it's not that the statement or opinion was completely without merit, but he very clearly has an agenda, i.e stoke the flames that'll reelect him in the next GE.

Hasn't the government, the left and the media all played into his hands then? So instead the kneejerk response of calling him a racist - wouldn't the best response have been to dispute the veracity of the World Bank figures?
That said, the CSO figures are fairly weak too.

mariaalice

high_king wrote: »

The word racist is used so often against anyone who questions anything, do the people using the word know the actual meaning of it ? It's not looking like they do.

He is allowed to question anything he wants that is of concern to his constitutions there is always the possibility he was not being raisist but I doubt it, but it does have to have a context would there be many Nigerians living in west Galway for example, is how much Nigerians in Ireland send to Nigeria a burning issue locally in west Galway?.

Homelander

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Hasn't the government, the left and the media all played into his hands then? So instead the kneejerk response of calling him a racist - wouldn't the best response have been to dispute the veracity of the World Bank figures?
That said, the CSO figures are fairly weak too.

That is exactly what was done today by senior cabinet, it's all over the news.

elperello

Homelander wrote: »

That is exactly what was done today by senior cabinet, it's all over the news.

A day too late.
Mr Varadkar & Co. dropped the ball yesterday.
When you're explaining you're losing.

tylercheribini

Ah yes, stat wars.

tayto lover

I would love to see statistics for the numbers from from each country outside the EU who are in the country and the percentage that are in employment and paying tax.

James Brown

Roversfan1 wrote: »

So there is one person who has not been called a racist by you?

He was caught off guard and not prepared.

There would be no reason not to assume the WB's figure's were correct without going through them thoroughly....and that is all anyone is asking for really.

TBF, I don't think, outside of Trump the racist, I've called anyone racist. Can you show your work or are you just fishing?

He shouldn't have been talking on record in the Dail if he was winging it. He's not Bertie Ahern, (not a racist).

I took his figures as sound. I don't automatically disbelieve 'facts' even those that may be uncomfortable.

I don't think you're a racist. That's three anyway.

Eric Cartman

tayto lover wrote: »

I would love to see statistics for the numbers from from each country outside the EU who are in the country and the percentage that are in employment and paying tax.

Well they only have a 64% employment rate vs 78% for our own and non EU migrants are overall net detractors from the economy, the CSO is particularly concerned with the huge unemployment rate of african migrants. However 93% of croatians work which puts them top of the non eu table.

James Brown

high_king wrote: »

The word racist is used so often against anyone who questions anything, do the people using the word know the actual meaning of it ? It's not looking like they do.

Nah, that's the scam.
People who feel uncomfortable that society is evolving love hyping up things like this. Claiming everyone is over using 'racist' and watering down the meaning by doing so. All the while being alleged champions for the genuine poor, homeless, immigrants, if that's to be believed.
It's another weapon in the arsenal of those trying to bring back the fifties when women knew their place, the church knew best and the 'darkies' were elsewhere.

SafeSurfer

tayto lover wrote: »

I would love to see statistics for the numbers from from each country outside the EU who are in the country and the percentage that are in employment and paying tax.

Those statistics, if made public, would only fan the flames of racism.

Seamai

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Well they only have a 64% employment rate vs 78% for our own and non EU migrants are overall net detractors from the economy, the CSO is particularly concerned with the huge unemployment rate of african migrants. However 93% of croatians work which puts them top of the non eu table.

Croatia is in the E.U.

Eric Cartman

Seamai wrote: »

Croatia is in the E.U.

A lot of the data is pre 2013.

jackboy

Homelander wrote: »

That is exactly what was done today by senior cabinet, it's all over the news.

They messed up though. They disputed the unreliable figures by quoting other unreliable figures.

Dante7

So, the reason why the huge amount of money was being sent to Nigeria is explained by inaccurate accounting methods by Nigeria and the World Bank. Great. That explains it. It was obviously a ludicrous amount of money, and the World Bank figures required explaining.

What I find interesting though, is that before this explanation was provided, a lot of people seemed to think that the €10 billion figure didn't require explaining, and that to even question it was racist.

MrMusician18

Homelander wrote: »

That is exactly what was done today by senior cabinet, it's all over the news.

As was pointed out above, when you're explaining you're losing. As soon as that clown Coppinger branded him a racist, Grealish won.

Eric Cartman

I see thejournal have their usual hatchet job 'factcheck' up about this , as usual trying to minimise figures and then the usual spiel about 'sure didnt the irish send money back years ago too' at the end.

The difference is we did it when there wasn't a welfare state to leech at the other end....

martingriff

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I see thejournal have their usual hatchet job 'factcheck' up about this , as usual trying to minimise figures and then the usual spiel about 'sure didnt the irish send money back years ago too' at the end.

The difference is we did it when there wasn't a welfare state to leech at the other end....

No irish didn't leeched off the British Welfare system

Faugheen

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I see thejournal have their usual hatchet job 'factcheck' up about this , as usual trying to minimise figures and then the usual spiel about 'sure didnt the irish send money back years ago too' at the end.

The difference is we did it when there wasn't a welfare state to leech at the other end....

Only a ‘hatchet job’ when the argument doesn’t suit your narrative.

Are you actually arguing with facts now?

Go outside. Seriously, you have little to be at if you’re starting to spread the ‘fake news’ spiel.

Before you start, the simple fact you have ‘factcheck’ in quotations is enough for me to conclude that you believe it’s nonsense.

SafeSurfer

Dante7 wrote: »

So, the reason why the huge amount of money was being sent to Nigeria is explained by inaccurate accounting methods by Nigeria and the World Bank. Great. That explains it. It was obviously a ludicrous amount of money, and the World Bank figures required explaining.

What I find interesting though, is that before this explanation was provided, a lot of people seemed to think that the €10 billion figure didn't require explaining, and that to even question it was racist.

That’s the point. Rather than the Taoiseach replying yes those figures look suspect they should be checked he took the figures at face value and replied with the usual nonsense about “ara sure didn’t the Irish send money home themselves”.

If there was an immigrant led terrorist attack in Dublin the response from some would likely be “ara sure didn’t the Irish do that over beyont in England, blowing things up all around the place”.

Seathrun66

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I see thejournal have their usual hatchet job 'factcheck' up about this , as usual trying to minimise figures and then the usual spiel about 'sure didnt the irish send money back years ago too' at the end.

The difference is we did it when there wasn't a welfare state to leech at the other end....

No Irish using the UK welfare state? That's an absurd claim you're making.

Odhinn

Dante7 wrote: »

So, the reason why the huge amount of money was being sent to Nigeria is explained by inaccurate accounting methods by Nigeria and the World Bank. Great. That explains it. It was obviously a ludicrous amount of money, and the World Bank figures required explaining.

What I find interesting though, is that before this explanation was provided, a lot of people seemed to think that the €10 billion figure didn't require explaining, and that to even question it was racist.

As Grealish has form with regards to the African-Irish population it's not suprising how quick the race card came out.

high_king

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Nah, that's the scam.
People who feel uncomfortable that society is evolving love hyping up things like this. Claiming everyone is over using 'racist' and watering down the meaning by doing so. All the while being alleged champions for the genuine poor, homeless, immigrants, if that's to be believed.
It's another weapon in the arsenal of those trying to bring back the fifties when women knew their place, the church knew best and the 'darkies' were elsewhere.

Sounds like you think you know what the word racist means. What does it mean ? and I don't mean making up what it means as it suits, what is the actual legal definition ?

SafeSurfer

Faugheen wrote: »

Only a ‘hatchet job’ when the argument doesn’t suit your narrative.

Are you actually arguing with facts now?

Go outside. Seriously, you have little to be at if you’re starting to spread the ‘fake news’ spiel.

Before you start, the simple fact you have ‘factcheck’ in quotations is enough for me to conclude that you believe it’s nonsense.

If your source of facts is the Journal.ie you can’t expect to be taken seriously.

high_king

Looks like the World Bank got their figures wrong, which is a bit worrying for international finance.

The Taoiseach said the CSO which is "a well-regarded and reliable statistical agency" have provided figures showing that remittances from Ireland to Nigeria are about €17m a year, which he said "is not an enormous figure".

Faugheen

SafeSurfer wrote: »

If your source of facts is the Journal.ie you can’t expect to be taken seriously.

You mean nothing in this article is cited and backed up?

https://www.thejournal.ie/noel-grealish-money-sent-from-ireland-to-nigeria-4889805-Nov2019/

Read it, look at the citations, and look where all of their information is coming from.

Where’s all of your facts you have to dispute them?

SafeSurfer

Faugheen wrote: »

You mean nothing in this article is cited and backed up?

https://www.thejournal.ie/noel-grealish-money-sent-from-ireland-to-nigeria-4889805-Nov2019/

Read it, look at the citations, and look where all of their information is coming from.

Where’s all of your facts you have to dispute them?

Look at the CSO figures they cite. Looks like a copy and paste exercise. The €17 million figure for Nigeria is repeated for 8 years in a row despite an increase in population. Factcheck indeed.

Strazdas

Homelander wrote: »

While in general it is a perfectly legit question, you have to question why last month, he asked the same question and was given more accurate figures, but chose, a month later, to use the world bank figure despite being informed it was incorrect.

So really find it hard to believe how Noel Grealish deserves to be treated with credibility in that context. I think he clearly and deliberately used the info to get exactly a response he predicted, that he was raising issues that were being 'shut down' by the Government.

He did the same thing with the spongers comment in Oughterard, it's not that the statement or opinion was completely without merit, but he very clearly has an agenda, i.e stoke the flames that'll reelect him in the next GE.

Apparently, he has no history of anti-immigrant comments over the years, which makes things even worse. Throw out a few inflammatory remarks about African people in the hope it generates controversy and headlines for himself (does he even care a jot about the subject?).

Dante7

Odhinn wrote: »

As Grealish has form with regards to the African-Irish population it's not suprising how quick the race card came out.

That's a very fair point, and I absolutely get that. Niall Collins asked the exact same question five years ago and didn't get shot down as racist. But I think we need to be careful about immediately dismissing a point just because of who said it. Listen to the information more, rather than the messenger.

JJayoo

So this politician used the following info which was published in the 'Independent'

"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."

And now the 'Independent' are leading the charge declaring how much of a racist he is.


"'I've sent money home, I'm not a criminal'- Nigerians in Ireland react to Noel Grealish money remarks"

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/ive-sent-money-home-im-not-a-criminal-nigerians-in-ireland-react-to-noel-grealish-money-remarks-38688562.html

He is using the same stats and figures that the same newspaper published.

Is this news outlet facing charges of racism???

SafeSurfer

Strazdas wrote: »

Apparently, he has no history of anti-immigrant comments over the years, which makes things even worse. Throw out a few inflammatory remarks about African people in the hope it generates controversy and headlines for himself (does he even care a jot about the subject?).

Why does the fact that he has “no history of anti-immigrant comments” make it worse?