What are your views on Multiculturalism in Ireland? - Threadbanned User List in OP

TheCitizen

biko wrote: »

As long as Ireland doesn't have a immigration referendum to guide the politicians they can easily be pushed around by EU bureaucrats or opinion writers in the Journal.

An immigration referendum? Who's calling for that exactly?

Great idea every dog whistler in the country will be all over it

TheCitizen

TheCitizen wrote: »

An immigration referendum? Who's calling for that exactly?

Great idea every dog whistler in the country will be all over it

Oh. back again? hmm.. care to follow up and answer the questions put to you after your last insightful and pleasant contributions?

As for "every dog whistler", how would that work exactly? (nope, we don't need references to the US... stick to Ireland)

We don't have any historic racism against anyone, nor do we have any racial superiority groups as such, except what's 'supposedly' been imported from Britain. Who exactly would be listening out for this dog whistling, and why would they have any real influence in deciding anything...? Or is this more of the alarmist (and never backed up) rhetoric about right wing supremacists that are somehow popping up around Ireland?

Or could it just be that Irish people might be sick of the current/past attitude to migration, and you'd like to shut down any suggestion that they might want to express themselves on the topic? After all, you seem to be suggesting that such an expression would be racist.. (although I'm still waiting for a proper explanation on how that works)

TheCitizen

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Oh. back again? hmm.. care to follow up and answer the questions put to you after your last insightful and pleasant contributions?

As for "every dog whistler", how would that work exactly? (nope, we don't need references to the US... stick to Ireland)

We don't have any historic racism against anyone, nor do we have any racial superiority groups as such, except what's 'supposedly' been imported from Britain. Who exactly would be listening out for this dog whistling, and why would they have any real influence in deciding anything...? Or is this more of the alarmist (and never backed up) rhetoric about right wing supremacists that are somehow popping up around Ireland?

Or could it just be that Irish people might be sick of the current/past attitude to migration, and you'd like to shut down any suggestion that they might want to express themselves on the topic? After all, you seem to be suggesting that such an expression would be racist.. (although I'm still waiting for a proper explanation on how that works)

I don’t live on here like some on here appear to.

The irony that you accuse me of not answering questions put to me in a post where You just totally swerved the question I asked. Who us asking for a Referendum on immigration, where did that daft idea come from exactly? Hmmmm

_Kaiser_

TheCitizen wrote: »

I don’t live on here like some on here appear to.

The irony that you accuse me of not answering questions put to me in a post where You just totally swerved the question I asked. Who us asking for a Referendum on immigration, where did that daft idea come from exactly? Hmmmm

I'd support that.. I'm sure there's a lot of others who would too. Maybe the Referendum Commission or whatever that group is called should look into it.

Leaving aside that we already spend a fortune on aid packages (and no doubt will continue to do so despite now being officially in recession again - just as we did last time), what is our obligation to take in thousands upon thousands of "refugees" (ie: economic migrants), allow them to be fed, watered and sheltered for years (and complain about it!), give them citizenship once they've "served their time", and generally continue to support them indefinitely thereafter?

GENUINE refugees... absolutely should we help - temporarily and only insofar as is sustainable and practical! Once the UN or WHO or whoever determines the danger in their homelands is over, they should be sent back, or apply through the existing options for residency.

GENUINE migrants seeking to improve their lives with needed skills and the ability to support themselves and where this can be readily verified by the authorities. Apply via the existing options. If approved - welcome!

Economic migrants with no skills and/or verifiable backgrounds, welfare chancers, lads turning up in the back of containers or found wandering the motorway and then claiming "asylum" - held while their claim is investigated and processed (which should take no more than a week). If denied, they have an option of ONE appeal. If that fails too - back where they came from.. no ifs, or buts - and certainly none of this nonsense of schools/locals campaigning on RTE and in the press for the Minister to personally override the decision.

I'd certainly welcome an opportunity to vote on that - where do I sign up?

TomTomTim

TheCitizen wrote: »

Who us asking for a Referendum on immigration, where did that daft idea come from exactly? Hmmmm

I'd assume that he believes in democracy, and mass-immigration is one of the most radical policies in Europe at the minute, at least in relation to things that will change the dynamics of Europe. In a truly democratic system, the people would get a say in their futures, and the futures of their children, so they should get a vote on the matter. The fact that you think it's "daft" is very telling.

TheCitizen

TheCitizen wrote: »

I don’t live on here like some on here appear to.

The irony that you accuse me of not answering questions put to me in a post where You just totally swerved the question I asked. Who us asking for a Referendum on immigration, where did that daft idea come from exactly? Hmmmm

Well, that one is pretty obvious. biko did.

So, that's a no, then.... Not answering the questions put to you, or backing up your statements. Nope, it's fair enough. I'm glad that we can identify you as someone we shouldn't spend any time giving decent answers to. You're just here to make statements and move away. okie dokie.

Sand

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

GENUINE refugees... absolutely should we help - temporarily and only insofar as is sustainable and practical! Once the UN or WHO or whoever determines the danger in their homelands is over, they should be sent back, or apply through the existing options for residency.

I agree with this, but I'd say the judgement should be made by the Irish government not by a third party. The institutions you mention (UN/WHO) are fully embedded in the mass migration industrial complex. They'll never acknowledge conditions permit the return of refugees to their homelands. Of course the Irish government is as well, but at least it is loosely accountable to the Irish people.

Cordell

No, realistically that's never going to happen, and it's cruel and unfair for those that make an effort to integrate, no matter how few will they be. If you allow them in, then let them stay, but make sure they integrate and contribute, encourage them and even push them if needed.
What should and can be done is to filter them better and expedite the process.

Pixel Eater

Having a citizenship test would be a pretty simple device to help with integration. Applicants would need to know a basic knowledge of the history, culture and language of the country; it's crazy that we don't have one.

I heard a long while ago that one was being looked at; is there any plan to implement one?

Pixel Eater

Pixel Eater wrote: »

Having a citizenship test would be a pretty simple device to help with integration. Applicants would need to know a basic knowledge of the history, culture and language of the country; it's crazy that we don't have one.

I heard a long while ago that one was being looked at; is there any plan to implement one?

In China, my students have heaps of examinations, where they have to learn reams of information, which they do, they pass the exam, and the very next day, the majority of what they've learned is forgotten. That's actually quite common throughout the world, where people will prepare for an exam, and then forget it afterwards.

What we really need is a case officer system, which track the migrants, their activities, their efforts at getting employment, record the problems they face, and to help resolve the issues they're having... but also to ensure that they're living a healthy and acceptable lifestyle. With these case officers, would come support groups, and other groups which would encourage continuous integration over a period of a full decade. Along with a scoring system based around educational achievements, with language aptitude being highest, but that it would be their efforts at integration, and reports by case officers, to determine their success. (we already have NGOs and other organisations getting funding by the State.. we could incorporate them into such a system, but with real oversight to hold back their 'virtuous' impulses)

A probation period for migrants who have fulfilled the basic requirements, and that they would need to match the needs within the probation period before any application for actual citizenship. Migrant parents would be responsible for their children's behavior during the probation period, regardless of whether they reach adulthood during the probation or not. Migrants who fail to accept the probation period would be immediately denied access to Ireland.

If they're here simply to work a fixed term, then integration isn't such an issue. It's more about people who want to become citizens and so gain those benefits that should only be available to Irish citizens and EU citizens.

Sand

I'm not in favour of exam style citizenship tests. It lends itself to a mindset that being Irish is a matter of meeting fixed, unchanging criteria that anyone in the world can meet. I.E. Is a person who speaks Irish fluently more Irish than someone who is not? Is a person who plays hurling more Irish than someone who is not? Is someone who drinks Guinness more Irish than someone who does not? It gets even worse if you try to define 'Irish values' people must hold.

Ethnic groups, including the Irish, aren't fixed. We evolve and change and learn over time. What remains fixed and consistent is common ancestry of that ethnic group. People are Irish because they have Irish ancestry, identify as being Irish and are accepted as being Irish by others. Our state recognizes this concept because Irish citizenship is primarily achieved by having an Irish parent, regardless of where you are born.

I could live in Japan all my life, and never be Japanese because I don't share any ancestry with the Japanese people. Even if I learned to speak the language and immersed myself in their culture I'd still be Irish.

Citizenship is a slightly different matter as it relates to the state, not to the nation. But Ireland is the nation-state of the Irish people. If the state doesn't exist to represent and protect Irish people then its pointless. So citizenship has to be primarily linked with the Irish people. I don't think citizenship cant be extended to non-Irish people but it is hardly ever necessary. EU citizens have full rights on the basis of their own citizenship. Non-EU Refugees will return home when they crisis ends. Anyone who wants to remain in Ireland can simply apply for it.

Sand

Sand wrote: »

I'm not in favour of exam style citizenship tests. It lends itself to a mindset that being Irish is a matter of meeting fixed, unchanging criteria that anyone in the world can meet. I.E. Is a person who speaks Irish fluently more Irish than someone who is not? Is a person who plays hurling more Irish than someone who is not? Is someone who drinks Guinness more Irish than someone who does not? It gets even worse if you try to define 'Irish values' people must hold.

Ethnic groups, including the Irish, aren't fixed. We evolve and change and learn over time. What remains fixed and consistent is common ancestry of that ethnic group. People are Irish because they have Irish ancestry, identify as being Irish and are accepted as being Irish by others. Our state recognizes this concept because Irish citizenship is primarily achieved by having an Irish parent, regardless of where you are born.

I could live in Japan all my life, and never be Japanese because I don't share any ancestry with the Japanese people. Even if I learned to speak the language and immersed myself in their culture I'd still be Irish.

Citizenship is a slightly different matter as it relates to the state, not to the nation. But Ireland is the nation-state of the Irish people. If the state doesn't exist to represent and protect Irish people then its pointless. So citizenship has to be primarily linked with the Irish people. I don't think citizenship cant be extended to non-Irish people but it is hardly ever necessary. EU citizens have full rights on the basis of their own citizenship. Non-EU Refugees will return home when they crisis ends. Anyone who wants to remain in Ireland can simply apply for it.

From living abroad, I'd say the biggest differences tend to be surrounding "values". The importance of actual honesty. Recognising others contributions. Accepting responsibility for our own mistakes. Being uncomfortable with corruption, and calling it out when we see it. A desire for actual equality, rather than simply a face saving exercise. The desire for a fair democratic system. etc. There are heaps of values that we take for granted, but are simply lacking in most "developing" countries.

This is really the culture that we should want migrants to be actively accepting should they wish to become citizens in Ireland. They need to be conditioned to believe that our value systems are right for Ireland... and that they should conform to believing, and supporting them. If they can't accept them, then they should be living elsewhere.

You raised the point about Japan. I have two close friends (older than I am) who are married to Japanese women, have children, businesses there, and understand Japanese culture intimately. They love the culture, and more importantly, appreciate the values that are openly shown (and those that aren't spoken of). They'll always be foreigners, but they're foreigners who fit in extremely well, because many Japanese will accept them because they do fit in so well... even though Japan is a very racially aware culture.

The difference is that with China, foreigners will never be accepted, regardless of how much they understand the culture or value systems. I've known westerners who have lived in China for over 30 years, and they still left in the end because there was no possible acceptance.... because some of their values just aren't compatible with ours.

It's the values that we should be focusing on for integration.

TheCitizen

Deleted User wrote: »

Well, that one is pretty obvious. biko did.

So, that's a no, then.... Not answering the questions put to you, or backing up your statements. Nope, it's fair enough. I'm glad that we can identify you as someone we shouldn't spend any time giving decent answers to. You're just here to make statements and move away. okie dokie.

Aye, I’ll make a statement and move away when I like and certainly won’t waste my precious time arguing in circles and seeking Thanks on here.

When it comes to a Referendum on immigration idea, I think it’s absolutely daft and it will be hijacked by the sort of opinion you see expressed on here a lot of the time. It’ll be trolled into the dirt. Immigration is far too complex an issue for it to be thrown into a Referendum with some binary in or out solution like the idiocy of Brexit that you saw in Britain. These are complex issues, a single vote on it is asking for trouble.

Policies and properly informed education need to be developed re immigration, a Referendum on it is no solution, it’d be taken over by the usual gobdaws.

TheCitizen

TheCitizen wrote: »

Aye, I’ll make a statement and move away when I like and certainly won’t waste my precious time arguing in circles and seeking Thanks on here.

OK. Although... you've just described what many people I know, consider being Irish to be. Talking and Arguing for the joy of it. Having a bit of craic while chasing weird and fun conversations. Tweaking peoples noses through great arguments. With a little bit of recognition to go along with it down at the pub. Not much though, since we're a modest people. :pac:

Not to worry. I know where you stand now. Got it. haha.

suicide_circus

A referendum is a question on changing something in the constitution- what is being proposed?

I'd settle for a coherent policy around asylum, particularly where applicants have bypassed multiple safe countries before reaching Ireland.

Hamachi

TheCitizen wrote: »

Aye, I’ll make a statement and move away when I like and certainly won’t waste my precious time arguing in circles and seeking Thanks on here.

Basically, you’re conceding that you have no argument, you can’t back up any of your assertions with facts, and that you’re intellectually hollow.

However, you do see fit to pop up occasionally, spew meaningless rhetoric, and cast aspersions on posters who disagree with you and have repeatedly backed up their arguments with facts and logic. Good man. I can see how your time must be very, very ‘precious’..

Hamachi

suicide_circus wrote: »

I'd setting for a coherent policy around asylum, particularly where applicants have bypassed multiple safe countries before reaching Ireland.

Agreed, but also augmented with a coherent and high-bar policy around regular economic migration.

Only those migrants who are filling a legitimate skills gap and will not become a burden on the state, should be admitted. As a country, we need to re-orientate our thinking around inward migration. It’s not a humanitarian issue. Rather, it’s something that must be of genuine benefit to Ireland and her people. Otherwise, no dice.

irishblessing

I have just finished reading about the fires in the west of the US this morning- over 100,000 displaced in evacuations or towns burning to the ground. So many with nowhere to go. Many more still are currently evacuating or sitting ready for the call to go. US cities in Oregon have the worst air quality in the world right now. Climate change appears to be the underlying driving factor. And then the migrant camp fire in Lesbos-which was set intentionally but all the innocent people not responsible for that are having to run for their lives and displaced once again. Where will these people go?

Topping off a lovely read of the news this morning, scientists are saying that the fires in the Amazon have caused the "lungs of the earth" to nearly be at a 'point of no return.'

You can talk about migrants only being allowed in to other countries if they fill a skill gap, but at the end of the day we're all human beings. The earth isn't going to sustain us if we carry on like this for much longer.
Before you take a cold position of "no dice" when it comes to other human beings surviving or thriving, you'd want to be certain we the people of Ireland will never find ourselves (again) needing to leave to survive. But that's not a reassurance anyone can give, can they? Maybe some of you should ask yourselves what kind of help you'd be hoping for if the shoe were on the other foot. You'd better hope the skills you have are needed in some other country with that shortage and opening or else you're SOL? Human lives are inherently valuable and have the potential to positively contribute wherever they are no matter what's on their CV.
Anyone remember the story about the "human Spiderman," the migrant who was given French citizenship after scaling a building to save a dangling child? These stories of migrant humans helping humans are everywhere.

irishblessing

irishblessing wrote: »

I have just finished reading about the fires in the west of the US this morning- over 100,000 displaced in evacuations or towns burning to the ground. So many with nowhere to go. Many more still are currently evacuating or sitting ready for the call to go. US cities in Oregon have the worst air quality in the world right now. Climate change appears to be the underlying driving factor.

Sure, they do.. they're US citizens, so the Federal government should provide. They're also one of the wealthiest countries in the world, so perhaps their population can stop concerning themselves with minor issues, and consider helping out their fellow citizens.

And then the migrant camp fire in Lesbos-which was set intentionally but all the innocent people not responsible for that are having to run for their lives and displaced once again. Where will these people go?

Why the assumption that there are innocent people? Perhaps they voted on it happening. Twice. And if not, then, do we really want these people here?

As to where they could go... back into the M.East, Africa, or Asia.

Topping off a lovely read of the news this morning, scientists are saying that the fires in the Amazon have caused the "lungs of the earth" to nearly be at a 'point of no return.' Faaaawwk.

Yeah, I've been hearing that for twenty years, and yet, the same claim pops up again every few years. It could be true. Don't really care, since I can't influence it, one way or another.

You can talk about migrants only being allowed in to other countries if they fill a skill gap, but at the end of the day we're all human beings. The earth isn't going to sustain us if we carry on like this for much longer.

I don't get this contradictory attitude. You harp on about climate change, and then tell us that we should be allowing migrants into Europe, regardless of whether they have the skills to be successful or not. You do realise that Europe consumes a rather hefty percentage of the worlds resources, and that it's not just the rich that do so. You're advocating encouraging immigration of people who would add to the drain on European resources, and increase the strain on the economies... thereby, increasing the ecological damage. Actually, by keeping migrants out of Europe, we're decreasing the resources being consumed, and therefore, doing something to help the planet..

Like... come on... think about your argument before making it. Your logic is full of holes. We're all humans... so we should all be poor together before the world ends. Yup.

Before you take a cold position of "no dice" when it comes to other human beings surviving or thriving,

Go on. Quote any poster on this thread who said such a thing. People can thrive and survive outside of western nations.

you'd want to be certain we the people of Ireland will never find ourselves (again) needing to leave to survive. But that's not a reassurance anyone can give, can they? Maybe some of you should ask yourselves what kind of help you'd be hoping for if the shoe were on the other foot. You'd better hope the skills you have are needed in some other country with that shortage and opening or else you're SOL? Human lives are inherently valuable and have the potential to positively contribute wherever they are no matter what's on their CV.

I already live, for the most part, abroad.... based entirely around my education, and skills. Amazing isn't it?

Anyone remember the story about the "human Spiderman," the migrant who was given French citizenship after scaling a building to save a dangling child? These stories of migrant humans helping humans are everywhere.

And... of absolutely no relevance. Also Easily countered with examples of migrants who committed horrible crimes.

Kivaro

irishblessing wrote: »

The earth isn't going to sustain us if we carry on like this for much longer.

And Ireland is not able to sustain unlimited migration into the country. The sentiment of your post is probably held by the vast majority of us; we do want to help. But with the way the world is going we just cannot continue to have mass inward influx of migration into Ireland; both legal and illegal. Where is the cut off? Do we accept 1 million, 2 million migrants, or more?

Our services are already stretched to the limit with health, education, and housing, and the massive social welfare bill is a ticking time-bomb. The substantial underestimating of the cost for Direct Provisioning in Ireland for 2020 is a good example of where the country is heading with the financial burden that we all have to shoulder.

It is now time that Ireland's government concentrates on providing quality of life to the people already in the country. There are millions upon millions of people who want to come here from Africa, the Indian sub-continent, and the far east. It would be economical and cultural suicide to allow this to happen.

ExMachina1000

On positive for those on the left side of the political spectrum is that the more immigration into Europe the more the demographics change and as immigrants become citizens they are more likely to vote left wing towards policies such as increased welfare spending and continued or increased immigration policies.

Immigrants from a different part of the globe won't be voting for nationalistic parties or right wing parties who traditionally would be in favour of things such as border control.

The balance will be changed where people with no heritage connection to a country will have an increasing say in its policies.

We see it already with louder calls from people who demand more diverse representation in politics, media etc to reflect "our diverse society "

Historically does it ever benifit the natives?
I don't think so

irishblessing

Deleted User wrote: »

Sure, they do.. they're US citizens, so the Federal government should provide. They're also one of the wealthiest countries in the world, so perhaps their population can stop concerning themselves with minor issues, and consider helping out their fellow citizens.



Why the assumption that there are innocent people? Perhaps they voted on it happening. Twice. And if not, then, do we really want these people here?

As to where they could go... back into the M.East, Africa, or Asia.



Yeah, I've been hearing that for twenty years, and yet, the same claim pops up again every few years. It could be true. Don't really care, since I can't influence it, one way or another.



I don't get this contradictory attitude. You harp on about climate change, and then tell us that we should be allowing migrants into Europe, regardless of whether they have the skills to be successful or not. You do realise that Europe consumes a rather hefty percentage of the worlds resources, and that it's not just the rich that do so. You're advocating encouraging immigration of people who would add to the drain on European resources, and increase the strain on the economies... thereby, increasing the ecological damage. Actually, by keeping migrants out of Europe, we're decreasing the resources being consumed, and therefore, doing something to help the planet..

Like... come on... think about your argument before making it. Your logic is full of holes. We're all humans... so we should all be poor together before the world ends. Yup.



Go on. Quote any poster on this thread who said such a thing. People can thrive and survive outside of western nations.



I already live, for the most part, abroad.... based entirely around my education, and skills. Amazing isn't it?


And... of absolutely no relevance. Also Easily countered with examples of migrants who committed horrible crimes.

The federal government providing... :pac::pac::pac: The people of the US have received ONE payment of 1200 dollars since the pandemic began and a massive backlog of processing unemployment payments. Nearly three quarters of people in the US are one pay check away from homelessness and utter disaster. The richest country in the world provides for their military prowess and the top 1%. "They" voted for. Hilary Clinton actually, nearly 3million more people did. Do you not know this?

Yeah, I'm advocating for humanity and humaneness. Guilty as charged. Think about your own compassionate holes why don't you.

Before you get too smug about your amazing skills that allow you to live abroad, consider the fact that you received an education in a country that safely supported you to do so. Many don't have that opportunity.

Irish people commit crimes too. I only brought up that story to illustrate the point that people contribute positively to society in ways not pointing to a skill on their CV.

irishblessing

Kivaro wrote: »

And Ireland is not able to sustain unlimited migration into the country. The sentiment of your post is probably held by the vast majority of us; we do want to help. But with the way the world is going we just cannot continue to have mass inward influx of migration into Ireland; both legal and illegal. Where is the cut off? Do we accept 1 million, 2 million migrants, or more?

Our services are already stretched to the limit with health, education, and housing, and the massive social welfare bill is a ticking time-bomb. The substantial underestimating of the cost for Direct Provisioning in Ireland for 2020 is a good example of where the country is heading with the financial burden that we all have to shoulder.

It is now time that Ireland's government concentrates on providing quality of life to the people already in the country. There are millions upon millions of people who want to come here from Africa, the Indian sub-continent, and the far east. It would be economical and cultural suicide to allow this to happen.

You have a valid point too! I'm not at all advocating or pushing for totally open immigration. I'd like to see us helping where and when we can (not direct provision ffs) and not basing our response on cv skills or "no dice."

I think our government can do both, and better. Better provide for us citizens and others who need help too.

irishblessing

irishblessing wrote: »

The federal government providing... :pac::pac::pac: The people of the US have received ONE payment of 1200 dollars since the pandemic began and a massive backlog of processing unemployment payments. Nearly three quarters of people in the US are one pay check away from homelessness and utter disaster. The richest country in the world provides for their military prowess and the top 1%. "They" voted for. Hilary Clinton actually, nearly 3million more people did. Do you not know this?

Sure, I do... however, it doesn't change that they are US citizens, and it is the duty of the Federal/State government to provide for them. They have options, considering the country they live in... your statement that they have nowhere to go is flawed.

Yeah, I'm advocating for humanity and humaneness. Guilty as charged. Think about your own compassionate holes why don't you.

No, you're advocating for collective poverty.

Compassionate holes? Judge others much, do you? Get off your self-imposed moral pedestal, and embrace some reality in your arguments. Anyway, you have no idea what I do to help others... and I suspect you wouldn't care, as long as you can suggest how virtuous your belief system is. What? You think I'm simply going to accept your high moral superiority? Meh.

You're arguing like a teenager.

Before you get too smug about your amazing skills that allow you to live abroad, consider the fact that you received an education in a country that safely supported you to do so. Many don't have that opportunity.

Smug? You're projecting again. Argue. Engage in a discussion. No need to throw around insults just because someone disagrees with you. Perhaps use this discussion as a way to organise your belief with some substance rather than vague notions of morality.

I'm in my 40s and I paid for the vast majority of my education myself. I also developed myself through free education on the internet... but in any case, those who didn't have that opportunity won't do well in a first world nation, that is predominately focused on a service economy, with higher skills/education being important for most jobs.

What will your migrants lacking the skills/education to be employed do in Ireland? Considering that Ireland is one of the most expensive countries in Europe to live in. Come on... show me that you can be practical, and consider the long term health of/success for these migrants. (Considering that those on the lower end of the economy are already struggling... importing more people to avail of those jobs, will simply make the situation for those people worse)

irishblessing

irishblessing wrote: »

Before you take a cold position of "no dice" when it comes to other human beings surviving or thriving, you'd want to be certain we the people of Ireland will never find ourselves (again) needing to leave to survive. But that's not a reassurance anyone can give, can they? Maybe some of you should ask yourselves what kind of help you'd be hoping for if the shoe were on the other foot. You'd better hope the skills you have are needed in some other country with that shortage and opening or else you're SOL? Human lives are inherently valuable and have the potential to positively contribute wherever they are no matter what's on their CV.

If things went bad here we wont be looking to move to Nigeria or Pakistan or Bangladesh. We would likely end up in countries nearby or in countries we have a history with.

irishblessing

Deleted User wrote: »

If things went bad here we wont be looking to move to Nigeria or Pakistan or Bangladesh. We would likely end up in countries nearby or in countries we have a history with.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. How would it help to go to a country without economic or safe supports in place.

The point is, as you allude to is that we would need to go somewhere but also within your point, is an absolute expectation to "most likely end up" somewhere.

irishblessing

irishblessing wrote: »

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. How would it help to go to a country without economic or safe supports in place.

The point is, as you allude to is that we would need to go somewhere but also within your point, is an absolute expectation to "most likely end up" somewhere.

We are in the EU. We would likely end up moving to those countries. We wouldn't end up in Japan or Korea. Or any Asian or African country regardless of their economic success.

ExMachina1000

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What will your migrants lacking the skills/education to be employed do in Ireland? Considering that Ireland is one of the most expensive countries in Europe to live in. Come on... show me that you can be practical, and consider the long term health of/success for these migrants. (Considering that those on the lower end of the economy are already struggling... importing more people to avail of those jobs, will simply make the situation for those people worse)

Collective handouts I believe is the common answer no matter how its dressed up. It all leads back to the same thing. Hand over public money to people who have no connection to a country except their name on a plane ticket.

Ireland is the third most indebted country on the planet. 1 in 6 of our tax euro comes from multinationals. Our economy is always on the brink of meltdown. One short run of bad luck or decisions made in board rooms across the pond and the whole thing comes down.

Low skilled non EU immigration has zero benefit for this country or the people who call it home. It is a drain on an economy built on matchsticks

Hamachi

irishblessing wrote: »

You can talk about migrants only being allowed in to other countries if they fill a skill gap, but at the end of the day we're all human beings. The earth isn't going to sustain us if we carry on like this for much longer.
Before you take a cold position of "no dice" when it comes to other human beings surviving or thriving...

Other posters have already critiqued your argument. Few points from my perspective.

1. Climate change is a challenge for sure. It’s an issue that needs to be addressed scientifically and by decent governance globally. The solution does not involve turning Ireland and Europe into a refugee camp for the world’s poor.

2. On the topic of refugee camps. Clearly, the destruction of the Moria camp was arson instigated by the migrants themselves, with the goal of forcing Europe’s hand. These people have passed through multiple safe countries whilst traveling to the Greek islands from Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East. Your solution; immediately grant them permanent residence and a lifetime on benefits in Western Europe. No. The right solution here is to repatriate them to their homelands and assess their asylum claims from there, determining those with a legitimate claim vs. those seeking to subvert our legal systems around asylum.

3. The ‘human spiderman’ story, whilst a heart-warming anecdote, is irrelevant to the migration crisis. Given that this episode occurred in France, I could also point to the migrants who slaughtered hundreds of Europeans in the Bataclan attacks and by driving a truck into tourists in Nice. However, this does nothing to help resolve the macro issue around migration.

4. My solution to asylum seeking is as follows. Europe and the wider developed world should establish ‘safe zones’ in those parts of the world, from which refugees originate. It’s far more economically effective to provide food, shelter, and healthcare locally. Claims are filed and adjudicated from there. Only those asylum seekers, with a legitimate claim, should be brought to Europe in a safe, transparent manner. They should be distributed across the continent in an equitable way, determined by population size and economic viability. Furthermore, asylum should be for a finite period. It’s not Carte Blanche to remain in Europe indefinitely. When local conditions improve, asylum seekers should be encouraged to return home to make space for the next batch of desperate people, with a genuine reason for coming to Europe.

Frankly, your claims that this is a cold-hearted approach do not stand up to any scrutiny. It’s relatively compassionate, but tempered by the reality that the European people also have a desire and a right to live in a place that remains recognizably ‘home’.

TomTomTim

irishblessing wrote: »

Yeah, I'm advocating for humanity and humaneness. Guilty as charged. Think about your own compassionate holes why don't you.

These types of platitudes are nothing but nonsense. You might as well say I believe in "love & hope", or "empathy & compassion". These words mean little in the context of your use; it's just a way for you to say that you're a good guy, without ever doing anything to justify said position.

You people use these terms to override realities, the complexities of issues. Just because you use some positive terms, it doesn't allow you the escape realities of the problems that we are facing. The terms you use are simple on the surface, much like your understanding of the issue.