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

10000maniacs

The EU has said that it will now deport any economic migrants trying to settle illegally anywhere in the EU.
We have to see if the EU sticks to its word on this. Ireland should do the same being part of the EU.
Syrian refugees fine, but that where we should draw the line.
We simply don't have the accommodation currently to house economic migrants.
By economic migrants, I mean people from safe countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan, most of Africa. etc.
If they want to move to Ireland to work, they should do so using the correct and legal channels.
There was a guy with COVID 19 recently interviewed on RTE News from Pakistan in a direct provision centre. How is this even possible when Pakistan is a safe country.

10000maniacs

10000maniacs wrote: »

Syrian refugees fine, but that where we should draw the line.
.

Dunno why Syrians are fine, but others aren't. Syrian refugees or any refugees coming from a war torn country, bring a host of psychological problems with them, in addition to other other issues with education/skills, or a very different culture which isn't likely to integrate easily with Irish/Western society. The costs in supporting and providing for refugees would be high... higher in many ways, from migrants who are simply moving for economic purposes.

There was a guy with COVID 19 recently interviewed on RTE News from Pakistan in a direct provision centre. How is this even possible when Pakistan is a safe country.

"Currently, 64% of Pakistan’s population is under the age of 30. Among them, youth with access to higher education carry disproportionate influence in society. However, Pakistan’s siloed education system does not allow interactions across diverse groups or campuses, leading to intolerance, and in some cases, radicalization."

Pakistan is a rather messed up nation actually. Having met a variety of Pakistani people living in Asia, I can understand why they would want to live elsewhere, and Asylum is a viable method of doing that (if you can get it)

10000maniacs

Deleted User wrote: »

Dunno why Syrians are fine, but others aren't. Syrian refugees or any refugees coming from a war torn country, bring a host of psychological problems with them, in addition to other other issues with education/skills, or a very different culture which isn't likely to integrate easily with Irish/Western society. The costs in supporting and providing for refugees would be high... higher in many ways, from migrants who are simply moving for economic purposes.



"Currently, 64% of Pakistan’s population is under the age of 30. Among them, youth with access to higher education carry disproportionate influence in society. However, Pakistan’s siloed education system does not allow interactions across diverse groups or campuses, leading to intolerance, and in some cases, radicalization."

Pakistan is a rather messed up nation actually. Having met a variety of Pakistani people living in Asia, I can understand why they would want to live elsewhere, and Asylum is a viable method of doing that (if you can get it)

What I mean by that, is of all the war emergencies in the world, Syria is the most violent and they should be the highest priority.
Pakistan is a safe country period.

TheCitizen

https://www.euronews.com/2020/09/23/watch-live-eu-announces-new-policy-aimed-to-streamline-asylum-process

Some good proposals from the EU that will hopefully tackle this issue in a humane fashion.

Mr. Karate

TheCitizen wrote: »

https://www.euronews.com/2020/09/23/watch-live-eu-announces-new-policy-aimed-to-streamline-asylum-process

Some good proposals from the EU that will hopefully tackle this issue in a humane fashion.

GTFO. Any Country that agrees to let them in needs to take them all. All or none. Don't let these boats dock with them just so you play the nice guy in the media and then demand the rest of us take. **** that. You want them. You take them.

I can't wait for the Visegrad to give Merkel and Co. another collective Middle Finger over this.

jmayo

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Couple of things - they are victims, so what is the problem with acknowledging that.

(ii) Lets go some through countries that have emerged from Colonial backgrounds.

India - one of the poorest countries on the planet with population growth out of control.

And whose fault is the population growth ?
India has incredible wealth.
It has huge industry.

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Pakistan, Bangladesh, similar poverty levels.
Argentina, frequent bankruptcies
Venezuela in free fall at present.

Do you have any idea how long Argentina and Venezuela have been independent ?

Tombo2001 wrote: »

While some African countries are beginning to become more prosperous - ghana would be a good example - circa 70 years after independence. Which is about the length of time it took Ireland to get its act together.

Ah yes Ghana.
The same country that on it's independence in late 50s was richer than South Korea.
Now look at them.

Bullcr** about Ireland taking 70 years on getting it's act together.
Yes that fooking boll***s Dev held us back in 30s and 40s, but we still had electrification started nearly the minute the Civil War was over by Cosgrave government.
Even Dev was trying to get people into decent housing.

On the other hand African states usually decide to keep their civil wars going for decades.
See Angola, Ethiopia, etc, etc as examples.

Why dont they put immigration to the European people for a vote.

TheCitizen

Mr. Karate wrote: »

GTFO. Any Country that agrees to let them in needs to take them all. All or none. Don't let these boats dock with them just so you play the nice guy in the media and then demand the rest of us take. **** that. You want them. You take them.

I can't wait for the Visegrad to give Merkel and Co. another collective Middle Finger over this.

A bit of collective responsibility is required, we can't all be as irresponsible as the Brits. Your I'm alright Jack and fúck you approach ain't going to resolve anything.

Calm down there Mr Karate, try a bit of meditation perhaps.

Arthur Daley

Deleted User wrote: »

Why dont they put immigration to the European people for a vote.

Because they know the answer they would get. You think the likes of Von Der Leyen, Martin, Varadkar or Coveney are interested in your views. Your role is to pay the bills and keep quiet about it.

10000maniacs

TheCitizen wrote: »

A bit of collective responsibility is required, we can't all be as irresponsible as the Brits. Your I'm alright Jack and fúck you approach ain't going to resolve anything.

Calm down there Mr Karate, try a bit of meditation perhaps.

Now that the EU has decided to deport anybody who is not a refugee but is there illegally, this will make the process a little more palatable, especially to the poorer EU countries who can ill afford to be giving blatant economic migrants five star accommodation and bags of money.

TheCitizen

10000maniacs wrote: »

Now that the EU has decided to deport anybody who is not a refugee but is there illegally, this will make the process a little more palatable, especially to the poorer EU countries who can ill afford to be giving blatant economic migrants five star accommodation and bags of money.

Yes I think there is plenty in it for those who have been hogging this thread to support. Mr Miyagi there was grabbing the wrong end of the stick methinks. There will still be a process to determine who is a genuine asylum seeker or not and then maybe a VISA type system I think i saw mentioned elsewhere where migrant workers could come to Europe to do seasonal work and then return when the work is done.

Making these systems streamlined os the key hopefully we'll see an end to these camps on the EU's borders where people are sitting for ages.

TheCitizen

Deleted User wrote: »

Why dont they put immigration to the European people for a vote.

How exactly would you even begin to phrase such a proposal?

Putting things to Referenda doesn't resolve some issues unfortunately especially complex issues like immigration. Look at Brexit, what a complete mess that is and the UK more divided than it ever was.

10000maniacs

10000maniacs wrote: »

What I mean by that, is of all the war emergencies in the world, Syria is the most violent and they should be the highest priority.

Again, I don't see why Syrians should receive priority over other migrants/refugees. All wars are violent, and there are quite a few civil wars ongoing throughout the world right now. In fact, there are some really brutal wars that have been ongoing for decades...

In any case, I pointed out the relative cost of helping Syrian refugees, or those from any warzone.. in addition to the normal costs (accommodation, education, medical, etc), many come with trauma/psychological problems which need specialised care... all of which costs extra, and raises the question of whether they're suitable for integration into our society.

Is this just the case of helping people regardless of the costs and any problems they bring with them? Just to clear the air.

Pakistan is a safe country period.

No, it isn't... perhaps do a few google searches? (since you obviously didn't read the link I provided previously)

TheCitizen

TheCitizen wrote: »

Yes I think there is plenty in it for those who have been hogging this thread to support. Mr Miyagi there was grabbing the wrong end of the stick methinks. There will still be a process to determine who is a genuine asylum seeker or not and then maybe a VISA type system I think i saw mentioned elsewhere where migrant workers could come to Europe to do seasonal work and then return when the work is done.

Making these systems streamlined os the key hopefully we'll see an end to these camps on the EU's borders where people are sitting for ages.

Except, your article doesn't provide anything new to the mix. It's PR spin. "The question is not whether Europe should help, but how". That goes against most of the objections to the current migration system... the belief that we must help. More efficient screening processes doesn't say what will happen to those who are rejected, or even better, those who get to bypass the screening process (like those from the Moria camp) due to political gestures.

weldoninhio

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

And now you're very lucky to be born here given how wealthy we are and all the opportunities we have. What's your point?

Aren’t African Americans lucky to be born there given how wealthy it is and all the opportunities they have?

TheCitizen

Deleted User wrote: »

Except, your article doesn't provide anything new to the mix. It's PR spin. "The question is not whether Europe should help, but how". That goes against most of the objections to the current migration system... the belief that we must help. More efficient screening processes doesn't say what will happen to those who are rejected, or even better, those who get to bypass the screening process (like those from the Moria camp) due to political gestures.

It says;

"To be honest I don't think I'll have the chance to have too many 'hoorays' when I present my proposal, but I do think I will have acceptance and respect because I think we are finding the right balance where we show solidarity towards migrants, asylum seekers and between member states, but that we're also clear that those who are not eligible to stay - they have to be returned," Johansson told Euronews.

So those who are not eligible to stay have to be returned. The procedures are there, they need implementation.

TheCitizen

TheCitizen wrote: »

So those who are not eligible to stay have to be returned. The procedures are there, they need implementation.

As I said, it adds nothing new. And the first statement is the expectation that Europe needs to help... it's a PR spin because it doesn't offer any specific movement to resolve the issue. It's a vague article without any detail on how to resolve the problems that Europe faces with migration. Political deflection.

TheCitizen

Deleted User wrote: »

As I said, it adds nothing new. And the first statement is the expectation that Europe needs to help... it's a PR spin because it doesn't offer any specific movement to resolve the issue. It's a vague article without any detail on how to resolve the problems that Europe faces with migration. Political deflection.

There's plenty of detail in the article. they mention a process that will take 5 days.

"The new screening at borders should take a maximum of five days, EU leaders said. There will also be health checks and a decision about which country will be responsible for the person. " If they're eligible I take it.

If they implement those proposals it'll go a long way to resolving these issues. These are complicated issues, I'm not sure what you expect exactly.

TheCitizen

TheCitizen wrote: »

If they implement those proposals it'll go a long way to resolving these issues. These are complicated issues, I'm not sure what you expect exactly.

As you said earlier, the procedures are already in place, and in many cases, they haven't been followed previously.

What do I expect? Specific promises that can be tracked, and that those responsible can be held to account for. Which the article does not do. It's more of the same vague promises that things will improve without committing themselves.

I've seen these kind of statements before, which is why I said there wasn't anything new, and that it was political deflection. Something needed to be said after Moria, and this is the kind of statement that I expected to see. I don't hold out much hope that they'll actually do more than they currently are, except to streamline applications with the aim of more migrants being accepted. The opening statement of the article said as much to me.

TheCitizen

Deleted User wrote: »

As you said earlier, the procedures are already in place, and in many cases, they haven't been followed previously.

What do I expect? Specific promises that can be tracked, and that those responsible can be held to account for. Which the article does not do. It's more of the same vague promises that things will improve without committing themselves.

I've seen these kind of statements before, which is why I said there wasn't anything new, and that it was political deflection. Something needed to be said after Moria, and this is the kind of statement that I expected to see. I don't hold out much hope that they'll actually do more than they currently are, except to streamline applications with the aim of more migrants being accepted. The opening statement of the article said as much to me.

There's always going to be migrants. People have been moving around since time immemorial. If they make the procedures more efficient and send back those who are ineligible, I don't see what you're complaining about.

Now if they don't do what they say then complain, but just cos they've failed to grapple with this up to now doesn't mean that they'll continue to fail in that regard.

TheCitizen

TheCitizen wrote: »

There's always going to be migrants. People have been moving around since time immemorial. If they make the procedures more efficient and send back those who are ineligible, I don't see what you're complaining about.

I'm "complaining" that the article doesn't present anything new. haha. How many times do I have to repeat myself?

As for the there's always going to be migrants speel, really? You really had to say something that obvious and irrelevant to the discussion?

Now if they don't do what they say then complain, but just cos they've failed to grapple with this up to now doesn't mean that they'll continue to fail in that regard.

What do you think the last 90 pages have been about? The results of those past failures, and the lack of recognition that there needs to be change to the existing policies. The fast tracking of the Moria refugees reinforces the point that their perspective haven't changed.

TheCitizen

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm "complaining" that the article doesn't present anything new. haha. How many times do I have to repeat myself?

As for the there's always going to be migrants speel, really? You really had to say something that obvious and irrelevant to the discussion?

How is that irrelevant? People have migrated illegally into the US and Aus for years, some from this country, now people are migrating here illegally. You can set up a system to prevent as much as possible but it will remain an issue at some level.

Deleted User wrote: »

What do you think the last 90 pages have been about? The results of those past failures, and the lack of recognition that there needs to be change to the existing policies. The fast tracking of the Moria refugees reinforces the point that their perspective haven't changed.

There is a recognition that changes are needed. You just don't like the sound of the changes they are talking about making perhaps.

Yep the 90 pages has been made up of whingers like you repeating the same ould guff over and over again, letting on to be an expert when in reality you're utterly utterly clueless.

I'm hopeful that the EU will begin to tackle this issue with some degree of improvements to the situation. You can have your echo chamber back. Wibble Wibble.

TheCitizen

TheCitizen wrote: »

Yep the 90 pages has been made up of whingers like you repeating the same ould guff over and over again, letting on to be an expert when in reality you're utterly utterly clueless.

You were doing so well... a number of posts where you were capable of treating another poster with respect, but <sigh> now you're back on form.

Did you read the past 90 pages? Or even 20 pages? I seriously doubt it. And where/when did I let on that I was an expert? haha.

I'm hopeful that the EU will begin to tackle this issue with some degree of improvements to the situation. You can have your echo chamber back. Wibble Wibble.

You could stay and actually argue points rather than repeating the same mantra over and over again... but whenever you receive any opposition to your statements, you turn hostile. insult others, and then run away. At least, you're proving to be reliable in your behavior. :rolleyes:

TheCitizen

Deleted User wrote: »

You were doing so well... a number of posts where you were capable of treating another poster with respect, but <sigh> now you're back on form.

Did you read the past 90 pages? Or even 20 pages? I seriously doubt it. And where/when did I let on that I was an expert? haha.



You could stay and actually argue points rather than repeating the same mantra over and over again... but whenever you receive any opposition to your statements, you turn hostile. insult others, and then run away. At least, you're proving to be reliable in your behavior. :rolleyes:

The EU are offering solutions in that article, but you'll never be happy. Or actually what appears to make you happy is bumping your gums complaining about it over and over again on here. Off you go, whatever blows your hair back.

"running away", ha, what's the point, solutions are offered and you'll just pick holes in them and continue bickering.

Amazing lack of awareness that you accuse me of repeating the same mantra over and over again:pac:

TheCitizen

TheCitizen wrote: »

The EU are offering solutions in that article, but you'll never be happy. Or actually what appears to make you happy is bumping your gums complaining about it over and over again on here. Off you go, whatever blows your hair back.

It's called a discussion. You post, I respond, you respond, I respond. Ahh.. I understand now. You want to say your stuff and not have anyone respond. Ok. No problem. Enough said.

Utterly oblivious to irony.

TheCitizen

Another hallmark of the malcontented wingnuts. Constant Anti EU sentiment, regardless of what they do or propose.

ExMachina1000

Bambi wrote: »

Ah the Guardian, if it isnt Trump then its climate change, I assume it was climate change that caused the dusbowl of the 30s and the Ethiopian famine of the 80s rather than just human mismangement.

Probably a mix of both. Guardian facts

TheCitizen

TheCitizen wrote: »

Another hallmark of the malcontented wingnuts. Constant Anti EU sentiment, regardless of what they do or propose.

What anti-EU sentiment? roughly a page ago, I was lamenting anything that could weaken the EU... Amusing.

Edit: Oops. Sorry.. I forgot you wanted to make statements but not be replied to. My bad.

Justin Credible Darts

Anyone coming here, regardless of color, creed, gender etc all need to be vetted.

We should never give a spot to criminals, we have enough of our own, without importing other countries criminals, bringing with them their own problems and conflicts.

If they are willing and able to work, abide by the laws, and contribute to society then let them come

TheCitizen

Deleted User wrote: »

What anti-EU sentiment? roughly a page ago, I was lamenting anything that could weaken the EU... Amusing.

Edit: Oops. Sorry.. I forgot you wanted to make statements but not be replied to. My bad.

Amazing, your comments re the recently released EU proposals are completely disparaging, yet along you come with a 180 degrees volte face claiming to be pro EU. They’ve announced solutions that will certainly help matters but you’re still complaining. When you’re pulled up on it you backtrack and sidestep and prevaricate. You’re not interested in solutions, you just want to wibble on incessantly.

I think any poster that drops in to this thread can figure out what’s happening and can see through the agenda of those that continue to hog it.