Irish birthrate slumps 22% in a decade

Hamachi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119164917#Comment_119164917

I’m late 30s, my wife is early 30s. We have two, with a third on the way. My brother is mid-thirties, wife is early thirties, they already have three. My sister is early thirties, has two and plans to have more. My two youngest sisters are still in their twenties and single. They hope to marry and have kids. All my friends from university are married with multiple children. Everybody I’ve spoken about is highly educated and have decent careers.

Your adult children aren’t representative of anybody except themselves and have zero impact on macro trends. Incidentally, having children is the best thing that ever happened to me. It beats career advancement, travel, and all of the other stuff I’ve done in my life by multiples. I highly recommend it! Shame you’ll miss out on the grandkids.

Danno

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119164756#Comment_119164756

Ah the old racist card...

If you want to understand what is happening you're going to have to accept that the policies of governments are directly at fault.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119165407#Comment_119165407

As I said before, given their fixation on neo-liberal economics they really have no other choice than to bolster their growth with migrants. It really isn't anything sinister - its a consequence of capitalism and free markets.

The Irish state has been violently opposed to immigration for all of its existence until this position was no longer sustainable economically.

c.p.w.g.w

I'd be happy for my cat to eat my corpse

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119165430#Comment_119165430

Its a reaction to propping up unsustainable industries... such as the pubs, hotels, etc which are no longer competitive, and should be allowed to fail, so that better businesses come into being to meet the actual demands of the market, and consequently pay proper salaries (and higher work standards) to attract talent to work. Alternatively, they can bring in cheap labour, provide subsidies, and not need to change at all.

How many bars does a town of 20k people need? Walk around my hometown, and the vast majority of pubs are empty or hold a few customers, with the majority heading to the two popular bars. Irish culture and society has changed, but the propping up of the hospitality industry hasn't. It's no different with the range of hotels, and B&Bs who far over-supply the market, but expect the government to help them continue. And the list goes on, if anyone is honest enough to appreciate that many traditional industries in Ireland are over supplied, and not really competitive. Besides, that the general quality of service can often be very low.

Your claim regarding capitalism and free markets relates to the nations with traditional manufacturing bases, or extensive service industries required to support a much larger population. It doesn't relate properly to Ireland, or other similar small nations whose focus has been on tech and financial services.

And the Irish State has been extremely pro-immigration for the last 20 years (in line with EU expectations). What is not sustainable is this need to support failing industries who don't modernise and won't streamline their businesses.

We don't need a larger population considering the industries in Ireland that remain profitable/self-sustainable. We need highly skilled individuals, and that can be provided by the native population.. or from limited contract work by foreign specialists.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119165630#Comment_119165630

Two major issues with what you just said. Hi-Tech industries in Ireland are paying for visa's for immigrants from all corners of the world in Ireland. These are highly skilled highly paid rolls which cannot be filled with domestic "native" labour - so you whole screed about the hospitaity industry is way wide of the mark. The high tech industries lobbied hard to be allowed to recruit foreign national and they got what they needed and couldn't find at home. This is exactly in line with what I said.

Traditionally and still now, the hospitality industry has used cheap teenage labour to allow them to operate - it shifted to better foreign labour because it cost the same for a better service (have you ever been served by a surly teenager in a restaurant).

Secondly, Ireland loved the EU immigrants because they were high skilled, flexable and they never needed to be offered nationality. As soon as they stopped working and used up their 12 months benefits they could be sent packing. The EU immigrants fitted well with the Irish states anti-migrant position.

Direct provision was a prison type system which sent out a strong message to anyone thinking of fleeing to Ireland - you are not welcome and you c could be stuck in internment camps for many years if you are foolish enough to try.

But the point you entirely missed is that neo-liberal economics relies on growing population to provide the economic growth it produces. If a country can no longer provide the population growth its economy is built on - then the market will look elsewhere to provide that population growth - and for the last 50 years all neo-liberal economies in all corners of the world have operate lax immigration policies for exactly this reason.

Sudden Valley

Australia is the poster boy for controlled immigration but seems to have all the same problems we have high property prices, high cost of lving, high child care costs so perhaps migration is not the cause of all our problems. I would consider anyone born in ireland even to an immigrant to be 100% irish but it seems extremes on the left and right want to emphasise that these kids are different to whose parents are both irish born

Dyr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119165698#Comment_119165698

EU nationals don't need a visa to work in Ireland. We're part of one of the largest labour markets in the world, if the multinational companies are looking outside of that market there's a reason for it other than availabillity of workers.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119165798#Comment_119165798

No - availability of workers is the only explanation necessary in a competitive tight labour market of high tech industries. No wet dream replacement conspiracy needed to explain basic labour market dynamics.

High tech industry across the EU are booming - and workers are staying at home where they want to be.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119165737#Comment_119165737

I'd regard Australia as pretty lenient. I know some say its strict but, in my opinion, they should be far stricter.

If I were them, I'd be limiting immigration from Ireland on a massive scale. A lot of Irish people are causing nothing but trouble over there.

Sudden Valley

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119165810#Comment_119165810

I cant think of any western country that is more strict or has their geographical advantages to control immigration. And the brexit crowd is always holding them up as a country they wish to follow. There is something wrong with they way all countries are meeting the housing supply, leaving it up to the free market is not the solution and this will have a knock on effects on birthrates. Generation renting cant have big families in apartments.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119165698#Comment_119165698

Two major issues with what you just said. Hi-Tech industries in Ireland are paying for visa's for immigrants from all corners of the world in Ireland. These are highly skilled highly paid rolls which cannot be filled with domestic "native" labour - so you whole screed about the hospitaity industry is way wide of the mark. The high tech industries lobbied hard to be allowed to recruit foreign national and they got what they needed and couldn't find at home. This is exactly in line with what I said.

Many of the tech jobs are filled with Irish labour, and yes, companies do bring in talent from abroad, but that doesn't mean that a greater focus on tech in Irish education, couldn't negate the need for foreign talent beyond the most specialist/niche areas, or those supremely good at their roles. I'm not advocating any kind of closed borders scenario... Educated/skilled immigration to Ireland is a benefit.

As for your remark about hospitality, you object over tech, but use the tech objection to dismiss the hospitality remarks... that makes no logical sense.

Traditionally and still now, the hospitality industry has used cheap teenage labour to allow them to operate - it shifted to better foreign labour because it cost the same for a better service (have you ever been served by a surly teenager in a restaurant).

No disagreement there, but it's not sustainable, due to the ever rising costs of living in Ireland, which will squeeze low-skilled labour to the point where the negatives of having such a large population at the bottom of our society, outweighs the slight positives (as has been seen developing in other European nations). If the current/traditional way of providing a service/product no longer works, change it. Don't prop it up by bringing in more people who will need to be supported, and ultimately won't be able to afford living here as costs continue to increase. Which they will.

Secondly, Ireland loved the EU immigrants because they were high skilled, flexable and they never needed to be offered nationality. As soon as they stopped working and used up their 12 months benefits they could be sent packing. The EU immigrants fitted well with the Irish states anti-migrant position.

The EU encouraged immigration of peoples from non-EU nations, as the drive for diversity became popular in the late 90s and early 2000s. You really should take a look at the national/ethnic breakdown of immigrants over the last 20 years...

Direct provision was a prison type system which sent out a strong message to anyone thinking of fleeing to Ireland - you are not welcome and you c could be stuck in internment camps for many years if you are foolish enough to try.

It makes no sense to skip from immigration to DP. It's a distraction. But in any case, DP was badly conceived and badly managed.. but the largest failure was in supporting such a wide range of NGOs to represent Asylum seekers, and so, increase the overall costs to Asylum claims in both expenditure and time.

But the point you entirely missed is that neo-liberal economics relies on growing population to provide the economic growth it produces. If a country can no longer provide the population growth its economy is built on - then the market will look elsewhere to provide that population growth - and for the last 50 years all neo-liberal economies in all corners of the world have operate lax immigration policies for exactly this reason.

I didn't miss the point... i actually addressed it, but you've simply dismissed what I said out of hand. Not going to bother repeating myself.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119165737#Comment_119165737

The only people I ever see holding up Australia as being the poster boy for controlled immigration are the ones wanting to object to their policies. (which have generally failed)

And nobody has tried to claim that Immigration is the cause of all our problems. Neither "the cause", or "all", being accurate.

It's an important consideration for the overall situation. That's it. As opposed to those who want to ignore it completely... or give it a tiny footnote at the bottom of other reasons.

I would consider anyone born in ireland even to an immigrant to be 100% irish but it seems extremes on the left and right want to emphasise that these kids are different to whose parents are both irish born

Whereas I'd ask the kids/adults as to what they see themselves as... that's the real problem as 2nd/3rd generation people born in a nation often don't feel to be of that nation/culture, due to a lack of integration or assimilation, usually because their parents haven't integrated/assimilated.. which leads to confusion and unhappiness about their position. Being of two cultures but not accepted by either.. at least from their perspective. There's often a clash between cultures as these 2nd/3rd gen try to find a place for themselves, but the host culture and the parents culture have differing expectations.

Shoog

The EU encouraged immigration of peoples from non-EU nations, as the drive for diversity became popular in the late 90s and early 2000s. You really should take a look at the national/ethnic breakdown of immigrants over the last 20 years...

There is not a shred of evidence to support this assertion, the EU encouraged interstate movement - any movement from outside the EU was entirely the responsibility of the member states to manage.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119165975#Comment_119165975

You do realise that what I said, and what you said just covered different points? And your counter is to the point you made yourself?

wow. Impressive.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/it/MEMO_15_4544

20.4 million third-country nationals are living in the EU in 2013 amounted therefore to 4% of the total EU population.The most important groups of third country nationals were Turks, Moroccans, Chinese Indians and Ukrainians.

-

However, not everything in the field of migration policy has a legislative character. While immigrant integration policies remain a competence of the Member States, and are implemented at the regional and local level, the European Commission also created a common framework for the integration of third-country nationals as early on as 2005.

Have a gawk.. it covers a lot of ground.. and seriously, don't come back expecting us to accept that the EU proposals have no influence over nations which have received funding from them, and receive a lot in EU based investment. Like Ireland, for example.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119165990#Comment_119165990

You said that the EU encouraged immigration from non-EU states to increase diversity - this is literally a lie.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119166066#Comment_119166066

this is literally a lie.

What is up with posters who, when they meet opposition, need to turn to being offensive?

I provided you with a link showing the encouragement of immigration by the EU from non-EU nations. Throughout the same period Multiculturalism/diversity has been promoted as being a wonderful thing, but nah.. they're not connected. Yeah right..

Discuss properly or I won't bother engaging with you again. Literally a lie.. ffs.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119166185#Comment_119166185

Your link did not support your position that the EU encouraged third party immigration - its as simple as that.

Strumms

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119165430#Comment_119165430

no.

give one example where the Irish state has been “violently“ opposed to immigration ? And YOU call other posters out falsely for lying yet you post the above !

The tide is simply turning and ordinary Irish people are seeing their wellbeing being compromised and threatened by having to share our resources with people who had not one shred of effort in creating these resources of ours…

The most important resources for our wellbeing such as housing, healthcare and multiple other services that are increasingly less attainable now here to us Irish, in OUR country.

downtheroad

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119163603#Comment_119163603

How is that exactly? In 2022 somebody earning €17,000 pays not 1 cent of income tax. Somebody earning €37,000 pays €4,040 of income tax (that's less than 11% of their income). I think you'll find somebody with a salary of €100,000 pays substantially more tax than both these examples combined.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119166266#Comment_119166266

Third party immigration... you really do like to shift goalposts. And it's obvious you didn't bother reading/scanning the link I provided.

Grand. I'm done wasting time with you.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119166365#Comment_119166365

Having a immigration policy is not the same as encouraging immigration. Your powers of comprehension are weak.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119166383#Comment_119166383

Yeah! Another shifting of the goalposts. Brilliant. Do you even remember the original statement and your response?

Meh. Forget it, you'll simply keep deflecting.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119166412#Comment_119166412

I remember clearly what you stated and it seem that you have been doing some mighty footwork to not justify it.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119166434#Comment_119166434

For all the empty rhetorical speech, you haven't backed up your claims at all.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119166473#Comment_119166473

I wasn't making any wild claims here - I rebutted a statement which was unsupported.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119163767#Comment_119163767

I think what that report is telling you is that a lot of people arrived from the newer EU member states in the five years before the report was published. This CSO report for the year 2016 elaborates on that a bit. I'm not sure where the OECD got its 17% foreign-born figure from, since the CSO says it's around 12%. Unless of course the OECD foreign-born figure includes Irish people born abroad who moved back here, which is a possibility.

Anyway, the CSO says that most of the non-Irish living here in 2016 were Polish, with Romanian, British and Lithuanian nationals accounting for most of the rest.

Three thoughts occur to me arising from that.

First, have things changed much since 2016 and are the figures and assumptions still in date? Anecdotally, a lot of non-nationals left Ireland during the pandemic, but is that borne out by the statistics?

Secondly, and sorry if this causes bother, but if you have a half a million non-Irish living here, the vast majority of whom are Polish, Romanian, British or Lithuanian, I've got news for you. That's not immigration. You might think it is, but you'd be wrong. We've spent 50 years creating a zone in which citizens of 27 countries can work, live, travel and trade freely. Plenty of Irish make their living all over that zone, and we're all entitled to if we like - just as plenty of other EU nationalities are entitled to make their living in this part of the zone. And before you get all snotty about the British, you'd do well to keep the Common Travel Area and the Good Friday Agreement in mind.

And thirdly, instead of making veiled references to mass immigration, do any of y'all have the ability to say what you mean? What, precisely, is wrong with the Polish people, Romanian people, British People or Lithuanian people who live and work here? Name it - and if your answer is some meaningless waffle about them being fine but they should be at home, then name that as well - and name why it's OK to throw them out and grind even more sections of our post-Covid economy to a halt, or better still throw them out and take our Paddies home from all the other places where they're making a living.

Galwayguy35

Crying babies and toddlers are like a bullet going through my brain, the thoughts of having to put up with that for a few years and then 20 more afterwards rearing a kid made it an easy decision for me never to have any of my own.

I'd imagine quite a few men and women feel the same as me because unlike in the past when people who should never have been parents in the first place felt pressure to start a family because everyone else was doing it its seen as being perfectly acceptable in 2022 to not want to have ankle biters.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119166331#Comment_119166331

Apologies, I wasn't as clear as I might have been. By "lower" income, I didn't mean low, I meant "lower than high". What I'm getting at is the oddball effects of the individualisation policy introduced by Charlie McCreevy back in the early 2000s.

Two spouses who are both working get a bigger standard rate band than two spouses where only one is working. If only one spouse is working the band is capped at €45,800. If both spouses are working, that band can be increased until it is capped at €73,600. It means there's a "sweet spot" in between those two figures, where the couple can earn extra money and "tax plan" it to be taxed at 20% rather than 40%, but only if the non-earner joins the labour force. In a world of mad childcare and commuting costs it might not make sense to do that anymore, but the difference between the two tax rates could be worth up to €600 a month to a couple. So some percentage of couples in the earning zone between (say) €4k and €6K a month will be tempted into the jobs market.

But if the couple have one earner on bigger money and a spouse on a lower wage, it can make more sense for the spouse to either quit the jobs market or else go part-time, especially if the take-home pay lost by doing that is balanced out by decreased commuting and childcare costs. So a couple earning (say) €10K a month where one spouse is making €8K or €8.5K might be tempted to partially back out of the labour force.

The policy was designed to attract married women with kids into the labour force at a time of very low unemployment. The main concern would have been to fill middle-ish income jobs, and the government of the day wouldn't have been thinking of high-earning couples when they introduced the change.