FAS proposes Green-card-type system for non-EU workers

therecklessone

arcadegame2004 wrote:

I have acknowledged the end of the restrictions in 2011 but the problem is that the shortfall between any shortfall would likely be filled by immigrants from non-EU countries handed out gawd-knows-how-many Green Cards by the Government if this new system comes in.

Ah, so you acknowledge your maths were wonky then? Or do you still believe that 100,000 migrants will enter this country from accession countries every year for the next 34 years, leaving the Irish in a minority? Or are you trying to cloud the issue by talking about shortfalls between shortfalls? You're figures were misleading AG, accept it and move on.

arcadegame2004 wrote:

BTW I never mentioned 114% but I did mention that the majority would be foreigners unless we get tough.

BTW I never said you did. Read the post again, hell read Bonkey's posted that I linked to.

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Yes it will make them better off. However many are even further behind the pack economically than we were in 1972, and I think it would take 50 years to catch up rather than 30. So the incentive to emigrate will continue.

And you have yet to show any evidence to suggest that new arrivals in this country (I refer specifically to EU nationals) are here for good. Care to provide?

arcadegame2004 wrote:

The 80% "Yes" in the Citizenship referendum together with the exit-polls seem to strongly indicate my views are closer to the pulse of the nation than yours, with all due respect.

That was a CITIZENSHIP referendum, not a plebiscite to see if we wanted to let the darkies in or not. So when I quoted you earlier as saying "We are not opposed to SOME immigration" I expected you to shed some light on who the "we" are, not to twist the issue and try to claim that the 80% yes vote in the Citizenship referendum represents one single bloc of public opinion, with you as its intellectual champion. Cop on AG. Citizenship is not immigration. Don't try to substitute one for the other.

Hobbes

arcadegame2004 wrote:

They would still be a burden. More so in fact. Their access to social-welfare would then be on par with that of Irish people. Bad move!

Your ability miss reality never ceases to amaze me. I said "PROVE THEY ARE NOT A BURDEN ON THE STATE" and your comeback is they would still be a burden? How exactly do you work that out? If it is proven they are not a burden, then with a green card they would be paying Irish taxes and contributing to Social Welfare.

I am not a racist or a bigot. However, you seem to have a bigoted attitude to people who favour immigration controls.

No your a racist. Clearly even if the person is to get Irish citizenship (there by being Irish) you are still against it. Add to that you are only picking certain races.

arcadegame2004

Originally posted by therecklessone
That was a CITIZENSHIP referendum, not a plebiscite to see if we wanted to let the darkies in or not. So when I quoted you earlier as saying "We are not opposed to SOME immigration" I expected you to shed some light on who the "we" are, not to twist the issue and try to claim that the 80% yes vote in the Citizenship referendum represents one single bloc of public opinion, with you as its intellectual champion. Cop on AG. Citizenship is not immigration. Don't try to substitute one for the other.

That's certainly not what most people on the "No" side in that referendum in these forums were saying to me in our debates on that referendum, e.g. "You're a racist/bigot/xenophobe etc.". Have a read of the Citizenship referendum debates on this forum and you will see that.

Also, the vast majority of those who voted said in exit-polls that concerns over the numbers of immigrants coming to Ireland and the perceived exploitation of Ireland by illegal immigrants was the main reason for them voting "Yes" (36% of those voting Yes said it was because "the country is being exploited by immigrants" and 27% said they voted yes because "too many immigrants". Also, the vast majority of the campaigners in the "No" campaign brought up the immigration-card on almost every TV and radio debate, not to mention newspaper coverage. To deny the link between that referendum and the issue of immigration seems to me to demonstrate either amnesia, wishful thinking, or both.

Frank Grimes

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Also, the vast majority of the campaigners in the "No" campaign brought up the immigration-card on almost every TV and radio debate, not to mention newspaper coverage.

Any links to prove that?
The only people I can remember playing the immigration card during the referendum were the yes side. I remember myself and many others saying that the referendum had nothing to do with stopping illegal immigrants or whatever it was people like you were trying to claim at the time.

arcadegame2004

Frank Grimes wrote:

Any links to prove that?
The only people I can remember playing the immigration card during the referendum were the yes side. I remember myself and many others saying that the referendum had nothing to do with stopping illegal immigrants or whatever it was people like you were trying to claim at the time.

Playing the immigration card is Very implicit in the name of one of the "No" campaign groups Campaign against the Racist Referendum. They accuse the referendum of being racist. As nearly everyone proportionately of an ethnic group other than Irish came here via immigration, there is no other sensible conclusion to come to than that immigration was a huge issue for CARR in this referendum.

Interestingly, on their website there is a list of some groups who opposed the yes side http://www.activelink.ie/carr/. Extraordinary how so many (for there were scores of such groups we heard it on the news remember) groups can be so unbelievable out of touch with 80% of our people. The chattering-classes have no right any longer to claim to have an automatic finger on the pulse of the Irish people.

Also, note this from the Irish Refugee Council;s website on the Citizenship referendum:

Tens of thousands of immigrants, seeking refuge from persecution in the countries they fled or who are here as economic migrants such as nurses from the Philippines, are legitimately resident in Ireland. Many of them are of childbearing age and the carrying of the referendum would inevitably mean that increasing numbers of babies living in Ireland would not be citizens of this country. Whether or not the Constitution would protect the rights of non-citizen children will only be determined through the courts in future years but case law to date offers no such guarantees. Allowing children to be born on an equal footing promotes tolerance and lessens the 'difference' factor for the child born of immigrant parents.

http://www.irishrefugeecouncil.ie/press04/pr21-5-04.html

I could also add Senator Brendan Ryan's accusation at the Labour Party conference that the referendum had shown that the government had chosen "racism over nationalism".

Frank Grimes

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Playing the immigration card is Very implicit in the name of one of the "No" campaign groups Campaign against the Racist Referendum. They accuse the referendum of being racist. As nearly everyone proportionately of an ethnic group other than Irish came here via immigration, there is no other sensible conclusion to come to than that immigration was a huge issue for CARR in this referendum.

So in other words, you're just surmising.

Also, note this from the Irish Refugee Council;s website on the Citizenship referendum:

That's just pointing out a fact, not "playing a card".

I could also add Senator Brendan Ryan's accusation at the Labour Party conference that the referendum had shown that the government had chosen "racism over nationalism".

He's entitled to his opinion, is he not? And again, I don't see anything about an immigration card here.

AngelofFire

Arcadegame2004 can deny all he likes that it was a racist referendum, a couple of weeks ago he stated that on a thread that all no voters were unpatriotic types allowing foreginers to ''run down our country'' http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=181761 , as far as im concerned anybody that trys to link immigration control with patriotism is a racist. Before the referendum there was a radio debate between Ivana Bacik and Michael Mcdowell. Michael Mcdowelll said '' Ivana all you have to do is go into town and look around you and you see the problem'' meaning when McDowell goes into town he sees black faces and dark skinned faces and he sees that as a ''problem''. The referendum was about inplicity using racism for political points scoring, no green paper was produced, there was no submission for to all party oireachtas committee, it was rushed, it was done in the context of the european and local elections, allowing little time for rational debate furthermore it was about distracting public attention from the FF/PD governements legacy of cutbacks, and broken election promises.

therecklessone

arcadegame2004 wrote:

To deny the link between that referendum and the issue of immigration seems to me to demonstrate either amnesia, wishful thinking, or both.

And to continue to lash square pegs with a lump hammer in a vain attempt to fit them in round holes smacks of desperation.

Lets do some AG2004-style maths...

80% yes vote in referendum, with a 60% turnout. So 48% of the total electorate voted yes. Then apply the figures from the post-election poll. By your own admission, 63% of respondants voted yes because of concerns over immigration. Lets make that 66% for ease of calculation.

66% of 48% = 32%.

So less than 32% of the total electorate voted yes because of concerns over immigration. And you're close to the pulse of the Irish nation? :rolleyes:

By the way, I voted yes in the referendum, and you DO NOT represent my opinion in anyway.

arcadegame2004 wrote:

That's certainly not what most people on the "No" side in that referendum in these forums were saying to me in our debates on that referendum, e.g. "You're a racist/bigot/xenophobe etc.". Have a read of the Citizenship referendum debates on this forum and you will see that.

Thats a unique approach..."here's all the people who've criticised me in the past, so of course I'm right"? :eek:

therecklessone

arcadegame2004 wrote:

We are not opposed to SOME immigration

I await a valid explanation of who "we" are.

arcadegame2004

AngelofFire wrote:

Arcadegame2004 can deny all he likes that it was a racist referendum, a couple of weeks ago he stated that on a thread that all no voters were unpatriotic types allowing foreginers to ''run down our country'' http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=181761 , as far as im concerned anybody that trys to link immigration control with patriotism is a racist.

AngelofFire I suspect from this remark that you have not read this contribution of mine from that thread:

I am not saying that voting "No" makes the person unpatriotic. I said that those who love running down the country all the time are unpatriotic (if they are Irish).

I was criticising those who refused to accept the result and just condemned basically all "Yes" voters as "racist/xenophobic" etc. The first post on that referendum aftermath thread is a case in point! :mad:

Before the referendum there was a radio debate between Ivana Bacik and Michael Mcdowell. Michael Mcdowelll said '' Ivana all you have to do is go into town and look around you and you see the problem'' meaning when McDowell goes into town he sees black faces and dark skinned faces and he sees that as a ''problem''. The referendum was about inplicity using racism for political points scoring, no green paper was produced, there was no submission for to all party oireachtas committee, it was rushed, it was done in the context of the european and local elections, allowing little time for rational debate furthermore it was about distracting public attention from the FF/PD governements legacy of cutbacks, and broken election promises.

Racism implies hatred of other races and and attitude that regards certain races as inferior/superior to others. I have never espoused such sentiments. Do you have to let all your friends move into your house to prove your their friends? I don't think so! So in the same sense, do we have to let every foreigner that wants to come here into our country to prove that we are not racist? Of course not! Where would you get the extra money to pay for their treatment in our hospitals? Like all humans a time would come when they would need health-care. How much would it cost ot extend the medical-card to them? How many new hospitals would have to be built to cope with the hundreds of thousands of new migrants the FAS proposal envisages? It seems to me extremely against the national interest to let in so many new people without planning for the inevitable costs and pressures they will inevitably bring, whatever about the happy clappy terminology about "new cultures enriching us and causing absolutely no problems at all". :rolleyes:

To those who say that we should let them all work and that this would pay for the above, I respond how would you make them work? How could you stop them avoiding supposed restrictions on the kind of jobs they get, with all the consequences of cheap-labour competition they would inevitably bring. Yes we have a minimum wage, but this kind of competition in parts of the economy not experiencing labour-shortages would likely at the very least stop wages rising. And because they would work for less, the tax-yield would definitely be insufficient by far to pay for the problems I mention in the previous paragraph. And what about the eventual costs of paying the pensions of the immigrants? Some here have asserted that they would return home when their countries are rich. I seriously doubt this, because only about 10% of Irish emigrants living abroad (150,000 out of about 1.5 million) returned home between 1996-2002, and anyway, with respect to the vast bulk of countries outside of the EU, which the FAS proposals refer to, they are far, far behind even the Eastern European EU members, so their countries would not likely reach Western standards of living until we are in our 70's at least (I am 24)! Would the lefties propose we let in yet more immigrants to help "pay the pensions of the immigrants"? At that rate Irish people will be a minority in their own country and when I say "we" I am confident that I speak for the majority of Irish people.

The turnout in the referendum of 59.5% is very high for an Irish referendum, being about the same as the GFA referendum. To my mind that reflected an issue that Irish people feel deeply frustrated and angry about, namely, an immigration policy that is seen as too liberal and too weighted to cheap-labour and political-correctness goals, rather than genuine economic needs of the country. Yesterday I chatted to a friend who told me that if things keep going as they are now, the day will come when Irish people become a minority in their own country. I agreed with her and I think this sticks in Irish people's craw. If we countenance such a foreign minority emerging here, then why bother having a country?

Hobbes

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Racism implies hatred of other races and and attitude that regards certain races as inferior/superior to others.

Which is what you are doing. Notice how you only refer to certain countries as being people we should keep out.

Where would you get the extra money to pay for their treatment in our hospitals?

Well with a greencard system you have to show you are not a burden on the state. Which means they would have to prove they could pay for medical insurance or costs. Also because they aren't a burden they would be required to pay taxes which would in turn give extra revenue to the state allowing all those people to go on medical cards (those fine up standing Irish people who always contribute to soceity that is).

How much would it cost ot extend the medical-card to them?

Medical cards come from taxes. More people = more tax money for state = where it comes from.

How many new hospitals would have to be built to cope with the hundreds of thousands of new migrants the FAS proposal envisages?

OMG are they flying in their sick and wounded to us! :-O

How about how many jobs would be created in making and running those new hospitals. How much money would be fed back into the country from that?

To those who say that we should let them all work and that this would pay for the above, I respond how would you make them work? How could you stop them avoiding supposed restrictions on the kind of jobs they get,

Easy... Let me make it big for you.
Prove they will not be a burden on the state when they apply for the green card.

Seriously, how much of a clue do you need? You ever gone for a green card in the US? You generally have to prove that if you become sick or unemployed that you can maintain yourself for 5 years without ever asking the state for a penny (IIRC).

with all the consequences of cheap-labour competition they would inevitably bring. Yes we have a minimum wage, but this kind of competition in parts of the economy not experiencing labour-shortages would likely at the very least stop wages rising.

Green Cards are rarely used for cheap labour. But trying to explain this to you seems not to be getting in.

Assuming there were people unemployed, they would get the revenue from those that were employed. Green card holders nearly always invest back in the country where as work permits remove money from the country (beyond living expenses). But as I said Green cards are not free for all visas.

Your in lala land if you think they will work for less on a green card. The person normally comes to get the same level of cash as nationals. Work permits tend to be the cheap labour force.

what about the eventual costs of paying the pensions of the immigrants?

You think money magicall appears in the tresurary? Your state pension is generally based on how much you put into it. Anyone relaying on the state pension alone is in for a wake up call when they get older.

Again... IF THEY ARE NOT A BURDEN ON THE STATE THIS WONT BE AN ISSUE.

we let in yet more immigrants to help "pay the pensions of the immigrants"? At that rate Irish people will be a minority in their own country and when I say "we" I am confident that I speak for the majority of Irish people.

Or let in more to pay the pensions of the Irish who are currently on state pensions? After all the money they will be bringing in will be used to fund Irish pensions for a good 50 years or so based on your flawed maths.

Yesterday I chatted to a friend who told me that if things keep going as they are now, the day will come when Irish people become a minority in their own country.

Wow! So anything your friend says is fact?

Frank Grimes

arcadegame2004 wrote:

To my mind that reflected an issue that Irish people feel deeply frustrated and angry about, namely, an immigration policy that is seen as too liberal and too weighted to cheap-labour and political-correctness goals, rather than genuine economic needs of the country.

How many times does it have to be said. That referendum had nothing to do with immigration, it was about citizenship.
Just in case there's any confusion about what 'nothing' means:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=nothing

Do you have to let all your friends move into your house to prove your their friends?

I wouldn't tell them to get lost if they asked though.

therecklessone

arcadegame2004 wrote:

The turnout in the referendum of 59.5% is very high for an Irish referendum, being about the same as the GFA referendum. To my mind that reflected an issue that Irish people feel deeply frustrated and angry about, namely, an immigration policy that is seen as too liberal and too weighted to cheap-labour and political-correctness goals, rather than genuine economic needs of the country.

Jesus help me. Some people felt that way, less than 32% of the total electorate in fact (based on the back of a beermat mathematical method you so often employ). Let me remind you...

therecklessone wrote:

Lets do some AG2004-style maths...

80% yes vote in referendum, with a 60% turnout. So 48% of the total electorate voted yes. Then apply the figures from the post-election poll. By your own admission, 63% of respondants voted yes because of concerns over immigration. Lets make that 66% for ease of calculation.

66% of 48% = 32%.

So less than 32% of the total electorate voted yes because of concerns over immigration. And you're close to the pulse of the Irish nation?

enochpowell2004 wrote:

Yesterday I chatted to a friend who told me that if things keep going as they are now, the day will come when Irish people become a minority in their own country. I agreed with her and I think this sticks in Irish people's craw.

Wow, I'm surprised it didn't make a Prime Time special.

enochpowell2004 wrote:

when I say "we" I am confident that I speak for the majority of Irish people

Misplaced confidence does not an argument make.

Good God man, do you believe that the thousands of confident, well-educated Poles, Czechs, and Baltic states twentysomethings coming into this country intend sitting around doing nothing for 40+ years until they can claim a pension and medical card? What about the hard-working Chinese (who could teach the Irish a thing or two about honesty and hard work, not to mention caring for the elderly)? You're living in a dream world (or from your perspective a nightmare) where you view all immigrants as free loaders and usurpers of national heritage. The reality is quite different. Learn to deal with it.

On a final note, do I recall you pontificating in the past about how health and pension reform was necessary to solve Irelands future population imbalance? Might I suggest that such reform would help deal with the "burden" of extra non-national inhabitants of this island? If its good enough for the Irish after all...

AngelofFire

arcadegame2004 wrote:

AngelofFire I suspect from this remark that you have not read this contribution of mine from that thread:



I was criticising those who refused to accept the result and just condemned basically all "Yes" voters as "racist/xenophobic" etc. The first post on that referendum aftermath thread is a case in point! :mad:




Racism implies hatred of other races and and attitude that regards certain races as inferior/superior to others. I have never espoused such sentiments. Do you have to let all your friends move into your house to prove your their friends? I don't think so! So in the same sense, do we have to let every foreigner that wants to come here into our country to prove that we are not racist? Of course not! Where would you get the extra money to pay for their treatment in our hospitals? Like all humans a time would come when they would need health-care. How much would it cost ot extend the medical-card to them? How many new hospitals would have to be built to cope with the hundreds of thousands of new migrants the FAS proposal envisages? It seems to me extremely against the national interest to let in so many new people without planning for the inevitable costs and pressures they will inevitably bring, whatever about the happy clappy terminology about "new cultures enriching us and causing absolutely no problems at all". :rolleyes:

To those who say that we should let them all work and that this would pay for the above, I respond how would you make them work? How could you stop them avoiding supposed restrictions on the kind of jobs they get, with all the consequences of cheap-labour competition they would inevitably bring. Yes we have a minimum wage, but this kind of competition in parts of the economy not experiencing labour-shortages would likely at the very least stop wages rising. And because they would work for less, the tax-yield would definitely be insufficient by far to pay for the problems I mention in the previous paragraph. And what about the eventual costs of paying the pensions of the immigrants? Some here have asserted that they would return home when their countries are rich. I seriously doubt this, because only about 10% of Irish emigrants living abroad (150,000 out of about 1.5 million) returned home between 1996-2002, and anyway, with respect to the vast bulk of countries outside of the EU, which the FAS proposals refer to, they are far, far behind even the Eastern European EU members, so their countries would not likely reach Western standards of living until we are in our 70's at least (I am 24)! Would the lefties propose we let in yet more immigrants to help "pay the pensions of the immigrants"? At that rate Irish people will be a minority in their own country and when I say "we" I am confident that I speak for the majority of Irish people.

The turnout in the referendum of 59.5% is very high for an Irish referendum, being about the same as the GFA referendum. To my mind that reflected an issue that Irish people feel deeply frustrated and angry about, namely, an immigration policy that is seen as too liberal and too weighted to cheap-labour and political-correctness goals, rather than genuine economic needs of the country. Yesterday I chatted to a friend who told me that if things keep going as they are now, the day will come when Irish people become a minority in their own country. I agreed with her and I think this sticks in Irish people's craw. If we countenance such a foreign minority emerging here, then why bother having a country?

Arcade i never said, that i didn`t accept the result of the referendum, i respect democracy. I said that i disagreed with the result and the motivations behind it which is my democratic right. My support for a liberal humane immigration policy is not because of political correctness, its because i have a bit and solidarity with my fellow human beings. Irish people have been emigrating for the past 150 years trying to look for a better life for themselves, as soon as things get better here and people from other countries come here to do the same, we complain. Large scale Emigration abroad was a blight on irelands development for decades, the young people left beacuse there was no opportunity. Most immigrants that come in here have a role to play in our society and are important to sustaining our economy, the reason why we see lots of asian, and coloured people working in Mcdonalds and newsagents is because most irish people wont do them type of Jobs, look at the amount of immigrants working in the building trade, where there is currently a Labour shortage. . I disagree with your view that we will be the ''minority'' in our own country, you`re just revamping the ''they`re taking our jobs and our women argument''. Its a silly irrational view with no firm basis.

billy the squid

Where would you get the extra money to pay for their treatment in our hospitals?

what gives you the impression that all foreigners are sponges. If they had the Green Card system here like they do in the states wouldn't these people be working in order to stay here, hence they can pay their own way. To say that just because they are foreigners they will get a medical card is tarring all with the one brush.

To those who say that we should let them all work and that this would pay for the above, I respond how would you make them work? How could you stop them avoiding supposed restrictions on the kind of jobs they get

what jobs would you like to restrict foreign workers to, cleaning your office toilets, handing out your fast-food on a saturday night. The reason people want to come here is because there are jobs here that Irish people think are beneath them. If a person whether they be irish or not are qualified to do a job then they should be allowed to do whatever job they apply for.

arcadegame2004

Originally posted by AngeloofFire
Arcade i never said, that i didn`t accept the result of the referendum, i respect democracy. I said that i disagreed with the result and the motivations behind it which is my democratic right. My support for a liberal humane immigration policy is not because of political correctness, its because i have a bit and solidarity with my fellow human beings. Irish people have been emigrating for the past 150 years trying to look for a better life for themselves, as soon as things get better here and people from other countries come here to do the same, we complain. Large scale Emigration abroad was a blight on irelands development for decades, the young people left beacuse there was no opportunity. Most immigrants that come in here have a role to play in our society and are important to sustaining our economy, the reason why we see lots of asian, and coloured people working in Mcdonalds and newsagents is because most irish people wont do them type of Jobs, look at the amount of immigrants working in the building trade, where there is currently a Labour shortage. . I disagree with your view that we will be the ''minority'' in our own country, you`re just revamping the ''they`re taking our jobs and our women argument''. Its a silly irrational view with no firm basis.

The Irish people who left for the US in the 1800's were genuine asylum-seekers in that they were fleeing famine and colonial landlordism, and foreign imperialism. You cannot say that about Romanians, Nigerians, Moldovans etc. who come here to claim asylum. If they crossed into an EU country before Ireland (which given our location is almost certain and if they didn't thaty was by choice) then they have no business as far as I am concerned claiming that their lives depend on coming to Ireland.

Regarding what you say about skills-shortages, I point out to you that I am not opposed to foreigners filling job-vacancies PROVIDED that there is a skills-shortage in the relevant industry. That is why I am opposed to letting people enter the job-market for jobs in industries where NO skills-shortage exist. That is why I am against the Green Card proposal. If you grant people citizenship at the click of a finger, and let them do whatever job they want in Ireland, then inevitably they will look for jobs where skills-shortages do not pertain, those losing Irish people their jobs because people from developing countries are inevitably prepared to work for less. This in turn would cause racial tensions and lead to an increase in racism in this country. That is in no-one's interests.

what gives you the impression that all foreigners are sponges. If they had the Green Card system here like they do in the states wouldn't these people be working in order to stay here, hence they can pay their own way. To say that just because they are foreigners they will get a medical card is tarring all with the one brush.

I didn't say they were all spongers. I actually made the point that it isn't necessarily good to let them work, if they are going to work in industries not experiencing labour shortages thus losing Irish jobs to cheap labour. This WOULD happen and denying it is just being silly. THe present work-permit system should continue keeping the work-permit in the hands of the employer, and not the employee. This is necessary A: to prevent forgery of work-permits, and B: to tue an foreign-employee to a labour-shortage industry where they wont compete with Irish workers on a cheap labour basis.

Frank Grimes

arcadegame2004 wrote:

If you grant people citizenship at the click of a finger, and let them do whatever job they want in Ireland, then inevitably they will look for jobs where skills-shortages do not pertain, those losing Irish people their jobs because people from developing countries are inevitably prepared to work for less.

So what do you propose? Just treat them like slaves and then boot them out if they speak up? Why shouldn't they be allowed apply for jobs they want? If the person's right for the job they should get it. Regardless of where they're from.
And leave out the "they're willing to work for less" crap. If you hadn't noticed, this country is a little on the expensive side, they wouldn't be able to afford to live here if they took salaries similar to "where they came from".
As a matter of interest, if an American or a German went for these hypothetical jobs you keep going on about, would they be suitable candidates? Do people just start becoming unsuitable candidates (except when applying for "menial" jobs of course) the further East they're from?

monument

arcadegame2004 wrote:

The 80% "Yes" in the Citizenship referendum together with the exit-polls seem to strongly indicate my views are closer to the pulse of the nation than yours, with all due respect.

Taking that err... people with err... “strong views” like yours about other people were A) more likely to vote, most likely to vote yes, I find your close to ‘the pulse of the nation’ thinking strange.

Hobbes

arcadegame2004 wrote:

You cannot say that about Romanians, Nigerians, Moldovans etc. who come here to claim asylum.

We are not talking about Asylum, we are talking about Green Cards. Asylum/Immirgration/Work Visas are not interchangable arguments.

I am concerned claiming that their lives depend on coming to Ireland.

IIRC Ireland is required to take up some of the Asylum seekers to Europe. But again Ayslum seekers has nothing to do with green cards.

That is why I am against the Green Card proposal. If you grant people citizenship at the click of a finger,

Except that Green cards are not issued at a click of the finger. You are required to prove you are not a burden on the state as well as you will contributing to the state via your cash funds or your skills which the country needs.

Of course all this is totally lost on you, and you seem to think the government will be handing them out free at the airport.

if they are going to work in industries not experiencing labour shortages thus losing Irish jobs to cheap labour. This WOULD happen and denying it is just being silly.

No it is not would happen. It is unlikely that a person on a green card will come here to work on minimum wage for all jobs (eg, IT industry). They may work below the average wage but certainly not super cheap labour.

Also with a green card you can't just walk into this kind of job using the card. (having the job offer beforehand wouldn't help with the green card neither). The reason being is having a job isn't proof of not being a burden for X amount of years.

But what you fail to realise is the problem isn't people coming into the country, but the jobs leaving the country. Afterall why jump through hoops to get work visas/green cards (using your logic) for minimum wagers when it is easier to just move all the work to one of those countries instead.

THe present work-permit system should continue keeping the work-permit in the hands of the employer, and not the employee.

I can keep repeating myself but I think your in your own little world.

Work Permits are totally different to green cards

AngelofFire

arcadegame2004 wrote:

. You cannot say that about Romanians, Nigerians, Moldovans etc. who come here to claim asylum.

Asylum seekers are not allowed to work, they are held in detention centres and are given E20 per week to live on thats less than most welfare recipients recieve per day. There are many cases which dont allow for people to claim asylum such as femal genital mutilation, its quite horrific, its practised on single mothers and young girls in Nigeria.

The Irish people who left for the US in the 1800's were genuine asylum-seekers in that they were fleeing famine and colonial landlordism, and foreign imperialism

Are people in Africa not fleeing from something similar.

BEAT

I am a perfect example of a foreigner who has been trying to find work there for the last 3 years to no avail. I have a specific trade and all I want to do is to move back there but because I cant find an employer to give me a work permit I am stuck over here.

I am not a sponge and wouldnt take advantage of the 'system' there or here. I work for a living and want to make a life for myself while contributing to the economy.
There are many out ther like myself.

I for one would love it it they implemented a green card system so I could live there legally and in turn find work.

Sure there will be those that will take advantage, but it wont be easy. If I have this much trouble trying to do it the legal way I cant see that many people getting away with it illegally...there are more people watching what goes on than you know.

Victor

Just on the 50,000 arriving here since May. It's poo.

Of the 100-200 eastern Europeans I know, 80-90% were here before May.

Poker_Peter

Originally posted by Victor
Of the 100-200 eastern Europeans I know, 80-90% were here before May.

Do you know the other 49,800?

I personally don't know any Eastern Europeans but suppose if I met 1 yesterday who was already here since April. Then you could say that 100% of Eastern Europeans I know were here before May :rolleyes: It would be about as representative as your sample, in my opinion.

Originally posted by Monument
Taking that err... people with err... “strong views” like yours about other people were A) more likely to vote, most likely to vote yes, I find your close to ‘the pulse of the nation’ thinking strange.

There are many cases which dont allow for people to claim asylum such as femal genital mutilation, its quite horrific, its practised on single mothers and young girls in Nigeria.

You don't need to come to Ireland to escape that. A Nigerian has ineviable crossed through many other countries since leaving Nigeria by the time they get to Ireland. Why not claim asylum in one of those? Coming to Ireland is not necessary to escape these things.

IIRC Ireland is required to take up some of the Asylum seekers to Europe. But again Ayslum seekers has nothing to do with green cards.

At a time when much of the UN structures are coming under increasing scrutiny, culiminating recently in proposals to reform the security council, I think we need to seek changes in the UN convention on refugees instead of treating it as a holy cow to be left untouched. The Convention arose from the Cold War, when the two superpowers wanted to encourage defections to each other. A new context exists now, so it needs to be looked at again.

Hobbes

Poker_Peter wrote:

Do you know the other 49,800?

He doesn't have to. You know polls aren't generated by asking every single person in the population.

However you are refuting his total based on what exactly? Do you have a link to the official figure? Seeing as ArcadeGames reality doesn't extend to here for him to link it.

Why not claim asylum in one of those? Coming to Ireland is not necessary to escape these things.

Why not start another thread and ask that question. We are talking about Green Cards which has absolutly nothing to do with Asylum seekers. Only Arcade spouted that off.

At a time when much of the UN structures are coming under increasing scrutiny,...

It has nothing to do with the UN. I said EU.

monument

Poker_Peter, I'm not quite sure why you quoted me, were you meaning to respond to my comment?

Victor

Poker_Peter wrote:

Do you know the other 49,800?

No, not all of them, but I've been introduced to mothers / fathers / friends on holiday here.

Poker_Peter wrote:

The Convention arose from the Cold War

The Green Card Convention?

Poker_Peter

monument wrote:

Poker_Peter, I'm not quite sure why you quoted me, were you meaning to respond to my comment?

Because you were implying that the result of the referendum was unrepresentative of the Irish public's opinion as a whole, due to an assumed higher turnout among yes voters. I strongly disagree!

Congrats arcadegame for challenging the PC-brigade.

monument

I was clearly saying something, there was nothing hidden in what I was saying. I'm still bemused to why you quoted me without commenting on what I said.

'challenging the PC-brigade' (sic)... now that's something you'd hear the BNP or UKIP say, strangely enough they also claim they are not racists.

therecklessone

arcadegame2004 wrote:

The Irish people who left for the US in the 1800's were genuine asylum-seekers in that they were fleeing famine and colonial landlordism, and foreign imperialism. You cannot say that about Romanians, Nigerians, Moldovans etc. who come here to claim asylum. If they crossed into an EU country before Ireland (which given our location is almost certain and if they didn't thaty was by choice) then they have no business as far as I am concerned claiming that their lives depend on coming to Ireland.

Rather conveniant that we live on an island then, ain't it Enoch? Would you say the same if we shared a border with Romania, or were part of the Mediteranean coastline which seems so inviting to Albanians?

arcadegame2004 wrote:

THe present work-permit system should continue keeping the work-permit in the hands of the employer, and not the employee. This is necessary A: to prevent forgery of work-permits, and B: to tue an foreign-employee to a labour-shortage industry where they wont compete with Irish workers on a cheap labour basis.

Now I see where you're coming from. You don't care what we pay the fuzzie-wuzzies, as long as Irish pay rates don't suffer. I'll take it you didn't object to Samantha Hutton's cleaning firm (requires registration, I can post the full article if required) exploiting Brazilian cleaners, failing to honour the terms of a contract and forcing 13 hour days on the cleaners. The effect of tying these immigrants to their employer was to infringe their rights. I'll take it thats ok with you.

The chairman of ISME, Robert Berney, seems to agree with the claim that the current permit system enables exploitation of cheap foreign labour source.

Speaking at the organisation’s annual conference, its chairman Robert Berney said that it was time for immigrant workers to be afforded the same conditions of employment as Irish workers.

There was anecdotal evidence, he said, that some were being treated unfairly by unscrupulous employers. The construction, catering and food processing sectors together with the hospitality sector are almost completely reliant on immigrant labour in order to stay in business, he said.

The Immigrant Council of Ireland concurs.

The temporary nature of employment in relation to the work permit is a huge issue,” said Denise Charlton, the chief executive of the Immigrant Council of Ireland. “The implication is that workers can be dispensed with if we don’t need them

I like the ISME's chairmans summation of the situation.

The work permit system needs to be overhauled as a matter of priority, he said. “The fact that the employer holds the permit has connotations of bonded labour and is unfair both on workers and on employers.”

You claim you do not want to see Irish pay rates suffer as a result of immigration AG, why is it that you seem happy to allow exploitation of non-nationals to facilitate this? Why are you happy to see our houses built, or dinners served, and our floors swept, by cheap immigrant labour, as long as it means our current wage levels (average 8% increase this year, according to Newstalk reports today) continue?

And why is it that a champion of liberalisation of our economy, particularly the semi-state sector, wants to see Irish business lose its competitive edge by refusing to face the fact that current growth is in a large part driven by immigrant labour, and will continue to be, whether you like it or not?

Hobbes

Poker_Peter wrote:

Congrats arcadegame for challenging the PC-brigade.

Which is a lot less then you did.

Generally racist posts go along the lines of
- "I am not racist but..."
- Quote statistics from unofficial source (like news article that doesn't quote source)
- Using said statistics to claim that in 20-30 years time we will be in the minority.
- Interchange Visa/Work permit/Asylum seeker as if they all mean the same thing.
- Claim Asylum seekers are taking everyones job and sponging off the state.
- Point out how Johnny Forienger is taking peoples jobs yet is somehow also able to be here legally and not have to pay taxes.
- Ask the question "Why can't they go elsewhere?"
- Continue to quote the same stuff over and over in the hopes that people may start to believe it.
- Ignore any counter argument and pretend it wasn't even brought up which may question your reality.
- Proceed to name call after everyone notices your spouting crap.
- Go back to board where everyone believes the same as you and spout off stuff like "They don't get it".

It's practically a formula, you could spot the SF'ers a mile off using this.