Was the government right to put no limit on the amount of Ukrainian refugees in Ireland? Read OP

Things are going to get interesting in Killarney.

I'm in favour of taking in Ukrainian refugees in general but the way it's being done is a shambles,there needs to be some sort of cap on numbers and we need to have some sort of accommodation and facilities ready before they arrive. I'm not in favour of taking young male refugees arriving from the UK from Albania and Georgia and elsewhere who have thrown away their travel documents .I have no faith in anybody in power to deal with any of this,they were floundering from the beginning but now its complete farce.

The domestic tourist industry will be completely destroyed,this is happening right now.The reason there's no uproar about this is the main players ie the hotels are coming out of this well.Im somewhat involved in the industry,being guaranteed full rooms throughout the winter on a 24/7 basis is an unbelievable offer for them,they'd be mad to turn it down and if I'm honest I'd probably do the same.

The issue will come next season when there will be no domestic tourism and restaurants/pubs/cafes/towns will be feiced and clowns shoes like Roderic O Gorman will still be welcoming lads to the land of milk and honey.

This is dire enough stuff,I'm not even going to go into the how this is effecting healthcare/education,the housing crisis and social issues coming down the tracks.This stuff is a much more serious situation than Covid,climate change or Brexit put together but we're so far away from being able to fix it that a grown up conversation is not allowed about this or you'll be shouted down as a racist.

Charging refugees for rent and bills. We'll have the Rwanda policy soon.

It's a sign being out there. No more refugees welcome.

Next will be a Rwanda policy. I think it would be quite popular in Ireland.

But they're in a 'safe' country now. Isn't that how living in a functioning society works, you work and pay your own way.

When I heard this initially, I thought they meant all refugees would pay a contribution towards their bed and board, out of their extremely generous welfare payments.

If anything, it'll be a disincentive for them to work.

Are the government just going to let them sit on their back sides for months and years on end.

Refugee D is housed in a vacant house and pays for all their food and contributes to the bills and gets the same as A and B and C .

I agree the system is unfair and needs reviewing very soon

Aren't they that?

Please explain the difference.

Ukrainians are fleeing a war and are refugees. Syrians are also fleeing a war and are refugees, coming to Ireland under a UN resettlement program. This is absolutely basic stuff, hence my comment. You can't not know this.

I've heard it. Please stop talking down to me. I realise now you believe you're far more intelligent than me.

China is a trading partner. So was Russia (technically they still are. Gas).

We are also above gdp for foreign aid compared to other first world country. Produce links where we're not meeting them please.

Their places.

Are all of them up to standard?

Edit: who's paying for both upgrades and morality of taking personal property.

I don't know what this means.

How would I know? I would assume not. I would also assume it'd take a lot less to bring a place up to standard than to buy or build a new one. It'd probably take a lot less to bring somewhere up to standard in many, many cases than it would to lease a hotel room for a year.

I don't know that anyone has actually advocated taking peoples' personal property. Maybe you know different. If so, please do link.

If I did have a holiday home, I'd be only delighted to let refugees avail of it. If I had a second property that I'd let go derelict for whatever reason (maybe it's too far away, or I couldn't afford renovations), I'd also be only delighted if there was some scheme that would see it brought up to standard so it could be used by the state for a couple of years, then revert to me. That'd be win-win, really.