Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1615616618620621643

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 156 ✭✭Nosler


    I used to work in the Middle East as an engineer. It was a genuinely skilled job and quite frankly you wouldnt get a local with the same skillset as me. That's when immigration works, I was getting a good tax free salary and the locals were getting a skilled expat worker. Both sides benefit...

    If you annoy the wrong people in the ME you get deported. I've heard stories of Westerners getting into road rage incidents with locals (the quality of driving is bad out there). The next day the police turn up at the Westerners workplace and he's on a plane home.

    When I left the ME I was escorted to the airport by my employer to make sure I left the country.

    Even if you worked in the ME for decades you wouldnt get a local passport.


    Compare that to Europe... we let in people that dont speak European languages and with no skills. We then give them free money and houses. Even if they commit serious crimes in Europe they dont get deported because of "human rights".

    I think Europe is just too soft. I dont think the present immigration policy is sustainable. I speak to native Europeans and quite frankly there's a lot of anger simmering under the surface regarding immigration.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,496 ✭✭✭Luxembourgo


    Can you point to a study that shows illegal migration and or asulym seekers are a net benefit please?

    Not sure many argue controlled immigration is a benefit



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Migration is studied as a whole, not broken into categories, at least no studies I've read break it into groups, but maybe there's something out there.

    In the meantime, here are some links that look at it as a whole

    OECD Study - PDF

    migration, no matter how controversial politically (see figure 1), makes sense economically. In the long term, both high and low-skilled workers who migrate bring benefits to their new home countries by increasing income per person and living standards. High-skilled migrants bring diverse talent and expertise, while low-skilled migrants fill essential occupations for which natives are in short supply and allow natives to be employed at higher-skilled jobs. Gains are broadly shared by the population, so it may be well-worth shouldering the short-term costs to help integrate these new workers.

    Economic selection criteria and early labor market integration increase the likelihood of substantially positive net fiscal effects. Less active migration policies and barriers to immigrant labor market participation enlarge the risk of weak or even negative fiscal effects. 

    and so on. If you want more there's about 30-40 studies done on the topic and they all say the same thing, regardless of the countries they examine. Let me know if you want me to supply links



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,267 ✭✭✭emo72


    well, you could interview people and check for a criminal past. the same way they do for the US. also no chance of coming in without documentation. its not that hard to do.



  • Registered Users Posts: 156 ✭✭Nosler


    I don't believe the research...

    Most European academic institutions rely on EU funding. A core policy of the EU is multiculturalism.

    Any institution that produced research that showed immigration was bad would get defunded....

    How does Roma Gypsy immigration make Ireland richer?



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Those studies assess the economic effects of migration, a very loose term.

    Most people are in favour of controlled migration, not mass uncontrolled migration. Nobody has said we want to shut the front door and let no migrants enter. As your studies show, migrants are needed. We all knew that, though.

    But that is not the same as having an open door to half a billion people including southern and eastern Europe, and taking in so-called asylum seekers - many of whose applications are tenuous at best (look at UK stats, for example), and many of whose social and moral values are incompatible with our own.

    So those studies don't even get into the meat of what's contentious about this subject. They're actually irrelevant.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    How?

    Talk to me how that would work in practical terms. Start with the data sharing between all nations on criminals and free access to this information to all nations without restriction in a fast and responsive way that still respects data protection legislation across all the worlds nations.

    Just look at that and tell me how that would work in reality and how feasible it really is. Also, if you consider using Interpol keep in mind that it does not include all countries, does not have a standardised data sharing process among all nations in a manner that would work for what you need and its structures are used by govt's around the work to reach out and "touch" dissidents and opponents.

    After that we can talk about how you pay for all these interviewing staff that are going to be carrying out thousands of interviews on a daily basis and the physical infrastructure to hold the interviews.

    Like the numbers render the idea utterly unworkable as far as I can see

    • 32.9 million passengers used Dublin Airport in 2019
    • lets say we divide that in 2 just to account for half being arrivals, so 16,450,000 arrivals
    • Lets say 95% are EU (very generous figure), that would leave you with 822,500
    • Lets split that into 364 days the airport is open and ignore the summer rush, just evenly split so 2,253 people a day
    • Any decent interview is going to be, what, 1-2 hours long? Lets go with the low end, 1 hour, so thats 2,253 daily hours of interviews
    • A staff member on an 8 hour shift will do 7 interviews (breaks) so you'll need 321 staff dedicated to just interviewing people each and every day

    Lets not even start with where you would physically carry these out, the infrastructure and staffing required to move people between that area and the arrivals section, processing and admin staff etc etc etc

    But just ignore all the last stuff, and explain the sharing of criminal records part to me and how its not hard to do



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I don't believe the research

    lol, k, no point engaging if you've got nothing beyond "liar, liar pants on fire" with anything beyond your own opinion to refute the many, many, many studies from around the world, not just the EU



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    From May to September this year, the UK recorded that 42% of asylum claims were from Albanians.

    In other words, asylum systems are open to stark levels of abuse.

    We have already seen how those traversing the English Channel are recommended to abandon their phones and passports by depositing them in the sea, hoping that they can claim asylum status as Syrians or Afghanis or Iraqis. There are TikTok videos on this entire process, including encouraging aspiring migrants to make the journey because of how the UK is considered a soft touch for migrants.

    Given their proximity to us, we have no reason to assume the system isn't being gamed in the same way.

    In fact, I suspect that this country is being taken for a ride to an even greater extent.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 300 ✭✭keynes


    One of the aforementioned studies has the beauty:

    "low-skilled migrants fill essential occupations for which natives are in short supply and allow natives to be employed at higher-skilled jobs."

    Ok right. So low skilled immigrants come in and that permits our low skilled to become doctors, lawyers, engineers etc. Its much clearer now. Well, in the real world, things are rather different. A mass inflow of low-skilled immigrants grinds down the wages of our low-skilled, further impoverishing them. (That's the best case scenario where the immigrants actually work, rather than scavenging off state.)



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Albanias application for EU membership has kicked off again after Bulgaria lifted its veto so they will have free movement once they join.

    In that regard, nobody should have any issues with them coming here and they will have that right once they have full membership. I certainly don't



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Should Albania be allowed to become a full EU member, that would be an absolute disaster for countries like Ireland and Germany and Denmark.

    Given that the minimum wage for Albanians is currently 288 euros a month, we will see an enormous migratory flow - yet again, uncontrolled. We will also be unable to control Albanians with a criminal record from entering this country, especially those linked to Albanian gangsterism. Finally, this will inevitably lead to a large population reduction for Albania, as happened with Lithuania - and the concomitant brain drain that this has on the host country. Sometimes mass immigration impacts the host country greater, and this often goes overlooked. The bright and the best sometimes leave, and this is not a good thing.

    I sincerely hope that Albanian is not permitted membership of the EU. It would be a disaster for Ireland as well as Albania. It would worsen the multicultural problem this country already suffers under.

    Associate membership without free movement of people might be a more sensible option.



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,265 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    study it all you like, I prefer real world real life experiences….that real people, real citizens and taxpayers endure…as of a result of unrestricted population growth :) from outside our shores.

    a study can be formulated to show only certain aspects of a situation. There is no such thing as ‘net benefit’ as relates to immigration..

    longer hospital waiting lists, increased housing waiting lists just to mention two…however are not stats that can be massaged and are as a result of overburdens population spiralling close to out of control….



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    The EU keeps expanding and the world has not come crashing down. There was prophecies of doom when Polish folks started coming here, was grand.

    As for criminal records, please outline how you stop a French man with a criminal record coming here currently, or a former terrorist from Northern Ireland coming to Dublin?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Anecdotal evidence isn't worth the paper it isn't written on



  • Registered Users Posts: 156 ✭✭Nosler


    Ok, say that immigration really did boost the economy and there wasnt any disadvantages.

    Why should rich countries like Ireland get their economy boosted? It stands to reasons that immigrants should go to poor countries and boost their economies?

    Albania is a poor country. Pakistan is a poor country. Somalia is a poor country. We should let Albanians move to Pakistan, Pakistanis move to Somalia, Somalians move to Albania. Just imagine how much their economies will grow!

    Omg, I'm going to nominate myself for the Nobel prize of Economics! I'm an economics genius!



  • Registered Users Posts: 156 ✭✭Nosler


    As I mentioned earlier. I worked in the Middle East as an engineer.

    I worked with various nationalities etc. A lot of nationalities just dont respect education. It's just not in their culture to work hard and get a good degree.

    I had to check a road design that was done by an Indian engineer. It never met any design codes and quite frankly was dangerous. I also knew of a block of flats that was blown up in a gas explosion (4 dead) because the local gas authority never acted upon the numerous reports of a smell of gas over a few weeks.

    Honestly, this idea that the West needs migrant workers is pure fallacy.



  • Registered Users Posts: 349 ✭✭McHardcore


    Good post. Just to add the research that you gave:

    Migrants and refugees are good for economies (Nature article)

    Analysis of 30 years of data from Western Europe refutes suggestions that asylum seekers pose a financial burden.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05507-0


    The Economics of Migration (Sage Journal)

    Economists broadly agree: the political backlash against immigration in many countries is not economically rational. The evidence strongly supports immigration as, overall, a clear benefit to destination countries.

    https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1536504219854712


    Impact of Migration on Income Levels in Advanced Economies (IMF book)

    Immigration significantly increases GDP per capita in advanced economies, that both high- and lower-skilled migrants can raise labor productivity, and that an increase in the migrant share benefits the average income per capita of both the bottom 90 percent and the top 10 percent of earners, suggesting the gains from immigration are broadly shared.

    https://www.elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/062/2016/008/article-A001-en.xml?language=en&redirect=true


    Two that were posted earlier:

    Migration to Advanced Economies Can Raise Growth (IMF Report)

    Immigrants in advanced economies increase output and productivity both in the short and medium term.

    https://www.imf.org/en/Blogs/Articles/2020/06/19/blog-weo-chapter4-migration-to-advanced-economies-can-raise-growth


    Is migration good for the economy? (OECD report)

    Migrants contribute more in taxes and social contributions than they receive in individual benefits

    https://www.oecd.org/migration/OECD%20Migration%20Policy%20Debates%20Numero%202.pdf



    There appears to be a cohort of posters in this thread that refuse to believe the view of the majority of economists. They have taken snippets from the research, ignored the original authors conclusions, drawn their own conclusions from the snippet that supports their own view, and dismissed all the other research based off that one flawed conclusion. Bizarrely, one poster even tried to use one of the papers above to bash the Georgian, Romanian, African, and Albanian race of people.

    They would do well to read the first paragraph from one of the OECD reports above:




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 25,265 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    i didn’t provide you with evidence I provided you with facts…Just as well it is ain’t anecdotal so :)



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I'm curious about whether Albanians and Georgians realise that they're damaging the reputation of their country hugely. What most Irish people know about their country now will not be positive. Its not the way to ingratiate yourself into the EU



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,265 ✭✭✭✭Strumms




  • Registered Users Posts: 300 ✭✭keynes


    All of the above "studies" assume migrants come in and contribute to the economy by working. Fact is, we attract welfare tourists who (by definition) don't work. And why should they? They come in, draw welfare and have vast families. I simply can't see any so-called "fiscal benefit" to this ongoing charade



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]




  • Registered Users Posts: 156 ✭✭Nosler



    With respect, I think you're asking the wrong question....

    Everyone agrees that immigration increases the size of the economy. How could it not? The Irish government putting tens of thousands of people in hotels etc is a textbook Keynesian boost to the economy.

    What the real question is "does immigration make the average irish person richer?" The answer to that is a fairly resounding "no"....

    The website below summarises the conclusions of various academic reports on the fiscal impact of immigration to the UK taxpayer...

    Some reports show EEA immigration is beneficial. Some reports show EEA immigration is a drain to the taxpayer. However every single report shows non EEA immigration is a massive drain to the taxpayer.... Overall the reports show that immigrants take more from the taxpayer than they pay in tax.

    It's like what I said earlier on, immigration boosts the size of the Irish economic "cake", however since there are more people the slice of cake each person gets goes down.

    https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/the-fiscal-impact-of-immigration-in-the-uk/



  • Registered Users Posts: 349 ✭✭McHardcore



    What the real question is "does immigration make the average irish person richer?"


    You must have missed some of the research summaries already posted:


    Impact of Migration on Income Levels in Advanced Economies (IMF book)

    Immigration significantly increases GDP per capita in advanced economies, that both high- and lower-skilled migrants can raise labor productivity, and that an increase in the migrant share benefits the average income per capita of both the bottom 90 percent and the top 10 percent of earners, suggesting the gains from immigration are broadly shared.

    https://www.elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/062/2016/008/article-A001-en.xml?language=en&redirect=true



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,496 ✭✭✭Luxembourgo


    If Albania becomes a member of the EU the EU is finished

    Surely the volume of asulym claims from the country alone should prevent this (in a sane world)



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,496 ✭✭✭Luxembourgo


    Yes, not all immigration is equal, and nor should it be treated thus. As an island we need an open economy, and have benefitted massively from skilled immigration. Noone will argue with that.

    See below in Denmark, Western countries positive, non Western are negative. I suspect looking into the data you may see even wider gaps amongst non Western countries.

    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00148-017-0636-1



Advertisement