Time for a zero refugee policy? - *Read OP for mod warnings and threadbans - updated 11/5/24*

So they are all vetted

It'd be interesting to know if some of those defending our lamentably deficient immigration policies here, are in fact conflicted. In that they are benefiting from said deficient system. For example, perhaps owning properties that are being monetised through the system by way of arrangements with the state for use of same?

What is deficient in our immigration policies do you think?

When they commit a crime fingerprints are taken and if deported there is a record . Many still are able to slip back in .

https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2022/10/06/thousands-of-passengers-destroy-or-lose-passports-before-arrival-at-dublin-airport/

Deflecting what? I'm asking a question

This is the definition of a straw man argument, not a single poster has advanced the suggestion of unlimited asylum seekers. Not a single poster.

"Believe me, the current idiots in power will have a change of tune coming up to election time.

By election time I expect some of those running will have their ear to the ground whether independent or whatever, this has become one of the major issues in small communities. "

Well then one way to get their attention is to turn up and vote for candidates that support your views and not candidates of any of the established political parties IMO. Don't even give them a single transfer, no matter what party they are for. That will shock them, and they will see that they can't have the same pattern in a general election. If that transferred to a general election then the likes of the Greens would be decimated, Labour and Soc Dems also live off transfers. Micheal Martin only got in on the 6th count, Simon Coveney on the 8th count. Pascal Donohoe 9th count. Leo Varadkar 5th count, Roddy O'Gorman 6th count. Simon Harris and Stephen Donnelly on the 15th count. Helen McEntee 7th count. They rely on transfers, if they go then they are in trouble. They rely on people's inertia and the sure I'll give them a vote to get in. When that stops the tide goes out and they're high and dry.

If SF for example see a fall off in their core vote due to this then they have no option but to pull back. They can't run with the hare and hunt with the hounds for ever. They pulled back on the water charges fairly sharpish when they saw how the people felt. Councillors in all other political parties will put pressure on their parties when they see their vote going away too.

If you feel strongly about this then make sure you're registered to vote and talk to friends and family and ask them to do the same. It can start like a ripple and spread.

As am I - your question has been well thrashed out already on the thread.

My question relates to posters motives as I suspect there is a strong correlation between peoples views on this matter and how it benefits or disadvantages them.

In my case and I've already mentioned this, the current refugee/ asylum system has affected my income negatively. Part of that income comes from tourism related activity which has been affected negatively. Outlets that may have sold our products along the 'Wild Atlantic Way' side of the country have felt the cold chill of fewer visitors and lower sales, hence little restocking and loss of income to me. Some retailer outlets have closed. Our children are affected negatively too in part by the increased population pressure which has impacted on rental accommodations and rents. Others may be affected negatively in all sorts of other ways.

But on the other side of the equation, clearly there are net beneficiaries of the current situation. Particularly those letting accommodation to the state for related purposes, those funded to work in agencies to support the refugee/ asylum system, those who are employers availing of a ready source of cheap subsidised labour, those who have increased sales due to the influx of refugee/ asylum seekers in certain areas with disposable incomes to spend.

So it would be useful to know if either of you above and others who are ultra supportive of the current arrangements are beneficiaries of the current situation. In the interests of clarity.

Well not that it's any of your business, but I don't even own the house I live in, I pay massive rent to live in it. I earn absolutely nothing from refugees or asylum seekers.

I also imagine that tourism has taken a big dive because it's too expensive. People with families can't afford to spend a wet week in the West coast when they only get one holiday a year. Who could blame them? They can get a week or two on the continent without having to take out a second mortgage!

Lol 🤣 I wish.

But keep on dreaming there...

Easier to point the finger at someone from far away rather than closer to home.

So you say you have a vested interest in reducing refugees then? Fair enough.

I have no vested interest, am not gaining any money from it.

Certainly more than some of those louts shouting the odds at those protests.

Gas how people can be worried about asylum seekers but on the other hand have no worries about some of those evil gits that are at every protest and dogfight!

There are quite a few of them with dodgy records that would be refused entry if they applied anywhere themselves . But thats' never mentioned here 😂.

I would be in favour of using peaceful means to get what you want ie the ballot box.

The problem with this approach is the people who are currently supporting an antiimmigration platform are not the type of people one would like to meet in a large room with lots of people never mind vote as your representative.

What about all the other issues, eg. health, housing, education, the economy?

For example, do you think a party that lost its own stash of gold and are currently fighting over who is De Leader would be ok to run the country??!

Or a serial litigant anti everything who would fight over his own toenails would be calmer if in power?

This is not joined up thinking is it?

Better to lobby your own tds and try to get some move on them to your pov.