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

Immigration to Ireland - policies, challenges, and solutions *Read OP before posting*

Options
16566687071558

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,807 ✭✭✭Ahwell




  • Registered Users Posts: 24 IlovemybrickFC


    It does. Sadly like a lot of people with your views you are so entrenched in the position that no one can prove anything.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,934 ✭✭✭suvigirl


    Nope, in fact your post doesn't even make sense.

    Where are the protests for our own homeless? So the fact that the general public are not out protesting, means that our government care more about non Irish nationals? You'll have to explain that.

    where are the court cases to force the government to house our homeless? Well, we do home our homeless in houses or emergency accommodation. And if someone has to bring government to court to force them to do what they are suppose to, that means government are not housing people from other countries. So don't care more about non Irish there either.

    everybody aged 70 upwards has a medical card, unless they are wealthy enough to pay for their own medical care. The government also supply medical cards to children under 7 years. So not putting non Irish before our elderly at all.

    sentencing of criminals is entirely the jurisdiction of the courts, judges very rarely imprison someone who steaks food because they are too poor to feed their family, in fact, I doubt it has ever happened. I'm not sure who exactly claims that asylum seekers are heroes, I for one have never heard anything like that. Neither of these things prove that our country treat non Irish better then Irish people.

    perhaps you could try again


    Oh and fyi, you don't know what my views are, obviously.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,933 ✭✭✭tesla_newbie


    Tried to provide a link and it failed to upload properly



  • Registered Users Posts: 483 ✭✭hymenelectra


    Not enough this, not enough that. Every year the same focus, every year worse than the last.

    Versus

    A stated goal of government to increase the population, and a current record population. Never a word said.





  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,807 ✭✭✭Ahwell




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,471 ✭✭✭TokTik


    That’s excellent. I’d a chest/throat infection during the week. Went onto my drs online appts service (only way to book an appointment), next available was this coming Thursday, 7th Sept.

    Doesn’t matter how free something is if you can’t access it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Very true and I am not sure why that is, but as you say, most come back and it looks like we have a net influx overall of irish vs those that left over the past couple of years.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,795 ✭✭✭Backstreet Moyes


    That can't be true our health service is great according to a poster here.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,807 ✭✭✭Ahwell


    Our health service is a basket case, but it always has been. It doesn't seem to matter how much money you throw at it, it doesn't improve.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 7,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭cdeb


    "Currently the employment is not present in the Balkans" - I know that. And it won't be while skilled people leave. That's literally my point. Developing economies are hamstrung while western economies pick off their skilled people.

    "If Germany didn't have those companies, they wouldn't be moving to the Balkans" - maybe not. But there's a trickle-down effect. Maybe they'd move to Poland or Hungary. And other companies can move down to the Balkans.

    People sending money back to Ireland didn't keep us poor - it was a symptom of our poorness that we had mass emigration and had to rely on cash remittances. Just like the Balkans in your example, or plenty of other places around the world. We didn't turn things around until we stopped the brain drain. But now you're arguing for brain drain to keep us rich. That's your privilege that I keep referring to. It's as if we've learned nothing from history. But hey - we're happy to undermine developing economies so long as we keep getting richer ourselves. That's what this is all about.

    And meanwhile we're increasing carbon emissions (the example I gave about record flight numbers), we're destroying diversity and multi-culturalism, we're going to get to some fairly interesting situations in the coming decades where a native people become a minority in their own country. That's working well in Hamtramck in Michigan, the first Muslim-majority town in the US, which now has an all-male council and which banned Pride flags as one of its first acts (conservative Muslims not being particular fans of women's equality or gay rights). This is another major discussion to be had which is being ignored at the moment.

    But when you see the cheap price of Bulgarian-picked strawberries, it's all worth it.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 7,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭cdeb


    For a second time - I'm not arguing against freedom of movement. However, I am arguing against freedom of working abroad. For the various reasons that I've given, which can be summed up by saying it's ultimately in the greater good for all. Not just the few who benefit currently.

    Your last paragraph doesn't stack up to the evidence of collapsing populations in eastern Europe. In fact, I think you'd struggle to find evidence for it anywhere. I think it's interesting that you dropped it into the discussion as pretty much your entire counter-argument and you're just assuming it's true. "There is nothing to say", you post - I think this is best applied to your own comment, no?



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,614 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    It would be very hard to go from having the freedom to work abroad to it being banned, restricted, limited or whatever. Freedoms are normally progressive in nature - it's rare that you see something that was once forbidden, that then becomes allowed and commonplace but then going back to being banned or heavily restricted again.

    Is there any evidence that governments in Eastern Europe are in favour of a ban on their citizens working abroad? It sounds like something only a very right wing or authoritarian government would introduce.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,934 ✭✭✭suvigirl


    'where a native people become a minority in their own country'

    Well done on posting the actual reason.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 7,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭cdeb


    It would be hard. But why not discuss it?

    Governments can't really introduce a ban on their citizens working abroad - really you can only introduce a ban on foreign nationals working. And EU governments can't even do that to EU citizens of course.

    But as populations in some of the eastern European countries continue to decline, you can imagine it's going to crop up at some stage.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 7,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭cdeb


    A good point, well made. Lots of considered discussion and interesting links. I'm swayed anyway.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,807 ✭✭✭Ahwell


    and what's your issue with the first Muslim-majority town in the US then. From a quick look at Wikipedia it was once a traditional Polish neighborhood. What's the difference?



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 7,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭cdeb


    Did you read the bit in my post where I explained that?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,807 ✭✭✭Ahwell


    I did, but this is in a country where Republicans proposed banning Pride flags at government buildings in Congress, GOP-led state legislatures have moved to pass a record number of restrictions on gay and transgender rights. I frankly doubt your concern is for the LGBT community, just as I doubt your concern is really for developing countries losing their populations - because I suspect this is really what's bothering you...

    '"where a native people become a minority in their own country"

    Post edited by Ahwell on


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,614 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    Such moves would be seen as controversial and yes, it has to be said, as right wing and authoritarian. The implication of such policies would be that immigration is in some way an inherently bad thing and something which needs to be restricted or repressed.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,933 ✭✭✭tesla_newbie


    Why do you assume immigration is inherently a good thing?



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,754 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    One doesn’t have to assume, when there’s plenty of evidence to support the fact that immigration is inherently a good thing -

    https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/arid-20449076.html



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,933 ✭✭✭tesla_newbie


    That is looking at immigration purely through an economic lens and also doesn’t distinguish between skills selection model and the open gate we have



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,910 ✭✭✭enricoh


    Students heading up north to go to college due to the disparity in accommodation between Belfast and Dublin. The north had 2000 Ukrainian refugees in February this year, the south 80000.

    Paddy is busy trying to house the world and it's mother, students are collateral damage!

    https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/housing-planning/2023/09/02/student-accommodation-in-northern-ireland-its-a-three-bedroomed-house-which-is-about-375-a-month-its-a-lot-cheaper/



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,754 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    That’s true, it doesn’t, but it does answer what I thought was a fair and open ended question - why is immigration a good thing? It gave plenty of reasons why immigration is a good thing. If I started from the position that immigration is a bad thing, there’s plenty of evidence to support that opinion too, but you didn’t ask why does anyone assume immigration is a bad thing.

    Most countries have the skills selection model and the open gate model anyway, but you asked about immigration and to be fair to you, you didn’t distinguish between different types of immigrants. I’d be more focused on the positive aspects of immigration and wouldn’t be looking for the negatives to be fair.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,933 ✭✭✭tesla_newbie


    Well there are negatives, it can destabilise social cohesion and erode the traditional culture and weaken its structure, it turns societies into a collection of labour units under the guise of multiculturalism

    only a naive ideologue is wilfully blind to the negatives



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,274 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    Clondalkin lol , not even somewhere youd want to live


    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,754 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    But that’s not what you asked?

    I’m aware of the arguments people have put forward that they associate with immigration by way of arguing it’s negative effects, and what makes anyone a naïve ideologue is being wilfully blind to either the negatives or the positives of immigration.

    I admitted I’d be more focused on the positive aspects of immigration and wouldn’t be looking for the negatives. It doesn’t mean I’m wilfully blind to them, I just don’t care for the arguments is all.

    As far as I’m concerned this discussion is looking for solutions to problems that don’t exist, and the only solution that seems to be acceptable to address these problems that they see, is to end immigration entirely. That’s what it means to be a naive ideologue who is wilfully blind to reality and the economic necessity of immigration. The benefits by far outweigh any negatives you’d care to come up with, and must be considered within that context.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 7,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭cdeb



    You can suspect away, but just like suvigirl, you've no real better argument than to doubt my concern for other groups for no readily apparent reason. A very convenient and lazy way of not engaging in the discussion.

    The reality is different cultures are different. (Obviously). Some are a closer fit to others. The Polish, for example, have a lot in common with the Irish. Culturally Catholic, fond of the drink, very friendly, experience of being oppressed. Others are not a close fit, and ultimately Islam is the obvious example of a bad fit in Europe.

    Conservative Islam is homophobic, misogynistic, and anti-Semitic. In Vienna, where one-sixth of the population is Muslim, there's been increasing discussions about the implications of this. There's a 2013 survey which clearly sets out the cultural differences - 73% of Austrian Muslims agree the rules Qoran are more important than the rules of Austria (we can see the impact of this when we look at honour killings in Europe - "Every year in the United Kingdom (UK), officials estimates that at least a dozen women are victims of honour killings, almost exclusively within Asian and Middle Eastern families. Often, cases cannot be resolved due to the unwillingness of families, relatives and communities to testify". 63% say you can't trust the Jews (where have we heard that in Austria before? Muslim immigration is linked with a rise in anti-Semitic attacks in Europe) and 69% would not want a gay person as a friend. The percentage of Catholics (or culturally Catholic) Austrians agreeing with those sentiments (with the Bible in for the Qoran) is naturally far smaller.

    It's dangerous to dismiss this as similar to the Republicans, even if there's some similar trends. And I'm not sure what the Republican equivalent in Europe would be. I think it's fair to say many in Europe see America as a remarkably backwards country in many respects.

    Now ask yourself - what would Europe be like if this were the majority culture? And with birth rate and immigration trends, there's no reason at all it won't happen in some countries; Sweden is forecast to be minority Swedish by 2050 for example. Others will follow over the remainder of the century (including Ireland) I'd argue it'd be similar to what we're starting to see in Hamtramck. Is that what we want?

    So there's very much a discussion around what we want for the future of our society, and that discussion has to go beyond cheap fruit.

    And that's just one factor on top of economic inequality (local and global), carbon emissions, loss of diversity and multi-culturalism, and the other factors I've discussed already.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 7,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭cdeb


    tesla-newbie has already asked the obvious question ("Why do you assume immigration is inherently a good thing?"). Of course it would be seen as controversial. Mainly by people who, as we've seen on this thread, can't imagine it's doing any harm.

    But then I've already shown a German MEP questioning the system of subsidies to the newer, poorer, EU countries on the grounds that it leads to corruption. He's asking if there's a different way - a better way of doing things, that leads to more fairness. A move to do away with or severely reduce EU subsidies would be seen as controversial, and maybe even right wing. The implication of such a policy would be that EU subsidies were in some way an inherently bad thing and something which needs to be restricted or repressed.

    Yet I've shown there's arguably a good reason to restrict or repress them, and the discussion is starting to be had, albeit I don't know how much influence one MEP can really have. Ultimately, the German economy is key to the EU and it'd be very hard to pass anything that holds that back.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement