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

Be more worried if the economy tanks into the future. Whats going to pay for it. Your still stuck with these people. The gobshite leaders promoting it will be long gone.

No, one doesn’t have anything to do with the other. Whatever Government does or doesn’t spend on providing services for people with disabilities has nothing, zero to do with how much Government spends on providing services for refugees and asylum seekers. That’s what the national budget is for, to determine how to make the best use of public funds. It’s because I was somewhat aware of your personal circumstances that I didn’t say too much other than to provide you with evidence which you were obviously previously unaware of.

It happens, I don’t expect everyone who is affected to be aware of every Government announcement, I do know that there are various lobby groups which don’t get much public support or media attention because people with disabilities just isn’t a hot button topic, nor is it something the general public has any great interest in. That’s why you don’t see any great pronouncements about Government policies relating to people with disabilities. It’s also why I couldn’t care less about Government announcements about travellers and asylum seekers that make headlines in mainstream media. I’m aware that plenty more people who aren’t me DO care about these things.

The rest of your post is just re-treading the same old ground about what you believe should be Government policy in relation to refugees and asylum seekers, while imagining that if Government were to spend less resources on immigration, it would mean those resources could be allocated to providing services for people with disabilities. I wouldn’t make that assumption, because I know that’s not how Government and budgets actually function. I also know that immigration services are chronically underfunded, which means that if Government were to follow your suggestions, the logical conclusion of your argument is that there would be even less resources available for people with disabilities (you’ve forgotten about travellers already, but that’s ok, nobody really cares about them anyway, they’re just a useful stick to beat Government over the head with, it’s not like they’re Irish or anything).

The system you’re proposing wouldn’t be fairer to anyone, it would be even more shìtty than the current system, and would piss off a far, far greater number of people, and it would mean far more families pursuing legal action against the State, with the taxpayer picking up the tab (I don’t care about the taxpayer picking up the tab, but if it’s something you’re genuinely concerned about, then it’s something you should be aware of). It’s why the UK’s previous Governments proposals in relation to how they sought to deal with illegal immigration weren’t actually all that popular once people did the math and realised what it would actually cost the British taxpayer:

It is little surprise that only 16% of the UK public see the scheme as good value for money.

https://odi.org/en/insights/the-cost-of-the-uks-rwanda-plan-lessons-for-eu-member-states/

Your proposals would have no impact whatsoever on people’s distrust and anger towards foreign workers, asylum seekers, refugees, immigrants, travellers, people with disabilities, etc. There will always be people who will seek out ways by which they can portray themselves as a greater victim than everyone else in Irish society. I’ve no doubt you’re aware of plenty of examples; the one which stands out in recent memory for me was the woman who complained that Government had money to spend on providing for abortion while her son couldn’t get a new electric wheelchair. Far more common are the people with everything who still try to play the victim, which is why people with disabilities are way, waaaaay down the pecking order in terms of who gets the most media attention.

Travellers and asylum seekers are also waaay, way down in that same pecking order. That’s because people don’t give a shìt whether a system is fair and equitable so long as it’s themselves who are benefiting the most from it, and they have the ability to ensure that other people should have no assistance whatsoever as in their view it would simply be a waste of resources and they’re not contributing taxes so they shouldn’t be entitled to anything.

You don’t need me to spell it out to you where that sort of argument and attitude towards other people leads to if those people were actually ever taken seriously:

https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/fact-sheets/Eugenics-and-Scientific-Racism

Looks like you dont know and cannot understand the post .

I see your points but interested to know what you mean by the General Election is key.

What change do you think will occur following the GE?

Wow. You respond to my fair and reasoned post, which had no racist, ableist or sectarian pronouncements whatsoever with a link to Eugenics and Scientific racism. 

Yes, in order to point out where your fair and reasoned post leads to. You don’t think your fair and reasoned post stops with you, do you? It would be latched onto by people who are actually racist, xenophobic, bigoted, etc, but most of all it would be latched onto by people who are determined in all circumstances to portray themselves as the victims of an unfair system.

On Boards at least, that seems to be people who imagine that the PAYE system of taxation operates like a Government savings scheme. That’s their idea of a fair system, the one where they benefit the most, and other people who are not them, are a burden on society, or are holding Irish society back from being great, etc, the usual stuff, which is why I pointed out that your opinion in relation to asylum seekers and refugees is doing nothing more than treading over old ground.

Nice shoehorn there. I'm replying to highlight how despicable and nasty your posts are, deliberately attempting to conflate my reasonable and fair views towards all people resident in Ireland with racism, all under the guise that you are a reasoned and fair poster. 

There was nothing either despicable or nasty in my post, nor did I attempt to conflate your views with the views of people who would take your views and run with them in order to appear reasonable and fair-minded. It’s how this kind of nonsense gets legs:

• There continues to be an emerging sense of concern about the impact of gender equality on men – and that we may have gone far enough. Almost half of people (46%) think that we have gone so far in promoting women’s equality that we are discriminating against men.  Gen Z (49%) and Millennials (50%) are more likely to think this than Baby Boomers (37%).

https://banda.ie/ipsos-annual-international-womens-day/

I'm actually shocked at how blatant that was, even for you.

You don’t know me nearly well enough if that’s the conclusion of your assessment. I could have been far more blatant and blunt if I wanted to, but I don’t, not just because Boards has rules against that sort of behaviour, but simply because I don’t want to. It’s rude and unnecessary.

That doesn’t mean other people will hold themselves to the same standard I do in how I treat other people, imagining that their behaviour is justifiable because they can articulate an argument which on the surface of it, as long as you don’t think too hard about it, it appears fair and reasoned and all the rest of it and means that treating other people unfairly is justified and will lead to a better, fairer society for everyone else… that is at least, anyone who’s left once society has been unburdened of it’s people who are regarded as being a burden on society.

Your ideas of how an immigration system should be run are just pie in the sky stuff. I should have left it there as it has nothing whatsoever to do with the provision of services for people with disabilities, regardless of whatever Government does or doesn’t publish on Twitter or gets published in mainstream media in relation to asylum seekers, refugees or travellers.

Love it! 😂

Far right views are getting legs because people like you are deliberately conflating fair and reasonable views with racism. Nothing I said was racist and none of the policies I promoted could in any way be shown to lead to racist, eugenicist thought. Smearing people attempting to discuss this will lead people to right wing sources, and that is on people like you and not people like me.

You know full well you are arguing in bad faith. You are being deliberately disingenuous and it is fooling no one.

No, that’s not the reason far right views are getting legs. It’s because they’re making what some people consider to be fair and reasonable arguments against Irish and European immigration policies.

Let’s just take one of your policies propositions as an example then - removing the right to work from asylum seekers. Asylum seekers can apply to work after 6 months while waiting for their claims to be processed. Removing that right from them means they would be unable to support themselves, unable to provide for themselves and their families. Removing that right from them is exactly what would lead to racist and eugenicist thought, because it would be argued that they cannot support themselves, ergo get rid of ‘em, burden on the taxpayer, etc.

Asylum seekers were only granted that right in 2018, precisely because being previously being denied the right to work meant they could be portrayed as… what way did you put it? “Shopping for welfare benefits”.

I’ve not smeared you or anyone else with anything, I really don’t care that much to engage in silly name-calling which you’re as unlikely to give a shìt about as I do. If however you could actually address the points being made rather than playing to the gallery, that’d be a far better use of your time. If you want to continue attempting to play to the gallery, that’s fine too, wouldn’t be the first time in history when people imagined their fair and reasoned opinions didn’t just amount to ammunition for other people to justify their bigotry, and the consequences of that:

In 1904 Father John Creagh, a Redemptorist and Spiritual Director of the Arch Confraternity of the Sacred Heart, gave a sermon at their weekly meeting attacking Jews.

 He repeated many antisemitic conspiracy theories, including that of ritual murder, and said that the Jews had come to Limerick "to fasten themselves on us like leeches and to draw our blood".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limerick_boycott

Thoroughly reasonable and fair-minded argument of course 😒

By currently allowing this to happen we are facilitating criminal trafficking gangs, both indigenous and foreign, we are facilitating non reputable businesses who prefer a vulnerable workforce of illegal migrants to exploit.

The Irish Government doesn’t allow it to happen. They allocate considerable resources to prevent it from happening, and even more resources to protect victims of human trafficking.

The current six months allowance to work is a draw to economic migrants who exploit the asylum process to stay here.

You’ll have to flesh that one out a bit better, because you’re referring to two different groups there - asylum seekers whom you class as economic migrants, and then economic migrants whom you claim are exploiting the asylum process to stay here. The six months is an arbitrary time during which their claims for asylum are being processed, it wouldn’t make any sense for them to try and exploit a system when they have a right to work within that system. What or whom are they exploiting? They’re gainfully employed, paying tax, they’re covered by employment law and they aren’t being exploited by unscrupulous employers. Surely they are welcome here when they’re gainfully employed and contributing to Irish society?

The fact that a significant proportion of asylum seekers are not legitimate has been acknowledged repeatedly by the Irish government.

That would indicate Ireland’s immigration and screening processes are working exactly as intended then, which is good news, surely? I’d suggest on that basis, as an Irish citizen and taxpayer the value I’m getting for fcukall investment is spectacular!

I presume by the segue into discussing the Limerick Boycott you are not trying to portray Minister McEntee as an anti-semite or proto racist are you?

Ohh now, is that any basis for an argument in good faith, or have you just abandoned that idea and gone with the idea of trying to blind me with bullshìt? It’s not as though the context wasn’t pointed out to you beforehand in that it was an example of the outcomes of the same reasonable and fair points you’re making.