2006 census results published

[Tha Gopher]

Originally Posted by oscarBravo

Um, no. In this particular case, the national census is the evidence to back it up. That's nice. What methodology was used to arrive at this figure? Obviously it was a more exacting, thorough and scientific study than the census. Right? Interesting. What methology did you use to arrive at that number? Good question - can you?

Im sorry but the pettyness in that response is simply too much. Im sorry Oscar but I really have to ask, do you believe that the census is reasonably accurate?

Anyway, in response

1- Yes, the census would appear to suggest that it would be the case. Government reports have suggested lots of things over the years. In the past they have suggested Iraq had WMDs, and that British beef in the 90s was safe to eat. Hell, most government surveys seem to suggest that the proportion of people who have ever taken an illegal drug is still under 50%. Go figure.

2- Common sense

3- As above

4- Well, the immigration figures would seem to suggest most West Aficans here are Nigerian. Seeing as West Africans look about as much like Somalis or South Africans as Swedes look like Greeks, again its common sense call. Particularly seeing that of all the West Africans Ive worked with, went to school with, hung out with, been neighbours with, you name it with, a grand total of one was not Nigerian (Sierra Leone). Therefore, if you reckon that around 10% of an area of Dublin is West African, it is probably correct to assume, based on the above evidence, that the majority are from Nigeria . Certainly there are older working class areas of Dublin which seem to have barely any foreigners (Finglas, Cabra, Ballyfermot etc), but in terms of the day to day visual evidence in the newer suburbs the census is years out.


Vctor- I worked with alot of Chinese back in the day. Generally speaking their only vices are smoking and gambling. Apart from the odd bottle of wine most of them didnt go out drinking more than twice per year. Also, alot more Chinese than other groups work minimum wage jobs (food service etc) and therefore dont have the spending money if they want to take a lump home (as well as the obvious cost difference in a Chinese man visiting home compared to a Pole etc)


Hobbes- I didnt know that. However IIRC the standard form was in English and Irish, and presumably you had to make some special effort by calling up the CSO if the person delivering had dropped the standard one in the door. Which tbh I doubt most people bothered doing.

[oscarBravo]

Originally Posted by Tha Gopher

Im sorry but the pettyness in that response is simply too much. Im sorry Oscar but I really have to ask, do you believe that the census is reasonably accurate?

Yes. Why? For the simple reason that a census is, by definition, a more methodical (and therefore more likely to be accurate) method of assessing population statistics than:

Originally Posted by Tha Gopher

...the day to day visual evidence in the newer suburbs...

I'm reminded vaguely of the cheese ad: "There's literally millions of things you can do with it - sandwiches, on toast... sandwiches..."

Originally Posted by Tha Gopher

Government reports have suggested lots of things over the years.

You keep suggesting that the CSO have deliberately falsified the census results, without bothering to offering anything that remotely resembles evidence.

Originally Posted by Tha Gopher

2- Common sense

3- As above

That's a wonderfully thorough and scientific methodology you're using there. Let's not bother with a census in future; we'll just ask a few randoms in the street what their common sense tells them about the population.

[Tha Gopher]

Oh Jesus H Christ

If you bothered reading my first post in this thread I said that I wasnt of the opinion that the survey had been falsified by the government (although with your defensive posts I am now wondering whether you are the director of the CSO and you actually are hdiing something ) As said previously, I think its less conspiracy and more just laziness by the CSO.

So observation counts for nothing? If someone were were to ask you what proportion of your workplace is foreign, would you give a rough answer percentage wise or refuse to answer the question on account that management has never done a survey of the national origins of staff? Im sorry but I have to be honest and say outright that I do not believe you when you say you largely believe the results of the census, as I simply find it impossible to fathom that anyone with an ounce of wit could think it is accurate. You dont have to review the met office annual reports 2002-2006 to deduce Ireland has rough winters and occasionally great summers. You know it from common sense. So use it.

[oscarBravo]

Originally Posted by Tha Gopher

If you bothered reading my first post in this thread I said that I wasnt of the opinion that the survey had been falsified by the government (although with your defensive posts I am now wondering whether you are the director of the CSO and you actually are hdiing something ) As said previously, I think its less conspiracy and more just laziness by the CSO.

You can keep saying it and saying it and saying it, but it's not going to become true until you produce something more concrete than a gut feeling to contradict a detailed study.

Originally Posted by Tha Gopher

So observation counts for nothing? If someone were were to ask you what proportion of your workplace is foreign, would you give a rough answer percentage wise or refuse to answer the question on account that management has never done a survey of the national origins of staff?

My workplace consists of 28.6% English people, with the remainder being Irish. I don't need to give a rough answer; I've counted them.

Now, if someone was to tell me that surely that couldn't be right based on the fact that they've met two of my English colleagues and me, and sure can't the dogs in the street use their common sense and figure out that the company is obviously two thirds English - how many times would they have to repeat it before it becomes true?

Originally Posted by Tha Gopher

Im sorry but I have to be honest and say outright that I do not believe you when you say you largely believe the results of the census, as I simply find it impossible to fathom that anyone with an ounce of wit could think it is accurate.

I'm not sure whether I'm being accused of lying or stupidity, but I'm not going to pass too much heed either way until you offer some factual evidence to back up your position.

Originally Posted by Tha Gopher

You dont have to review the met office annual reports 2002-2006 to deduce Ireland has rough winters and occasionally great summers. You know it from common sense. So use it.

Suppose I want to know exactly how many days of rain there were in Belmullet in the period 2002-2006. What answer does your common sense give you? If you were to guesstimate the answer, and I got a different answer by researching it through Met Éireann, would you accuse Met Éireann of laziness?

[LouiseIV]

There are two points that I don't think have been considered so far. For a start, the census is about a year old and so it really only covers the population as it was a year ago. As the population is increasing so rapidly, any census carried out now is likely to be out of date after only a few months. To get a more up to date snapshot of the population we're going to have to wait until the past year's immigration figures are released and then add those to the non-national figure in this census.

Another point, in working out the non-national figure, I don't think the census includes the Irish-born children of the non-nationals in the non-national figure itself. It would be interesting to know whether they're included in the Irish category.

Originally Posted by gurramok

British (including N.I.) - 122,000

God almighty! Since when has an ROI government started considering people up in the north as British? Gerry must be fuming.

Even more unforgivable - they're included under the Non-Irish category!

Not stated- 44,000

That's interesting. Why would someone a) not state their nationality and b) get away with not stating their nationality. I can understand people not stating their religion but why would they have reason not to state their nationality?

Chinese - 11,000

That cannot be right. 11,000 out of a population of 4.1 million? That would mean only one Chinese person out of every around 370 people in the country. For some reason it just seems a lot more than that.

Nigerian - 16,000

Something tells me that that figure of 44,000 non-stated people is made up of alot of Poles and Nigerians.

What astounds me, where did the media get their figures of 200,000 Poles from?..Sensationalism??

I think those figures probably comes from all the PPS numbers issued to non-nationals.

Originally Posted by lisnageragh

Around 1 million Migrants here upto 2006 alone.

The Census states it.

I wasn't able to find that 1 million figure in the report you linked to but you might not be entirely off the mark either.

There's a book out now with information on the issues behind the coming general election. You probably know the one - it has Bertie Ahern's beautiful face on the front. I was in a bookshop the other week and I was having a quick flick through it. It has a chapter on immigration and it mentioned a figure of 750 thousand immigrants coming here over the last few years.

[Tha Gopher]

Originally Posted by oscarBravo

You can keep saying it and saying it and saying it, but it's not going to become true until you produce something more concrete than a gut feeling to contradict a detailed study. My workplace consists of 28.6% English people, with the remainder being Irish. I don't need to give a rough answer; I've counted them.

Good for you. I could be troll like and demand to see a copy of a proper survey carried out by managemen using yadda yadda methodology but Ill accept your headcount.

Originally Posted by oscarBravo

Now, if someone was to tell me that surely that couldn't be right based on the fact that they've met two of my English colleagues and me, and sure can't the dogs in the street use their common sense and figure out that the company is obviously two thirds English - how many times would they have to repeat it before it becomes true?

Anyone who would judge on having seen two people is clearly an idiot. That example is so far out it doesnt even deserve reading.

Originally Posted by oscarBravo

I'm not sure whether I'm being accused of lying or stupidity?

With all due respect I am of the personal opinion it is the first. Im sorry but I fail to see how anyone with common sense could honestly, truly believe the results.

[Tha Gopher]

Originally Posted by LouiseIV

There are two points that I don't think have been considered so far. For a start, the census is about a year old and so it really only covers the population as it was a year ago. As the population is increasing so rapidly, any census carried out now is likely to be out of date after only a few months. To get a more up to date snapshot of the population we're going to have to wait until the past year's immigration figures are released and then add those to the non-national figure in this census.

Another point, in working out the non-national figure, I don't think the census includes the Irish-born children of the non-nationals in the non-national figure itself. It would be interesting to know whether they're included in the Irish category.

That's interesting. Why would someone a) not state their nationality and b) get away with not stating their nationality. I can understand people not stating their religion but why would they have reason not to state their nationality?

That cannot be right. 11,000 out of a population of 4.1 million? That would mean only one Chinese person out of every around 370 people in the country. For some reason it just seems a lot more than that.

Something tells me that that figure of 44,000 non-stated people is made up of alot of Poles and Nigerians.

I think those figures probably comes from all the PPS numbers issued to non-nationals.

re the children, I would think they would be put down as Irish unless their parents mistakenly filled them in as foreign born. However, iirc there was a race section on it, white irish, black irish, asian irish etc. Maybe alot of those surveyed who were born abroad filled in this section instead. Id assume the "non stated" forms were forms returned not fully filled in.

re your assumption of the Chinese figure Louise, careful now, you are using common sense rather than a clearly inaccurate government report

[Black Briar]

tha gopher banned for 2 weeks for calling a mod a liar
This is a debating chamber and not a ranting soap box insult hurling chamber.
Have a bit of cop on.

[LouiseIV]

Originally Posted by Tristrame

tha gopher banned for 2 weeks for calling a mod a liar
This is a debating chamber and not a ranting soap box insult hurling chamber.
Have a bit of cop on.

Can you get banned for calling a moderator an asshole? I feel a strong urge now to call one moderator an asshole so I just wanted to check before I do in case I suffer the same fate as Tha Gopher.

[Hobbes]

You can get banned for calling anyone an asshole. The mod bit just got him an extra week most likely.

back on topic. This whole "feelings" rather then census reminded me of Colbert.

Originally Posted by Colbert

We go straight from the gut, right sir? That's where the truth lies, right down here in the gut. Do you know you have more nerve endings in your gut than you have in your head? You can look it up. I know some of you are going to say I did look it up, and that's not true. That's cause you looked it up in a book.

[LouiseIV]

Originally Posted by Hobbes

You can get banned for calling anyone an asshole. The mod bit just got him an extra week most likely.

Tha Gopher didn't call anyone an asshole, nor did he call anyone a liar. If you don't believe me, do a Control+F and search for the word 'liar' in any of the three pages of this thread. You'll notice that the first time it's used is by that moderator above.

back on topic. This whole "feelings" rather then census reminded me of Colbert.

I trust the CSO enough that I'm willing to accept their census results, but you have to admit at the same time that some of their figures do seem a bit surprising. Only 11,000 Chinese, does that really seem to be accurate?

[Hobbes]

Originally Posted by LouiseIV

nor did he call anyone a liar.

Actually he did, and you don't need control-F.

I trust the CSO enough that I'm willing to accept their census results, but you have to admit at the same time that some of their figures do seem a bit surprising. Only 11,000 Chinese, does that really seem to be accurate?

Until you can prove something other then your gut I'll be more then willing to listen. Maybe you have statistics from Immigration?

[LouiseIV]

Originally Posted by Hobbes

Actually he did

Actually he didn't, but if you can provide the quote showing where he used the word 'liar' I'd be more than willing to listen.

and you don't need control-F.

I don't need to find the evidence? Strange, coming from someone who's so big into people providing proof to back up what they say.

Until you can prove something other then your gut I'll be more then willing to listen. Maybe you have statistics from Immigration?

This is taken from BusinessWeek online. It contains a quote from the Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao when he was on a visit to Ireland back in 2004.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...3085_mz054.htm

As many as 60,000 Chinese now live in Ireland, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao noted during a visit to Dublin in May.

Another quote from the same article that may be of interest:

And the official data underestimate the true scale of immigration.

[Rebel Racer Dan]

Surely we all know that the figures here are not totally correct. How many poles actually filled out the census form? I used to live in a house wit 1 around census time and i know for a fact he did not fill it out

[LouiseIV]

I just noticed another interesting link from that main business week article.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...3087_mz054.htm

It just shows the increase in Chinese student numbers in Ireland up to 2004. I think it's significant because it provides the sources for the data i.e. the Chinese embassy and the Garda immigration bureau. Yes, I know the 30,000 figure is an estimate, but it's an estimate from fairly authoritative sources.

Bear in mind, this doesn't include all Chinese, just the number of Chinese enrolled in colleges. If 30,000 Chinese were enrolled just in colleges alone back in 2004, isn't it a bit strange that the number of Chinese people in the country could have fallen so drastically by last year?