Immigration both nationally and internationally

Darith · 05-05-2010 06:35PM #1

I wondering if someone explain the following points in relation to migration, economics and society. I have had the fortune to travel and work in some amazing countries and hence meet some amazing people. I have also enjoyed been to these other countries and wish them the best in the future. I personally think migration is a positive attribute but at the same time I do not want it abused by other interests to the detriment of society or migrants themselves. Whenever the subject of migration or emigration came in some of the conversations, the views I heard were quiet confusing. There seems to be some serious brain washing going on with relation to this whose ultimate purpose I have yet to fathom out but I must admit I not done my research or am no expert in this matter or its underlying causes or symptoms.
1) It seems any person whom wants a civilized and rational debate on this subject is considered a racist. Well with history one would one understand such a view but going from one extreme to another is certainly not the answer.
2) Certain sections of societies in some countries want excessive immigration in order to provide cheap labor for certain business interests. Now this observation must be taken in the context that this is what it seems on the surface but if someone could explain that this is incorrect or to a piece of research which clarifies this point I would be grateful.
3) Some conspiracy theorists point out that migration is a tool to essentially destabilize whole communities. This leads to confrontation within communities instead against those whom are corrupt and milking the system. This in turn makes these communities easier to control; the gradual taking away of power from communities to seemly ever larger centralized entities whether these be federal institutions, certain international financial organizations etc. Whether this is true is unfortunately not black or white and very debatable.
4) Then there is the argument that migration can only fill jobs that the indigenous population are unable to fill or unwilling to do. This seems to be very true that certain professionals or trades will always need a quota of migrants in some economies. As regards other jobs such as catering or security for example; I do not know. Do we start some sort of national service to fill these jobs or simply let market forces dictate supply and demand to these positions? But then you have the knock on effect to tourism and other areas. Again I am naïve to the basic economic principles at work here.
　

Denerick · 06-05-2010 10:39AM

Immigration is good for our country and sooner or later Europe will have to face up to the reality that it needs migrants. What bothers me is that the US attracts some of the most skilled migrants in the world, while Europeans attract unskilled workers to do menial jobs. This is insane. We need highly skilled Africans and Asians to work in our economy, the Asians in particular played a very important role in Silicon Valley in America, they helped launch the new economy.

Europe is getting older, with a massive retiree population. Someone will have to pay the taxes to sustain this elderly population. An influx of black and brown people is necessary, whether people are willing to face that or not.

IrishManSaipan · 06-05-2010 01:45PM

Denerick wrote: »

Immigration is good for our country and sooner or later Europe will have to face up to the reality that it needs migrants.

Prove it.

A FAS study carried out over a year ago found that the average immigrant earned just €440 per week, therefore, there is very little by way of income tax and as much of this income will go on staple food which is 0 vat rated and transferred abroad the contribution in consumption taxes and the 'multiplier effect' is very much reduced. Overall, of course there is a contribution to increased economic activity but how much of this activity is generated through public expenditure on immigrants which ultimately costs the citizens of the State?

Consider the thousands of teachers that have been taken on in our schools because of immigrant children and the additional cost of immigrant children over and above Irish children because of language support.Then add in the health costs, justice (something like 1/3rd of the prison committals in 2008 were non- Irish nationals). The asylum system alone costs circa €300-400million per annum.

Then look at the economic activity of immigrants. The CSO said the non-nationals were 19.4% of the live register and that figure was rising month on month, but is somewhat stagnant during the previous quarter. This is despite figures suggesting that immigrants are 12-15% of the workforce, but then also factor in those that cannot make a claim because of the 2 year habitual residence rule. This suggests to me that circa 20%+ of immigrants in the labour force who could potentially make a claim are doing so compared to an overall 12% unemployment rate. Then add in child allowance, rent supplements, medical cards, fuel allowance, the whole shebang.

Therefore, immigrants certainly lead to a greater level of economic activity but if that economic activity is provided through the exchequer in net terms then it is a burden on society in taxation and social costs. We are lacking the kind of research to state on way or the other what the answer is, unlike the UK, but do not anticipate the government to commission that research as they may suspect what the answer is and would rather not have it exposed to the public.

Denerick wrote: »

Europe is getting older, with a massive retiree population. Someone will have to pay the taxes to sustain this elderly population. An influx of black and brown people is necessary, whether people are willing to face that or not.

Where will they work? Europe is suffering from huge unemployment.

Also, the immigrants will eventually need pensions too.

Denerick · 06-05-2010 02:53PM

I was complaining about our fetish for attracting unskilled migrants, obviously these people are out of the tax net. And the economic downturn of course affects migrants too. Thats a bit of a red herring. Their economic activity is vital, Ireland has an ageing population, not as bad as the rest of Europe but getting there. The older we get, the more we need younger migrants to do the jobs that sustains our welfare system.

Of course immigrants will eventually need pensions. But this is besides the point, if the average immigrant is in his 20s, and the average working Irish person is in their late 30s, then it stands to reason that the youthful influx will pay for the older generation in the long term (And I'm not talking about one giant wave of immigration, a sustained trickle effect would be much more effective)

Most of the opposition to immigration is based on quasi nationalist fears of a destruction of Irish identity. Well so what. The less insular we are the better.

Darith · 06-05-2010 09:01PM

Denerick wrote: »

Immigration is good for our country and sooner or later Europe will have to face up to the reality that it needs migrants. What bothers me is that the US attracts some of the most skilled migrants in the world, while Europeans attract unskilled workers to do menial jobs. This is insane. We need highly skilled Africans and Asians to work in our economy, the Asians in particular played a very important role in Silicon Valley in America, they helped launch the new economy.

Europe is getting older, with a massive retiree population. Someone will have to pay the taxes to sustain this elderly population. An influx of black and brown people is necessary, whether people are willing to face that or not.

IrishManSaipan wrote: »

Prove it.

A FAS study carried out over a year ago found that the average immigrant earned just €440 per week, therefore, there is very little by way of income tax and as much of this income will go on staple food which is 0 vat rated and transferred abroad the contribution in consumption taxes and the 'multiplier effect' is very much reduced. Overall, of course there is a contribution to increased economic activity but how much of this activity is generated through public expenditure on immigrants which ultimately costs the citizens of the State?

Consider the thousands of teachers that have been taken on in our schools because of immigrant children and the additional cost of immigrant children over and above Irish children because of language support.Then add in the health costs, justice (something like 1/3rd of the prison committals in 2008 were non- Irish nationals). The asylum system alone costs circa €300-400million per annum.

Then look at the economic activity of immigrants. The CSO said the non-nationals were 19.4% of the live register and that figure was rising month on month, but is somewhat stagnant during the previous quarter. This is despite figures suggesting that immigrants are 12-15% of the workforce, but then also factor in those that cannot make a claim because of the 2 year habitual residence rule. This suggests to me that circa 20%+ of immigrants in the labour force who could potentially make a claim are doing so compared to an overall 12% unemployment rate. Then add in child allowance, rent supplements, medical cards, fuel allowance, the whole shebang.

Therefore, immigrants certainly lead to a greater level of economic activity but if that economic activity is provided through the exchequer in net terms then it is a burden on society in taxation and social costs. We are lacking the kind of research to state on way or the other what the answer is, unlike the UK, but do not anticipate the government to commission that research as they may suspect what the answer is and would rather not have it exposed to the public.

Where will they work? Europe is suffering from huge unemployment.

Also, the immigrants will eventually need pensions too.

Denerick wrote: »

I was complaining about our fetish for attracting unskilled migrants, obviously these people are out of the tax net. And the economic downturn of course affects migrants too. Thats a bit of a red herring. Their economic activity is vital, Ireland has an ageing population, not as bad as the rest of Europe but getting there. The older we get, the more we need younger migrants to do the jobs that sustains our welfare system.

Of course immigrants will eventually need pensions. But this is besides the point, if the average immigrant is in his 20s, and the average working Irish person is in their late 30s, then it stands to reason that the youthful influx will pay for the older generation in the long term (And I'm not talking about one giant wave of immigration, a sustained trickle effect would be much more effective)

Most of the opposition to immigration is based on quasi nationalist fears of a destruction of Irish identity. Well so what. The less insular we are the better.

Interesting views here. I agree with the synopis of what type of immigration we are attracting. Needing migrants to pay for the aging population is also true but is there an alternative ?

silverharp · 08-05-2010 08:46AM

Darith wrote: »

Interesting views here. I agree with the synopis of what type of immigration we are attracting. Needing migrants to pay for the aging population is also true but is there an alternative ?

Saving for an aging population would be a good start. Any alternative is some form of ponzi scheme or perpetual growth model which would imply doubling the population every 50 or a 100 years i'd assume

southsiderosie · 08-05-2010 12:19PM

Denerick wrote: »

Immigration is good for our country and sooner or later Europe will have to face up to the reality that it needs migrants. What bothers me is that the US attracts some of the most skilled migrants in the world, while Europeans attract unskilled workers to do menial jobs. This is insane. We need highly skilled Africans and Asians to work in our economy, the Asians in particular played a very important role in Silicon Valley in America, they helped launch the new economy.

Europe is getting older, with a massive retiree population. Someone will have to pay the taxes to sustain this elderly population. An influx of black and brown people is necessary, whether people are willing to face that or not.

Actually, this isn't quite true. Overall, migrants in Ireland are actually more skilled (in terms of tertiary education) than the native population (although there is an age cohort effect). However, many end up in menial jobs because their qualifications don't transfer across countries and/or they do not speak enough English to work in their field. This is in stark contrast to, say, Germany and the US, where many migrants who came to work in heavy industry were from relatively poor rural regions and had low human capital relative to the native population (but high for their countries of origin).

Nevertheless, there are many skilled immigrants here who are working in their fields - particularly in health services and IT. In my view, this means Ireland may actually have less to worry about when migrants do settle and start families - the majority of second generation immigrants here will come from high human capital families that value education. However, I do worry about Irish people accepting the second generation as fellow citizens - this to me is the big failure of continental European immigration (particularly in France).

Cavehill Red · 08-05-2010 12:29PM

"Migrants in Ireland are actually more skilled (in terms of tertiary education) than the native population."

Given that Ireland has one of the highest penetrations of third level education in the world, I find the above statement extremely hard to believe.
I presume this is supposed to relate only to EU migrants? And even then I'm sceptical, given the invasion of entirely uneducated welfare and social unrest fodder like the Roma.
Sure there are some Filipino nurses around. But speaking frankly, I'm not seeing a lot of African PhDs down Parnell Street.

southsiderosie · 08-05-2010 12:41PM

Darith wrote: »

1) It seems any person whom wants a civilized and rational debate on this subject is considered a racist. Well with history one would one understand such a view but going from one extreme to another is certainly not the answer.

How would you define a civilized and rational conversation? I think a big issue here is, what is the starting point of the conversation? Oftentimes, the starting point is something like "there are lots of immigrants on welfare" or "immigrants commit crime", but these statements are not put into context and/or there is no backup data. "Conversations" about integration are particularly infuriating, because they are consistently one-sided: if immigrants have a responsibility to integrate, via learning the language, customs, etc, then what is the obligation of native-born people to treat immigrants as equals, and their children as fellow citizens? Because it's easier for the state to force one side to "integrate" than the other.

Darith wrote: »

2) Certain sections of societies in some countries want excessive immigration in order to provide cheap labor for certain business interests. Now this observation must be taken in the context that this is what it seems on the surface but if someone could explain that this is incorrect or to a piece of research which clarifies this point I would be grateful.

It is not incorrect. Many employers love immigrant labor because migrant workers are seen as a) cheap and b) 'pliable'. Migrant workers are also particularly favorable in industries where cash or day wages are common (like restaurants or construction) because employers generally don't pay taxes on these workers (and workers don't declare taxes on their incomes).

Darith wrote: »

3) Some conspiracy theorists point out that migration is a tool to essentially destabilize whole communities. This leads to confrontation within communities instead against those whom are corrupt and milking the system. This in turn makes these communities easier to control; the gradual taking away of power from communities to seemly ever larger centralized entities whether these be federal institutions, certain international financial organizations etc. Whether this is true is unfortunately not black or white and very debatable.

To be honest, I can't think of a case where this was done deliberately. I think what happens is that labor migrants, many of whom arrive alone and are just in a country to work and send money home, tend to live in areas with low rent, and often those areas have relatively high levels of native unemployment or are relatively deprived. This leads to social tensions over what are perceived to be scarce resources: housing, jobs, etc. In addition, many immigrants are quite entrepreneurial, and open local shops, etc, spurring further resentment in some quarters (muttering seems to be a particularly Irish trait!). Shops with signs in another language seem to be particularly threatening to natives. This fuels perceptions that immigrants are 'taking over', 'stealing jobs' or are getting special favors from the government. But as one Polish woman told me, "my neighbors have never worked a day in their lives - I'm not stealing their jobs, they never had a job in the first place."

Darith wrote: »

4) Then there is the argument that migration can only fill jobs that the indigenous population are unable to fill or unwilling to do. This seems to be very true that certain professionals or trades will always need a quota of migrants in some economies. As regards other jobs such as catering or security for example; I do not know. Do we start some sort of national service to fill these jobs or simply let market forces dictate supply and demand to these positions? But then you have the knock on effect to tourism and other areas. Again I am naïve to the basic economic principles at work here.
　

Hm, yes and no. While some would argue that raising wages in some sectors would make these jobs more attractive to natives (or, conversely, changing the welfare rates so that working was more financially attractive than being on the dole), there is other research (interestingly carried out by economists), that some jobs are tagged as "immigrant jobs" not because of wages, but because they are socially undesirable. This is less the case I think in Ireland (although it may have been true in the Celtic Tiger years), but it may be more true in the US.

southsiderosie · 08-05-2010 12:47PM

Cavehill Red wrote: »

"Migrants in Ireland are actually more skilled (in terms of tertiary education) than the native population."

Given that Ireland has one of the highest penetrations of third level education in the world, I find the above statement extremely hard to believe.
I presume this is supposed to relate only to EU migrants? And even then I'm sceptical, given the invasion of entirely uneducated welfare and social unrest fodder like the Roma.
Sure there are some Filipino nurses around. But speaking frankly, I'm not seeing a lot of African PhDs down Parnell Street.

See page 18 of this report from the CSO.

EDIT: I embedded the link in the original post, I should have done that off the bat, sorry.

When you control for age, the difference washes out. However, when you break out the population by region of origin, Western Europeans and non-EEA migrants (i.e. Africans and Asians) are more likely to have completed third-level education than the Irish population. So, yes, that African on Parnell street may have a PhD...and, incidentally, what does someone with a PhD look like anyway? This is the kind of comment that I find maddening. Just because you don't wear a tweed jacket and horn-rimmed glasses doesn't mean you don't have a formal education.

southsiderosie · 08-05-2010 01:18PM

IrishManSaipan wrote: »

Prove it.

A FAS study carried out over a year ago found that the average immigrant earned just €440 per week, therefore, there is very little by way of income tax and as much of this income will go on staple food which is 0 vat rated and transferred abroad the contribution in consumption taxes and the 'multiplier effect' is very much reduced. Overall, of course there is a contribution to increased economic activity but how much of this activity is generated through public expenditure on immigrants which ultimately costs the citizens of the State?

"Just" 440/week? That is not bad money. I make less than that, and I spend plenty of my money on rent, clothes, and non-staple items with high VAT like alcohol.

IrishManSaipan wrote: »

Consider the thousands of teachers that have been taken on in our schools because of immigrant children and the additional cost of immigrant children over and above Irish children because of language support.Then add in the health costs, justice (something like 1/3rd of the prison committals in 2008 were non- Irish nationals). The asylum system alone costs circa €300-400million per annum.

Can you provide some links here?

IrishManSaipan wrote: »

Then look at the economic activity of immigrants. The CSO said the non-nationals were 19.4% of the live register and that figure was rising month on month, but is somewhat stagnant during the previous quarter. This is despite figures suggesting that immigrants are 12-15% of the workforce, but then also factor in those that cannot make a claim because of the 2 year habitual residence rule. This suggests to me that circa 20%+ of immigrants in the labour force who could potentially make a claim are doing so compared to an overall 12% unemployment rate. Then add in child allowance, rent supplements, medical cards, fuel allowance, the whole shebang.

Migrant representation on the live register is skewed because they were disproportionately employed in the construction and tourism industries; in 2006, only 4.3% of Irish workers were employed in the hotels and restaurants industry versus 16.5% of Eastern Europeans. 11.8% of Irish workers were employed in construction; over 20% of Eastern European workers were.

As for welfare supplements, again, this was an issue long before migrant workers showed up. If you worked in this country and paid into the system, why shouldn't you be able to benefit from it? Frankly I think the problem with the Irish welfare system isn't that migrants can use it, but that anyone can use it indefinitely...and given that migration is a recent phenomenon, the vast majority of long-term welfare recipients are native Irish people, a significant number of which have not worked a day in their lives - even during the boom years when unemployment was under 4%.

IrishManSaipan wrote: »

Therefore, immigrants certainly lead to a greater level of economic activity but if that economic activity is provided through the exchequer in net terms then it is a burden on society in taxation and social costs. We are lacking the kind of research to state on way or the other what the answer is, unlike the UK, but do not anticipate the government to commission that research as they may suspect what the answer is and would rather not have it exposed to the public.

But the structure of EU institutions means to do this analysis you would have to construct it two ways: what is the shared burden of all states, given the free movement of labor and access to state welfare services within the EU, and what is the analysis for non-EU migrants. As the report I cited above shows, non-EU migrants are actually highly skilled and tend to work in stable, well-paying industries, so I would suspect that they are net contributors to the state. There is also a broader issue of the size of the Irish welfare state, which is a separate issue from immigration.

IrishManSaipan wrote: »

Where will they work? Europe is suffering from huge unemployment.

Also, the immigrants will eventually need pensions too.

Again, pension reform has implications for immigration, but is not directly related. In my view, Ireland needs a complete overhaul of its political institutions and social services, and that is a distinct conversation apart from immigration. By and large the immigration issue was settled via EU membership: Ireland will always have a significant number of foreign nationals living and working here by virtue of being a member of the EU, so moaning about people using the existing system is a bit of a non-starter.

I agree that immigrants will need pensions too but, again, I think this is more a problem of existing institutions. The presence of immigrants only highlights problems that have been around for a long time (and not just in Ireland, but in most industrialized countries, which have over-promised on pensions and never-ending benefits to elderly populations that are completely unsustainable).

Cavehill Red · 08-05-2010 03:00PM

southsiderosie wrote: »

See page 18 of this report from the CSO.

EDIT: I embedded the link in the original post, I should have done that off the bat, sorry.

When you control for age, the difference washes out. However, when you break out the population by region of origin, Western Europeans and non-EEA migrants (i.e. Africans and Asians) are more likely to have completed third-level education than the Irish population. So, yes, that African on Parnell street may have a PhD...and, incidentally, what does someone with a PhD look like anyway? This is the kind of comment that I find maddening. Just because you don't wear a tweed jacket and horn-rimmed glasses doesn't mean you don't have a formal education.

Oh dear, where to begin? Firstly, the data's OLD. It predates the arrival of Bulgarians, Romanians and Roma into Ireland. But it does make clear that the accession state levels of education were MUCH lower than that of any other grouping.
Secondly, as you admit, once age is corrected for, your statement is revealed to be nonsense. Irish are as well educated or better in the relevant age group.
Thirdly, that data conflates Asians and African migrants, which is ridiculous. Asians coming to Ireland AS YOUR LINK STATES, tend to be healthcare workers with healthcare qualifications.
Africans, with the exception of the occasional white South African or the occasional refugee claimant who gained a qualification in Ireland at the expense of the Irish taxpayer, don't tend to have such qualifications.
I don't see many PhDs down Parnell Street among my African friends there because they don't have them. It's as simple as that.
It's preposterous to seek to attempt to justify the current open-doors policy on the basis that it has somehow attracted highly educated migrants when that is demonstrably untrue.
A points-based system of immigration, coupled with the closing of asylum scams, is the only way to ensure that you get the immigrants your economy needs, as Australia, Canada and many other countries have illustrated.

southsiderosie · 08-05-2010 07:26PM

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Oh dear, where to begin? Firstly, the data's OLD. It predates the arrival of Bulgarians, Romanians and Roma into Ireland. But it does make clear that the accession state levels of education were MUCH lower than that of any other grouping.
Secondly, as you admit, once age is corrected for, your statement is revealed to be nonsense. Irish are as well educated or better in the relevant age group.
Thirdly, that data conflates Asians and African migrants, which is ridiculous. Asians coming to Ireland AS YOUR LINK STATES, tend to be healthcare workers with healthcare qualifications.
Africans, with the exception of the occasional white South African or the occasional refugee claimant who gained a qualification in Ireland at the expense of the Irish taxpayer, don't tend to have such qualifications.
I don't see many PhDs down Parnell Street among my African friends there because they don't have them. It's as simple as that.
It's preposterous to seek to attempt to justify the current open-doors policy on the basis that it has somehow attracted highly educated migrants when that is demonstrably untrue.
A points-based system of immigration, coupled with the closing of asylum scams, is the only way to ensure that you get the immigrants your economy needs, as Australia, Canada and many other countries have illustrated.

First let me just say that the tone of your post is exactly why it is almost impossible to have a rational conversation about immigration. Nowhere did I say anything about an open door policy; the only policies I referred to were Ireland's welfare policies. Furthermore, I revised my post once I found the report to acknowledge that academics were a wash, and noted as such in my post. I actually bothered to pull up data, while you responded with an anecdote. Incidentally, all of the Africans that I know in Dublin have at least a bachelor's if not a Masters degree, and most of them are also fluent in at least three languages. But I wouldn't assume that they were representative of the rest of the population. And let me tell you, if I formed my judgement of the Irish based on what I saw on Parnell street, I would not assume that this was a country that "has one of the highest penetrations of third level education in the world". :rolleyes:

No immigration data will ever be perfect, but the census was taken in 2006, which is the year when the highest number of PPSN numbers were allocated, so it's a good benchmark year for picking up trends during peak migration. The 2006 census data also shows that Africans are a relatively small percentage of the overall immigrant population; the vast majority of immigrants are EU nationals, yet half the immigration-related conversations on boards comes back to them (or Roma).

The original claim in the thread was that Ireland attracts too many low-skill people. Overall, however, Ireland has a well educated immigrant population, especially compared to countries in continental Europe. However, due to the attitudes of many Irish people towards immigrants, there are, frankly, more attractive places to live and work - especially given the cost of living here. And I say this as a "highly skilled", English speaking, non-EU immigrant living in Ireland.

Cavehill Red · 11-05-2010 01:39PM

No, I said it was an open doors policy, not you.
And I did so because it is an open doors policy. Absolutely anyone can come here and reside on the basis of an asylum claim, even though the Dept of Justice has found that the vast majority of such claims are bogus and fraudulent.
Furthermore, given that accession immigration began in 2007, your data remains old and does not reflect peak immigration.
The original claim is correct - Ireland has attracted far too many welfare claimants and beggars and unemployables as immigrants. Because we have failed to police our asylum system properly and because we failed to implement a points-based immigration programme, it was inevitable that we would receive too many undereducated foreigners.
And due to our immensely generous welfare system, many are staying here to avail of those payments.
You keep making statements that bear no scrutiny. Your latest is that Ireland has received a well-educated migrant workforce compared to other locations in Europe.
I think this is disputable on a number of bases - primarily the fact that you've offered nothing to support that assumption, secondly due to the fact that many foreign qualifications (especially African and Asian ones) do not bear comparison with European qualifications, thirdly because comparing recent immigration into Ireland with the 60s migrant waves into Britain and France is nonsensical, and finally because the levels of unemployment and welfare dependency among migrant populations in Ireland indicate otherwise.

southsiderosie · 12-05-2010 12:29PM

Cavehill Red wrote: »

No, I said it was an open doors policy, not you.

Yes I know. My point was that you are raising an issue that did not appear anywhere in the thread.

Cavehill Red wrote: »

And I did so because it is an open doors policy. Absolutely anyone can come here and reside on the basis of an asylum claim, even though the Dept of Justice has found that the vast majority of such claims are bogus and fraudulent.

Because Ireland is a) a democracy and b) a signatory to international law governing how asylum applicants are processed, then, yes, they process all claims and people are entitled to stay until their claims are settled. One could certainly make an argument for speeding up the process; the glacial pace of decision-making is bad for all parties involved.

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Furthermore, given that accession immigration began in 2007, your data remains old and does not reflect peak immigration.

This article from the ESRI clarifies several key points, some of which I have made already, yet you seem determined to ignore. First, large-scale accession state migratory flows started in 2004 when Poland, Latvia, et. al. (EU-10 states) joined the EU, not 2007. Subsequently, net migration flows peaked in 2006. Second, EU-10 workers had significantly higher levels of workforce participation than native workers. Third, although educational levels are comparable to natives for where people end up in the labor market, there is a significant wage disadvantage for EU-10 workers who are highly educated. This effect washes out for less educated migrant workers, who earn the same as their less educated Irish counterparts. Finally, as I noted before, EU-10 and Polish workers in particular, are heavily concentrated in industries that have suffered during the economic downturn. Given their high levels of workforce participation, and over-representation in construction, manufacturing and retail, it is no surprise that they are claiming welfare and unemployment benefits in large numbers.

Migration from Romania and Bulgaria is relatively low compared to the rest of the EU, especially since they require a work permit (subject to certain criteria); the 2004 EU-10 citizens can work wherever they want.

Cavehill Red wrote: »

The original claim is correct - Ireland has attracted far too many welfare claimants and beggars and unemployables as immigrants. Because we have failed to police our asylum system properly and because we failed to implement a points-based immigration programme, it was inevitable that we would receive too many undereducated foreigners.
And due to our immensely generous welfare system, many are staying here to avail of those payments.

As I noted, immigrants claim welfare benefits because they worked in industries that are now slumping. And all members of EU states are eligible for welfare in the states where they have worked for a set period of time. Again, as I noted before, the quirk here is in the pre-existing Irish welfare system which allows people to claim indefinitely.

The people who came here are not inherently unemployable; the problem is that the economy has collapsed for low skilled workers across the board, and highly skilled EU-10 workers have been unable to work in sectors of the economy commiserate with their qualifications. A points system would do little to ameliorate this, since Eastern Europeans qualify via their EU citizenship, and non-EEA citizens already have to be highly educated to get a work permit in Ireland anyway.

Cavehill Red wrote: »

You keep making statements that bear no scrutiny. Your latest is that Ireland has received a well-educated migrant workforce compared to other locations in Europe.

I think this is disputable on a number of bases - primarily the fact that you've offered nothing to support that assumption, secondly due to the fact that many foreign qualifications (especially African and Asian ones) do not bear comparison with European qualifications, thirdly because comparing recent immigration into Ireland with the 60s migrant waves into Britain and France is nonsensical, and finally because the levels of unemployment and welfare dependency among migrant populations in Ireland indicate otherwise.

Comparing recent waves of migration into Ireland with past waves in Germany and France is relevant if you think that having a low-skilled workforce will be problematic in the long term. Ostensibly immigrant children in high human capital families will find it easier to "close the gap" with natives; certainly we seen this in the US where Russian and Korean immigrants and their children often outperform natives because the parents were highly educated in their home countries (this study gets similar results). Even if educational qualifications do not transfer for the parents, the fact that someone has a degree is a sign that they value education, and that gets passed on to their children.

Given that you have provided no links to back up your starkly anti-immigration claims, I find it rather rich that you say my posts "bear no scrutiny". When you come up with something to back up what is essentially a baseless, anti-immigration screed, please let the rest of us know, thanks.

Madd Finn · 12-05-2010 01:26PM

Why are we worried about immigration? We ain't going to have any "problem" with immigration for some time. Our economic collapse has seen to that.

You want to stop immigration? Trash your economy. We didn't have too many Africans Asians or Middle Easterners flocking to our shores in the 1980s. I exclude Eastern Europeans in that because they couldn't get out of their home countries for a start.

Of course we had high levels of immigration when our economy took off. Any successful economy does.

We're not going to have too many in the next few years. So it's not an issue.

And for what it's worth, I think people who are scared of immigrants are scared of life.

Speaking as a former immigrant myself.

drdoon · 14-05-2010 11:42PM

It's quite late now so I'll only write a little. I will however write again when I have time. I'd just like to say "Where have all the Africans come from"? I know Ireland had a boom. I know hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans flooded in due to the border-less EU. But how and why did so many Africans get into this country. Are they highly educated, have they brought skills we require to integrate into our economy? As Africa is not part of the EU, what gives them the right to come here and simply settle in this country. I would like to hear your views, as I have plenty of my own. Thanks
Ross

Denerick · 15-05-2010 12:34AM

drdoon wrote: »

It's quite late now so I'll only write a little. I will however write again when I have time. I'd just like to say "Where have all the Africans come from"? I know Ireland had a boom. I know hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans flooded in due to the border-less EU. But how and why did so many Africans get into this country. Are they highly educated, have they brought skills we require to integrate into our economy? As Africa is not part of the EU, what gives them the right to come here and simply settle in this country. I would like to hear your views, as I have plenty of my own. Thanks
Ross

I'm sure you have plenty of views, the whole 'where does that shower come from, then' routine is a code for an altogether more sinister question.

drdoon · 15-05-2010 11:43PM

Denerick wrote: »

I'm sure you have plenty of views, the whole 'where does that shower come from, then' routine is a code for an altogether more sinister question.

Thanks for your reply Denerick. But why so abrupt. Because I ask about a specific race determines that obviously I am racist? Hmm oh really. Are you willing to talk/debate/chat about the subject of immigration or simply fobb me off without any discussion on the subject? Are you worried about something, is it now racist to even bring up the subject of immigration? thanks

Denerick · 16-05-2010 12:17AM

drdoon wrote: »

Thanks for your reply Denerick. But why so abrupt. Because I ask about a specific race determines that obviously I am racist? Hmm oh really. Are you willing to talk/debate/chat about the subject of immigration or simply fobb me off without any discussion on the subject? Are you worried about something, is it now racist to even bring up the subject of immigration? thanks

Talk about it all you like, but I know exactly what you're going to say. Just say it, don't dance around what you're talking about.

drdoon · 16-05-2010 12:31AM

If you are talking about that fact that as an Irishman returning to my country (yes I too WAS an immigrant) I see great swathes of people here that were not here in 1997 when I left and the fact that I do not like some of these people being here then yes I hold my hands up, you got me. If you want to know where and why I came to this conclusion. Please feel free to ask, as I am only too happy to indulge you. But if you want to rebuff any discussion and claim that anyone who raises the question of immigration is a racist, well then suppose we have nothing more to talk about. It's up to you, if you have a vested interested in not taking this any further so be it. I just thought that's whats boards was for..perhaps

Denerick · 16-05-2010 01:19AM

Stop having an instinctive outraged reaction. I'm asking you to explain your position, you dithered in your first post, and anyone else can see what you're really hinting at ('were did all those black people come from then?') What do you expect me to think? And now you continue to dither. Just say whats on your mind.

I never said questioning immigration is racist, you said that. What I did say is that judging by your very tentative comments, you are the atypical 'racistnotaracisthonest' type. Just make your point and get on with it, stop dithering.

SlabMurphy · 17-05-2010 12:31PM

Well the vast majority of them couldn't be any worse than the last shower who came in 400 years ago.

Denerick · 17-05-2010 12:59PM

SlabMurphy wrote: »

Well the vast majority of them couldn't be any worse than the last shower who came in 400 years ago.

Who are they, the Hugenots? Lol. It never ceases to amaze me the attitudes of some people. I'm sure your hero Slap Murphy did great work to undo the 'damage' those Cromwellians did by killing the odd Protestant here or there, once he could find time in between his vodka smuggling.

Cavehill Red · 17-05-2010 01:17PM

southsiderosie wrote: »

Yes I know. My point was that you are raising an issue that did not appear anywhere in the thread.

You'd rather we didn't discuss it? I think it's the reason our immigration system has failed.

southsiderosie wrote: »

Because Ireland is a) a democracy and b) a signatory to international law governing how asylum applicants are processed

As are Australia, Canada and plenty of other countries that have points-based immigration systems and who move quickly to deport those caught breaching them.

southsiderosie wrote: »

Given their high levels of workforce participation, and over-representation in construction, manufacturing and retail, it is no surprise that they are claiming welfare and unemployment benefits in large numbers.

No, that merely explains why they are now no longer employed in Ireland. It doesn't explain why we're borrowing funds on international markets to pay them each 200 euro a week.
And before you start citing EU regulations, I'm well aware of the breach of sovereignty preventing Ireland from looking after its own citizens first by preference.

southsiderosie wrote: »

Migration from Romania and Bulgaria is relatively low compared to the rest of the EU, especially since they require a work permit (subject to certain criteria); the 2004 EU-10 citizens can work wherever they want.

The roundabout Roma (remember those charmers?) came here like many others on holiday visits to circumvent the requirement for work permits.
It's a nice workaround, akin to the Nigerian economic migrants who abused the asylum system.

southsiderosie wrote: »

As I noted, immigrants claim welfare benefits because they worked in industries that are now slumping. And all members of EU states are eligible for welfare in the states where they have worked for a set period of time. Again, as I noted before, the quirk here is in the pre-existing Irish welfare system which allows people to claim indefinitely.

I'm with you on time-capping dole payments. They were never intended to become a lifestyle choice.
But the problem is our economy can barely afford the benefits we're paying to indigenous unemployed. There must be some incentive provided to encourage people to seek work elsewhere rather than sponge here.
Leo Varadkar suggested paying people to leave. I'm more of the mind to timecap social welfare and reduce the levels to the point where it becomes more economically viable for people to seek work in their countries of origin than languish on unemployment benefits here.

southsiderosie wrote: »

The people who came here are not inherently unemployable; the problem is that the economy has collapsed for low skilled workers across the board, and highly skilled EU-10 workers have been unable to work in sectors of the economy commiserate with their qualifications. A points system would do little to ameliorate this, since Eastern Europeans qualify via their EU citizenship, and non-EEA citizens already have to be highly educated to get a work permit in Ireland anyway.

A points system would need to accompany a wholesale renovation of the asylum system. It's no good pretending that somehow Ireland was the first safe haven for tens of thousands of abused Africans. It wasn't. There aren't even direct flights to the continent from here.
The fact is that due to a combination of throwing the doors open to accession states when few others did and failing to police the asylum process properly, we have allowed tens of thousands of economic non-contributors to migrate here who have no incentive to find work due to the levels of benefits they receive. That's not sustainable.

southsiderosie wrote: »

Comparing recent waves of migration into Ireland with past waves in Germany and France is relevant if you think that having a low-skilled workforce will be problematic in the long term.

Sure is. I don't look forward to repeats of the Turkish-Neo Nazi clashes or the riots of the peripherique in Ireland. But I fear they may come someday.

southsiderosie wrote: »

Ostensibly immigrant children in high human capital families will find it easier to "close the gap" with natives...
Even if educational qualifications do not transfer for the parents, the fact that someone has a degree is a sign that they value education, and that gets passed on to their children.

Such a pity we weren't targetting such migrants with a points-based immigration system then, isn't it?

southsiderosie wrote: »

Given that you have provided no links to back up your starkly anti-immigration claims, I find it rather rich that you say my posts "bear no scrutiny". When you come up with something to back up what is essentially a baseless, anti-immigration screed, please let the rest of us know, thanks.

Yawn.
What would you like, seriously? The stats from the Dept of Justice on how over 90% of Nigerian asylum seekers were found to be fraudulent?
The DSW stats on comparative unemployment of nationalities in Ireland?
The state of our finances?
It's all on the web. Google is your friend.

drdoon · 17-05-2010 10:39PM

Denerick!
Oh well then, if I must. I suppose I had better give you some history first. I left Ireland and went to UK in 1997. Before I left I had a keen interest in getting to know some black people once I got to UK. You see at the time I was led to believe that blacks in many ways were the same as us. If you remember the Commitments "the Irish are the blacks of Europe" line. When you think about that statement what does it mean, the blacks of Europe, what’s so wrong with blacks that we are labelled the Blacks of Europe? Hey why can’t we be the Pakistanis or the Orientals. Are they referring to the hard drinking, fighting kind of Irish. The hard working kind, the travellers? Don’t you tell me. Anyway let’s move on. In my innocence I thought we'd have alot in common. I'm just trying to say that I had no ill feeling towards any blacks before heading out into the big world - my first dog my was called Tyson for peats sake (after the boxer, no joke - just some light relief). Many of my friends regularly said I wanted to be black, well maybe I did. It's fair to say I had a lot of black people I really looked up to. Anyways after I arrived in the UK I worked alot on building sites, so I was a working class guy hanging in working class circles. Apart from the animosity I myself felt from the Brits. They were constantly going on about how much they hated blacks. I asked one guy one day why? He said that he had grown up with a black guy as his best mate. But one day when he saw him with his black buddies, he basically turned his head and blanked him. When he met him this guy he said that because he was with his crew he couldn't acknowledge him, well the guy obviously took it to heart and ever since hated the sight of them. That was my first real memory of hearing someone who really hated blacks, hey maybe this guy was a twat I dunno. Throughout all my time working on sites, I only ever came across one black bricklayer. Every other guy was a painter decorator. In case you don't know, its the job that required the least amount of physical exertion which anyone can do. I was a price work hod carrier (the more you do, the more you make), the toughest job onsite, doing hard graft everyday, trying to pay bills, **** I didn’t have proper shoes during the winter for nearly a month, but it had to be done. Perhaps I was a fool and should have chosen the easiest job. One thing was for sure, the blacks had the painting decorating side all sewn up. I'd see these guys swaggering around the site without a care in the world, just showing up to get a pay check, they just didn't have the drive or inclination to work hard and that grated on me. One time one of the black guys onsite who I kind of knew came and asked me for some cash as he had a fine to pay or go prison. All the English said don't do it, but guess what. I did, silly me, never saw that guy or cash again. Rrrrr stung again SNAP! Not to worry, there’s always one bad grape in the bunch.
Anyway I lived in about eight different places in London, the majority of which were black neighbourhoods as the rent was cheapest. I personally never had any issues while living in any of these places. Apart from a stabbing, a gun being pulled in my house, a rape and two murders nearby. But it was things that I saw and experiences throughout my time in UK that went on the shape my attitude. I'd also like to add that I don't look at all people of colour and think bastards. How can I put this, seeing as I’m a “racistnotracisthonest” type, I suppose I am a selective racist. Are you still a racist if you like some of one race and not some others in the same race? This racism thing is very confusing.
I lived in Tottenham in a house where I was the only white person. I got on really well with most that were all straight from Africa and not British blacks I made good friends with a guy called Mustafa from the Ivory Coast. A really good guy who I ended up giving my car to when I bought another (note to self: must try harder to be racist). Ended up never getting any money for the car, but it was ok. He had nothing and worked hard cleaning toilets and I respected him for that, so I let it go.
You see, I see and experience big differences between 2nd, 3rd British blacks and Africans. Now not all Africans as Nigerians generally are not to be trusted and yes I know this from personal experience. Even amongst the Africans I knew. They told me Nigerians were not to be trusted, GAngstas they'd say. As a side note, have you seen the movie “district 9”, see how the Nigerians are the gangsters who do business with the Aliens, good movie that.
Anyway my distain for certain blacks grew over a number of years. The first obvious thing that pissed me off was their major attitude problem. Guys swaggering down the street like the owned the place. Body language is 93% of communication, so when you see grown men coming down the road at you unwilling to give you any room and bouncing off you kind of sends a message. Hanging out on street corners, staring at you as you walk by, giving it the BIG UN as they say. Constantly, not some of the time, constantly. If I or anyone I know see’s an Irishman, Englishman, Frenchman, well anyone swaggering down the road looking like the cat that got the cream. We say look at the state of this dude. But with the blacks, it’s acceptable. Their culture is almost in complete opposite to ours. Zero humility, zero self deprecation, zero respect for common decency.
One of the funniest things ever was an old Jamaican lad, passing a comment on this guy doin the black walk down the railway tracks toward us (for years I worked fixing the railway tracks in London) saying to a young black guy working with us. “what happened to your leg maaan, why is you limping”...laughs all round.....”oh yeah I hurt it”..Some funny stuff to see one generation taking the mick from another and seeing right through that crap for all of us whiteys to see. And guess what, if any of the white guys had said it, that would have been racist too I suppose!
You see their hero’s ain’t Samuel L Jackson or Barack Obama or even Nelson Mandela. Their hero’s are basketball players and rappers who sing about killing and ****ing ho’s. They aspire to be those guys, they want that crib, they don’t respect anyone or anything. And yet it’s all they talk about, respect, respect. They wouldn’t know it if it came up and bit them on the ass. Teenagers walking around talking like American gangsters (not Al Capone). Not British black UK slang, but American lingo, trying their damdest to emulate their Gods from MTV, not the Tribesmen and wise men of Africa! Talk about no culture.
You ever heard of Trident, that’s the special task force set up to specifically deal with black crime in the UK. Not MI5, not Interpol or the not special branch. There’s a whole department dedicated to dealing with black crime. So while MI5 are off dealing with the home-grown terrorists. There’s a whole other portion of the police dealing with black crime on the streets of the UK. Where to start on how I developed my racism...
So many disgusting instances that stick in my head that have moulded my bad attitude. I know I know the whole “there’s always a minority” who give the rest a bad name. But wait and listen... Maybe it was that time when, the guys who stopped and turned off his car at traffic lights in Brixton to have a chat, stopping all the cars behind. Hell yeah high fives all round mate. Perhaps it was when a man in Tottenham who when he told a group of black youths to stop sitting on his car, called their friend who arrived and blew the back of this married man with children’s head off with a shotgun. Maybe it was the guy who was stabbed to death a few yards from his home as he ran from some blacks who tried to mug him. He never even put up a fight; they stabbed him as he ran away. There’s his new wife waiting indoors for him to arrive back from a hard day’s work, was never to be. Oh yeah, the recent thing where if they see a guy not from their manor (area) walking or shopping, they attack them, kick, stab or shoot. All depends on which way the wind is blowin. Now these guys don’t even have to be in a gang, it’s just if they know they aren’t local, bringing that whole US gang colours thing to the UK. I remember being at a bus stop, on a Saturday, 1pm in the day, full of women, children, shoppers and next thing this kid, say 16 gets a bottle smashed in his face. He didn’t know these guys and they didn’t know him, apparently he looked at them wrong, go figure. Perhaps it was the little African kid about 14 who lived downstairs in my tower block I would lend him stuff to fix his bicycle. Then one day I heard all this shouting. I see him running up to another black kid who’s hitting on a shop window. He hands him a sheathed carving knife that the other youngfella starts banging on the window (he won’t be getting my wrench again). How about the gang who held up a whole train carriage as it travelled across the city. Robbing everyone of their money old, young, black, white, yellow. I forget, was this the same gang who had studio photos taken of themselves posing in 1940’s gangster clothes, really believeing they were certified OG’s. How about the guy in Holloway road where I lived who was stabbed to death on a bus for telling a black guy top stop throwing chips at his girlfriend. How about the group of about 40 teenagers who surrounded another youth and shot him dead, then cycled off. Before I left in June 2008, I think the number was 16 teenage murders in UK, the vast majority committed by black youths on black youths. Maybe it was the two white girls who were tortured by a group of blacks as she owed some petty money for drugs. They spent 4 hours burning, stabbing and raping before finally slitting her throat, one barely lived, the other died. How about that black gang of guys and girls who came upon two drunk white guys walking home from a bar in central London and threw them off the bridge into the river (one drowned, one lived). CCTV footage showed them laughing and joking as they got on the TUBE afterwards. Was it that time I was watching day time TV and an older Jamaican businessman was on. He said he couldn’t employ black guys to work in his warehouse. He couldn’t trust them and they were too lazy. His business would simply disappear if he did. You should have heard all the blacks in the audience, “man what you talking about, no maan no way mann”. Funny stuff, yet very informative. A white businessman could or would never say something like that. He’d be crucified! Lambasted...you white racist. Go back to wherever you came from..oh wait. This is your country, we forgot. What’s about these blacks in Dublin I heard about. Who after getting verbally abuse on buses were given cars so they didn’t have to travel on public transport and be subjected to racist abuse. Jesus when my dad went to the UK. My uncle would say they often stood back to back fighting English, being called them every name under the sun, Paddys, Micks, go home you *****. Today it’s “here’s another freebie, last thing we want to do is upset you, so sorry”. Sweet mother of God. What a load of rubbish, we are being screwed from every angle. If it’s not the people from outside the country it’s one’s from within. “Oh you can’t say that, we were immigrants too remember”. Yes but the difference is, we didn’t export our extreme criminality, vulgarity or disrespect for common decency. (oh yah, the African woman holding her child up while it made a piss right beside the footpath where we were walking, no going into nearby bushes required in Richmond park) During my quite recent time in University as a mature student. I had the pleasure of being in class with loads of different races. People on their mobile phones in University, in class answering calls and sending texts and the six million dollar question “who were the main culprits”? Chatting like they are on the street outside, not giving a **** about anyone else. To add insult to injury they are there because of equal opportunities, not because they got good enough grades to earn a place. But because what, yes they are an ethnic minority and the University has to fill its imposed quota. On top of that, they aren’t even paying for it, it’s all paid for by the government i.e. the taxpayer, free education for people who don’t want to be educated. They want it handed to them, so they can live like those fools on MTV cribs. Guys bringing their pit bull dogs on to campus, dressed in black, playing that gangster role. Two black guys who got into a fist fight during a class. How about the fella who walked straight into a lecture past the lecturer to his buddies, passes them something and walks back out. Sniggers all round. Yes that’s right, that’s how you show off to your buds. Don’t show anyone respect, don’t have any manners. Be the BIG MAN... **** THE POLICE as Public enemy would say! When I graduated I remember my dad saying “there’s hardly any English people here” (white obviously). It’s true, I’d say the graduation year was 70% minorities. Some very hard workers, especially the Asian guys and girls. While the other didn’t deserve a god damn thing as they copied and cheated their way through the whole degree. My University was full of racists like me who would comment on the attitude of the black students and how they had no respect for anyone or anything. These racists came from every corner of the world, all races, all creeds and all managed to come together in the same place at the same time, strange.
My sisters partner - sister, (complicated!) Well she was over here a few days ago. Her local Catholic school in London has closed down, so she needed to find an alternative. The other local school is now 70% Somali kids and she didn’t want their child, in their country going to a school where there were almost no White British kids, is that racist? Must be, surely..By 2020, it is estimated London will be 60% black and Asian. Now let’s digest that for a second, that’s roughly 9 million people in London alone, so that makes it 5.4 million. What about Manchester, Birmingham, Wolverhampton. Can you picture Dublin, Limerick, Galway or any other major city for that matter being completely over run with people from outside your country? No matter how well meaning they are or where they are from. What in your mind makes that ok? This isn’t the New world, there aren’t any cowboys and Indians running around. Back then they didn’t get welfare cheques. Mass influx of people, no matter where they are from will lead to the rise of the far right. In the modern world where everything is based on economics and not on the need for people to populate a country, it just doesn’t work. You dump thousands of people into any country, you are asking for trouble.
I have a thousand more tales to tell from my time in the UK. But right now I am sick to death of typing. Sufficed to say this is how I see the future for Ireland. It lies in store 5, 10 20 years from now. Not this generation of people who came here in search of a better life. It’s their children who will follow on who feel like they are owed something by society, not because they have worked hard to achieve it. But simply because they exist!
Now I realise this commentary will probably be full of inconsistencies, mistakes and so many obvious discrepancies. But at least I hope you can see where I am coming from and why I am where I am. I wasn’t born racist, I wasn’t raised racist. And I really, truly would rather get on with things and not think the way I do as life is too short. But things that I have experienced have shaped my views and those things will never leave me. Ireland 2030 = UK 2010, lets wait and see who's right and who's wrong. Either way, by then it will be too late anyways. PEACE

digme · 18-05-2010 03:25PM

That's some insight drdoon thanks for telling your story.Best post i've read on here in a long time.

drdoon · 18-05-2010 10:52PM

Just trying to keep it real digme. Its easy for people to turn around and call someone a racist. Never knowing anything about them, what they have been through and why they think the way they do. That's my life, that's what I experienced. I'd like to see anyone try justify that kind of behaviour, which is ingrained into a culture. Europe is on a slippery slope to the bottom and no one is willing to stand up and say it as they are automatically labelled a racist by these people who live in Ivory towers. They should try living on a council estate in South London for a while, see what the future holds for them and their children. later

Denerick · 30-05-2010 06:27PM

Your anecdote is admittedly interesting, but it doesn't prove anything. When different cultures come together (You pinpoint the blacks) there will be tensions, I think thats inevitable. I'm sure the local English working classes weren't too happy with an influx of paddies competing for their kind of jobs either.

drdoon · 30-05-2010 10:58PM

It's good that you are underwhelmed by that kind of disgusting behaviour. It's strange how I never came across such extreme violence among any other races while I lived in the UK. If you think these kind of events are a result of racial tension. You are obviously either black yourself or just a very simple person who hasn't lived outside of his little village. Either way there's no point discussing such matters with people like yourself who stick their head in the sand.

Denerick · 31-05-2010 06:02PM

drdoon wrote: »

It's good that you are underwhelmed by that kind of disgusting behaviour. It's strange how I never came across such extreme violence among any other races while I lived in the UK. If you think these kind of events are a result of racial tension. You are obviously either black yourself or just a very simple person who hasn't lived outside of his little village. Either way there's no point discussing such matters with people like yourself who stick their head in the sand.

Theres a difference between saying 'from my experience of living in the UK, racial tensions created a situation wherein some black people got involved in organised violent crime' and 'only black people commit violent crime'.

I think the statistics of white working class crime speaks for itself (You have the Dublin scangers and Limerick murderers - all white as far as I'm aware) I doubt you may have damaged your credibility with that howler I've bolded above.

Immigration both nationally and internationally

Comments