Asylum Seeker protest on Kinsale Road. Mod warning in OP.

AlekSmart

Nodin wrote: »

You mean playing populist reactionary politics with the issue.

Yep,the larger clue is in the Populist bit..as in Popular...as in a Policy favoured by the majority of voters.

Otherwise it would have to be UNpopulist,reactionary politics ?

Or is it perhaps,the actual Politics bit that causes the issue ?

alastair

AlekSmart wrote: »

Yep,the larger clue is in the Populist bit..as in Popular...as in a Policy favoured by the majority of voters.

Otherwise it would have to be UNpopulist,reactionary politics ?

Or is it perhaps,the actual Politics bit that causes the issue ?

FF were/are a pretty typical example of populist politics. Political populism is no guarantee of effectiveness, consideration, or intended outcomes.

AlekSmart

alastair wrote: »

FF were/are a pretty typical example of populist politics. Political populism is no guarantee of effectiveness, consideration, or intended outcomes.

Well afaik,there's no great FF presence in Australia...politically speaking anyway.

My point is that Populist may not sound great,but if it accurately reflects the wishes of the majority of the electorate,it becomes Democratic.

I'm uncertain as to whether there's a suggestion that the new Australian policy is somehow UN-democratic ?

alastair

AlekSmart wrote: »

Well afaik,there's no great FF presence in Australia...politically speaking anyway.

My point is that Populist may not sound great,but if it accurately reflects the wishes of the majority of the electorate,it becomes Democratic.

I'm uncertain as to whether there's a suggestion that the new Australian policy is somehow UN-democratic ?

I think we're all aware FF aren't Australian.

My, point, in case you missed it, is that populist politics are no guarantee of effectiveness, consideration, or intended outcomes. You appear to believe that popular reactionary policies have some intrinsic merit.

Nobody suggested that the Australian policy was undemocratic - not sure where you got that from.

rgossip30

I am not sure why the debate has moved to discussing Australia's asylum system . The only relevance is that you take away the attraction and numbers seeking asylum drops.

There are no statistics for those granted refugee status that actually work ? We must assume that is a low figure or there would be some praising/glorifying them for contributing to Irish society.

AlekSmart

alastair wrote: »

I think we're all aware FF aren't Australian.

My, point, in case you missed it, is that populist politics are no guarantee of effectiveness, consideration, or intended outcomes. You appear to believe that popular reactionary policies have some intrinsic merit.

Nobody suggested that the Australian policy was undemocratic - not sure where you got that from.

Just gettin a feel for whether the adoption of a more robust attitude to the issue in Ireland,should that be endorsed by referendum,would be any more acceptable ?

And,yes I do see some merit in popular reactionary policies, particularly as Politics itself, as an art-form is all about responding constantly changing Demands and mobile Goalposts.

We sure have moved a long way in this thread already...Kinsale to Cambodia...goes to show the extent of the problem ?

alastair

AlekSmart wrote: »

We sure have moved a long way in this thread already...Kinsale to Cambodia...goes to show the extent of the problem ?

Not really. Rather more a reflection of the usual blogosphere/forum tendency to fringe exaggeration and scapegoating.

alastair

rgossip30 wrote: »

I am not sure why the debate has moved to discussing Australia's asylum system . The only relevance is that you take away the attraction and numbers seeking asylum drops.

There are no statistics for those granted refugee status that actually work ? We must assume that is a low figure or there would be some praising/glorifying them for contributing to Irish society.

We've comparatively few asylum applicants, and far fewer successful asylum applicants, so yes - it's a low figure, whether in employment, or not. Don't know why you assume anything beyond that.

Nodin

AlekSmart wrote: »

Yep,the larger clue is in the Populist bit..as in Popular...as in a Policy favoured by the majority of voters.

Otherwise it would have to be UNpopulist,reactionary politics ?

Or is it perhaps,the actual Politics bit that causes the issue ?

You seem to be under the impression that just because something is popular, it is somehow objectively 'correct'. Nor would it necessarily meet our international obligations.

AlekSmart

Nodin wrote: »

You seem to be under the impression that just because something is popular, it is somehow objectively 'correct'. Nor would it necessarily meet our international obligations.

Another impression I "seem" to be under is that "Meeting our International Obligations" is the sole criteria by which some folk judge their Countrys condition.

Ireland has met,and exceeded,it's "International Obligations" regarding Asylum provision for a lot longer than the allegations of it NOT doing so have been loudly proclaimed.

It may be worth associating with some of those who,in the past, have benefited from Irelands realistically applied systems before seeking it's dis-assembly and replacement by something more...erm...."Populist" ?

Nodin

AlekSmart wrote: »

Another impression I "seem" to be under is that "Meeting our International Obligations" is the sole criteria by which some folk judge their Countrys condition.

Ireland has met,and exceeded,it's "International Obligations" regarding Asylum provision for a lot longer than the allegations of it NOT doing so have been loudly proclaimed.

It may be worth associating with some of those who,in the past, have benefited from Irelands realistically applied systems before seeking it's dis-assembly and replacement by something more...erm...."Populist" ?

No idea what you're on about.

AlekSmart

Nodin wrote: »

No idea what you're on about.

Not a problem.

walshb

AlekSmart wrote: »

Ireland has met,and exceeded,it's "International Obligations" regarding Asylum provision for a lot longer than the allegations of it NOT doing so have been loudly proclaimed.
?

+ 1

It's as clear as day what you're on about!

AlekSmart

walshb wrote: »

+ 1

It's as clear as day what you're on about!

Oh Oh...this is heading towards Dead Parrot land....:)

jank

Nodin wrote: »

No goalposts were moved.



What about them?

Sigh, your one liners and failure to see basic arguments on their own is tiring Nodin. Wont be responding to you again in this thread.

rgossip30

alastair wrote: »

We've comparatively few asylum applicants, and far fewer successful asylum applicants, so yes - it's a low figure, whether in employment, or not. Don't know why you assume anything beyond that.

The refugees that get Irish citizenship can also apply for family reunification. This adds to the figure .
Your opinion seems to be that its fine if refugees do not work does this apply to Irish citizens too ?

AlekSmart

jank wrote: »

Sigh,your one liners and failure to see basic arguments on their own is tiring Nodin. Wont be responding to you again in this thread.

No don't run.......there may be another way

http://maxyshideout.blogspot.ie/2014/01/smart-ass-one-liners.html

I kinda like this one......;)

Think Im Sarcastic? Watch Me Pretend To Care!

But,seriously though...there are enough contributors,all wading in to allow for a reasonable cup-a-soup to be produced.

The main thing,for me,is that the likes of The Irish Times don't get a free run in the indignation stakes by consistently running down our National Systems and,by implication,those who perform a selfless task attempting to produce order out of carefully crafted chaos !

alastair

rgossip30 wrote: »

The refugees that get Irish citizenship can also apply for family reunification. This adds to the figure .

This adds a smaller figure to the small figure. Sure. You're still left with a small figure.

rgossip30 wrote: »

Your opinion seems to be that its fine if refugees do not work does this apply to Irish citizens too ?

That's my opinion, is it? Where did you get that from?

rgossip30

alastair wrote: »

This adds a smaller figure to the small figure. Sure. You're still left with a small figure.




That's my opinion, is it? Where did you get that from?

The cost of this 'small' figure 150 million +equals the proposed take from the water rate.

http://www.thejournal.ie/asylum-seekers-cost-1670088-Sep2014/

Your posts . ' it's a low figure, whether in employment or not ' You suggest as its a low figure it does not matter.

alastair

rgossip30 wrote: »

The cost of this 'small' figure 150 million +equals the proposed take from the water rate.

http://www.thejournal.ie/asylum-seekers-cost-1670088-Sep2014/

Your posts . ' it's a low figure, whether in employment or not ' You suggest as its a low figure it does not matter.

What exactly has the cost of direct provision got to do with the numbers of those offered asylum, and whether they're in, or out of work?

By law, everyone in direct provision is unable to seek work. So, if you're asking about figures regarding employment there, it would be 100% out of work.

rgossip30

alastair wrote: »

What exactly has the cost of direct provision got to do with the numbers of those offered asylum, and whether they're in, or out of work?

By law, everyone in direct provision is unable to seek work. So, if you're asking about figures regarding employment there, it would be 100% out of work.

100% is not correct some do work for cash .

The number of asylum seekers are set to increase 40% this year. This is in turn adds to the refugee population.
The cost of social welfare for those refugee's not working can be added to the bill.
The refugee population is small as a result of recent Irish citizenship ceremonies .Those granted Irish citizenship apply for family reunification .

alastair

rgossip30 wrote: »

100% is not correct some do work for cash .

They do? How would you know this?

rgossip30 wrote: »

The number of asylum seekers has increased 40% this year. This is in turn adds to the refugee population.

No they haven't. Please don't make up figures.

rgossip30 wrote: »

The cost of social welfare for those refugee's not working can be added to the bill.

Added to what bill? What number of refugees aren't working? Cost to the exchequer as a percentage of total social welfare outgoings?

rgossip30 wrote: »

The refugee population is small as a result of recent Irish citizenship ceremonies.

No idea what you're trying to say here.

rgossip30 wrote: »

Those granted Irish citizenship apply for family reunification .

They can, and some do. So?

rgossip30

alastair wrote: »

They do? How would you know this?

You agree they do work. I know from TV newspapers and first hand.


No they haven't. Please don't make up figures.

http://www.orac.ie/website/orac/oracwebsite.nsf/page/orac-stats_13-en

I suggest you look at Orac its 35% increase on Jan to July 2013 and its estimated to increase to at least 40% by the year end.


Added to what bill? What number of refugees aren't working? Cost to the exchequer as a percentage of total social welfare outgoings?

Yes the tax payer. There are no figures for refugees who work I stated this before.


No idea what you're trying to say here.

When refugees are granted citizenship they are not regarded as refugees for statistics . The number then drops a convenient way to hide the true figure of non eu former asylum seekers living here .

They can, and some do. So?

This increases the non European population . They can apply for council housing adding to the already high numbers 90K on the waiting list .

http://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/population/populationclassifiedbyreligionandnationality2011/


53,781 have no nationality !! There is also the view that those coming from the UK are welfare tourists . I know one family living here while the husband works in the UK to get Habitual residence and eventually the lotto welfare .

The abuse of the system effects Irish citizens .When you try to sponsor a legitimate tourist to visit here its extremely difficult .
The view is still held that its easier to come and claim asylum for visa required nationals.

alastair

rgossip30 wrote: »

This increases the non European population.

Assuming they're not European asylum applicants - yes. Now what is the number of asylum-granted people within the state, and what number of those are claiming social welfare?

Because, as I've already stated, it's a very small number.

rgossip30 wrote: »

They can apply for council housing adding to the already high numbers 90K on the waiting list .

If they meet the criteria, yes. Again, a very small number of people compared to the remainder of those who can apply for social housing.

alastair

rgossip30 wrote: »

http://www.orac.ie/website/orac/orac...ac-stats_13-en

I suggest you look at Orac its 35% increase on Jan to July 2013 and its estimated to increase to at least 40% by the year end.

I suggest you look at the date on those figures. They're for last year (2013).

Actual figures for asylum applications for 2013 in total - 946
Figures for 2012 - 956

Kind of hard to extrapolate a 40% increase in those figures.

For 2014, total applications for the first 6 months are 597, so an increase so far, but nowhere near 40% - even if you assume that increase sustains for the full year.

alastair

rgossip30 wrote: »

When refugees are granted citizenship they are not regarded as refugees for statistics . The number then drops a convenient way to hide the true figure of non eu former asylum seekers living here .

How is it convenient to anyone? What's the problem with granting citizenship to those that want it, and qualify? Is your thesis that there's a vast number of nefarious refugees hiding out under the cloak of citizenship to soak up public housing and dole? Really?

AlekSmart

alastair wrote: »

I suggest you look at the date on those figures. They're for last year (2013).

For 2014, total applications for the first 6 months are 597, so an increase so far, but nowhere near 40% - even if you assume that increase sustains for the full year.

I took the OP's reference to be the current YTD situation.

I would suggest that the second half of 2014 may see an increase in that rate of acceleration as the Syrian/ISIS and West African Ebola situations worsen.

So on those two situations alone,I'd go with that 40%. (The Ebola situation alone certainly will present us with new challenges should it surface on the list of oppressive situations).

alastair

AlekSmart wrote: »

I took the OP's reference to be the current YTD situation.

I would suggest that the second half of 2014 may see an increase in that rate of acceleration as the Syrian/ISIS and West African Ebola situations worsen.

So on those two situations alone,I'd go with that 40%. (The Ebola situation alone certainly will present us with new challenges should it surface on the list of oppressive situations).

And for those of us without crystal balls, it's a bit harder to justify a claim of a 40% increase.

AlekSmart

alastair wrote: »

And for those of us without crystal balls, it's a bit harder to justify a claim of a 40% increase.

Not that difficult,with some relatively small assumptions....?

2013-Total 946

2014 YTD- Total 597

2014 Crystal Ball. - 1194 (Assuming static level of increase)

I'll stick with a Crystal Ball guesstimate of 40% for now

rgossip30

alastair wrote: »

And for those of us without crystal balls, it's a bit harder to justify a claim of a 40% increase.

Given the current level of increase I put it at over 40% by the year end.