Is Ireland to replace its Emigrants with Immigrants?

end of the road

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

Libya needs to start getting billed for their lax border controls.
If there's no deterrent it will just be rising annual numbers.

there will never be a deterrent. Libya will not pay anything. this is down to america and britain for overthrowing the dictator that was there.

Nodin

conorhal wrote: »

Because nationalism is the anthisis of the corporatist superstate that the EU disires to create.
Seriously Nodin, when you find youself on the same side of an immigration debate as Peter Sutherland and Donkey-lafs Bruton do you not get worried that you might just be wrong about a stance that mirrors that of libertarian capitalism?

.......I think you and me have rather different views of reality.

end of the road

topper75 wrote: »

The EU sees Irish nationalism as something to be diluted and defeated.

well, that isn't happening. so there is nothing to worry about

SpaceTime

Grayson wrote: »

Every year my family puts candles in every window of the house on christmas eve. It's supposed to be a welcome for any travellers/homeless people who are wandering with no place to stay. So that unlike Mary and Joseph they will not be turned away everywhere and will have somewhere to stay.

That's what this is. These people need help. What kind of people would we be if we said no.

Let's say a bunch of homeless people turned up at their house... Would they actually be so accommodating?

A lot of people like to *seem* generous.

MathDebater

Nodin wrote: »

Why, in the name of jaysus?

Hes not far wrong.

The EU should "do its best to undermine" the "homogeneity" of its member states, the UN's special representative for migration has said.

Peter Sutherland told peers the future prosperity of many EU states depended on them becoming multicultural.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-18519395

Gatling

MathDebater wrote: »

Hes not far wrong.



http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-18519395

The idea has been apparently prompted since the late 40's early 50's .
Wipe out individual cultures and replace it global multiculturalism.

topper75

I don't subscribe to the idea that Irish are actively being made to leave or indeed that any agency is seeking to deliberately flood Ireland with non-Irish. No doors are being knocked on nor guns used here. Young folks are curious are curious about Canada, Aus etc. in their own right, and the jobs market has been really flat here. That is all. And the third world people have always been keen to get into the relatively well-off countries. Nothing strange about either phenomenon in isolation.

However, both may soon be happening on larger scales. Note, that such a happenstance plays directly into the hands of an EU that will stop at nothing in its drive towards assimilation of hetergenous identities within its "territories". Be in no doubt that they are thrilled at anything that waters down borders and weakens the resolve of difficult little countries who might jam in their Brussels/Frankfurt levers.

xhoundx

Grayson wrote: »

I'm losing track here. Are they stealing our jobs or our benefits.

Ok. You said they were coming to work, so tell us what jobs do we have here for them?

Let me know if that's too difficult a question for you to answer and I'll try simplify it even more

Bongalongherb

In regards to taking in say 500 refugees a year or maybe more, as is always the case and always a much higher figure than we're told. I wonder will these refugees be moved to the top of the social housing list ? over-taking the Irish citizens of which have already been waiting 10/15 years.

Will it be a priority to house these refugees over our own citizens as I said above ?.

RandomName2

Grayson wrote: »

That's what this is. These people need help. What kind of people would we be if we said no.

Realistic? Okay, 500 people is no issue - literally none. 500 people makes no difference. But the signs are obvious

Sources said she will seek resettlement for at least 520 migrants - more than double the figure announced earlier this year.

the salient bits are "at least" and "double the figures announced earlier this year".

520 is the minimum, not the maximum - and provided that the economic migration continues (and why wouldn't it?) then it will be just the beginning. Maybe a 1000 a year, if we are lucky.

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

Libya needs to start getting billed for their lax border controls.
If there's no deterrent it will just be rising annual numbers.

Which part of Libya? The ports controlled by ISIS, the central government, or the alternative government? Although I'd imagine that ISIS are making a profit off of the people trafficing, so at the very least we should get a kickback for the ferrying service.

Bob24

K-9 wrote: »

What's the acceptable number of immigrants and asylum seekers then?

If these are immigrant who are going to stay, the answer is no more than we can welcome properly and integrate/assimilate so that their children and grand children feel no different from any other Irish citizen.

Giving a hard number is impossible though as 1) it will take decades to see if it was right and 2) it very much depends on our integration policies and migrants willingness to assimilate to local culture (which will vary hugely depending on their own background). But since we are late into the game we can look at other European countries and see how various policies and immigration flows have worked out for them or not.

One thing that is for sure dangerous is having a large number of people from a similar cultural background come at the same time, settling them in the same areas (voluntarily or not), and watching them get married and have kids with each other while not engaging with local culture (I am not saying I don't understand and sympathise with why people would be doing that - and the responsibility would be shared between locals and immigrants, but in the long term it is creating ghettos and generating cultural/religious conflicts).

We (Europe) should open our borders - they are economic emigrants - give them a temporary visa to come and work - if they find sustainable long term work they will stay and contribute to our society - if they can't find work they can return home with whatever they might have earned and come back again in a few years on another temporary visa.

They won't be coming in rickety boats if they can take a ferry. The state won't have to house and feed them if they can work.

They are coming anyways, why try to stop them.
All we are doing at the minute is putting money in the pockets of traffickers.

Gatling

Bongalongherb wrote: »

In regards to taking in say 500 refugees a year or maybe more, as is always the case and always a much higher figure than we're told. I wonder will these refugees be moved to the top of the social housing list ? over-taking the Irish citizens of which have already been waiting 10/15 years.

Will it be a priority to house these refugees over our own citizens as I said above ?.

It's possible yes .
I or you couldn't walk into a local authority and scream discrimination and racism add the usual liberals calling for them to be housed immediately.
groups of Syrians who came here and were fast tracked and granted asylum their local authority and voluntary housing are queing up to house them before they even landed
If 500+ are given immediate priory for housing it will lead to longer waits currently facing family's already waiting years

Bongalongherb

The ole trusty freedom of information request should give statistics on whether this is, or will be the case. Maybe the Journal should look into this question ? or would they be called Racist for doing so, I wonder. Or maybe I'll just do it myself.

Just like this video I took earlier in the sunshine.

We Need To Feed/House And Look After Our Own First.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxocnByQSrs

conorhal

Bob24 wrote: »

If these are immigrant who are going to stay, the answer is no more than we can welcome properly and integrate/assimilate so that their children and grand children feel no different from any other Irish citizen.

Giving a hard number is impossible though as 1) it will take decades to see if it was right and 2) it very much depends on our integration policies and migrants willingness to assimilate to local culture (which will vary hugely depending on their own background). But since we are late into the game we can look at other European countries and see how various policies and immigration flows have worked out for them or not.

One thing that is for sure dangerous is having a large number of people from a similar cultural background come at the same time, settling them in the same areas (voluntarily or not), and watching them get married and have kids with each other while not engaging with local culture (I am not saying I don't understand and sympathise with why people would be doing that - and the responsibility would be shared between locals and immigrants, but in the long term it is creating ghettos and generating cultural/religious conflicts).

Sadly, rather then learn from the mistakes of other nations immigration policy we seem determined to repeat them.

As to the question of how many migrants we can hope to facilitate, I'd say not more then a one or two thousand a year.

You make a very valid point about the prospects of integration. Since there's little or no chance that Africa or the Middle East is likely to stabilize any time in the next century and thus the likelihood of refugees returning home is effectively nil, I've long suggested that it is logical in the long run to send refugees to where they are most likely to prosper.
We know multiculturalism doesn't work, so send Sunni refugees to Saudi, Shia ones to Iran, send the Christians to Europe etc. They will all benefit because they will more effectively adapt to their host nations and won't end up in marginalized ghettos seathing in resentment.

Nodin

conorhal wrote: »

Sadly, rather then learn from the mistakes of other nations immigration policy we seem determined to repeat them.

As to the question of how many migrants we can hope to facilitate, I'd say not more then a one or two thousand a year.

You make a very valid point about the prospects of integration. Since there's little or no chance that Africa or the Middle East is likely to stabilize any time in the next century and thus the likelihood of refugees returning home is effectively nil, I've long suggested that it is logical in the long run to send refugees to where they are most likely to prosper.
We know multiculturalism doesn't work, so send Sunni refugees to Saudi, Shia ones to Iran, send the Christians to Europe etc. They will all benefit because they will more effectively adapt to their host nations and won't end up in marginalized ghettos seathing in resentment.

So we dismantle Britain, France, the US and send everyone back 'where they belong' because mixing of religions and races is a disaster....hmmmmmm.

AlekSmart

Nodin wrote: »

So we dismantle Britain, France, the US and send everyone back 'where they belong' because mixing of religions and races is a disaster....hmmmmmm.

Not seeing any suggestion of such measures from conorhal's post ?

If there is anything to decry in his post,it is the 1 or 2,000 migrant number he suggests is acceptable for Ireland.

I would suggest that figure to be 1 or 2 HUNDRED at most,and those only after a guaranteed funding programme is drawn up with whatever EU nations want rid of their overspill.

Kalman

Mixing of different creeds does not work!

Nodin

AlekSmart wrote: »

Not seeing any suggestion of such measures from conorhal's post ?
.................

His general theory seems to be that multiculturalism is having different cultures in one country, rather than multicultural policy, therefore......

Nodin

Kalman wrote: »

Mixing of different creeds does not work!

Fairly sure theres a fair few creeds in the US.

Bob24

Nodin wrote: »

So we dismantle Britain, France, the US and send everyone back 'where they belong' because mixing of religions and races is a disaster....hmmmmmm.

Who talked about races?

As far as religions are concerned, experience in other countries actually shows that religious people tend not to mix ... They rather remain within their own group when it comes to founding a family. Migrants from afar and with different culture who mix the most are probably non religious Asians (Chinese parents would often be happy and even feel proud if their son or daughter gets married to a local, whereas religious parents would not be thrilled and there would especially be pressure on women not to mix with men from different religious groups).

Gatling

The government has volunteered to take another 300 Syrians in this year

Grayson

SpaceTime wrote: »

Let's say a bunch of homeless people turned up at their house... Would they actually be so accommodating?

A lot of people like to *seem* generous.

I know that my family have fed homeless people who called to the house. It's not like we were even close to well off. Most of the time when I was a kid my parents were struggling. There were times when I'd wander into the kitchen and there were strangers eating there.

They never stayed the night but they never called at night. I have no idea if they were invited to stay or not. However I very much doubt they would be turned away if they called.

You might be snide and cynical but there are people who are genuinely good. And they are far more common than you think. The majority of people on this planet are good, nice decent human beings who will help an individual in distress.

darkpagandeath

The amount of Young single men you see on the news networks interviewed going on about a better life in Europe without mentioning work is pretty shocking.

Nodin

Bob24 wrote: »

Who talked about races?

As far as religions are concerned, experience in other countries actually shows that religious people tend not to mix ... They rather remain within their own group when it comes to founding a family. Migrants from afar and with different culture who mix the most are probably non religious Asians (Chinese parents would often be happy and even feel proud if their son or daughter gets married to a local, whereas religious parents would not be thrilled and there would especially be pressure on women not to mix with men from different religious groups).

And when you look at France, you see that the majority of muslims there are no longer practicing.

MathDebater

Nodin wrote: »

And when you look at France, you see that the majority of muslims there are no longer practicing.

Yes, what a success Muslim integration into French society has been. So much so, that 1,200 of them have decided to go off and join the ISIS. Thirty of 'our boys' are over there with them. Be some craic when they return 'home'.

http://s.telegraph.co.uk/graphics/MobileSwitcher/v2/images/1269-14337752701765648255.png

Bob24

Nodin wrote: »

And when you look at France, you see that the majority of muslims there are no longer practicing.

I was not talking about who is practising of not, but the fact that religious people (in general) don't tend to mix with other culture who are not religious or of different religion. Your example perfectly illustrates this and even after 3 generations it is not THAT common in France to see descents of Muslim migrants getting married with French Catholics or Atheists (of course not saying it doesn't exist at all). So while I am all in favour of immigrants mixing with "locals" it is not really happening, and at the end of the day you just have two groups living in the same country be fairly separately.
As I was saying it is definitely more common for non religious Asians to mix and you can actually see it in the streets of Dublin as well.

Now if you are interested in Islam and its practise in France, yeah over 40% of Muslims are practising regularily and over 70% are fasting during Ramadan (and growing within the younger population).

Reading the French media there are constant talks about the fact that there are not enough mosques (currently 2000) and leaders of the Muslim community are saying the number needs to be at least doubled to catter for the the demand they currently have.

This tells me that if Ireland was to receive mass immigration from majority Muslim countries as France did (we are not talking 500 per year as per the original post), in 30-40 years time there would be a mosque in most towns and attendance would be higher than church (assuming Catholics keep becoming less religious which is what has happened in France). Maybe it is perfectly fine, but people would need to be told clearly what they are signing-up for.

denhaagenite

Bob24 wrote: »

I was not talking about who is practising of not however, but the fact that religious people (in general) don't tend to mix with other culture who are not religious or of different religion. Your example perfectly illustrates this and even after 3 generations it is not THAT common in France to see descents of Muslim migrants getting married with French Catholics or Atheists (of course not saying it doesn't exist at all).

I'm studying in the Netherlands and roughly about 10% of the students in my course are Muslim. One of them practices fully and wears a headscarf (but is very much an advocate for women's right to choose). Another is non practising. Another says he tries not to drink on Fridays out of respect for his mother . I could go on but to be honest I'm not bothered about proving the fact that in societies where there are generations of Islam, younger generations are making a choice. There is no integration for them, this is their home.

Islam is evolving whether leaders want it to or not. The extremists are thankfully very much in the minority. The only reason we hear about them is that they are, by nature, much louder than normal everyday people trying to get on with their lives.

Bob24

denhaagenite wrote: »

I'm studying in the Netherlands and roughly about 10% of the students in my course are Muslim. One of them practices fully and wears a headscarf (but is very much an advocate for women's right to choose). Another is non practising. Another says he tries not to drink on Fridays out of respect for his mother . I could go on but to be honest I'm not bothered about proving the fact that in societies where there are generations of Islam, younger generations are making a choice. There is no integration for them, this is their home.

Islam is evolving whether leaders want it to or not. The extremists are thankfully very much in the minority. The only reason we hear about them is that they are, by nature, much louder than normal everyday people trying to get on with their lives.

I would add a caveat saying people who are better educated are not representative fo the whole population, but yes sure things are evolving.

And out of curiosity are the majority of your Muslim classmates (especially ladies) dating non-muslims?

conorhal

Nodin wrote: »

So we dismantle Britain, France, the US and send everyone back 'where they belong' because mixing of religions and races is a disaster....hmmmmmm.

Yeah, that's exactly what I said Nodin. In your pernicious little strawman mind it is!