Deleted User wrote: » Sure, I do... however, it doesn't change that they are US citizens, and it is the duty of the Federal/State government to provide for them. They have options, considering the country they live in... your statement that they have nowhere to go is flawed. No, you're advocating for collective poverty. Compassionate holes? Judge others much, do you? Get off your self-imposed moral pedestal, and embrace some reality in your arguments. Anyway, you have no idea what I do to help others... and I suspect you wouldn't care, as long as you can suggest how virtuous your belief system is. What? You think I'm simply going to accept your high moral superiority? Meh. You're arguing like a teenager. Smug? You're projecting again. Argue. Engage in a discussion. No need to throw around insults just because someone disagrees with you. Perhaps use this discussion as a way to organise your belief with some substance rather than vague notions of morality. I'm in my 40s and I paid for the vast majority of my education myself. I also developed myself through free education on the internet... but in any case, those who didn't have that opportunity won't do well in a first world nation, that is predominately focused on a service economy, with higher skills/education being important for most jobs. What will your migrants lacking the skills/education to be employed do in Ireland? Considering that Ireland is one of the most expensive countries in Europe to live in. Come on... show me that you can be practical, and consider the long term health of/success for these migrants. (Considering that those on the lower end of the economy are already struggling... importing more people to avail of those jobs, will simply make the situation for those people worse)
irishblessing wrote: » Calm down with your aggressive replies.
Hamachi wrote: » Other posters have already critiqued your argument. Few points from my perspective. 1. Climate change is a challenge for sure. It’s an issue that needs to be addressed scientifically and by decent governance globally. The solution does not involve turning Ireland and Europe into a refugee camp for the world’s poor. 2. On the topic of refugee camps. Clearly, the destruction of the Moria camp was arson instigated by the migrants themselves, with the goal of forcing Europe’s hand. These people have passed through multiple safe countries whilst traveling to the Greek islands from Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East. Your solution; immediately grant them permanent residence and a lifetime on benefits in Western Europe. No. The right solution here is to repatriate them to their homelands and assess their asylum claims from there, determining those with a legitimate claim vs. those seeking to subvert our legal systems around asylum. 3. The ‘human spiderman’ story, whilst a heart-warming anecdote, is irrelevant to the migration crisis. Given that this episode occurred in France, I could also point to the migrants who slaughtered hundreds of Europeans in the Bataclan attacks and by driving a truck into tourists in Nice. However, this does nothing to help resolve the macro issue around migration. 4. My solution to asylum seeking is as follows. Europe and the wider developed world should establish ‘safe zones’ in those parts of the world, from which refugees originate. It’s far more economically effective to provide food, shelter, and healthcare locally. Claims are filed and adjudicated from there. Only those asylum seekers, with a legitimate claim, should be brought to Europe in a safe, transparent manner. They should be distributed across the continent in an equitable way, determined by population size and economic viability. Furthermore, asylum should be for a finite period. It’s not Carte Blanche to remain in Europe indefinitely. When local conditions improve, asylum seekers should be encouraged to return home to make space for the next batch of desperate people, with a genuine reason for coming to Europe. Frankly, your claims that this is a cold-hearted approach do not stand up to any scrutiny. It’s relatively compassionate, but tempered by the reality that the European people also have a desire and a right to live in a place that remains recognizably ‘home’.
TomTomTim wrote: » Attributing emotion that isn't even there. A very cheap tactic.
irishblessing wrote: » Topping off a lovely read of the news this morning, scientists are saying that the fires in the Amazon have caused the "lungs of the earth" to nearly be at a 'point of no return.'
Yellow_Fern wrote: » Just to clarify the Amazon are not the lungs of the Earth, most oxygen is produced by marine algae. The Amazon are incredible reservoirs of biological diversity but dont make the air we breath https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/08/why-amazon-doesnt-produce-20-percent-worlds-oxygen/
irishblessing wrote: » Jaysus, it's impossible to have a calm and reasonable discussion in this thread it seems. That first part I put in bold is aimed at me yet I never once gave that solution. You're making that up, a complete embellishment to try and make a point where you don't have one. Can you not just stick to what was actually said instead of putting words in my mouth? You have some fair and interesting solutions in point 4. I completely agree actually. Next time consider posting your ideas without false assumptions.
Hamachi wrote: » I’m very calm and reasonable thanks. So please outline your plans for the 12.5K migrants in the Moria refugee camp. I’d like to see a prescriptive solution from you. Mine is: 1. Re-patriate. 2. Determine claims from their homelands. 3. Admit those with a legitimate claim for a finite period. This will likely be a pretty small cohort, which should not trigger outrage, if the adjudication process is known to be fair and comprehensive. Your solution please? I’m not going to engage in tit-for-tat with you, but I’d ask you to refrain from reporting other posters who have engaged with you rationally and have contributed significantly to this discussion.
irishblessing wrote: » Calm down with your aggressive replies. It's just a discussion and you're angrily posting in an insulting manner. If you continue to speak to me in that manner I simply won't engage with you going forward.
No, the duty on the federal government doesn't change but the point is people need help and are often massively disadvantaged by their own governments - the people in the US are no different. They don't have options actually, YOUR reply is flawed and flatly untrue. I have family and friends there and my grandparents have just sent over financial help for family members to go to a hotel. What do you know about it.
Other countries have such huge problems and ongoing warfare that have decimated their country and reduced it to a rubble or war zone.
You paid for your own education, but yet still not educated in some ways. How did you pay for it? With a job that was available to you in that economy? Where did you live while you built up your own ability to pay, at home with your parents? You lived in a country that provided you an internet infrastructure. Please.
Are you also demanding to know the skills that stay at home parents (mostly mothers) have to be employed in Ireland? People contribute to society in other ways, childminder, cleaning, fruit/veg farm workers, factory workers, seamstresses/clothes makers, entrepreneurs.... etc etc. People find ways and can learn new skills too once the support is there.
Also, I'm reporting your post directing at me. Don't speak to me in that manner again.
Deleted User wrote: » You started it... Sorry... I'm a believer in personal responsibility, and you are responsible for how you've worded your statements. I know that the US is one of the wealthiest nations in the world, and if it can't provide for its own citizens, then your suggestions that Ireland or Europe should accept migrants is ridiculous. You're not thinking about your arguments and how they affect each other. You want to increase the demands on the system, that doesn't provide for its own people already. As for what else I know.. it's irrelevant, because your inclusion of this doesn't add anything to the argument. And? What's the relevance? Still not educated in some ways? Huh? Yup. Still arguing like a teenager. Yes, I grew up in a nation that provided the services that allowed me to improve myself. And what? What's your point? That some people don't have those options? Wow.. how enlightening. You dodged my point. Go back.You're seeking to increase the numbers of people in society that are lacking in education and skills. Probably lacking in English too. By introducing more people without decent skills, you're increasing the demand on jobs which are limited, since this is a higher level economy, where such low end jobs are finite. There's no growth in those kind of jobs, and the income from such jobs will be very low... once again, in a very expensive country.So you expect the taxpayer to pick up the cost of supporting these migrants who can't support themselves. We already accept paying/supporting the weakest members of our own society.. but you want to increase the demands on that support, and it's highly questionable whether those new people would ever stop needing that support. Throughout Europe, there has been significant failures in educating migrants, especially those with extremely basic skills. So...how long should we realistically expect to be supporting migrants before they become self-sufficient? Report away. I didn't insult you directly. I attacked your post. In any case, you set the tone with your own comments. I'd be fine with dealing only with the content of your arguments but you've repeatedly sought to elevate yourself over others.
irishblessing wrote: » Hamachi, I already said I agree with you. You seem to want to have a fight about it but let me say it again in another way - your reasonable and informed solutions are good ones and ideas I personally hold as well. You actually lied and put words in my mouth in your previous post. You say you don't want to engage in tit for tat yet that is exactly what you're doing. I'll ask you to refrain from accusatory, made up words in my mouth and leave the moderating to the mod's. Based on the limited history here so far, it's anything but rational. Thanks.
Hamachi wrote: » I’m not looking for a fight. I’m engaging in a discussion. I didn’t lie. You proposed no solution to the issue in Moria. The only reasonable inference is that your thought process is to admit them to Europe. As another poster has pointed out, the vast majority will not have the skills or language ability to seek employment and be self-sufficient here. This means lengthy periods accessing welfare. That’s neither accusatory nor hyperbolic. It’s simply a statement of fact as to how this scenario is likely to play out. Anyway, I’m glad we’re in agreement on an equitable and reasonable solution to the asylum seeking. Always happy to engage with logical posters who are prepared to have a constructive discussion. Have a great day.
irishblessing wrote: » Wow, this thread is insane, and literally full of disingenuous posters claiming others have said things that just wasn't said. Not a worthwhile place to spend my time, but I suspect that is the angle here. Aggressive posting driving out new and other viewpoints so they just give up and leave you to it. Well done. You did in fact attack me and not the post. Reporting you again and I will not be engaging with you further.
mike_ie wrote: » Mod: @klaz, @irishblessing rein it in with the aggressive posting, both of you.
irishblessing wrote: » You quite literally said, actually "your solution....." Now you're admitting I didn't propose any such solution. Now you continue to put words in my mouth because you think that an absence of a certain opinion so far is the "only reasonable inference?" That is the very definition of hyperbolic. Glad we're in agreement to some solutions too, maybe we can leave it there. Hope you have a great day as well.
Hamachi wrote: » I’m admitting nothing of the sort. You proclaim your humanitarianism, brand posters who hold contrary opinions as ‘cold hearted’, cite the Moria refugee camp as an imperative in the debate around migration, but propose no solution. You then protest loudly when others reasonably infer (from your silence), that your proposal is to admit the migrants to Europe. I guess we’ll let the readers consuming this thread come to their own conclusions. I’m really signing off this time ��.
Deleted User wrote: » " Between 2020 and 2100, Africa’s population is expected to increase from 1.3 billion to 4.3 billion. Projections show these gains will come mostly in sub-Saharan Africa, which is expected to more than triple in population by 2100." "Half of babies born worldwide are expected to be born in Africa by 2100, up from three-in-ten today. Nigeria is expected to have 864 million births between 2020 and 2100, the most of any African country. The number of births in Nigeria is projected to exceed those in China by 2070." "India is projected to surpass China as the world’s most populous country by 2027. Meanwhile, Nigeria will surpass the U.S. as the third-largest country in the world in 2047, according to the projections." So, we're to see a major rise in population from areas which are economically poor, have little infrastructure, and little to no education... from areas where we already are experiencing high migration applications. So... I don't understand this desire to reduce our immigration restrictions. While Europe's population is set to decline (somewhat) our economies are driven by roles which require less manpower, especially, with automation set to make it's presence known, there's even less of a need for unskilled labor. All the while, costs of living and the costs to operate western nations are on the rise throughout the western world... combined with greater vulnerabilities in economic systems worldwide. So... where do all these unskilled migrants with little education find jobs to support themselves? Considering that such low end jobs are already in demand from the local population, and many of such jobs will disappear due to automation, causing greater demand on those jobs remaining.
[Deleted User] wrote: » OK. Although... you've just described what many people I know, consider being Irish to be. Talking and Arguing for the joy of it. Having a bit of craic while chasing weird and fun conversations. Tweaking peoples noses through great arguments. With a little bit of recognition to go along with it down at the pub. Not much though, since we're a modest people. :pac: Not to worry. I know where you stand now. Got it. haha.
Hamachi wrote: » Basically, you’re conceding that you have no argument, you can’t back up any of your assertions with facts, and that you’re intellectually hollow. However, you do see fit to pop up occasionally, spew meaningless rhetoric, and cast aspersions on posters who disagree with you and have repeatedly backed up their arguments with facts and logic. Good man. I can see how your time must be very, very ‘precious’..
suicide_circus wrote: » A referendum is a question on changing something in the constitution- what is being proposed? I'd settle for a coherent policy around asylum, particularly where applicants have bypassed multiple safe countries before reaching Ireland.
TheCitizen wrote: » You ignored the rest of what I said which was in reply to what you asked and now you are moaning that I was arguing for the sake of it. Typical of what passed for debate on here a lot of the time and illustrates my other point re the pointless echo chamber this place has become perfectly.
irishblessing wrote: » This misquoting and putting words in others mouth is ridiculous. I never, not even once said or branded anyone "cold hearted" as you claim I did and even put into quotes. Here's what I actually said, verbatim: "Before you take a cold position of "no dice" which quoted someone else who said 'no dice.' I then "protested loudly." Aka posting my opinion like anyone else. You are indeed misquoting in a disingenuous, hyperbolic manner. If your position is so strong then why the need to try to turn other's posts into something they're not? I don't have to stick to some posting script posting in the manner you would like with every opinion I hold at the one time or else I'm slated. Bizarre.
TheCitizen wrote: » Another one, leaving out what doesn’t suit. It’s becoming an echo chamber on here resembling the old Stormfront website or the likes of it.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w9.vanillicon.com/v2/9c6ef39403f5dc93bd4b9e77a11c1821.svg)
