RobbieTheRobber wrote: » Tallaght was a lovely little country village before all the social housing. Jobstown would have been positively picturesque before they built the houses I can only imagine. Wait what was the point of this again.
WrenBoy wrote: » I think to highlight how pumping up population numbers through lax immigration standards is doing more harm than good in terms of our housing crisis.
Strumms wrote: » Social housing was added in Tallaght, because Irish taxpayers required it... they also paid for it.
bubblypop wrote: » Yep, the answer to racism is to keep all different races and cultures away from each other. Yep. That's it! Genius.
RobbieTheRobber wrote: » How do people on social housing lists pay for it exactly Strumms?
Swindled wrote: » Unforteunely Rochdale's, Brixton's and Bradford's are much more like the destination planned for most of Ireland's cities. They will never be new Londons/New Yorks. The ethnic Irish are a tiny population by international standards. The terms Irish and Ireland are now meaningless cheap brand names. As Pat Kenny recently let slip "Balbriggan is the template for Ireland", and they have poured millions of funding into the Balbriggan template model.
kildare lad wrote: » Is that the same balbriggan where a couple of hundred locals protested at the gardai station to do something about the amount of crime and anti social behavior going on in the town ??
RobbieTheRobber wrote: » Klaz anti means opposed to. By holding a position that you are against most immigration you are by default anti immigration. I did not say the majority of posters were racist. I said anti immigrant and I stand by that view.
If a person is opposed to immigration they are by the very definition of the word anti-immigrant.
RobbieTheRobber wrote: » Is it silly, surely you would have to agree that racist beliefs in Ireland have actually reduced in Ireland in the period during which we have had the highest foreign immigration in our history. So racism can be reduced, it can be educated against and legislated against.
Who is pro multicultural and what does it mean? I would like many people in this thread be in support of a stricter immigration policy but the difference is I do not lay the blame for all Irelands social ill at the feet of immigrants.
But I also am optimistic for Irelands future. I have multiracial Irish children and do not feel they are to blame for any of Irelands problems nor is their mother a non Irish resident to blame. I don't believe my children are less Irish like many posters in this thread have stated they are. I have formed relationships both personal and professional with non national residents and I personally believe these relationships are positive. Have all or the vast majority of your experiences with foreign born residents being negative?
Actually poor white Britons are struggling more in educational attainment anyway.https://www.bbc.com/news/education-55804123
Ireland is consistently ranked very high in all those surveys of best countries to live. So what is the evidence for decades of bad management you speak of?
Strumms wrote: » Same Balbriggan my cousin is absolutely desperate to escape from, even to the point of taking a hit, financially... she lives in a gorgeous estate but the amount of crime is dispiriting... it’s dangerous and intimidating.
kildare lad wrote: » Maybe Pat Kenny would be interested in a swap...lol
Swindled wrote: » that's what happens everywhere in every country instead of actual integration when the mass migration numbers are too high, actual integration becomes impossible. You just have independent ethnic groups within one "country".
Cordell wrote: » I oppose large scale immigration while being an immigrant myself. How about that? And in general, is it anything wrong with being anti-immigration?
jmreire wrote: » Nope, they will do it themselves...they will form their own "enclaves" whereever and when ever possible. And historically, this is what has happened in other Country's too.
Wibbs wrote: » Quite simply because of human nature. Human nature doesn't respond too well to any ideals or social engineering that doesn't fit it. Never has. Never will. It's one of the lies of multiculturalism that it can. Indeed such demographic shifts in an area illustrate how fanciful multiculturalism is. People prefer to be around those most like them. This is fundamental human nature. And fair enough. Those from a similar background, culture, "race" and usually creed. Often even economic differences are lower down on the list. These subcultures organically form into enclaves once a certain population size is achieved. The more outwardly different the incoming people are the more likely and more rapidly these areas will form. It is found everywhere you care to look in "multicultural" societies. Go to any such society and ask a local where the [insert minority here] live and they'll be able to tell you. You may find a Little Italy, a Spanish quarter, a Chinatown, the Jewish area, the Russian, the African/Black, the Irish and so on. You quite simply can't legislate against that, unless you have a housing commission that decides from on high who lives where.
bubblypop wrote: » I think being an immigrant against immigration is hypocritical, why shouldn't others benefit the same way you did? Also, it doesn't make one right, it's like council housing tenants voting against further council housing.
RobbieTheRobber wrote: » Klaz anti means opposed to. By holding a position that you are against most immigration you are by default anti immigration. I did not say the majority of posters were racist. I said anti immigrant and I stand by that view. If a person is opposed to immigration they are by the very definition of the word anti-immigrant.
RobbieTheRobber wrote: » Have you proved that monoculturalism is better? I must have missed that part Is North Korea a good example of the benefits of mono culture. Do you consider Ireland currently to be a mono culture and if not how do aspire to make Ireland a monoculture?
bubblypop wrote: » I think being an immigrant against immigration is hypocritical, why shouldn't others benefit the same way you did?
Tony EH wrote: » Well for a start it stinks of "I'm alright Jack" and pulling the ladder up, which is never going to win you too much agreement. You've been able to reap the reward of something that you now want to deny others.
Cordell wrote: » Let me explain myself then. You conveniently missed the large scale attribute of my anti-immigration stance. If everyone is to benefit as myself did there will be no large scale immigration, only a small sustainable level. Then, I came here because I liked what I found here, I don't want to see the changes other European countries did, after all I have chosen Ireland, not Poland or Dubai. I had a wtf where did I land moment when in an estate in Galway the only English speaking people were obviously of non European origin. In the end I don't have any power to effect any change, but I'm very open to speak my mind, at least here
Swindled wrote: » Actually it doesn't, it's simply the reality of first come, first served, where resources are finite, not infinite. Sensible immigrants to Ireland know mass immigration into Ireland won't work, and nothing wrong with that point of view.
Strumms wrote: » Incorrect. People are just anti uncontrollable immigration... They want the ability to limit, facilitate as and when we can and is appropriate for this country and it’s citizens. Ireland is our home.... speaking of home...My front door gets opened and a certain number of people can visit, I decide who comes and when... I will also determine what hospitality and generosity they receive... for how long too.. We need to be of the same ability as regards immigration...
Swindled wrote: » This is my point, so why are we doing that in Ireland, instead of a gradual natural integration ?
bubblypop wrote: » You liked what you saw and chose to live here? But you wouldn't allow others to have that same option?
Cordell wrote: » Others like me, sure. But what we're getting is mostly nothing like me
Wibbs wrote: » Actually I wouldn't agree it's been reduced. Not by any more than it was on the way to being reduced before the main influx in the Celtic Tiger. And if "racism can be reduced, it can be educated against and legislated against" why is it still such a big problem in the UK, France, Italy, Germany, Spain, The US and so forth? Nations that have had government campaigns, education and legislation for decades.
Wibbs wrote: » Neither do I. I lay what blame there is on the multicultural politic itself. It has proven to be at best a mixed bag, at worst a source of often serious social issues in urban areas, not least for the immigrant populations themselves.
Wibbs wrote: » Good for you, but nope. 'Fraid not. About the same as native Irish people. Good friends of mine are married to non nationals(from first world countries), two here, two overseas and many of my exes weren't Irish. Of those who have kids they consider them as from both cultures and ethnicities, they all speak their respective native languages and have contacts with their non Irish cultures.
Wibbs wrote: » None would consider themselves Irish in block capitals and as a stance. Rightfully so. If I married a French woman, moved to France gained citizenship and had kids I'd consider them Irish French. And I most certainly wouldn't consider myself French.
Wibbs wrote: » Big shock. Hold the presses! Poor working class kids less likely to go to university. Must be a sudden change that. In other news; water is wet. Again, who is more likely to be undereducated, in receipt of social welfare, in gaol, in poverty; a White [insert multicultural nationality here] or a Black [insert multicultural nationality here]? Please point to one multicultural nation where this pattern doesn't play out. Just one will do. I'll save you the looking, you can't. If all this was so easy to reduce, educate and legislate for, why are there near zero examples where it works?
Wibbs wrote: » And again, all nations have social problems and people who are left behind. Adding in multiculturalism increases that and increases other different social problems on top. A White say doctor who is only two generations away from poverty has moved up, he fits in, a Black doctor could come from a solidly middle class background, but he's still Black. That makes a difference. Sadly, but true too.
Wibbs wrote: » Ireland has had and continues to have huge holes in management and not just around this subject. To believe otherwise is naive at best, deliberately fanciful at worst. Direct provision. Bad management. Tracing of illegals. Bad management. Birthright passports. Bad management. The rapid development of ethnic enclaves. Bad management. The current fast track to social welfare and housing, with other government depts stating it won't be workable. Bad management. The amnesty for existing tax evading illegals and their Irish enablers. Bad management.
Wibbs wrote: » Ireland's growth in those rankings is down to a massive influx of non native big businesses, mostly American, that pulled us out of the doldrums of the earlier stages of our independent history. The EU helped a lot too. All of which were in play by the mid 90's, before the peak of the influx of non EU and EU migrants.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/20f4606d019ca0b240328ff30d91e82b.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w9.vanillicon.com/v2/9c6ef39403f5dc93bd4b9e77a11c1821.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6b0748b4741870baaad828fe92174b3c.svg)
