Deleted User wrote: » Ya, agreed with all that. I've been studying demographics for years, it's a fascinating topic and realistically one that is very hard to be perfectly accurate on. Some of the official Census Bureau of America's predictions just over a decade or so ago had America reaching 450 million by 2050/2060, there is a possibility now that they top out at 340/350 million. The Middle East is another fascinating region and one that doesn't line up with most people's preconceptions. Stories of low sperm counts are appearing now as well as a possible concern throughout the world
bubblypop wrote: » I don't remember exactly but there was some poster that linked Dublin city council lists earlier, Bosnians I believe were high on the waiting list, I guess in receipt of HAP. Do you think just non white migrants should be illegible, or white immigrants also? Because this sentence seems to give the impression that it is non whites you are referring to?
bubblypop wrote: » And that is the reason there is no robust defence. Because people don't feel the need to, it is accepted and most people don't have any issue with multiculturalism. So, no need therefore to defend it. The only people who feel so strongly are anti, so they need to point out what they see as negative points. If you are happy with something, it doesn't particularly raise any emotion either way, it just is.
TomTomTim wrote: » I hate posts like this more than anything. While I wouldn't rush to say that there's many people against immigration, you're quick to do the opposite. You've no way of knowing the support levels for immigration, yet you make these claims boldly, without evidence. It's not one bit rational, because you simply don't have any way to measure it accurately. On top of that, Ireland is in the early stages of the process, revolt, if there is any, won't happen for another ten years or so.
TomTomTim wrote: » You've no way of knowing the support levels for immigration, yet you make these claims boldly, without evidence. It's not one bit rational, because you simply don't have any way to measure it accurately.
kildare lad wrote: » It doesn't matter what colour they are, anyone coming here that can't support themselves and their families without relying on the state for handouts should be turned away. I don't think it's that controversial . We can't afford it , we've no housing , we're massively in debt so why keep adding to the problem, just so NGOs and bleeding hearts can keep spending other people's money. Why not do a system like Australia , you're given a year working visa to get yourself set up . If you're a decent worker you'll get sponsored by your employer to stay on for another bit. You can also get an extension on your visa if you you do 3 months of farm work or fruit picking. Overstay your visa , you get throw out within a month . No solicitors milking the taxpayer for years fighting deportation .It's a lot better system than we have here. Some people arrive in Ireland expecting everything to be handed to them , Australia doesn't attract that type of migrant because you don't get fxck all of the state.
bubblypop wrote: » I said multiculturalism. I didn't say immigration.
bubblypop wrote: » But we do have that system. Non EU immigrants need visas to live and work here.
Wibbs wrote: » In theory, though we had an influx of non EU migrants in the late 90's into the noughties, many from countries who are refused entry today at a rate near 100%. We also have nearly 20,000 illegal immingrants, sorry "undocumented" according to the government who want to make them legal.
bubblypop wrote: » But we do have that system. Non EU immigrants need visas to live and work here. You can also get visas for family reasons in Australia, it's not just workers that can move there. Is it just asylum seekers that you don't believe should be here?
bubblypop wrote: » Yep, there are illegal immigrants also, much like most other countries.
jmreire wrote: » On the same subject, google a recent article from the BBC, "How modern life is making us infertile" The human race is in trouble down the road. Nature's way if hitting back???
Deleted User wrote: » And they should be turfed out rather than made legal be rewarded for criminality
Wibbs wrote: » They've got huge overlap. Well, you can't really have the former without the latter.
kildare lad wrote: » . They're should be no migrants getting social housing or hap, .
Cordell wrote: » But you absolutely can have immigration without multiculturalism.
crooked cockney villain wrote: » The biggest housing scandal of the last 12 months, media wise, was the vulture fund buying up the housing estate in Maynooth. Personally I can't understand why the biggest housing scandal wasn't - the Kurdish lad in the country 10 minutes being given a 700K one bed flat in Terenure - the Nkencho family being moved from a, IMO, circa 280- 350K home in Clonee to a newer upwards of 400K home up the road (or where they- in a video where the family abused Gardai they appeared to live in Hollystown, but in a radio interview where a heckler told them to leave Clonee the sister claimed they still lived there- are they living between TWO homes?) Vulture funds are one thing, free gaffs for ingrates is another.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Ahh well, I think it matters whether you're looking at multiculturalism from a modern or traditional sense. The older view of multiculturalism was less... forced, in that with smaller numbers involved, coexistence happened naturally. Whereas with the more modern approach of multiculturalism there's almost an artificial feel to it all, like it's being forced on the population.
kildare lad wrote: » . My bosses accountant made a mistake and he ended up owing the revenue 7 grand , well he was getting letters non stop about paying the money or he'd end up in court etc.
Burkie1203 wrote: » Time to start deporting those who live here as a result of an application but behave like thishttps://twitter.com/dubslife1/status/1401881725727301638?s=19
bubblypop wrote: » And that is the reason there is no robust defence. Because people don't feel the need to, it is accepted and most people don't have any issue with multiculturalism. So, no need therefore to defend it. The only people who feel so strongly are anti, so they need to point out what they see as negative points. If you are happy with something, it doesn't particularly raise any emotion either way, it just is. Even though this particular thread appears to be far more of an anti asylum seeker thread than anything else.
MarkEadie wrote: » Correct. A lot of the posts from the anti immigration side are just not worthy of response I feel, which is a shame. Its a little bit like reviewing a product. The majority of people who review are usually the ones who complain. You can't really get a reasonable discussion going with people who want to set up their own parties against immigration as I've seen in a couple of posts. Then there were the emails to the TDs
bubblypop wrote: » 200,000 over 6 years Approx 33K more per year entered the country, then left the country? It doesn't seem like a lot.
ThunbergsAreGo wrote: » Its likely these are our own....
ThunbergsAreGo wrote: » A Leitrim every year, a Kildare every six....