Have we lost our Patriotism?

You're not a newreg. No. I don't stalk people's profiles. For someone with a small postcount, you seem very au fait with all the usual trope argumebts. You also did a quick turnaround to join the open/no borders gang, which leads me to believe your first post wasn't quite sincerely heartfelt.

A country which doesn't value its borders or its citizenship isn't a country which deserves any respect or patriotism.

Ask the Ukrainians...

As I posted above: Ireland 2023.

That's all folks.

No need to stalk accounts, but simple enough to check facts before you accuse.

Not sure what you what you mean by "tropes", seems you totally missed my point.

A poster was lamenting that Irishness is being given to people overnight (which is false), and that now irishness "means nothing only a piece of paper" (which is also false).

I was not saying we should accept anybody here because the Irish are abroad. I was explaining that making foreign born people citizens if they meet prescribed thresholds is a facet of nationhood that occurs around the world, and used Irish people in USA and Oz as a example of this.

Those that have citizenship in those counties are still Irish, but they have rights in those countries - how does that harm them or their host countries?

If people come here and contribute, and meet the threshold for citizenship, then they should also get those rights. It doesn't make you or me less Irish.

I agree there's a reason the Dublin riots were carried out by poor people. As you point out, they're the ones in competition with lots of the immigrants for both housing and jobs (and social status, which i dont think the middle classes understand).

I'm fine with immigration. But I'm not priced out of the market by them, so its not the same. A poor person who feels shafted out of jobs and a decent life by their wages not keeping up with house prices, might see me as lacking patriotism because I don't oppose immigration.

I was anti-brexit while living in England during the 2016 referendum and I argued that people like us discount the impact of immigration on wages for low skilled jobs (hate that phrase). But my friends wouldn't have it. They said there were studies that showed immigration didn't drive down wages. Unless the rules of supply and demand have been suspended, that had to be BS. Low wages dont get you a house these days and they used to get you a house in the past. My OH's grandad was the sole earner, had a low wage, low status job and they had a council house, 10 children and they eventually bought the house so they had some wealth. None of that could happen today.

When the riot happened, I thought to myself "why are they so angry?". And the answer is obvious. They feel they gave been shafted out of a decent life in this Ireland which I'm so proud of because I'm doing fine.

When some within the Northern Ireland civil rights movement turned violent, I understood it was because there was a genuine, chronic injustice in the system. When the Gazans commit atrocities I understand the same. Doesn't excuse violence, it just explains it. So how do I explain that only poor people from sh1tty neighbourhoods were involved in the Dublin riots?

One explanation is they feel shafted out of what they feel was coming to them. They might have come from poor stock but their parents and grandparents could work and earn enough wages to have a family without being called leeches by the middle classes for simply having children.

I think it's our patriotic duty to at least find out what caused those fellow Irish citizens to turn violent. Even if the answers offend my middle class sensibilities.

Thanks

I agree but I wonder if they have voiced their concerns through the politicians they elect and the middle classes haven't listened. For example, People Before Profit candidates have more success in poor areas. They aren't taken particularly seriously. Previously they voted SF and they weren't taken particularly seriously either (until the last election).

Maybe they have voiced their concerns in a way, and we just haven't listened. They sure as shyte don't have a Jim Larkin or James Conolly to vioce their concerns. But if they did have voices like that, they wouldn't tell the middle class and wealthy things they want to hear so I wonder of we'd listen even of they did.

Take education for example. In the past a leaving cert was good and a degree was a nice extra that suggested a life of success. Now a leaving cert is nothing and a degree is little better. Still takes a lot of family encouragement and support and time to get a get, but doesn't mean you'll ever be able to buy a house or have a family without being considered a leech by the middle class.

Since there has been such education inflation, I think we should see massively disproportionate funding for schools in poor areas to get those children up to (and maybe even beyond) educational success of the wealthy areas.

Wages are a serious concern too. What's the point of being a wealthy country if peoppe who do a weeks work still need government assistance to have a house and raise a family and be consider a leech? Where's the pride in that? I have pride in my work like because it allows my family to live well and do nice things. Would I be so proud if I worked as hard, couldn't live well and was called a leech because I still needed government assistance? I don't think so.

If we had a less unequal society, we wouldn't have riots whipped up over immigration or anything else.

Romantic Ireland is dead and gone, it’s with O’Leary in the grave….

The irony of that poem, being written 3 years before one of the most romantic chapter in Irish history. Written by a man who talked a good game and then shirked responsibility to actually take part in the rebellion when he had the chance and sneered at the dreamers who did take part.

At least he had the self-awareness to regret it afterwards.

Good poem though.

I was asking specifically about the low skilled and those on low wages. I honestly can't see how practically endless supply of low skilled workers doesn't have an impact on demand and result in slower rising wages (falling relative to others).

Look at the other ways it impacts pw wage jobs. Fewer low wage workers with unions to represent them. If they even threatened to strike fr better wages, they could be replaced tomorrow morning. Instead of unions and Bettws working conditions, more low wage jobs are outsourced to contractors who don't give sickbay and holidays. They're essentially self employed. See Hermes truck drivers who rebranded as Evri when their employment practice became public knowledge. Driving used to be a normal decent job. Now it's "gig" in the "gig economy".

Maybe it's not because of immigration but I don't blame those who think immigration is a factor because I can't understand why it wouldn't be a factor.

Overall immigration is good for the economy. But I think there are winners and losers. The company who hires a foreign professional with great new ideas is winning, the bloke who moves from permanent job as a truck driver be replaced by a bloke who will take a truck driving contract job without holiday pay, is not winning.

Yes I will pay more for everyone who works to have a decent, if basic, life. From my post earlier: "I would pay more so that others who do a weeks work in a necessary job, can live a basic decent life, with dignity and without needing government assistance and being called a leech (house and family). But i think I'm in a minority. If it was a package of change which included taxing wealth and unearned income at a higher rate than earned income, then I think more people would come onboard too".

In reality I would adjust my expectations based on my income and spending power. If pints went a lot more expensive, I probably wouldn't be able to buy them very often or at all. So it would have knock on effects on the industry and overall employment in the industry. But it's not right that someone should work in a pub all week on a wage that doesn't allow them to live and raise a family without government assistance amd being sneered at as a leech for needing benefits to survive.

The endless supply of unskilled workers obviously affects those people's ability to work together to fight for better conditions (such as unionising). Look at their conditions over the decades. They haven't risen or even kept pace. They've fallen. The ability to replace those people so easily means they're too busy working against reach other, undercutting each other by accepting gig economy work without normal benefits I enjoy like paid leave and paid sick days and a bit of job security. It's not about immigrants as such, I'm just talking about supply and demand.

I think it would be very unpopular to pay low skilled people enough to live with dignity. I still think it's right thing to do.

The UK farming is a brilliant example.

Who picked the fruit and veg in the UK? Immigrants.

Did working conditions go up or down? Down.

After years of endless supply of labour, prices went down. The low wages are priced in now and if they increase wages to reflect supply/demand , they'll lose business. So all the farmers are in a Mexican standoff, nobody can riase wages or the others will pounce on their contracts. Instead they make special rules for immigrants to come pick fruit and veg at the lowest wages.

This is precisely what I'm talking about. the endless supply of labour for decades has distotred the market and now we all expect the product price to be based on the lowest possible wages. They even created work arounds to get immigrants to work for unrealistically low wages.

Christ alive, I'm not even opposed to immigration. But I can't sit on my middle class, mid-height horse and pretend supply and demand an obvious rule of economics but its magically suspended for the lowest paid because I like migration.

My solution to the farming problem BTW is that food security is very important so the wages should rise so they can get people to do the work and government should subsidise the wages so farmers can also live. They need to correct the distortion that decades of oversupply of labour has created.

I think it's obvious that the importation of cheap labour will drive down wages and working conditions to a certain degree in particular areas of employment. What that degree is, however, is open to debate. But I've never been into this idea that that kind of dynamic isn't a reality. I've also never subscribed to this idea that gets pushed by certain quarters that indigenous populations don't want to do certain types of labour either.

Who did the work in the first place before it was "outsourced" to immigrants? It's not as if there's types of jobs that only just appeared because of immigration.

I don't believe that that's necessarily the case Thelonious, TBH. There are plenty of unskilled Irish people knocking about competing for low skilled jobs. We don't all have Masters degrees now.

I'm old enough to remember when the construction industry was completely staffed by Irish people, usually lads from outside Dublin. Then it was dominated by Poles who emigrated to Ireland. I don't, for a second, believe that all those Irish lads who previously held positions in construction just disappeared to some other job because they suddenly found a new career type.

Shops, too, that were staffed exclusively by Irish people gradually became more and more staffed by non-Irish folk.

Also, in more recent times, I've noticed that getting a taxi with an Irish driver is becoming a rarity. Taxi drivers aren't suddenly deciding to go and be doctors.

My first job was in a factory and everyone was Irish. You'd be hard pressed to find any Irish people in that area now.

It's those types of jobs that immigrant labour competes with indigenous people.

So, while over all across all job types, it might be fair to say that immigration doesn't have that much of an effect on the labour market, it can have a very large negative impact on certain jobs.

If few people wanted to do the job, and there were no immigrants to do it, what would have happened?

Wrong, the employer would simply have to offer future employees better pay or benefits

I find the people the main people in Ireland who 'show' their patriotism are normally or a certain demographic. Over compensating for lack of education, or early school leavers. They like the thought of the Irish language for example, but never attempted to learn it properly. Never attempted to speak it outside of school setting.

So how do this demographic express their 'Irishness' through the stereotypes - 'Celtic FC' (which they pretend is Irish) and are drawn to Sinn Fein, prior to that the IRA. And the latest version of this is Conor McGregor as a lot of that demographic would follow MMA.

Most Irish people have long past that insecure sort of level where the Irishness was more image than substance. But gradually as people become more secure in themselves they grow out it. There is a reason why those from Ulster counties love the flag waving and symbolism, they are insecure about their identity and have to show off the image of Irishness, with very little substance to it.

Ireland as a whole has now moved on with a more multicultural society, and an economy that is supported by multinationals. FDI - global tech companies.

But those who simply want to put the 'Pub' in 'Republic' are of a bygone age, or have missed the boat.

Why were they doing it before?

It's not as if there wasn't ever any Irish abattoir workers to fill those jobs.