Immigration and Ireland - MEGATHREAD *Mod Note Added 02/09/25*

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/firm-housing-international-protection-applicants-receives-e10-65m-from-justice-dept-in-three-months-1878917.html

I am delighted that my taxes are being used to deliver €11 million in dividends to two Ballinalsoe men over two years.

I can't think of a better use of the taxes I pay, at a rate of 47.2% after just €44,000.

The link is working. Try it again.

You keep going on about this guy, I don’t even know who he is. It’s not about him - it’s about the data.

How about you actually just look at the data, instead of making up reasons that the official figures from the Danish government are somehow invalid?

It’s not a meaningless response though. It was fine for you to suggest that I would find that your opinion is true, and then you went on to simplify it for me by trying to tell me what I buy into, so let’s not pretend you’re making any attempt to be objective.

I didn’t draw any equivalence between the welfare system and the international protection system based upon the idea of whether or not they are begrudgingly supported. I drew the comparison on the basis of the popularity of providing support for people who need it, nothing there about begrudgingly supporting either idea.

This is becoming tedious to unpick but it’s important that you don’t misrepresent what I said and try and argue against a point I haven’t made that you choose to substitute in. There certainly is an appetite for cutting some forms of social welfare supports from certain groups in Irish society. The social contract nonsense is your baby, I don’t care for it, but no evidence that Government ineptitude has undermined the social welfare system to the extent that it could be understood to be a collapse in the social contract? You’re obviously having a laugh -

https://www.socialjustice.ie/article/more-559800-people-are-still-living-poverty-ireland-which-176912-are-children

I disagree with you that there is a significant appetite for cutting immigration and asylum in Ireland. It amounts to a small but very loud minority, about the same as those opposed to increasing welfare for people living in poverty (or rather - argue that people who aren’t them should be deprived of welfare supports), and in terms of welfare supports for immigrants and asylum seekers, well, that depends on who you ask -

https://www.irishtimes.com/politics/2024/11/30/most-voters-support-existing-state-benefits-for-asylum-seekers-or-believe-they-should-be-expanded-exit-poll/

And as far as pensions are concerned, I didn’t ask you what the solution isn’t, I asked you how do you suggest the problem of pension provision in a society with an increasing number of people qualifying for the State pension is expected to be serviced by a decreasing number of workers?

I don’t think the solution is asylum seekers either. However I do know that they can be part of the solution by being given the opportunities which will enable them to integrate into Irish society in a meaningful way, as opposed to just being holed up in conditions I wouldn’t keep a dog in.

What you said was in an ideal world, you would cut tax and redirect funding for the welfare system to capital infrastructure projects. But you’re a realist and you know this isn’t going to happen. It isn’t going to happen because public support for it simply isn’t there. Only about a fifth of the public support tax cuts over increased public spending. Some three-quarters of the public support redistributive welfare policies. Even the gap in support for State spending on elderly care over unemployment benefits is far more narrow than in most European countries. Cap it all off with Government ineptitude and it’s not looking well for your ideal world. So far so good. What you also did was draw an equivalence between the social welfare system and the international protection system. In your mind, this dynamic applies to the asylum system. Stop a random person in the street and they’re as likely to complain about the excesses of the welfare system as international protection. All depends on who you ask. As for welfare, so for asylum. In an ideal world… but you’re a realist… Except, I don’t think that’s true. It seems to me the balance of public opinion demonstrably isn’t supportive of international protection in the way it is of the welfare system. Around 70% of the public support very strict limits on immigration. At 82%, an even greater number think the government isn’t doing enough to address immigration. More than half, some 56% of the public, support far more robust measures than are being implemented, such as the processing of asylum seekers in third-countries. So Id suggest that the two aren’t quite the same at all. Your tax cuts aren’t a realistic policy option because they’ve got the balance of public opinion against them. That’s not at all the case for the international protection system. Except, of course, for the non-representative random sample you seem to be stopping in the street!

Nope, I’ve given you the sources of the data like you asked

You’re the one disputing the data. I don’t care about this twitter guy. Talk about the data - I don’t know on what basis you’re questioning the official Danish figures

But again this is all just the usual evasion. You’ve no interest in actually discussing the topic.

Do you believe that MENA migrants do not offend at a greater rate than Danes?
On what basis if so?

The post seemed to be referring to marginal rates, not effective

I don't think you understand marginal rates. Or maybe you're choosing not to.

Or one or both is using a false ID with the same name .A fingerprint comparison should solve that .

The marginal income tax rate is 47.2% after €44,000. It's bonkers.

Average workers face a marginal income tax rate of a massive 47.2% on just €44,000 of income.

Crazy.

To pay for 160,000+ bogus AS and 100,000+ UKR refugees.

The news is full, day after day, of stories of such waste of public funds.

I often wonder why there isn't a revolution.

The top marginal income tax rate is 45% in Germany, but it starts at over €250,000!!!

You’re the one disputing the data. I don’t care about this twitter guy.

Whether you care or not, you owned the Jpeg when you decided to share it here.

Personally I'd be mortified if I shared something that was produced by a cosplay White Supremacist.

The reason I don't use sites like Twitter and prefer here, is the standard of what is expected here is infinitely higher.

If you want to have a reasoned debate on the integration and socio and economic nuances of certain demographics in Europe and the problems and solutions associated with all that, you will have to do better than through up a Nazi Wannabes Jpeg you harvested off that cesspit of a site and declare "Discuss?"

But you have no interest in that, the overall tone of this thread can be summed up by.

Foreigners = Bad! Mmmkay!

It's lots of things, but predominately it's just plain boring.

I'm not sure why anybody would be arguing the positives of taking in thousands of Somalian 'asylum seekers'. Just look at their employment rates across Europe never mind crime (which is almost never reported for reasons that we all know). They are a massive cost to every country they have gone into. The majority are unemployed (in the UK it's over 70%) even into second and third generations and the majority are reliant on welfare/state support.

It's not racism to point out facts and ask why. Although I'm sure some will argue it's the racism against them causing this everywhere.

Precisely, the crime stats don’t include descent, so why did you try add descent into your population set when calculating the crime rate?

You’ve been completely caught out trying to deceive everyone and fudge the numbers and you have the neck to call me dishonest??

And now you want to run off with your tail between your legs because you’ve been confronted with a dose of reality and might actually have to have a debate based on evidence.

Talk about mortifying!

No, they don’t include the option for descent - the crime figures are purely based on country of origin i.e. first generation immigrants, as has been explained.

So with that established, once again, why would you try to include descent in your population set?

It’s because you wanted to dishonestly dilute the figures so that the crime rate wouldn’t look as bad. (Hilariously it was still nearly quadruple the Danish crime rate)

I compared the number of crimes by first generation Somalians with the population of first generation Somalians.
You incorrectly compared the number of crimes by first generation Somalians with the entire population of all people of Somalian descent (1st, 2nd, 3rd etc generation) in Denmark.
Perhaps it was an honest error, I’m not sure, regardless of intention it’s an error nonetheless.

And don’t dare try and flip this somehow - you have been caught out and it is clear for everyone to see. You know this and that is why you want to run away now. I would advise it is you that should put down the shovel, along with your craven accusations of bad faith.

If you would like to have an open and honest discussion of this official Government of Denmark data I will be here.