Prime time

Kivaro · 15-05-2019 9:38pm

John DoeReMi wrote: »

Surely most Sinn Fein voters would be anti-immigration at least if not outright racist? The kind of knuckle dragger who votes for SF isn't going to be out celebrating Africa Day in the Iveagh Gardens.

You would expect the inward migration policy of Sinn Fein to somewhat reflect their nationalist ethos.
However, the official policy of Sinn Fein (found on their web site) is that there should be no limit to the amount of asylum seekers that we take in.
Think about that for a moment.

Everyone, and I mean everyone, knows that the overwhelming majority of asylum seekers in Ireland are economic migrants. But Sinn Fein wants us to take in every single asylum seekers from every corner of the planet ..... without any limit.

They also want the country to give amnesty to failed asylum seekers and not deport them. Think about that also. A failed asylum seekers who resorts to criminality should be rewarded with amnesty according to Sinn Fein.

I actually believe that this is one of the main reasons why Sinn Fein are doing badly in recent polls; their voter-base is finding out about these ludicrous polices.

paleoperson · 15-05-2019 9:40pm

TheDiceMan2020 wrote: »

Pretty insulting attitude to have about your own countrymen.

I'll say. Patronizing race-baiting ****e all while taking a high horse.

Patty Hearst · 15-05-2019 10:12pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

You didn't provide a link, why don't you do your own research?

I'm just showing you what the Department has published. The average numbers of family members reunited with their loved ones is 2 - 3.

The Irish Minister of State for Equality, Immigration and Integration David Stanton speaking in the Dáil said that before the old Family Reunification program for refugees was altered, one refugee had applied to bring in 70 of their family members.

The average number per application was 20

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTMOgUwYKxI

1:05
"In July the Govt informed the house that the average number of family members applied for family reunification provision of the refugee act was 20 and the largest application was for over 70 family members"

Topgear on Dave · 16-05-2019 10:24am

This came to my attention this morning.

http://www.courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/09859e7a3f34669680256ef3004a27de/d3f719e142b7d12f802583fb0039239b?OpenDocument

Ms Chen is a national of China. She came to Ireland on 14.11.2013 on a 90-day ‘C’ visa and remains here today. On 19.02.2014, she applied, by reference to s.4(7) of the Immigration Act 2004, to stay in Ireland on a long-term basis. That application failed. Ms Chen then commenced these proceedings.

Is this normal?

Arrive on a holiday visa and almost immediately look for long term residence?

Get denied and 6 years later the case is still clogging up the courts! Shes not going home ever.

[Deleted User] · 16-05-2019 10:26am

Patty Hearst wrote: »

The Irish Minister of State for Equality, Immigration and Integration David Stanton speaking in the Dáil said that before the old Family Reunification program for refugees was altered, one refugee had applied to bring in 70 of their family members.

The average number per application was 20

I think the reason for the discrepancy is that, on occasion, people may apply to be reunited with family members in circumstances where (a) the Applicant, or (b) the Family Member is prima facie ineligible. An example would be a refugee applying to be ruunited with a cousin, or a sibling and that sibling's family. That will be rejected out of hand, and does not form part of the statistics.

The staistics I have just shown you only include cases where both the Applicant and the Family member had advanced a valid application, in accordance with the International Protection Act (which application may, nevertheless, be declined).

I'm sorry to disappoint you, but the average number of family members for which there are valid applications is 2-3 per annum, and has been so since at least 2012.

You'll have to find something else to get worked-up about. Or just, you know, chill out a bit.

[Deleted User] · 16-05-2019 10:34am

paleoperson wrote: »

I'll say. Patronizing race-baiting ****e all while taking a high horse.

I agree 100% paleoperson but the clue is in the grammer, this is obviously not an irish person by birth who posted that shyte…

"its about time irish discovered there more than just white people"... QED

DelaneyIn · 16-05-2019 11:48am

What annoys me about the immigration debate is that the people in favour of mass immigration like to pretend they are morally superior to those of us who are not. When you look into it, the people most in favour of mass unfettered immigration are politicians, landlords, and property developers who want to drive up rents and property prices, and also employers who want to drive down wages.

These people are in favour of mass immigration for entirely selfish reasons and are happy to cram 15 immigrants into a damp 3 bedroom house and when they become ill in winter they can't afford the €60 to visit a GP. There is nothing moral about supporting this.

Then you have all the professional activists from immigration quangos and brainwashed leftists who are ideologically committed to open borders and bringing in as many third worlders as possible. These people talk incessantly of how awful Direct Provision is (it's actually full board accommodation in a hotel plus free lawyers, doctors, dentists, clothes etc) while having nothing to say about the Irish homeless. The left wing journalists/activists will always write and broadcast propaganda in favour of open borders and tell the rest of us there's nothing to fear because there's a Muslim in Mayo who plays GAA or because there's an African girl in Blanchardstown who can say a poem in Irish. Of course any misbehaviour or crimes committed by third worlders must always be downplayed, and the crisis in housing must never be linked to mass immigration in case the ordinary Irish people begin to realise it's not in their interest.

It’s some scam. I wonder what the result of the experiment shall be.

suicide_circus · 16-05-2019 12:36pm

integration doesnt mean abandoning your own culture when you move to a new place. but it does mean compromising on and modifying those aspects of your culture which clash with the culture of the new place.

this is never discussed.

Blueshoe · 16-05-2019 12:43pm

suicide_circus wrote: »

integration doesnt mean abandoning your own culture when you move to a new place. but it does mean compromising on and modifying those aspects of your culture which clash with the culture of the new place.

this is never discussed.

When Irish people go to Australia or Canada for work the locals don't change to accommodate them. They go on as normal. It's fit in or **** off.

Seems to be an idea that some have here that we should change to accommodate strangers. No thanks

(Nothing to do with your point but I wanted to add it anyway)

[Deleted User] · 16-05-2019 12:44pm

suicide_circus wrote: »

integration doesnt mean abandoning your own culture when you move to a new place. but it does mean compromising on and modifying those aspects of your culture which clash with the culture of the new place.

this is never discussed.

agreed. case in point, some judge had a slew of stabbings from eastern Europeans on other eastern Europeans here over a period and commented something about those deaths happening during drink fueled sessions which were often a way of coping with homesickness and a longing for the family and culture left behind. He went on to suggest that these communities should seek to integrate more with irish life and society, rather than setting up minority cultures sometimes soaked in melancholy. We Irish really aren't that bad he might have said!

[Deleted User] · 16-05-2019 12:47pm

DelaneyIn wrote: »

What annoys me about the immigration debate is that the people in favour of mass immigration like to pretend they are morally superior to those of us who are not.

Sometimes when the facts are at-odds with a persons biases, and that person is presented with the facts, there's a tendency to claim you are being 'talked down to'. Surely the whole point of threads like this is to debate, not to have your feelings protected.

Very strangely, the same people who complain about "morally superior" attitudes on the left seem to think everyone else is a snowflake.

people are in favour of mass immigration for entirely selfish reasons and are happy to cram 15 immigrants into a damp 3 bedroom house and when they become ill in winter they can't afford the €60 to visit a GP.

You're conflating a number of issues there. You're ignoring the overwhelming reliance that our healthcare system has on non-EU doctors (both in terms of Middle Eastern and Asian Government's funding Irish medical schools, and graduates staffing our system as nurses, pharmacists and doctors), whilst blaming them for flooding the system with their inconvenient illnesses.

They should come here and do jobs that irish people cannot or will not do, but just don't get sick?

I can anticipate the reply so let me answer it now. Not all non-EU migrants are skilled graduates or students. Agreed. And we should curtail the migration into Ireland, for economic purposes, of people without those skills and without funding their own education. And we already do.

You only get an employment visa to enter Ireland if you are a worker in an area with a shortage of skilled workers, whether you're a developer, a doctor, a chemist, or whatever.

Don't turn around and blame the workers who are needed here when they have to rent a property or visit a GP. They're paying taxes like the rest of us, and the fault is our own for not building houses, or incenticising those who can do so.

These are problems that can be addressed without closing the borders. How do we know? Because other European countries like France, Germany and Sweden are managing to house their people and run their healthcare services whilst processing a substantially bigger proportion of migrants.

TheDiceMan2020 · 16-05-2019 1:00pm

rusty cole wrote: »

I agree 100% paleoperson but the clue is in the grammer, this is obviously not an irish person by birth who posted that shyte…

"its about time irish discovered there more than just white people"... QED

No they are very much Irish. I know the poster (not personally but know who they are)

Wheeliebin30 · 16-05-2019 1:11pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Sometimes when the facts are at-odds with a persons biases, and that person is presented with the facts, there's a tendency to claim you are being 'talked down to'. Surely the whole point of threads like this is to debate, not to have your feelings protected.

Very strangely, the same people who complain about "morally superior" attitudes on the left seem to think everyone else is a snowflake.

You're conflating a number of issues there. You're ignoring the overwhelming reliance that our healthcare system has on non-EU doctors (both in terms of Middle Eastern and Asian Government's funding Irish medical schools, and graduates staffing our system as nurses, pharmacists and doctors), whilst blaming them for flooding the system with their inconvenient illnesses.

They should come here and do jobs that irish people cannot or will not do, but just don't get sick?

I can anticipate the reply so let me answer it now. Not all non-EU migrants are skilled graduates or students. Agreed. And we should curtail the migration into Ireland, for economic purposes, of people without those skills and without funding their own education. And we already do.

You only get an employment visa to enter Ireland if you are a worker in an area with a shortage of skilled workers, whether you're a developer, a doctor, a chemist, or whatever.

Don't turn around and blame the workers who are needed here when they have to rent a property or visit a GP. They're paying taxes like the rest of us, and the fault is our own for not building houses, or incenticising those who can do so.

These are problems that can be addressed without closing the borders. How do we know? Because other European countries like France, Germany and Sweden are managing to house their people and run their healthcare services whilst processing a substantially bigger proportion of migrants.

Actually every country you just listened has MORE homeless people than Ireland.

Get your facts right.

[Deleted User] · 16-05-2019 1:18pm

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Actually every country you just listened has MORE homeless people than Ireland.

Get your facts right.

As a proportion of the local population?

Wheeliebin30 · 16-05-2019 1:20pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

As a proportion of the local population?

Hold on now.

You said they are managing to house their people.

Stop moving the goalposts.

What you said is incorrect.

[Deleted User] · 16-05-2019 5:06pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

As a proportion of the local population?

I mean, it's taken for granted that no country has completely abolished homelessness. Or maybe you're claiming that we should keep blaming migrants until not one person remains homeless, which is so daft I didn't think it needed to be clarified.

In 2017, the latest year for which there are figures, 0.07% of Sweden's population were acutely homeless or sleeping rough.

Compare that to 0.22% in Ireland -- 3 times as many as in Sweden.

Explain?

Wheeliebin30 · 16-05-2019 5:09pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I mean, it's taken for granted that no country has completely abolished homelessness. Or maybe you're claiming that we should keep blaming migrants until not one person remains homeless, which is so daft I didn't think it needed to be clarified.

In 2017, the latest year for which there are figures, 0.07% of Sweden's population were acutely homeless or sleeping rough.

Compare that to 0.22% in Ireland -- 3 times as many as in Sweden.

Explain?

Now you’ve changed your argument.

But you admitted you’re wrong so let’s move on.

Where are you getting .07% from by the way?

All I can see is 0.26%?

Not doubting you just wondering.

Germany has 420,000.

France has 150,000.

Sweden has 34,000.

And so on.

[Deleted User] · 16-05-2019 5:16pm

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

All I can see is 0.26%?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thelocal.se/20150115/a-portrait-of-sweden-in-ten-statistics/amp

Not doubting you just wondering.

Ah -- that's because in Ireland, homelessness is defined as applying to those in short term/ medium-term emergency accomodation or sleeping rough. The Swedes define it so as to include people whom we routinely exclude, (inter alia) are living with family members they'd rather not live with, for example, and an involuntary living arrangement with friends, with a lease of less than three months.

Could you imagine the stats if we applied those standards here?

So I have taken those figures out of the Swedish stats.

A full report is available here.

https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/Lists/Artikelkatalog/Attachments/20990/2018-6-19.pdf

Wheeliebin30 · 16-05-2019 5:19pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Ah -- that's because in Ireland, homelessness is defined as applying to those in short term/ medium-term emergency accomodation or sleeping rough. The Swedes define it so as to include people whom we routinely exclude, (inter alia) are living with family members they'd rather not live with, for example, and an involuntary living arrangement with friends, with a lease of less than three months.

Could you imagine the stats if we applied those standards here?

So I have taken those figures out of the Swedish stats.

A full report is available here.

https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/Lists/Artikelkatalog/Attachments/20990/2018-6-19.pdf

Can you quote the 0.07% from that please I’m not trawling through 9 pages.

So Sweden can’t house their people like you claimed originally yes?

[Deleted User] · 16-05-2019 5:27pm

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Can you quote the 0.07% from that please I’m not trawling through 9 pages.

Do some basic mathematics. Add up the people who are Homeless Type 1, Homeess Type 2, and leave out those in long-term social accommodation, living with friends etc (Types 3 and 4) Then express that as a % of the total population.

All of the figures are tabulated on page 6.

So Sweden can’t house their people like you claimed originally yes?

You can jump up and down and cry "I got you! I got you!", if it helps. I didn't think it needed to be explicitly stated that no country in the world has eradicated homelessness.

But the Swedes are managing to do a very impressive job of it, far better than we are, with a much bigger migrant population.

They're so good at it, they include as homeless some people who are living in long-term social housing, and people in casual, private accommodation.

Wheeliebin30 · 16-05-2019 5:50pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Do some basic mathematics. Add up the people who are Homeless Type 1, Homeess Type 2, and leave out those in long-term social accommodation, living with friends etc (Types 3 and 4) Then express that as a % of the total population.

All of the figures are tabulated on page 6.
You can jump up and down and cry "I got you! I got you!", if it helps. I didn't think it needed to be explicitly stated that no country in the world has eradicated homelessness.

But the Swedes are managing to do a very impressive job of it, far better than we are, with a much bigger migrant population.

They're so good at it, they include as homeless some people who are living in long-term social housing, and people in casual, private accommodation.

34,000 homeless people?

Yeah seems their doing a great job alright.

What about Germany which you said the same thing about?

450,000 homeless.

[Deleted User] · 16-05-2019 6:13pm

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

34,000 homeless people?

Where did you get 34,000 from?

Not only does that include thousands who are living with their family without a lease, and almost 10,000 in social housing, you've also tacked-on almost 2,000 for no apparent reason.

I have given you all the evidence, the definition, the artihmentic, and you can't even get the ctrl+c correct, and now you seem to be demanding me to start doing other research for you.

Reckon I'll pass.

Wheeliebin30 · 16-05-2019 6:23pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Where did you get 34,000 from?

Not only does that include thousands who are living with their family without a lease, and almost 10,000 in social housing, you've also tacked-on almost 2,000 for no apparent reason.

I have given you all the evidence, the definition, the artihmentic, and you can't even get the ctrl+c correct, and now you seem to be demanding me to start doing other research for you.

Reckon I'll pass.

You still haven’t shown me the figure from the report.

Just show me how many are homeless in Sweden from that report.

One simple figure.

Wheeliebin30 · 16-05-2019 6:29pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Where did you get 34,000 from?

Not only does that include thousands who are living with their family without a lease, and almost 10,000 in social housing, you've also tacked-on almost 2,000 for no apparent reason.

I have given you all the evidence, the definition, the artihmentic, and you can't even get the ctrl+c correct, and now you seem to be demanding me to start doing other research for you.

Reckon I'll pass.

On page 6 it says 33,000 people are homeless.

That’s where I got that figure from.

I can’t see anything about 10,000 people in social houses, I can see the 2,000 in family members alright.

[Deleted User] · 16-05-2019 8:04pm

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

34,000 homeless people?
Yeah seems their doing a great job alright.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Where did you get 34,000 from?

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

On page 6 it says 33,000 people are homeless.

It's just over 32,000. You just inflated it by almost 2,000, and I am asking why.

I can’t see anything about 10,000 people in social houses, I can see the 2,000 in family members alright.

It's there in front of you on page 6. Are you even reading the page? Social and municipal contracts, right beside where it refers to long-term living arrangements.

Further information on pg 7

Almost half of the individuals had long-term housing solutions, mostly apartments with social or muncipal contracts, where the municipality has a contract for the housing bas sublets it.

Marcusm · 16-05-2019 8:05pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I mean, it's taken for granted that no country has completely abolished homelessness. Or maybe you're claiming that we should keep blaming migrants until not one person remains homeless, which is so daft I didn't think it needed to be clarified.

In 2017, the latest year for which there are figures, 0.07% of Sweden's population were acutely homeless or sleeping rough.

Compare that to 0.22% in Ireland -- 3 times as many as in Sweden.

Explain?

It’s not as cold here.

[Deleted User] · 16-05-2019 8:17pm

Marcusm wrote: »

It’s not as cold here.

In both countries, rough sleepers are a tiny proportion of the total numbers.

In Sweden, it's 647 of 10,000-odd homeless people (6%)

There are no figures routinely collected for all of Ireland, but in Dublin during last Spring, it was only 118, and 156 over last Winter.

You'd have to guess it must be less than 250 for the whole country (if so, it would be about 2% of the whole homeless population of over 10,000).

So that's one stat we're doing better at than Sweden. But the rest is pretty hopeless.

Wheeliebin30 · 16-05-2019 8:29pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

In both countries, rough sleepers are a tiny proportion of the total numbers.

In Sweden, it's 647 of 10,000-odd homeless people (6%)

There are no figures routinely collected for all of Ireland, but in Dublin during last Spring, it was only 118, and 156 over last Winter.

You'd have to guess it must be less than 250 for the whole country (if so, it would be about 2% of the whole homeless population of over 10,000).

So that's one stat we're doing better at than Sweden. But the rest is pretty hopeless.

Hopeless really?

Jesus talk about hyperbole.

[Deleted User] · 16-05-2019 8:59pm

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Hopeless really?

Jesus talk about hyperbole.

Oh no, it's not hyperbole. I literally have very little hope for children who have spent two years in homeless services. Experts on child welfare use terms like 'troubling' and 'great concern', but I'd call that diplomacy. A lot of those children are going to end up being pretty dysfunctional.

But you want some good news? Sweden's experience tells us that it isn't the fault of immigration. They do far better than us in terms of homelessness, despite taking in enormous numbers of migrants, especially asylum seekers.

Wheeliebin30 · 16-05-2019 9:17pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Oh no, it's not hyperbole. I literally have very little hope for children who have spent two years in homeless services. Experts on child welfare use terms like 'troubling' and 'great concern', but I'd call that diplomacy. A lot of those children are going to end up being pretty dysfunctional.

But you want some good news? Sweden's experience tells us that it isn't the fault of immigration. They do far better than us in terms of homelessness, despite taking in enormous numbers of migrants, especially asylum seekers.

I was never blaming immigrants!!

Prime time

Comments