Guinness in the Irish Potato Famine

Tarzan007 · 23-02-2010 10:58am

Dean Roche wrote: »

You have just proven my point, that’s because the Scots and welsh had fewer children later in life, most of them ware able to afford it. Unlike the Irish that had “unnecessary gigantic families” that they just could not afford to have, it’s just not logical to have loads of children if you can’t afford it, any reasonably intelligent person would know that. Back in those times it was hard; it was all about survival of the fittest.

The more dire the poverty, the larger families people tend to have. Due to the high morality rate, extremely poor people all over the world have large families due to the extreme fear and insecurity of having no surviving children to look after them. The birth rate in India over the last 50 years is a fine proof of it. Ireland's large population growth started in the years after the act of union which ushered in the destruction of already exisiting depleted economy of Ireland.

The Irish with their naturally leftwing leaning play the victim mentality, like to blame the British for everything, the Irish will never blame themselves for anything, but at the same time the Irish always had a notorious fondness of getting one way tickets to Britain to live, the brits ware always good enough to take them in, their so called oppressors eh! They are more Irish living the UK than what they are in Ireland itself, this was due to years of immigration right up to the 80s, immigration that was brought on by the poverty environment that Irish too often created for themselves.

They got one way tickets to Britain as that was where the wealth of Ireland was been extorted to and they therefore had to follow it.

Besides anyway, as someone has laready said, your just a troll, and a pretty poor one at that.

ejmaztec · 23-02-2010 11:25am

Tarzan007 wrote: »

The more dire the poverty, the larger families people tend to have. Due to the high morality rate, extremely poor people all over the world have large families due to the extreme fear and insecurity of having no surviving children to look after them. The birth rate in India over the last 50 years is a fine proof of it. Ireland's large population growth started in the years after the act of union which ushered in the destruction of already exisiting depleted economy of Ireland.

If he thinks that the poor people in Ireland were the only ones with large families, he should think again. There were many areas in the UK where the same situation occurred, and not just in the ever expanding slum-filled towns and cities.

silverharp · 23-02-2010 2:16pm

I gather population growth wasnt so far ahead of Britain and to the extent that it was can be linked to the Corn laws that created a agricultural bubble in Ireland, so there was an incentive due to rising land prices to displace the peasants onto smaller spaces to free up land for cash crops. When the laws were finally repealed it caused a crash here.
It took poor economic planning by Britain and unfair property rights here to turn a fungus problem into a mass starvation problem

luckily governments learned from this and never implemented policies to create bubbles in land prices again:D:D:D

Dean Roche · 24-02-2010 12:02am

Tarzan007 wrote: »

The more dire the poverty, the larger families people tend to have. Due to the high morality rate, extremely poor people all over the world have large families due to the extreme fear and insecurity of having no surviving children to look after them. The birth rate in India over the last 50 years is a fine proof of it. Ireland's large population growth started in the years after the act of union which ushered in the destruction of already exisiting depleted economy of Ireland.

They got one way tickets to Britain as that was where the wealth of Ireland was been extorted to and they therefore had to follow it.

Besides anyway, as someone has laready said, your just a troll, and a pretty poor one at that.

Typical Irish with their go along with their own flow of things, this is the way it is on Irish trends, you don’t agree with all the rest or the Irish or have a different opinion as the rest of the Irish you are called a troll! This is the towering Irish intellectuals’arsenal at its best LOL. What do you expect me to do!?, Agree with all rest of you and blame the British for all your wows?!. What next?, You lot will probably blame the British for the beatings, physical and mental torture, molestation and “rape” of tens of thousands little children under the very eye of Free State cowards and mob rule? The Irish are far more cruel to the own people in more ways than one than any outsiders in history.

A lot of Irish have in all bred and indoctrinated into their minds that British are the root of all their wows, many have a deep hatred for Britain only out of jealousy when playing the victim at the same time. Call me what you like, its freedom of speech and opinions, someting that hyper sensitive to criticism Irish have a problem with.

Tarzan says:

They got one way tickets to Britain as that was where the wealth of Ireland was been extorted to and they therefore had to follow it.

Just look at the rubbish you are pedalling!, Pathetic!. Is that really the best you can do LOL!.If you had of read and grasped what is said, I clearly mentioned “the Irish always had a notorious fondness of getting a one way tickets to the UK right up to the 80s”. A matter a fact they still do!, More Irish emigrated during the "free state" than what the did during the so called famine. The native population has barely grown in a 100 years so what does that say Tarzan?, we can deduce that the Irish constantly left Ireland simply because it has always failed them time and time again, in fact it still fails, people are starting to immigrate again and more will in the future. My parents had to immigrate to the UK during the 80s, a dark and dismal time, when Free State crooks and dimwits in government ware swindling and screwing their very own people, the very people that they kept voting in and still do for the same daft reason, a almost inability to learn.

Tarzan says:

The more dire the poverty, the larger families people tend to have. Due to the high morality rate, extremely poor people all over the world have large families due to the extreme fear and insecurity of having no surviving children to look after them. The birth rate in India over the last 50 years is a fine proof of it. Ireland's large population growth started in the years after the act of union which ushered in the destruction of already existing depleted economy of Ireland.

You have absolutely no logic in that head of yours whatsoever do you? And what better ware the Irish parents for having huge amount of children when many of them starved to death and immigrated because they couldn’t afford keep so many, when you lack logic you will always shoot yourself in the foot time and time again.

You mention the likes of poor central Asian countries like India with massive families in poverty, what would you think what would happen if bleeding hearth European countries and charity’s stop giving high populated 3rd world countries like most of India and most African countries trillions of charity money and aid and aid worker helpers every year? . You would have gigantic pile of human fertilizer for their country’s soil.

Dean Roche · 24-02-2010 12:10am

ejmaztec wrote: »

If he thinks that the poor people in Ireland were the only ones with large families, he should think again. There were many areas in the UK where the same situation occurred, and not just in the ever expanding slum-filled towns and cities.

The British did have their paupers and slum dwellers in fact all European countries had them, but the amount of paupers and slum dwellers with the Irish was grossly disproportionate, in the early and mid 1800s the Irish slum dwellers came to the UK by the 1000s every week, it was a menace to the British making the majority of slum dwellers of the UK of Irish catholic stock turning entire sections of their cities into Irish areas, not to mention the Irish immigrated from the free state to those parts as well. Glasgow Liverpool and Manchester are the most Irish areas in the UK today, other parts of the UK have a large amounts of Irish as well, but Glasgow Liverpool and Manchester are the most, hence the dreadful drug, crime, chav and pikey social problems you see in those Irish areas in the UK today, just like you see too often in Ireland, its not a cowincedence!

Some Irish Catholic clans stock carry the genes and are decedents of the fitter Anglo Normans and fitter grades of Celtic breeding stock which make up most of the intelligent lace Irish, sadly lace Irish are only over quarter of the Irish native population in Ireland today, as for the shanty Irish clans are for a lot of the part are a race, look different and behave differently from the British on average regardless living in a British environment for 123 4 and even 5 generations.

MarchDub · 24-02-2010 4:58am

Dean Roche wrote: »

The British did have their paupers and slum dwellers in fact all European countries had them, but the amount of paupers and slum dwellers with the Irish was grossly disproportionate, in the early and mid 1800s the Irish slum dwellers came to the UK by the 1000s every week, it was a menace to the British making the majority of slum dwellers of the UK of Irish catholic stock turning entire sections of their cities into Irish areas, not to mention the Irish immigrated from the free state to those parts as well. Glasgow Liverpool and Manchester are the most Irish areas in the UK today, other parts of the UK have a large amounts of Irish as well, but Glasgow Liverpool and Manchester are the most, hence the dreadful drug, crime, chav and pikey social problems you see in those Irish areas in the UK today, just like you see too often in Ireland, its not a cowincedence!

Some Irish Catholic clans stock carry the genes and are decedents of the fitter Anglo Normans and fitter grades of Celtic breeding stock which make up most of the intelligent lace Irish, sadly lace Irish are only over quarter of the Irish native population in Ireland today, as for the shanty Irish clans are for a lot of the part are a race, look different and behave differently from the British on average regardless living in a British environment for 123 4 and even 5 generations.

This forum has reached a low that I never thought I would see. Other users have been banned for far less outrageous and offensive statements than this. You are nothing more than an ignorant, moronic racist and your posts are not based on anything that approaches historical analysis.

Simarillion · 24-02-2010 11:58am

Dean Roche is missing the point of his own eugenics debate. The fact is, population groups who have lower mortality rates (i.e. in this case those people who weren't tenant farmers) tend to breed less often and produce smaller numbers of offspring. This way they can concentrate their resources (food, finance, shelter etc.) on these few individuals in the hope that they will survive due to better care. This is commonly seen in humans, in the developed world.
For those who do not have resources available to them, and therefore have a higher mortality rate (lower order animals and in the human world, 3rd world populations and lower class families) there is a differaqnt method of ensuring that offspring survive. That is to have as many as possible, as often as possible in the hopes that of the many had, some percentage will survive the harsh conditions of their lifestyle, reach a mature age and inevitably take care of their parents

Therefore while you may call Irish tenant farmers feckless, they are merely involved in a common evolutionary fight for survival.

I am still baffled by the lack of usage of surrounding food sources - rabbits, fish- and how they were just ignored.

FINALLY - for the first time ever im agreeing with MarchDub, throw Dean Roche off the board. His ranting, moronic posts, are destroying a thread, which has completly drifted off topic!!

ejmaztec · 24-02-2010 12:11pm

Dean Roche wrote: »

The British did have their paupers and slum dwellers in fact all European countries had them, but the amount of paupers and slum dwellers with the Irish was grossly disproportionate, in the early and mid 1800s the Irish slum dwellers came to the UK by the 1000s every week, it was a menace to the British making the majority of slum dwellers of the UK of Irish catholic stock turning entire sections of their cities into Irish areas, not to mention the Irish immigrated from the free state to those parts as well. Glasgow Liverpool and Manchester are the most Irish areas in the UK today, other parts of the UK have a large amounts of Irish as well, but Glasgow Liverpool and Manchester are the most, hence the dreadful drug, crime, chav and pikey social problems you see in those Irish areas in the UK today, just like you see too often in Ireland, its not a cowincedence!

Some Irish Catholic clans stock carry the genes and are decedents of the fitter Anglo Normans and fitter grades of Celtic breeding stock which make up most of the intelligent lace Irish, sadly lace Irish are only over quarter of the Irish native population in Ireland today, as for the shanty Irish clans are for a lot of the part are a race, look different and behave differently from the British on average regardless living in a British environment for 123 4 and even 5 generations.

I think that you should blame yourself for any personal problems that you might have, and not the gene-pool that spat you out onto the planet.

VW 1 · 24-02-2010 12:44pm

Dean, you said " The native population has barely grown in a 100 years ", this is simply not true it has grown by approx 33%YearPopulation
% Change 2006 4.24m +8.1
2002 3.92m +8.2
1996 3.63m +2.9
1991 3.53m -(0.6)
1986 3.54m+2.8
1981 3.44m +2.3
1979 3.37m +13.2
1971 2.98m +3.2
1966 2.88m +2.3
1961 2.82m -(2.7)
1956 2.90m- (2.2)
1951 2.96m +0.3
1946 2.96m -(0.5)
1936 2.97m -(0.2)
1926 2.97m- (5.4)
1911 3.14m

secondly, large family size is normal for any developing country due to the high mortality rate and lower life expectancy, look up any population statistics on any of the developing african or asian countries, i guarantee they will have a pyramid shaped demographic chart.

thirdly, as a state which was under the control of the UK it was their responsibility to provide us with policies and laws, if their implemented policies failed it was up to them to bail us out as we had no means of independant decision making through a government of our own, they would hardly let a million people starve and a further million to emigrate from the midlands in england would they?

finally, go away do some reading and come back with some non-racist non-moronic statements based on facts and maybe then some of the posters will feel you are worth having a debate with, even if they disagree with what you are saying

ejmaztec · 24-02-2010 12:47pm

Simarillion wrote: »

I am still baffled by the lack of usage of surrounding food sources - rabbits, fish- and how they were just ignored.

With the land-owners owning the game and fishing rights, the peasants would probably have been shot for poaching.

I know that somewhere on this forum there's mention of what the situation was in coastal areas, but I'm too busy to search for it.

MarchDub · 24-02-2010 1:36pm

Simarillion wrote: »

FINALLY - for the first time ever im agreeing with MarchDub, throw Dean Roche off the board. His ranting, moronic posts, are destroying a thread, which has completly drifted off topic!!

My objection to Dean Roche remains and I am baffled as to why he not even been warned or censored – never mind banned. His racist screed is the same vile poison that I have personally heard sputtering from the mouths of the KKK on rural Virginia hilltops. I objected to it then and I object to it here and now. It is the same poison that marched Hitler into power and killed millions in the camps.

It is not worthy of direct response because people who hold those views are lost to reason - they are filled with the poison of their own hatred and twisted thinking. The proper response is the passing of laws that protect their victims and prevent the spread of their asinine contagion – this is why I suggested that he ought to be banned from the forum. Others have been banned for far less. Moderation is failing in this one.

VW 1 · 24-02-2010 1:53pm

ejmaztec · 24-02-2010 2:14pm

MarchDub wrote: »

My objection to Dean Roche remains and I am baffled as to why he not even been warned or censored – never mind banned. His racist screed is the same vile poison that I have personally heard sputtering from the mouths of the KKK on rural Virginia hilltops. I objected to it then and I object to it here and now. It is the same poison that marched Hitler into power and killed millions in the camps.

It is not worthy of direct response because people who hold those views are lost to reason - they are filled with the poison of their own hatred and twisted thinking. The proper response is the passing of laws that protect their victims and prevent the spread of their asinine contagion – this is why I suggested that he ought to be banned from the forum. Others have been banned for far less. Moderation is failing in this one.

Had he concentrated on the 2% truth aspect of his offerings, and left the 98% off the wall twisted bullsh1t out of the equation, it would have been more interesting.

brianthebard · 24-02-2010 7:53pm

Dean Roche banned for 10 days for repeated ignoring of mod warnings, nation-bashing and general trolling.
Marchdub infracted for backseat moderation and insults. There were two reported posts for this thread, and neither of them were from you. Mods aren't mindreaders, if you have a problem report it.
Thought about leaving this open but tbh there have been plenty of threads on the famine before and there will be again. The OP's question has been answered. Locked.

Guinness in the Irish Potato Famine

Comments