The far right

[whitey]

Interestingly, yet another poll this morning shows immigration is the number one concern for the electorate, and 75% have a negative perception of the government's handling of same. So, yes, it is important to people.

So by all accounts then FF/FG and SF will be gone from government and opposition the next day? As with a 75% showing as number one concern the new ones should have sorted Irelands 'problems' 

So do you think maybe government policy is impacted by the polls

All of a sudden after not enforcing certain laws for years, they start enforcing them - eg cracking down on people arriving without papers

They add a bunch of countries to the list of safe countries

They make a token effort to deport people who've exhausted every legal option

So its sorted now, so get back in your box, Ireland will be all white again 

I'm really looking forward to moving back in about 5 years time

I have a line on a house I'm going to buy in the next 6 months....just sorting out a few loose ends

Exciting times to be able to contribute to my home country

[Milltown Row2]

Strangely enough my cousin is heading back to have her kids secondary educated in the North, she's pretty well off so could afford privately.

They may return when completed though

America might not be the go to place, daughter back after nearly four months, wasn't her cup of tea either.

[whitey]

Strangely enough my cousin is heading back to have her kids secondary educated in the North, she's pretty well off so could afford privately.

They may return when completed though

America might not be the go to place, daughter back after nearly four months, wasn't her cup of tea either.

It's become almost impossible for people to start out fresh like we did 30-40 years  ago.

It's kinda like those Facebook pages talking about the Irish on the building sites in London in the 70/80s-the "Golden Age" has definitely passed over here too (for new people thinking of coming over)

If your goal was to come over for the craic for a few years, that's still doable...but barely (cheap places the Irish lived in back in the 80s and early 90s have all become gentrified and would be completely unaffordable)

[trueblue1234]

I do notice you are all still turning a blind eye to the money racket between the Government and the landlords of these Camps concentrated with a lot of people. Huge money involved in treating these people like a commodity.

WELL LADS, WHAT DO YE THINK?

You will notice I have not at resorted to labelling or calling you names. I would expect the same in return. Thank you.

Personally I do not disagree. I see a lot of unsavoury people making a lot of money put of refugees. BUT, I ask this. We have to take our fair share of refugees in the EU. So if not private sector who else would provide the accommodation at short notice? That's the problem, complain about things but unless you have an alternative why bother?

This should be the priority. The coming of people is going to continue. So public sector has to set up proper structures for accommodation that are not Cattle marts. Encourage a spread of people across the country, not horsing them all into a couple of communities.

This won't happen as Government are in a lot of the Private sectors pockets.  And sadly Immigrants have become a profitable commodity.

I agree and I'm on record here pages ago saying that im cornered about ghettos and I want to see proper plan for integration of our guests. But man, you claimed that hosting refugees was destroying communities and that's just not true.

Guests?? What a euphemism! What about they be made to go home once the wars are over? How would ye feel about that? THEN we could treat them like guests.

What a nasty inhumane comment.
Be some influx if all our people and their generations  around the world because of famine, war and unemployment were made to go home.

You realize that some of the people you're defending go back "home" on vacation several times a year and some have even sublet their taxpayer funded accommodation

Comparing these welfare tourists to Irish people fleeing the famine is virtue signaling of historic proportions

(FWIW-I was in Ireland in June and saw plenty of UA reg Audis, Porches and BMWs)

Not to mention this: https://www.irishtimes.com/politics/2024/04/11/tanaiste-defends-states-payment-of-up-to-1m-a-month-for-ukrainian-pets/

Today should be a good reminder for the likes of Whitey why these "welfare tourists" have come to Ireland.

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

And imaging complaining about them returning home occasionally to visit family and friends and for having a nice car. The 'American Dream' can't be that great - it certainly hasn't erased your Irish begrudgery.

So do you think the Irish taxpayer should foot the bill for people who drive €80,000 luxury cars through 7 safe countries for free accomadation, food, education and medical care?

Not to mention free vetinary care and dog/cat day care for their pets?

Simple yes or no will suffice.

Poland is the first safe country in the west. Should they have taken all the millions of Ukrainian refugees themselves based on your criteria?

A simple Yes or No will suffice

Every single Ukrainian I know living in Ireland that initially was on 'welfare' is now working and working hard. Starting businesses. Paying taxes. Aren't you yanks and plastic yanks obsessed with other people paying taxes? You should be pleased.

Don't take my word for it

https://kyivindependent.com/ireland-set-to-introduce-significant-reduction-in-benefits-for-ukrainian-refugees/

"The Irish government has said that around a third of Ukrainian refugees came to Ireland from "safe countries," with some Irish officials implying that some came to Ireland specifically because the welfare payments are higher"

Genuine question here. This coming from safe countries bit and passing through safe countries enroute. Is this a big deal? Surely you can't expect the nearest safe country to take all the refugees? So there would have to be an element of getting to a safe country first and then moving on? Or am I missing something?

[Father Murphy]

I do notice you are all still turning a blind eye to the money racket between the Government and the landlords of these Camps concentrated with a lot of people. Huge money involved in treating these people like a commodity.

WELL LADS, WHAT DO YE THINK?

You will notice I have not at resorted to labelling or calling you names. I would expect the same in return. Thank you.

Personally I do not disagree. I see a lot of unsavoury people making a lot of money put of refugees. BUT, I ask this. We have to take our fair share of refugees in the EU. So if not private sector who else would provide the accommodation at short notice? That's the problem, complain about things but unless you have an alternative why bother?

This should be the priority. The coming of people is going to continue. So public sector has to set up proper structures for accommodation that are not Cattle marts. Encourage a spread of people across the country, not horsing them all into a couple of communities.

This won't happen as Government are in a lot of the Private sectors pockets.  And sadly Immigrants have become a profitable commodity.

I agree and I'm on record here pages ago saying that im cornered about ghettos and I want to see proper plan for integration of our guests. But man, you claimed that hosting refugees was destroying communities and that's just not true.

Guests?? What a euphemism! What about they be made to go home once the wars are over? How would ye feel about that? THEN we could treat them like guests.

What a nasty inhumane comment.
Be some influx if all our people and their generations  around the world because of famine, war and unemployment were made to go home.

You realize that some of the people you're defending go back "home" on vacation several times a year and some have even sublet their taxpayer funded accommodation

Comparing these welfare tourists to Irish people fleeing the famine is virtue signaling of historic proportions

(FWIW-I was in Ireland in June and saw plenty of UA reg Audis, Porches and BMWs)

Not to mention this: https://www.irishtimes.com/politics/2024/04/11/tanaiste-defends-states-payment-of-up-to-1m-a-month-for-ukrainian-pets/

Today should be a good reminder for the likes of Whitey why these "welfare tourists" have come to Ireland.

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

And imaging complaining about them returning home occasionally to visit family and friends and for having a nice car. The 'American Dream' can't be that great - it certainly hasn't erased your Irish begrudgery.

So do you think the Irish taxpayer should foot the bill for people who drive €80,000 luxury cars through 7 safe countries for free accomadation, food, education and medical care?

Not to mention free vetinary care and dog/cat day care for their pets?

Simple yes or no will suffice.

Poland is the first safe country in the west. Should they have taken all the millions of Ukrainian refugees themselves based on your criteria?

A simple Yes or No will suffice

Every single Ukrainian I know living in Ireland that initially was on 'welfare' is now working and working hard. Starting businesses. Paying taxes. Aren't you yanks and plastic yanks obsessed with other people paying taxes? You should be pleased.

Don't take my word for it

https://kyivindependent.com/ireland-set-to-introduce-significant-reduction-in-benefits-for-ukrainian-refugees/

"The Irish government has said that around a third of Ukrainian refugees came to Ireland from "safe countries," with some Irish officials implying that some came to Ireland specifically because the welfare payments are higher"

I'm not taking your word for anything.

Those Ukrainians driving those fancy cars that you're envious of, will have had very good lives in Ukraine. Whitey would have us believe they left it all behind  to scrounge €237 Euros and live it up in a damp shithole in Ballygbackwards.

They're escaping a war.

As for "safe countries" you think Poland should take them all? Ireland should do f**k all?

[Father Murphy]

I do notice you are all still turning a blind eye to the money racket between the Government and the landlords of these Camps concentrated with a lot of people. Huge money involved in treating these people like a commodity.

WELL LADS, WHAT DO YE THINK?

You will notice I have not at resorted to labelling or calling you names. I would expect the same in return. Thank you.

Personally I do not disagree. I see a lot of unsavoury people making a lot of money put of refugees. BUT, I ask this. We have to take our fair share of refugees in the EU. So if not private sector who else would provide the accommodation at short notice? That's the problem, complain about things but unless you have an alternative why bother?

This should be the priority. The coming of people is going to continue. So public sector has to set up proper structures for accommodation that are not Cattle marts. Encourage a spread of people across the country, not horsing them all into a couple of communities.

This won't happen as Government are in a lot of the Private sectors pockets.  And sadly Immigrants have become a profitable commodity.

I agree and I'm on record here pages ago saying that im cornered about ghettos and I want to see proper plan for integration of our guests. But man, you claimed that hosting refugees was destroying communities and that's just not true.

Guests?? What a euphemism! What about they be made to go home once the wars are over? How would ye feel about that? THEN we could treat them like guests.

What a nasty inhumane comment.
Be some influx if all our people and their generations  around the world because of famine, war and unemployment were made to go home.

You realize that some of the people you're defending go back "home" on vacation several times a year and some have even sublet their taxpayer funded accommodation

Comparing these welfare tourists to Irish people fleeing the famine is virtue signaling of historic proportions

(FWIW-I was in Ireland in June and saw plenty of UA reg Audis, Porches and BMWs)

Not to mention this: https://www.irishtimes.com/politics/2024/04/11/tanaiste-defends-states-payment-of-up-to-1m-a-month-for-ukrainian-pets/

Today should be a good reminder for the likes of Whitey why these "welfare tourists" have come to Ireland.

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

And imaging complaining about them returning home occasionally to visit family and friends and for having a nice car. The 'American Dream' can't be that great - it certainly hasn't erased your Irish begrudgery.

So do you think the Irish taxpayer should foot the bill for people who drive €80,000 luxury cars through 7 safe countries for free accomadation, food, education and medical care?

Not to mention free vetinary care and dog/cat day care for their pets?

Simple yes or no will suffice.

Poland is the first safe country in the west. Should they have taken all the millions of Ukrainian refugees themselves based on your criteria?

A simple Yes or No will suffice

Every single Ukrainian I know living in Ireland that initially was on 'welfare' is now working and working hard. Starting businesses. Paying taxes. Aren't you yanks and plastic yanks obsessed with other people paying taxes? You should be pleased.

Don't take my word for it

https://kyivindependent.com/ireland-set-to-introduce-significant-reduction-in-benefits-for-ukrainian-refugees/

"The Irish government has said that around a third of Ukrainian refugees came to Ireland from "safe countries," with some Irish officials implying that some came to Ireland specifically because the welfare payments are higher"

Genuine question here. This coming from safe countries bit and passing through safe countries enroute. Is this a big deal? Surely you can't expect the nearest safe country to take all the refugees? So there would have to be an element of getting to a safe country first and then moving on? Or am I missing something?

You're not missing anything. It's just a non-argument the far right crowd use to try to justify their position of not wanting to help refugees.

[whitey]

TrueBlue

The issue with emigration/emigration is that there are elements of push and elements of pull when it comes to people migrating

As a host country you only have control over the element of pull and by offering overly generous benefits you encourage way more people to come than you can accommodate

When the Irish government changed the generosity of entitlements for new arrivals coming from Ukraine the numbers fell off a Cliff 

[trueblue1234]

TrueBlue

The issue with emigration/emigration is that there are elements of push and elements of pull when it comes to people migrating

As a host country you only have control over the element of pull and by offering overly generous benefits you encourage way more people to come than you can accommodate

When the Irish government changed the generosity of entitlements for new arrivals coming from Ukraine the numbers fell off a Cliff 

But talk of passing through Safe countries is just muddying the water. An irrelevance, unless I'm mistaken in what I said earlier.

[whitey]

TrueBlue

The issue with emigration/emigration is that there are elements of push and elements of pull when it comes to people migrating

As a host country you only have control over the element of pull and by offering overly generous benefits you encourage way more people to come than you can accommodate

When the Irish government changed the generosity of entitlements for new arrivals coming from Ukraine the numbers fell off a Cliff 

But talk of passing through Safe countries is just muddying the water. An irrelevance, unless I'm mistaken in what I said earlier.

No-you're completely missing the point

If every country in Europe had identical benefits, then this would be a non issue

By having the most generous benefits in all of Europe, Ireland enticed additional people who were already out of harms way and receiving benefits and shelter.

Their decision to come was based on the extra benefits available rather than their safety or their ability to return home once the conflict abated

The issue of people transiting through safe countries was actually brought up by the Ukrainians themselves in that news article. The implication is/was that if you were transiting from an already safe country , you were doing so just to take advantage of a more generous benefits package than you were currently receiving (and as I said, when the benefit package changed the numbers arriving dropped off a Cliff )

[trueblue1234]

TrueBlue

The issue with emigration/emigration is that there are elements of push and elements of pull when it comes to people migrating

As a host country you only have control over the element of pull and by offering overly generous benefits you encourage way more people to come than you can accommodate

When the Irish government changed the generosity of entitlements for new arrivals coming from Ukraine the numbers fell off a Cliff 

But talk of passing through Safe countries is just muddying the water. An irrelevance, unless I'm mistaken in what I said earlier.

No-you're completely missing the point

If every country in Europe had identical benefits then the burden would have been spread more evenly

By having the most generous benefits in all of Europe, Ireland enticed people who were already out of harms way.

Their decision to come was based on the benefits available rather than their safety or their ability to return home once the conflict abated

The issue of people transiting through safe countries was actually brought up by the Ukrainians themselves in that news article. The implication is/was that if you were transiting from an already safe country , you were doing so just to take advantage of a more generous benefits package than you were currently receiving (and as I said, when the benefit package changed the numbers arriving dropped off a Cliff )

I'm not missing anything. I do not expect that the nearest countries pick up all refugees. And I would not expect all refugees to want to stay in those countries. So there is a necessity for refuges to get into a safe country first before moving on. The issue about benefits in Ireland is totally separate. The fact they came from a safe country is irrelevant.


So you do think the surrounding countries should just take all the refugees?

[Rossfan]

Wasn't it an EU response to the Ukranians, so that they could be dispersed across the 27 Countries* rather than having 4 or 5 million people living in tent cities in Poland?

* not sure if Putin's mate in Hungary taking any.

[whitey]

TrueBlue

The issue with emigration/emigration is that there are elements of push and elements of pull when it comes to people migrating

As a host country you only have control over the element of pull and by offering overly generous benefits you encourage way more people to come than you can accommodate

When the Irish government changed the generosity of entitlements for new arrivals coming from Ukraine the numbers fell off a Cliff 

But talk of passing through Safe countries is just muddying the water. An irrelevance, unless I'm mistaken in what I said earlier.

No-you're completely missing the point

If every country in Europe had identical benefits then the burden would have been spread more evenly

By having the most generous benefits in all of Europe, Ireland enticed people who were already out of harms way.

Their decision to come was based on the benefits available rather than their safety or their ability to return home once the conflict abated

The issue of people transiting through safe countries was actually brought up by the Ukrainians themselves in that news article. The implication is/was that if you were transiting from an already safe country , you were doing so just to take advantage of a more generous benefits package than you were currently receiving (and as I said, when the benefit package changed the numbers arriving dropped off a Cliff )

I'm not missing anything. I do not expect that the nearest countries pick up all refugees. And I would not expect all refugees to want to stay in those countries. So there is a necessity for refuges to get into a safe country first before moving on. The issue about benefits in Ireland is totally separate. The fact they came from a safe country is irrelevant.


So you do think the surrounding countries should just take all the refugees?

Never said or even implied that!

Let's say People are in a safe country and their benefits are about to be cut. They can (1) go home assuming it's safe (2) deal with it (3) move to another country (Ireland) where their benefits will be double or triple what they're currently getting (before cuts).....what do you think they're going to do?

And I don't blame or fault them one bit. I'd do the same myself.

The EU should have ensured uniformity of benefits, but they didn't. Then the virtue signaling Irish leprechauns (looking for a pat on the head) decided to introduce a benefits package without fully thinking it out which led to completely unsustainable inflows

So the article, written by Ukrainians, implied that people moving from already safe countries were simply gaming the system (at the expense of the Irish taxpayer)

[trueblue1234]

I know the reasons. My point is saying there're coming from a safe country is pointless. It doesn't mean anything. The bordering countries can't take them all, so they were always going to move on.

Does anyone have figures for how much each country is giving refugees? Just to see how Ireland compares? Be interested to see.

[From the Bunker]

Fair dues to the Ukrainians. What would you expect? They had a whole system set up for them when the war started post Covid (a fair coincidence that). Anyone if you are blaming Ukrainians you are looking the wrong way. Feck me I'd have done the same.

Free Postage home was one of the biggest perks. I seen a set of four tyres sent from Ireland to Ukraine - for free. You should have seen the madness when this freebee was to end. An Post Depots and depots full up of stuff going to Ukraine. Once again I'd have done the same.

In every walk of life there are legitimate victims and there are chancers. The problem is - you try too hard to weed out the chancers, you'll probably affect helping those in need.

[Wildweasel74]

What is the definition of a refugee. 30/40% of persons who left the Urkaine were enlistment age. They def in no rush back to the Ukraine.