this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2025
174 points (98.9% liked)

Futurology

3245 readers
37 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In the 12 months to April 2025, 6,100 Irish people emigrated to America. But the figure for Americans emigrating to Ireland was a third higher, at 9,600. The fact that this number has suddenly jumped by 96% suggests it might not be a permanent trend, but while it lasts, it might be a significant one, especially for Ireland.

3 million Americans hold an Irish passport, and 10s of millions more are eligible for one. Add to that, Italian passports are easy to obtain for Americans with Italian ancestry. An Irish or Italian passport is an EU passport, meaning you can work, start a business, and reside freely anywhere in the EU as an EU citizen. Even after Brexit, Ireland and the UK allow each other's citizens to work and reside freely in each other's countries, too.

Might the centuries-long trend of European-American emigrant traffic be about to reverse, too?

96% jump in number of people coming from the US to live in Ireland

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So what's the third higher reference?

[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Sorry I am lost now. What exactly is still unclear?

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What does the increased by a third figure refer to. The change in yhebdelayou are unclear, lol.

It says the number of Americans immigration to Ireland is a third higher than the Irish emigrants. But it's more like 50% higher. You suggested that maybe it was the American figure that changed by a third, but it changed by 96%.

So what does the third refer to? I suspect it's a misunderstanding of a 50% increase means that the excess is a third of the total.

2 to 3 is a 50% increase. 2 is 1/3 less than 3.

[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Your last line. They used it wrong, using the "higher number" as the basis for the relative change from the perspective of the smaller number. Does not make sense.

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Lol, so you agree with my initial comment?

[–] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yes. I completely missed your point earlier.

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago

No dramas. The article is confusing was my reason for posting.