Zoid, are you the one vote who thinks it okay? If so, why do you feel it is okay?
Were someone looking for me, I’d be offended if a colleague said, “Oh, she’s the guinea/wop/greaseball/dago upstairs in the tech office.” Sheesh.
They are both derogatory but offense is in the eye of the beholder.
Kid Rock with regard to Mick.
No, that’s what HE said. LOL!
I think that any “derogatory” appellation depends almost entirely on context. For me to call Snoop Dogg the N-word would be indescribably offensive; for his buddy that he grew up with in Long Beach to use it, it’s not offensive at all.
In the part of rural Missouri where I live, the term “Redneck” is a badge of honor. But if a visitor from, say, New York or L.A. were to use it (not that they’d have any reason to come here, but you get my point), it would be extremely offensive. At least to some.
Neither is as offensive as some slurs are, and of the two, I would consider “Mick” to be less offensive (mostly due to the vast number of “dumb Polack” jokes). But both are definitely offensive to a nonzero degree.
I’m Polish (well, first generation. My folks were both born in Poland). I voted “yes” to both, but it is somewhat context dependent. I’ll use it at times with in-group speak or in a bit of a self-conscious manner, but it is generally regarded as at least mildly offensive. I find Mick as, if not more, offensive. Polack at least has the defense if being the actual Polish word for a Polish man polak, while Mick is purely meant as derogatory slang (in my experience). I’ve heard people use Polack not knowing any better, but I can’t think of a context where someone would casually refer to someone as a Mick without derogatory intentions (other than some sort of in-group joking.) To me, though I am not Irish, I treat it as offensive as Spic, Dago, Guinea, Jap and Kraut (though Kraut I haven’t heard used unironically by someone since I heard an old man sitting on the stoop use it back in 1992.)
I grew up in a farm town in Oklahoma. I wouldn’t go so far as to say “Redneck” is a badge of honor; but its definition was completely different. For us it mean that you worked in the sun (probably more specifically, on a farm) and your neck would get red from sunburn. Only when I moved to Georgia and experienced Floridians did I see how it was an insult. I’m (half) Irish with an Irish last name that Begins with McC; and I wouldn’t be offended if someone called me “Mick.” Sometimes I think people try to find ways to be offended.
Not so much calling you Mick as “a Mick.” There’s a difference in the way I hear those two. One is a nickname based on your actual name. The other is a generic derogatory terms or people of Irish decent.
“Offensive” is in the eye of the beholder, so I think you need to clarify what you’re asking:
“Do YOU find these terms offensive?”
“Are these terms generally considered offensive?”
“Are these terms offensive to the people they refer to?”
Personally, I’d say it would depend on the context, but without knowing any more, I’d say I think of them as mildly offensive, but also as sort of old-fashioned and Archie-Bunkerish.
I’d consider both offensive although not “Fire him and burn his house down for saying it” offensive. However, much like some African Americans and the n-word, I’ll happily call my sister a Polack if I feel the situation calls for it.
Offensive mostly out of context and/or depending on the situation. Married-into-the-family cousin Walter the Pollock for example ----- from anyone outside the family it would be offensive. For those of us in the family it is just a way of describing which Walter we mean without going to middle names.
My Irish friends are usually too drunk to notice. My Polish friends are definitely offended, although they usually do not realize they were offended until hours later.
No, I do not use either term.
The nickname would usually be “Mac”, not “Mick”, no? ETA: Oh, Michael. Never mind!
To me, the default is that they are offensive. In some contexts, they can be used as jovial teasing. But more often than not, they are offensive. You would not use either term with someone you did not know well.
Same with Spick, Wop, Beaner, Wetback, Kike, Slant, Nip, Chink, Gooks, Kraut, etc.
Canuck is A-OK, though. 
I did not vote
For so many people who regard “mick” as offensive, there seems to be a fascinating lack of awareness in this thread of the TV show “The Mick.”
I voted “Mick” as being offensive. I’m English and middle-aged, and when I heard the term being used in my youth it was being used offensively. Thankfully, living in more enlightened times, I never hear it being used.
I’m vaguely aware of it. From the commercials, it’s “Sweet Dee Watches Kids” except she’s named Micky (hence the title) so I just assumed that wink-wink racism was part of its supposed charm.
With a caveat that the terms are not derogatory when someone from the same ethnic group uses it. I’ve known Polish people who called themselves “polacks” with no offense taken. But if it were said by someone who wasn’t Polish, it would be derogatory.
Sort of like “When you call me that – smile,”
That’s pretty much it. Although, other ethnic groups from “the neighborhood” can use the terms in a joshing manner, like with them referring to me as a Polack, and me to them as a Dago or Bohunk or Mick or Beaner or whatever.
It’s kind of interesting to see my mom get pissed off at the term “Polack.” She’s Polish and she’s pretty free in her speech and not “PC” by any normal definition (and politically conservative), but, boy, if I use the word “Polack,” when speaking in English she is not happy. (Even though, as I said above, polak is the Polish word for a Polish male.)