Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Trudeau's Committment to Syrian Refugees - 25,000 by Year End


Recommended Posts

In any case, if Trudeau succeeds in bringing in the full 25,000 by February (I believe the current goal), then to keep harping on this as a failure and an indication of incompetence is pointless. The job was done, and who hasn't had a project go over a deadline and overbudget? It happens all the time, whether one is remodeling a room in their home, building a whole new house, building icebreakers or bringing in refugees, apparently.

Actually, the goal of the "full" 25,000 government assisted refugees is now the end of this year - December 31st, 2016. If the current trend is continued, that will almost certainly be extended into 2017. Until then, they'll just be padding their numbers with privately-sponsored refugees - most or all of whom would have arrived in Canada no matter who won the election.

Edited by Keepitsimple
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Actually, the goal of the "full" 25,000 government assisted refugees is now the end of this year - December 31st, 2016. If the current trend is continued, that will almost certainly be extended into 2017. Until then, they'll just be padding their numbers with privately-sponsored refugees - most or all of whom would have arrived in Canada no matter who won the election.

Yup, bad planning all around and doesn't look to be getting any better. I do hope this is a learning moment for Trudeau, and he does better in future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So in his assessment so far he has "no promises broken" but we all know that to be untrue..

No. He shows the Syrian refugee promise to be broken. We believe he will have higher deficits than he said but that will take time to confirm that broken promise.

So far the site seems to be objective whether you like Tim Hortons or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. He shows the Syrian refugee promise to be broken. We believe he will have higher deficits than he said but that will take time to confirm that broken promise.

So far the site seems to be objective whether you like Tim Hortons or not.

What about the "revenue neutral" tax plan, or saying that someone of his means doesn't require govt. funded child care?

I like the occasional Timmies. :wacko:

Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the "revenue neutral" tax plan, or saying that someone of his means doesn't require govt. funded child care?

I like the occasional Timmies. :wacko:

I think he can only mark it as a broken promise once it actually happens. We all know it's GOING to happen but to be truly objective, he needs to keep it in the In Prgoress category.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the "revenue neutral" tax plan, or saying that someone of his means doesn't require govt. funded child care?

I like the occasional Timmies. :wacko:

To be precise, he didn't say government-funded childcare, he said rich people don't need big baby bonus cheques (too tired to remember what they're currently called). Also, if his household budget doesn't exceed the previous resident even with Nannies, then he hasn't received anything "extra". Getting hung up on Nannies because it involves children and so do baby bonus cheques, when the cost to the taxpayer is identical to a PM who doesn't employ Nannies is silly.

If in a couple of years we find they were an additional expense, or some clever bookkeeping sleight of hand to cover extra nanny costs, that will be a good time to castigate him for hypocrisy. And given politicians overall behavior, it will probably happen so just hold your horses. You'll have plenty of real stuff to criticize soon enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, bad planning all around and doesn't look to be getting any better. I do hope this is a learning moment for Trudeau, and he does better in future.

Others remain to be seen - but on this issue, it's not bad planning. It should be as clear as the nose on your face that they knew without any doubt that their "promise" was ridiculously impossible. Aiming for 25,000 in two months as opposed to the now "estimate" of 25,000 in 14 months should tell you that. The purpose of what was essentially a lie was to keep the momentum of gaining NDP voters.

Another issue that drew NDP voters was the "bring home the jets immediately" promise. They have already broken the spirit of that one - it remains to be seen if they will break the promise outright. Pretty simple - bring them home - or not. Will it prove to be another lie?

Edited by Keepitsimple
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he can only mark it as a broken promise once it actually happens. We all know it's GOING to happen but to be truly objective, he needs to keep it in the In Prgoress category.

Thank you for your posting. I respect your objectivity. I try to share it.

I also try to make decisions based on as factual data as possible and it is very difficult to find objective data. I try very hard not to have a bias since that does not translate into clarity of decision making.

To Smoke - if there is a more objective and comprehensive site then please direct me to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you feel that having "almost" balanced the budget, down to a few billion, as the conservatives did has left us on "shaky" ground, yet you are now supporting the Liberals promise to increase the deficit to 10B (a number which many are predicting will undoubtedly grow).

As half of it is going to infrastructure, about 1/4 is going to increased child benefits, and a bit more is going to poor seniors, resulting in increased spending for me in particular and the economy in general whilst lifting tens of thousands out of poverty - yes, at the moment I am.

Of course, personally, I'd rather raise the GST.

Link to post
Share on other sites

98% of adult immigrants entering Canada have higher qualifications than an average Canadian when as the respective figure in Germany is a mere 10% because we Europeans stupidly put other things first when deciding who to let in. Therefore little surprise that xenophobia has little appeal in North-America when as in Europe it is a natural consequence of totally foolish policies regarding immigration.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To Smoke - if there is a more objective and comprehensive site then please direct me to it.

One does not need a website to point out the Trudeau Liberals broken promises. One simply has to watch the news. But if you require a special website to put it all together in some understandable way for you, then have at it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As half of it is going to infrastructure, about 1/4 is going to increased child benefits, and a bit more is going to poor seniors, resulting in increased spending for me in particular and the economy in general whilst lifting tens of thousands out of poverty - yes, at the moment I am.

Of course, personally, I'd rather raise the GST.

Add in the 2.65B promised for climate change, the 1.2B miscalculation for the revenue neutral tax changes, the additional money required to get all the refugees in (that number continues to grow so I don't have a number), and might as well add in the cost of the T&R recommendations and we are already way over 10B.

Funny that the left were outraged when Harper wanted to spend money to kick-start the economy, but NOW that it's a Liberal spending to kick-start the economy it's all OK sunny ways. I think it's about time you become a little more honest and change your handle from Smallc to HugeLib.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As half of it is going to infrastructure, about 1/4 is going to increased child benefits, and a bit more is going to poor seniors, resulting in increased spending for me in particular and the economy in general whilst lifting tens of thousands out of poverty - yes, at the moment I am.Of course, personally, I'd rather raise the GST.

Short term gain for long term paid. And raising the GST. Especially now is about as dumb of an economic policy as possible. You're just a stenographer for the new government.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Refugees are receiving over $400 dollars a week just for meals. Meanwhile, some Canadians, that work and pay taxes, go hungry. If only they had darker skin and had come here more recently. They'd be better taken care of by our new king .... er .... Prime minister.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Refugees are receiving over $400 dollars a week just for meals.

Meanwhile, the Old Age Security payment increases by less than one dollar per month for the period January 2016 to March 2016.

OAS benefits, which consist of the basic OAS pension, the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) and the Allowances, will increase by 0.1 per cent for the first quarter of 2016 (January to March). As of January 1st, 2016, the basic OAS pension will increase from $569.95 to $570.52 per month.

https://www.kelownanow.com/watercooler/news/news/Provincial/16/01/01/Canada_Pension_Plan_and_Old_Age_Security_will_Increase_in_2016/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, the Old Age Security payment increases by less than one dollar per month for the period January 2016 to March 2016.

https://www.kelownanow.com/watercooler/news/news/Provincial/16/01/01/Canada_Pension_Plan_and_Old_Age_Security_will_Increase_in_2016/

It's unjust and sickening.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Refugees are receiving over $400 dollars a week just for meals.

I don't believe that's true, Shady.

They get normal welfare benefits until they get a job. Individual welfare benefits are about $700/month for all expenses ... housing, food, clothing transportation, etc.

For a family it would be more, but $400/wk just for food?

No way.

Prove your claim.

Link pls.

.

Edited by jacee
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe that's true, Shady

Link pls.

And when you see that it's true, what then? Just another excuse exonerating our new prime minister?
Link to post
Share on other sites

And when you see that it's true, what then?

Prove it!

Link pls.

And don't show us that moronic email that's been circulating claiming benefits are $2400 a month.

It's wrong: The one time start up is ... one time, not every month.

Look it up, figure it out, back up your moronic claim ... or retract it.

You are entitled to whatever ridiculous opinion you choose.

You are not entitled to lie about facts.

A single person on welfare gets less than $400/month for basic needs (including food) plus shelter amounts:

http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=2179707b1a280410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD&vgnextchannel=36b2d08099380410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD#a

Edited by jacee
Link to post
Share on other sites

Refugees are receiving over $400 dollars a week just for meals. Meanwhile, some Canadians, that work and pay taxes, go hungry. If only they had darker skin and had come here more recently. They'd be better taken care of by our new king .... er .... Prime minister.

The refugees don't get that money. If they're staying in a hotel (usually for 1-2 days) the hotel gets that money as payment for meals up to that amount.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




×
×
  • Create New...