Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Argus

Immigrants cost Canada $30 billion per year

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

It just means you and your millennial friends will have to rent rather than buy...

None the less, Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal are still undervalued by global standards.

Immigrants will not be going to New Brunswick.

Megacities are the future.

So still a good buy if you have the means, Canada will simply continue to load up on Indians and Chinese with money to keep the megacities growing.

I did sell my stake in the megacity, but only because I'm getting old, have to take your profits sometime, can't spend it when you're dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dougie93 said:

No, I don't think the incentive programs are accomplishing what the British used to accomplish with legal force which is the assertion that the Eskimo Communist was making

The incentive programs are just fast tracks for immigrants who would otherwise not easily qualify. Extra immigrants piling in,  who would otherwise be rejected,

Again, the vast majority who come, Indian, Chinese, Filipino, qualify by purchasing property and/or starting businesses, Landed Immigrants on the spot without further ado.

Actually while a residential requirement might make it easier for less qualified applicants to enter Canada, they would still be on the points system.   These wouldn’t be additional immigrants but a diversion of a portion of current immigration levels into the new category, which could be adjusted up or down as a percentage of total immigration based on market needs.  

The only reason I don’t propose a residential requirement on all points system candidates is because we need to remain open to and encourage the most talented people to come here where there’s sectoral demand and for innovation.  The wunderkinds need to be fastracked with minimum obstacles.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

None the less, Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal are still undervalued by global standards.

Immigrants will not be going to New Brunswick.

Megacities are the future.

So still a good buy if you have the means, Canada will simply continue to load up on Indians and Chinese with money to keep the megacities growing.

I did sell my stake in the megacity, but only because I'm getting old, have to take your profits sometime, can't spend it when you're dead.

Toronto and Vancouver have the most expensive real estate on average in North America.  

https://amp.businessinsider.com/the-most-unaffordable-housing-markets-in-north-america-2017-10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rue said:

Does not change a thing I said.  The entire area known as Canada was inhabited by indigenous peoples who came before the rest of us,. Their inhabiting the land first, determines their status not your interpretation of what ruling means. The fact the indigenous peoples did not have a centralized government or body to dictate to them rules does not mean they did not inhabit the land and functionally operate with their own systems of decentralized laws and regulations.

Life in Canada did not start with a European model of law and how that model defines the country. Its precisely why the Magna Carta Act and King John did not deny the pre-existence of aboriginal laws and customs but honoured them.

 

But the notion of property arises with the agrarian economy:  growing crops and corralling livestock.  The Algonquins hunted and canoed.  The Iroquois had temporary encampments that might last several years at the most.  Indigenous in BC had more sedentary towns and villages along the coast.  The waters teemed with fish and the communities were fairly wealthy.  

When there were so few people and so much open land, the notion of property seemed ridiculous and foreign.  The Indigenous in the territories of New France, the Acadias, and HBC, where Europeans first arrived, had no deeds for property.  

Property only became a hot commodity after two centuries of settlement, as many more people arrived, especially from places like Ireland in the immigration waves of the 1830’s.  It became more intense with the railroad revolution of the 1860’s.  

Now that hundreds of thousands of people are migrating to already well populated areas, property has become highly valued and may soon be completely out of reach of the middle class in major urban areas.  

Edited by Zeitgeist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Toronto and Vancouver have the most expensive real estate on average in North America. 

North America is not the most expensive real estate market, America is comparatively cheap.

Vancouver is still cheap compared to Hong Kong

Toronto is dirt cheap compared to Singapore, London, Paris, Los Angeles, New York, Shenzen and Beijing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

North America is not the most expensive real estate market, America is comparatively cheap.

Vancouver is still cheap compared to Hong Kong

Toronto is dirt cheap compared to Singapore, London, Paris, Los Angeles, New York, Shenzen and Beijing.

 

Not really.  They’re more expensive on average than Paris, Rome, New York, LA, and probably Beijing.  London and Hong Kong are pricier.  That’s my point though.  There used to be fast tracks for an investment class of immigrant who came to Canada promising to invest a certain amount of money here.  Does this still exist?  There were a ton of virtually fake temporary businesses set up by Hong Kong Chinese in Vancouver.  When such people arrive with 10 million plus in the bank and show up at another realtor-engineered bidding war, the 33 year old Vancouverite who has put his life savings towards the piddly $100000 20% down payment doesn’t stand a chance.  That $500000 entry level studio condo will simply sell over that shmuck’s pay grade at, say, $550000.  This is the story of real estate in Canada’s largest cities today.  Too much demand for too little supply, scewed upwards by buyers who are coming at the market from a completely different idea of normal housing prices.  

Edited by Zeitgeist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Kalergi-plan in action. You don't just end up in Canada. It is not a country on the route anywhere and it is not easily accessible by any means of transport. Therefore the very thing that Canada receives hundreds of thousands of immigrants every year is a plan.

The same thing here in Europe; the so-called refugees travel through ten perfectly safe countries and end up in Sweden or Finland and claim asylum.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

And when the terms of the contract are fulfilled, they will get citizenship and be issued passports and will then go where they want to go, which is not Down Home.

Zeitgeist has said that people from Down Home can't even live Down Home anymore, they have to go to Fort Mac or Toronto.

Again, this is like the Mainland Chinese who learn French to get fast tracked into Canada by way of Quebec, but have no intention of staying there

Once they are in, they move to Toronto or Vancouver with everybody else.

Atlantic Canada is not set up to bring in different ethnic people, there is no expertise in that area here, no special infra structure such as mosques etcs….and it has been a struggle on both sides, a huge learning curb, huge differences in culture, a lot of people not very accepting which was also returned in kind.... larger provinces don't have this issue they have a plan of action , infra structure, people from that culture have already laid down the ground work.....  so yes most will leave once they can, but not all and that was the goal right to attract some immigrants to the Atlantic provinces......

Eventually all these big cities will not be able to sustain large numbers year after year without major investment in infra structure etc etc, soon or later those cities will be crossed out from the immigration choices....new cities will have to become the new Mecca for immigrants... immigration will have to say any where but here ,here and here....

Atlantic Canada does have it's challenges, but it is not a welfare state that most think it is, yes people were traveling to Alberta for jobs, extremely high paying jobs, i might add,  but then again most Canadians where taken advantage of this..... Now they are coming back to work for normal wages until Alberta's economy picks up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Eventually all these big cities will not be able to sustain large numbers year after year without major investment in infra structure etc etc, soon or later those cities will be crossed out from the immigration choices....

Bullshit.

Shanghai is 24 million

Beijing is 18 million

Shenzen is 12 million

All going strong, all kicking Canadian cities asses, Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver can triple in size at least, the growth pays for the infrastructure.

 

Edited by Dougie93

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada is behind the big countries, the future you can see right now,  saying that New Brunswick is going to grow because Toronto is full, is silly.

New York City keeps growing, nobody is fleeing Manhattan en masse to Rhode Island.

Butt f*ck middle of nowhere New Brunswick will still be the butt f*ck middle of nowhere a hundred years from now

Plenty of small towns in America which don't grow much, in a country with ten times Canada's population, fly over country is fly over country, that doesn't change,

In a hundred years, Canada might reach the population of America a hundred years ago, while America will be well over a billion by then.

Edited by Dougie93

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Canada is behind the big countries, the future you can see right now,  saying that New Brunswick is going to grow because Toronto is full, is silly.

New York City keeps growing, nobody is fleeing Manhattan en masse to Rhode Island.

But only the rich can live below 110th Street in Manhattan, at least as property owners.  I’m just trying to keep these cities both desirable and affordable.  We have far too much empty space in Canada to justify such a lack of affordable property.  There’s no need to spoil the air and water quality of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin or BC’s lower mainland, both of which have the most fertile land in the country. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Zeitgeist said:

But only the rich can live below 110th Street in Manhattan, at least as property owners.  I’m just trying to keep these cities both desirable and affordable.  We have far too much empty space in Canada to justify such a lack of affordable property.  There’s no need to spoil the air and water quality of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin or BC’s lower mainland, both of which have the most fertile land in the country. 

Immigrants are no going to flow to the butt f*ck middle of nowhere no matter how many stupid government programs Canada enacts to make that happen.

They're all going to Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver, same as they have been for 200 years, get real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody is going to live in the Arctic neither, that will be an empty wasteland of Eskimo Communism a hundred years from now too.

Nothing much changes, there's not going to be flying cars, nor jet packs, nor robot dogs

People will still walk the dogs they walk now, and Oromocto New Brunswick will still be a small town beside an army base in the armpit of the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at the 6ix it's not even close to being dense, all the density is on a narrow strip down Yonge Street.

Toronto can easily grow that out in both directions, tripling in size, quadrupling in size, no problem.

It's already much bigger than when I moved there in 70's, but in fifty years it hasn't changed much, a hundred year timescale is not actually that long.

Never  the less, even 500 years from now, Oromocto will still be a small town.

Countries grow by way of their cities, no country is growing out into the countryside

Quite the opposite, 500 years from now it's more likely nobody will live in the countryside, it will just be automated farms n' shit.

Edited by Dougie93

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cougar said:

Which nation exactly did you manage to exterminate?  You did not exterminate the Irish, they remained their own country, not the Scots, they also kind of have their own country and currency, and so on and so forth.  In fact, I do not know of an exterminated nation in Europe or any other place.  

I'm talking about how the natives treated each other when they made war. When they moved onto another tribe's territory they slaughtered ever single member or drove them off.

Quote

The difference is there were people here already who could legitimately lay claim on all lands in North America.  Then "the crown" showed up to take all it could take and the taking continues to this date.

So what? That was the case in every nation on Earth. Groups of people moving into the territory of others, fighting, and the winner takes the land. Happened from the first time we first began to from tribes hundreds of thousands of years ago. There isn't a single country in Europe or Asia that didn't start out as warring tribes or whose borders weren't drawn after they conquered someone else.

 

Edited by Argus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tribes of Europe all moved around, the Russians are the Rus, they came from around Finland.

The French are the Franks, they came from around Poland.

The British are the Normans from Norway and the North Germans.

Anatolia was Roman, then it was conquered by Turks from Central Asia.

The real problem for the Indians is that they were being swept aside by an epoch.

They were nomadic, the agrarian age arrived from  Europe, it was adapt or perish, they didn't adapt well, they perished.

It wasn't a nefarious plot, it was Darwinian forces, suck it, Indians.

Their societies were not adapted to agriculture, they couldn't compete with European farmers, too bad so sad, that's called natural selection.

There was no battle of annihilation, there was no mass killings, they just couldn't farm right, because they didn't want to farm, they refused to.

They still don't farm, they still don't produce on any great scale, they are small potatoes forever, because they refuse to adapt to the world as it is.

European cultures are masters of adaption, thus how we came to conquer the world.

Canada has been trying to get them to join Canada in the future, for two hundred years.

They refuse.  They insist on living in the middle of nowhere where there is nothing to do and they don't develop it.

Canada cannot save them from themselves, and every time Canada tried it was a disaster.

This is why Saskatchewan has no time for them, if you're going to live in Saskatchewan but refuse to farm, what exactly are you going to do then?

Answer; they've become grievance farmers.   That's their gig, they farm grievances and get handouts in return, and so the cycle continues.

Edited by Dougie93

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2019 at 8:50 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

The StatsCan numbers are already in....skilled immigrants depress the wages and opportunities for higher educated Canadian citizens.

Figures lie and liars figure. Why should I feel differently given the several new co-workers I have from around the world and the 25% raise in pay I've gotten these last couple of years?

Don't forget it wasn't that long ago when the people crapping their diapers over this depression of Canadian's wages were crapping in their diapers over the poor productivity of our lazy overpaid workers.

I put in 11 hours and had one 15 minute break today btw.  Tomorrow looks like it'll be closer to a 12 hour day.

Edited by eyeball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

  Too much demand for too little supply, scewed upwards by buyers who are coming at the market from a completely different idea of normal housing prices.  

The prices are inflated by the policy stimulus, asset classes are inflated while the real economy is moribund, so they just keep drowning in debt,

But whatever, f@ck them all, Canadians deserve everything that's coming to them and I will feast on the ruins of their lives like a carrion bird, with pleasure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, eyeball said:

I put in 11 hours and had one 15 minute break today btw.  Tomorrow looks like it'll be closer to a 12 hour day.

How you still manage to keep up with this board after so much work is a total mystery to me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Argus said:

Groups of people moving into the territory of others, fighting, and the winner takes the land.

Sounds quite primitive to me.  Not really a fair fight going with gun powder against knives and arrows, but hey, it was all about the taking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

Immigrants are no going to flow to the butt f*ck middle of nowhere no matter how many stupid government programs Canada enacts to make that happen.

They're all going to Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver, same as they have been for 200 years, get real.

That’s what public policy is for, including immigration policy, to prevent the carnage rather than celebrate it and try to profit from other people’s misery.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Argus said:

And I pointed out when you said that you were wrong, and basing it on a previous report. The updated report is based on 2016 data.

And here is the rebuttal to that rebuttal.

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/fiscal-transfers-to-immigrants-in-canada.pdf

And I will do the same again. I have zero interest in propaganda pieces from corporate Canada's lobby group telling us we need ever more immigrants. I trust nothing corporate Canada's lobby groups have to say.

I don't 'smear' all immigrants except insofar as to consider their economic and social effects and impacts in a macro environment. There is, after all, no other way to make such considerations. And you maintain this because... because.... help me out here, Rue. Your economic training consists of what, again? You cite economists who 

That is perhaps the most pathetic, time-worn, idiotic cliche imaginable. It's also racist in that it presumes that only the aborigines have true right to this country, and everyone else is second class and illegitimate.  If someone turned that argument on Israel and said all the Jews who came since 1947  and their descendants born there are illegitimate you'd call them antisemitic. But nooo, people who have been here for hundreds of years are STILL immigrants to you? Seriously? Drivel.

In regards to your first comment, the up-dated report is still based on the same erroneous presumptions.

In regards to your second comment, the rebuttal you provided has not rebutted the erroneous assumptions in the first report, simply continued them.

Your third comment shows you do not debate the content of the reports provided simply name call. I don't care what YOU trust. This is a debate on whether portraying ALL immigrants as a drain on Canada is accurate or logical or even makes economic sense. Your feelings are not material to the issues.

In regard to your fourth comment, of course you do and repeat the same negative smeer of all immigrants in this latest response then make a proclomation that your subjective method of smeering all immigrants as a drain on Canada is the only way to discuss the issue. This shows you are close minded to any view but your own and now go so far as to pose you are infallible making this about you personally and how you can not be debated.

Your last comment above is the most illogical. To start with never have I on this or any other forum in any response ever contended the rights of any one group of citizens in Canada is superior to another. Never, you projected that because you did not understand the point I made.

The point I  made was that:

i-it is not when analyzing the impact of immigrants snap shotting them into a narrow period or span of time to determine their impact is inaccurate and no neither I nor anyone else has to be an economist to understand that extrapolation of statistics is innacurate of its parameters are too restricted. That is actually a basic quantitative statistical fact and many people who have never gone to school but learned their lessons on the street understand that as well. Knock off the attempt to question me on being an economist because neither are you and everyone regardless of their academic background has the right to their opinion when debating and they don't have to have cancer to discuss it.

Next had you understood the above point which you didn't bother to respond to and thus simply name called away in the studies by the people you call names you did you would have understood my point was that with the exception of indigenous people everyone in this country is in fact an immigrant and so to study the impact of immigrants in this country where do you claim you will only analyze the current impacts within a very confined time span? How is that accurate?

How does that account for say the results an immigrant creates today, that will only show up as a positive impact on Canada 50, 100, 200 years from now? That was the point you failed to grasp and so you projected an illogical projection as to what I was claiming and accused me of being a racist when in fact you are the one arguing we should make blanket negative generalizations about an indentified group of people not me.

To compound your ignorant projection as to what I said even further you made a false analogy about Israel and anti-semitism. In fact I have contended the exact opposite of what you claim. I have stated whether someone arrives in Canada today or has been here since being born, differentiating their positive or negative impacts on the economy of Canada simply based on whether they are a recent come to Canada individual is illogical.

One needs to properly extrapolate if one is to forecast trends and economics provide forecasts of trends, not absolute rigid rules of cause and effect.

Now the reason I argue that is not because I am an economist but perhaps because as a lawyer I understand the definition of a Canadian before and after they become a Canadian citizen and that this legal status in itself will not determine their negative or positive contributions as you have claimed.

Next I argue that because as I said, it is illogical for you to think you are not an immigrant simply because you were born in Canada or that if someone is born in Canada and is a drain on Canadian society you make no comment on them but will smeer thousands of not millions of people who came to this country and built it.

Now before you get in my face and lecture me about anti-semitism or drivel, take the time to read the points I made and stop engaging in personal remarks. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

That’s what public policy is for, including immigration policy, to prevent the carnage rather than celebrate it and try to profit from other people’s misery.   

We should be able to profit from people's misery if those people are a buncha America hating,  speech banning, gun grabbing Canadian commies.

The God of the Hebrews is a vengeful Lord, upon them far leftist kooks let is wrath fall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

Canada is behind the big countries, the future you can see right now,  saying that New Brunswick is going to grow because Toronto is full, is silly.

New York City keeps growing, nobody is fleeing Manhattan en masse to Rhode Island.

Butt f*ck middle of nowhere New Brunswick will still be the butt f*ck middle of nowhere a hundred years from now

Plenty of small towns in America which don't grow much, in a country with ten times Canada's population, fly over country is fly over country, that doesn't change,

In a hundred years, Canada might reach the population of America a hundred years ago, while America will be well over a billion by then.

Take a deep breath, your turning blue...... Dougie, no where did I say New Brunswick was going to grow because Toronto was full, our largest cities have already expressed concerned by their Majors to the federal government that they can not continue to absorb 90 % of the immigrants coming into Canada, they are saying that they have a negative balance in infra structure already, with NO to little funding to build it, they are begging Ottawa for funding but none is forth coming....Under the Liberal and Conservative government they only plan to increase the numbers of immigrants.... You can't shove 10 lbs of shit into a 5 lb bag...with no funding. despite what you say....

These people will have to go into the other large cities where they have an infra structure surplus along with the funding to support it....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, cougar said:

Sounds quite primitive to me.  Not really a fair fight going with gun powder against knives and arrows, but hey, it was all about the taking.

Where is it written it has to be fair.

Share this post


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.


×
×
  • Create New...