Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Argus

Immigrants cost Canada $30 billion per year

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

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....

Doesn't matter what these politicians whine about, they're just pandering to foolish people who think the government can run things with a fine tooth comb.

Immigrants have been flocking to cities for thousands of years, Rome was founded by Greeks fleeing war and they built a city and then people flocked.

You think John Tory or the NDP is going to control that somehow?

Share this post


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

Doesn't matter what these politicians whine about, they're just pandering to foolish people who think the government can run things with a fine tooth comb.

Immigrants have been flocking to cities for thousands of years, Rome was founded by Greeks fleeing war and they built a city and then people flocked.

You think John Tory or the NDP is going to control that somehow?

Politician's are not going to control shit....the lack of funding and infra structure is going to dictate the whole process, other cities are going to have to take up the slack, until this infra structure deficit is under control. Toronto , Montréal , Vancouver are still going to grow, but not at the same pace 90 % of all incoming immigrants is not sustainable...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like, lift up your head and look around, the GoC can't even tie its own shoelaces, they are totally incapable of controlling people, people do what they want to do, can't stop them.

Furthermore, a country which puts immigrants in de facto labour camps is not a free country, what is done to the immigrants first will be done to all next.

I would fight to overthrow a country which overthrew Section 6 of the Charter, because if they can take the immigrants rights, that's how they'll take mine too.

Share this post


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

Politician's are not going to control shit....the lack of funding and infra structure is going to dictate the whole process, other cities are going to have to take up the slack, until this infra structure deficit is under control. Toronto , Montréal , Vancouver are still going to grow, but not at the same pace 90 % of all incoming immigrants is not sustainable...

Let the market decide, New York City wasn't built by Washington DC

Share this post


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

So basically you're a New York elitist?

No, classical liberal limited government conservative free market populist.

I loved the Big Apple when it was the Big Apple back in the 1970's, filthy and free, but Giuliani ruined my New York,  that New York is gone forever, but a moment in time,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/9/2019 at 10:26 PM, Rue said:

I am a son of a refugee and immigrants and proud of it as are most Canadians. The only non immigrants in this country are indigenous people.

I'm not an immigrant.  I was born here.  So were my parents.

If by your logic anyone with ancestors who originally migrated here from a foreign land are immigrants then all natives are immigrants too...they immigrated here from Asia.  What is the completely arbitrary number of generations one will no longer be deemed an "immigrant" under your logic?

An immigrant is someone who was born in one country and then migrated to another country, full stop.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 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.

Do you think Ghengis Khan was interested in fair fights when he swept across Asia? Were the Huns looking for fairness when they trashed Rome?  Did the Ottoman army look for fairness when they tried to take Vienna? For that matter, would you go to Turkey and Egypt and tell everyone they're just immigrants since they stole the land from the Christians who used to live there? Warring tribes and nations swept back and forth over every bit of territory on this planet right up through Napoleon and Hitler and Stalin, taking what they could hold.

Do you think the Turks wallow in guilt and shame over the deaths of the Christians they stole Turkey from? Does anyone anywhere other than us in the English speaking world have any shame about having defeated others instead of having been defeated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2019 at 8:41 PM, Dougie93 said:

Nope.  Temporary work visas are time contingent, for the duration of the visa you are protected by Section 6.

When the visa expires you must reapply, if application is rejected you are subject to removal or can leave of your own volition.

Landed immigrants are protected by Chapter 6 as residents.

Refugees are not permitted to work, so they live by the grace of welfare alone.

Refugees in Canada are granted work permits.

Edited by Moonlight Graham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Refugees in Canada are granted work permits.

And by those means they acquire residency and as a result are protected by Section 6 of the Charter.

You can't issue somebody a SIN number and then deny them their rights therein.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2019 at 8:53 PM, Dougie93 said:

As soon as you receive your permit and SIN, you have the status of a permanent resident.

That status protects you under Section 6 of the charter, once you grant a refugee the right to work, you can't tell him where to work and who to work for,

No that's not how it works.  A refugee claimant is not a permanent resident, they are a refugee claimant.  They can apply for a work permit. A work permit allows them to get a temporary SIN.  The refugee claimant protection document they receive, the work permit and SIN all have expiry dates on them that coincide with each other, and have to be renewed.  The work permit has conditions on it, which vary.

A regular person here in Canada on work permit or study permit is not a permanent resident either.  They often have conditions on their work permits, such as only being allowed to work for the specific employer/company that hired them.

Share this post


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

And by those means they acquire residency and as a result are protected by Section 6 of the Charter.

You can't issue somebody a SIN number and then deny them their rights therein.

We need a lawyer to settle this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

No that's not how it works.  A refugee claimant is not a permanent resident, they are a refugee claimant.  They can apply for a work permit. A work permit allows them to get a temporary SIN.  The refugee claimant protection document they receive, the work permit and SIN all have expiry dates on them that coincide with each other, and have to be renewed.  The work permit has conditions on it, which vary.

A regular person here in Canada on work permit or study permit is not a permanent resident either.  They often have conditions on their work permits, such as only being allowed to work for the specific employer/company that hired them.

Only if they agree to those terms, it cannot be imposed upon them by law, they enter into a contract with the government of their own free will, but they don't have to.

What refugees do is look for work wherever they can find ir, de facto seeking prosperity in whatever province they are offered work, when they find the job they want, they apply for it

The employer then gets the government to issue them the permit, so they are protected by Section 6, they just do the leg work first, take the permit after.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2019 at 9:02 PM, Dougie93 said:

All that McCallum said there is that the permanent residency status is not absolute.  Nobody ever said it was.

None the less, once you grant someone the right to work and issue them a SIN number, they are permanent residents until such time as that is revoked.

Wrong.  You are a permanent resident legally only until such a time as the government grants you permanent resident status after you apply for PR and your application is approved by IRCC.

Share this post


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

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.

And again, you are presuming them erroneous simply because you want the others to be right and Fraser wrong. And again you're completely ignoring the citations of government of Canada studies because they don't fit the narrative you're trying for.

Quote

Your third comment shows you do not debate the content of the reports provided simply name call.

Really? Who did I name call? What was the name? I pointed out that a lobby group for corporate Canada is not a disinterested or unbiased party. Do you trust corporate Canada to have Canada's interest at heart ahead of its own? You might ignore the affects of self-interest on such material but I do not. That's why I showed cites of government studies.

Quote

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.

Nope. This seems to a debate about your poor communications skills. No one has ever used the term 'all immigrants'. I invite you to go and find a cite. 

Quote

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.

You are again repeating a lie which appears to be derived from your inability to read plain English. We have only discussed immigrants as a whole, and the impact of immigration as a whole based on studies. No one has ever even attempted to suggest that ALL immigrants are an economic drain on society. That would be moronic.

Quote

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.

When you say I'm an immigrant, and that the only people who aren't are the indigenous you are stating they have more rights to this country than I do. Which is offensive.

Quote

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

I question your economic knowledge because you are so absolutely and completely certain that the Fraser report is wrong,  and the one you cited is right. And you again ignored that multiple studies were cited with regard to the economic impact of immigrants - which you ignored.

The 1985 MacDonald Royal Commission Report concluded that immigration did not contribute to economic growth and, in fact, caused a decline in per capita income and real wages. In 1989, a two-year study by the Department of Health and Welfare supported the MacDonald report and stated there was no argument for increased population growth and that immigration was not the answer to the aging of the population. In 1991, the Economic Council of Canada reached the same conclusion.

A more recent study by Prof. Herbert Grubel of Simon Fraser University and economist Patrick Grady found that in the year 2002 alone, the costs in services and benefits received by the 2.5 million immigrants between 1990 and 2002 exceeded the taxes paid by these immigrants by $23 billion. It is not surprising that this study has received little media coverage in Canada.

Studies outside of Canada have come to the same conclusion about the economic value of immigration. In Britain, a report by the House of Lords in 2008 warned that the government’s plan to admit 190,000 immigrants per year would achieve little benefit and would seriously affect the availability of housing and the quality of public services.

Respond to this.

Quote

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

I will again ask what name I called you or anyone else. And I want an answer on this one.

Quote

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

Your point is erroneous and illogical insulting.

Quote

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?

Because I live in today, not in future centuries, and no one can predict what the impact of an individual's descendants will be.

Quote

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.

You are again demonstrating a complete absence of logic. Of course we need to differentiate between immigrants and Canadians, because only in analyzing the economic impact of immigrants can we determine whether our immigration system needs adjusting. We can hardly do anything about people born here, but if we determine immigrants are not performing well we can take action to adjust the criteria and numbers for immigration.

Quote

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.

You have repeatedly said I have smeared immigrants and name called - neither of which is true - and you expect me to not engage in personal remarks? I'm getting tired of your accusations. If you are incapable of discussing this rationally without throwing out accusations then go talk about something else.

Edited by Argus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Wrong.  You are a permanent resident legally only until such a time as the government grants you permanent resident status after you apply for PR and your application is approved by IRCC.

The law says "status" of a resident, doesn't say you have to formally be a PR, you just have to have residency to be protected by the Charter.

Even visitors are protected by the Charter, refugees are at their liberty to seek work in whatever province.

So for example my buddy runs a slaughterhouse out in Brooks Alberta.  All his workers are immigrants and about half of them are refugees.

Those refugees don't apply for asylum in Brooks Alberta, he comes to Toronto, offers them the job, then he gets the government to issue them work permits after.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2019 at 10:01 PM, Dougie93 said:

You're free to come try to stop me.  Send bachelors, come heavy.

Work permits are handed out like candy too, that's why the refugees come here.  They know its easy to obtain permanent residency by undercutting locals as cheap labour.

There are corporations lining up to hire them, when they get the work permits they quickly obtain residency by these means.

Your assertion that the Elite Consensus agenda of flooding cheap labour into the country,  to keep work scarce in order to stave off inflation,  can be stopped by residency requirements,  is false, both de jure and de facto.

I know for a fact that migrants work without a SIN all the time and are still granted PR.  I meet these people all the time.  It's also very, very common for someone here to be granted a work permit and get a temporary SIN # that expires when the work permit expires...and then they renew the WP but forget to renew the SIN# and are technically working illegally but there is no punishment.

A SIN is for your employer and for CRA.  Even a bank can't require you to give them your SIN unless you're earning money from them ie: savings account interest.  If you find an employer who will let you work under the table for cash jobs, IRCC doesn't give a f**k, and CRA isn't going to care and almost never will catch you.

You can enter and stay in Canada illegally, work illegally, commit fraud by avoiding paying taxes illegally, and still be granted permanent residency, they don't care how you've been making a living in Canada.  IRCC doesn't really care, they have a backlog to get through.  Criminal activity is fine, criminals will surely make good permanent residents and citizens!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2019 at 11:50 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

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

https://www.ctvnews.ca/immigration-has-lowered-wages-in-canada-statscan-1.242667

Wages are based on supply and demand.  So this would make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Wages are based on supply and demand.  So this would make sense.

 

Not when skilled and educated Canadian IT workers have to seek employment in the "states" and elsewhere because wages and opportunities are depressed by skilled immigrants in Canada.   High immigration numbers are distorting and depressing the labour market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

I know for a fact that migrants work without a SIN all the time and are still granted PR.  I meet these people all the time.  It's also very, very common for someone here to be granted a work permit and get a temporary SIN # that expires when the work permit expires...and then they renew the WP but forget to renew the SIN# and are technically working illegally but there is no punishment.

A SIN is for your employer and for CRA.  Even a bank can't require you to give them your SIN unless you're earning money from them ie: savings account interest.  If you find an employer who will let you work under the table for cash jobs, IRCC doesn't give a f**k, and CRA isn't going to care and almost never will catch you.

You can enter and stay in Canada illegally, work illegally, commit fraud by avoiding paying taxes illegally, and still be granted permanent residency, they don't care how you've been making a living in Canada.  IRCC doesn't really care, they have a backlog to get through.  Criminal activity is fine, criminals will surely make good permanent residents and citizens!

And the whole time they are protected by the Charter.

If not,  my buddy out in Alberta could violate their Charter rights, but he can't, because if he did, those refugees could get a lawyer and sue the company.

He's a good guy tho, he loves the immigrants, he has contempt for Canadian born workers, he says the immigrants are the best, so he never violates their rights, he treats them well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2019 at 10:03 AM, jacee said:

And Zeitgeist's 'idea' is a ridiculous and unnecessary NIMBY 'idea' anyway.

 

It won't work legally i don't think, but it isn't NIMBY either.

If things continue to get worse in Toronto, if housing prices keeping going up while the ROC housing remains much lower, hopefully this keeps providing incentive for immigrants to move to cheaper cities to work.  The capital market works its magic. What is odd to me is that a migrant will move over an ocean away from their home but won't go a few hours more to Winnipeg or Ottawa in order to have more money in their pockets.  A wage at Timmies or Walmart is going to go a lot further there than Toronto/Vancouver.  But migrants want to live with their own people, they don't want to live with whitey.  Migrants and minorities are just as racist as whitey.

Edited by Moonlight Graham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

It won't work legally i don't think, but it isn't NIMBY either.

 

That's right....it won't work legally.

Rather than try to force immigrants to go north, perhaps more efforts should be made to slow down the loss of far more Canadians going "south" !

More than 10% of Canadian citizens don't even live in the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2019 at 1:41 PM, 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.

There are more aboriginals alive in Canada today than just before Columbus and John Cabot made their way here.  So "the entire area known as Canada" was certainly not inhabited by indigenous people, only a clan here and a clan there with giant masses of empty land between that they very likely never set foot on.

The horse is not native to North America, the Europeans brought them over.  How do suppose natives explored "the entire area known as Canada", and made use and claim to it?  There were no domesticated animals used for transport by natives until the Europeans brought horses etc over.  Until then, natives traveled by boat/canoe along rivers, otherwise they travelled by foot.  Good luck traversing the Boreal forest by foot.  Natives can't claim land they didn't even know existed let alone used or traveled on or lived on.

Before Europeans arrived North America was a giant landmass, not a country, with some warring clans spread around the vast emptyness and the vast majority didn't even know each other existed, there was no newspaper or telephone, natives were all illiterate, did not have an alphabet or writing system.  British (and French) created New France, Upper & Lower Canada, then Canada.

Aboriginals should be thankful the Chinese or Japanese didn't discover North America first and murder all of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Rather than try to force immigrants to go north, perhaps more efforts should be made to slow down the loss of far more Canadians going "south

Going north is a dumb idea.  There's plenty of space along the south for people to settle.

There's a lot of Canadians who are suckers for getting ripped off, their charity won't be returned in kind.  Most Americans at least don't put up with sh!t (hence Trump's election)...except for the current crop of Democrats who do things like attack Joe Biden because Obama admin had the nerve (the nerve!) to deport a lot of people who had recently arrived in the country illegally.

Share this post


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

The law says "status" of a resident, doesn't say you have to formally be a PR, you just have to have residency to be protected by the Charter.

Even visitors are protected by the Charter, refugees are at their liberty to seek work in whatever province.

So for example my buddy runs a slaughterhouse out in Brooks Alberta.  All his workers are immigrants and about half of them are refugees.

Those refugees don't apply for asylum in Brooks Alberta, he comes to Toronto, offers them the job, then he gets the government to issue them work permits after.

I don't know of any residential requirements under any kind of work permit.  The only thing close would be that they sometimes force you to only work for a specific employer for which you applied under...but if they have offices in Alberta and PEI they don't care where you work.  There are study permits that say you can only attend the specific college you applied under, but doesn't mean you can't do online courses there while living in a different province.

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...