Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Immigrants cost Canada $30 billion per year


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Teena said:

Hey calm down! Every one is allowed their opinion. No need for swearing Jacee :) 

And limit everyone? What are you talking about? Bill 21 is for public service workers and I happen to agree with it. Many people agree with it!  As for the "Burkini", I don't get it. The Muslim men can swim in shorts and no shirt and soak up some sun ... lucky them!

People can wear whatever they want. Nobody's business.

Just cos you don't like it doesn't make it 'law'. Lol

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 710
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The anti-immigrant sentiment has always been there through many waves of newcomers, but it is more viral and more virulent and does seem more manufactured now. I'm not really sure whose purposes it se

No political party supports the Indian Act.  Support for the Indian Act comes from vested interests within Indigenous communities.  Another dirty secret is that residential schools were not some great

Infrastructure needs to be updated all the time. It's inevitable. It's not a bad thing. Infrastructure is one of the top job creating areas in most countries. Baby boomers are retiring at a muc

Posted Images

44 minutes ago, dialamah said:

My sister is Muslim, she never wears hijab, not even in Egypt where she lives.   I've worked with a few Muslim women who never wore hijab, here in Canada.  No hijab-wearing Muslim woman I've ever spoken with has ever suggested that all Canadian women should be covered.  Just the opposite, in fact, they have said it's up to the individual.

Your comment reeks of ignorance and bigotry. 

Wonderful to hear about your sister! I would not know she is Muslim and she would not know I'm Christian. Bill 21 would not affect her. Well I have had comments from Muslim women on dress and also I did socialize with a Muslim family and they behind my back tried to convince my 9 year old daughter that she should be wearing a Hijab. And I could go on and on. I am not racist or ignorant. It is my own personal experiences that have led me here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Teena said:

Hey calm down! Every one is allowed their opinion. No need for swearing Jacee :) 

And limit everyone? What are you talking about? Bill 21 is for public service workers and I happen to agree with it. Many people agree with it!  As for the "Burkini", I don't get it. The Muslim men can swim in shorts and no shirt and soak up some sun ... lucky them!

Welcome to the forum Teena. Some of us old folks on the Forum get grumpy from time to time. Laugh us off when it happens.  We need more bran in our diet.  I think awhile back Wes was making a point that if you apply a law to everyone the same way, i.e., you say all citizens not just some, can not wear visible religious attire, it technically does not discriminate. It would if it singled out only one group. I think in Quebec where I was born, there are complex factors involved. Quebecois puritaines who call themselves purlaines and like to talk of protecting and preserving their culture use code words to justify racism. They claim they are concerned about their "language" but then when people speak French fluently but are Arabic, African or from Haiti then they switch to them not being "culturally" attuned to Quebec culture and then it becomes something else other than simply language. Its always been that way. Quebecois have never liked anyone not from their own town. It can be very inbred that way like the Quebec French language itself. Montreal where I was born I exclude from that category. Montreal was always an international city until the subsequent separatist governments harassed everyone. Rene Levesque himself was not in any way shape or form a bigot but many in his party were especially Parizeau. Luciens Bouchard was not.

I would say Quebec passed Bill 21 to imitate France's law which is what they love to do. The irony is when it was passed they left a large cross up in the National Assembly and it remains and none of the members who passed Bill 21 found nothing strange about that religious icon remaining visible while passing a law to make religion invisible.

I  am like many moderates on this board. I think a full face covering goes too far if you want to testify at trial, drive a motor vehicle, engage in anything requiring serving the public or engaging in operation of machinery. I myself look at that as a functional issue only requiring we see a face. In regards to anything else, I don't wet my pants over how people look or dress. It is their business.l. I can't and won't judge how others dress unless it becomes a safety or danger or security issue.

So if you have blue hair and two hundred earings in one ear lobe its your business.

 

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

I lived and worked through that era. For example, there were NOT more women doctors when affirmative action began, but only as a result of it - because the white men making medical school admission choices had to be forced to select more women, when qualifications were equal.

ONLY as a result of affirmative action have more women become medical doctors?  That's a very demeaning assertion towards these women.  More women have entered the workforce since affirmative action began, and they have been choosing certain professions over others.  As a whole, more women graduate university than men.  Women tend to choose more "caring" and social professions than men like doctors, nurses, social work, teaching, psychology/psychiatry, child care, PSW etc.  Men tend to choose to work with "things" like engineering, IT, architecture, finance, various trades, truck driving etc.  There's obviously exceptions, these are the general trends and have nothing to do with affirmative action but choice.

Breakdown of bachelor degrees by gender:  http://www.randalolson.com/2014/06/14/percentage-of-bachelors-degrees-conferred-to-women-by-major-1970-2012/

Within medicine itself one can see that women more than men lean towards more caring sub-fields such as hospice/palliative care and pediatrics, this is choice not affirmative action: https://www.ama-assn.org/residents-students/specialty-profiles/these-medical-specialties-have-biggest-gender-imbalances

Quote

There's lots of solid data.

Show me the data.

Quote

Incompetent men were still generally hired and promoted to leadership positions more than competent women, and still continued to harass, demean and objectify women in the workplace,  especially women more competent than them. 

Yes unfortunately this does still happen.

Quote

That's NOT discrimination against white men. It's a correction of discrimination against women, people of colour and other people marginalized by the white patriarchy, which was and is still over-represented in positions of authority.

In certain fields this happens i agree, but there has to be clear data factoring all variables to show this before affirmative action takes place. Same with the gender wage gap. Sometimes women are discriminated against in pay, sometimes there's other factors involved.  Looking at only one variable when a multi-variable analysis is need is bad social science.  Saying women make 77 cents on the dollar to men doesn't take into account choices in professions, women who take time to have children, who choose less hours or less time-consuming work in order to care for children or parents.  Women's pay drops significantly after having children:  https://www.vox.com/2018/2/19/17018380/gender-wage-gap-childcare-penalty

MALE_FEMALE_2x.jpg

FEMALE_FEMALE_2x.jpg

 

Quote

And you don't EVER get to mansplain women's reasons, unless you provide a link to valid and relevant research.

Someone describing their points to you isn't "manspaining', it's called having a discussion. I find that assertion derogatory and sexist.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Rue said:

Welcome to the forum Teena. Some of us old folks on the Forum get grumpy from time to time. Laugh us off when it happens.  We need more bran in our diet.  I think awhile back Wes was making a point that if you apply a law to everyone the same way, i.e., you say all citizens not just some, can not wear visible religious attire, it technically does not discriminate. It would if it singled out only one group. I think in Quebec where I was born, there are complex factors involved. Quebecois puritaines who call themselves purlaines and like to talk of protecting and preserving their culture use code words to justify racism. They claim they are concerned about their "language" but then when people speak French fluently but are Arabic, African or from Haiti then they switch to them not being "culturally" attuned to Quebec culture and then it becomes something else other than simply language. Its always been that way. Quebecois have never liked anyone not from their own town. It can be very inbred that way like the Quebec French language itself. Montreal where I was born I exclude from that category. Montreal was always an international city until the subsequent separatist governments harassed everyone. Rene Levesque himself was not in any way shape or form a bigot but many in his party were especially Parizeau. Luciens Bouchard was not.

I would say Quebec passed Bill 21 to imitate France's law which is what they love to do. The irony is when it was passed they left a large cross up in the National Assembly and it remains and none of the members who passed Bill 21 found nothing strange about that religious icon remaining visible while passing a law to make religion invisible.

I  am like many moderates on this board. I think a full face covering goes too far if you want to testify at trial, drive a motor vehicle, engage in anything requiring serving the public or engaging in operation of machinery. I myself look at that as a functional issue only. In regards to anything else, I don't wet my pants over how people look or dress. It wasn't too long ago (well 45 years ago or so) I had two pony tails and a third that hang down to the side in front,  quilt patched jeans, vests, beads around my wrists and neck and wore sandals and people would stare at me and tell me to cut my hair and join the army. Lol. I can't and won't judge how others dress unless it becomes a safety or danger or security issue.

Now me I reject my religion's fundamentalist orthodox rituals) (Judaism) but I keep my version of my beliefs to myself unless someone asks even then I still sound like a Bhduddist Hindu Hippy Jew with Zionist collective identity and existential dimensions that most people do not get nor do I care they get. All you need to know is I prefer animals to people and if I have to Judge people I would take the advice of a horse, dog, cat, on that. Also crows. I had a pet crow. They know jerks when they see them.

 

Thank you Rue :) My father was born in Quebec. He does not like his hometown for many of the same reasons you mention lol  But like me, he fully agrees with Bill 21. 

PS There is always Metamucil *wink

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2019 at 1:02 PM, dialamah said:

Wages for meatpacking jobs in Canada average $16 to $17 per hour.  I'm all for raising wages, but dread the conservative whine about how people aren't entitled to such high wages because people in other countries don't make that much.  Of course, raising the wage would result in fewer people buying as much meat, good for the climate and no meat tax required.

But if they raised wages, corporate profit would drop, shareholder earnings would drop, so no increases.  Capitalism it's finest!  

Packers have another record year.

Have to choose to support either immigration or capitalism, I guess.  Can't do both.

 

I support neither of them. Immigration means more problems for Canada. More infrastructure, more damage to the environment, and more social and medical services required.

Capitalism means more wealth for the upper zionist and liberal elite. What is needed is real conservatism and for a real and true conservative party that believes in more freedom, less taxes, and less government, and the many new rules and regulations that are created that stifle growth in Canada. Liberals and the Zio's are the elite capitalists, the NDP and Green party socialists are for more government intrusion into our lives and much less freedom. Taxes will go thru the roof. The BQ are only in it for Quebec. why they are in the debates id beyond me. The only political party that wants to change this old french socialist status quo is the PPC party. If any of the other party's take power, it will truly be the end of our British/European ways of life and values. If people wnat more government and more immigration, well then, vote for the others because they sure as hell will give it to you. :(

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

Thank you Rue :) My father was born in Quebec. He does not like his hometown for many of the same reasons you mention lol  But like me, he fully agrees with Bill 21. 

PS There is always Metamucil *wink

Lol. Yep.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To go back to the original topic, I have the perfect solution: let's build a wall on our border!  That way there is only one way into canada unless you know how to swim.

Then we will only allow people from certain  countries to have citizenship, just like our forefathers would have wanted.  

Immigration is what built our country.  Not one citizen of Canada today can claim that they did not come from immigrants.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jacee said:

That's not new. It's the old concept. But since human judgement is always involved in those decisions, it turned out that the (mostly) white men in positions of authority still picked (mostly) white men, as they always had. So, yes, the patriarchy had to be 'interfered with' to force the issue. 

Oh well. Ho hum. Yawn. 

Old news. 

It's 2019 like you pointed out, and if a women or person of color that can not stand on her or his own merits when compared to all Candidates thats to bad, thats life.....If they are discriminated upon for those reasons  and they can prove that in a court of law then sue the bastards.. it's that easy , .......Hiring someone just for color or race or to pretty up a pie chart or graph is a retarded practice...Just to make up for past practices beyond most peoples control, Now your acting like your owed something....the law that is written to protect everyone, short ,fat, skinny, white, brown, black , purple with warts on your ass … gay, straight you name it....the law protects you …. and we don't need new laws protecting special interest groups because they think they are owed something for past grievances.......thats more liberal bullshit...

 

 

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

People can wear whatever they want. Nobody's business.

Just cos you don't like it doesn't make it 'law'. Lol

 

Apparently thats not the case in Quebec is it, because it is law....until removed or deemed  by the courts.  they removed religion from the work place, did we make a fuss over removing religion from state affairs....at yet that is a normal practice now....

And it is not the first time the nation, or groups or companies have dictated dress codes or what your going to wear or not wear be it a uniform, or no jeans, of dress in heels you either jump on board or look for employment else where...

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

It's 2019 like you pointed out, and if a women or person of color that can not stand on her or his own merits when compared to all Candidates thats to bad, thats life.....If they are discriminated upon for those reasons  and they can prove that in a court of law then sue the bastards.. it's that easy , .......Hiring someone just for color or race or to pretty up a pie chart or graph is a retarded practice...Just to make up for past practices beyond most peoples control, Now your acting like your owed something....the law that is written to protect everyone, short ,fat, skinny, white, brown, black , purple with warts on your ass … gay, straight you name it....the law protects you …. and we don't need new laws protecting special interest groups because they think they are owed something for past grievances.......thats more liberal bullshit...

 

 

It's a necessary adjustment. 

The odds are still far in favour of white men in positions of power, who still hire white men, so it's still necessary to continue the adjustment to more appropriate proportions of women and people of colour, who meet qualifications. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jacee said:

It's a necessary adjustment. 

The odds are still far in favour of white men in positions of power, who still hire white men, so it's still necessary to continue the adjustment to more appropriate proportions of women and people of colour, who meet qualifications. 

 

You're obsessed with skin colour.

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

It's a necessary adjustment. 

The odds are still far in favour of white men in positions of power, who still hire white men, so it's still necessary to continue the adjustment to more appropriate proportions of women and people of colour, who meet qualifications. 

White men hiring white men, has nothing to do with skin color and everything to do with qualifications. The reason less women and some minority groups make less than white men is not because of race or sex based discrimination, it has to do with less of those people wanting "positions of power" and not being as qualified to attain them because of their own personal choices, while more white men were willing to make the sacrifices necessary to attain those positions. Plenty of minority groups are willing to make those sacrifices even more often than white men and that's why they earn more than white men, it has nothing to do with discrimination.

Edited by Yzermandius19
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

When Australia did a big study of immigration, one of the things they discovered was that the better the English skills, the more employable immigrants were, the higher they were paid, and the faster they assimilated. After discovering this, Australia increased the requirements for language, and gave preference to immigrants from English speaking countries. This wads quickly reflected in higher immigrant employment rates. Canada only requires a minimum score in privately administered English tests to get full marks in English. Australia requires a high score in government administered tests - not relying on private companies.

I wonder why.

Boraks is referencing a recent report that Niagara College in Ontario ordered over 400 students who had been admitted to its January 2019 programs and had taken IELTS tests in India to undergo a second English test or risk losing their offer of admission. A probe found “inconsistencies” between the IELTS test scores submitted by some students from India, and their actual English proficiency. The college made 1,300 admission offers to Indian applicants during the winter 2019 term; of which 428 were asked to retake the IELTS test or take an alternative English test.

Boraks brings attention to the fact that IELTS is co-owned by IDP Education, and 50% of IDP Education is owned by SEEK Ltd. 

“SEEK is in the recruitment business. They’re in the business of moving bodies around the world,” Boraks told True North. 

This means an English proficiency exam company is in partnership with companies that help people find jobs around the world – mostly in the English-speaking world. 

“Look at Laurentian University. They set up entire courses [for international students largely from India], and none of the kids showed up,” said Boraks.  

“They all went to work illegally, working 60-80 hours as truck drivers. You need drugs to stay awake for that long as a truck driver. But eventually, if you’re taking drugs, you’re useless as a truck driver. Then these undocumented people become unemployed and turn to crime. That’s why there is so much crime in places like Brampton,” Boraks states.

https://tnc.news/2019/10/18/english-exam-system-is-corrupt-compromised-immigration-lawyer-claims/

Link to post
Share on other sites

How can immigration go bad and impact a country in terrible ways? Just look to Sweden. Bomb attacks are now so common in Sweden are now so common the news barely bothers to report them.

One night last week, explosions took place in three different locations in and around Stockholm. There were no injuries this time, just the usual shattered windows, scattered debris and shocked people woken by the blast.

The police bomb squad was already on its way to the first explosion in the district of Vaxholm when it had to turn around and prioritise the detonation at a residential building in the more densely populated city centre. Residents whose doors had been deformed by the shock wave had to be rescued. The third target (seemingly unrelated) was a facility belonging to a Syriac Orthodox church, which had already been bombed twice in the past year.

‘Normalisation’ is a term that we have come to associate with domestic violence: the victim begins to think of abuse as a part of everyday life. Explosions have become so normalised in Sweden that SVT, Sweden’s equivalent of the BBC, did not even mention the three explosions in the country’s capital on its national news programme that evening. Instead, the main domestic story was the purported censorship of ‘big female bodies’ on Instagram. Apparently, we mustn’t be referred to as ‘women’ any more, but ‘female bodies’, lest anyone’s gender be assumed. The explosions were left to the local news.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/10/bomb-attacks-are-now-a-normal-part-of-swedish-life/

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Join the free Bahari campaign. 

#FreeBahareh 

https://torontosun.com/news/world/beauty-queen-begs-canada-for-asylum-fearing-torture-in-iran

“The Philippines has proven it is not a safe place for Bahareh, so Minister Freeland and Minister Hussen need to act quickly and grant asylum to ensure Bahareh is safe and away from Iran’s tyrannical reach.” She is a dentist a women's right defender and a beauty queen and will be a tax payer and positively contributing citizen for decades to come. She will not cost Canada a thing. Canada will benefit from immigrants like her.

Edited by CITIZEN_2015
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Join the free Bahari campaign. 

#FreeBahareh 

https://torontosun.com/news/world/beauty-queen-begs-canada-for-asylum-fearing-torture-in-iran

“The Philippines has proven it is not a safe place for Bahareh, so Minister Freeland and Minister Hussen need to act quickly and grant asylum to ensure Bahareh is safe and away from Iran’s tyrannical reach.” She is a dentist a women's right defender and a beauty queen and will be a tax payer and positively contributing citizen for decades to come. She will not cost Canada a thing. Canada will benefit from immigrants like her.

No... She has to fight her own wars for democracy in Iran!

She can Also apply for Australia, New Zealand... United States, Europe, or maybe Try moving to Turkey. We take in enough immigrants.

We don't owe her anything.

The topic is immigration, and Canada takes in more than it's fair share. We need to stand our ground... If we give an inch, they will take a mile.

Edited by PPC2019
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/26/2019 at 12:36 PM, Argus said:

How can immigration go bad and impact a country in terrible ways? Just look to Sweden. Bomb attacks are now so common in Sweden are now so common the news barely bothers to report them.

One night last week, explosions took place in three different locations in and around Stockholm. There were no injuries this time, just the usual shattered windows, scattered debris and shocked people woken by the blast.

The police bomb squad was already on its way to the first explosion in the district of Vaxholm when it had to turn around and prioritise the detonation at a residential building in the more densely populated city centre. Residents whose doors had been deformed by the shock wave had to be rescued. The third target (seemingly unrelated) was a facility belonging to a Syriac Orthodox church, which had already been bombed twice in the past year.

‘Normalisation’ is a term that we have come to associate with domestic violence: the victim begins to think of abuse as a part of everyday life. Explosions have become so normalised in Sweden that SVT, Sweden’s equivalent of the BBC, did not even mention the three explosions in the country’s capital on its national news programme that evening. Instead, the main domestic story was the purported censorship of ‘big female bodies’ on Instagram. Apparently, we mustn’t be referred to as ‘women’ any more, but ‘female bodies’, lest anyone’s gender be assumed. The explosions were left to the local news.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/10/bomb-attacks-are-now-a-normal-part-of-swedish-life/

That's what happens when you import Third World Trash. You get third world problems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The topic is that immigrants cost Canada 30 billion dollars a year and as I have stated before many times I have said this is not true if we are more selective in who we admit in. In fact we benefit from immigration overall in spite of not being selective enough with current immigration system. That is why Canada is such a prosperous country and past 30 years since we have increased immigration Canada's economy has grown rapidly and standard of living risen significantly. Those racists and blindly anti-immigrants crowd who are in a tiny minorities are blinded by hate and don't wish even the best of immigrants and the ones who are genuinely in need of help p come to Canada even a beauty queen whose life is in danger and why the countries you have listed should take her any more than Canada. Are they better countries than Canada or their people have bigger hearts?

Edited by CITIZEN_2015
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, PPC2019 said:

That's what happens when you import Third World Trash. You get third world problems.

This is fear mongering and scare tactics. This will not happen if Canada is selective in who can enter the country. Race relations in Canada is by far better than European countries. The problem is not immigration. Immigrants have contributed and are contributing and will  contribute to Canada in the past, present and future. The problem is NOT immigration but selectivity. Those blinded by hate cannot see these simple facts fear mongering that a highly educated human rights fighter beauty queen may become a bomb throwing terrorist just because she is born in Middle East!!!!!..

Edited by CITIZEN_2015
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, PPC2019 said:

 

We don't owe her anything.

Yes YOU don't owe her anything. The human race does but you are not part of that I can see.

Also when a part of world is hit by a natural disaster I bet you are among the tiny minority who says we don't own them anything and we should not help. Let then take care of themselves. Canadians in general (and Americans too) have been the most generous nations when it comes to aiding the needy. So you are not spoke person for Canada for sure so do not use the word "We".

Edited by CITIZEN_2015
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

This is fear mongering and scare tactics. This will not happen if Canada is selective in who can enter the country. Race relations in Canada is by far better than European countries. The problem is not immigration. Immigrants have contributed and are contributing and will  contribute to Canada in the past, present and future. The problem is NOT immigration but selectivity. Those blinded by hate cannot see these simple facts.

A few days ago I ate at an Indian restaurant and love the food... The waitress was also super cute... and I felt positive about diversity, but then I saw this video.... and forgive me if I'm going to put my racist hat on for a week.

Some people are ok... but we don't need freaks from Third World Trash countries, that still commit cannibalism.

 

 

And if we do import the odd few, then let makes sure they show their appreciation, and don't have Third World Trash values.

If you give an inch. They will take a mile.

Edited by PPC2019
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes you are eating in their restaurants, being served and nursed in the hospitals by immigrants, taken care of every day in shopping malls, clinics, hospitals, universities, public places, every day and there are no videos of those many thousands of instances but once there is a bomb attack or a bad instance then the video is put in public and ALL immigrants are instantly blamed for the action of one. Did the super cute waitress who served you or the cook in the kitchen who prepared the good food for you had anything to do with the video you put online? or even indirectly responsible for it?. Or you wish her out in spite of serving you because she had non-white skin? Incredible how far hate can go.

Edited by CITIZEN_2015
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

This is fear mongering and scare tactics. This will not happen if Canada is selective in who can enter the country.

We're not.

Edited by Argus
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




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...