Is Canada a "Hotel"?

[Guest FrootLoops]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...tory/Front/home

...We want immigrants who will in their diversity contribute to the development of that Canadianism. We do not want immigrants who dilute it by leaving their hearts elsewhere.

Citizenship can neither be bred by preaching nor be enforced by law. It can be encouraged or not. At present it is not.

Legally, we minimize the meaning and responsibilities of citizenship. We give substance to the jibe that, by making so light of being Canadian, we are the hotel among countries: a place to which you come and go at your convenience, in escape from the obligations of a household...

Immigration should depend on the intent to become Canadian. It would give the right to live here for three years. Within that time, the immigrant could either become a citizen or leave.

If this procedure were to be challenged before the Supreme Court, Parliament should use the "notwithstanding" provision of the Constitution to uphold the law against the arrogance of lawyers. ...

... The duty to pay taxes should be inherent in citizenship. Where the citizen chooses from time to time to live is irrelevant. The obligation is to the state that provides the rights of citizenship. Taxation is the price you pay to have those rights. But not, at present, if you are Canadian. Live in Barbados, or wherever, and you are Canadian free of charge...

... The legal failure to link citizenship and tax invites the alienation that increasingly weakens our national politics, that among some newcomers encourages indifference to public affairs except those that impinge on their countries of origin...

..An immediate penalty for tax delinquency would be international notice that the offender's passport has become invalid. That would apply equally to citizens by birth and by naturalization. After a fair notice, this would be followed by cancellation of a citizenship acquired by naturalization. Citizenship by birth cannot be so thrown aside (except, of course, on the initiative of someone who values it less than a foreign rank), but the delinquency is reason to refuse a passport in all cases. A tax offender who nevertheless presented herself or himself for return to Canada would be required to pay what was due, with interest and penalties, or be admitted into detention...

These quote were written by

TOM KENT

From Saturday's Globe and Mail

April 25, 2008 at 11:09 PM EDT

For Full article click here

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...tory/Front/home

I could comment on this very interesting article but I'll leave the floor open to you all.

[jbg]

I could comment on this very interesting article but I'll leave the floor open to you all.

Interestingideas. I don't know the legality of "tiering" citizenship in that manner but I certainly support requiring people getting "landed" status having to speak either English, French or Canadian, and requiring some kind of knowledge abouto their new country.

[eyeball]

How about big signs at airports that simply say 'Welcome to Earth Fellow Earthlings!' and just leave it at that?

[Keepitsimple]

As he points out, there are a few exceptions but in general, it makes a lot of sense. It eloquently puts into words what most Canadians think.....don't just come here for a free ride. The Lebanon debacle opened a lot of people's eyes. I was flabbergasted at the sheer numbers on "Canadians" who were living in Lebanon. Unfortunately, it makes too much sense to become law. It's not a coincidence that our immigration system, tax system and judicial system are so complicated - the lawyer/legal lobby is the most powerful and influential of all the "behind the scenes" players. I don't have the numbers but I do believe that about 50% of Liberal MP's in the Chretien governments were lawyers. The Legal lobby is a big reason why we don't have something resembling a flat tax and why we have a revolving door justice system.

[Leafless]

Tom Kent must be some kind of joker.

Surely he must be painfully aware that the diversity trend in Canada is built around Quebec and continues to-day with a further blend of mismatched so called Canadians.

Canada is a hotel and will always be a hotel.

[Wild Bill]

How about big signs at airports that simply say 'Welcome to Earth Fellow Earthlings!' and just leave it at that?

I'd support that idea, when the rest of earth shares in the costs of running things in Canada!

If someone comes to Canada it's only fair that if they want to partake of the benefits of Canada they owe their citizenship and their allegiance.

If their heart is still really with another country and they are here simply for what they can take then screw 'em and the horse they rode in on!

When I was a lad in the days of hippies there were a lot of communes that sprung up. I visited a few. It was interesting that the successful ones were well aware that while many young folks would come to a commune not all of them would actually WORK to do what was necessary in the building and farming. They sure loved playing guitars and smoking doobies around a campfire at night!

Usually after a few days to see what they were like the main body of the commune would suddenly throw a meeting, have a "show of hands" vote and decide on the spot who could stay and who had to go. Those who were voted out were tossed out on the spot, while everybody sang "Hit the road, Jack! And don't you come back no more...!" For all I know some of these communes may be still going today! I think I might check them out, out of curiosity.

Those communes that accepted anybody and paid no attention to those who did the work found that in a surprisingly short time the worker element quietly left and the commune then fell apart.

The parallels are obvious.

[August1991]

AnMLF-IT (Another Maple Leaf Forum Immigration Thread)

We live in a world where it is cheap to travel. Canadians and foreigners, like it or not, can buy a cheap air ticket to travel abroad or to Canada. "Poor" Canadian students spend a week in Bali, texting their friends. Such is the world.

Canada cannot become Iceland, Japan or Greenland. We cannot isolate ourselves from the world. Foreigners will come here and we will go abroad.

Welcome to the 21st century.

Edited April 28, 2008 by August1991

[punked]

Great another I hate anyone who isn't white thread. Seeeeee this is good cause we can never get enough of those.

[Wild Bill]

Great another I hate anyone who isn't white thread. Seeeeee this is good cause we can never get enough of those.

What has race got to do with it? Mooches come in all colours. So do working folks. For that matter, we have a fair number of native-born Canadians who expect a free ride with their citizenship.

Besides, we live in a Star Trek society. Race hasn't been much of a factor for several generations here now, except in certain hold-out areas "up in the hills".

CULTURE now, that IS a factor! Not all cultures are as advanced as another. Not all cultural values are positive when compared to our core culture.

So cultural clashes are inevitable. I say, let people practise their culture all they want but when push comes to shove don't expect other citizens to PAY for it!

I don't expect the government to pay my fee for when I go haggis hunting in the fall...

[jbg]

Canada cannot become Iceland, Japan or Greenland. We cannot isolate ourselves from the world. Foreigners will come here and we will go abroad.

Great another I hate anyone who isn't white thread. Seeeeee this is good cause we can never get enough of those.

Japan is Exhibit "A" for what the possibilities are. It is an affluent country that has decided not to throw a party for the poor of the world.

While I consider Japan's approach to be a bit extreme on the xenophobic side, there is no reason that a country has to open itself up to destroy the very things that make people want to go there.

Edited April 28, 2008 by jbg

[MontyBurns]

Japan is Exhibit "A" for what the possibilities are. It is an affluent country that has decided not to throw a party for the poor of the world.

Canada is having a party and all the world is invited. Free social programs for one and all. Come here if you have dark skin, we love you.

[Argus]

AnMLF-IT (Another Maple Leaf Forum Immigration Thread)

We live in a world where it is cheap to travel. Canadians and foreigners, like it or not, can buy a cheap air ticket to travel abroad or to Canada. "Poor" Canadian students spend a week in Bali, texting their friends. Such is the world.

Canada cannot become Iceland, Japan or Greenland. We cannot isolate ourselves from the world. Foreigners will come here and we will go abroad.

Welcome to the 21st century.

Every time you make these "we are the world" statements, August, I remind you that Quebec feels the complete opposite, strictly limiting immigrants and the type of immigrants - and that you support that. So once again, you don't care about whether Canada outside Quebec protects its culture or heritage, don't care if it's overwhelmed with foreigners who practice their own culture. You blithely advise us not to worry while you and your friends keep the drawbridge up and a steely eye on anyone with an interest in coming to Quebec.

[Argus]

If I had my way immigrants who came here would have no status for the first year, no more than visitors with a work visa. They could live here, and work here, but that was it. After a year they can apply for landed immigrant status, proving their knowledge of the language, gainful employment, and efforts to learn about and adapt to Canadian cultural mores and values. Seven years after that they could get citizenship, after proving that they had been gainfully employed, contributing to society, and had adapted, to some degree, to Canada. If, for example, they were sending their kids to special schools designed to remind them of their old-world culture and values, that would be a strong mark against them having adapted. If their kids were born in Canada but still needed to attend ESL classes that would be another strong mark against them. If they had spent any large amount of time unemployed, or spent a lot of time out of country, that would be another. Immigrants would not be eligible for welfare, but would get health care and UIC.

A naturalized citizen would have to renounce any foreign citizenship, and if they left Canada to return home for an extended period of time except in the case of a family emergency, they would lose their citizenship.

[jbg]

If their kids were born in Canada but still needed to attend ESL classes that would be another strong mark against them.

What about FSL in Quebec or CSL (Canadian as a second language) elsewhere?

If they had spent any large amount of time unemployed, or spent a lot of time out of country, that would be another. Immigrants would not be eligible for welfare, but would get health care and UIC.

I think that if they're gainfully employed for your hypothetical seven year period they should have the same benefit eligibility as everyone. The possibility of drawing moocher immigrants is a strong argument for reducing benefit levels overall.

A naturalized citizen would have to renounce any foreign citizenship, and if they left Canada to return home for an extended period of time except in the case of a family emergency, they would lose their citizenship.

As far as renunciation goes, there should be exceptions for countries such as the US, UK and maybe Australia. My Rabbi, for example, is a Canadian citizen who has the equivalent of landed status in the US. I could see why he'd have a need to keep both citizenships; his sister died at 34 in Vancouver from a brain tumor, with young children. Our countries are integrally interwoven. Otherwise I agree with you.

[capricorn]

If I had my way immigrants who came here would have no status for the first year, no more than visitors with a work visa. They could live here, and work here, but that was it. After a year they can apply for landed immigrant status, proving their knowledge of the language, gainful employment, and efforts to learn about and adapt to Canadian cultural mores and values. Seven years after that they could get citizenship, after proving that they had been gainfully employed, contributing to society, and had adapted, to some degree, to Canada. If, for example, they were sending their kids to special schools designed to remind them of their old-world culture and values, that would be a strong mark against them having adapted. If their kids were born in Canada but still needed to attend ESL classes that would be another strong mark against them. If they had spent any large amount of time unemployed, or spent a lot of time out of country, that would be another. Immigrants would not be eligible for welfare, but would get health care and UIC.

A naturalized citizen would have to renounce any foreign citizenship, and if they left Canada to return home for an extended period of time except in the case of a family emergency, they would lose their citizenship.

This is a good start. I would add this. Award additional points to those immigrants willing to settle OUTSIDE cities with over 1 million inhabitants for a minimum of 5 years. The idea being that after 5 years they would have made roots, found jobs, started businesses, married a local etc. and would likely not want to move away, especially NOT to Montreal, Vancouver or Toronto where they tend to gravitate now.

But before all this takes place, that is in their home country where they apply for immigration, I would show them orientation videos. For example videos of Canadian seasons including a typical winter, i.e. a snowstorm and an ice storm, a typical household, i.e. in a single dwelling and in apartment dwellings. It's amazing how folks from some of the countries are not aware of some things they'll encounter once they immigrate here. I don't think this is being done presently. Anything to make sure they understand what awaits them in Canada.

[MontyBurns]

Anything to make sure they understand what awaits them in Canada.

Don't show them videos about free social programs though.

[gc1765]

After a year they can apply for landed immigrant status, proving their knowledge of the language, gainful employment, and efforts to learn about and adapt to Canadian cultural mores and values. Seven years after that they could get citizenship, after proving that they had been gainfully employed, contributing to society, and had adapted, to some degree, to Canada. If, for example, they were sending their kids to special schools designed to remind them of their old-world culture and values, that would be a strong mark against them having adapted.

Of course, if such a system had been in place a few hundred years ago, you probably wouldn't be here right now...so perhaps you should count your blessings?

[jbg]

Of course, if such a system had been in place a few hundred years ago, you probably wouldn't be here right now...so perhaps you should count your blessings?

My ancestors came between 1892 and 1910. Their first order of business was to learn English. My maternal grandmother, born in Yonkers, NY in 1904 and her sister, born in 1900 spoke English without an accent. I knew them until their respective deaths in 1995 and 1999. You have no clue what you're talking about.

[gc1765]

My ancestors came between 1892 and 1910. Their first order of business was to learn English. My maternal grandmother, born in Yonkers, NY in 1904 and her sister, born in 1900 spoke English without an accent. I knew them until their respective deaths in 1995 and 1999. You have no clue what you're talking about.

Yonkers you say? I don't suppose they happened to learn Algonquian or Iroquoian??

I must say I'm a bit surprised by you, jbg...you're usually one of the more sensible posters on this forum.

[jbg]

Yonkers you say? I don't suppose they happened to learn Algonquian or Iroquoian??

I must say I'm a bit surprised by you, jbg...you're usually one of the more sensible posters on this forum.

I was a bit tired and in a bad mood. Sorry.

[gc1765]

I was a bit tired and in a bad mood. Sorry.

Apology accepted.

(for the record, I respect people who can own up to their mistakes...which goes to show that I was right about you - you are one of the better posters here )

[jbg]

Apology accepted.

(for the record, I respect people who can own up to their mistakes...which goes to show that I was right about you - you are one of the better posters here )

Thanks.

And what I meant to say is that I believe that people who move to a new place should, for their own good as well as their hosts' good familiarize themselves with the new land. They might even find some things they like, and all benefit from learning and integration.