Leaderboard

Indeed, but they think the whole nation revolves around them.

If one billion people come to Canada to find work, even if they are the highest quality people, intelligent, driven, law-abiding, etc, Canada's environment would be utterly destroyed. There is simply no need for so many people in Canada. Part of what makes Canada a great and unique place is its vast untouched wilderness areas where nature can take its course as it has for millions of years. Add a billion people and Canada would have 100 more major cities and their surrounding farmland and suburbs, and essentially no natural environments left. No thank you!

It's about Canadians being generous, but being really angry when they're played for suckers. Also, we don't actually KNOW what the numbers are. The number quoted by the CBC woman attributed to Stats Canada was quite low, about 300. But Stats Canada only knows what is reported, and almost no hospitals actually record when the mother of a newborn is or is not a citizen. An article on CTV a few years ago said one single hospital in Richmond which did record this found that 300 foreign babies were born there in a single year, in just that one hospital. Canadian immigration recommended changing the law, but since it's the Tories who are now talking about it the Liberals and NDP immediately jump in to insinuate they're intolerant of immigrants. https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/health-headlines/is-birth-tourism-a-problem-in-canada-doctors-on-frontline-of-debate-1.3023973

Trust the market under an assumption of ideally crafted environmental policies? Sorry but I don't trust the government to have that much foresight. If politicians thought it would be to their political benefit over the next 2-4 years to let a billion people into Canada, I'm sure they would, future be damned.

Mexico and USA getting the deal done....Canada still playing with its "feminist agenda" and virtue signaling. Trudeau and Freeland are incompetent on trade.

quantity far too high, quality far too low.

A few items and articles have provoked thought of late about the deliberate division of people into separate identity groups that politicians and social activists are busily engaged in. For politicians it's a way to win votes by tailoring legislation and policies to specific identity groups and sub-identity group members. For the social justice activists, who are inspired by Marxist anti-Capitalist ideology its the division of the world into oppressor and oppressed so they can harangue the former while exploiting the latter. If we're all divided into separate 'tribes' now, then tribal behaviour will follow. We are, as a species, hard wired into tribalism after all. If the politicians and media and academics keep separating us into our separate groups, then those groups become tribes. The white tribe, the black tribe, the native tribe, the muslim tribe and the christian tribe, the asian tribe and the the gay tribe among others. The problem is that these tribes are not treated equally. In fact, one is constantly singled out for abuse and attack. That being the white one. And that produces an obvious sense of resentment we can see rising in the form of populism and far right political parties, particularly in Europe where such tribalist separation is more advanced than here (though Trudeau is fighting desperately to catch up). Political tribalism and identity group tribalism are dividing America in the same way. At its core, the problem is simple but fundamental. While black Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, Jewish Americans, and many others are allowed – indeed, encouraged – to feel solidarity and take pride in their racial or ethnic identity, white Americans have for the last several decades been told they must never, ever do so. People want to see their own tribe as exceptional, as something to be deeply proud of; that’s what the tribal instinct is all about. For decades now, nonwhites in the United States have been encouraged to indulge their tribal instincts in just this way, but, at least publicly, American whites have not. On the contrary, if anything, they have been told that their white identity is something no one should take pride in. “I get it,” says Christian Lander, creator of the popular satirical blog Stuff White People Like, “as a straight white male, I’m the worst thing on Earth.” ... Or consider this blog post in the American Conservative, worth quoting at length because of the light it sheds: I’m a white guy. I’m a well-educated intellectual who enjoys small arthouse movies, coffeehouses and classic blues. If you didn’t know any better, you’d probably mistake me for a lefty urban hipster. And yet. I find some of the alt-right stuff exerts a pull even on me. Even though I’m smart and informed enough to see through it. It’s seductive because I am not a person with any power or privilege, and yet I am constantly bombarded with messages telling me that I’m a cancer, I’m a problem, everything is my fault. I am very lower middle class. I’ve never owned a new car, and do my own home repairs as much as I can to save money. I cut my own grass, wash my own dishes, buy my clothes from Walmart. I have no clue how I will ever be able to retire. But oh, brother, to hear the media tell it, I am just drowning in unearned power and privilege, and America will be a much brighter, more loving, more peaceful nation when I finally just keel over and die. Trust me: After all that, some of the alt-right stuff feels like a warm, soothing bath. A “safe space,” if you will. I recoil from the uglier stuff, but some of it— the “hey, white guys are actually okay, you know! Be proud of yourself, white man!” stuff is really VERY seductive, and it is only with some intellectual effort that I can resist the pull … If it’s a struggle for someone like me to resist the pull, I imagine it’s probably impossible for someone with less education or cultural exposure. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/mar/01/how-americas-identity-politics-went-from-inclusion-to-division

His first 100 days will be a flurry of activities to implement most of the policies he'd promised. Here's an excerpt from a lengthy article how he says it would look: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/05/us/politics/donald-trump-president.html?_r=0 "I know people aren’t sure right now what a President Trump will be like,” he said. “But things will be fine. I’m not running for president to make things unstable for the country.” ....and I think he will indeed do things that'll be best for the USA. Well I mean, when he becomes President, this guy will practically have everything - including the prestige of being President, right? If he's an egoist (as they say he is)........of course he'd want to go down in history not just as another US President........ ..........but as, the best President the USA had ever had! He'll most likely work on that. That will be his ultimate goal!

Remarkable...even Canadian news media has turned on the epic Trudeau/Freeland NAFTA negotiation failure. Apparently they spent more time attacking Trump than watching what Mexico and the USA were doing to strike a deal. Canadian leadership was clueless....and now is "backed into a corner":

Yes. It was ludicrous in the first place - and it's ludicrous to keep doing it. If the parents want the baby to be Canadian, they can immigrate to Canada and apply for citizenship for themselves and their child.

I would end birthright tourism, for sure. The issue is now being confused in the MSM with the refugee issue, noting how banning birthright citizenship could generate stateless citizens where children born here to refugee claimants are concerned. While this is a legitimate consideration to take into account, a law ending automatic birthright citizenship should focus on those, including tourists and temporary residents and visa holders, who have children here while not holding and not formally seeking status in Canada. It should be fairly easy to write such a law.

Wealthy GTA and GVRD landowners are a very tiny portion of the Canadian population.

"The Internet" is not a source. Racist sites paint her as a Jew but Wikpedia (also on the internet) rightly says she is Lutheran.

When they smugly scream "Waycist...waycist", just mock them right back for political correctness and "value signaling". "Here a racist...there a racist...everywhere a racist racist."

What has that got to do with my statement? It seems like just more cock waving, like that moron BC does to make his miserable life feel meaningful. Are you that desperate, too?

I was fine with it at 250,000 per year which to me is enough, as long as we gear the people we accept our economy and skill set needs.

A couple of years ago, Tesla took 2/3 of UBC's electrical engineering graduating class. 10 most highly educated countries

Be not afraid. If Bernier provides a clear alternative to the tri-party consensus, at least going forward Canadian voters who dislike the status quo won't be able to say they weren't provided a clear choice. This will hold if either the LPC or CPC prevails in 2019. Bernier apparently believes that real change simply isn't possible within the current CPC. And we all know what we get when the Libs are in power. And the NDP? I won't get into what kind of disaster an NDP government might bring. So, with Bernier's party, we might at last have a real choice in that the tri-party elitist consensus will be challenged. If the status quo prevails, well, we'll get the government and country we deserve, may the deity of our choice help us all!

You're right. It would likely be much worse since the NDP and BQ won't be taking votes from the Liberals in the mostly Liberal areas. Unless Bernier's party has a much greater rate of success in Quebec than elsewhere, replacing the BQ, in effect, I see the Liberals taking over 250 seats. No, it's not. It appeals to conservatives. And if he's going to hang onto those righteous principles, he's not going to be able to veer off into the territory which would attract left of centre voters. Are some Liberal and NDP voters concerned and unhappy about immigration? Yes! About a third. But just how concerned are they? You think they're more concerned about this than any of their social justice issues? You think they're going to jump to a party which is to the right of the Tories just because of immigration? I do not.

Maybe he'd just farted? Some find that amusing. Seriously, though, it's not uncommon for people to smirk or laugh when they're nervous. I believe it's seen as a mechanism for diffusing tension. Trudeau will now have to debate and defend some of his cherished but controversial policies in public. His angry outburst in Quebec last weekend suggests he won't enjoy this.

He's got my support. Don't count on a Trudeau victory in 2019. Bernier will pull support from all three conventional parties. Given political volatility in his home province, he could sweep the place, which at the very least would likely deny the Libs a majority. A minority parliament with a governing CPC-Bernier coalition might be just the right solution for Canada at this time. Putting issues like immigration and refugee policy and identity politics squarely in the electoral debate will in my opinion advance the integrity of Canadian democracy.

One of the problems is, overpopulation makes money for the elite. Globalist can outsource jobs to high growth countries, and make billions off an endless supply of cheap labor. Real estate speculators need rapid population growth, to drive up the price of their holdings. Depopulation is going to put transnational corporations out of business. Liberals won't talk about population growth, because they believe it's the 1% telling the 99%, how to live their lives. I don't think anyone needs a family larger than 2. You want a 3rd person in your family, you adopt. We could implement compulsory vasectomies after a father has his second child, but the political backlash would be to severe. So we could spend billions promoting volunteer vasectomies, after the second child. We must encourage as respect family size, up to the second child. Promote personal finance and parenting education in schools.We need liberal environmentalist to recognizes that "all roads lead to overpopulation". Manmade climate change wouldn't exist without overpopulation. Deforestation would be less severe without overpopuation. The oceans would have more fish without overpopulation. To say that westerners are greedy, and Africans aren't, because they use less energy is false. They would acquire our wealth, and consume, as much as we do, if given the chance. Instead of demonizing personal consumption, we need to slow down and than reverse rapid population growth.The price of housing and food would go down, as demand decreases. The quality of life for the average citizen would go up, with a gradual and ethical depopulation. In Europe, many countries are making the mistake, of providing incentives to increase their population. Virtually every country, except Greenland needs to depopulation. China and India should talk highest priority, followed by Africa and Latin America. We need to come up with the concept of "Ethical Depopulation". It we advocated for a documentary to be made, as power as "An Inconvenient Truth", tt might be a good idea. We need to sell the concept of "Ethical Depopulation". Having a birthrate solution, while have a 2 child global target. If we could reduce the population by 5% per decade, I think the planet would have a chance. Work with dozens of researchers, put your best information together, and get this documentary made. We need to put all our best arguments forward.