Renegade

Of course immigrants affect demand on housing, but again they are not the only factor. Population growth, of which immigration is part, affects housing demand and population growth is not substatantially different. One does not have to be an economist to grasp that, but one would have to be a moron to dispute it. If you are so aginst housing demand causing upward pressure on prices, why are you also not against population growth by increased birthrate? Leafless, despite what you believe, I don't dwell on your every word, so I have not seen such a response. A link to the appropriate thread woudl be sufficient. I know what I think it is. What I don't know is what you think it is. You have misused so many words which have obvious English definitions, it is hard to take your definitions for granted. Yes, it did. But it also outlawed other religions being taught or practiced in public shools, so Chriistianity is on the same footing as every other religion. This neither disadvantages Christianity nor advantages it. BTW, the country you point out as your "model" democracy, also outlaws religion in schools, and they don't even have the Charter or Liberals. Are they part of the grand conspiracy? No actually I don't. Christianity has had it share of "incompatible" behaviour, including forced conversion of conquered peoples, and killings in the name of religion. Your solution is to exclude other religions. The way Canada has dealt with the issue is to define what is permissable religious behaviour and what is not. That applies to all religions, including Christianity and Muslim. Maybe, but I doubt it. If I live in a degenerate part of the city, then the rest of the city must be paradise. I can only wonder if other can have better neighbourhoods, than the beautiful yards, clean streets, and beautiful houses I see in my neighbourhood. So yet another allegation for which you have no objective evidence. What a surprise. Yep, I'm familiar with your statistical methodology. Look through the newspaper and television, see a black or ethnic suspect, and conclude that all ethnics are criminals. Yep, got that. So again, you don't want the job, don't take them. Someone else will or they will be moved offshore. It is up to Canadians of all backgrounds to make themsleves valuable enough to be employable for a good wage. If they don't, tough-titty, I don't feel sorry for them. They can live in slums if thats all they can afford. ---------------------------- BTW, you accused me of disputing that Canada takes a lot immigrants. I asked you for proof to back up your accusation. I'm still waiting. Or did you choose to ignore the request because there was no evidence?

Try again dude. You've been so wrong on so many issues, why should this be different. BTW, I love white canadian culture. Why wouldn't I, it is my culture. I was point out that you use the word immigrant incorrectly. Here is the definition of "immigrant": a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence. Note the use of the word "permanent", makes the phrase "'Temporary immigrant workers" an oxymoron. Maybe they will teach you in remedial english what an oxymoron is. As far of use of resources, yes, anyone within the confines of the country will consume resources to varying degrees, including tourists and temporary workers. Temporary workers are unlilkely to add pressure to housing as the nature of their work makes it unlikely that they would purchase permanent housing. Actually YOU did. In fact you said we wouldn't have to wait. You said they already did. Do you I have to quote the same phrase again? I agree. Did I say anywhere otherwise? Right I don't, and neither do you, but I'm not the one making the case that ethnic immigrants are the cause of the woes of this country. Your generalization shows you lack any knowledge of the educational standards applied in foreign countries. Some are more lax than Canada and some are far mor rigourous. Only an idiot would make sweeping generalizations, especially ones he couldn't back up with proof.

Yes, but only to the extent of gambling income. IMV, that is a double standard. If they unconditionally tax gambling income, they should unconditionally allow the deduction of losses.

In the US gambling winnings are taxable, in Canada they are not (unless you are a professional gambler). I suspect that the reason that if gambling winnings were made taxable, then logically gambling losses would be tax deductable, and as much money as is won in lotteries, more is lost.

First, temporarty workers are not immigrants. You really need remedial English. Second, you said this: Note that "allowed" is past tense and cannot be construed to be 2007. Note too that it is inconcevieable that the Liberals can reassume power in 2007 and let in so many immigrants. Instead of just acknowledging you were mistaken, you have started the backpeddling. In fact, I didn't know you could sprint backwards. Prove it. I have already shown with a multitude of evidence that the population growth rate is nothing unusual. Go back and look at the cites and evidence. I appears that you ignore any evidence which contradicts your view. I have already cited evidence that home ownership is at a significantly high-level. Evidence you failed to refute because you can't. Even those who cannot afford homes, you have not shown it is because of an influx of immigrants. Hard to know what this even means because you have refused to define what you mean by "culture". You have also despite been asked, been unable to state how you have been unable to practice your religious beliefs. You simply seem to be pissed that others also have the right to practice theirs. You provide no evidence that these are true and even less that the cause is immigration. I live in the city and have no complaints about it turning into slums. As far as I remember, actual crime rates have gone down, though I have not looked at any correlation of visible minorities to crime. Got any evidence of that? Yes, previous waves were white, and the latest wave is brown and yellow. I know it makes all the difference in the world to you. Fine. That is your perogative. You should realize that as my statements come under scrutiny, so will yours. So, you agree that immigrants will take lower-paying jobs that native Canadians won't touch? Seems like a win-win situaton to me. Excellent! Everyone wins. Corporate Canada is free to hire anyone who willing works for the employment offered. You don't want to work, fine, but don' complain when someone else takes the job you didn't want. Sure, but you don't hear me complaining that the quantity of churches is evidence that the WECC are myopticly focused upon religion. Evidence of many churches is only evidence that people need a place to worship, same as for other religions.

What a simplistic relationship you paint. So what if banks pay taxes? You, I, immigrants and WECC pay taxes and the government gets a cut of all of our prosperity. Do you see the hand in hand relationship??????? It is only your myoptic focus which leads you to belive that immigration is the sole or major driver of housing. There are are a multitude of drivers. While immigration does impact population growth, and population growth does drive demand, it is not significantly different than historical levels and is much less than some years. BTW, from 1990-96, the year you suggested well-heeled immigrants started pouring into Canada, housing prices declined in much of the country. As someone once said. "It's the market, stupid". Funny, didnt' you just finish telling me how immigrants built up this country? My experience tells me that a large percentage of the background of the residential construction industry is Italian and the decendents of Italian immigrants. I guess they had nothing to do with the housing build-up. I love how you ursurped the term " Native Canadians". What would you like them to do? Tax you some more so that they build housing for the wave of immigrants? Clearly your math skills are even weaker than I feared. It would seem besides remedial English, you should consider remedial math.

It proves you like to make up numbers and quote them as "facts" when time and again you are proved wrong. I don't think anyone disputed that Canada takes a lot of immigrants. I acknolwedge it. The point is you distort numbers, whether knowingly or not, so it is hard to take any of your statemetns seriously. Any population change has a multitude of effects, some desirable some undesirable. Immigration is only one aspect. You need to look at immigration on balance. You seem to think that I am an advocate for large-scale immigration. I am not. My position is as follows: 1. Immigration levels should be scaled back. 2. Potential immigrants should face tighter criteria on their suitability for Canada, as determined by Canada's best interest. 3. Family-class immigrants should be eliminated. 4. Immigrants should have restricted access to social programs which disappear over time. Yes it is your view, yet you show no evidence that any destruction is occuring. Yes, I agree. It seems odd that you acknowledge that all immigrants built up the country, yet are so anti-immigrant. Perhaps it is just that the newer wave of immigrants is a little more tanned. It is a ridiculous response to a ridiculous request. Ah yes, you refuse to say because it may seem racist. You know what., if it seems racist, it probably is. I see as well, the guessing on my background continues. Keep guessing, dude. True, till recently. Canada will simply have to get used to the fact that "white" immigrants no longer are in a stampede to come to Canada. For now, it can still be choosy about the non-white immigrants who apply. It is neither good nor bad. It is however a fact which contradicts your statement. So what? I've seen churches all over the place, and I've seen more churches than golden domes.

Leafless seem to claim that immigration has put an unprecedented strain on infrastructure. In fact, the pressure on infrastructure comes from population growth which is a combination of natural growth and immigration. I wanted to see if in fact Canada's population growth is historically unprecedented. I have plotted the population growth rate since 1867 using the data from here:List of Population of Canada by Years The chart is posted here: Canadian Population Growth Rate since 1867 As you can see, the growth rate over the last 10 years is not unusually high when compared historically. The overall population growth rate of Canada is also very close to the US, despite the US having lower immigration rate.

So it would seem you agree that immigration of 330,000 has never occured in the last 10 years. It was never a point of dispute. Canada takes more immigrants than the US or most other developed countries. What does that mean? 150 years Canada was an established country because it had a cross-country railroad. Sure, prove to me that the immigrants of 1913-14 built the country, and in about 90 more years I will prove that the current wave will have built the future Canada. like? Then prove it. You statement that it is fact is not proof. Actually by your own admission, much of what is Canada was built by previous generations of immigrants. Huh, you mean like India is not diverse? Do you even have a clue how many different religions and languages there are in India? Actually what it proves is that these people need a place to worship and in the absence of one, will build one at their OWN expense. Oh, you "heard"... Where, on one of these unnamed radio talk shows???

So what? Banks entice for financial products all the time. 0% credit cards, promotional rate loans, etc. It is up to the consumer to make their own decision and accept responsibilty for the consquence. Buy a condo then, or move further away from the city then, or don't buy at all. The choice is ones own to make. No one is owed a property. Again rampant racism. First there is no one giving it away. Second, what do you care if a house it bought by a Canadian by birth or a Canadian by naturalization. Yes exactly, and the same is true for any native-born Canadian. Actually there is scant evidence that even growth by birth rate is planned for. You can see that the impact the baby-boom caused to the housing market. If there was the kind of planning you suggest, there would have been a massive building spree 30years ago. If fact it was market forces which caused building not preplanning. The same will be true for immigration.

As with SSM, it should have nothing to do with religion. Sure, and why sholuldn't she. BTW, she will also be able to have 2 daddies and one mommies, or multiple mommies and multiple daddies.

1% is a policy goal and is not a specific yearly target. Prove it. I am not aware of any recent year when 330,000 immigrants were allowed into the country. Nonsense. Harper had nothing to do with it. Specificly yearly targets were never set at 330000. Achievement of target immigration levels If those immigrants are the ones who built Canada to what it is today, then the current wave is who will build Canada into what it will be tomorrow. Do you have proof of your allegation that ethnic immigrans "basically only worry about setting up their religion and culture and segregating from from mainstream Canada." If you wonder why you position is considered racist, it is because of a multitude of statements such as this.

No one forces anyone else to buy a house. Canadians must make their own decisions on their financial investments including what is for many people the largest household asset, their residence. If they have bought houses based upon low rates without any tolerance for rate increases, they take a risk and must accept responsibility for the outcome. It is a situation of ones own making. If they want to sleep better they could have chosen to buy a smaller property or not buy at all. The individual homeowners are the ones who willingly take on the risk. Many do so because of greed and so purchase the largest property they can afford without suitable consideration for the risk. In any case, since you predict a housing collapse, you should be pleased that these "well heeled" immigrants are buying up houses at high prices, as when it collapses it will be they who incur the losses. No one said it wasn't, but wages are only one driver which affects property values.

Don't doubt it. My spelling is atrocious. That combined with my hasty typing and my unwillingness to go back and correct errors would compound the problem. Since you have already admitted you are no English professor, I'm not about to take contexual advice from you especially when the distinctions between words are obvious to me. Lets just agree to call them WECCs (White English Christian Canadians) to save ourselves some typing, ok? So, you'd consider yourself spokesman for the WECCs? Religious teachings do not belong in public schools and the prohibition of these religious activities does not preclude the personal practice of those activities. You need to be specific on what Charter rights "greatly dilutes Canadian culture and the ability to properly propagate Christian cultural traditions" because I am not aware of what specifically you are talking about. When exactly was "before mass immigration", before 1990? I have cited refrences which prove that large scale immigration is not new in Canada. Who exactly are you saying controlled housing demand? The data disagrees with you: Decade in review - 1995-2005 Well, that's the topic for a whole different thread, isn't it?

Another interesting source of immigration statistics and data: IMMIGRATION & SKILL SHORTAGES

You are really contridicting yourself. On one hand you claim that the constant flow of immigration drives up prices, on the other hand you claim that houses will be devalued as soon as interest rates go up. Frankly interest rates would need to be significantly higher than they are today for a price devaluation, and even then, unless they are recent buyers they would not likely lose the amount invested. I doubt that it is the "well heeled" ethnics who make up the bulk of the immigrant influx, and many come to Canada to improve their economic lot. Even it is, we should be grateful because the wealthier they are, the more they are likely to contribute in taxes. Thanks for the link, but its source leads me to question its validity. Did you notice the small print "User-generated content; read this important disclaimer"? An anonomyous source entering an answer cannot be considered a reliable source. There also seems to be a discrepancy between answers as $18/hour is no where near $80K per year. Racism is inherent in an opinion which singles out the culture and religion of visible minorities as destructive factors. okey dokey. Let me know what you find.

So, you consider me a self-appointed spokesman, even though I explicitly deny I undertake such a role? Sometimes I have doubts that English is your mother-tongue. FWIW, I don't consider you a spokesman for the White English Christian population because I don't believe the majority share your opinion nor have you been designated as the spokesman. It has everything to do with it. If English White Christian Canadians have no restriction on their cultural practices, you can't legimately claim that immigrants are destroying Canadian culture. Geez, then how did the infrastructure sustain high levels of immigration for the last 100 years. You seem to think that the influx of immigrants since 1990 is a new event unprecedented in Canadian history. It is not. Canada has had waves of immigrants over the last 100 years. The biggest difference is that this wave is largely composed of visible minorities. 100 years of immigrationin Canada Pay particular attention to the Chart on Pg 4 showing the number of immigrants over time, and the chart on Pg 6 showing the % of immigrants in the population over time. The fact is that population growth drives up demand and because land is a fixed commodity it will go up in price as demand increases. But this is nothing new. In the past population growth has been driven by the birth rate. More recently the population growth has been driven by immigration. Are you against population growth, or only population growth driven by immigration? Of course. That is why as the population grows, and infrastructure decays it will always need investment. Frankly I don't even undestand the distinction you are trying to make. Immigrants raise children to adulthood in the same way native-born Canadians do. Not really. The population growth trends have not really changed. The only real difference is that more of the growth has come from immigration. In addition, considerable housing stock has been built over the last 10 years esp in the condo market. If you sincerely believe this is true, then invest in real-estate because it will only go up. Personally I think it would foolish for the government to intervene in something the market is well capable of addressing.

There is plenty of room to increase property taxes. TO's taxes are significantly less than the surrounding suburbs. The increased tax rates in the suburbs did not seem to stall the housing market there. In addition, many of the suburbs have user fees for use of the facilites, which TO doesn't. For example it cost to swim in the pool in Mississauga. It is free in Toronto. If TO is so cash poor there are several sources of untapped revenue.

It is not clear to me how these extra activities are funded. I'm in Mississauga and while the school offers many of these activies, it is the parents who are expected to fund it.

IMV, people should be able to "will" their organs to whomever they wish. If they wish to "will" them into the pool, so be it. IMV, people (or their estate) should be able to sell their organs, afterall it is their body. Obviously the estate should only be able to sell the organs if the person has preauthorized it. If they allowed this, there would not be a shortage of organs and people would be properly compensated for their donation.

So, yet another allegation without a cite. I'll bet you though, that most Canadians who bought a house when Martin was PM are glad they did. Sooo, what's your theory of how "whiteys" got so poor and "ethnics" got so well-heeled? Oh please, please, please, Leafless, pretty please pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeese supply us a link...there is that better?? It seems Leafless is a littled pissed... Poor Leafless. Actually you never asked me so you don't know what I would support, and acually, yes I do support tighter restrictions and regulations on immigrants. I do happen to believe that immigrants should be accepted based upon whether they serve the interest of Canada. I just happen to disagree with you on what those interest are. I'm not. It would be a waste of time and effort. It's not the ethnic immigrant's fault either. I expect that ethnics make up the bulk of the applicants for immigration. It appears there is a small racist minority which needs that slap in the face. They may need a kick in the rear to boot.

Soooo, who "deputed" me??? Funny I don't remember being "deputed". Ok, if we both agree that there is White English Christian Canadians have no restrictions on practiciing their culture, language and religion, there shouldn't be a complaint, right? Actually I don't know it. Yes I agree too much immigration can overwhelm a country, however it is not clear what is "too much". What infrastructure are you expecting? Huh?? The housing supply is "not meant to accommodate full grown adult immigrants"??? Why are the houses only built for whites and kids? Personally, I don't think subsidized housing should be made available to anyone. So then again, the question remains, when did the excessive immgration begin?

Hang on now, Drea. The lack of more significant population growth can hardly be attribtuted to Walmart. In 1978, the popultion was 8,031. In 1994, (the year Walmart came to Canada) the population was 8,497. That seems to indicate that in the almost 20 years prior to the introduction of Walmart*, the population was stablle and not high-growth. *I don't know when the Walmart store opened in Quesnel, so I'm assuming worst case it was the year it came to Canada. BTW, how can you fault Dancer on the choice of Quesnel as an example, when it was YOUR example.

The logic is that all kids in the province are entitled to the same level of public education regardless of if they live in a "rich" school district, or "poor" one. By controlling funding at the provincial level, it gives the province to ensure the quality of education is more uniform. I'm not sure I follow your logic. Are you saying that city kids are entitled to better quality education because funds are raised locally?

Got any proof of this? Even if he did, do you not think that Canadians are capable of making up their own minds? Most of those who did buy houses are no doubt thankful as prices have increased over the last 10 years. Is that another figure you have pulled from your ass? Ok let me rephrase in language which is more to your liking. Since you have indicated that you do not support the effects of poorer immigrants nor the effects of richer immigrants, is there any economic class of immigrants you do support? If you think that there is onl a single reason for the pricing effect on housing, then you are economicly naive. I don't have the time or patience to explain it to you. And I, Leafless, am astounded at how you can narrowly focus so many problems of society and find a single group to act as a scapegoat for your percieved set of societal problems.