I am Groot

So it's your belief that spending tens of billions of dollars doing something that accomplishes absolutely nothing is better than just doing nothing? Because it seems to me that in the latter case, we're at least ahead by tens of billions of dollars.

Perhaps you can tell us what you take issue with in the above-quoted piece. It's demonstrably true. Government policy does indeed tell judges to take the accused's membership in a group that has historically suffered racism for granted in sentencing, and judges have interpreted this as a requirement for a lesser sentence in most cases. People who see other people as monsters because of political/ideological reasons tend to become monsters. After all, if someone is a 'monster', they deserve no consideration. And any act of repression or violence is justified. Those who see others as monsters do monstrous things and do them while feeling good about themselves doing it.

There's barely enough black history in Canada to justify twenty minutes, never mind a month.

Thanks for proving again that the English language remains a mystery to the Left.

It's funny but almost no one here is acting freaked out. And you seem angrier than anyone on this side of the political fence. But you often do. LIke much of the Left there is a totalitarian streak running through you, a contempt for anyone who disagrees. You're on the side of goodness and light, after all, so anyone else must be evil.

It sounds to me that it takes very little to satisfy either one of you.

Does 'disapproving and thinking parents should be involved' translate in your mind to 'freaked out, angry and bigoted'? Because that's a really weird translation, frankly.

I think humoring a child's delusions, congratulating them on their 'bravery', making them feel they're special because of it, making it 'bigotry' for anyone to say anything bad to them, and all the rest that goes with it these days is just going to drive that delusion deeper and help persuade them they're right and should, when old enough, start taking the drugs and then the surgery. I doubt more than 5% of those calling themselves transgender are actually suffering from gender dysmorphia. The attitude you and the schools are exhibiting is going to help destroy one hell of a lot of young lives.

Because of the fantastic military, we have that's undermanned and poorly equipped but is bilingual, right? Quebec has no allies, except maybe France, and he figures France can look after itself.

Does that mean you don't think parents should be told if junior acts up? Or should be informed of junior's marks? Because the chance of abuse is very real?

Why does anything you wrote make Canada a good country? What makes it "the most wonderful country on earth"?

Trump doesn't know a thing about economics. He's proven that by innumerable statements and questions. He also doesn't know anything about history. The man is a certified imbecile.

We have the worst productivity increases in the OECD. We have a massive, and ballooning debt. Our housing industry, which is the only thing the Liberals seem to care about sustaining, is strangling Canadians with its out-of-control costs. The average home used to be twice the average salary. Now it's ten times. Our healthcare system is on the edge of collapse. And business is strangling on government red tape and the costs to fulfill the regulatory burden imposed on them. Largest economy? What difference does that make? Yeah, increasing the number of people through wide open immigration increases the size of the economy. So what? It's not increasing the GDP per person, and that is what matters. It's increasing crowding, increasing demand on public services, increasing infrastructure and healthcare needs, increasing pollution, and it does the existing citizens of Canada no good at all unless its carefully managed. And its not.

No, he hasn't. He and I are not speaking of the same thing. What I have said in this topic from the beginning is we need to be more careful about who we let in because some of them are bringing Canada down in various ways. The point of immigration is to improve Canada. We don't do that by bringing in people who will forever be poor and forced to live in miserable conditions. We do not improve Canada by bringing in people who will resort to crime, or people who have fundamental religious values which are inimical to our own. I care about the well-being of Canada. I don't see that well-being improved by bringing in hundreds of thousands of unskilled, third-world laborers to live in public housing. I do not have White Knight syndrome. I have no interest in saving these people from themselves. I'm asking you what you suggest we do with Canadians who are economic failures. Our growth has already flatlined. We have the GDP of Alabama and are sinking further and further back every year as everyone else increases their productivity.

Maybe that belief arises from information, and so is not so much a bias as a judgment. You are reading things into what I say. Perhaps because like many you are suspicious of anyone who dares to speak a word against our present immigration system. Strictly speaking, people fleeing war don't qualify as refugees under the UN asylum treaty we signed. And I'm for taking in as few refugees as possible. I'd rather the government send money to help the UN take care of them in countries near to where they live so they can eventually return. You can take care of a lot more people for the same amount of money that way. As for how to determine immigrants - the same way you determine employees you want to hire. You set standards for what will best fit what you want, then you examine their credentials with that in mind, interview them, and choose those who seem likely to be most successful. This is not rocket science. You use the word 'discriminate' as if there's something wrong with it. Should employers simply take whoever applies and has the right credentials without making any effort to determine which would be best fit? Is that 'discrimination'? Have you ever gotten hired without an interview? So what do you want to do, shoot them? As I've already pointed out we're stuck with whoever doesn't perform well or who goes into crime or whatever. That doesn't imply we have a duty to accept more of the same.

Did I say that? It seems that pointing out facts disturbs you for some reason.

I caught a brief video of Camille Paglia speaking to this, and she was saying that this kind of thing happens in the late stages of a culture as it is beginning to unravel, such as in Greece, Rome, Weimar Germany, etc. From a society and people who know longer believe in themselves. From the 2 minute mark

Moral and intellectual bankruptcy. Oh? Were you alive then? Because you don't sound like it.

And yet, technically true. Given Canada was developed and largely populated by Europeans. And up until the 1970s was a largely homogenous country. Well, it was mostly white, esp given most of the natives stayed on their reserves back in the day.

WHy would you presume such a judgment resulted from bias? Some are pretty clearly a burden. The trick is to only bring in those who are NOT. Or bring in the fewest possible of those who will be. Or change our system so we can boot out those who are a burden. Whatever studies show makes for the best fit. What kind of person/people are the ideal immigrants? Certainly language skills, applicable job skills, and adaptability/flexibility would be pretty high on the list. I've said from the beginning that some are. Are you going to deny that?

I'm not implying it I'm saying it outright. Because we don't have a lot of choice. Some are. Some are not. The question was who to allow in. The answer is those who are going to draw an income sufficiently high to be paying income taxes, and who are interested in joining and integrating with Canadians. Not those who want to work here just long enough to get a green card to head south. And not those who want to work here to get a stake to open up a business back 'home' and not those whose job skills are insufficient to make them contributing taxpayers. Recall, that according to Statistics Canada over 2/3rds of visible minorities are immigrants, and most of the remainder are their kids, and then explain this, if you say you have no evidence immigration causes problems.

Even worse than this? Or perhaps this?