I am Groot

No, he did not. He wanted to get more tory voters. He actually asked the Economic Council of Canada what tripling the immigration rate would do for the economy. Their answer was very little. It might help a bit, might hurt a bit, depending on the mix of immigrants. The question, they said, would have to be answered on non-economic grounds. From what I have read the question was decided by his immigration minister convincing cabinet that immigrants tend to vote for the party that was in power when they came in once they get to vote. I have no reason to believe Trudeau's increases aren't just as self-serving. Even during Harper's time we had issues with integration, with growing ethnic ghettoes. How do the kids of immigrants learn to become Canadians when they go to school and 80% of the kids there are non-Canadian? But in any event, a study would tell us how many would be best.

Would you WANT to live in a highrise?

I'm Scottish - which means your domestic service is expected to be to us.

Okay, I will grant you that when I made the statement you quote I did not mean to suggest No Muslims could be integrated, but merely that it would be more difficult and time-consuming. I don't meant to interfere in religious stuff and am not particularly religious myself but I wish we could impose a law that all clerics must be Canadian born and raised. I think a lot of the nonsense that is being carried over is due to the importation of clerics from places like Saudi Arabia.

Wall of crap deleted unread. Surely you don't imagine a single person was willing go through all that drek, do you? Conservatives have indeed had an issue with the importation of people from a culture with values inimical to our own and whose religion would prevent them from properly integrating. There's no doubt about that. Conservatives want to 'conserve' after all, and that means preserving much of our own values, traditions, institutions and culture. So of course, conservatives have always been unhappy about too-high numbers of such people entering the country. But on the whole, the very term 'islamophobia' suggest an unreasoning and unreasonable fear whereas it's been repeatedly demonstrated that such concerns are not unreasonable. This very topic about the pushback from Muslims on gay pride ought to suggest to you there was and is some truth in the fears of conservatives. But instead, you seem to have simply used it to ignore everything other than your need to attack conserevatives. That suggest a degree of unhealthy obsession on your part.

I think what you mean to say is that for the past 20 odd years Conservatives have warned that importing large numbers of Muslims was going to lead to social trouble as they were very unlikely to integrate and drop their extreme religious social values. Is that not correct? And isn't this headline basically just showing evidence conservatives were right all along?

There's nothing we can do about climate change, anyway, other than start putting in place measures to lessen its impact. Income inequality stopped growing in 2006 when Harper was elected, and began to diminish thereafter due to largely progressive tax measures he put in place. This from a PBO report in 2013.

With people like Bernardo and Legebokoff that's perfectly understandable. Their brutality and cruelty are beyond forgiveness. With others the desire to keep them locked up is more about the protection of society than vengefulness. I'm perfectly happy to see them given months of drug addiction treatment and then their sentences shortened if they have kicked their habits. For others, who have been criminals their entire lives, like certain gang members, I see no purpose in releasing them. They have demonstrated through decades of crime they have no interest in desisting.

America's problems lie in their inner cities with a culture and values system among urban blacks they cannot bring themselves to even address, much less face up to and try to improve. This is largely the same problem we have on native reserves in Canada.

You don't personally decide what the work is worth. The market does that. That's how capitalism works. If you can't find workers, then the market says you have to pay more to attract them. This is the flip side of having to pay more for scarce items or products. So what? The market says if you can't find people who don't want to work those shifts or that type of work you raise your pay/benefits until you can. Or you replace them with automation. I agree that there are people who simply don't want to work, and who are content to live off various government funding schemes. This is a distortion of the market and should be strictly policed. Give schools a break. They're too busy teaching about gender fluidity and critical race and oppression and anti-racism.

That's one take on things. The other would be if the courts wanted to protect the community from violent offenders they'd put them in prison for much longer periods of time. The primary focus of the courts should be the protection of the community, and not the well-being and happiness of rapists, murderers and other scum. Poiievre doesn't strike me as someone who's going to engage in bold policy moves. If he was, though, he'd pass all new legislation under the notwithstanding clause as a sign of his disrespect and contempt for our heavily politicized judicial system.

There are two aspects to those cites you ignore. The first is that violent crime has been increasing. The second is that when it says 'police reported crime' it means just that. It's what crime is reported to police. And greater and greater percentages of crime are NOT being reported to the police (as per the government's victims of crime social survey) because people have less and less faith in the police or courts to do anything about it.

That's an interesting take on what I suggested. You think banning kids from sex shows is interfering with capitalism and free speech, do you?

Our immigration system was purring along at about 85k per year until Mulroney decided to triple it for no good reason. I'd like to go back to that, and only take the cream of the crop. We don't need more people to work at Tim Hortons.

And just how densely populated is the area you live in? You're in a highrise apartment, are you?

Who cares if you're ignoring him? And I mean ignoring as in putting him on the ignore list. Then you won't even see him. It's a handy tool. I've got lots of people on variations of 'ignore' on other forums. I have a problem with page after page of back-and-forth childish insults. They're not even clever insults. They're boring the f*ck out of me. So I might just put both of you on ignore. Which would be a pity because both of you sometimes pop out some interesting posts.

To the tender, sensitive, progressive souls of academia who are appointed to our courts even raising your voice is probably considered cruel and unusual. The harshest thing about our prisons is that you get housed with other criminals. We started approaching things differently in the 1970s. We've been getting progressively more liberal and more caring and more sensitive to backgrounds, ethnicity, racism, psychological and emotional problems and drug abuse, and making more and more excuses for them while softening punishments ever since. It's not been working out very well. The streets are considerably less safe now than they used to be, day or night. F*ck the courts. The term 'justice' is, to a certain extent, flexible. It depends on the standards and values of whoever is doing the judging. But if the term is to be applied in the criminal courts and in laws then it should represent what the great mass of citizenry believes is right given the damage done and their own value system. That's not what we're getting. We're getting justice based on the values of the academic and governing elites who largely sit above the fray.

Meh. Don't care. So was my father. He still worked right up until his death. And if you're saying someone's an alcoholic and posts raving nonsense then the answer to that is ignore the raving nonsense, not post your own back at him. Who was it who said you should never wrestle with a pig because all it does is get you dirty and annoy the pig...

You don't need to lock down threads. You just need to delete posts that have degenerated to nothing but insults. And if two people are just hurling unimaginative insults at each other tell them to stop, delete their posts and tell them if they keep it up they'll get sent to their rooms.

We are not allowed to talk about 'issues' in the Black community, or even admit they exist. The only 'issue' the black community has is white people's racism. That's it, that's all. Every problem is because of that.

More like using it to keep violent, criminal addicts off the street. But you do you!

WTF has all this nonsensical hissing and cat fighting got to do with Canada's air force or military? Jesus, girls, shut it down already. None of you are looking very good right now.

Then ban most social media. Or at least what's aimed at kids.