Michael Hardner

1. Maybe ? Or maybe we just need their money, ie. investments. I'm sure that's correct though - the net benefit of bringing in higher earners is better, I assume. 2. I stand corrected. Someone, years back, posted that there was one but it doesn't appear to be true. The vetting that is done is listed here: https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+the+vetting+of+Canadian+immigrants&oq=what+is+the+vetting+of+Canadian+immigrants&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCDg1MDBqMGo5qAIAsAIB&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 I have no response to the rest of your post, but it seems that the 'big picture' discussion on immigration is what you want to have. At 100K immigrants, our population will shrink. Do you have an economist who thinks that shrinking population would produce a better economy. We seem to be in the domain of the 'no growth' economy discussions. I have a relative who is an environmentalist, Green Party guy. He talked about this before.

Wouldn't you say that Trumpy types are more libertarian than conservative though ?

Sadly they are gone now. Wait did I say sadly? 😂 I told you already, you're in ignore so I don't see your posts except for the odd time when I peek 🫣 Don't post to me. 🙂

Based on a quick scan of this post, it seems insult-free so let me start going through it. Seems pretty hefty.... Here we go: 1. Yes, of course every country wants investors and monied immigrants. But it's not practical to base policy on that. Poor people with potential are the more practical win-win for Canada, ie. people with education, ambition etc. etc. Wealthier than average people (I think) still have a fast lane to get here but there aren't enough of them to make a difference. 2. Well, from past discussions on here we do put a screening question on 'values' in the immigration vetting process. So nobody coming here should be surprised that they're coming to a place with its own values - and values that may be very different than those from which they came. I often point to my previous boss, a devout Muslim who put his pronouns in his email signature at the bank. In other words, there are liberals and pluralists in every religion. But no system will screen out everyone. And 'values' are different than 'opinions'. You might think homosexuality is a sin, but do you think they have the right to exist ? 3. The points system favours these people, I think. There are things we could do to make sure more of them come. We talked about barriers to Doctors for example... 4. Not sure where you got that number. It's less than 1/2 the levels of the Harper years levels and likely not replacement level so you'd see population shrinkage, right ? 5. GDP per capita is still going up, though. Some of the other metrics are useful I would say (you *could* define disposable income, say, a lot easier than what a 'decent' job is). But given that GDP per capita goes up, I think you really should look at the GINI coefficient. 6. You're the one defining what we're discussing more than me. Suffice it to say you're asking whether 'ordinary Canadians' who have been here awhile - say ones who were born here - benefit ? 7. 'Do not' is a blanket statement. I can name off people who have benefitted from immigration and globalization from my personal life if you like ? I mentioned real estate investors, agents and renovators. Franchise owners (who are not oligopolists) who are the people who hire and provide services to the growing populations. Healthcare and Education workers... I mean the list goes on and on. It's obvious, but I am only countering the blanket statement that 'no one' benefits. 8. 'As a group'... I can't say that unless we are talking about the big picture. And then we're entering into the realm of macro-discussions and academia. At that point, we'll be posting opposing cites. I will say that you will find it difficult to find a critical mass of economists who argue that immigration is a net negative. 9. Ok. The protectionist side of NDP policy is what I was thinking about. Point taken. 10. As Peter Zeihan pointed out in that video, the idea of the 'violent foreigner' is a trope, used by Trumpish scare mongerers. They will cite a single crime by a immigrant as evidence that they're right and will reject any academic study on the ground that an egghead liberal did it. 11. So does that mean they don't exist ? Of course they do. So do the others who are hired to service increasing population including police, educators, and renovation people who all are predominantly white in my experience. 12. You don't have to do that, I lived in Toronto at that time. Granted I was a little big younger and I do remember an idyllic time. But let's talk about it... as Carly Simon sang in 1971 "these ARE the good old days". She's trying to tell you that nobody thinks that. Not today and not then. Liberals and Conservatives were at war over the controversies of the day. So what about objective facts ? Economics ? One thing we can say is that Canada and the US were nearing the end of their dominance in manufacturing. The rest of the world had caught up. And gains made by working people through socialist labour laws were seeing their sundown because they could not compete globally. We could enact harsh protectionist measures... basically equating to state control of the economy. Trudeau Sr. tried that with "Wage and Price controls"... it was a disaster. You can't turn back the clock in that way. The alternative is to 'reform' the economy by opening up select sectors to competition, throwing them into peril, while making opportunities for other sectors and also lowering prices. Canada, at least, had stronger transitional supports IMO so you didn't end up with the same types of blights as they have in the US... rust belt etc. As for services... all governments have cut back since that time. Taxes need to be cut to keep the working class spending, and especially to keep the 'investor class' putting money into the economy. In my lifetime the 'Conservative' governments of Ontario built attractions such as Ontario Place, Universities, Science Centres... now they can't afford to maintain these things. When Ontario elected an actual NDP majority government in the 1990s, they DECLINED the chance to create a provincial Auto Insurance provider... to give you an idea of how the winds have blown over the last 50-60 years. In the 1970s the NDP had a policy to nationalize car manufacturing (!). So much for the drift to the left... the so-called leftward drift that people talk about is entirely identity-politics based, and about grand moral proclamations, which have a negligible effect on anything must less the economy. 13. Toronto is still pretty white, when you walk around downtown. Although I was pretty shocked in the 1990s, when I leaned in to listen to a couple of skateboard-toting teens to hear what they were chatting on, in the subway, and discovered they were speaking Russian. -------- The Philosopher Hegel touted the importance of INSTITUTIONS that help people. I submit that governments institute a new Ministry of Well-Being... that is arms length from government, has a guaranteed budget, and is directly accountable to people for providing programs for the mushy middle. They would foster an online culture where you had to be a citizen and use your real name to propose, vote on, and monitor short-term programs. A big part of the failure of policies today is that they seem so distant and unresponsive. Sorry to sprawl all over the topic, Groot... hopefully you can see that we're more on the same page than not. That's it for online time for me today though

They often want the facts to care about their feelings. That's why they cite TrueNorth news, which deals in anger before facts.

I did NOT. Liar.

Long post to say you have no evidence. I appreciate your honesty, sincerely. But you continued your post assuming this is a fact. I can't follow this without proof.

I need a cite on the number of doctors we lost. That was your point I think. 1. Chemistry. 2. As far as I know, it's pretty easy still to get a job in IT. I had only have anecdotal evidence of a few friends who joined the industry and got in the door pretty easily. 3. Agreed.

1. All right then. What do you want to do? You want to measure by? How many years someone's been in Canada? Because the Canadian economy designed to benefit Canadian citizens. Even then, I'm sure that a growing economy helps so-called old school Canadians. Of course it's impossible to find metrics around that, because.. what would that even look like? 2. You are loading the dice on your argument here. Lots of Canadians who have been here for generations benefit from more people being here. Again, I'm not arguing net benefit overall. Putting an empirical argument around that would be difficult if not impossible. 3. No, you're not conservative. You're NDP. Who exactly are you worried about then? One Canadian businesses make money, Canadians overall make money. Even the NDP believes that there is some level of trickle down But again, you are loading the dice. It would be impossible for me to find a survey or a study that looked at, for example, second generation canadians and how they have benefited over the last 20 years. Anecdotally, I have lots of examples, and even examples of groups of people. What about home builders? What about renovators? I know lots of people who did that for a living and none of them are first generation or even second generation I think. Real estate agents, people involved in providing goods and services for new homes. Do I have to survey the race of a Bell repairman who comes to my house to prove it to you?

Cite on this please.

1. A relative of mine worked at Burger King and his TFW co-worker had a Masters degree. 2. Tons of IT jobs. 3. No, they can't work without Canadian accreditation.

Who pays ? Not the poster you responded to...

CBC reports the numbers that the Immigration Ministry Reports. If they're wrong, that's on the government.

1. 2. 3. I'm starting to sense that this conversation might be going sideways. Point a) - You have added a new category of stakeholder that you call "newcomers". So if I point out that something benefits working Canadians, you might now be able to state that - no - it only benefits 'newcomers'. Point b) - You seem to be claiming that there is absolutely no economic benefit for working Canadians. I have pointed out that demand for goods and services increase, and surely you don't need me to explain why this provides an economic benefit to working Canadians do you ? Note that I am not saying 'net economic benefit', but instead 'cash in their pocket'. That's all I am saying. The 'net economic benefit' discussion is not what I'm intending to have here, I am just pointing out that there are some winner. We had the 'net economic benefit' discussion in the past, which is a huge topic that requires us citing economists who disagree with each other and that is where that discussion went. Point c) - If large Canadian companies make money, then 'Canada' makes money. Let's not muddy the waters on that. I feel that we've probably discussed this as far as it will go, but as I have pointed out in the past I appreciate your perspective and you carry yourself (generally) well in these discussions, especially when you avoid demonizing actors in the economic game. You have changed my mind on things. Cheers.

1. I will calmly assure you that my relationship with that product is very deep. DM me for details. 2. It was a contact high due to the potency of BC weed. The judges knew it.

1. I'm glad nitpick with you. Babylon is known as a city-state, and towns and other kinds of jurisdictions make laws. It's semantic and nebulous 2. An anarchist is an extreme form of libertarian, which is an extreme form of conservative. But it bends around... So they smoke weed, are vegan, and date trans people. IOW they are your worst nightmare 3. And not a good day for me. It's true. But you have to have your captain crunch and stop insulting people.

1. Lots of entities create laws, and laws predated Nations too. If you want to accuse me of nitpicking, then that's fair... But look up a guy named Hammurabi. Also see 'International Law'... 2. Said the man who has never smoked weed with an anarchist at 3 am. 3. Yaaaaaaaawn... Somebody give Insult man a bowl of Capn Crunch...

Well, truth be known In a pacificst as meaningless and admittedly incipid it is for me to say that. No one should cheer on death of civilians or ones own countrymen IMO. I find it immoral.

I don't care if they are or not. Obviously it's important to Americans but I'm not interested in their messes.

Yes, of course people take sides on anything. Even science. But behind the politics, there's supposed to be an objective reality that any one of us can really just take our best guess at. And these days some of the people arguing don't seem to believe that. They think that they have an absolute truth, and that people who disagree with them are 100% wrong. Our political system is set up In opposition to such ideas... It is set for wise people who have differences of opinion to discuss and try to get closer to that truth. To say half of the people are just wrong is to say that politics is a bad idea, and we should just have the smart half decide everything. And I would come to that conclusion also, if I felt half the people were just wrong. I mean you must somehow believe that I have something to offer, or I'm redeemable.. because you're trying to convince me to come over to the right side. All of this based on your ridiculous idea that somehow I like Joe Biden, or thought he was a good president... Or would defend him. It's so weird how you have to put me in some kind of box that way. Haven't you ever known or liked someone that had very very different politics from you? How do you resolve that in your mind? It makes politics more like religion to think of those binary terms.

I don't know. I just don't see the world that way. And our system wasn't designed for that.

1. Yes. It was a funded attack, I am sure. 2. 👍 3. To be honest, I got a lot of my leads from YouTube, but from people who had good credentials such as careers in science, journalism... And they themselves would point to official sites for the source data such as NASA I also watched videos from the outlying scientists and the skeptics, as well as people who would respond to the skeptics and debate with them.

It's not about politics. Discussion isn't a zero sum game.

There are no losers and this isn't wrestling. If you think that, you should really leave.

1. Well... I think Dunning Kruger is a kind of ignorant derangement, not exactly a 'lie'. Many ignorants think they know something that others don't. 2.The hit job was executed. Try to follow. Do you know what happened with Climategate ? To add: my studies, such as they are, ARE amateur since I am not being paid but also I don't submit original material - I cite experts...