Canada's immigration policy.

[benny]

Maybe it is what it should be? I think we should fix the backlog though.

I don't think it is possible to fix this backlog until we acknowledge that it is much like any refugee camp and that refugee camps are rapidly growing everywhere around the World.

[Leafless]

This topic is not about what would have happen if Trudeau had never been Canada's prime minister, it is about the direction of Canada's immigration policy should take independently of the past.

We very wll know what direction government coercion has driven Canada's immigration policies and other cultural politically correct Liberal policies.

It's called CULTURAL GENOCIDE.

[Machjo]

It is an established fact that Canada has let in more immigrants per capita, over the past forty years than anyone else in the world.

New York, London and Paris have a lot of foreign immigrants - but not over half the population, as we have in Toronto.

Had this land never allowed in foreigners, there would never have been "two founding nations". In fact, there would likely never have been a Canada, but many nations, including Cree, Algonquin, etc.

[Machjo]

English is easier for the French to learn than the reverse, by several orders of magnitide.

Dearest creature in creation,

Study English pronunciation.

I will teach you in my verse

Sounds like corpse, corps, horse, and worse.

I will keep you, Suzy, busy,

Make your head with heat grow dizzy.

Tear in eye, your dress will tear.

So shall I! Oh hear my prayer.

Just compare heart, beard, and heard,

Dies and diet, lord and word,

Sword and sward, retain and Britain.

(Mind the latter, how it's written.)

Now I surely will not plague you

With such words as plaque and ague.

But be careful how you speak:

Say break and steak, but bleak and streak;

Cloven, oven, how and low,

Script, receipt, show, poem, and toe.

Hear me say, devoid of trickery,

Daughter, laughter, and Terpsichore,

Typhoid, measles, topsails, aisles,

Exiles, similes, and reviles;

Scholar, vicar, and cigar,

Solar, mica, war and far;

One, anemone, Balmoral,

Kitchen, lichen, laundry, laurel;

Gertrude, German, wind and mind,

Scene, Melpomene, mankind.

Billet does not rhyme with ballet,

Bouquet, wallet, mallet, chalet.

Blood and flood are not like food,

Nor is mould like should and would.

Viscous, viscount, load and broad,

Toward, to forward, to reward.

And your pronunciation's OK

When you correctly say croquet,

Rounded, wounded, grieve and sieve,

Friend and fiend, alive and live.

Ivy, privy, famous; clamour

And enamour rhyme with hammer.

River, rival, tomb, bomb, comb,

Doll and roll and some and home.

Stranger does not rhyme with anger,

Neither does devour with clangour.

Souls but foul, haunt but aunt,

Font, front, wont, want, grand, and grant,

Shoes, goes, does. Now first say finger,

And then singer, ginger, linger,

Real, zeal, mauve, gauze, gouge and gauge,

Marriage, foliage, mirage, and age.

Query does not rhyme with very,

Nor does fury sound like bury.

Dost, lost, post and doth, cloth, loth.

Job, nob, bosom, transom, oath.

Though the differences seem little,

We say actual but victual.

Refer does not rhyme with deafer.

Foeffer does, and zephyr, heifer.

Mint, pint, senate and sedate;

Dull, bull, and George ate late.

Scenic, Arabic, Pacific,

Science, conscience, scientific.

Liberty, library, heave and heaven,

Rachel, ache, moustache, eleven.

We say hallowed, but allowed,

People, leopard, towed, but vowed.

Mark the differences, moreover,

Between mover, cover, clover;

Leeches, breeches, wise, precise,

Chalice, but police and lice;

Camel, constable, unstable,

Principle, disciple, label.

Petal, panel, and canal,

Wait, surprise, plait, promise, pal.

Worm and storm, chaise, chaos, chair,

Senator, spectator, mayor.

Tour, but our and succour, four.

Gas, alas, and Arkansas.

Sea, idea, Korea, area,

Psalm, Maria, but malaria.

Youth, south, southern, cleanse and clean.

Doctrine, turpentine, marine.

Compare alien with Italian,

Dandelion and battalion.

Sally with ally, yea, ye,

Eye, I, ay, aye, whey, and key.

Say aver, but ever, fever,

Neither, leisure, skein, deceiver.

Heron, granary, canary.

Crevice and device and aerie.

Face, but preface, not efface.

Phlegm, phlegmatic, ass, glass, bass.

Large, but target, gin, give, verging,

Ought, out, joust and scour, scourging.

Ear, but earn and wear and tear

Do not rhyme with here but ere.

Seven is right, but so is even,

Hyphen, roughen, nephew Stephen,

Monkey, donkey, Turk and jerk,

Ask, grasp, wasp, and cork and work.

Pronunciation -- think of Psyche!

Is a paling stout and spikey?

Won't it make you lose your wits,

Writing groats and saying grits?

It's a dark abyss or tunnel:

Strewn with stones, stowed, solace, gunwale,

Islington and Isle of Wight,

Housewife, verdict and indict.

Finally, which rhymes with enough --

Though, through, plough, or dough, or cough?

Hiccough has the sound of cup.

My advice is to give up!!!

-- Author Unknown

[Machjo]

Really? So it doesn't require tens of thousand of public servants who have NO contact with the public, EVER, to be fluent in French?

And notice they can never give concrete examples for their assertions.

My own father learnt French for a year through the military, courtesy of the taxpayer, and this after having heard my mom and I speak it throughout my childhood, and he still can't speak it well. Well, he can understand it though, but that only allows for one-way communication.

And just look at StatsCan 2006. Very few Canadians on either side of the language divide learn their second official language well in spite of years of instruction.

And then here they come on this forum pretending that spending all of this money to teach public servants French is so beneficial.

Have they got any statistics to prove the rate of success of this investment? I've posted numbers on these forums before, yet have never seen numbers in return, only rhetoric.

[Argus]

Canada will always remain the country best protected against illegal immigration though.

No, Japan is, actually. There are virtually no immigrants, legal or illegal, in Japan.

[Argus]

That doesn't mean that our standards are lower.

Generally speaking, if you approached the immigrants who had just arrived in Canada and offered them citizenship in the US instead, 95% would take you up on it. They came here because they can't get in there.

Edited June 2, 2009 by Argus

[Argus]

Had this land never allowed in foreigners, there would never have been "two founding nations". In fact, there would likely never have been a Canada, but many nations, including Cree, Algonquin, etc.

Had the Europeans not come to this land the noble savages would still be living life as they were, with their thirty year lifespans, worshiping the sun, killing and sometimes eating each other, freezing their butts off every winter. You think that's desirable, do you?

[Smallc]

The proof of Argus again I see.

[Argus]

Dearest creature in creation,

Study English pronunciation.

You are the master of cliche's tonight, are you?

I've had several French teachers, and every one of them stated without hesitation that it was much easier for a Francophone to learn English than the reverse. An Anglophone has to accustom himself to the concept of words having a gender, and that gender changing the pronunciation and spelling of almost every word. Not to mention how much that complicates verbs - which are already far more complex than in English because the French use many more tenses than we do in English. Then there are the accents, again, not something we have in English. Oh, and grammar rules. There are a zillion grammar rules in French, and every single one of them has scores of exceptions. There's also the little matter of standards. The standards we have for non-English speakers who massacre our language are pretty shallow. We accept almost any kind of "dis, dat and da udder ting" and even vote some people in as prime minister despite that being the best they can do.

The French, who hold their language in such massive esteem they cry with joy every time they hear themselves speak it, are horrified at people mispronouncing words or screwing up their grammer. It "hurts their ears", and they are far, far less tolerant than Anglos are, so getting things half right just won't cut it.

[Argus]

The proof of Argus again I see.

What proof are you looking for? Proof that I've explored an alternate timeline and have pictures?

[Machjo]

No, Japan is, actually. There are virtually no immigrants, legal or illegal, in Japan.

Though Japan, in spite of being among the most ethnically homogeneous societies in the world, has three major ethnic groups, including Koreans and Ainu.

[Smallc]

I think the alternate time line is the only one you've been exploring.

[Machjo]

You are the master of cliche's tonight, are you?

I've had several French teachers, and every one of them stated without hesitation that it was much easier for a Francophone to learn English than the reverse. An Anglophone has to accustom himself to the concept of words having a gender, and that gender changing the pronunciation and spelling of almost every word. Not to mention how much that complicates verbs - which are already far more complex than in English because the French use many more tenses than we do in English. Then there are the accents, again, not something we have in English. Oh, and grammar rules. There are a zillion grammar rules in French, and every single one of them has scores of exceptions. There's also the little matter of standards. The standards we have for non-English speakers who massacre our language are pretty shallow. We accept almost any kind of "dis, dat and da udder ting" and even vote some people in as prime minister despite that being the best they can do.

The French, who hold their language in such massive esteem they cry with joy every time they hear themselves speak it, are horrified at people mispronouncing words or screwing up their grammer. It "hurts their ears", and they are far, far less tolerant than Anglos are, so getting things half right just won't cut it.

You are right that French verb conjugation is more difficult than English verb conjugation, and yes, the French language has a much narrower range of tolerance for pronunciation than English, which has both advantages and disadvantages.

However, English spelling is more difficult than French spelling, which is in its turn more difficult than other European spellings. Here are the facts on that:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1233

Also, when I'd switched from French-medium to English-medium instruction in highschool, I'd found my French to be superior to that of my teacher, so such a degree that they had to take me out of that lesson. So i wouldn't just blindly take a french-teacher's word for it, but rather hard research as in the link above.

Both English and French are quite difficult to learn. But if you're going to claim 'by an order of magnitude', then you'll have to prove it. I've read research showing that success rates in English or French as a second language are both poor.

[Machjo]

Had the Europeans not come to this land the noble savages would still be living life as they were, with their thirty year lifespans, worshiping the sun, killing and sometimes eating each other, freezing their butts off every winter. You think that's desirable, do you?

On the countrary. In the initial stages, the 'noble savages' were quite curious about European culture. It's only once it became thrust on them did they recoil defensively.

By the way, we took some technology from them too, such as the snow shoes. Also when British sailors got stranded in the North, those who adopted local ways often survived. The locals were more familiar with the nutritional properties of local plants than the British were. Those sailors who didn't conform usually died of scurvy.

[benny]

We very wll know what direction government coercion has driven Canada's immigration policies and other cultural politically correct Liberal policies.

It's called CULTURAL GENOCIDE.

Again this topic is not about what direction some government had given to Canada's immigration policies but about the direction of Canada's immigration policy should take independently of the past.

[Leafless]

Again this topic is not about what direction some government had given to Canada's immigration policies but about the direction of Canada's immigration policy should take independently of the past.

Do you actually think anything you say will make any ion of difference to Canada's immigration policy.

The current government is content as with past Canadian governments by acting in the postion of 'multicultural supremacist'.

And as far as this thread is concerned the anwer up to now is SEAL THE FLOODGATES.

[benny]

And as far as this thread is concerned the anwer up to now is SEAL THE FLOODGATES.

I think that if we close unilaterally Canada to immigration, we will decrease short-term problems by increasing long term ones.

[Leafless]

I think that if we close unilaterally Canada to immigration, we will decrease short-term problems by increasing long term ones.

I prefer the smaller easier to handle population of 20-25 million Canadians.

But we have increased long term problems by allowing into this country incompatible non-White immigrants who want to retain their culture and not assimilate.

We already know for a fact the tremendous social problems caused by Quebec and French Canadians who also refuse to assimilate.

Why should we import more of this type of immigrant only to increase cultural and social strife in Canada.

This is on top of the fact the average age of an immigrant is 39 years old, meaning that they will immediately present a strain on Canada's health care system and only pay taxes for approx. 26 years as compared to an 18 -20 year old native born Canadian who will pay taxes for 45-47 years.

[benny]

I prefer the smaller easier to handle population of 20-25 million Canadians.

A relatively smaller population is also easier to handle by countries which want to expand by invading other countries.

[wyly]

seal the flood gates oh my you guys are real smart, if you think our economy is on the rocks now, close the gates and watch it go down the toilet...

Canada's natural growth has reached ZPG, without those immigrants our pension system and healthcare would collapse...

[M.Dancer]

I prefer the smaller easier to handle population of 20-25 million Canadians.

We already know for a fact the tremendous social problems caused by Quebec and French Canadians who also refuse to assimilate.

Why should we import more of this type of immigrant only to increase cultural and social strife in Canada.

This is on top of the fact the average age of an immigrant is 39 years old, meaning that they will immediately present a strain on Canada's health care system and only pay taxes for approx. 26 years as compared to an 18 -20 year old native born Canadian who will pay taxes for 45-47 years.

So many clangers....so little time

But we have increased long term problems by allowing into this country incompatible non-White immigrants who want to retain their culture and not assimilate.

Leafless cannot name these non-White (sic) immigrants or identify the long term problems...

We already know for a fact the tremendous social problems caused by Quebec and French Canadians who also refuse to assimilate.

TWO clangers in one statement.

Leafless cannot name the tremendous social problems....

Quebecs and French Canadians are already assimilated

Why should we import more of this type of immigrant only to increase cultural and social strife in Canada.

Leafless's arthritic grasp of English fails him again....how does one import more French Canadians?

This is on top of the fact the average age of an immigrant is 39 years old, meaning that they will immediately present a strain on Canada's health care system and only pay taxes for approx. 26 years as compared to an 18 -20 year old native born Canadian who will pay taxes for 45-47 years.

Given that Leafles often doesn't understand what he reads, the figure "39" years old is a best taken with a shovel of salt.

The tendency for immigrants to be

younger is clear: more than 15 percent of immigrants are less than 10 years old

when they arrive, and more immigrants are below the age of 20 than above the

age of 40. In the short term, therefore, higher immigration would result in a lower

average age of the population and a smaller increase in the old-age dependency

ratio.

http://www.cdhowe.org/pdf/backgrounder_96.pdf

Poor leafless...

[benny]

seal the flood gates oh my you guys are real smart, if you think our economy is on the rocks now, close the gates and watch it go down the toilet...

Canada's natural growth has reached ZPG, without those immigrants our pension system and healthcare would collapse...

Immigrants are not slaves to be used to save us.

[Smallc]

Nobody said that they were.

[benny]

Nobody said that they were.

Read between the lines!

Edited June 2, 2009 by benny