Ignatieff calls for fewer skilled immigrants, more illiterates

[Argus]

I guess Liberal pollsters have told him this issue will help the Liberals with their ethnic support. God knows it makes no sense in any other respect. Ignatieff wants to broaden the definition of relatives who can be sponsored to come and live in Canada to basically everyone and anyone - uncles and aunts, nieces and nephews, cousins and whatever.

Just from Haiti? How can that possibly be done. As Jason Kenney said rather eloquently, we never made instant definition changes for previous disasters, including the tsunami that hit Indonesia or the earthquake in Sichuan. Why would we change that now?

There was a bit on the CBC the other day showing Jacmel and pointing out the GG's close ties with it. Half the crowd waved ID cards to show they were in some way related to her. So just how many illiterate, uneducated non-english speaking immigrants does Ignatieff want to saddle us with? We've been moving progressively further away from the system Trudeau seet up which brought us mostly slum dwellers for years, towards a system which brings in more skilled immigrants. Ignatieff's handlers have apparently decided there's political advantage to be had in going back in time. Regardless of the cost to Canada.

Edited January 26, 2010 by Argus

[Michael Hardner]

A lady I worked with at my last job (a production coordinator for web advertising) was a refugee, and she and her brothers were university graduates.

When immigration comes up, the question I usually ask to silence opponents is: how do you intend to grow the country without it ?

... just how many illoiterate, ....

[Argus]

A lady I worked with at my last job (a production coordinator for web advertising) was a refugee, and she and her brothers were university graduates.

Good for her, but half the population of every slum in Canada is made up of immigrants.

When immigration comes up, the question I usually ask to silence opponents is: how do you intend to grow the country without it ?

This counry will soon be double the population it was when i was young. It has not improved one single solitary bit because of that "growth". In fact, in most respects you could say it is a less pleasant place than it used to be, with more crime, more poverty, more crowded cities with more traffic and more pollution.

[Michael Hardner]

Good for her, but half the population of every slum in Canada is made up of immigrants.

Cite ?

Also, the other 1/2 is presumably what you'd call "real Canadians" who will still be there in a generation. Why not deport them ?

This counry will soon be double the population it was when i was young. It has not improved one single solitary bit because of that "growth".

That is an opinion and that is all.

Economic growth is generally regarded as a good thing, and overarching desire for economic growth is what sets our economies apart from hard socialist economies.

In fact, in most respects you could say it is a less pleasant place than it used to be, with more crime, more poverty, more crowded cities with more traffic and more pollution.

From what I understand violent crime has been on the decrease for a long time, poverty is a relative measure, so again you're talking like the socialist I know you're not, and cities everywhere are crowded.

[EyesWideOpen]

Good for her, but half the population of every slum in Canada is made up of immigrants.

So what you really mean is 'visible minorities", isn’t it.

Unless of course you can back up this claim??? Otherwise, I'll have to assume you meant folks who aren't 'white' and 'English speaking'..and hell, probably not even "Christians'!!

Course, I'm also assuming that you are probably of Inuit or First Nations descent, otherwise…well, that would make you a descendant of an 'immigrant' too, wouldn't it?!??!

[Shady]

A lady I worked with at my last job (a production coordinator for web advertising) was a refugee, and she and her brothers were university graduates.

Good for them. Usually that's not the case. And it's definitely not the case that Ignatieff is proposing.

When immigration comes up, the question I usually ask to silence opponents is: how do you intend to grow the country without it?

How about we stick to skilled immigrants? We can grow plenty while at the same time making sure people that immigrate here are educated and/or skilled. You present a false choice, and your question silences nobody.

[Sir Bandelot]

So just how many illiterate, uneducated non-english speaking immigrants does Ignatieff want to saddle us with? We've been moving progressively further away from the system Trudeau seet up which brought us mostly slum dwellers for years, towards a system which brings in more skilled immigrants. Ignatieff's handlers have apparently decided there's political advantage to be had in going back in time. Regardless of the cost to Canada.

Ignatieff is such a political whore, he wears 9 inch stilleto heels but aside from that, there is room at the bottom for more labourers. While we teach our kids to all become PhD's, we need someone who knows how to work a roto-router. Thats life

[Argus]

Ignatieff is such a political whore, he wears 9 inch stilleto heels but aside from that, there is room at the bottom for more labourers. While we teach our kids to all become PhD's, we need someone who knows how to work a roto-router. Thats life

I bet you could go to every job site in Ottawa and not find a single Haitian.

There are three nations which stand head and shoulders below the rest insofar as the value of the immigrants from those countries goes: Haiti, Jamaica, and Somalia. Their major contributions to Canada are in crime and welfare consumption.

[Argus]

So what you really mean is 'visible minorities", isn’t it.

I think you should get over your fixation with skin pigmentation. It doesn't say anything flattering about you.

Unless of course you can back up this claim???

Folks like you have made sure there are no statistics kept on crime or welfare by race or ethnicity. So I can only go by simple observation and exeprience.

Course, I'm also assuming that you are probably of Inuit or First Nations descent, otherwise…well, that would make you a descendant of an 'immigrant' too, wouldn't it?!??!

Is there no mindless cliche you won't dig up? In fact, all people on the planet are descended from tribes who moved one place or another repeatedly. I fail to see the relevance.

[Michael Hardner]

Good for them. Usually that's not the case. And it's definitely not the case that Ignatieff is proposing.

How about we stick to skilled immigrants? We can grow plenty while at the same time making sure people that immigrate here are educated and/or skilled. You present a false choice, and your question silences nobody.

Let's have some cites about the fate of immigrants in Canada over generations.

I didn't mean to offer a false choice, but Argus tends to make blanket statements that prompt from me an all-or-nothing type of response.

[Michael Hardner]

Folks like you have made sure there are no statistics kept on crime or welfare by race or ethnicity. So I can only go by simple observation and exeprience.

That doesn't work. If there are no statistics, you can't just substitute your own false observations that people from 3 countries are worse off than others. There is no way that you can make that assessment accurately.

[Keepitsimple]

While we teach our kids to all become PhD's, we need someone who knows how to work a roto-router. Thats life

Bingo. Trades people, who are revered in Europe, are sneered at here in Canada. Plumbers, painters, electricians, welders, construction workers - all make a good living and are in demand. The beauty of being a tradesperson is that those skills are highly transportable all over Canada. Try and use your Masters in Victortian History or Socialogy or Arts in a small town of 5 or 10 thousand. Our education system should not be so biased towards an elitist education. We'll know by grade 8 if someone should be streamed towards the trades......we should encourage it and give the trades the respect that they deserve. There's something really good to say about people who are "doers" as opposed to "thinkers".

Edited January 26, 2010 by Keepitsimple

[Argus]

Also, the other 1/2 is presumably what you'd call "real Canadians" who will still be there in a generation. Why not deport them ?

Why waste my time asking silly questions? Because we have unemployable people here that doesn't mean we should deliberately bring in more.

Economic growth is generally regarded as a good thing, and overarching desire for economic growth is what sets our economies apart from hard socialist economies.

No it actually has nothing whatsoever to do with capitalism or socialism. And economic growth hand in hand with population growth means no actual improvement. Ten people with six pies do not eat any better than five people with three pies.

From what I understand violent crime has been on the decrease for a long time, poverty is a relative measure, so again you're talking like the socialist I know you're not, and cities everywhere are crowded.

Perhaps the official crime rate has fallen from its high in the nineties because people are not reporting crimes to the undermanned, overworked police. According to criminal victimization studies done by the UN Canada's actual crime rates are higher than in the US.

the 2004 survey shows: “--- no significant change in self-reported rates of violent victimization, namely sexual assault, robbery or physical assault. However, rates rose by 24% for theft of personal property, 42% for theft of household property and 17% for vandalism.”

Crime

[Michael Hardner]

No it actually has nothing whatsoever to do with capitalism or socialism. And economic growth hand in hand with population growth means no actual improvement. Ten people with six pies do not eat any better than five people with three pies.

But there are 6 pies produced, instead of 3 - so the pie producer is twice as rich.

And again, it's about growth. If you're not growing, you're getting smaller.

Perhaps the official crime rate has fallen from its high in the nineties because people are not reporting crimes to the undermanned, overworked police. According to criminal victimization studies done by the UN Canada's actual crime rates are higher than in the US.

Perhaps, but I haven't heard that part about undermanned and overworked police. The Toronto police budget sure keeps going up.

[Argus]

That doesn't work. If there are no statistics, you can't just substitute your own false observations that people from 3 countries are worse off than others. There is no way that you can make that assessment accurately.

If there are no statistics how do you know my observations are false? I've been a news and report junkie for decades and haved lived in or near some poor areas in my time, and heard from many others about other such areas. Not to mention seeing innumerable news reports from "poverty stricken" areas of our larger cities. They inevitably seem filled with recent immigrants and their children. Government statistical reports which I have posted on this site have shown that the economic performance of immigrants has been in a steady decline for years, with significantly larger numbers living in poverty. Every street gang that I have been made aware of through media has an ethic base made up of recent immigrants and their children.

[Argus]

But there are 6 pies produced, instead of 3 - so the pie producer is twice as rich.

Not when the price of ingredients has doubled.

And again, it's about growth. If you're not growing, you're getting smaller.

There is good growth, and deceptive growth. Economic growth through simple population growth is the latter kind.

Perhaps, but I haven't heard that part about undermanned and overworked police. The Toronto police budget sure keeps going up.

Canada has considerably fewer police per population than most other countries, a lot less than the US or UK, Germany or France. And crime solution rates are not impressive.

[Michael Hardner]

If there are no statistics how do you know my observations are false? I've been a news and report junkie for decades and haved lived in or near some poor areas in my time, and heard from many others about other such areas. Not to mention seeing innumerable news reports from "poverty stricken" areas of our larger cities. They inevitably seem filled with recent immigrants and their children. Government statistical reports which I have posted on this site have shown that the economic performance of immigrants has been in a steady decline for years, with significantly larger numbers living in poverty. Every street gang that I have been made aware of through media has an ethic base made up of recent immigrants and their children.

It's not false but unproven. And it's impossible for you to prove it anecdotaly, as you would need statistics that aren't available to the public.

[Argus]

It's not false but unproven. And it's impossible for you to prove it anecdotaly, as you would need statistics that aren't available to the public.

Fine, whatever, but the argument was not about crime but about the value of third world illiterates as immigrants. Why do people accept, without question, that the chances of economic success for a Canadian born individual without at least a high school education are low, but seem to think immigrants who have even less education - and no communications skills - have a good chance of success?

[Moonbox]

Regardless of whether or not Argus is making blanket statements, should we not be making sure that new immigrants to Canada have some worthwhile qualifications? I don't care if they're PhD's. Plumbers, electricians and trained construction workers and manufacturers would be fine with me as well.

What I don't like is the 'family reunification' programs, which bring refugees and immigrants here simply because they already have family. We need immigrants in this country, it's a fact, but we need ones that have proven they're hard working and willing to contribute.

You might revile Argus for saying Haitian or Jamaican immigrants are generally undesirable, but there's something to be said for that. What do you think would be the results if we compared the percentage of Chinese immigrants on pogie to the percentage of Haitians?

[Moonbox]

Fine, whatever, but the argument was not about crime but about the value of third world illiterates as immigrants. Why do people accept, without question, that the chances of economic success for a Canadian born individual without at least a high school education are low, but seem to think immigrants who have even less education - and no communications skills - have a good chance of success?

I'd like that question answered.

[ToadBrother]

You might revile Argus for saying Haitian or Jamaican immigrants are generally undesirable, but there's something to be said for that. What do you think would be the results if we compared the percentage of Chinese immigrants on pogie to the percentage of Haitians?

This is getting to have some fairly racist overtones to me.

[Michael Hardner]

Fine, whatever, but the argument was not about crime but about the value of third world illiterates as immigrants. Why do people accept, without question, that the chances of economic success for a Canadian born individual without at least a high school education are low, but seem to think immigrants who have even less education - and no communications skills - have a good chance of success?

We'd need a link to the original statement, but from memory I think what we're discussing is family for existing immigrants, so these questions are beside the point aren't they ?

[Riverwind]

This is getting to have some fairly racist overtones to me.

It is not race - it is culture. People from some cultural backgrounds are better equipped to integrate into Canadian society than people from other cultural backgrounds. It should be be perfectly reasonable to discuss this as one criteria among many for choosing immigrants.

[ToadBrother]

It is not race - it is culture. People from some cultural backgrounds are better equipped to integrate into Canadian society than people from other cultural backgrounds. It should be be perfectly reasonable to discuss this as one criteria among many for choosing immigrants.

I'm seeing people say "I don't want Jamaicans and Haitians, but Chinese are okay!" If The Bell Curve isn't sitting at the bottom of that, you've got me fooled.

[Riverwind]

I'm seeing people say "I don't want Jamaicans and Haitians, but Chinese are okay!"

These same people would likely say that middle class blacks from the US are okay too because they share similar cultural values. Race is not the issue.

I have no interest in pandering to political correctness when it comes to immigration rules which are, by definition, arbitrary and discrimatory. Selecting people based on how existing immigrants from their culture faired is probably a better criteria than their ability to speak english.

Edited January 26, 2010 by Riverwind