Why conservatives want tougher laws and less immigration

[Bonam]

Fine, but it's millions and millions of dollars a year.

Yep, that's fine. Canada's GDP/capita is $40k. 300k immigrants per year means the economic impact of just one year's worth of immigrants is $12 billion annually. If we can improve the quality of those immigrants by just 1% for "millions and millions", it's well worth it.

Over a 40 year career, if an immigrant is as productive as an average Canadian, they'll contribute $1.6 million GDP-years to the economy. If you can get a 1% incremental benefit in immigrant selection for $16k per immigrant, you are breaking even. Any better than that and it's worth doing.

This will just make it undesirable for some, and impossible for others to come.

Which is fine, because there are many more applicants than spaces available, so making it tough to get selected is not a problem. It's also very difficult to get accepted to the best schools, jobs, etc, and that only makes them more respected and highly regarded, not less.

Why not just tax them at a higher rate for their lifetimes here too ?

Because that would be unreasonable. Asking someone to pay a fee related to the actual cost of providing a service to them (in this case, the background check needed for immigration) is perfectly reasonable.

Please refrain from calling me a liar unless you can prove that I'm not just mistaken. It's not conducive to dialogue to have posters calling each other liars, i.e. you calling me one here.

I apologize.

That's the way the system is said to work, but it doesn't work that way. The US is built on cheap labour, and illegal labour in many cases.

Good luck getting legally given a green card to come immigrate to the US if you have no ties and your only skill is being able to work for minimum wage at Walmart. Not gonna happen. But yes, there is significant illegal labour.

Then why do we engage in trade deals that do just that ? You don't seem to understand the economic benefits of lower wages. Most Conservatives support these programs as being good for business.

There are also economic benefits to having lower unemployment rates. Importing a mass influx of labour from other nations to force down wages will also raise unemployment, as there will be more people looking for jobs than there are jobs. Having a bunch of people on EI/welfare brings only problems to the economy, not benefits.

You're the one suggesting massive change to the system, not me. Don't pin me with the idea that I want to "let anyone in" or that I want to change things at all, as I haven't said that.

The current system is "letting in" a lot of people that it probably shouldn't. So yes, I do propose changes.

You seem to be another one of those confused conservatives whose biggest beef is with the current government, if I'm guessing right.

Hmm? You have me confused with someone else. I happen to have an opinion on Canada's immigration system, which I have expressed in this thread, as well as previously. It has no particular relationship to Canada's current or past governing parties.

Edited April 4, 2012 by Bonam

[Smallc]

Yep, that's fine. Canada's GDP/capita is $40k.

Nominal GDP per capita is now over $50K

[Bonam]

Nominal GDP per capita is now over $50K

Oh ok, thanks for pointing that out. Well that just boosts my argument a bit more. I just quickly pulled a number from some wikipedia page that may have been old or maybe it was ppp or something.

[Smallc]

Oh ok, thanks for pointing that out. Well that just boosts my argument a bit more. I just quickly pulled a number from some wikipedia page that may have been old or maybe it was ppp or something.

Probably PPP, it's about $40K per year. When you're looking at comparing economies, then generally, IIRC, nominal is the one to use.....but I'm no completely sure.

[Michael Hardner]

Yep, that's fine. Canada's GDP/capita is $40k. 300k immigrants per year means the economic impact of just one year's worth of immigrants is $12 billion annually. If we can improve the quality of those immigrants by just 1% for "millions and millions", it's well worth it.

You might not improve the quality, though. The best ones may opt to go elsewhere.

There are also economic benefits to having lower unemployment rates. Importing a mass influx of labour from other nations to force down wages will also raise unemployment, as there will be more people looking for jobs than there are jobs.

How does that work ? Forcing down wages raises unemployment ? More people are hired if there are fewer barriers to the employer to hiring them, including higher wages. That's the standard view.

I happen to have an opinion on Canada's immigration system, which I have expressed in this thread, as well as previously. It has no particular relationship to Canada's current or past governing parties.

Are you against globalized trade too ?

[cybercoma]

Since when did people like Harper start worrying about the sustainability of the planet or the lack thereof?

hahaha. Partisan hacks crap all over sustainability when it comes to industry, then all of a sudden turning to it as an argument against immigration. This is beyond absurd.

[cybercoma]

I think there is some sharing of data, although you seem to know more about this than I do. I have heard of EI people who received suspended payments because records showed they were out of the country. Am I wrong ? Did that not happen ?

Yes. This has happened. EI even indicates on their website that information is shared between them and border services.

[cybercoma]

Bump

Yeah. The thread was over after that post.

[Tilter]

Yes. This has happened. EI even indicates on their website that information is shared between them and border services.

And this is a bad thing?

[cybercoma]

And this is a bad thing?

What a bizarre question.

[Bonam]

You might not improve the quality, though. The best ones may opt to go elsewhere.

Why? The best ones would still qualify, and would know that they'd be going to a place where only similarly qualified individuals could get into. Knowing that you're trying to get somewhere highly exclusive usually only increases people's desire to get there. See the competition for getting into the best schools, for example. Do people shun these schools because they think the admission standards are unfair? Maybe some do, but most just try harder to get in.

How does that work ? Forcing down wages raises unemployment ? More people are hired if there are fewer barriers to the employer to hiring them, including higher wages. That's the standard view.

Having more people without a corresponding increase in jobs raises unemployment. Pretty simple, no? You have 20 million people who want to work and 19 million jobs. Your unemployment rate is 5%. Bring in another 1 million people looking for jobs, and unless your economy has created a million new jobs, you now have ~10% unemployment.

By the way, having participated in the hiring process on a number of occasions, I can tell you this much: employers hire people when they need people to do a certain job. If we need an extra technician, we'll hire an extra technician, doesn't matter if the prevailing wage is $25/hour or $27. And having that wage pushed down to 25 from 27 isn't gonna make us hire two when we just need one.

Are you against globalized trade too ?

Globalized trade is a complex issue. I have mixed opinions regarding it. Briefly, I believe that in the very long term, it will provide benefits worldwide, but in the shorter term, it can and does cause economic problems in nations that lose jobs to competitors where labor is cheaper. But going into a deep discussion of this issue would be off topic in this thread.

Edited April 5, 2012 by Bonam

[dre]

Why? The best ones would still qualify, and would know that they'd be going to a place where only similarly qualified individuals could get into. Knowing that you're trying to get somewhere highly exclusive usually only increases people's desire to get there. See the competition for getting into the best schools, for example. Do people shun these schools because they think the admission standards are unfair? Maybe some do, but most just try harder to get in.

Having more people without a corresponding increase in jobs raises unemployment. Pretty simple, no? You have 20 million people who want to work and 19 million jobs. Your unemployment rate is 5%. Bring in another 1 million people looking for jobs, and unless your economy has created a million new jobs, you now have ~10% unemployment.

By the way, having participated in the hiring process on a number of occasions, I can tell you this much: employers hire people when they need people to do a certain job. If we need an extra technician, we'll hire an extra technician, doesn't matter if the prevailing wage is $25/hour or $27. And having that wage pushed down to 25 from 27 isn't gonna make us hire two when we just need one.

Globalized trade is a complex issue. I have mixed opinions regarding it. Briefly, I believe that in the very long term, it will provide benefits worldwide, but in the shorter term, it can and does cause economic problems in nations that lose jobs to competitors where labor is cheaper. But going into a deep discussion of this issue would be off topic in this thread.

Having more people without a corresponding increase in jobs raises unemployment. Pretty simple, no? You have 20 million people who want to work and 19 million jobs. Your unemployment rate is 5%. Bring in another 1 million people looking for jobs, and unless your economy has created a million new jobs, you now have ~10% unemployment.

Not really... Population growth in itself creates jobs because immigrants consume products and services, need food and shelter, drive cars etc. Population growth and economic growth are pretty closely linked, as long as you have a good immigration policy which Canada does. In fact... its one of the only things our government has ever done well. We have high quality immigrants. Smart, skilled, and well educated. Almost 40% of Canadian workers who hold a post graduate degree are immigrants. Doctors, engineers, etc.

We are able to have the kind of standard of life we do temporarily because we are a growth economy. If GDP doesnt grow by about 2.5+% per year we our standard of life starts to drop rather quickly. The economists and bean counters actually want to increase immigration substancially to fuel economic growth.

I totally agree with your analysis on wages and hiring. If your workload is increasing because of increased demand for your products/services then you will hire. If it isnt... you wont. If the workload shrinks you RIF. It doesnt matter if workers cost a billion dollars per hour or 5 dollars per hour, or if you are taxed at 30% or 70%.

Edited April 5, 2012 by dre

[-TSS-]

Not really... Population growth in itself creates jobs because immigrants consume products and services, need food and shelter, drive cars etc. Population growth and economic growth are pretty closely linked, as long as you have a good immigration policy which Canada does. In fact... its one of the only things our government has ever done well. We have high quality immigrants. Smart, skilled, and well educated. Almost 40% of Canadian workers who hold a post graduate degree are immigrants. Doctors, engineers, etc.

We are able to have the kind of standard of life we do temporarily because we are a growth economy. If GDP doesnt grow by about 2.5+% per year we our standard of life starts to drop rather quickly. The economists and bean counters actually want to increase immigration substancially to fuel economic growth.

I totally agree with your analysis on wages and hiring. If your workload is increasing because of increased demand for your products/services then you will hire. If it isnt... you wont. If the workload shrinks you RIF. It doesnt matter if workers cost a billion dollars per hour or 5 dollars per hour, or if you are taxed at 30% or 70%.

I mentioned the point-based system of immigration Canada uses. If one is too old, doesn't have any required special skills of which there is a shortage in Canada, or one has no relatives already living in Canada then one has really little or no chance of being allowed to move to Canada.

[Tilter]

I mentioned the point-based system of immigration Canada uses. If one is too old, doesn't have any required special skills of which there is a shortage in Canada, or one has no relatives already living in Canada then one has really little or no chance of being allowed to move to Canada.

And that's a bad thing???

[Argus]

Yes. This has happened. EI even indicates on their website that information is shared between them and border services.

Border Services does not have information on when people left the country. Go ahead. Call them and ask.

[Argus]

Not really... Population growth in itself creates jobs because immigrants consume products and services, need food and shelter, drive cars etc. Population growth and economic growth are pretty closely linked, as long as you have a good immigration policy which Canada does. In fact... its one of the only things our government has ever done well.

Of course an increase in population creates jobs. But that increased population also needs to HAVE jobs. So just what good is it to bring in enough immigrants to create 100,000 when the immigrants need 100,000 jobs in order to not be on welfare? We get a more crowded country, with more pollution, and in exchange for what exactly? You're talking about gross increases and I'm asking where are the net benefits.

We have high quality immigrants. Smart, skilled, and well educated. Almost 40% of Canadian workers who hold a post graduate degree are immigrants. Doctors, engineers, etc.

Yes, I often see them driving my taxis. Too bad their degrees aren't recognized here, or that their skills are useless without them being highly literate in English or French, eh?

[dre]

Of course an increase in population creates jobs. But that increased population also needs to HAVE jobs. So just what good is it to bring in enough immigrants to create 100,000 when the immigrants need 100,000 jobs in order to not be on welfare? We get a more crowded country, with more pollution, and in exchange for what exactly? You're talking about gross increases and I'm asking where are the net benefits.

Yes, I often see them driving my taxis. Too bad their degrees aren't recognized here, or that their skills are useless without them being highly literate in English or French, eh?

So just what good is it to bring in enough immigrants to create 100,000 when the immigrants need 100,000 jobs in order to not be on welfare?

Simple... it allows us to maintain a growth economy, and enjoy a standard of life we could not have otherwise. GDP increases, government revenues increase, etc. Like I said before if the decision was based on economics alone we would let a lot more immigrants in. A Bank of Canada report on the economic impact of immigration recommend we increase immigration by 40%.

Arguing against immigration from an economic standpoint just doesnt work. Youre better off basing your xenophobia on social concerns, if you actually want to be able to support it in an argument.

[-TSS-]

And that's a bad thing???

No, it's neither good or bad thing, just a fact. I said earlier that Canada has a points-based system of immigration, that is a world-wide known fact, but Argus insisted that only a fraction of immigrants are chosen by that system and most of them can't even speak English and end up as taxi-drivers.

After that dre said that Canada has one of the highest standard of immigrants in the world concerning training and education, which confirms what I said about the point-based system. Therefore either Argus or dre is being incorrect in their claims, they can't be both right.

[Bonam]

No, it's neither good or bad thing, just a fact. I said earlier that Canada has a points-based system of immigration, that is a world-wide known fact, but Argus insisted that only a fraction of immigrants are chosen by that system and most of them can't even speak English and end up as taxi-drivers.

After that dre said that Canada has one of the highest standard of immigrants in the world concerning training and education, which confirms what I said about the point-based system. Therefore either Argus or dre is being incorrect in their claims, they can't be both right.

One can score very highly in the number of points, but then still fail to get a job. Having a post-secondary degree is great and all, but if you can't get a job, you are still going to be a net drain on the economy, rather than contributing to it.

Employers are the ones doing the hiring, in the end, it is their criteria that matter, not the government's "points".

For economic immigrants, the emphasis should be placed on whether they have a valid well-paying permanent job offer, not on arbitrarily determined criteria set by the government that give you a certain amount of points.

And yes, Argus is right too. If someone qualifies to immigrate based on points, they can bring their dependents. Many immigrants come as a family based on the points of just one member of that family. For example, when my parents immigrated to Canada, it was based on my dad's qualifications. Me and my mom were just dependents. If people immigrate in families of 3-4 on average, that means that on average only 1/4-1/3 of the immigrants are actually selected by the points system. Then there's also family reunification programs that let people bring in their parents, etc. So potentially for one immigrant selected by the points system, you could end up with their spouse, several children, and the qualifying immigrant's parents and his/her spouse's parents, easily getting up to 10 people or so. Now all of this is fine, people operate in family units and all, but if this causes a net drain on the economy, it's not good for Canada.

Economically speaking, it might be much more beneficial for Canada to let in only young single professionals as immigrants, with no dependents at all (unless they independently qualify).

Edited April 6, 2012 by Bonam

[-TSS-]

This is a funny test;

http://www.cic.gc.ca/app/ctcvac/english/index

I would get a temporary visa to live in Canada.

[doitwell]

Seems to me many racially unaware Canadians still haven't worked out that because of:

1. Low White birth rates and

2. Huge non-White immigration and

3. Miscegenation (race mixing)

that Canada will become a 3rd world country.

You can't build a first world nation with 3rd world immigrants.

Racial diversity is a HUGE source of tension and conflict.

When White Canadians drop to below 50% of the national population, do you think Canada will still be prosperous with low crime rates???

The Japanese are smart enough to realise racial diversity would ruin their nation.

Only Whites are dumb enough to embrace the suicidal ideology of Cultural Marxism.

SO many Whites have been brainwashed to hate their own culture and heritage. These self-hating Whites are anti-racist.

Anti-racist is a code-word for anti-White.

Look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tacvR87FzBU

[Michael Hardner]

Why? The best ones would still qualify, and would know that they'd be going to a place where only similarly qualified individuals could get into. Knowing that you're trying to get somewhere highly exclusive usually only increases people's desire to get there. See the competition for getting into the best schools, for example. Do people shun these schools because they think the admission standards are unfair? Maybe some do, but most just try harder to get in.

You've got it backwards - people don't want to go there because they're hard to get in to - they're hard to get into because people want to go there.

Having more people without a corresponding increase in jobs raises unemployment. Pretty simple, no? You have 20 million people who want to work and 19 million jobs. Your unemployment rate is 5%. Bring in another 1 million people looking for jobs, and unless your economy has created a million new jobs, you now have ~10% unemployment.

We already qualify immigrant to make sure they're employable.

By the way, having participated in the hiring process on a number of occasions, I can tell you this much: employers hire people when they need people to do a certain job. If we need an extra technician, we'll hire an extra technician, doesn't matter if the prevailing wage is $25/hour or $27. And having that wage pushed down to 25 from 27 isn't gonna make us hire two when we just need one.

It's basic economics - higher wages are a barrier to hiring more people. The business case for hiring becomes more difficult with a higher wage.

Globalized trade is a complex issue. I have mixed opinions regarding it. Briefly, I believe that in the very long term, it will provide benefits worldwide, but in the shorter term, it can and does cause economic problems in nations that lose jobs to competitors where labor is cheaper. But going into a deep discussion of this issue would be off topic in this thread.

I just wanted to know if you're for it or against it. It sounds like you're mostly against it.

[Michael Hardner]

Seems to me many racially unaware Canadians still haven't worked out that because of:

1. Low White birth rates and

2. Huge non-White immigration and

3. Miscegenation (race mixing)

that Canada will become a 3rd world country.

You haven't provided any evidence, probably because the true believers of these kind of ideologies are motivated by negative emotions rather than facts.

[WWWTT]

I would get a temporary visa to live in Canada.

Probably because there are no visa requirments to come to Canada from Finland.Many western European citizens do not require a visa to visit.Same does not apply for people outside of western Europe and the US.Maybe Japan?

My wife was denied twice and she is from China!

WWWTT

[Wild Bill]

Seems to me many racially unaware Canadians still haven't worked out that because of:

1. Low White birth rates and

2. Huge non-White immigration and

3. Miscegenation (race mixing)

that Canada will become a 3rd world country.

You can't build a first world nation with 3rd world immigrants.

Racial diversity is a HUGE source of tension and conflict.

When White Canadians drop to below 50% of the national population, do you think Canada will still be prosperous with low crime rates???

The Japanese are smart enough to realise racial diversity would ruin their nation.

Only Whites are dumb enough to embrace the suicidal ideology of Cultural Marxism.

SO many Whites have been brainwashed to hate their own culture and heritage. These self-hating Whites are anti-racist.

Anti-racist is a code-word for anti-White.

Look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tacvR87FzBU

You ignore a very important factor - assimilation!

It's not race that makes us different, it's culture. While it is true that many less advanced countries are of mostly non-white populations, that is just the result of the coils of history. That too is changing, as witness China and India.

Perhaps Canada has done a poor job with immigration, favouring those from less advanced or even negative cultures, like those of fundamentalist Islamic states. Do you seriously believe that these people will come to Canada and stay the same forever? Or that their children, their children's children or their children's children's children, for every generation thereafter?

That's just not reality! Environment shapes people and new immigrants can't help adopting some of OUR culture! This is proven by conflicts between some immigrant cultures and their born-in-Canada children over arranged marriages, dating and clothing styles. Why do you think so many poor women have been killed in "honour" killings?

No, Canada will not change to become like those negative cultures. Immigrants from those cultures will become Canadian, if not so much the initial immigrants then their offspring.

Sharia law can never compete with blue jeans and rock & roll! Western culture brought down the Berlin Wall. It can handle our immigrants.