Does 'progressive racism' exist?

[bush_cheney2004]

Seems like people are contesting it, after all.

That's not true, unless you want to go back to the beginning, the Irish maybe, the British, the French ?

Indeed....First Nations are still dealing with those type of "immigrant gangs".

[cybercoma]

Keep scanning American cable channels for the full story.

It's a discussion forum. How about you actually contribute something and tell us.

[cybercoma]

Economic success, perhaps, but value to Canada not. The benefits to Canada could be great even for a minimum wage earner, if they're generating enough economic activity.

This begs the question. Is economic activity the only thing that matters?

[Jimmy Wilson]

How about violent street gangs? I grew up in a time when we didn't have any of note. This was an American phenomenon, mainly of American Blacks and Hispanics. Immigration created the street gang problem in Canada, helped feed it, and continues to do so.

Immigration or the lack of immediate economic opportunity (1st generation) many immigrants not necessarily predisposed to Western Culture have?

Or is your contention that certain ethnic types are predisposed to crime regardless of economic standing or longstanding historical racial/ethnic bias?

Edited October 27, 2013 by Jimmy Wilson

[GostHacked]

This begs the question. Is economic activity the only thing that matters?

Apparently that is the case. Even if it comes at the cost of the planet and our very way of life, yes, money/economic activity is the only thing that matters to many.

[Michael Hardner]

Votes also matter. I would say that they matter more. This means that we have at least two major goals to resolve, that are not always in line.

[dre]

I much prefer earning power in Canada as an indication of economic success and value to Canada. As per statitics taken from a previous thread I believe you are familiar with.

This shows a lack of understanding of how the economy works. We need unskilled wage earners every bit as much as we need engineers or doctors. Espcially in todays reality where we are trying to compete with countries who have an abundance of super cheap labor.

And economy might have high demand for people that pick fruit for 10 bux an hour. If we dont have those workers than fruit wont get picked or it will cost a lot more. But by your simplistic and fallacious criteria that would represent failed immigration policy.

[dre]

Economic success, perhaps, but value to Canada not. The benefits to Canada could be great even for a minimum wage earner, if they're generating enough economic activity.

It really just depends on what the economy needs. In general the best way to judge immigration policy is by the employment rate of immigrants, regardless of whether they are doctors or cab drivers. Last time I looked the unemployment rate for immigrants was only about 3% higher than NBC's which is pretty damn good.

[Argus]

You like to blame everything on ethnic immigrants eh Argus?

Violent criminal white street and biker gangs existed in Canada in the 1950's. They didn't come from 'somewhere else'.

I just don't make excuses for anyone iike you do. I don't wait to see thier skin colour before deciding whether the answer is good or bad.

[Argus]

I read the reports you linked in more detail than you did.

I don't think you even know what we're talking about. I was referring to the statistical chart which showed earning power of immigrants from a variety of different source areas.

You see through a racial prism Argus.

You've made up your mind that racial minorities are 'a problem' and you don't seek truth, only justification for your racial prejudices, imo.

Like the typical progressive, you have no interest in logical discussion, even when the results are plainly displayed. Instead you seem to want to probe my life in hopes of confirming your own drooling hatred for anyone who disagrees with your own race based opinions.

[Argus]

What are "American-style" street gangs and how do they differ from other style street gangs?

In violence, for one.

[Argus]

Seems like people are contesting it, after all.

Not really. They're just drooling on their keyboards. I presented actual facts. They rebutted by calling me names. Phht.

The origin of the violent ethnic street gangs which make up the vast, vast majority of violent street crime in Candada is fairly well known to police and sociologists. The ignorant of course, know little about it, or anything else.

That's not true, unless you want to go back to the beginning, the Irish maybe, the British, the French ?

Not saying there weren't always small groups of criminals, but the level of violence rose enormously after we opened up immigration to third world countries in the early 70s.

[Argus]

Economic success, perhaps, but value to Canada not. The benefits to Canada could be great even for a minimum wage earner, if they're generating enough economic activity.

People who earn minimum wage don't really generate much economic activity, especially when you bear in mind that they have to be subsidized by taking money from other groups. Remember that most low income Canadians pay no income taxes. That means the rest of us have to pay more. Most get GST rebates, and many get other means tested subsidies which again have to be paid for by the rest of us.

In any event, no realistic case can be made for importing more such people as opposed to importing higher wage earners.

[Argus]

This begs the question. Is economic activity the only thing that matters?

It is the raison d'etre for our immigration system, one used to refute all questions about the problems high immigration brings (depressing low income wages, increasing pollution and urban congestion, social upheals etc.)

"We must have high immigration because Canadians aren't having babies! We need new wage earners to support our elderly!"

Fine, but if they're earning very little then they're not supporting anyone, even themselves. In fact, others have to help support THEM.

[Argus]

Immigration or the lack of immediate economic opportunity (1st generation) many immigrants not necessarily predisposed to Western Culture have?

Or is your contention that certain ethnic types are predisposed to crime regardless of economic standing or longstanding historical racial/ethnic bias?

I think I explained the origin of Jamaican street gangs in fairly easy to understand terms. You could apply similar explanations to any number of cultural groups who came to CAnada and have become somewhat noted for violent activity. Somalians, for example, are well-noted for this. Why? Well, look at where they came from, an ultra violent society where people led a hardscrabble fight for existence and survival. In that society you take anything you can get, or as I recall testimony from the inquiry into the Somalia military mess, 'if it wasn't tied down and guarded, they'd steal it in a second'. There are a lot of places in the world with a deep history of corruption and violence, some of which will certainly have been imported here during mass immigration. Jamaica and Haiti are among those areas, certainly.

Historical racial/ethnic bias applies to American African blacks. In Canada, the non-white community (excluding aborigines) was miniscule prior to the 1970s.

[Argus]

Votes also matter. I would say that they matter more. This means that we have at least two major goals to resolve, that are not always in line.

I agree that our immigration system is driven by politicians' desire to curry favour among ethnic (and left wing) voters. But we're speaking of what is good or bad for Canada, which is not something most politicians ever really take into consideration with reference to immigration.

[eyeball]

I agree that our immigration system is driven by politicians' desire to curry favour among ethnic (and left wing) voters.

Canada's natural ruling ideology in other words. Why don't you just emigrate to a more intolerant right-wing country?

Maybe you just hate curry.

[Michael Hardner]

Not really. They're just drooling on their keyboards. I presented actual facts. They rebutted by calling me names. Phht.

Well, B_C made a point about biker gangs, for example...

The origin of the violent ethnic street gangs ...

Wait... were we talking about "ethnic" street gangs ? If so, then I wouldn't have contested the "ethnic" source of "ethnic" street gangs.

Organized crime, though, is another story.

Not saying there weren't always small groups of criminals, but the level of violence rose enormously after we opened up immigration to third world countries in the early 70s.

Nobody would even fund such a study, so let's stop pretending it exists.

[Michael Hardner]

People who earn minimum wage don't really generate much economic activity, especially when you bear in mind that they have to be subsidized by taking money from other groups. Remember that most low income Canadians pay no income taxes. That means the rest of us have to pay more. Most get GST rebates, and many get other means tested subsidies which again have to be paid for by the rest of us.

Again, you have to show a study. A computer programmer making $30K a year could generate many times that in economic activity, and attendant taxes and so on.

[Argus]

This shows a lack of understanding of how the economy works. We need unskilled wage earners every bit as much as we need engineers or doctors.

No, we actually don't. There are plenty of unemployed amongst the low skilled/low education set. All bringing in masses of low skill workers does is further depress wages and lead to increaed unemployment among stuch people, many of whom give up, stop trying, and wind up on welfare forever.

Espcially in todays reality where we are trying to compete with countries who have an abundance of super cheap labor.

Minumum wage people don't and can't compete with such labour. The vast majority of them are in service industries.

And economy might have high demand for people that pick fruit for 10 bux an hour. If we dont have those workers than fruit wont get picked or it will cost a lot more.

Immigrants, by and large, settle in the larger urban areas, and do not pick fruit in the countryside. We have to import large numbers of temporary workers to do that every year.

[Michael Hardner]

... we're speaking of what is good or bad for Canada, which is not something most politicians ever really take into consideration with reference to immigration.

I'm pretty sure that our economist PM has a better grasp on such topic than either you or me.

[Argus]

Again, you have to show a study. A computer programmer making $30K a year could generate many times that in economic activity, and attendant taxes and so on.

Computer programmers don't earn $30,000 a year unless they're calling in from some other country.

Why do I need a study? You know very well that low income earners do not pay income taxes. You know they get subsidies and rebates. Most of those who are actually working are in the service sector, so are not generating economic further activity.

[Argus]

I'm pretty sure that our economist PM has a better grasp on such topic than either you or me.

What has that got to do with anything?

Harper has shown his only real ideology is power. Whatever his economist side tells him is right or wrong any decision will ultimately be ruled by whatever brings him the highest short-term political advantage.

[eyeball]

You have shown to be just like Harper. Whatever terms you try to couch your concerns in the issue is ultimately about something else - in this case letting people into Canada who aren't white.

[Michael Hardner]

Computer programmers don't earn $30,000 a year unless they're calling in from some other country.

Why do I need a study? You know very well that low income earners do not pay income taxes. You know they get subsidies and rebates. Most of those who are actually working are in the service sector, so are not generating economic further activity.

What has that got to do with anything?

1. As a recruiter, I encountered Toronto companies that employed immigrants at not much over minimum wage.

2. You need a study because there are ancillary effects to be considered, which you are dismissing.

3. It speaks to your comments about politicians and assessment of benefit.

4. If Harper's ideology is power only, then why would he take risks such as large trade agreements rather than playing it safe as Chretien did for years ?