Immigration

[Machjo]

What does Israel have to do with Canadian immigration policy?

[Michael Hardner]

...you should double check your facts.

Argus has some eye opening facts on this topic. I would characterize his opinions as akin to David Suzuki's.

[Argus]

I would like someone to tell me what the purpose of immigration is. What do we want to accomplish with this very, VERY expensive program?

Edited August 24, 2015 by Argus

[WestCoastRunner]

Argus has some eye opening facts on this topic. I would characterize his opinions as akin to David Suzuki's.

I don't understand your championing his posts? Do you think we can't analyze them without your comments? Why would a moderator weigh in on his posts?

Edited August 24, 2015 by WestCoastRunner

[On Guard for Thee]

No, that wasn't the word he left out. He meant we need more immigrant voters, as in, more immigrants to vote Conservative.

Yet another assumption on your part. Not sure how you seem to know what he meant, but as usual we will ignore that. What he commented on, was the well known fact that due to low fertility rates, and ageing population, we need to top up the population or a lot of employers are going to find gaps in their work force.

[On Guard for Thee]

I don't understand your championing his posts? Do you think we can't analyze them without your comments? Why would a moderator weigh in on his posts?

Hopefully his comment was tongue in cheek. But maybe not.

[WestCoastRunner]

Hopefully his comment was tongue in cheek. But maybe not.

Ugh. Probably so. My mistake.

[On Guard for Thee]

Ugh. Probably so. My mistake.

Not necessarily. The jury is still out on that one.

[Argus]

Yet another assumption on your part. Not sure how you seem to know what he meant, but as usual we will ignore that. What he commented on, was the well known fact that due to low fertility rates, and ageing population, we need to top up the population or a lot of employers are going to find gaps in their work force.

I already dealt with that myth. Why do I have to keep dealing with it?

Here, reposted since some of you seem to feel no need to read the actual topic before jumping in.

The noted French-Canadian demographer Jacques Henripin (1988) examined the consequences of such a plan, that is, to build up the population of Quebec through high levels of immigration. His conclusion was simple. The plan would not work! His reasoning was straightforward. At the level of immigration necessary to restore population growth to past rates, the effect would be to change the composition of that which its proposers sought to protect. By the early decades of the twenty-first century, he predicted that at these levels of inflow the foreign-born arrivals would dominate the population. For example, at levels of inflow that would eliminate the fertility deficit, the population of Montreal Island by mid twenty-first century would be 60% foreign-born. It was his contention that such inflows would have a profound effect on the cultural or ethnic or language composition of the host region/country.

http://immigrationre...rsity-press.pdf

Even so, immigration rates equal to 1% of the already resident population would not prevent workforce growth in Canada dipping to historic lows in the 2020s, and the immigration that would be needed—even with major efforts to attract a larger share of younger people—to maintain workforce growth at its recent rate would be well outside the realm of economic or political feasibility. Aging is more difficult yet. Increasing immigration to 1% of population a year without varying its age distribution would slow the rise in the OAD ratio only marginally. And raising immigration to this level while trying to select only very young immigrants with children, so as to lower dramatically the average age of immigrants, would still not prevent a historic rise in the ratio. Only extreme and unpalatable policies, such as rapidly increasing immigration from less than 1% of the population to well over 3% for decades, could come close to stabilizing the OAD ratio.

http://www.diversity...Immigration.pdf

A study by the RAND Corporation (Grant et al., 2004), for example, looked at the demographic consequences of low fertility in Europe and reached conclusions broadly similar to ours on the question of whether immigration could compensate for the demographic challenges faced by EU nations. Schertmann (1992) shows that a constant inflow of immigrants, even relatively young ones, does not necessarily rejuvenate low fertility populations, and may in the long term actually contribute to population aging. Specific studies on Canada (United Nations, 2004; Denton and Spencer, 2004; Guillemette and Robson, 2006) have found that the dynamic of aging among the resident population is so strong that immigration’s ability to affect it is remarkably small.

http://www.fraserins...y.aspx?id=13504

Edited August 24, 2015 by Argus

[On Guard for Thee]

I already dealt with that myth. Why do I have to keep dealing with it?

I dunno. Perhaps as long as you continue to consider it a myth.

[Michael Hardner]

Why would a moderator weigh in on his posts?

Not championing but commenting- I am a facilitator which means I also discuss and try to move things along

[Michael Hardner]

Also if you try to find common ground with reasonable arguments you will find it

[WestCoastRunner]

Not championing but commenting- I am a facilitator which means I also discuss and try to move things along

So you are championing his comments.

[Michael Hardner]

I don't think so

[WestCoastRunner]

Also if you try to find common ground with reasonable arguments you will find it

You are actually pointing out another members posts considering you are a moderator. Do you not see a problem with this?

[On Guard for Thee]

So you are championing his comments.

It's certainly not hard to find the bigotry in them.

[Smallc]

I think you'd all do better to focus on the discussion and not how closed minded you are.

[Argus]

I dunno. Perhaps as long as you continue to consider it a myth.

So I give you four cites saying that immigration is not the solution to an aging population and this is all you come back with?

Here's another.

While Canadians have many reasons to welcome more immigrants, alleviating the economic and fiscal consequences of an aging population is not one of them. Policies to encourage work and saving, such as raising the retirement age, have greater power to contain the rise of old-age dependency.

https://www.cdhowe.org/sites/default/files/attachments/research_papers/mixed//backgrounder_96.pdf

[Argus]

You are actually pointing out another members posts considering you are a moderator. Do you not see a problem with this?

You appear to be growing frustrated at the suggestion that you address the arguments rather than simply insulting the person who makes the arguments. Perhaps you would feel a more congenial atmosphere somewhere you are better protected from reading opinions which offend you. I believe rabble.ca has a rule against anyone having contrary opinions to progressives. I would suggest you go and join them.

Contrarily, if you simply wish to call me names, I would be happy to exchange my honest, unvarnished opinion of you, your intelligence, or lack thereof, and your value or lack thereof, as a human being, if the moderators permit it.

[On Guard for Thee]

So I give you four cites saying that immigration is not the solution to an aging population and this is all you come back with?

Here's another.

While Canadians have many reasons to welcome more immigrants, alleviating the economic and fiscal consequences of an aging population is not one of them. Policies to encourage work and saving, such as raising the retirement age, have greater power to contain the rise of old-age dependency.

https://www.cdhowe.org/sites/default/files/attachments/research_papers/mixed//backgrounder_96.pdf

http://www.oneimmigration.ca/why-canada-needs-immigrants/

[Argus]

It's certainly not hard to find the bigotry in them.

Yet it seems awfully difficult for you to find a counter argument to the ones I place. Does that stem from lack of knowledge, lack of intelligence, or both?

[Argus]

http://www.oneimmigration.ca/why-canada-needs-immigrants/

LOLOLOL! You are trying to use the web site of an immigration consulting firm, a company which makes money off immigrants, as your cite?! Seriously!? :lol:

[On Guard for Thee]

LOLOLOL! You are trying to use the web site of an immigration consulting firm, a company which makes money off immigrants, as your cite?! Seriously!? :lol:

Ah the typical shoot the messenger deflection, right on schedule.

[On Guard for Thee]

Yet it seems awfully difficult for you to find a counter argument to the ones I place. Does that stem from lack of knowledge, lack of intelligence, or both?

Not very difficult at all, and I' not alone as has been pointed out numerous times.

[Argus]

Ah the typical shoot the messenger deflection, right on schedule.

The messenger was an immigration lawyer saying we need more immigrants! WTH!

The fact is there are a number of groups which certainly benefit from immigration - immigration lawyers and consultants being one of them. But generally, business supports higher immigration levels because it provides a pool of cheap, easily exploited workers. Also, complaining of 'labour shortages' gets the government to allow them to bring in temporary foreign workers and pay them less than Canadians.

But the notion that Canada is facing large labour shortages in coming years “is very misleading,” said Mr. Halliwell, an economist who has studied labour market trends for 36 years.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/no-labour-shortage-on-horizon-study-says/article15324642/

Edited August 24, 2015 by Argus