Immigration

[On Guard for Thee]

That is correct. I am with Harper on this (one of very few things I am with him). The underlying problem of war and poverty must be addressed. ISIS's brutally is largely responsible for recent refugees so a coordinated afford to get rid of them once and for all. Considering there are 50 million refugees in the world, taking even 25000 which the liberal and NDP are promising is not going to address even the tip of problem and we should not bring more for the reasons I stated earlier.

Assad is responsible for a hell of a lot more of those refugees and I don't see us whipping out our F 18's to go after him.

[CITIZEN_2015]

I think it's only common sense that Christians will be a better fit here, since whatever female hatred their society has will fade quickly in the Canadian context. This is clearly not the case with Muslims.

This statement comes likely from religious right. These ultra conservatives and religious right (coalition to form this conservative government) are as bad as Muslim fanatics.

[Civis Romanus sum]

Assad is responsible for a hell of a lot more of those refugees and I don't see us whipping out our F 18's to go after him.

Do you want us to?

[Civis Romanus sum]

This statement comes likely from religious right. These ultra conservatives and religious right (coalition to form this conservative government) are as bad as Muslim fanatics.

I don't know what the religious 'right' is. I would suppose those folks who are religious tend to also be fairly conservative, but I haven't heard that they want to execute people for blasphemy or for proselytizing, or for being homosexual or offending God. And I haven't heard them say those who are non Christians are fair game to be used, raped or killed if you want to. So I think your equating them with Muslim fanatics is completely out of line.

[cybercoma]

From what I've read very few are people fleeing persecution. Most are simply fleeing poverty and instability.

So the problems in Syria are fake? I guess we can bring the military home too then, right?

[Civis Romanus sum]

So the problems in Syria are fake? I guess we can bring the military home too then, right?

I thought we were speaking of refugees in general who have come to Canada over the years, and which has caused the government to tighten up rules.

I am still waiting, by the way, for you to provide some backup to your claim that the name I've chosen here is in some way associated with white nationalists.

Edited September 7, 2015 by Civis Romanus sum

[CITIZEN_2015]

Assad is responsible for a hell of a lot more of those refugees and I don't see us whipping out our F 18's to go after him.

Likely because he is now an ally when it comes to fighting ISIS!!!. Strange world.

[scribblet]

Some snapshots here of mostly male migrants with designer clothing and cell phones, two different classes are trying to get in, real refugees and economic migrants. Merkel is starting to tighten up now too.

http://inbalkans.info/inbalkans/web/?p=7300

and now Iraqis are lining up to get in on this so will to the huge numbers - Europe cannot handle the numbers, there will be tears and blood in the near future.

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/09/05/437727526/with-eyes-on-europe-iraqis-line-up-to-leave-baghdad

[cybercoma]

Some snapshots here of mostly male migrants with designer clothing and cell phones

You think being a refugee has something to do with your economic class?

[scribblet]

I thought we were speaking of refugees in general who have come to Canada over the years, and which has caused the government to tighten up rules.

I am still waiting, by the way, for you to provide some backup to your claim that the name I've chosen here is in some way associated with white nationalists.

I thought it meant I am a Roman citizen which guaranteed legal rights

[CITIZEN_2015]

I don't know what the religious 'right' is. I would suppose those folks who are religious tend to also be fairly conservative, but I haven't heard that they want to execute people for blasphemy or for proselytizing, or for being homosexual or offending God. And I haven't heard them say those who are non Christians are fair game to be used, raped or killed if you want to. So I think your equating them with Muslim fanatics is completely out of line.

Nazi Germany and more recent Serbia were examples of religious right. Nazis pointing to Jews as Chris killers murdered some 6 million innocent people and yes many homosexuals too. Serbia murdered and raped many Muslims. In North America mainly US but Canada too religious right wishes to build a pure Christian society where religious laws are being practiced. Fortunately they don't have many supporters in Canada so they hide in the sheep's clothing and call themselves Reformers and more recent progressive Conservatives even!!.

[scribblet]

You think being a refugee has something to do with your economic class?

There is a big difference between a refugee and an economic migrant.

[scribblet]

Nazi Germany and more recent Serbia were examples of religious right. Nazis pointing to Jews as Chris killers murdered some 6 million innocent people and yes many homosexuals too. Serbia murdered and raped many Muslims. In North America mainly US but Canada too religious right wishes to build a pure Christian society where religious laws are being practiced. Fortunately they don't have many supporters in Canada so they hide in the sheep's clothing and call themselves Reformers and more recent progressive Conservatives even!!.

Oh sure... of course - just another thinly veiled jab

[Bob Macadoo]

There is a big difference between a refugee and an economic migrant.

I understand an apple is not an orange.....but a crab and a red delicious.....any other mutually exclusive terms to define?

[eyeball]

If you want to help the millions and tens of millions you need to do something to end the war.

facepalm/

[scribblet]

I understand an apple is not an orange.....but a crab and a red delicious.....any other mutually exclusive terms to define?

That's a useless reply...

As A. Jolie said Refugees from war are distinct from economic migrants

[msj]

While I find the idea of rich people not being "real refugees" so "send them back" to be appealing on a "take that you rich person" level, the reality is I would gladly take them.

In fact anyone who has brains and fleeing a war torn country is welcome.

I have 2 people in my employ (though not refugees) from foreign lands and only 1 of my Canadian born staff is better.

I'll take foreigners 9 times out of 10 over the lazy morons this country produces.

So Syria's loss can be Canada's gain.

Bring 'em on.

[Mighty AC]

Harper is correct in that housing a few tens of thousands of refugees will do nothing to help the millions and tens of millions in danger. It will make some of you liberals feel better about yourself, but let's not kid ourselves into thinking there is any other accomplishment in bringing them here. If you want to help the millions and tens of millions you need to do something to end the war.

A handful of planes is just a tiny part of the effort and probably wouldn't even be missed. Just ask BC how insignificant our military contribution is. Yet, sheltering, feeding, protecting those displaced by war is an important part of the process in a conflict like this. When citing humanitarian grounds as the reasoning behind joining a war, it's probably important to look after the humans.

[waldo]

That's a useless reply...

As A. Jolie said Refugees from war are distinct from economic migrants

as is your reply... particularly when you attach your agenda to an interpreted quote... one taken out of full context. Perhaps you should actually read the full Times of London editorial (as written by, "Angelina Jolie Pitt - special envoy of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and Arminka Helic - a member of the House of Lords and a former refugee from the 1990s war in Bosnia-Herzegovina"): Don’t blame refugees for seeking a better life

We must face some hard truths. The first is that the responsibility to help is not determined by the accident of geography but by adherence to universal human rights and values. It transcends religion, culture and ethnicity. We should not be reaching for the lowest common denominator in our response to the refugee crisis, but striving to live up to our highest ideals. Every country in the world, not just in Europe, must be a part of the solution.

Third, at this moment of emergency, we should be conscious of the distinction between economic migrants, who are trying to escape extreme poverty, and refugees who are fleeing an immediate threat to their lives. All people on the move in these tragic circumstances must have their human rights and dignity respected and their needs understood and addressed. We should not stigmatise anyone for the aspiration to a better life.

But refugees are facing an immediate need to be saved from persecution and death and their rights are defined in international law. That is why effective reception and screening are so important, to enable claims to be analysed and protection extended to those who need it.

what I find particularly galling is you continuing to play up the "image lie" you claim was/is driven by the media... as if to presume to give cover to Harper Conservatives failure in policy/action! I trust you have equal efforts targeted to ensure your favoured party is making that/your selective distinction between "economic migrants and refugees"... do you think there's a shortage of "real" refugees... to the point you keep dwelling on that single image of a child drowned on a beach?

.

[Army Guy]

A handful of planes is just a tiny part of the effort and probably wouldn't even be missed. Just ask BC how insignificant our military contribution is. Yet, sheltering, feeding, protecting those displaced by war is an important part of the process in a conflict like this. When citing humanitarian grounds as the reasoning behind joining a war, it's probably important to look after the humans.

Your right....but at what point do we draw the line in accepting more....we all know this is just the start of the flow, and many other nations not afficted by war are now joining this crises.....which must be becoming a problem as the German Chancellor mentioned it on national tv, that they would be sending those back.....what do we do when the flow of refugees become unmanageable.

[Army Guy]

I think the whole immigration process needs to be looked at and revamped from the bottom up....there are many studies done on "why we have a need for immigration, some studies favor huge immigration numbers.....

One of the most ringing endorsements of a high immigration rate came from the 1991 report by the Economic Council of Canada, the first detailed analysis of Canadian policy. It called for immigration to be increased to eventually bring Canada's population to 100 million. While it found that the economic benefits to Canada of immigration were fairly small, the benefits to the newcomers themselves were extremely large.

and

In 2005 a report by the Royal Bank of Canada called for boosting Canada's immigration rate by 30% to 400,000 per year to ensure continued economic growth.

All saying that for good economic growth we need high immigration numbers.....

Can all our problems be solved with immigration these guys don't think so....

Another factor that may lead Canadians to support high immigration levels is Canada's low birth rate (see List of countries by birth rate). The theory is that new residents can assist in meeting future government obligations relating to pay-as-you-go liabilities. The economic dangers of population decline are not universally accepted. Organizations like the Fraser Institute, a conservative think tank, question whether a declining population would reduce or increase per capita income, noting that in the short term, with a stable economy, fewer people would increase the per capita income simply because you divide the income among fewer people. The study's authors conducted a series of studies using large amounts of census data (844,476 individuals) and conclude that immigrants who arrived from 1987-2004 paid only 57% of the taxes paid by average Canadian in 2006, with the effect that taxes from immigrants do not exceed the government expenses relating to them (a gap of $23 billion annually according to their numbers).^[13] A study by the C. D. Howe Institute, another conservative think tank, suggests that immigration cannot keep Canada's population young and could possibly contribute to population ageing in the near term.^[14] Employment statistics also bring into question whether skilled worker immigrants, with a 34% unemployment rate,^[15] are successfully meeting existing labour market needs in Canada. Many developed nations have much lower fertility rates than Canada but have not embraced immigration.

So if one of the major impacts is our lower birth rate , why not look at the problem and find a solution.....immigration cost this country from 17 to 26 bil every year......we already have small programs that try to encourage higher birth rates but, in reality they don't even cover the cost of day care....but what if they did.....what if we could reduce immigration numbers say by half, and throw that money into a new super baby bonus.....cancel all the existing programs for families...which would result in even more funding available....so instead of handing out 6081 dollars to immigrants we hand that to new families.....or increase it to a higher amount, or one based on age of children say 0-5 you get so much, 5-10 you get this much, 10 to 18 you get this much....giving families more disposable income, might entice them to start pumping out kids....or having one or two more....perhaps starting another baby boom generation....

[Mighty AC]

Your right....but at what point do we draw the line in accepting more....we all know this is just the start of the flow, and many other nations not afficted by war are now joining this crises.....which must be becoming a problem as the German Chancellor mentioned it on national tv, that they would be sending those back.....what do we do when the flow of refugees become unmanageable.

There certainly is a limit to what we can handle. The problem is the Harper government has lowered that limit and cut the health care we provide, while talking about how charitable he is out of the other side of his mouth. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/07/04/refugees-health-care-cuts-conservatives-court_n_5557881.html

For years we have been able to manage our commitment to humanitarian aid through housing and providing proper care. For years we have been able to provide veterans with pensions and accessible services. Why is it that the Harper government, so fond of sending troops into battle, doesn't like to look after those involved and displaced?

[CITIZEN_2015]

I am all for humanitarian help and immigration but lets take care of our own people first. Those in the line up for housing, health care, on social programs, pensioners and who built this country unable to make ends meet,...... may not welcome more immigrants (unless we pick them based on their skills and education or assets so that they can contribute and become tax payers right away or create jobs with their wealth) especially refugees which takes years for most become productive.

Adoptability should play a bigger role too. Some (not all)Immigrants from certain regions are less adoptable so we should give more points to adoptability and specially apply it to potential immigrants to those regions. As an example an Arab Sheikh may have lots of assets and over qualify but must fail on adoptability. Also 250,000 for a nation of 32 million with many of our university graduates unable to find jobs and many people in the line up for housing and health care may be too high.

Edited September 7, 2015 by CITIZEN_2015

[carepov]

While I find the idea of rich people not being "real refugees" so "send them back" to be appealing on a "take that you rich person" level, the reality is I would gladly take them.

In fact anyone who has brains and fleeing a war torn country is welcome.

I have 2 people in my employ (though not refugees) from foreign lands and only 1 of my Canadian born staff is better.

I'll take foreigners 9 times out of 10 over the lazy morons this country produces.

So Syria's loss can be Canada's gain.

Bring 'em on.

I was just thinking the same thing. For the most part, these refugees are risk-takers and have been able to accumulate enough funds to pay hefty smuggling fees.

Within reason, this refugee crisis can be a win-win-win situation:

Win for Canada - more hard-working, risk taking workers and entrepreneurs

Win for Canada - improve our reputation around the world for helping out

Win for the refugees

[Army Guy]

There certainly is a limit to what we can handle. The problem is the Harper government has lowered that limit and cut the health care we provide, while talking about how charitable he is out of the other side of his mouth. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/07/04/refugees-health-care-cuts-conservatives-court_n_5557881.html

For years we have been able to manage our commitment to humanitarian aid through housing and providing proper care. For years we have been able to provide veterans with pensions and accessible services. Why is it that the Harper government, so fond of sending troops into battle, doesn't like to look after those involved and displaced?

So in your opinion what is that number....as i was thinking 25k and that might be high....after that what does Canada tell the refugees sorry were filled to capacity....