dialamah Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 (edited) Not all refugees even want to come to Canada. Perhaps we only end up with the least conservative group by default, the more conservative choose to remain close to home. Fear of the unfamiluar does seem to be a more conservative trait. "One woman told us three families had been offered the possibility of going to Canada by the UN, but that two refused, afraid of going such a long way, and worried they would never get back." http://vf.to/4VWf7BMHLeS Edited November 25, 2015 by dialamah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notca Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Not many people if this site is any indication. Precisely what is it you think people are ignorant about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hal 9000 Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Not all refugees even want to come to Canada. Perhaps we only end up with the least conservative group by default, the more conservative choose to remain close to home. Fear of the unfamiluar does seem to be a more conservative trait. "One woman told us three families had been offered the possibility of going to Canada by the UN, but that two refused, afraid of going such a long way, and worried they would never get back." http://vf.to/4VWf7BMHLeS You just can't stop insulting people eh! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Lots of legislators in the USA have no intention of dealing with Syrian refugees. I wonder if there will be a call to change the abitity of "Canadians" to come into the USA from Canada. I guess more and more will just walk across at one of the thousands of places on the border which straddle both countries. I wonder how many of these refugees will end up in the USA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hal 9000 Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Trudeau had to move the deadline...or fail - that was obvious. What concerns me a little is that it was such common sense and when given the perfect "get out of jail free" card, being the Paris attack, he didn't take it and instead doubled down. Conservatives simply used common sense, while all the liberals jumped "all-in" on an unrealistic timeline - calling everyone who used logic out as being racist. Good grief! If liberals (small l) keep jumping all in on a politician they don't even know, its gonna be a long rough ride for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 (edited) You just can't stop insulting people eh!There's been at least one study suggesting that risk-averse people also tend to be more conservative over all. http://www.futurity.org/politics-conservative-dopamine-989972-2/ So to my mind, not an insult but more a statement of fact. But if you like, I'll rephrase: "Perhaps we'll end up with more progressive people because conservative people tend to be risk-averse and will choose to stay home." Most of my family tend to be conservative, they prefer things to remain the same and to avoid the unfamiliar. I don't get why they let fear direct their actions and miss out on some great experiences, but perhaps they have little choice if it's partly gene-driven. I've seen the same kind of fear exhibited by conservative people my entire life, especially Republicans when I began following US politics more. To me the religious right is probably the most fearful type of person there is, regardless of culture or religion. Edited November 25, 2015 by dialamah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 There's been at least one study suggesting that risk-averse people also tend to be more conservative over all. http://www.futurity.org/politics-conservative-dopamine-989972-2/ So to my mind, not an insult but might a statement of fact. I remember one of my earliest political memories was of my Dad, a dyed in the wool Labour man in the UK, complaining about all the Conservative signs in gardens on our working class street in Bradford in the sixtes. "What the bloody hell do they have to conserve?", he would ask. Of course, our political views diverged over the years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 (edited) You would never vote Liberal anyway so they are not really going to care one way or the other as to what you think of the initial promise. First, you are incorrect about my never voting Liberal. In fact, if Mulcair had been their leader I would have. Second, isn't this just a mirror image of the attitude so many on the Left complained about with regard to Harper? That he only paid attention to his base and didn't give a damn what others thought? Are you saying the Trudeau Liberals are the same as the Harper Tories in their thinking? Edited November 25, 2015 by Argus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 I remember one of my earliest political memories was of my Dad, a dyed in the wool Labour man in the UK, complaining about all the Conservative signs in gardens on our working class street in Bradford in the sixtes. "What the bloody hell do they have to conserve?", he would ask. Of course, our political views diverged over the years. I'm not even sure that being conservative means you have to vote conservative. One can be afraid of change and the unknown, but still vote for a party that puts social issues on a par with economic issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Speaking of phony facts... Canada does nothing of the sort. The vast majority of the roughly 250,000 immigrants we take each year are not refugees in any way. 95% of that 250k are picked because they can support themselves from day one, or have family members who guarantee that. All of them pay the costs of their own processing. Only 10k to 15k per year are actual refugees, and many of those are not supported by government resources but by private means, mostly charities. Those who pay little or nothing in taxes are always generous with the money the government forceably extracts from those who do. It makes them proud to give it away to other people, even foreigners, as if it came from them, somehow. Well, the generosity is theirs, of course, even if those grubby taxpayers they disdain might complain about it. But then, they're not as noble and generous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 There's been at least one study suggesting that risk-averse people also tend to be more conservative over all. http://www.futurity.org/politics-conservative-dopamine-989972-2/ So to my mind, not an insult but more a statement of fact. This theme of yours seems in odd conflict with another popular progressive theme, which is that all the business leaders, CEOs and owners of corporations are conservatives. How do you think they all got to be leaders, to rise to the top, if they were risk adverse? Maybe you and your study need to differentiate between 'risk' and risk which is assessed carefully based on likely gains and losses. When you take a risk, if you're smart, you consider the rewards, or up side, and the possible costs, consequences, or 'down side'. People who do that intelligently become leaders. People who don't become, well.. nobodies. Kimmy asked a question before which no one has answered. What is the up side of bringing in lots of Muslims to Canada? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 (edited) I guess more and more will just walk across at one of the thousands of places on the border which straddle both countries. I wonder how many of these refugees will end up in the USA? Thank you for presenting one of the possible major down sides to this. The paranoia in the US is real. While you used to be able to walk across the border, access is now strictly enforced, even to what some might call ridiculous levels which cause great inconvenience to Canadians. We even have one US candidate saying that the issue of a 'wall' along their northern border needs to be studied. All of that is because of immigration. It's unspoken, of course, but the US is not afraid of people like me crossing the border. They're afraid of the masses of third world people we have let into the country, many with unknown political sympathies. If Syrian refugees are caught getting into the US that will have a strongly negative impact on many Canadians. Border enforcement will be even more strictly enforced. If, God forbid, someone among them is caught trying to cross the border with a bomb, as happened once before, or even worse, is successful, the impact on border waits will be even more severe. I consider the second scenario unlikely, but the first, all-too likely. Edited November 25, 2015 by Argus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 I'm not even sure that being conservative means you have to vote conservative. One can be afraid of change and the unknown, but still vote for a party that puts social issues on a par with economic issues. That's one of the reasons I don't feel bad about voting conservative. The courts will make sure my pro choice, pro gay rights, anti death penalty, etc. views are upheld. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msj Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Second, isn't this just a mirror image of the attitude so many on the Left complained about with regard to Harper? That he only paid attention to his base and didn't give a damn what others thought? Are you saying the Trudeau Liberals are the same as the Harper Tories in their thinking? I'm sure there are people who complain about politicians playing to their base. And it is fine to play to one's base as long as their base does not become so narrow as to allow the other party to win the election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 I don't give a damn about forty years ago. I have more interest in Jews being stabbed in the streets of Jerusalem by fanatical Muslims today. There's nothing the Irgun did forty years ago that hasn't been vastly surpassed by the last forty years of Palestinian terrorism anyway. The point that you are missing is that this isn't a straight-line "Muslims are always causing problems and the Israelis have to protect themselves" situation. The Israelis have been terrorists and committing war crimes since before 1949 and they still are today, but everyone sees the guys on "their side" as "freedom fighters" and are willing to cut them some (or unlimited) slack. The Old Testament and Quran give their followers carte blanche to discriminate against, fear, hate and ultimately kill people of other religions. It would take more than just a large-scale massacre for you to ever say "The Israelis crossed a line today". I'm an atheist, I distrust both sides equally. I don't think we should back the Israelis no matter what they do. They need to smarten up or just be left to fend for themselves. The last thing I want to see is Canadians getting killed or injured fighting for the current version of the Israelis. They are crap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 This theme of yours seems in odd conflict with another popular progressive theme, which is that all the business leaders, CEOs and owners of corporations are conservatives. How do you think they all got to be leaders, to rise to the top, if they were risk adverse? Fair point, Argus, but on the other hand other factors are at play. One is that many of the people who currently heads of large corporations didn't necessarily start those businesses. For example, however the current head of Ford feels about change (or votes), the founders began a foundation supporting and promoting what most people consider liberal values. There's also a fairly strong contingent of garden variety psychopaths among heads of multi-nationals, a rather amoral bunch who make decisions based on a different risk/benefit model than the average person. It might be interesting to know how many small business owners/starters are liberal in outlook rather than conservative. And as BCsapper mentioned, he can safely vote Conservative knowing that the Liberal values he feels are important will be protected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 (edited) The point that you are missing is that this isn't a straight-line "Muslims are always causing problems and the Israelis have to protect themselves" situation. The Israelis have been terrorists and committing war crimes since before 1949 And I have already replied that virtually all the terrorist acts the Jews committed before there was a state of Israel were in response to terrorist acts committed against Jews by Arabs. They were then immediately attacked by every Arab state the moment of their independence, and had to fight for their lives. Most of those Arab states are still in a declared state of war with them. Those states have aided and abetted the Palestinians, using them without conscience, as pawns, to attack the state and people of Israel over the years in too many terrorist acts to even list here. And those, of course, were in between repeated military assaults by Arab countries. That is the history you are glossing over in your one-sided condemnation of Israel. and they still are today, but everyone sees the guys on "their side" as "freedom fighters" and are willing to cut them some (or unlimited) slack I'm willing to cut them some slack for a number of reasons. First, they are the only democratic state in the region. Second, all of those opposing them, including the Palestinian governments, have worse human rights records than the Israelis do. Third, I have the empathy and imagination you evidently lack, in considering what it must be like to grow up in Israel surrounded by a horde of hundreds of millions of implacably hostile people who want to kill each and every Jew if only they could get around or over or under the armies and fences and border towers and walls. So many hostile Muslims willing to sacrifice their lives if only they can kill a Jew, any Jew, man, woman or child. The awareness of that is going to produce a people an awful, awful lot less squeamish and kindly than the fat assed, contented, supercilious progressives of Canada. That doesn't mean I dont think the west bank settlements shouldn't be abandoned. I think they are counter productive. And it doesn't mean I don't shake my head in resignation at some of the things Israel, or Israelis do at times. But it does mean I am not about to condemn them while embracing their enemies - who are in every respect worse. Edited November 25, 2015 by Argus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Soldiers generally hate the outdated, cramped and generally shitty accomodations found on military bases. The Liberals will pay to spruce up the barracks to provide acceptable digs for the refugees. So, bonus, when the refugees "spread out throughout the country", our troops will move back in and enjoy the enhanced ambiance. Of course, without the refugees moving in, not a plugged nickel would be spent by the feds to upgrade those units. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 The Liberals will pay to spruce up the barracks to provide acceptable digs for the refugees. So, bonus, when the refugees "spread out throughout the country", our troops will move back in and enjoy the enhanced ambiance. Of course, without the refugees moving in, not a plugged nickel would be spent by the feds to upgrade those units. is it a fact that the barracks will be spruced up for refugees, or a supposition on your part? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 It might be interesting to know how many small business owners/starters are liberal in outlook rather than conservative. And as BCsapper mentioned, he can safely vote Conservative knowing that the Liberal values he feels are important will be protected. Well, speaking as someone who is self-made, I can tell you that while we have some sympathy for the poor, we have very little with people who are poor due to their own actions or inaction. When my neighbours on welfare were sitting out on their balconies drinking beer I was trudging off for my hour long trip to my midnight shift job as a security guard - and half of that hour long trip would be a long walk into a darkened industrial district with no public transit. I was always checking want ads, always applying, and I paid for my own courses and studied on my own time. I kept plugging away for years until I got a break. Others just sat back and bitched and moaned about their lot in life but did little or nothing to improve it. So now I'm fairly well-off. And like most who did not inherit their money I don't have a lot of sympathy for those who feel entitled to what I earned because they never bothered to put much effort into improving their lives when they could drink beer and watch TV instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 is it a fact that the barracks will be spruced up for refugees, or a supposition on your part? CFB Trenton Commanding Officer Col. Colin Keiver said, last Thursday, personnel are busy wintering barracks used by the summer air cadet training program at the west end of the base. http://www.intelligencer.ca/2015/11/23/bases-prepare-for-syrian-refugees Lemire said the base at Gagetown is looking at everything from how to provide food and medical services to allocating space for religious practice for refugees from Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/11/25/canadian-forces-bases-on-standby-for-refugee-arrivals-preparations-underway_n_8645146.html Civilian employee Lisa Goodsell cleans one of the barracks at CFB Kingston in Kingston, Ont., on Monday Nov. 23, 2015. http://www.metronews.ca/news/canada/2015/11/25/canadian-forces-bases-on-standby-for-refugee-arrivals-preparations-underway.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 (edited) So that's a no to it being a fact then? Edited November 25, 2015 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 http://www.intelligencer.ca/2015/11/23/bases-prepare-for-syrian-refugees http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/11/25/canadian-forces-bases-on-standby-for-refugee-arrivals-preparations-underway_n_8645146.html http://www.metronews.ca/news/canada/2015/11/25/canadian-forces-bases-on-standby-for-refugee-arrivals-preparations-underway.html Winterizing Barracks: These are apparently the barracks that are used by summer cadets, and are not used in the winter by military personnel. No doubt, if they were used in the winter, the'd already have been winterized. So, as proof for "Sprucing up" - fail. "Allocating prayer space" - I could be wrong here, but 'allocating space' doesn't mean the same thing as 'Sprucing up'. Fail #2. In any case, I imagine military personnel are allowed accommodation for their religious needs, so why not refugees? "Cleaning up barracks" - From this and other articles I've read, they are attempting to utilize as many empty/unused spaces as they can - they probably do need cleaning up. Fail #3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Have it your way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 So that's a no to it being a fact then? I don't have time to argue with people who can't agree that winterizing accommodations located on military bases is an upgrade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.