Trudeau's Committment to Syrian Refugees - 25,000 by Year End

Smallc · January 3, 2016

The rates are not extravagant for the situation, though the dinner could probably be cut down by maybe the cost of a glass of wine.

To get that rate, the hotel has to provide a service worth that much. If they provide one that is worth less, they get less. The amounts stated are the maximum.

Smallc · January 3, 2016

Interesting point made. Lake St. Martin and other Manitoba FN flood victims have been housed in Winnipeg hotels for 4 years, and have gotten the government rate for food as well. Harper was in charge then, I believe.

Big Guy · January 3, 2016

It's only taxpayer money.

Currently, Canadian airplanes are dropping GBU12 500-pound laser-guided bombs on Iraq and Syria. I understand that sometimes they hit something.

Each one of those bombs cost US $21,896.

I wonder how many Syrian refugee families could be assisted and assimilated by the cost of one of those bombs which are changing prosperous Syrian citizens into Syrian refugees?

Oh, and the cost of our meddling in the Middle East?

At least $528.5 million so far.

That might pay for the assimilation into Canada of a few innocent refugee families.

Argus · January 3, 2016

It's true.

But TSS is talking about regular immigration, not refugees.

It's still nonsense.

Shady · January 3, 2016

Interesting point made. Lake St. Martin and other Manitoba FN flood victims have been housed in Winnipeg hotels for 4 years, and have gotten the government rate for food as well. Harper was in charge then, I believe.

So what? The government should be there to provide for Canadian citizens, especially during things like natural disasters.

Shady · January 3, 2016

They had a substantive costed platform. The Conservatives...not so much.

Yep, an immense and absurd cost platform.

Shady · January 3, 2016

Nobody crumbles their way to it, either.

Prioritizing revenue makes things like this possible. Not blowing up the deficit for the unicorn type economic fantasies of infrastructure. The reason why we pay high fuel taxes is for exactly that very thing.

ironstone · January 3, 2016

When did Canada initially go into debt? How prosperous is Canada (Canadians) relative to the rest of the world? We don't seem too badly off, but perhaps I'm missing some important indicators that we have a lower standard of living (less prosperous) than 50 years ago.

Too much debt scares me,like Greece.Too much debt is not a good thing,just look at Ontario and how much we pay to service our debt,over $11 billion.It's not right to saddle future generations with this burden either.

Smallc · January 3, 2016

Too much debt scares me,like Greece.

We could run $40B deficits for 100 years and it's unlikely we'd be in the situation of Greece.

capricorn · January 3, 2016

It's not right to saddle future generations with this burden either.

Mea culpa. I was the beneficiary of Trudeau Senior's largesse. Humongous pay increases and benefits. Life had never been so good. I was young and I didn't have a care in the world. I kept voting Liberal hoping the good times would keep rolling but reality set in and I realized someone had to pay the piper. I have learned it's best to live within your means, including family budgets and government budgets. Sadly, I think the days of largesse are returning with Trudeau Junior. I hope I'm wrong. The upcoming federal budget will say a lot on that score.

Smallc · January 3, 2016

So what? The government should be there to provide for Canadian citizens, especially during things like natural disasters.

So you think it was a good policy to have people living in hotels for 4 years, giving them $1500 a month for meals and (at one point) $60 a day for snacks? The reality is, Canada has always taken refugees, especially in a time of crisis. That means we have to care for them.

Yep, an immense and absurd cost platform.

I suppose that's a matter of perspective. It seems that enough people to create a Liberal majority disagreed with your perspective.

Prioritizing revenue makes things like this possible. Not blowing up the deficit for the unicorn type economic fantasies of infrastructure. The reason why we pay high fuel taxes is for exactly that very thing.

The deficit, even at $20B, won't be blown up - certainly not by recent standards anyway.

Keepitsimple · January 3, 2016

So you think it was a good policy to have people living in hotels for 4 years, giving them $1500 a month for meals and (at one point) $60 a day for snacks? The reality is, Canada has always taken refugees, especially in a time of crisis. That means we have to care for them.

Then there should have been no need to lie to Canadians and say it would only take two months and $100 million - as opposed to over a year and $1.2 billion over 6 years......and like longer and more.

Smallc · January 3, 2016

Then there should have been no need to lie to Canadians and say it would only take two months and $100 million - as opposed to over a year and $1.2 billion over 6 years......and like longer and more.

I would agree that the cost should have been disclosed. I don't agree that it was misleading to change the timeline.

Keepitsimple · January 4, 2016

I would agree that the cost should have been disclosed. I don't agree that it was misleading to change the timeline.

From two months to at least 14 months? Seven times as long? Less than 2000 government assisted refugees instead of 25,000 ....you don't find that "misleading"? They only have it "right" now because it was so ridiculously impossible before - and so very designed to pander to the NDP voters.

Shady · January 4, 2016

So you think it was a good policy to have people living in hotels for 4 years, giving them $1500 a month for meals and (at one point) $60 a day for snacks? The reality is, Canada has always taken refugees, especially in a time of crisis. That means we have to care for them.I suppose that's a matter of perspective. It seems that enough people to create a Liberal majority disagreed with your perspective. The deficit, even at $20B, won't be blown up - certainly not by recent standards anyway.

Taking care of refugees is subjective. Completely subjective. Absurd allowances can legitimately be criticized. If you don't like that, tough shit. And no, the details of the refugee situation wasn't a part of the election, but nice try. Continue to defend and make excuse for your new tax, spend and borrow government. I have a feeling you'll have a lot of work doing so over the next few years. Let's be honest though. You know your vote for the Liberals was a complete and utter disaster, and you just don't want to accept it. The more you defend here, the more it's a cathartic release for you. And you're able to convince yourself that you did the right thing. Even though, day after day, the evidence suggests otherwise. I feel sorry for you buddy. You've got a long road a head! Lol.

Shady · January 4, 2016

From two months to at least 14 months? Seven times as long? Less than 2000 government assisted refugees instead of 25,000 ....you don't find that "misleading"? They only have it "right" now because it was so ridiculously impossible before - and so very designed to pander to the NDP voters.

He's gotta come up with any way possible to convince himself that everything is alright. It's just the beginning of the delusion. I saw the same thing with his support of Obama. It took 7 years before he finally admitted to his mistake in judgement.

Smallc · January 4, 2016

From two months to at least 14 months? Seven times as long? Less than 2000 government assisted refugees instead of 25,000 ...

Am I supposed to be concerned about that? They weren't able to keep their promise on timeline. They're obviously very intent on meeting the numbers they promised. I don't care to be honest, as this isn't why I voted for them. Just the same, I don't really fault them for it.

Smallc · January 4, 2016

He's gotta come up with any way possible to convince himself that everything is alright. It's just the beginning of the delusion. I saw the same thing with his support of Obama. It took 7 years before he finally admitted to his mistake in judgement.

At this point, I would call my support for Harper in 2011 a mistake. Trudeau hasn't done anything to cause me concern up to this point.

Smallc · January 4, 2016

I mean, for me, it's pretty simple - I'm happy they slowed down the refugee intake because of public concern, and that they have yet to pull out the jets (though, again, I question their efficacy at the current time). I want them to leave them there, as it would be bad for our international reputation to pull them out before close to when the mission was set to end.

Keepitsimple · January 4, 2016

Am I supposed to be concerned about that? They weren't able to keep their promise on timeline. They're obviously very intent on meeting the numbers they promised. I don't care to be honest, as this isn't why I voted for them. Just the same, I don't really fault them for it.

OK - you're obviously entitled to your opinion. Another viewpoint might be that they have no choice but to try to eventually get that number up to 25,000 - no matter how long it takes. Do you really think they could admit that their election promise was so outlandish?

Smallc · January 4, 2016

OK - you're obviously entitled to your opinion. Another viewpoint might be that they have no choice but to try to eventually get that number up to 25,000 - no matter how long it takes. Do you really think they could admit that their election promise was so outlandish?

I don't see why the number would be a problem. We take refugees every year - this year, we'll take a few more. There's nothing reckless about the promise, and as they've already identified and have in process that many, I don't see a problem meeting the goal.

Argus · January 4, 2016

We could run $40B deficits for 100 years and it's unlikely we'd be in the situation of Greece.

I don't think math is your strong suit, Smallc...

Smallc · January 4, 2016

I don't think math is your strong suit, Smallc...

A deficit up to $25B per year (assuming normal growth rates) would result in Canada keeping its debt to GDP ratio at its current ~35%. I was extrapolating. Lets be generous and say $40B would make it go up by 1% a year. In 100 years, we still wouldn't be where Greece is.

Edited January 4, 2016 by Smallc