Canadian Immigration

[taxme]

Again if you had bothered to read my previous posts you would have realized that I also said that our existing immigration policy is not that great and needs improvements. I did say we need to change t SMART immigration. Take those who have a good chance of becoming long term significant tax payers. I also said immigration numbers should be cut in half. I also cited SELECTIVELY as very important factor we need to have not only based on future prospects but also cultural compatibility with Canadians in order to keep out undesirables from entering Canada in order to avoid social disturbances we witness in Europe by Muslim extremists. Did you read my post before you launched your attacks? Contrary to what you and your supporters may think I care about the well being of this country as much as you guys do. This is where I live and this is where I will be buried too.

You asked me to show you the alternative media websites that I like to visit and I did. Now go to them and start reading. They won't bite you. There is no bogeymen there that will jump out at you. So, enjoy, and do get back to me and let me know what you think.

PS: American Renaissance is another alternative media website for you to visit.

Edited August 25, 2016 by taxme

[CITIZEN_2015]

You asked me to show you the alternative media websites that I like to visit and I did. Now go to them and start reading. They won't bite you. There is no bogeymen there that will jump out at you. So, enjoy, and do get back to me and let me know what you think.

PS: American Renaissance is another alternative media website for you to visit.

The report concentrates on numbers only and does not criticize the lack of selectivity in the system. The target set in my view at 25000 per year is just too low. It might as well be zero. And where did they come up with this figure was never answered. I do believe that 250,000 for a population of only 35 million is too high and I believe a BALANCED approach would be to reduce the number to between 100,000 to 150,000. And if we SELECT all those based ob financial prospects (either with proven records of ability to establish a business and creating jobs or possessing skills that Canadians do not have and is needed in Canada) then none of the issues that the report has cited would not arise (again it did not cite the danger of culturally incompatible intakes mostly from ME). So you asked me how I think about it and I told you what I think about the report.

[taxme]

The report concentrates on numbers only and does not criticize the lack of selectivity in the system. The target set in my view at 25000 per year is just too low. It might as well be zero. And where did they come up with this figure was never answered. I do believe that 250,000 for a population of only 35 million is too high and I believe a BALANCED approach would be to reduce the number to between 100,000 to 150,000. And if we SELECT all those based ob financial prospects (either with proven records of ability to establish a business and creating jobs or possessing skills that Canadians do not have and is needed in Canada) then none of the issues that the report has cited would not arise (again it did not cite the danger of culturally incompatible intakes mostly from ME). So you asked me how I think about it and I told you what I think about the report.

About many many decades ago I remember listening to an ex-Immigration Minister who was a member of the Liberal party(believe it or not)at the time who said that Canada does not need to have new immigrants or needs very few to keep the country up and running. He said that just as many people who die in Canada in one year are replaced by the same amount of babies being born in that same year. So, basically, what he was saying is that 100,000 die, and 100,000 are born. So, all this Canada needs to bring in more new immigration is all nonsense. We certainly don't need the hundreds of thousands of new immigrants that come here every year. I am surprised that the environmentalists don't cry about all this massive immigration going on into Canada, and all the extra environmental damage that is being done as a result of all these new immigrant people. Hello, where are you enviros?

Edited August 25, 2016 by taxme

[G Huxley]

"We certainly don't need the hundreds of thousands of new immigrants that come here every year. I am surprised that the environmentalists don't cry about all this massive immigration going on into Canada, and all the extra environmental damage that is being done as a result of all these new immigrant people. Hello, where are you enviros? "

I've been posting about this thread after thread. I'm in full agreement with you, but note also that very few alleged/claimed environmentalists speak out about this at all, which is grossly hypocritical.

[Argus]

This argument is a fallacy. If a business can't find workers at a wage it is offering, it can offer a higher wage until it finds workers. That's how capitalism is supposed to work, that's how wages go up and prosperity is shared among the working class not just business owners. By importing people that are willing to work at lower rates of pay, all you are doing is causing wage stagnation.

Canada's Left, doing its best to help big business earn higher profits while screwing the little guy. Weird, huh? But you have to remember, as far as the Left is concerned defending immigration is defending minorities. That trumps all other concerns. If all our immigrants came from Europe we would be holding a much more honest and straightforward discussion about the costs, and the left would be demanding we not bring in so many that it harms the working class and their wages.

Edited August 25, 2016 by Argus

[Argus]

So if we increased minimum wage to 15 an hr would they end up paying income tax? Would that work for you?

Raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour will increase unemployment. And whether they pay taxes is still related to how many deductions they have, which means if you have kids you aren't going to pay income tax even at $15hr.

[Argus]

So we stand for the same thing but I guess you never bothered to read my previous posts on this topic. Did you?

I did. I agree that we should lower immigration. I am disputing other statements you made. Why? Is that not permitted?

This is a flawed report. It ONLY considered NEWCOMERS. It does NOT track them after a few years or worse after many years to see that this newcomers have climbed up the ladder and have much higher incomes and hence paying much higher taxes, In full life most are net contributors big time.

Not only did you not read the report, you didn't even bother to read the story on the report. If you had you would have realized it does indeed track them for decades.

The 62-page report used a 2006 Census database to estimate the average incomes and taxes paid by immigrants who arrived in Canada over the period from 1987 to 2004. It found that immigrants paid an average of $10,340 in income tax and other taxes, compared with the $16,501 paid by all Canadians. While newcomers each received $110 less than the rest of Canadians, the “net fiscal transfer per immigrant” still amounted to $6,051 annually. The study examined the incomes of adults exclusively, and assumed the average immigrant pays taxes and receives benefits for 45 years.

[Argus]

It's not happening.

Really? And you know this how? Did you wave your arms and repeal the laws of supply and demand?

[Argus]

There is a definite need for tfw. Canadians refuse to work for industries that pay minimum wage as I mentioned above

You don't actually read anything before replying, do you?

[Argus]

Like arguing with a broken record. Oh well, I tried.

I know. It's weird. You explain it carefully and she ignores the explanation and just repeats the same thing.

[taxme]

"We certainly don't need the hundreds of thousands of new immigrants that come here every year. I am surprised that the environmentalists don't cry about all this massive immigration going on into Canada, and all the extra environmental damage that is being done as a result of all these new immigrant people. Hello, where are you enviros? "

I've been posting about this thread after thread. I'm in full agreement with you, but note also that very few alleged/claimed environmentalists speak out about this at all, which is grossly hypocritical.

It's just like those feminists who never say anything about how women in some of those Islamic countries are stoned to death by their own religious fanatical leaders just because they were raped by a stranger. These feminists should be fuming. But for some strange reason they remain silent.

Now if this were being done in a Caucasian country they would be screaming like hell about it along with the lame duck liberal media, along with our oh so politically correct politicians who would be all demanding that this cease right now or else. My suspicions are that they are too afraid that they would appear to be somehow racist, and thus remain silent. Hypocrites they are indeed. Just my opinion of course.

[taxme]

Again if you had bothered to read my previous posts you would have realized that I also said that our existing immigration policy is not that great and needs improvements. I did say we need to change t SMART immigration. Take those who have a good chance of becoming long term significant tax payers. I also said immigration numbers should be cut in half. I also cited SELECTIVELY as very important factor we need to have not only based on future prospects but also cultural compatibility with Canadians in order to keep out undesirables from entering Canada in order to avoid social disturbances we witness in Europe by Muslim extremists. Did you read my post before you launched your attacks? Contrary to what you and your supporters may think I care about the well being of this country as much as you guys do. This is where I live and this is where I will be buried too.

If you want to see a SMART immigration policy, well we are not going to see or get it from the liberals. The liberals will only make things worse, not better. The liberal party appears to be only concerned about the rest of the world, and not Canada, and that includes the PC's and the NDP.

[G Huxley]

It's just like those feminists who never say anything about how women in some of those Islamic countries are stoned to death by their own religious fanatical leaders just because they were raped by a stranger. These feminists should be fuming. But for some strange reason they remain silent.

Now if this were being done in a Caucasian country they would be screaming like hell about it along with the lame duck liberal media, along with our oh so politically correct politicians who would be all demanding that this cease right now or else. My suspicions are that they are too afraid that they would appear to be somehow racist, and thus remain silent. Hypocrites they are indeed. Just my opinion of course.

A lot of feminists are for open borders or pro immigration, so they are actually helping the spread of Islam.

[taxme]

A lot of feminists are for open borders or pro immigration, so they are actually helping the spread of Islam.

Most women are just to emotional in their ways of thinking to think rationally. Sad to say but many lack any common sense and logic. A sob story gets to them every time, and dam the consequences of what they will go along with until later which may be too late by then. The feminist movement is a real joke which is sadly being dumped on many women who just never bother to ask questions about who or what feminism is supporting or why. They support feminism because it mainly sounds like a good thing for a women to belong too and become. They have been led to believe that most men are nothing more than a bunch of anti-women a-holes who only look at them as sexual objects, and they eat up that nonsense.

Of course many women are for open borders and are pro-immigration because they see and read all this stuff about poor refugees and others who are in need of help. Being of a caring and loving nature, they are conned into believing that they must help these poor people. And they don't care as to what the benefits are for the country or how much tax dollars this will all cost. They just want to help which in the end could end up being a disaster for their country.

Edited August 25, 2016 by taxme

[CITIZEN_2015]

If you want to see a SMART immigration policy, well we are not going to see or get it from the liberals. The liberals will only make things worse, not better. The liberal party appears to be only concerned about the rest of the world, and not Canada, and that includes the PC's and the NDP.

I agree that neither of the parties you mentioned nor those which you did not mention (like green party) would do the right thing and adopt the SMART immigration policy which is cutting the number in half and SELECTIVITY of those who admit in based on financial situation and cultural compatibility. However I am not going to vote for an extreme right wing party who may be willing to select based on race and religion and skin color or stop immigration altogether as I enjoy cultural diversity in Canada and I see it as one reason why this country is the best in the world.

[dre]

Some immigrants make a lot of money and pay taxes. Some immigrants make very little money and pay no taxes. Some immigrants make no money and cost us in supporting them. The Fraser Institute, calculating the net income vs the cost of the immigration system to Canada has said that the cost outweighs the benefits by some $24 billion per year.

Can you show me the methodology they used to take into account the fact that immigrants are creating most of the new housing and generating most of the new demand for our entire services sector? Did they take into a fact that for each immigrant that moves here about $250 thousand dollars enters the economy through the banking system?

[taxme]

I agree that neither of the parties you mentioned nor those which you did not mention (like green party) would do the right thing and adopt the SMART immigration policy which is cutting the number in half and SELECTIVITY of those who admit in based on financial situation and cultural compatibility. However I am not going to vote for an extreme right wing party who may be willing to select based on race and religion and skin color or stop immigration altogether as I enjoy cultural diversity in Canada and I see it as one reason why this country is the best in the world.

I have no problem with limited diversity. I enjoy going out to a Chinese restaurant and eating Chinese food. I like Thai and Punjabi food and once in awhile I will eat Sushi. No problem there. It's great to have a variety of foods out there to eat and enjoy.

But my problem is with the numbers of where we are presently getting our majority of immigrants from. As you probably already know I am a pro-white activist, and what I would like to see is more of our new immigrants coming from the many original countries that we once use to get our new immigrants from like mainly Britain, Europe and Australia, and run around in the range of 90%. I cannot accept the fact that if we continue on with our present day immigration policy, my grandchildren will be a minority in this country. This I cannot and will not accept. This is where I stand. ???????

[CITIZEN_2015]

I have no problem with limited diversity. I enjoy going out to a Chinese restaurant and eating Chinese food. I like Thai and Punjabi food and once in awhile I will eat Sushi. No problem there. It's great to have a variety of foods out there to eat and enjoy.

But my problem is with the numbers of where we are presently getting our majority of immigrants from. As you probably already know I am a pro-white activist, and what I would like to see is more of our new immigrants coming from the many original countries that we once use to get our new immigrants from like mainly Britain, Europe and Australia, and run around in the range of 90%. I cannot accept the fact that if we continue on with our present day immigration policy, my grandchildren will be a minority in this country. This I cannot and will not accept. This is where I stand. ???????

I enjoy diversity more than the food factor. I enjoy to see oriental faces, the east indians, the middle eastern, the eastern European, the latins, africans as well as Caucasians. I am happy to live in a country where a small portion of my tax dollars mat be going to support people in need (economic immigrants, refugees, foreign aid). I do NOT stand for what you stand for. I do not discriminate, like or dislike based on color of skin or race. It is the size of the hearts and minds that matters to me not skin color. White skin does not make a person better or superior but big hearts and intelligent minds do. I believe immigrant proportion should be based on regional distribution on the planet. The Caucasian race is about 25 to 30% of planet's population and I think this is also the portion of our immigrants too or should be.

Edited August 25, 2016 by CITIZEN_2015

[Machjo]

What if immigrants just all bleached their faces white?

[Argus]

Can you show me the methodology they used to take into account the fact that immigrants are creating most of the new housing and generating most of the new demand for our entire services sector? Did they take into a fact that for each immigrant that moves here about $250 thousand dollars enters the economy through the banking system?

It's been a few years since I read the report. It is 62 pages and I'm not going to read it again, but they were challenged and responded to those challengers by slightly changing some data.

And, in fact, they say that the fiscal burden of our immigration policy is now up to $35 billion per year. The report and summary are available here.

What if immigrants just all bleached their faces white?

Then all the progressives would stop supporting immigration.

[cybercoma]

Raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour will increase unemployment.

Completely unfounded. When employees have more money, businesses have more customers.

[TimG]

When employees have more money, businesses have more customers.

Except it is simply not plausible to claim that a large boost in the pay for a small subset of the population will have any measurable effect on demand. When you add to this the fact that increasing prices will reduce demand it is simply not reasonable to claim that hikes in minimum wages will have any net benefit for the economy. The most likely long term, consequence is greater unemployment as the number of entry level jobs decreases over time. Edited August 26, 2016 by TimG

[cybercoma]

Henry Ford had it all wrong, eh?

[bush_cheney2004]

Henry Ford had it all wrong, eh?

Another great Canadian !

[Machjo]

Except it is simply not plausible to claim that a large boost in the pay for a small subset of the population will have any measurable effect on demand. When you add to this the fact that increasing prices will reduce demand it is simply not reasonable to claim that hikes in minimum wages will have any net benefit for the economy. The most likely long term, consequence is greater unemployment as the number of entry level jobs decreases over time.

Either that or inflation, and inflation hurts the poor the most plus it undoes the wage increase in real terms. Like a dig chasing its tail.