Canadian Immigration

[DogOnPorch]

14 minutes ago, Argus said:

Many immigrants with masters degrees can't find work because they lack the high level of language skills needed to obtain work at that level.

 

Some of the finest forged degrees money can buy.

[Omni]

54 minutes ago, Argus said:

The only one showing bias on the Fraser Institute report is you.

You only wish that were true. There are numerous reports that point out the bias of the right wing Fraser Institute's report you seem to live by, but here's just one for your edification.

http://torontonorthlip.ca/sites/torontonorthlip.ca/files/MythsAboutImmigrants-phase1-report-final.pdf

[Argus]

2 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

Some of the finest forged degrees money can buy.

There is that, too. Most of the areas where we take immigrants are extremely corrupt in all levels of society. I've heard a number of stories of immigrants being given interviews for professions and being unable to demonstrate more than the most cursory level of knowledge of what the job even involves.

 

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Omni said:

You only wish that were true. There are numerous reports that point out the bias of the right wing Fraser Institute's report you seem to live by, but here's just one for your edification.

http://torontonorthlip.ca/sites/torontonorthlip.ca/files/MythsAboutImmigrants-phase1-report-final.pdf

Really? This is an immigration advocacy group. What do you expect them to say? Immigration is how they earn their living. They quote the same disagreement that the immigrant researchers did with the Fraser Institute's first report. The Fraser Institute read their rebuttal, examined it, and then, while taking some of it into account, repudiated most of it based on faulty design, and came out with a new report the following year.

You understand that, unlike immigration advocacy groups the Fraser Institute does not have any particular axe to grind or profit to make in coming out with a report on immigration, right?

 

Edited May 11, 2017 by Argus

[Omni]

1 minute ago, Argus said:

Really? This is an immigration advocacy group. What do you expect them to say? Immigration is how they earn their living. They quote the same disagreement that the immigrant researchers did with the Fraser Institute's first report. The Fraser Institute read their rebuttal, examined it, and then, while taking some of it into account, repudiated most of it based on faulty design, and came out with a new report the following year.

 

Feel free to buy whatever you want from the Fraser. The last time you tried to flog this same report from them, there were numerous rebuttals, but you like to simply follow your right winger's because they seem to have the same views as you. 

[Argus]

5 minutes ago, Omni said:

Feel free to buy whatever you want from the Fraser. The last time you tried to flog this same report from them, there were numerous rebuttals, but you like to simply follow your right winger's because they seem to have the same views as you. 

There were numerous rebuttals from same band of empty headed progressives who are always indignant whenever anyone disagrees with their emotional devotion to open immigration. None of them ever have any economic or logical reasons or cites other than things like "I love ethnic restaurants!" and "Anyone who objects to immigration is like Hitler!"

That's the sum total of YOUR arguments, to date, in fact. Your vacuous protestations that anyone who objects to immigration is a 'xenophobe' or 'bigot' only shows the depth of your inability to debate. The only person I've seen on this site in the last year who can even attempt to put up an intelligent and coherent defense of immigration is carepov. And even he will admit there are problems with immigration which ought to be corrected.

Edited May 11, 2017 by Argus

[Omni]

7 minutes ago, Argus said:

There were numerous rebuttals from same band of empty headed progressives who are always indignant whenever anyone disagrees with their emotional devotion to open immigration. None of them ever have any economic or logical reasons or cites other than things like "I love ethnic restaurants!" and "Anyone who objects to immigration is like Hitler!"

That's the sum total of YOUR arguments, to date, in fact. Your vacuous protestations that anyone who objects to immigration is a 'xenophobe' or 'bigot' only shows the depth of your inability to debate. The only person I've seen on this site in the last year who can even attempt to put up an intelligent and coherent defense of immigration is carepov. And even he will admit there are problems with immigration which ought to be corrected.

Oh it's not an "emotional devotion", at least not like the one that you demonstrate with your "anyone who points out xenophobic comments is empty headed".You quote some pretty questionable sources, and only ones that support you "cause". That's of course your choice, but don't be surprised when people dismiss them.

[Argus]

8 minutes ago, Omni said:

Oh it's not an "emotional devotion", at least not like the one that you demonstrate with your "anyone who points out xenophobic comments is empty headed".You quote some pretty questionable sources, and only ones that support you "cause". That's of course your choice, but don't be surprised when people dismiss them.

I've posted so many cites from mainstream sources, including the government of Canada over the last year that any reasonable person would easily see the truth of the arguments I make. You, in return, rarely post any kind of cites, and when you do they are always highly biased. The fact is that there is no amount of information from any source that would ever convince you.

[carepov]

20 hours ago, Argus said:

So in the words of someone who is a proponent of immigration, there is no real gain to Canadians. As I have said repeatedly. It's like inviting more people to dinner who bring their own food. Yes, there's a bigger supply of food. But there's more people to eat it. Result no net gain.

First there are net gains for Canada, albeit a very slight positive increase in GDP per capita and therefore standard of living.  However - remember that the average standard of living of new Canadians is lower than old stock Canadians, therefore old stock Canadian standards of living increase further.  The new people invited to dinner bring more food but eat less than those already there.

20 hours ago, Argus said:

Except almost all of Canada's trade is with western countries. The largest suppliers of immigrants are poor third world countries which have little ability to purchase goods from Canada. China is also a major immigrant producing country, and it puts strong, and often illegal trade barriers in the path of any exports other than raw resources.

By far the top three sources by far are the Philippines, India and China.  These are not third world (is that still a valid term?) It is in Canada's interests to diversify our trading partners.

20 hours ago, Argus said:

Oh, there's a resounding vote of support. "Probably yes.".

In general, and specifically with immigration, I will only trust sources that objectively report both the costs and benefits.  To me another sign of a good report is that it acknowledges uncertainty.  Overconfidence in an economic model is a red flag.

What I'm understanding is that:

-In the past, immigration has been a huge benefit to Canada and has contributed to the impressive growth in our standard of livin.

-Today the benefits have decreased and we are at or just slightly above the economic break-even point.

-Going forward, if we do nothing we risk drifting into a net loss.  With more economic immigrants (educated and skilled) and better integration we will see strong net benefits.

21 hours ago, Argus said:

What do you think the untapped potential is of all those immigrants filling our public housing units? What is the untapped potential of someone with no recognized educational credentials, no compatible job skills, and no language skills? Does Canada really need more unskilled labour? According to multiple reports over the last few decades the economic success rates of immigrants have been steadily deteriorating as the gap between Canada's high tech, high communications economy and the comparatively low tech and backward economies of our main immigrant source countries grows wider.

Yes, incomes of new Canadians are taking longer to catch up to the average, but you are exaggerating the difference and importance of this.  Besides, as I've mentioned, average Canadian wages are increasing, so if immigrant wages are decreasing old-stock are increasing even faster.

One day we will have driver-less cars but Canada needs truck drivers now.  Canada needs meat packers now.  Canada needs... Some people may say, well if these jobs paid more, more Canadians would do them.  Maybe, but if it is no longer feasible to operate a meat packing facility in Canada, the entire operation will move South.

[DogOnPorch]

India and Philippines are definitely Third Word. Red China is from the nearly defunct Second World (Commies).

[Hydraboss]

41 minutes ago, carepov said:

new people invited to dinner bring more food but eat less

Actually, this is the sticking point for those of us against mass immigration.  Your statement above is the exact opposite of what "my side" believes.  People show up and bring their entire extended family while only one or two of them work.  The entire extended family therefore ends up consuming tax dollar funded supports which takes away from Canadians.

They "eat more than they bring to dinner".

[Omni]

33 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

India and Philippines are definitely Third Word. Red China is from the nearly defunct Second World (Commies).

The term is a relic of the cold war days and is outdated. If India is third world them so are Sweden and Switzerland.

[carepov]

7 minutes ago, Hydraboss said:

Actually, this is the sticking point for those of us against mass immigration.  Your statement above is the exact opposite of what "my side" believes.  People show up and bring their entire extended family while only one or two of them work.  The entire extended family therefore ends up consuming tax dollar funded supports which takes away from Canadians.

They "eat more than they bring to dinner".

The studies in my previously linked sources show that today we are at around the break-even point.  This includes refugees and family re-unification.  Simply increase economic/skilled immigrants and we will be clearly in the black.

[carepov]

"new immigrants do not have a significant impact on the property crime rate, but with time spent in Canada, a 10% increase in the recent-immigrant share or established-immigrant share decreases the property crime rate by 2% to 3%. Neither underreporting to police nor the dilution of the criminal pool by the addition of law-abiding immigrants can fully explain the size of the estimates. This suggests that immigration has a spillover effect, such as changing neighbourhood characteristics, which reduces crime rates in the long run."

https://a4039938-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/haiminzh/research/Immigrant Crime - 20140109.pdf?attachauth=ANoY7cpIQyQSG4gjh06WqjIqsVnCUehokZNidKtUdK4oTisSwATNfKEHX_6I_hWNbPy2-No5LOqGhEcMhElrajJLD8MKsAcqs6H5zKh-SOXPL1q4BnyvyG5s-ihR4sxnLWH1aDOykDlUYtv1GZNdi_dkDa9zAaUPEzyMl687ekZGMUnu9aQaPFJ-TN4jlKsjCdAWc0_DAGtTPihzPzwfa6ZlZwDZCwLRocZCP2rnvO-2blrPiLvp8OZAk3Ivxsqki7TzNwqk9-nQ&attredirects=0&revision=1

 

[tehal3x]

35 minutes ago, carepov said:

"new immigrants do not have a significant impact on the property crime rate, but with time spent in Canada, a 10% increase in the recent-immigrant share or established-immigrant share decreases the property crime rate by 2% to 3%. Neither underreporting to police nor the dilution of the criminal pool by the addition of law-abiding immigrants can fully explain the size of the estimates. This suggests that immigration has a spillover effect, such as changing neighbourhood characteristics, which reduces crime rates in the long run."

https://a4039938-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/haiminzh/research/Immigrant Crime - 20140109.pdf?attachauth=ANoY7cpIQyQSG4gjh06WqjIqsVnCUehokZNidKtUdK4oTisSwATNfKEHX_6I_hWNbPy2-No5LOqGhEcMhElrajJLD8MKsAcqs6H5zKh-SOXPL1q4BnyvyG5s-ihR4sxnLWH1aDOykDlUYtv1GZNdi_dkDa9zAaUPEzyMl687ekZGMUnu9aQaPFJ-TN4jlKsjCdAWc0_DAGtTPihzPzwfa6ZlZwDZCwLRocZCP2rnvO-2blrPiLvp8OZAk3Ivxsqki7TzNwqk9-nQ&attredirects=0&revision=1

 

Interesting article but its three years old and since the liberals came into power, its been nothing but downhill since then.

 

checkmate.

sincerely

[email protected]

[DogOnPorch]

6 hours ago, Omni said:

The term is a relic of the cold war days and is outdated. If India is third world them so are Sweden and Switzerland.

 

India is Third World. Sweden wants to be but still isn't. Switzerland...lol.

 

Edited May 12, 2017 by DogOnPorch

[Omni]

3 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

India is Third World. Sweden wants to be but still isn't. Switzerland...lol.

 

I see you don't really understand the term "third world"

[Argus]

On 5/12/2017 at 11:00 AM, carepov said:

First there are net gains for Canada, albeit a very slight positive increase in GDP per capita and therefore standard of living.  However - remember that the average standard of living of new Canadians is lower than old stock Canadians, therefore old stock Canadian standards of living increase further.  The new people invited to dinner bring more food but eat less than those already there.

This seems counter intuitive. Let me use an example. An immigrant comes in, complete with wife and three children. Because of poor language skills he can only work as a taxi driver. For cultural reasons, his wife does not work. As a result, the money he earns is such that, due to our progressive tax system, he pays no taxes. Thus the money to pay for whatever government services his family uses, including health care, has to be taken from people like me. His presence thus impoverishes me, rather than enriches me.

Quote

By far the top three sources by far are the Philippines, India and China.  These are not third world (is that still a valid term?) It is in Canada's interests to diversify our trading partners.

Yes, it's a valid term. These are all unsophisticated countries with rudimentary infrastructure. Don't be fooled by the shiny towers in Shanghai, there's a whole world beyond that full of peasants guiding oxen through rice fields. India has some high technology, and even nuclear weapons, but they still defecate in the filthy streets since 60% of homes have no toilet, and their transportation system and infrastructure are appalling and deadly messes. The Philippines is run by a guy who makes Donald Trump seem delicate and diplomatic and its cities are filled with horrible slums without electricity or running water that make our public housing look like palaces. Google images of Manila slums sometime if you want to see if they're third world.

 

Quote

In the past, immigration has been a huge benefit to Canada and has contributed to the impressive growth in our standard of livin.

-Today the benefits have decreased and we are at or just slightly above the economic break-even point.

I would agree with the first, but I haven't seen evidence to support the second. The Fraser Report would indicate a tremendous cost to immigration. But I think both of us would agree that the economic success of immigration depends almost entirely on the type of immigrants we bring in. Immigrants who can not only earn enough to support themselves, but to pay taxes, AND who can fit into our culture without causing problems will perform far better than those who don't.

Quote

One day we will have driver-less cars but Canada needs truck drivers now.  Canada needs meat packers now.  Canada needs... Some people may say, well if these jobs paid more, more Canadians would do them.  Maybe, but if it is no longer feasible to operate a meat packing facility in Canada, the entire operation will move South.

If Canada actually needs such people then it should bring in immigrants specifically to do those jobs. In the US, skilled immigrants need a job offer to get in. Why should we not do something similar? Specifically recruit someone willing and interested and able to work as a truck driver or meat packer or plumber, and then find Canadian companies willing to extend a job offer to them before we accept them. My personal opinion, however, is that most such lower level jobs are only available due to the generosity of our social welfare system in allowing healthy people to sit at home and collect benefits rather than doing unpleasant work. I would rather fix that, and then bring in people with higher level and scarcer skills.

Edited May 13, 2017 by Argus

[Argus]

14 hours ago, Omni said:

I see you don't really understand the term "third world"

Do you think a country where 60% of the homes have no toilets and mounds of garbage pile up in every major city qualifies as a modern and sophisticated nation-state?

[Argus]

23 hours ago, carepov said:

"new immigrants do not have a significant impact on the property crime rate, but with time spent in Canada, a 10% increase in the recent-immigrant share or established-immigrant share decreases the property crime rate by 2% to 3%. Neither underreporting to police nor the dilution of the criminal pool by the addition of law-abiding immigrants can fully explain the size of the estimates. This suggests that immigration has a spillover effect, such as changing neighbourhood characteristics, which reduces crime rates in the long run."

https://a4039938-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/haiminzh/research/Immigrant Crime - 20140109.pdf?attachauth=ANoY7cpIQyQSG4gjh06WqjIqsVnCUehokZNidKtUdK4oTisSwATNfKEHX_6I_hWNbPy2-No5LOqGhEcMhElrajJLD8MKsAcqs6H5zKh-SOXPL1q4BnyvyG5s-ihR4sxnLWH1aDOykDlUYtv1GZNdi_dkDa9zAaUPEzyMl687ekZGMUnu9aQaPFJ-TN4jlKsjCdAWc0_DAGtTPihzPzwfa6ZlZwDZCwLRocZCP2rnvO-2blrPiLvp8OZAk3Ivxsqki7TzNwqk9-nQ&attredirects=0&revision=1

 

I won't discuss the mathematics he uses but will point out he does mention immigrants tend to under report crime both as witnesses and victims. And interestingly while he mentions making use of the GSS on victimization he fails to point out that successive reports have, over the past twenty years, shown a marked decline in the percentage of crime being reported to police. Further, he deals only with property crime. What concerns Canadians is violent crime, street crime, in other words. Virtually all of that in Ottawa appears to be coming from the immigrant communities, principally Somalian and other North African, and Lebanese and other Middle Eastern communities.

[Omni]

13 minutes ago, Argus said:

Do you think a country where 60% of the homes have no toilets and mounds of garbage pile up in every major city qualifies as a modern and sophisticated nation-state?

Call it what you want. but it's not third world.

[Argus]

1 minute ago, Omni said:

Call it what you want. but it's not third world.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=indian+slums&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwixsZjere3TAhVKxYMKHaXYCLcQ_AUIBigB&biw=1280&bih=591

[Hydraboss]

Heaven on Earth, eh

Such beautiful neighborhoods

 

I think these types of countries are far behind what we would normally call Third World.  They can't even begin to reach that lofty level.  Sure hope we bring in more people from these places....

[dre]

On 5/13/2017 at 9:49 AM, Argus said:

Thus the money to pay for whatever government services his family uses, including health care, has to be taken from people like me. His presence thus impoverishes me, rather than enriches me.

You have no idea whether his presence enriches you or not. You only look at one tiny part of the picture... net tax reciepts and government expenditures. Nobody with even an elementary understanding of economics would do that. That's the problem with the Fraser report as well... its probably a good accurate report but it is not a study on the economic impact of immigrant. Its a narrow study of taxes and expenditures. 

First of all your assumption is complete bullshit. That cab driver makes 30-55 thousand dollars. The average in BC is $40,106. He pays $1811.98 in CPP, he pays $754 into EI, he pays $1455.49 in provincial tax, and $3760.12 in federal tax.

That leaves him with $32324.66 in net pay.

He saves almost nothing and spends that entire $32324.66 into the economy. He most likely pays a few thousand dollars in consumption taxes as well. The companies that he buys things from pay taxes on the profit generated, and the fact he increases the demand for goods and services means more workers are hired. Most of them pay taxes as well. Almost 75% of our economy is based on this domestic consumption.

 

Furthermore he increases demand for housing by one unit. This causes about $300 000 of new money to enter the economy the moment the developer finances the project. That developer hires workers, buys insurance, and buys materials which causes increased demand for things like timber, aluminum, concrete, steel, and glass which creates growth in those industries as well, and those industries employ people that pay taxes, and those industries make taxable profits as well. And that original 300k doesnt just get spent once... it swirls around the economy for a long time... it is gradually annihilated as the loan is paid off but that will likely take 20 to 30 years. The financial industry and people with bank deposits, or investments in realestate will make a couple of hundred thousand dollars in addition to that in interest and appreciation, and the demand for new housing units increases the value of all realestate which increases the equity of all homeowners nation wide.

 

But lets not stop there... According to stats-can once that immigrant has been here for 4 years he is 30% more likely to start a business than other Canadians, and his son or daughters are more likely to own a home than other Canadians. Recent immigrants are a major source of businesses that provide professional, scientific and technical services, and retail trade and accommodation and food services as well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 16, 2017 by dre

[Omni]

4 minutes ago, dre said:

But lets not stop there... According to stats-can once that immigrant has been here for 4 years he is 30% more likely to start a business than other Canadians, and his son or daughters are more likely to own a home than other Canadians. Recent immigrants are a major source of businesses that professional, scientific and technical services, and retail trade and accommodation and food services as well

Good report and good on you for the effort. It will likely fall on deaf ears due to obvious reasons, but it's always reassuring to hear from those who have avoided that "rabbit hole".

Cheers