Canada's Refugee System in Chaos

[betsy]

On 6/13/2018 at 11:32 AM, Argus said:

Here, in a nutshell, is a prime example of the problems we have with both our refugee system and our judicial system. A guy is suing the government for almost $60 million for violating his charter rights. He's an illegal immigrant who's been in detention for years while we've tried to deport him. He's also a career criminal. Oh ,in case you wonder who's paying for his lawsuit - that's us.

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/stateless-man-jailed-for-seven-years-while-canada-tried-to-deport-him-sues-for-57-5-million/wcm/f0352a67-6a21-48a1-bc7f-2c2a64ec7aa0

That's why I tend to agree with Trump on his new policy - illegal migrants won't see any court or judges.  They're sent right back to where they came from.  That should put an end to it once words spread around that USA is no patsy anymore.  That's the only way.

 

What's happening is that all they have to do is set a toe on Canadian soil, and we're stuck with them!  Human rights, my foot!   What about those LEGALLY  waiting in line?  Treat them like doormats?

 

 

I just saw Tory on the news - in front of the cameras - begging for money!  Toronto cannot accept any more refugees.  

How come Trudeau isn't giving anything to Toronto?  After all, he's the cause of this chaos!  Lol.  Looks like mayors of places affected,  will have to resort to shaming the federal government for refugee funding!  Good luck.  If he can't think far enough beyond his nose before all these latest happenings,  what makes you think Trudeau can even  focus at all........especially, right now.

Edited June 26, 2018 by betsy

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, capricorn said:

 

We've got a new wave of migrants poring over the Canada/US border. The situation is getting out of hand. Now we're seeing the possibilty of  the education needs of students in jeopardy and community programs uprooted. What the hell are our government officials doing about this debacle? Or are they too busy licking their wounds over trade, another issue they can't fix.

You were warned about this years and years ago. You haven't seen anything yet.

Just wait until climate change refugees start piling up. But you probably laughed at and ignored warnings about that too didn't you?

[Argus]

1 hour ago, betsy said:

That's why I tend to agree with Trump on his new policy - illegal migrants won't see any court or judges.  They're sent right back to where they came from.  That should put an end to it once words spread around that USA is no patsy anymore.  That's the only way.

It's not a new policy. It's his expressed wish. It's for political purposes, to get people saying "Yeah! He's right!" It's not designed to actually do anything since the courts wouldn't allow it.

[turningrite]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

You were warned about this years and years ago. You haven't seen anything yet.

Just wait until climate change refugees start piling up. But you probably laughed at and ignored warnings about that too didn't you?

I think we need to look at the future implications of mass migration. The more a society struggles to cope with uncontrolled migration, the more benefits will have to be curtailed for the broader population. As the Nobel prize winning economist Milton Friedman noted: "It's just obvious you can't have free immigration and a welfare state." And others, including the British economist Sir Paul Collier, have noted that one of the significant impacts of open large-scale migration is to undermine social cohesion, whereby established taxpaying citizens tend to lose interest in paying for expensive programs that disproportionately benefit those in the population who haven't paid into these programs. So, accepting mass migration as either desirable or inevitable brings with it a whole host of other implications that many might be very hesitant to accept, including likely declining support for universal health care and pension programs. We may have to move to the American system, where those who are eligible to receive these benefits are mainly those who've paid into them for decades. Those progressives who think we can have open migration within a welfare state based on anything close to universal access are burying their heads in the sand.

Edited June 26, 2018 by turningrite

[taxme]

5 hours ago, capricorn said:

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2018/06/26/toronto-cant-handle-influx-of-refugee-claimants-tory-tells-ottawa.html.

We've got a new wave of migrants poring over the Canada/US border. The situation is getting out of hand. Now we're seeing the possibilty of  the education needs of students in jeopardy and community programs uprooted. What the hell are our government officials doing about this debacle? Or are they too busy licking their wounds over trade, another issue they can't fix.

Everyone wants to talk about the immigration crisis in America but for some reason here in Canada there is no debate or discussion going on in parliament or anywhere about all this criminal illegal activity going on at our Canadian border by our dear leaders. Is it to politically incorrect to do so? I guess Trudeau and the liberal media do not want to talk about it. WHY? The Canadian taxpayer's are getting ripped off big time from all this criminality going on. These illegal so-called refugees already have shown us that they do not want to abide by the rules. They broke into America, were going to get booted out, and so why not go to Canada and break into our country illegally. There have been well over 30,000 legal and illegals in Canada now and all living off the taxpayer's tax dollars. This is criminal and all our political leaders and their party's should be made to pay for this bull chit that is going on, and not the taxpayer. Enough already. Stop with the bull chit. Stop all immigration now. Works for me. 

PS: Our dear leader politicians are more concerned about and are too busy worrying about trying to make Canada a more multicultural and diverse country. Canadians for far too lang have allowed our dear leaders to run this country without a whimper from we the people. They have screwed up our immigration, and they will screw up trade, and they will screw up anything that they put their useless hands on. When will Canadians decide that we are the boss here and not these stunned and wasteful politically correct puppet on a string for the elite and special interest groups politicians who obviously have shown that they have no love for Canada but only for the rest of the world. Come on Canadians. It is time to stop remaining quiet about what these politicians are doing to us. I am doing it. 

[Centerpiece]

5 minutes ago, taxme said:

Everyone wants to talk about the immigration crisis in America but for some reason here in Canada there is no debate or discussion going on in parliament or anywhere about all this criminal illegal activity going on at our Canadian border by our dear leaders. Is it to politically incorrect to do so? I guess Trudeau and the liberal media do not want to talk about it. WHY? The Canadian taxpayer's are getting ripped off big time from all this criminality going on. These illegal so-called refugees already have shown us that they do not want to abide by the rules. They broke into America, were going to get booted out, and so why not go to Canada and break into our country illegally. There have been well over 30,000 legal and illegals in Canada now and all living off the taxpayer's tax dollars. This is criminal and all our political leaders and their party's should be made to pay for this bull chit that is going on, and not the taxpayer. Enough already. Stop with the bull chit. Stop all immigration now. Works for me. 

 

Let's be clear - there is no immigration crisis in Canada. We can handle the planned immigration of people who genuinely WANT to come to Canada and duly follow the application process. We have a developing crisis in bogus refugees, queue jumpers, economic migrants and those who would just try and sneak into the country. Anyone who is found to have entered Canada through any point other than an official crossing should be immediately turned back. It's lawyers and the refugee industry that has "championed" the extended appeal process that is given to people who should be given no more than one kick at the can. If not - no matter what the hand-wringers say - the true refugees being housed in camps are the ones that get shunted down the list - if not off it completely.

[turningrite]

9 minutes ago, Centerpiece said:

Let's be clear - there is no immigration crisis in Canada. We can handle the planned immigration of people who genuinely WANT to come to Canada and duly follow the application process.

I'm not sure I completely agree with this. I think we have to keep legal immigration in place but need to be much more careful about immigration intake levels and the kind of immigrants we are permitting to enter the country. A internal federal government study, which wasn't publicly released but was disclosed via an access to information request, concluded that at current levels Canada is not effectively socially and economically absorbing immigrants. (Link to article posted below) Also, independent analysis, including by the Fraser Institute, suggests that immigration has become a very costly program where social costs are calculated in comparison to taxation collected from the most recent generation of immigrants. This is estimated to be costing Canadian taxpayers in excess of $30 billion annually. It may not be a crisis, but it's clearly a problem.

http://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/douglas-todd-canada-struggling-to-absorb-immigrants-internal-report-says

Edited June 26, 2018 by turningrite

[taxme]

12 minutes ago, Centerpiece said:

Let's be clear - there is no immigration crisis in Canada. We can handle the planned immigration of people who genuinely WANT to come to Canada and duly follow the application process. We have a developing crisis in bogus refugees, queue jumpers, economic migrants and those who would just try and sneak into the country. Anyone who is found to have entered Canada through any point other than an official crossing should be immediately turned back. It's lawyers and the refugee industry that has "championed" the extended appeal process that is given to people who should be given no more than one kick at the can. If not - no matter what the hand-wringers say - the true refugees being housed in camps are the ones that get shunted down the list - if not off it completely.

It's time for a moratorium on all kinds of immigration. We have tens of thousands of illegal immigrants waiting in the wings to find out if they can get to stay in Canada or will have to leave and all being paid by the already over burdened taxpayer's. But the real problem here is that the more that are allowed into the country to stay the more toll will be taken on the environment and the infrastructure. More housing to be needed, more roads and more assaults on our social and medicare services. Massive Immigration is more of a burden rather the good. Thanks to Trudeau he now wants to raise the level of immigration to approx. 400,000 a year and this is not counting all the illegals that are entering Canada every day by the hundreds. This is insane. I think that our dear leaders are border line insane. WTH are they trying to do here anyway? Our immigration policy is truly out of whack and only is going to get worse. 

Edited June 26, 2018 by taxme

[Argus]

5 hours ago, turningrite said:

I'm not sure I completely agree with this. I think we have to keep legal immigration in place but need to be much more careful about immigration intake levels and the kind of immigrants we are permitting to enter the country. A internal federal government study, which wasn't publicly released but was disclosed via an access to information request, concluded that at current levels Canada is not effectively socially and economically absorbing immigrants

And the Liberals responded by increasing immigration levels again, so Mister Selfie could puff out his chest and wave his curly hair and show everyone how progressive he is. Again.

[turningrite]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

And the Liberals responded by increasing immigration levels again, so Mister Selfie could puff out his chest and wave his curly hair and show everyone how progressive he is. Again.

I suspect that's why the internal study wasn't released. Immigration is a political rather than an economic policy. Were it to be examined in rational economic terms the current program couldn't be sustained. As long as enough Canadians are kept in the dark about problems with the current program the government can probably maintain high levels of support. As reported in a recent CBC piece (link to article below), support for immigration drops when people are made aware of actual immigration numbers. Thus the government downplays this information. It would be interesting to see how any party willing to challenge the status quo on immigration policy would fare in terms of public support. I think the current federal parties, which seem to work in concert to preclude honest political debate on immigration policy, might be surprised.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/immigration-public-support-1.4619762

[eyeball]

11 hours ago, turningrite said:

I think we need to look at the future implications of mass migration. The more a society struggles to cope with uncontrolled migration, the more benefits will have to be curtailed for the broader population. 

The future implications were figured out decades ago by studying rats in a cage, island biogeography, take Easter Island .  All anyone needed to do was connect the dots people like James Malthus, Aldo Leopold and John Calhoun were pointing at.

Quote

Those progressives who think we can have open migration within a welfare state based on anything close to universal access are burying their heads in the sand.

I suppose but that's nothing compared to where those conservatives who insist we grow without limit have their heads buried. What is it about conservation that conservatives never ever seem to get?

In any case, its been obvious for years that a warming climate will causes animals and even plants to seek cooler latitudes, people being no exception.  The implications are that eventually we'll kill them for trying. Self-preservation can be a real bitch which is something people should have considered more carefully.  We didn't have to subject ourselves to being subjects in a behavioural sink experiment but here we are.

We haven't seen anything yet, and yet....we know full well that when the waterhole shrinks the animals get meaner. 

Edited June 27, 2018 by eyeball

[turningrite]

6 hours ago, eyeball said:

I suppose but that's nothing compared to where those conservatives who insist we grow without limit have their heads buried. What is it about conservation that conservatives never ever seem to get?

In any case, its been obvious for years that a warming climate will causes animals and even plants to seek cooler latitudes, people being no exception.  The implications are that eventually we'll kill them for trying. Self-preservation can be a real bitch which is something people should have considered more carefully.  We didn't have to subject ourselves to being subjects in a behavioural sink experiment but here we are.

We haven't seen anything yet, and yet....we know full well that when the waterhole shrinks the animals get meaner. 

Your post reflects a Malthusian philosophy, which is essentially pessimistic. i tend to see the human race as more adaptable, particularly given technological progress. There is emerging evidence that the world's population growth will slow considerably, and the global population may even start to decline, within this century. Even if one buys into your pessimistic climate change-driven and dystopian migrational logic, does it make sense to promote the movement of people from hot latitudes to cold northern ones when by so doing per capita GHG emissions for these migrants increase significantly? To craft policy by assuming the worst possible outcomes seems to me a specious approach. 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, turningrite said:

Your post reflects a Malthusian philosophy, which is essentially pessimistic. i tend to see the human race as more adaptable, particularly given technological progress. There is emerging evidence that the world's population growth will slow considerably, and the global population may even start to decline, within this century. 

I love how conservative thinking gets all wooly-headed and la la like when confronted with pessimism that questions its wisdom.  In any case I'm fairly confident that population will decline too just not as benignly as you imagine.

Quote

Even if one buys into your pessimistic climate change-driven and dystopian migrational logic, does it make sense to promote the movement of people from hot latitudes to cold northern ones when by so doing per capita GHG emissions for these migrants increase significantly?

It makes sense from the perspective of someone who understands that the path to enlightenment is painful.  And of course there's the schadenfreude and vindication from being right - which if the angst over immigration is anything to go by was spot-on.

But no, it doesn't make sense, we should be more like the survivors of a shipwreck who know that trying to help the people floundering in the water will probably overturn the lifeboat. Like I said when times get tough the animals will get meaner.  The direction conservatism is taking towards immigrants sure underscores that reality - and as I've said, we haven't seen anything yet.

 

Quote

To craft policy by assuming the worst possible outcomes seems to me a specious approach.

See, there's that wooly-headed thinking again, that everything is going to come up roses - like believing budgets can just balance themselves or something.

Edited June 27, 2018 by eyeball

[turningrite]

26 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I love how conservative thinking gets all wooly-headed and la la like when confronted with pessimism that questions its wisdom.  In any case I'm fairly confident that population will decline too just not as benignly as you imagine.

It makes sense from the perspective of someone who understands that the path to enlightenment is painful.  And of course there's the schadenfreude and vindication from being right - which if the angst over immigration is anything to go by was spot-on.

But no, it doesn't make sense, we should be more like the survivors of a shipwreck who know that trying to help the people floundering in the water will probably overturn the lifeboat. Like I said when times get tough the animals will get meaner.  The direction conservatism is taking towards immigrants sure underscores that reality - and as I've said, we haven't seen anything yet.

 

See, there's that wooly-headed thinking again, that everything is going to come up roses - like believing budgets can just balance themselves or something.

I think you're getting carried away on the basis of some rather bizarre assumptions. As for budgets, I don't think they balance themselves as in fact  conservatives, "wooly-headed" or otherwise, seldom do. How you ever came up with an analogy that associates the two ideas boggles the mind.

Edited June 27, 2018 by turningrite

[eyeball]

7 minutes ago, turningrite said:

I think you're getting carried away on the basis of some rather bizarre assumptions.

What assumptions exactly?

Quote

 

As for budgets, I don't think they balance themselves as in fact  conservatives, "wooly-headed" or otherwise, seldom do. How you ever came up with an analogy that associates the two ideas boggles the mind.

 

I came up with it because I knew comparing how conservatives think to how liberals think would hit a nerve and boggle your mind.

Edited June 27, 2018 by eyeball

[Argus]

I read about this poll in a column by Douglas Murray in the Spectator. I'd link the column but you need a subscription.

Basically, they poll all 28 members of the EU on various topics. One of which is migration. As Murray puts it, though.

One of the presumptions of democracy is that leaders listen to the public. But as poll after poll in Europe shows, this presumption breaks down around the subject of migration. On that — and the numerous issues surrounding it — mainstream politicians consistently ignore the public. And not only ignore them but berate them and act against their concerns.

.. What is most striking once again is that there is such extraordinary unanimity around the question of immigration. While numerous political divides exist within each of the 28 member states, and considerable differences exist between them, only on the matters of migration, borders and security can this not be said.

..For instance, in response to the question of EU border protection, more than three-quarters (78 per cent) of EU citizens believe that the external borders of Europe should be better protected. This number rises to nine in ten in central and eastern European countries, including Hungary and Slovakia (these being among the countries that have most opposed the open-borders policies propagated by Berlin and Brussels in 2015). But anyone wishing to dismiss this as a solely Visegrad concern will be disappointed. Not only do 78 per cent of all Europeans think that illegal immigration into their countries is a problem, in every single European country more people think that it is a serious problem than think it is not a problem or not a very serious problem.

This is much the same as in Canada, where Canadians want the problem of phony refugees and asylum seekers handled and political parties mostly ignore it, and pretend those concerned are horrible people who are of course, not at all representative of most Canadians, who love refugees and never question whether they're legitimate.

http://project28.eu/migrants-2017/

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, Argus said:

This is much the same as in Canada, where Canadians want the problem of phony refugees and asylum seekers handled and political parties mostly ignore it, and pretend those concerned are horrible people who are of course, not at all representative of most Canadians, who love refugees and never question whether they're legitimate.

Political parties are afraid of what they'll have to become if they're to handle migrants the way the Argus' of the world would like to see migrants handled.

Remember Alan Kurdi?  We really haven't seen anything yet.

[capricorn]

15 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Remember Alan Kurdi?

Are you kidding? It's been hammered into me so violently, it has taken over at least one of my brain cells. It's your fault, it's your fault, it's your fault....pay for it, pay for it, pay for it....killer,...killer...

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, capricorn said:

Are you kidding? It's been hammered into me so violently, it has taken over at least one of my brain cells.

Maybe when the beaches are piled hip deep with bodies - one cell at a time.

You figure political parties will or could let it go that far? What do you propose politicians do, force refugees back out to sea?  Is it any wonder it doesn't matter what their base thinks in the face of thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of people washing up on shore? 

[Argus]

2 hours ago, capricorn said:

Are you kidding? It's been hammered into me so violently, it has taken over at least one of my brain cells. It's your fault, it's your fault, it's your fault....pay for it, pay for it, pay for it....killer,...killer...

Wasn't he the kid who was safe with his family in Turkey  until his family decided to try to get to Europe on a crummy boat?

[capricorn]

32 minutes ago, Argus said:

Wasn't he the kid who was safe with his family in Turkey  until his family decided to try to get to Europe on a crummy boat?

Quote

Alan Kurdi (Kurdish: Alan Kurdî‎), initially reported as Aylan Kurdi,[2][3] was a three-year-old Syrian boy of Kurdish ethnic background[4] whose image made global headlines after he drowned on 2 September 2015 in the Mediterranean Sea. He and his family were Syrian refugees trying to reach Europe amid the European refugee crisis (see timeline). Photographs of his body were taken by Turkish journalist Nilüfer Demir and quickly spread around the world, prompting international responses.[5] Because Kurdî's family had reportedly been trying to reach Canada, his death and the wider refugee crisis immediately became an issue in the 2015 Canadian federal election.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Alan_Kurdi

There was controversy about whether the images of the boy on the beach were original or staged. We'll never know but the images accomplished one thing, the kid was killed by unknown assassins in the West that were not present on that beach. Nonetheless they are guilty.

Edited July 1, 2018 by capricorn

[eyeball]

13 hours ago, capricorn said:

There was controversy about whether the images of the boy on the beach were original or staged. We'll never know but the images accomplished one thing, the kid was killed by unknown assassins in the West that were not present on that beach. Nonetheless they are guilty.

In any case, we know what's coming...dead bodies and lots of them piles of them in fact.  We also know the conservative base of right wing parties will sneer and lol at the images.

The question is will politicians follow suit?

[Centerpiece]

On 7/2/2018 at 9:39 AM, eyeball said:

In any case, we know what's coming...dead bodies and lots of them piles of them in fact.  We also know the conservative base of right wing parties will sneer and lol at the images.

The question is will politicians follow suit?

Eyeball - your posts seem to reflect cynicism and bitterness. There is always a huge middle ground between the extreme (by North American standards) Right Wing and the extreme Left Wing. The media has a need to polarize issues - sometimes ideologically - sometimes just to sell papers. No better example than abortion. Gallup has been following the issue for years - currently 29% say it should be legal in any circumstance, 18% say it should be illegal in all circumstances - and 50% say it should be legal only under certain circumstances. Virtually all Western countries (except Canada of course) have had mature conversations and arrived at balanced legislation. The media in North America? They boil it down to pro-choice or pro-life and never give us the context of the middle roads that other countries have taken. 

So have a bit more faith in humanity - if not the politicians. There is a large silent swath - often a majority - who just want the arguing to stop and to take some meaningful action that resolves some of the impasses - like abortion and immigration.

Link: https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

Edited July 3, 2018 by Centerpiece

[eyeball]

12 hours ago, Centerpiece said:

Eyeball - your posts seem to reflect cynicism and bitterness.

Well that's a relief...I thought it might be due to my becoming more conservative as I get older.

[Argus]

So it looks like Ford is going to use Trudeau as a handy punching bag in blaming the rush of migrants on him (deservedly so). That might be a welcome break from the very careful mouthings of most of Canada's politician who are too terrified of offending ethnic voting blocks to question the costs of any of this. Of course, it doesn't help that most of Canada's municipal and provincial governments are liberal.

Ford raised the flood of migrants in their first meeting, and his office blamed it on Trudeau's stupid tweet inviting all the third world to come to Canada. Trudeau, as is the norm for prog-lib governments across the West, downplayed things and said soothing things about 'the process'. The fact the process doesn't work appears as irrelevant to him as it was to EU bureaucrats with the same mindset a couple of years back. And look what's been happening to Europe?

Ah but it's no big deal, right!? We're not getting anything like the numbers the Europeans are! Except, we actually are. We're actually getting about the same number of migrants as Europe, if you compare the numbers and take into consideration our population vs that of the EU. It's just that our dainty, delicate media and their good friends in politics are downplaying it or ignoring it. But while the feds have done an excellent job - along with the lapdogs in media, of ignoring the costs, those costs are starting to emerge from places like Toronto and Montreal, who are running out of closets and cupboards to stick all these migrants, even as more and more arrive daily.

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/john-ivison-the-battle-of-queens-park-ford-trudeau-meeting-turns-super-heated?video_autoplay=true