Entitled refugees

[Argus]

1 hour ago, jacee said:

Link?

https://www.thestar.com/news/immigration/2015/03/20/government-studies-immigrant-incomes-by-where-they-come-from.html

[Argus]

1 hour ago, jacee said:

Whether one chooses to transmit germs  through skin contact or not is a personal choice, not a criterion for 'choosing' immigrants.

What a very strange and irrelevant idea, certainly not defensible in law.

And criteria for accepting immigrants must be defensible in law, of course. Wouldn't you agree?

I don't think the law would have a problem with setting criteria which put potential immigrants who seem flexible and adaptable as more desirable than those who showed a rejection of Canadian mores and values. Certainly the Swiss and French have found it worthwhile to reject applicants who refused to shake hands with people.

[Yzermandius19]

7 minutes ago, Argus said:

I don't think the law would have a problem with setting criteria which put potential immigrants who seem flexible and adaptable as more desirable than those who showed a rejection of Canadian mores and values. Certainly the Swiss and French have found it worthwhile to reject applicants who refused to shake hands with people.

Those who reject "Canadian values" can simply pretend to endorse them. Your system will not screen out anyone who prepared for the values test and is willing to lie, it comes nowhere close to even addressing the issue.

Edited January 26, 2020 by Yzermandius19

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

If you think better interviews is going to fix this issue, you have way too much faith in interviews to weed out bad applicants. There is no screening process which will eliminate all the bad apples, it is wishful thinking to believe otherwise.

But I don't believe otherwise. I do believe it would definitely help in doing so, though.

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Canada already has merit based immigration,

Yes, where people send in documents, quote possibly forged, and an immigration officers gets 3 minutes to review them and accept or reject them. And not everyone who immigrates here does so under the points system. Many are family class. And most of the rest are the immediate family of the people applying under the skills class.

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

and refugees are not a large proportion of immigrants to the country

50,000 a year is a reasonably large proportion.

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

we have a better screening process than most

Evidence of this?

 

[Yzermandius19]

6 minutes ago, Argus said:

But I don't believe otherwise. I do believe it would definitely help in doing so, though.

Yes, where people send in documents, quote possibly forged, and an immigration officers gets 3 minutes to review them and accept or reject them. And not everyone who immigrates here does so under the points system. Many are family class. And most of the rest are the immediate family of the people applying under the skills class.

50,000 a year is a reasonably large proportion.

Evidence of this?

 

If you think documents are less reliable than interviews, because people can forge documents, that ignores that people can lie during interviews far easier than they can forge documents. Most who immigrate here, do so under a points system, and it's a system that works infinitely better than values test interviews. You might catch a handful of idiots who didn't prepare for the test and know nothing about Canadian values, any competent terrorists can easily avoid being caught by interviews and lie their way through them.

Edited January 26, 2020 by Yzermandius19

[Argus]

38 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

You're stereotyping an entire region of people.

That's what statistics do. That's what businesses do when they prioritize hiring from the better schools. That's what you do when you decide to buy a brand name because you know it's good and its reliable, or when you shop in a higher class store, or decide you're not going to buy a certain brand of car or appliance because - statistically - they have more problems. This is basic logic in trying to get the best for ourselves.

38 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

I know Muslims from the ME that are poor, and I know Muslims from the ME in Canada that have done very well.  Stop painting these people with a broad brush. 

We are clearly not capable of discerning which individual is going to be best. I see nothing wrong with 'painting with a broad brush' as long as statistics back me up. We owe nothing to potential immigrants. If we feel bringing in more Irish than Iranians would be better for us because they'll perform better economically and fit in better then we ought to do that.

[Yzermandius19]

1 minute ago, Argus said:

That's what statistics do. That's what businesses do when they prioritize hiring from the better schools. That's what you do when you decide to buy a brand name because you know it's good and its reliable, or when you shop in a higher class store, or decide you're not going to buy a certain brand of car or appliance because - statistically - they have more problems. This is basic logic in trying to get the best for ourselves.

We are clearly not capable of discerning which individual is going to be best. I see nothing wrong with 'painting with a broad brush' as long as statistics back me up. We owe nothing to potential immigrants. If we feel bringing in more Irish than Iranians would be better for us because they'll perform better economically and fit in better then we ought to do that.

We are capable of discerning which individual is going to be best, within reason. Merit based immigration is infinitely better than letting in all the bad apples from a region just because the average person from that region does better than most who immigrate to Canada.

Edited January 26, 2020 by Yzermandius19

[eyeball]

16 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Rotting is not literal.  He should have been serving hard time in prison is the point.  He was a terrorist who killed a US soldier who was trying to defend the West from these terrorists. Khadr made EID's to kill NATO soldiers, which includes Canadians.  Khadr and his family was at war with Canada and he was a national security threat, so yes he should have been serving  hard time.  But he should not have been tortured or treated inhumanely.  That's the balance I'm talking about.

He was a child ffs. I don't see any shred of balance in your positions at all.

Edited January 26, 2020 by eyeball

[Argus]

11 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Those who reject "Canadian values" can simply pretend to endorse them. Your system will not screen out anyone who prepared for the values test and is willing to lie, it comes nowhere close to even addressing the issue.

I doubt many refugees are able to study up on the kinds of questions likely to be asked. The questions are rarely blatant and obvious anyway. And I really don't care if you don't feel we should try to enforce any standards on immigrants. And btw, aren't you one of those people who fantasize about licking Trump's shoes? Trump would simply ban all non-white immigration and you haven't ever expressed a problem with that.

[Argus]

Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

We are capable of discerning which individual is going to be best.

Demonstrably false. Or our public housing wouldn't be filled with immigrants, not to mention our police most wanted posters.

[Yzermandius19]

1 minute ago, Argus said:

I doubt many refugees are able to study up on the kinds of questions likely to be asked. The questions are rarely blatant and obvious anyway. And I really don't care if you don't feel we should try to enforce any standards on immigrants. And btw, aren't you one of those people who fantasize about licking Trump's shoes? Trump would simply ban all non-white immigration and you haven't ever expressed a problem with that.

Trump wants merit based immigration, not ban all non-whites.

[Argus]

5 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

If you think documents are less reliable than interviews, because people can forge documents, that ignores that people can lie during interviews far easier than they can forge documents.

No, they can't. Can a guy with a fake degree in engineering answer questions about engineering? Unlikely. Can they do so in fluent English when the paper which says they passed the test was bought? Nope.

5 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Most who immigrate here, do so under a points system,

Only a minority of people immigrate under the points system. That is, are the original applicants who have to provide some evidence of their needed skills and education. The rest are family and refugees.

5 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

and it's a system that works infinitely better than values test interviews.

Really? Our immigrants don't perform as well as Canadians. Yet American immigrants perform better than Americans. Why is that?

[Argus]

1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Trump wants merit based immigration, not ban all non-whites.

Oh give us a break.

[Yzermandius19]

1 minute ago, Argus said:

Demonstrably false. Or our public housing wouldn't be filled with immigrants, not to mention our police most wanted posters.

Public housing is filled with plenty of non-immigrants too, and plenty of wanted posters as well. Nothing false about it.

[Yzermandius19]

5 minutes ago, Argus said:

No, they can't. Can a guy with a fake degree in engineering answer questions about engineering? Unlikely. Can they do so in fluent English when the paper which says they passed the test was bought? Nope.

Only a minority of people immigrate under the points system. That is, are the original applicants who have to provide some evidence of their needed skills and education. The rest are family and refugees.

Really? Our immigrants don't perform as well as Canadians. Yet American immigrants perform better than Americans. Why is that?

A majority immigrate under the points system. Our immigrants perform better than Canadians all the time. Cherry picking a group that does poorly compared to those born in Canada doesn't mean all immigrants who qualify under the points system do worse than Canadians. Those who qualify under the points system do better. Refugees do not qualify under the points system, stop lumping all legal immigrants in with refugees and pretend they are the same. There are plenty of people from groups who do poorly that do great in Canada, and vice versa, painting with a broad brush results in more bad apples not less.

Edited January 26, 2020 by Yzermandius19

[Argus]

2 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

A majority immigrate under the points system. Our immigrants perform better than Canadians all the time.

Evidence? Immigrants have higher unemployment rates than Canadian born. American immigrants don't.

2 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Cherry picking a group that does poorly compared to those born in Canada doesn't mean all immigrants who qualify under the points system do worse than Canadians.

I didn't say all of them do worse. Some obviously do better. We need more of those and less of the other kind.

[Yzermandius19]

11 minutes ago, Argus said:

Evidence? Immigrants have higher unemployment rates than Canadian born. American immigrants don't.

I didn't say all of them do worse. Some obviously do better. We need more of those and less of the other kind.

Many immigrant groups have lower unemployment rates than Canadian born or American born, both in Canada and America.

Those who do better are helped by a points system, not using blanket stereotypes about immigrants from certain regions in the world to disqualify anyone who is a member of a group who performs lower on average. This is why Trump wants a points system, less bad apples getting in just because they are related to someone who lives in America. You are pushing for less merit based immigration, and yet you think the result will be more meritocratic if the system isn't based on merit, but on a silly values test that has nothing to do with merit? Good luck with that.

Disqualifying all the good apples from poorly performing regions results in a worse good apple to bad apple ratio than letting in all the good apples from poorly performing regions. Disqualifying as many bad apples regardless of region, results in a better good apple to bad apple ratio than letting in everyone from highly performing regions.

You want a system that disqualifies all the good apples from poorly performing regions, and qualifies all the bad apples from highly performing regions, you are going to make the very problem you decry, letting in too many bad apples and not enough good ones, worse with your proposed solution.

Edited January 26, 2020 by Yzermandius19

[bush_cheney2004]

20 minutes ago, Argus said:

...Trump would simply ban all non-white immigration and you haven't ever expressed a problem with that.

 

Actually, Trump just extended legal residency and provided a path to U.S. citizenship for about 4,000 Liberian refugees.

 

https://qz.com/africa/1779248/trump-defense-bill-grants-path-to-citizenship-for-4000-liberians/

Edited January 26, 2020 by bush_cheney2004

[Argus]

50 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Actually, Trump just extended legal residency and provided a path to U.S. citizenship for about 4,000 Liberian refugees.

 

https://qz.com/africa/1779248/trump-defense-bill-grants-path-to-citizenship-for-4000-liberians/

Come on. You're not a fool. You know that a lot of things get added to enormous bills like the defense bill by horsetrading for support from various congressmen. Given the Trump administration is in a minority position in the congress they had to give some stuff to the Democrats to ensure their votes. Or as your own cite states:

Advocacy groups hailed the “legislative prowess” of Senator Jack Reed, a Democrat from Rhode Island and Senator Tina Smith, a Democrat from Minnesota.

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Many immigrant groups have lower unemployment rates than Canadian born or American born, both in Canada and America.

And? I'm not arguing against those immigrants. I'm arguing for a policy change to try and get more of them.

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Those who do better are helped by a points system, not using blanket stereotypes about immigrants from certain regions in the world to disqualify anyone who is a member of a group

And YET... statistics are quite clear in that overall, immigrants from different source countries have enormously different economic outcomes (as groups). How do you explain that?

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

You want a system that disqualifies all the good apples from poorly performing regions, and qualifies all the bad apples from highly performing regions,

Oh hardly. I'm simply suggesting the better apples are to be found in the better orchards, and we should seek to fill our basket there. I'm not saying to ignore a shiny apple in another orchard if it comes to our attention, just that we'd find it easier to look for the majority of our apples from the orchard with the better drainage and soil conditions.

[dialamah]

2 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I offered my hand to a Muslim women earlier this year.  It was a simple reaction to being introduced to someone and by the time I realised who she was it was too late to do anything about it.  She took it and shook it.  I think she was uncomfortable. 

But obviously well mannered.

Why would you assume that because she's Muslim, it would be wrong to shake her hand?   Why made you think she was uncomfortable?   

My neighbor wears an hijab because her husband likes her to.  I asked her one day how strict he was about other things and she said .. "not strict at all, I can shake hands with men, talk to them, its ok.  It's just the hijab he likes".  My partner has been over on a couple ocassions when her fire alarm malfunctioned when her husband wasn't home.  Other than putting a scarf over her hair,  she was perfectly comfortable, and her husband didn't bat an eye when he got home and my partner was still there.   

[bush_cheney2004]

9 minutes ago, Argus said:

Come on. You're not a fool. You know that a lot of things get added to enormous bills like the defense bill by horsetrading for support from various congressmen. Given the Trump administration is in a minority position in the congress they had to give some stuff to the Democrats to ensure their votes.

 

No, as Trump reversed his position on Liberians in March 2019, long before the omnibus legislation, continuing extensions granted by several presidents before him.  

The Democrats only control the House, not the Senate.

Refugee games in Canada are impacted more by domestic politics than by Donald Trump.

 

[Argus]

3 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

No, as Trump reversed his position on Liberians in March 2019, long before the omnibus legislation, continuing extensions granted by several presidents before him.  

The Democrats only control the House, not the Senate.

Refugee games in Canada are impacted more by domestic politics than by Donald Trump.

 

Yeah, okay there, sport. Trump loves black people, Mexicans and Muslims.

[Yzermandius19]

20 minutes ago, Argus said:

Oh hardly. I'm simply suggesting the better apples are to be found in the better orchards, and we should seek to fill our basket there. I'm not saying to ignore a shiny apple in another orchard if it comes to our attention, just that we'd find it easier to look for the majority of our apples from the orchard with the better drainage and soil conditions.

Well that's just captain obvious shit then, doesn't even need to be stated. It's easier to find more good apples in better orchards ain't really insightful in any way, no one is going to disagree with that.

Edited January 26, 2020 by Yzermandius19

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Why would you assume that because she's Muslim, it would be wrong to shake her hand?   Why made you think she was uncomfortable?   

My neighbor wears an hijab because her husband likes her to.  I asked her one day how strict he was about other things and she said .. "not strict at all, I can shake hands with men, talk to them, its ok.  It's just the hijab he likes".  My partner has been over on a couple ocassions when her fire alarm malfunctioned when her husband wasn't home.  Other than putting a scarf over her hair,  she was perfectly comfortable, and her husband didn't bat an eye when he got home and my partner was still there.   

Well, you talk about your neighbour as though that is something to make a point of.  Why is that?

An almost imperceptible hesitation, and an equally imperceptible expression. My assumption, as you say.  It was too late for me.  I was committed.