Increased Immigration not needed, will hurt workers

[Right To Left]

On 3/8/2021 at 1:34 PM, Argus said:

Indeed. Capitalism regulates wages in that manner. Increase supply and prices go down. Increase demand and prices go up. Has nothing to do with the 'bourgeoise' or greed.

It has everything to do with the bourgeoise, and even the petty bourgeoise -- the business owners who focus on temp agencies to recruit workers from, and take no more than a glancing notice of identification and records, just want the cheapest worker available to work for them....no questions asked!  And if that's not about greed, what is it?

Quote

I don't resent people who come here to earn a better life.

Neither do I, and that's why I don't like to see my fellow plebs being led astray by divisive rightwing arguments that try to negate or downplay the actions their country (or in our case- the big brother nation our toadying governments serve and refrain from criticizing) has committed to cause the desperation in the colonies and targets of regime change to make their governments more compliant with foreign ownership of their economies.

Quote

I'd try to do the same if I were in the middle east. However, from my perspective, what many of these people are to me are unskilled labour, people who will be unlikely to ever earn enough money to be capable of contributing to the national fisc because of our progressive tax system.

I support progressive taxation regardless, and in principle my only beef is that not enough is taken off the top anymore since Mulroney's "tax reforms" of 30 to 35 years ago. Taxes on multimillionaires and billionaires should be much, much higher, because those with high incomes have the highest discretionary incomes. So they can keep squirreling away more and more money on their investments and toys...like fancy cars, 2nd and 3rd homes, expensive vacations etc., which those of us in the middle certainly can't spend much idle time thinking about! 

Taxes on investment income and real estate holdings should be the primary source of government revenues NOT high income tax rates on us middle class (now higher income earners (80,000 to 85,000 per year)) who can afford to live in relative comfort, but certainly are not at the same level as the scammers who own some pisspot business and can write off large chunks of income against their tax assessments! 

Quote

Which means people like me will have to pay for their health care and other government services, including the roads they will drive on or the public transit they will use, including their children's schooling, and THEIR health care. I don't need more poor, noon-contributing citizens here always voting for whichever political party offers them more free stuff, thanks.

I'll wager that I and others in my tax group are covering more of the healthcare and government services burden than you and your high-fallutin capitalist class ever have! And now that Liberals follow the same tax policy as Conservatives, it's worse than it ever has been.

 

[Right To Left]

On 3/8/2021 at 1:28 PM, Argus said:

Yeah... bullshit. Islam grew BY ethnic cleansing, by the sword. Whole countries had their populations wiped out or made to flee. That's why places like Turkey are Muslim now after being Christian for a thousand years. Ethnic cleansing? Have a look into the centuries of Arab attacks into the Indian sub-continent, and the wanton slaughter they engaged in there because the people were regarded as infidels.

You haven't bothered to address the fact that the secular republics of the Middle East - Syria, Iraq and to a lesser extent - Turkey (after the despicable conduct of their still reigning president - Erdogan and his Islamist talking political party) did not expel or ethnically cleanse Christians or Jews, or any other religious minority sects, including 'infidel' Islamists like the Alawites. During the era of the Caliphates - Arab and later Turkish Ottoman empires, they applied taxes on Christians and Jews. But, if you bother to crack open a source from the other side, you will find out that the reason was because Christians and Jews were not trusted to serve in the Caliph's armies...which was regarded as a religious obligation for young Muslim men. So, a tax was applied on them instead. Worth noting that near the end of the Ottoman Empire...in the 1840's, the Government repealed all of the 'Jizya' taxes on Christians and Jews. 

I could add that it was your good Christian crusaders who caused genocides as they marched to the 'Holy Land' in the middle ages. Even sacking Constantinople during the 4th Crusade ....because they were the wrong kind of Christians - Orthodox... did not accept the Roman Pope! 

Regarding your other 'throwing crap at the wall to see what will stick' points - Arab attacks on India were not much different than the prior armies of Rome or the even previous Alexander The 'Great'. 

Sure they could dress it up as a holy cause in defense of the faith and the one true god, but how is that different than the Christian terraforming of the world over the centuries? And which imperial theocracy killed the most and I would say worse- destroyed the most indigenous cultures: Christendom or Islam?

Edited March 9, 2021 by Right To Left

[Argus]

2 hours ago, Right To Left said:

You haven't bothered to address the fact that the secular republics of the Middle East - Syria, Iraq and to a lesser extent - Turkey (after the despicable conduct of their still reigning president - Erdogan and his Islamist talking political party) did not expel or ethnically cleanse Christians or Jews

They pretty much did. These were all Christian countries. Now there are almost no Christians left.

2 hours ago, Right To Left said:

Regarding your other 'throwing crap at the wall to see what will stick' points - Arab attacks on India were not much different than the prior armies of Rome or the even previous Alexander The 'Great'. 

Just a hell of a lot bloodier. And your point was to blame colonization and intolerance on western Europeans, remember. Saying the Muslim world was no worse is not much of an argument.

[Argus]

On 3/7/2021 at 2:17 PM, dialamah said:

Where have I ever said they "immediately" abandon their cultural beliefs?   I repeat, endlessly, *over time*, about 3 generations.  Can you at least try some honesty, now and then?  Or would that break your bubble too hard?

This may surprise you but I'm concerned about the world I live in not the one three generations down the line. Half the population in major cities is already made up of foreign born people, and the Liberals are trying to increase that still further. If that's the case the least they could do would be to select people more compatible with our culture and values.

[Argus]

23 hours ago, dialamah said:

Kinda like Europeans and Native North Americans; we were stronger and more advanced, so of course we'd take over, as you've explained previously. 

Sure. Though we didn't try to exterminate them the way the Muslims did to Hindus, or force them to convert to Christianity by executing all who refused.

Quote

This is as natural as the tribalism that results in persecution of minorities, which you also support. 

I don't support the persecution of anyone, but I accept that you're not intelligent enough to understand that.

Quote

So why hate on Islam for doing exactly what you praise and support for Europeans?  

Gee, to begin with, I haven't 'praised' the Europeans, but simply explained that that was the way the world worked back then. Second, it's a different era. What was acceptable a couple of centuries ago no longer is. Third, while Europeans have advanced, the Muslim world largely has not. Certainly not the ones in the middle east. And fourth, accepting that was the way the world once worked doesn't mean I want to be 'conquered' by foreigners while people like you throw open the gates and gleefully welcome them in because you love their quaint ethnic customs and restaurants.

Edited March 9, 2021 by Argus

[cannuck]

On 3/8/2021 at 6:23 PM, dialamah said:

Kinda like Europeans and Native North Americans; we were stronger and more advanced, so of course we'd take over, as you've explained previously.  This is as natural as the tribalism that results in persecution of minorities, which you also support.  So why hate on Islam for doing exactly what you praise and support for Europeans?  

As usual, you have taken the liberal playbook to the extreme.   Yanks set out to do the genocide thing,  Brits never did.  What followed North of 49 was a matter of ignorance, but you are once again judging those people by the standards of today.  For the most part efforts in this country, even though often misguided were meant and believed to be helping our aboriginal population.  But, reading from your playbook, we are supposed to be guilty of some horrible crime for what our ancestors did in mostly good faith.

Edited March 10, 2021 by cannuck

[cannuck]

11 hours ago, cannuck said:

duplicate post...sorry

 

Edited March 10, 2021 by cannuck

[dialamah]

14 hours ago, cannuck said:

As usual, you have taken the liberal playbook to the extreme.   Yanks set out to do the genocide thing,  Brits never did.  

Are you sure about that?  Cause some of the policies that were put in place certainly suggests otherwise.  

14 hours ago, cannuck said:

But, reading from your playbook, we are supposed to be guilty of some horrible crime for what our ancestors did in mostly good faith.

I'm living with someone who experienced, first hand, "what our ancestors did."  

You only need to feel bad about your cluelessness if you refuse to learn more about the way "our aboriginals" were treated, both by government policy and societal attitudes.  Government policy may have changed some, but societal attitudes need a lot more work when people still think that what happened was generations ago and "they should be over it" by now.

[dialamah]

17 hours ago, Argus said:

1. Though we didn't try to exterminate them the way the Muslims did to Hindus,

2. or force them to convert to Christianity by executing all who refused.

1.  Just one example of Christians attempting genocide.

2.  Plenty of examples of Christian conversion by sword.

These examples of Christian barbarity is not to excuse Islamic extremists (or any other extremists) who think forcing someone, by threat of death, into conversion is acceptable.  Its to disabuse you of the notion that Christianity is any better or different than Islam when it has power over people.   In regions of high religiousity, political violence is supported equally by Muslims, Christians and Hindus, although only a tiny minority actually engage in that violence.

Just because our nightly news only reports violence by non-Christians doesn't mean Christianity is exempt.

17 hours ago, Argus said:

And fourth, accepting that was the way the world once worked doesn't mean I want to be 'conquered' by foreigners while people like you throw open the gates and gleefully welcome them in because you love their quaint ethnic customs and restaurants.

If everyone - politicians, Muslims, Christians - rejected the tribalism you champion, there would be considerably less violence in the world.  If everyone practiced the tolerance you eschew, there would be less violence in the world.

To me, personally, your continued harping on the barbarity, backwardness, dress, beliefs and unacceptability of Muslims looks no different than a Muslim harping on Westerners' immorality, barbarity, war-mongering, dress, faithlessness and unacceptability.  Both look equally ignorant and extreme to me.  

Edited March 10, 2021 by dialamah

[dialamah]

17 hours ago, Argus said:

I don't support the persecution of anyone, but I accept that you're not intelligent enough to understand that.

You may not think you do, but your comments on here about certain immigrants and First Nations belies your words.

[cannuck]

2 hours ago, dialamah said:

Are you sure about that?  Cause some of the policies that were put in place certainly suggests otherwise.  

I'm living with someone who experienced, first hand, "what our ancestors did."  

You only need to feel bad about your cluelessness if you refuse to learn more about the way "our aboriginals" were treated, both by government policy and societal attitudes.  Government policy may have changed some, but societal attitudes need a lot more work when people still think that what happened was generations ago and "they should be over it" by now.

Uh.....have lived and worked with aboriginals for quite some time...my children are eligible for status.    As usual, you make some incredibly racist and ignorant assumptions.

[DogOnPorch]

22 hours ago, Right To Left said:

You haven't bothered to address....

 

In 1858 I believe it was, the Ottoman Empire allowed the purchase of land by private individuals...who were subject to property taxation and military service. Not only did this allow the Zionists a way in, but made certain clans like the Hashemites and al-Husseinis very rich.

[dialamah]

43 minutes ago, cannuck said:

Uh.....have lived and worked with aboriginals for quite some time...my children are eligible for status.   

I have family members who are both status and non-status  What's sad is that several of them downplay their aboriginal background because they know they'll be looked down on by a lot of people and have said as much.    Still, one of them, at least, faces her history straight on and what happened to her parents and grandparents.  She doesn't blame the current crop of Whiteys, but she does expect not to have the truth of the past and present denied.  Or relegated to ancient history as something our ancestors did.

Quote

As usual, you make some incredibly racist and ignorant assumptions.

What are my 'racist' assumptions, exactly?  Please itemize them. 

Unless you mean the facts around the way our parents and grandparents instituted polices that resulted in the decimation of aboriginal families and culture; that is well documented.     

[DogOnPorch]

19 minutes ago, dialamah said:

She doesn't blame the current crop of Whiteys...

Whiteys?

 

Quote

 

Unless you mean the facts around the way our parents and grandparents instituted polices that resulted in the decimation of aboriginal families and culture; that is well documented.     

 

 

Your parents and grandparents, perhaps.

[Right To Left]

32 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

In 1858 I believe it was, the Ottoman Empire allowed the purchase of land by private individuals...who were subject to property taxation and military service. Not only did this allow the Zionists a way in, but made certain clans like the Hashemites and al-Husseinis very rich.

Yes, what I read of the late, floundering in debt period of the Ottoman Empire was that they actually became increasingly reliant on non-Muslim minorities to staff their civil service, because the administration had become such a corrupt money-sieve, that the leaders felt minority officials who would already be regarded with suspicion, if not hostility in their communities, would have greater incentives to act honestly and carefully.

So, regardless of all the claptrap passed around today about Islam and Quranic verses, the lives and wellbeing of all minorities within the former empire became more precarious after the collapse of the empire, and the rise of regional, competing nationalist states. None more so than Turkey, which began a genocide campaign against Armenians in Eastern Turkey, out of revenge for the Armenian break with an alliance with "The Young Turks" ---- who revolted against the Sultan in favour of forming a republic. Early on, Armenians and most minorities within what is now - Turkey joined the Young Turks' revolt, but Armenian leaders later withdrew and demanded a separate Armenian republic. And, the Young Turks responded with a campaign of mass genocide against Armenians...which they've been denying ever since! 

But, I didn't come here to defend the Ottoman Turks or even immigration in general, but to make the point that whatever crap rightwing clowns have thrown at Arabs and Muslims in general since the War On Terror days, most of the worst evils committed in the past 150 years have been caused by the Anglo-American Empire, which no average working stiffs in the West should be supporting either! Because empires are only created to serve the power and wealth of small, privileged ruling classes/ NOT the majority of people living within their borders.

I imagine that during the height of Roman Empire, the average Roman was still patriotic and repeating the boast: "I am a Roman citizen!" even as they were increasing driven into poverty by the wealthy Patrician classes who bought up most of the land. That's one way to keep your armies stocked with lots of new recruits for foreign campaigns. So now, in an era of pushbutton and aerial warfare, fewer soldiers are needed, and the neocapitalist dynamics of our economies create more surplus labour than is ever needed. The US solution seems to be to expand "Tough On Crime" laws that target poverty, and leave the poor( not just so called "illegal" immigrants) in the new growth industry: private, for-profit prisons.

[Right To Left]

4 hours ago, dialamah said:

Are you sure about that?  Cause some of the policies that were put in place certainly suggests otherwise.  

I'm living with someone who experienced, first hand, "what our ancestors did."  

You only need to feel bad about your cluelessness if you refuse to learn more about the way "our aboriginals" were treated, both by government policy and societal attitudes.  Government policy may have changed some, but societal attitudes need a lot more work when people still think that what happened was generations ago and "they should be over it" by now.

I would like to know how poisoning land and water supplies by allowing mining and petro (especially tarsands) operations to dump their toxic wastes on or near treaty lands is NOT a form of slow genocide...make people sicker and sicker until they die off!

[dialamah]

20 hours ago, Argus said:

This may surprise you but I'm concerned about the world I live in not the one three generations down the line. Half the population in major cities is already made up of foreign born people, and the Liberals are trying to increase that still further. If that's the case the least they could do would be to select people more compatible with our culture and values.

Do not 'foreign born' people also include Europeans, of which you are so enamored?  Or Asians, about which you are only slightly less enamored?  

Anyway, Stats Canada tells us that 25% of visible minorities are South Asian; 20% are Chinese, 15% are black.  The remaining 40% are, in descending order, Filipinos, Arabs, Latin Americans, West Asians, Koreans and Japanese.  

Stats Canada also tell us that 37.5% of children are foreign-born, or have at least one parent who is foreign-born - nowhere near the "half" you are claiming.  But, unlike you, Stats Canada does not assume that every non-white person in Canada is foreign-born.  And, given that 16% of all immigrants are from Europe/UK, that 37.5% number includes non-brown folks, too.

So, as usual, you are a spreading misinformation to support your xenophobia.

[dialamah]

11 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

Your parents and grandparents, perhaps.

Yup, mine for sure.  As an individual, perhaps not you, since you insinuate that your ethnicity is something other than European.    But certainly the parents of most White UK descended folks, which is most of us in Canada.

[Right To Left]

21 hours ago, Argus said:

They pretty much did. These were all Christian countries. Now there are almost no Christians left.

 

Christian countries which forced conversion on those who fell under their control. Until Dubya demolished Iraq, there were one million Christians still living there. 

Sure, like everyone else there, they had to beware of incurring the wrath of Saddam Hussein. But it seems obvious being a Shia Muslim in Iraq was more precarious than being a Christian. And then you have to explain how large Christian populations survived there century after century since the first missionaries arrived in the 3rd and 4th centuries. Same as in Syria, Turkey, Egypt etc..

The biggest threat to Christians....and Jews also, over most of the history of the Middle East, didn't start until the arrival of the British and French, and then the American imperialists, who embarked on a strategy of favoring and building up the worst, most extreme and ruthless Islamic sects to rule over a population.

That's what created the Wahabbi's and other Salifist sects that demand complete obedience and allegiance to their dogmas. To maintain power, these extremists have had to rely heavily on foreign British and American help....which comes at a price. Just ask Arabians who don't appreciate the Saud Family's feudal theocracy!

[DogOnPorch]

2 minutes ago, Right To Left said:

Yes, what I read of the late, floundering in debt period of the Ottoman Empire was that they actually became increasingly reliant on non-Muslim minorities to staff their civil service, because the administration had become such a corrupt money-sieve, that the leaders felt minority officials who would already be regarded with suspicion, if not hostility in their communities, would have greater incentives to act honestly and carefully....

 

 

That the British...besides the disaster at Gallipoli...were able to trounce the Ottomans with so few numbers and relatively few casualties shows how far gone the Turks were. The glory days were long gone...heck probably gone right after 1571.

But they threw their lot in with the Germans for a few promises of free warships and tacit support on the logistical end...German officers, etc. Worked for two years...I guess. 

The soon to be Mufti al-Husseini participated in the Armenian Genocide, apparently. A warm-up for his & Eichmann's efforts during the Final Solution. And frankly, it is the Mufti's thugs that live-on today in the form of present-day terrorists who can trace their roots to Fatah, the PLO & PLF...plus later, the Red Brigade/Red Army Faction on the Euro side. 

[DogOnPorch]

6 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Yup, mine for sure.  As an individual, perhaps not you, since you insinuate that your ethnicity is something other than European.    But certainly the parents of most White UK descended folks, which is most of us in Canada.

 

Squirm race-baiter.

[Right To Left]

9 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Do not 'foreign born' people also include Europeans, of which you are so enamored?  Or Asians, about which you are only slightly less enamored?  

Anyway, Stats Canada tells us that 25% of visible minorities are South Asian; 20% are Chinese, 15% are black.  The remaining 40% are, in descending order, Filipinos, Arabs, Latin Americans, West Asians, Koreans and Japanese.  

Stats Canada also tell us that 37.5% of children are foreign-born, or have at least one parent who is foreign-born - nowhere near the "half" you are claiming.  But, unlike you, Stats Canada does not assume that every non-white person in Canada is foreign-born.  And, given that 16% of all immigrants are from Europe/UK, that 37.5% number includes non-brown folks, too.

So, as usual, you are a spreading misinformation to support your xenophobia.

I recall that Trump said he liked Norwegian immigrants!  Only problem is 99.999999% of Norwegians would never consider moving to the US!

[DogOnPorch]

2 minutes ago, Right To Left said:

I recall that Trump said he liked Norwegian immigrants!  Only problem is 99.999999% of Norwegians would never consider moving to the US!

 

German and Scandinavian immigrants make-up a large slice of the American pie. The old joke during the Civil War was that the Union officers speak English while the soldiers Sprechen Sie Deutsch.

[Right To Left]

2 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

That the British...besides the disaster at Gallipoli...were able to trounce the Ottomans with so few numbers and relatively few casualties shows how far gone the Turks were. The glory days were long gone...heck probably gone right after 1571.

But they threw their lot in with the Germans for a few promises of free warships and tacit support on the logistical end...German officers, etc. Worked for two years...I guess. 

The soon to be Mufti al-Husseini participated in the Armenian Genocide, apparently. A warm-up for his & Eichmann's efforts during the Final Solution. And frankly, it is the Mufti's thugs that live-on today in the form of present-day terrorists who can trace their roots to Fatah, the PLO & PLF...plus later, the Red Brigade/Red Army Faction on the Euro side. 

What connection does some mufti have with the defunct Red Brigades or RAF factions, which were all Marxist and/or anarchist sects.... according to recently released government cables in Italy, western leaders of the time considered Red Brigades such a divisive force in Italy that they were causing dissension and breaking up the large and politically potent communist and socialist parties that could have easily taken over parliament at the time.

[Right To Left]

Just now, DogOnPorch said:

 

German and Scandinavian immigrants make-up a large slice of the American pie. The old joke during the Civil War was that the Union officers speak English while the soldiers Sprechen Sie Deutsch.

That was at a time when Scandinavia was relatively poor. A lot has changed since then. Biggest one being that Norway has the highest per capita income in Europe and the most equal income and wealth distribution. Except for any plutocrats stationed there, nobody else is going to want to come to America!