Jump to content

Liberals flood Canada with hundreds of thousands of colonists/settlers as part of ramping up Neo-colonization plans.


Recommended Posts

The notion that any one or more ethnic groups has special and exclusive ownership or title to a specific territory or land, apart from the ownership of private property, in this day and age, is very difficult to argue and prove.   Various peoples have warred and kicked each other out of lands for thousands of years.  Apart from maintaining existing territorial privileges in the Indian Act and reserve system for those Indigenous peoples who insist on keeping them, I would discourage adding more land claims to this creepy apartheid system that creates two categories of citizens.   Dividing Canadians, such that some get special benefits on the basis of their ethnic status, is wrong and hasn’t worked. It sows resentment. Either these groups are totally independent entities on totally independent territories or they are not. We’ve inherited this mess and have to manage it without adding to the problem.  

Federal money has skewed markets and maintained some unsustainable remote communities that could never survive in the modern world without such support.  It creates cultures of dependence.  The most successful Indigenous areas seem to be the ones that have to take most of the responsibility for managing their people and resources unto themselves.  They get to benefit from tapping their own human and natural resources, but without collecting their own taxes and paying for their own infrastructure, hospitals, schools, etc., they are not truly independent, and everyone knows it.

Calling Indigenous victims of colonialism is an oversimplification.  Indigenous and settlers have been together for hundreds of years.  Oppression occurred for sure, as all cultural groups have oppressed each other for thousands of years.  Hopefully now we know better and can move on from oppressive practices, but substance abuse and suicide still exist in Indigenous run schools and you’re going to have some form of residential schools as long as small remote isolated communities exist.  Sad but true.

With regard to the impacts of high immigration on a society that doesn’t have enough transportation infrastructure to move people hastily and efficiently, enough housing to make it affordable, and enough places outside the biggest few cities that people actually want to settle, it’s important to consider the impacts of adding hundreds of thousands more people to the mix each year. Yes there are environmental impacts and there are impacts to social cohesion as some of these new arrivals don’t bother to integrate with Canadian society.  Some don’t really value it.

Outside Quebec we don’t really demand much assimilation or respect for existing Canadian culture.  Part of the problem is that we have stopped valuing our own cultures.  We slam the cultures of the main founding cultures of Canada, French and English, as “colonial” and oppressive without appreciating that these cultures were some of the most progressive of their day.  They brought us common law, democracy, free universal public education, and much of what we consider essential to human rights.  Indigenous cultures contribute to these foundations as well and we’re taking more time today to appreciate those contributions.

I think we’re doing a few things wrong today.  We’re throwing away democracy and freedom to pander to voices of fear and paranoia.  We’re crushing working people with fuel and food prices because we think that hitting them with carbon taxes is going to save the planet when there are cheaper and more sensible ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, such as incorporating green energy into the building code.   We’re also failing to see that some cultural values are more productive and healthy than others in the efforts to build and maintain a cohesive, thriving democracy.

An emerging and dangerous trend is the turning over of responsibility for our organizations to systems or algorithms that have no inherent values.  We become slaves to compliance in order to enjoy basic freedoms.  I see this in our current public health Puritanism and the new puritanical fight against climate change.

Canada could accommodate millions more people in the north without overwhelming our metropolitan areas in the south, but only if we have policies that encourage northern settlement.  I don’t know why such a push to the North isn’t integrated into some form of immigration policy, such as a minimum period of residence outside certain regions prior to the granting of full citizenship. There could at least be a fast track incentive form of citizenship for this.

There’s much that we could do to improve Canada cheaply and affordably, but our leaders often take the easy way out for political expediency, borrowing money and saddling future generations with debt to buy off voters and pay for dubious pet projects.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Canada could accommodate millions more people in the north without overwhelming our metropolitan areas in the south, but only if we have policies that encourage northern settlement.  "

Why would we even do that?

"I don’t know why such a push to the North isn’t integrated into some form of immigration policy, such as a minimum period of residence outside certain regions prior to the granting of full citizenship. "

Waste of time. The vast majority will move south at the first opportunity.

"There’s much that we could do to improve Canada cheaply and affordably, but our leaders often take the easy way out for political expediency, borrowing money and saddling future generations with debt to buy off voters and pay for dubious pet projects.   "

Indeed.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main reason that this is happening is that Canada has been selected as the place for international resettlement.  Since we refuse to beef up our military or push aside identity politics to address real problems in the world with realistic solutions, our main contribution to international affairs is taking refugees from the parts of the world where the superpowers have intervened militarily or manipulated local affairs.  Syria, Ukraine, Afghanistan, etc.   Trudeau is reckless on immigration and spending.  It makes a mockery of his government’s climate change actions.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Myata have you seen this one?  https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/vacant-piece-of-land-less-than-30-centimetres-wide-hits-the-toronto-market-and-it-s-attracting-attention-1.5694423  

Land less than 30 centimeters wide going for $50,000 in Toronto.  Kind of goes against the B.S. we are being fed by the shovelful about higher density lowering housing prices.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, G Huxley said:

Zeitgeist agreed in all, but beefing up our military.  Instead of going on Uncle Sam's expensive and useless crusades we should be using money saved to actually defend our borders.

Well not ALL of America wants to continue the crusades.  Most Republicans these days and Independents want no more of the George Bush-Clinton cabal that want to nation build.  They have serious military problem due to woke-ism.  Our problem is perpetual underfunding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The biggest problem is that Trudeau doesn’t know what he stands for.  Because he doesn’t know what makes Canada valuable, he thinks nothing of selling it out.  There was a time not that long ago when Canada took principled stances.  Our democracy is being traded for cheap offshore production and foreign investment.  The steady flow of immigrants helps push up home prices, giving us an inflated sense of our value.  I don’t care anymore about real estate.  It’s not enough.  I care about our freedom and social conditions, which are deteriorating because Trudeau is afraid of offending Beijing.

https://apple.news/A6aR5F5lDQCi7tnQLvzUvCA

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/6/2021 at 1:57 PM, G Huxley said:

Zeitgeist agreed in all, but beefing up our military.  Instead of going on Uncle Sam's expensive and useless crusades we should be using money saved to actually defend our borders.

The majority of Canadians are not going to allow major investment into our military, "which it so desperately needs" they are more interested in social programs, and how much is going into their pockets...And those that do take an interest think we have a modern military able to hold ground with a near peer nation, which at the time might be New Zealand...or some 3rd world country in Africa.

...They refuse to do any research on the topic, instead they take our governments word for it. If the average Canadian knew just how bad it really is, they would be outraged.. The media has put in article after article about this topic and everyone brushes it aside.. I'm convinced that Canadians have the military they want, or think they need, without understanding the threats or consequences. Canadians can not be shamed into investing, or for that matter participating in peace keeping or peace making in fact they are proud of what we have now and want it smaller...

As the majority really don't care about the military or those that serve within it... Ya some will come out on Nov 11, shake a few hands then go home,  thats the extent of their caring...Droves of DND members are leaving for brighter futures..., some units are under investigation on why so many are leaving...Like it is some secret or something... it is hard to get wrapped up in our flag, and promote its interests when it's own population can't be bothered to even look after it's own soldiers.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

The majority of Canadians are not going to allow major investment into our military, "which it so desperately needs" they are more interested in social programs, and how much is going into their pockets...And those that do take an interest think we have a modern military able to hold ground with a near peer nation, which at the time might be New Zealand...or some 3rd world country in Africa.

...They refuse to do any research on the topic, instead they take our governments word for it. If the average Canadian knew just how bad it really is, they would be outraged.. The media has put in article after article about this topic and everyone brushes it aside.. I'm convinced that Canadians have the military they want, or think they need, without understanding the threats or consequences. Canadians can not be shamed into investing, or for that matter participating in peace keeping or peace making in fact they are proud of what we have now and want it smaller...

As the majority really don't care about the military or those that serve within it... Ya some will come out on Nov 11, shake a few hands then go home,  thats the extent of their caring...Droves of DND members are leaving for brighter futures..., some units are under investigation on why so many are leaving...Like it is some secret or something... it is hard to get wrapped up in our flag, and promote its interests when it's own population can't be bothered to even look after it's own soldiers.

 

Canada continues to be toothless.  With Biden a full on Manchurian Candidate for the Chi Coms, its only a matter of time that Canada becomes part of the Chi Com franchise.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2021. A major Canadian city. Municipal project: concrete wall about 30m length. Started late August. Most days, couple of guys hammering something into the ground. Mid December, nowhere near completion, no one on site. Looks like frozen till spring.

And they plan to bring 50 million of third world here? Really? Sure there's a name for that. Try to guess.

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are actually calling for 100 million. Have you heard of the Century Initiative?

https://www.centuryinitiative.ca/

One of the founders of the organization is Dominic Barton, who just resigned as Canada's ambassador to China. Seriously.

https://www.centuryinitiative.ca/our-team/dominic-barton Edited by G Huxley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem for Canada is that only 20% of the country’s land is arable, which is also the land where our biggest cities are located, and all of it is along the southern end of the country.  Already without the lakes Canada’s land mass is smaller than the US’s.  When you then look at how much of our land is drained and has some kind of transportation connection to other settlements, our areas available for settlement are even further reduced.  100 million is far too many people, especially if most of the new immigrants join the southern end of the country, which they will.

I think the key is to incentivize northern settlement and to build up the population just high enough that we can have the economy of scale that makes it possible to be fully independent militarily and in terms of providing a domestic market for our production.  I don’t know the magic number.  70 million?   It would give us the scale of Britain or France.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That will simply cause massive environmental problems and probably end up requiring more subsidization than we actually get back in taxes, as is already the case with the North as far as I am aware.

And where are this extra 30+ million people going to come from?

Are they going to come here, because they patriotically believe in Canada's vision and care deeply about its environment? Or simply to make a quick buck? Edited by G Huxley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, G Huxley said:

Have you heard of the Century Initiative?

As any number of countries endowed with land and natural resources that failed to realize their potential, the attention naturally drifts from achieving top performance in quality of life, public functions, innovation and sustainable in this age development (that is hard) to monstrous ideas with unclear substantiation except "it can be so big" (easy to proclaim and begin writing policies). The potential for a failure on a corresponding scale follows immediately.

Check it out, the numbers are out there: Norway has lower fatalities with more than 4 times the cases. Shouldn't this be in the focus and ask for intelligent and immediate action, or some outlandish future grandeur ideas?

Edited by myata
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, myata said:

As any number of countries endowed with land and natural resources that failed to realize their potential, the attention naturally drifts from achieving top performance in quality of life, public functions, innovation and sustainable in this age development (that is hard) to monstrous ideas with unclear substantiation except "it can be so big" (easy to proclaim and begin writing policies). The potential for a failure on a corresponding scale follows immediately.

Check it out, the numbers are out there: Norway has lower fatalities with more than 4 times the cases. Shouldn't this be in the focus and ask for intelligent and immediate action, or some outlandish future grandeur ideas?

Yes it’s true.  Generally French immigrants go to Montreal and most English speaking immigrants go to Toronto.  At the current growth rate, by 2050 the GTA will look more like one giant Orange County stretching from Niagara to Peterborough to Barrie/Orillia and Kitchener, approximately 13-14 million people.  Vancouver will be very similar to Hong Kong.  Half of our remaining richest farmland will be paved over.   The far north, Maritime provinces, and Saskatchewan, will have slightly more people than today.  How is this an improvement on our current social and environmental conditions?

If a certain amount of net population increase is necessary, the focus should be on making northern communities with the potential to be sustainable the focus for future growth.  It would provide the necessary workforce to tap national resources and decrease regional economic disparities between the big population centres and everywhere else.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Half of our remaining richest farmland will be paved over. "

Then why do you want to facilitate this by bringing in 30 million+ more people? (doubling the population)

"If a certain amount of net population increase is necessary,"

Key word "if".

Why do you think a certain net population increase is necessary?

" the focus should be on making northern communities with the potential to be sustainable the focus for future growth. It would provide the necessary workforce to tap national resources"

Read more environmental destruction so that you can try to grow your antlers.

"sustainable the focus for future growth."

There is nothing sustainable about future growth. Endless growth is a tumour.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, G Huxley said:

"Half of our remaining richest farmland will be paved over. "

Then why do you want to facilitate this by bringing in 30 million+ more people? (doubling the population)

"If a certain amount of net population increase is necessary,"

Key word "if".

Why do you think a certain net population increase is necessary?

" the focus should be on making northern communities with the potential to be sustainable the focus for future growth. It would provide the necessary workforce to tap national resources"

Read more environmental destruction so that you can try to grow your antlers.

"sustainable the focus for future growth."

There is nothing sustainable about future growth. Endless growth is a tumour.
 

I hear what you’re saying, but then we’ll have to shift to a low growth model.  Our economy is built on the idea that by locking in today’s prices, for example by buying a house right now and taking on a mortgage, over time, as wages and the economy grow, that mortgage payment becomes a smaller portion of your income.  You get wealthier.  The inflation that goes with this growth also means that when you sell your home 20 years later, it will be worth far more than you paid for it.  This is the story of how most Canadians have built their nest eggs and moved up financially for the last century.  Much of that growth and inflation depends on a steady increase in development, which comes through settlement, mainly immigration, since our birth rate is close to negative.

A world in which your asset values and wages are essentially stagnant would require a more modest lifestyle and slower accumulation of wealth than we’ve had in many decades.  Doable but difficult.  There may be little cheats we can make as a society, such as letting automation do more work and giving money to people, but these measures likely have modest impact.  Basically we’d end up living in small apartments and living on essentials.  It jibes with efforts to slash greenhouse gasses and recent totalitarian restrictions on movement and surveillance to control the “pandemic”.   Be careful what you wish for, because the old Chinese and Soviet lifestyles were pretty dull.

 I think we have to find sustainable forms of modest growth.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I hear what you’re saying, but then we’ll have to shift to a low growth model."

Why any growth? At the very least stop growth, or go to a de-growth model.

"Our economy is built on the idea that by locking in today’s prices, for example by buying a house right now and taking on a mortgage, over time, as wages and the economy grow, that mortgage payment becomes a smaller portion of your income. You get wealthier. The inflation that goes with this growth also means that when you sell your home 20 years later, it will be worth far more than you paid for it. This is the story of how most Canadians have built their nest eggs and moved up financially for the last century. Much of that growth and inflation depends on a steady increase in development, which comes through settlement, mainly immigration, since our birth rate is close to negative. "

Indeed.

"A world in which your asset values and wages are essentially stagnant would require a more modest lifestyle and slower accumulation of wealth than we’ve had in many decades. Doable but difficult. "

A better situation. Wages are stagnant anyway as they are wiped out by inflation.

"Basically we’d end up living in small apartments and living on essentials. "

I don't see why small apartments are necessary under a de-growth model. They become a necessity under the current model as housing price inflation and increased growth development/density lead to exactly this picture.

"It jibes with efforts to slash greenhouse gasses"

Naturally.

"recent totalitarian restrictions on movement and surveillance to control the “pandemic”. "

Non sequitur. De-growth involves none of the above.

"I think we have to find sustainable forms of modest growth. "

Sustainable growth is an oxymoron. Endless growth is a tumour plain and simple. Edited by G Huxley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/4/2021 at 8:40 PM, G Huxley said:

https://www.cicnews.com/2021/11/canada-welcomed-historic-45000-new-immigrants-in-september-1119536.html

All this during the pandemic.

Meanwhile housing costs and inflation keep skyrocketing and the environmental situation becomes worse and worse each year.

They will keep pumping bodies into this country at higher and higher volumes and continue to "develop" and destroy lands and forests and they do it , you know why?

Because the fuckers can't think of anything else that will sustain the pyramid scheme society that they have created.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,713
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...