Pierre Poilievre wants to increase the number of economic immigrants in Canada

[QuebecOverCanada]

Poilievre: "To get our economy firing on all cylinders we need to quickly process economic immigration." "We need to make it fast and simple for people to come here as refugees to get to work right away" "The Conservative Party is pro-immigration"

That, and his State-sponsored porn control are the two reasons I will not vote for Poilievre in the next election.

[Moonbox]

lol that's certainly a way to look at PP...don't think it makes much sense but you do you. 

 

 

[herbie]

Only bring in the immigrants that can afford $2M homes, that will solve the housing crisis!

[I am Groot]

4 hours ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

Poilievre: "To get our economy firing on all cylinders we need to quickly process economic immigration." "We need to make it fast and simple for people to come here as refugees to get to work right away" "The Conservative Party is pro-immigration"

That, and his State-sponsored porn control are the two reasons I will not vote for Poilievre in the next election.

You won't vote for Poilievre because he's not a Quebecer. That's the first, last, and only thing that matters to you. At least have the honesty to admit it.

This old clip you dug up where he wants more economic immigrants and that thing where he said websites should keep kids out are ridiculous excuses.

[I am Groot]

3 hours ago, herbie said:

Only bring in the immigrants that can afford $2M homes, that will solve the housing crisis!

I agree, actually. No more economic immigrants who don't have sufficient skill, education, AND language skills to immediately or very soon be earning a superior income should be allowed in unless it's in a field where we're desperately short of people like the medical industry or tradesmen. No more Indian coders, half of whom have fake degrees anyway and wind up working at Tim Hortons after they get fired from their first job.

[CdnFox]

Of course the CPC is pro immigration.  Immigration is important.  They just want it to be reduced to sensible levels that are in line with the amount of infrastructure being added.  But they still want immigration.

And of COURSE it's desirable to have it happen quickly.  Right now a doctor wanting to come to canada has to wait years to be processed and recognized, Even nurses are well over a year to get their stuff processed to come work here.  And the immigration process itself is slow. 

Why WOULDN"T we want to be able to have those people who can benefit canada processed quickly and efficiently so they can be admitted and start to work in a reasonable time frame? How is it BETTER to make them wait for ages?

They're people FFS - they're not scotch. They dont' get better as they get older or something.

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Why WOULDN"T we want to be able to have those people who can benefit canada processed quickly and efficiently

Sure, the question is can we? What or where is the expectation this efficiency will suddenly materialize once Poilievre is elected come from?

Following Trudeau it'll be all to easy for Poilievre to look impressive in comparison while also getting next to nothing done.

Where is his policy on how he'll achieve the sort of efficiency the word quickly actually relates to a quantifiable timeline?

Quick, quicker, quickest, quickly can all mean anything. A month after his election, 6 months, 2 years, after his second run at office...when?

IMO, wth the kind of transparency and accountability Harper bestowed on us Poilievre should have all the resources he and his team need to know to hit the ground running. There'll be little excuse for us not being in a position where foreign doctors and nurses are being hired within 3 months of his election.

[CdnFox]

36 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Sure, the question is can we? What or where is the expectation this efficiency will suddenly materialize once Poilievre is elected come from?

We can and it's been better in the past.  It boils down to a matter of political will.  No gov't can do everything of course, you always have to deicide how much energy and political capital you can spend on any given thing but in this case a number of recommendations were already made and it's just a matter of executing them, and that's something that trudeau was absolutely horrible at.

And he doesn't understand how government works. As a result even things he might have agreed with were not done.

This is going to give PP a rare opportunity to actually look like he's getting an insane amount of things done relatively early on in his term. Of course he may choose to spread it over the term but just correcting those mistakes and executing the things Trudeau should have done will radically improve the situation. PP will look like a genius when in reality he's just merely competent.

40 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Following Trudeau it'll be all to easy for Poilievre to look impressive in comparison while also getting next to nothing done.

Hammer meet nail

41 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Where is his policy on how he'll achieve the sort of efficiency the word quickly actually relates to a quantifiable timeline?

If he's smart it's safely tucked away where nobody can possibly find it until the election starts.

41 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Quick, quicker, quickest, quickly can all mean anything. A month after his election, 6 months, 2 years, after his second run at office...when?

Doesn't really matter as long as it gets done. It will never happen under the current regime. When the next election rolls around people will be able to judge.

42 minutes ago, eyeball said:

IMO, wth the kind of transparency and accountability Harper bestowed on us Poilievre should have all the resources he and his team need to know to hit the ground running.

Well we've already explored this at great length and that is not your opinion, it's your mild delusion and your excuse for why the Liberals committed so many crimes and have been so corrupt. They're corrupt because it's Harper's fault. That's just not the way the world works and the voters are obviously not buying your line of crap.

The real question is not whether or not PP can do better, the real question is will he spread it out nicely over time to prevent people from Relaxing to the point where they'll turn back to their corrupt roots and vote liberal again. He should get a second term fairly easily, but he's going to have to play his cards right to get the third term.

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Well we've already explored this at great length and that is not your opinion, it's your mild delusion and your excuse for why the Liberals committed so many crimes and have been so corrupt. They're corrupt because it's Harper's fault. That's just not the way the world works and the voters are obviously not buying your line of crap.

Actually I just made a case for Poilievre availing himself of Harper's efforts so he can be more effective.

I wouldn't buy your malarkey about blaming Trudeau's failures on Harper either.

It remains to be seen if Poilievre can rise above the mediocre expectations you've  based on Trudeau's dismal performance.

[August1991]

8 hours ago, herbie said:

Only bring in the immigrants that can afford $2M homes, that will solve the housing crisis!

Poilievre's wife was born abroad.

Heck, Donald Trump's current wife was born abroad.

====

This old-school Leftist idea that people on the Right are nationalist - it no longer works, makes no sense.

Edited February 26 by August1991

[Moonlight Graham]

11 hours ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

Poilievre: "To get our economy firing on all cylinders we need to quickly process economic immigration." "We need to make it fast and simple for people to come here as refugees to get to work right away" "The Conservative Party is pro-immigration"

That, and his State-sponsored porn control are the two reasons I will not vote for Poilievre in the next election.

He was talking about speed to process immigrants, not total numbers from what I heard in that interview.  If he said he wants to "increase the number of economic immigrants in Canada" as you say then please provide the quote, otherwise I'll assume this is misinformation on your part.

This is the 2nd time recently you've made a topic with a lie about PP in your thread title.  Your last one was "'Small Government' Pierre Poilievre wants you to show your ID to watch Internet Porn". 

Edited February 26 by Moonlight Graham

[Moonlight Graham]

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

Sure, the question is can we? What or where is the expectation this efficiency will suddenly materialize once Poilievre is elected come from?

Following Trudeau it'll be all to easy for Poilievre to look impressive in comparison while also getting next to nothing done.

Where is his policy on how he'll achieve the sort of efficiency the word quickly actually relates to a quantifiable timeline?

Quick, quicker, quickest, quickly can all mean anything. A month after his election, 6 months, 2 years, after his second run at office...when?

IMO, wth the kind of transparency and accountability Harper bestowed on us Poilievre should have all the resources he and his team need to know to hit the ground running. There'll be little excuse for us not being in a position where foreign doctors and nurses are being hired within 3 months of his election.

If the government reduced the total number of immigrants they accepted and processed every year but keep the same # of immigration officials to process them as they have now then it would be logical to assume they'd be processed faster.

[CdnFox]

12 hours ago, eyeball said:

Actually I just made a case for Poilievre availing himself of Harper's efforts so he can be more effective.

 No you didn't.  ANd you've already tried desperately numerous times to suggest harper wasn't effective at all (he was of course).

And at the end of the day there's nothing PP can do that the next gov't can't undo so it's still up to the voter to police.

Quote

I wouldn't buy your malarkey about blaming Trudeau's failures on Harper either.

Nobody would buy it -  but you're the one constantly selling it.

Quote

It remains to be seen if Poilievre can rise above the mediocre expectations you've  based on Trudeau's dismal performance.

If he's mediocre he'll look like  a hero thanks to trudeau.

I'm sure he CAN rise far above that but i'm not sure it would be wise for him to do so. People like you still exist, the kind of person who will blame harper for justin's corruption and still vote liberal or ndp (same thing these days).

And what tends to happen is the Conservatives bust their asses to clean up after a liberal disaster and they do - things get better by far. But the people don't like the belt tightening and they think all the problems are solved and the liberals  and ndp show up and swear that they can give them all kinds of free things with no problem and they vote in another trudeau.

Rather than that - PP might be wise to go a little more slowly - constantly make things a little better and such but leave people concerned enough about the future that they are still afraid of voting for the ndp/libs and ruining their lives like that again.  That might be the best way to get three terms.

[eyeball]

36 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

No you didn't. 

I most certainly did. You mean to say Harper's T&A Act doesn't exist anymore?

But I thought you said it was instrumental in uncovering the SNC Lavalin Affair.

Maybe you just thought you were being honest.

[CdnFox]

11 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

If the government reduced the total number of immigrants they accepted and processed every year but keep the same # of immigration officials to process them as they have now then it would be logical to assume they'd be processed faster.

Thats' sort of true but there's other problems in the way the system is set up. But the thing is that these deparments have been looking at ways to speed things up and have produced recommendations, they just werent' acted on. So it's not like PP will have to start from scratch, and as you say reducing the number of applicants you're processing helps right out of the gate.

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I most certainly did. You mean to say Harper's T&A Act doesn't exist anymore?

You most certainly did not.  You didn't make any case in the slightest. You didn't even hint at how it might come into play.  Like - at all. 

Quote

But I thought you said it was instrumental in uncovering the SNC Lavalin Affair.

It was but seeing as conservatives dont' behave that way in the first place it will be of no help at all to PP to 'hit the ground running" as you say.

Quote

Maybe you just thought you were being honest.

Maybe you were just lying.  And me being honest and you lying is pretty much the normal state of things  

[eyeball]

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You most certainly did not.  You didn't make any case in the slightest. You didn't even hint at how it might come into play.  Like - at all. 

Of course I did. If T&A makes all of the government's/public's business perfectly clear there's no excuse for Poilievre not having a plan in place to turn this country around on a dime.

Why on Earth would he want to keep his plan a secret?

Well, as you said yourself....

52 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

PP might be wise to go a little more slowly - constantly make things a little better and such but leave people concerned enough about the future that they are still afraid of voting for the ndp/libs and ruining their lives like that again.  That might be the best way to get three terms.

....to play Canada for fools, for his own self-interested purposes.

Seeing thru you is easy enough. 

[CdnFox]

Just now, eyeball said:

Of course I did.

Ahhh. This is my fault. I keep forgetting you have no idea what a logical or reasoned statement looks like so of course you THINK you did. 

Quote

If T&A makes all of the government's/public's business perfectly clear there's no excuse for Poilievre not having a plan in place to turn this country around on a dime.

That is not sane.  The two have nothing to do with each other. He can have a plan and not be transparent about it and he can not have a plan and be transparent about it or any combination.  The one does not affect the other. Nor does the transparency act require anyone to have a plan.

Quote

Why on Earth would he want to keep his plan a secret?

Because he's actually intelligent and not a complete dimwit. And anyone who's intelligent and not a dimwit knows why you don't release plans before an election.  I can see why you needed to be told that  

Quote

 

Well, as you said yourself....

....to play Canada for fools, for his own self-interested purposes.

 

Yeah - i never actually said that.  But you fake-quoting people and then pretending to argue what they never said is pretty much expected.

Quote

Seeing thru you is easy enough. 

That's your mirror, stupid.

[eyeball]

16 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

And anyone who's intelligent and not a dimwit knows why you don't release plans before an election. 

Well not their real plans of course which is why they have to lie.

Thank's for being so honest about your expectations. I'm sure you'll be pleased.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Well not their real plans of course which is why they have to lie.

 

You're thinking of the libs and dips, but yes that is their running strategy. 

PP isn't releasing his strategy at all.  No lies.  See how that works  

I know - your buddies lie all the time and you think it's just normal that everyone does it, but no - that's just you.

[eyeball]

26 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

PP isn't releasing his strategy at all.  No lies.  See how that works.

Except he's released all sorts of strategies, plans, and promises.

Every one of them is a lie according to you.

 

[CdnFox]

Just now, eyeball said:

Except he's released all sorts of strategies, plans, and promises.

 

 

Like what.

Quote

Every one of them is a lie according to you.

Sure - that sounds like something i really actually said and not something you made up and lied about me saying.

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Like what.

Let me guess, you didn't do your homework again did you?

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Sure - that sounds like something i really actually said and not something you made up and lied about me saying.

Your inability to understand anything you read is so legendary it's not surprising you can't understand yourself either 

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

PP isn't releasing his strategy at all.  No lies

So if you're not lying perhaps you're simply mistaken. But how can anyone be certain PP isn't lying, especially if they hear it from you?

[CdnFox]

28 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Let me guess, you didn't do your homework again did you?

LOL - sounds more like you didn't do yours You're the one making claims of him releasing "all sorts" of policies and plans,  so which ones are you referring to?  It wouldn't be my job to figure out what YOU meant

You just made it up didn't you   And now you look like a bit of a dim bulb.

30 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Your inability to understand anything you read is so legendary it's not surprising you can't understand yourself either 

Yeah - just because the voices in your head tell you something is so doesn't mean it is

So you made all that crap up too.  Yeah, lying about what people said so you can argue it is kind of your thing

32 minutes ago, eyeball said:

So if you're not lying perhaps you're simply mistaken. But how can anyone be certain PP isn't lying, especially if they hear it from you?

Because they didn't hear it from you  

You always have to lie to try to make your point.  You're a leftie - it's in your blood. And this is just another case in point

 

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You're the one making claims of him releasing "all sorts" of policies and plans,  so which ones are you referring to?  It wouldn't be my job to figure out what YOU meant

Actually you were the initial positive claimant on the topic of PP's policies and plans when you said If he's smart they're safely tucked away where nobody can possibly find it until the election starts.  You also plainly said PP isn't releasing his strategy at all.

In the meantime a googly search of PP including the terms strategy, policy, promise yields dozens of them. I also found this interesting take on PP and all the policies he's laid out by:

Ginny Roth is the National Practice Lead for Government Relations at Crestview Strategy and a long-time conservative activist who previously worked at Queen’s Park and as party organizer for the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario.

Ginny Roth: If you want to know how Pierre Poilievre would govern, try listening to him

So, what explains the constant refrain that while Poilievre has increased his likeability, painted broad strokes, and given us hints, he’s light on policy and either doesn’t have a plan or if he does have one, he’s hiding it?

First, it’s important to address the matter of policy commitments directly. It’s hard to dismiss the assertion that Poilievre is a policy lightweight without, practically speaking, just writing an exhaustive list of the various policies he’s committed to. I’ll spare readers such a list and simply say that a few hours and an internet connection reveal there’s almost no federal department and current ministerial mandate for which Poilievre hasn’t made multiple actionable policy commitments.

https://thehub.ca/2024-01-31/ginny-roth-if-you-want-to-know-what-poilievre-would-do-try-listening-to-him/

You figure this Ginny Roth is mistaken, lying or just doesn't know what she's talking about?

In any case you keep up the good work trying to convince anyone you have a clue what you're talking about and the honest effort you put out being a PP booster.

Like I said there'll be little excuse for a Poilievre to not have the sun rising in the west within months if not weeks of being elected especially given the immense power of a PMO, people's expectations and of course his multiple actionable policy commitments.

Of course if he can't deliver he can always blame Trudeau.

 

Edited February 27 by eyeball