Ten Reasons To Rethink Mass Immigration To Canada

[Nationalist]

Psst... @carepov

Only liars and traitors will try to excuse this chickenshit.

They will be tracked down and unceremoniously deported.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, carepov said:

In 1966 we had 20 Million people.  Canadians are way better off today, and our infrastructure in also way better.

 

Not really.  Technology has improved but actually people were wealthier and had more opportunity economically speaking starting around 66 and leading into the 70's. 

But that's not really about population, it's about the speed of population growth.  we wouldn' have a problem if our growth was equal to the growth in infrastructure (housing, medical facilities etc) 

[CDN1]

 

More diversity, more conflict.

Just look at what is going on in the UK and Europe now. That region is poised for major violent unrest due to cucked impotent Western leaders who are actively importing a foreign army.

How anyone could watch this playing out and proceed to double down on repeating the same mistake here is treason.

Edited July 31 by CDN1

[carepov]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Not really.  Technology has improved but actually people were wealthier and had more opportunity economically speaking starting around 66 and leading into the 70's. 

But that's not really about population, it's about the speed of population growth.  we wouldn' have a problem if our growth was equal to the growth in infrastructure (housing, medical facilities etc) 

It is a myth that the average person was better off in the past.  Canadian Real GDP per capita chart tells a good story of wealth.  We are at least 50% richer now compared to the 70's

The other part of the story is how much cheaper most things are now (after adjusting for inflation).  Check our the book Superabundance.

[Michael Hardner]

8 minutes ago, carepov said:

It is a myth that the average person was better off in the past.  Canadian Real GDP per capita chart tells a good story of wealth.  We are at least 50% richer now compared to the 70's

The other part of the story is how much cheaper most things are now (after adjusting for inflation).  Check our the book Superabundance.

Almost all GDP gains have gone to the investors.  We're competing against low Labour costs globally so many many people are worse off.

[CdnFox]

45 minutes ago, carepov said:

It is a myth that the average person was better off in the past. 

Nope. 

Canadian Real GDP per capita chart tells a good story of wealth.  We are at least 50% richer now compared to the 70's

Nope.  You forgot inflation.  A dollar now is not worth what a dollar was then.  And not just purchasing power inflation but the costs of things like regulation and such. 

In 1973 ish a young couple starting out at age 25-30 who was of average income could expect to purchase a nice home more than large enough to raise a family comfortably even in many of the metro areas or suburbs. They could expect to own a few toys comfortably such as  a nice boat or camper, they would  have been able to feed their family well (sometimes too well).  Medical services were free and easily accessed, if you went to hospital you had a room. 

It is the absolute truth that the quality of life was better. 

Now  go to 1983 and things take a dip. Inflation runs away,  we have stagflation etc.  But it recovers in the 90's. 

But now? No sorry it's not even close.  People spend about 75 percent or more on taxes and shelter alone, leaving just 25 percent for other things, and our gdp per capita vs inflation is not good and getting worse. 

We have a long way to go to get back to where we were. 

[I am Groot]

6 hours ago, carepov said:

Successfully integrating immigrants is Canada's super-power.  Many times in our history we have brought in more than 1% of our population (where we are now).

That was before multiculturalism, before the government's message to newcomers was "Stay as you are!", and before the government's message about Canada was not one of pride but disgust and contempt. Why should newcomers want to integrate into a whole racist society where they will be nothing but oppressed victims?

Besides, even before Trudeau jacked up immigration, refugee intake, foreign students and foreign workers we were having hard time integrating newcomers. Ethnic ghettoes are expanding, fewer immigrants are becoming citizens, and fewer are learning English or French.

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada officials are digesting a significant report that defines absorptive capacity as “a two-way process that encourages adjustment on the part of both the newcomer and the receiving society.”

Indeed, the internal report, obtained under an access to information request, shows that immigration analysts are worried that the “absorptive capacity” of Canada is going down.

“Declining outcomes of recent immigrants have shown that integration is not automatic,” says the report, which surveys emerging problems with immigration flows and the pressure it’s putting on Canadian sectors.

 

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

[I am Groot]

6 hours ago, carepov said:

In 1966 we had 20 Million people.  Canadians are way better off today, and our infrastructure in also way better.

Barring technological and scientific progress, no, we are not.

This is a comparison of the cost of major purchases today vs 1972. As it's American it actually understates how bad things are in Canada today.

https://www.marketplace.org/2022/08/17/money-and-millennials-the-cost-of-living-in-2022-vs-1972/

Edited July 31 by I am Groot

[I am Groot]

Other countries are very choosy about who they let in. And they put the responsibility on the would-be immigrant to demonstrate that they want to integrate into the majority population. Before you can gain citizenship you will be interviewed and have to show what efforts you've made, like improving your language skills, like joining clubs and making friends that are not geared to your countrymen/ethnicity/religious group, learning about the nation's culture, being able to demonstrate you have the kind of societal understanding and knowledge and tolerance of those who live there. Also, any run-in with the law threatens not only your ability to obtain citizenship, but your ability to stay there. The Swiss are particularly adamant about this.

Now compare this to Canada. We require virtually nothing. And the citizenship test is a 20 question true/false and multiple choice questionnaire on a single page. No interview. As for run-ins with the law, our sappy, hand-wringing, bleeding-heart judges will actually give refugees and permanent residents a sentence that won't interfere with their efforts to get citizenship. Even if they're guilty of sexual assault. 

Edited July 31 by I am Groot

[carepov]

9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Nope.  You forgot inflation.  A dollar now is not worth what a dollar was then.  And not just purchasing power inflation but the costs of things like regulation and such. 

"Real" means that the dollars are adjusted for inflation.

[carepov]

I call BS on all of claiming that the median Canadian had a better/more comfortable life in the 50s/60s/70s/80s/90s...

First, most importantly look at the poverty rate, especially child poverty, if I remember correctly it was 15 % and is well bellow 10% now.

How many kids went hungry then compared to now?

How many people ate out at restaurants back then.  There are more f'n sushi joints now than there were total restaurants.

How often did people travel on sunny vacations?

Wanna talk housing, what was he square footage of an average house back then? How many bathrooms?  And divide that by the number of people lining in each home?

We used to spend 25-30 % of total income on food, it was as as low as 11% recently but is probably 15 % now.  Look at the selection in the supermarket compared to back then!

Take the median Canadian from the good ole days and zip them to the present and they would call us lazy whiney spoiled brats!

[cougar]

On 7/23/2024 at 4:09 AM, Nationalist said:

Canadians...stand in guard for your own lands and culture...for a change.

This should have happened a very, very long time ago.  Now it is a lost cause.  They have taken over indeed.  No matter which small Canadian s* h* place you go to, the East Indians are already there , well established like weeds that have been given all proper conditions to flourish.

But the country is messed up with giving a different set of rights to indigenous indians and it all goes down the drain from there on.

Put East Indians or Chinese in key government position and then guess whose interests they will represent.

 

[CdnFox]

31 minutes ago, carepov said:

"Real" means that the dollars are adjusted for inflation.

They may be adjusted for the inflation rate based on the 'basket of goods' which is somewhat useful but is not the same as actual inflation that people experience. there are a number of things they do to 'levelize' the rate and it often doesn't reflect lived experience. 

As a silly example to give the idea, if beef goes up 10 percent but anchovy paste goes down 5 percent they will report that groceries went up an average of 5 percent.  But how much anchovy paste do you buy?

There is also tech inflation. In 1970 you were lucky to have one phone line per household.  ANd that's all that was needed because the world adapted to that.  You MIGHT have had cable tv, but many if not most did not. 

NOW  you pretty much have to have a cell for every teen or older in the house (50 bucks per phone on a family plan avg), you really can't get away without internet (90 bucks a month) even if you don't have cable tv.  Those are expenses that weren't necessary in the past. 

THe percent of money people used to spend on housing and groceries was well under 35 percent in the past, now for many it's over that just for the housing  and the food is a lot more. As a young guy renting a home in the 80's i paid about 28 percent of my income and i didn't have great income, nowadays even people with above average income can find themselves paying well over 35 percent

Objectively it's harder to get by right now. 

 

[CdnFox]

28 minutes ago, carepov said:

I call BS on all of claiming that the median Canadian had a better/more comfortable life in the 50s/60s/70s/80s/90s...

First, most importantly look at the poverty rate, especially child poverty, if I remember correctly it was 15 % and is well bellow 10% now.

They changed the definitions of impoverished. They can no longer be measured directly.

 

Quote

How many people ate out at restaurants back then.  There are more f'n sushi joints now than there were total restaurants.

People ate out at restaurants all the time. But they also ate at home more because women could afford to stay at home and cook. The reason people go out more now is they don't have the time. Which puts even further burden on their expenses.

Quote

How often did people travel on sunny vacations?

 

Constantly. And they took trips across the country and did a lot more outdoor activities like camping and boating and fishing and hunting. We would spend two or three weeks at a time on the boat, nowadays it would be financially extremely difficult to do that.

Quote

Wanna talk housing, what was he square footage of an average house back then? How many bathrooms?  And divide that by the number of people lining in each home?

Homes were considerably bigger then. A young couple starting off might very well find themselves in a nice three bedroom home. A young couple starting off today would barely be able to afford a one bedroom condo

Quote

We used to spend 25-30 % of total income on food, it was as as low as 11% recently but is probably 15 % now.  Look at the selection in the supermarket compared to back then!

You are completely out to lunch (pun intended  ) There was never a time when we spent anywhere close to 30 percent. Maybe in some town in the yukon or something.  But nope, no where near that for the average person. 

It might be that if only one person was working the house hold might spend about 15 percent back in the day but honestly food was cheaper. Except eggs and milk and such. 

Quote

Take the median Canadian from the good ole days and zip them to the present and they would call us lazy whiney spoiled brats!

As a median canadian from the good ole days - yes you're a lazy whiny group    But  that's a seperate issue. 

Right now the kids have it harder than young people in the 70's did. The early 80's were tough but the 90's were better. 

[cougar]

On 7/24/2024 at 8:45 AM, CdnFox said:

 AND we're not giving enough time for them to integrate before the next batch lands. 

There is no real integration anyways.  You do not integrate to a totally mixed up and messed up society and a lack of culture.  You just get to function in that mess somehow by getting a job and becoming part of the government's game of growing GDP and the taxes they collect.

The idea has always been to kick wildlife out and replace with some form of tax paying homo sapiens.  

 

[CdnFox]

16 minutes ago, cougar said:

There is no real integration anyways.  You do not integrate to a totally mixed up and messed up society and a lack of culture.  You just get to function in that mess somehow by getting a job and becoming part of the government's game of growing GDP and the taxes they collect.

The idea has always been to kick wildlife out and replace with some form of tax paying homo sapiens.  

 

Call it what you will, people do learn the ways of the local culture, they establish themselves in the job market and begin to build a track record, they find stable housing and begin to put down ties in their community. They become, as you say, functional. At that point they don't need "help", they can continue on thier path themselves.

Then the resources that went to get them settled can go to someone else. 

But it takes years in some cases, and meanwhile people are still flooding in and suddenly there aren't enough resources to go around which makes things worse and you wind up with an ever-growing number of unhappy and scared people who begin to get a little desperate.  

And that's a recipe for serious disaster. 

[carepov]

10 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Objectively it's harder to get by right now. 

 

Check this out from https://humanprogress.org/

 

 

 

Edited August 1 by carepov

[carepov]

21 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Almost all GDP gains have gone to the investors.  We're competing against low Labour costs globally so many many people are worse off.

https://humanprogress.org/trends/working-less-for-more/

[ironstone]

That's an awful lot of charts. But perspective changes when we fill up our car or go to buy groceries. There is a housing shortage. There are serious issues with health care, specifically long wait times and way too many people without a family doctor. 

We have had mass immigration for a long time, so if it's so beneficial, why do we still have these chronic issues?

Multiculturalism is another can of worms.

[PIK]

People are not as happy as they used to be. To much stress, jyst to stay afloat. We need a pause on immigration ,refugees and such, and clean up the mess. Populations will be dropping around the world, but not in N.A.  N.A is going to become a cess pool.

[Michael Hardner]

37 minutes ago, ironstone said:

 

We have had mass immigration for a long time, so if it's so beneficial, why do we still have these chronic issues?

 

It's just one aspect of the economy,, which as I'm sure you can appreciate is massively complex.

[ironstone]

9 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's just one aspect of the economy,, which as I'm sure you can appreciate is massively complex.

I think immigration levels have a huge impact on housing and health care. How could they not?

https://financialpost.com/diane-francis/trudeau-immigration-housing-health-breaking-point

In the fall, the federal government said it was on track to admitting a record 431,000 immigrants in 2022. That number doesn’t include the many “non-permanent residents,” such as guest workers and international students (and their families), who all need places to live, and some of whom gain access to Canada’s crumbling and understaffed universal health-care system.

CIBC’s report said the total number of newcomers in 2022, including “non-permanent residents,” was an estimated 955,000, which represents “an unprecedented swing in housing demand in a single year that is currently not fully reflected in official figures.”

According to Benjamin Tal, managing director and deputy chief economist at CIBC Capital Markets, “Any discussion regarding the housing market in Canada starts and ends with references to the growing number of new immigrants and to the government’s aggressive targets that are aimed at lifting the number of new immigrants by no less than 75 per cent relative to pre-pandemic levels by 2025. This in an environment in which the rental market is getting tighter by the day.”

This is one of the reasons why health care is flailing, housing is unaffordable, roads are clogged and infrastructure projects never keep up with demand — and it’s only going to get worse as the government continues to let in record numbers of newcomers. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government is reducing the living standards of Canadians while at the same time attacking the country’s economic base and resource industries.

[blackbird]

The federal government says they are going to hold immigration at 5% of the Canadian population for the next 3 years.

That is no reduction.  5% of 40 million people is two million people.  That means the government is going to bring in about 666,000 people per year for the next three years.  That is a huge number. That might not include other categories as well.

[carepov]

10 hours ago, CdnFox said:

They changed the definitions of impoverished. They can no longer be measured directly.

 

People ate out at restaurants all the time. But they also ate at home more because women could afford to stay at home and cook. The reason people go out more now is they don't have the time. Which puts even further burden on their expenses.

Constantly. And they took trips across the country and did a lot more outdoor activities like camping and boating and fishing and hunting. We would spend two or three weeks at a time on the boat, nowadays it would be financially extremely difficult to do that.

Homes were considerably bigger then. A young couple starting off might very well find themselves in a nice three bedroom home. A young couple starting off today would barely be able to afford a one bedroom condo

You are completely out to lunch (pun intended  ) There was never a time when we spent anywhere close to 30 percent. Maybe in some town in the yukon or something.  But nope, no where near that for the average person. 

It might be that if only one person was working the house hold might spend about 15 percent back in the day but honestly food was cheaper. Except eggs and milk and such. 

As a median Canadian from the good ole days - yes you're a lazy whiny group    But  that's a seperate issue. 

Right now the kids have it harder than young people in the 70's did. The early 80's were tough but the 90's were better. 

Your facts are wrong.

Regarding poverty and food:

"Back in the early 1960s, when the American economist Mollie Orshansky defined the U.S. poverty level, she made a quick observation. Families spend about one third of household income on food. So, find out the cost of a cheap but adequately nutritious diet, triple it, and that’s the poverty line. That was meant to be just a quick and easy measure to use for a year or two while something more sensible was worked out. Sixty years later, we’re still using it – Milton Friedman did say there’s nothing so permanent as a temporary government program. Today American families spend a little under 10 percent of their income on food  – and that includes eating out, something the poor of the 1960s didn’t do, and even the middle class did only very rarely."

https://humanprogress.org/the-secret-recipe-for-civilization/?ref=topic&related=1827

Regarding housing, median square footage is way up:

Regarding leisure time, see previous charts about hours worked.  There are more charts about the decrease in housework, the increase of leisure time, the increase in travel.

To be clear, I'm not saying that life is perfect today.  There are certainly many challenges, however life is way better now than in your romanticized past. 

[Michael Hardner]

11 minutes ago, ironstone said:

I think immigration levels have a huge impact on housing and health care. How could they not?

 

I didn't say that they didn't.

 

For those aspects the impacts are more obvious. The government went too fast and too far despite warning signs, and inability to plan for the increase. 

 

For the economy as a whole, obviously there are benefits to well managed immigration.  The question posted above was rather open-ended.