Charter of Rights: 25 Years Later

[guyser]

What does it say about us as a nation that we need immigration to survive?

It says that we are growing and the current pop cannot provide for all the jobs that are there.

Isn't that something worth fixing BEFORE we start inviting the third world here? Is it appropriate to commit ethnic suicide?

As for the first part, we cannot fix that "something" being the need for more people without getting....more people?

As for the second, well thats just pure folly . I dont see, and frankly neither do you, the ethnic suicide occurring. Only if one imagines it, does it then become true and only in ones mind.

The cost of floodgate immigration is the destruction of Canada, its people and its culture. It's all very well to celebrate "colourful street festivals", "diversity" and "vibrancy" and all the happy happy words that go with hiding one's head in the sand, but reality will one day intrude.

Perhaps the view looking into the sand has misconstrued the view you have.

But perhaps no one is celebrating...Maple Syrup Festivals , Canada Day festivals, Thanksgiving, Christmas,Winter Carnival.....yes, our culture and people are under attack.

Thanks, I will run for the hills now. Or small town BC ?

[August1991]

This thread has gone all over Hell's half acre. I'll take it from there.

You're quite mistaken. We accept far more than average, and, so far as I know, more than anyone on Earth. We certainly, on a per capita basis, accept more than the US. And many countries don't accept any immigrants or refugees. And our standards for immigration are, again, so far as I know, lower than any other country on Earth. People come here who can't get into the US or Australia or England or France.

You are wrong, Argus.

Let me quote myself:

In general, Canada takes in around 200,000 immigrants per year. Of these, about half (100,000) are admitted in the category of skilled workers, about a third (70,000) as family class and the rest (30,000) as refugees. Be cautious however. The 100,000 in the skilled worker categaory include dependants (children, spouse) so in fact, we only accept about 30,000 skilled workers.

In addition, Canada loses about 70,000 every year through emigration (primarily to the US). Hence, Canada's net immigration is around 130,000 each year. Statcan data

Incidentally, we accepted more immigrants in the early 1900s than we do now in absolute numbers. (In per capita terms, the difference is even more stark.)

In per capita terms, Australia accepts more net migrants than we do. In the past ten years or so, net migration to Australia has been around 120,000 annually. Australia's population is around 20 million. Australian government

Between 2000 and 2006, the US accepted about 7.6 million net migrants, or about 1.25 million annually. On a per capita basis, that's about the same as Canada accepted. US Census

The US accepts its so-called skilled immigrants by lottery. We and Australia attempt to select such immigrants by skill set.

----

We live in a world where people (thankfully) have the means to travel and borders are porous. It would be wrong to imagine that we can absolutely control who enters or resides in Canada. We cannot isolate ourselves from the world around us.

Moreover, Canada, Australia and the US are dynamic societies because they view immigration in pragmatic terms.

Let me make a prediction about the future (and go off on a tangent).

In 100 or 200 years, the notion of citizenship and government will change. At present, these are largely based on geographic territory. In the future, these will be based on allegiance or membership.

Even now, a person can be a Canadian citizen, pay Canadian taxes, vote in Canadian elections, contribute to a Canadian state pension and benefit from Canadian state health insurance - and yet, not live in Canada. The Canadian government has passed laws that apply to Canadian citizens outside of Canada.

If you want to know the future, look at what "rich" people are doing now. Conrad Black, a British citizen, is in an American court for the affairs of a Canadian company. Thomas Mulcair and Stephane Dion, both Canadian politicians, are voting in French elections.

To return to the subject of the OP, I don't know what the Charter will do in such a future world. At some point in the future, the Canadian government will charge a Canadian citizen for activities in Mexico (or another foreign country) and the Canadian citizen will use the Charter in defence. Then, the Supreme Court (of Canada) will have to decide whether the Charter applies.

[Charles Anthony]

Let me make a prediction about the future (and go off on a tangent).

In 100 or 200 years, the notion of citizenship and government will change. At present, these are largely based on geographic territory. In the future, these will be based on allegiance or membership.

Let me go off tangent too and say that all we need is to have smaller countries.

At some point in the future, the Canadian government will charge a Canadian citizen for activities in Mexico (or another foreign country) and the Canadian citizen will use the Charter in defence. Then, the Supreme Court (of Canada) will have to decide whether the Charter applies.

At which point, state power will be balanced by the power to negotiate between countries.

[Argus]

This thread has gone all over Hell's half acre. I'll take it from there.

You're quite mistaken. We accept far more than average, and, so far as I know, more than anyone on Earth. We certainly, on a per capita basis, accept more than the US. And many countries don't accept any immigrants or refugees. And our standards for immigration are, again, so far as I know, lower than any other country on Earth. People come here who can't get into the US or Australia or England or France.

You are wrong, Argus.

No, I'm absolutely right. You're simply being anal about statistical interpretations.

Let me quote myself:In general, Canada takes in around 200,000 immigrants per year.

It's more like 240k, and that is a higher percentage than any other country on Earth. If you have counter figures I'd appreciate seeing them.

Nothing else of what you wrote has any bearing on the question at hand. I don't care how many Canadians leave each year. THe question was how many immigrants and refugees we take in.

We live in a world where people (thankfully) have the means to travel and borders are porous. It would be wrong to imagine that we can absolutely control who enters or resides in Canada. We cannot isolate ourselves from the world around us.

You mean like the Swiss or the Japanese, because their countries are such utter failures as a result of that isolation.

In 100 or 200 years, the notion of citizenship and government will change. At present, these are largely based on geographic territory. In the future, these will be based on allegiance or membership.

Only if the wide gulf between cultures narrows considerably, not to mention the wealth gap.

[August1991]

You mean like the Swiss or the Japanese, because their countries are such utter failures as a result of that isolation.

Fine, Argus. Let us become the Switzerland or Japan of the New World.

It is foolish to believe that any country cannot be isolated from the rest of the world in the future. The economic cost of isolation will be too great for government bureaucrats/leaders. (eg. Burma, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Iran and North Korea.)

The traditional response to incorrect behaviour is ostracism.

Edited November 2, 2007 by August1991

[ScottSA]

Fine, Argus. Let us become the Switzerland or Japan of the New World.

It is foolish to believe that any country cannot be isolated from the rest of the world in the future. The economic cost of isolation will be too great for government bureaucrats/leaders. (eg. Burma, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Iran and North Korea.)

You're mixing concepts here. To equate limiting immigration to radical and complete isolationism is ridiculous. Of course we can control our own borders. Quite easily. We can't stop every single person from coming here, but we can sure as hell stop inviting them here, and make it difficult for them to survive if they do manage to make it. You're just muddying the waters.

[Hydraboss]

"Closing the borders" does not have to involve constructing a wall around the country. Burn that useless piece of parchment called the Charter, and let's start again. Change the wording from "person" to "citizen", and don't extend ANY rights to non-citizens. If you're not Canadian, you don't get to share in our rights.

Freedom of Speech

Freedom of Religion

Freedom to Own Property

Freedom to Assemble and Drink Beer

That's about it.

Immigration is a whole other can of worms. Close the border to those that we do not need. ANY hint of criminal activity....here's your boat now. Bye. Enter the country under false pretenses or with fake documents....here's your boat. Bye. Marry a Canadian to stay in the country? Now both of you can have seats beside each other on the boat. Guess your new spouse is a citizen of YOUR country now.

Let an Albertan run the Immigration Department.

[no queenslave]

"Closing the borders" does not have to involve constructing a wall around the country. Burn that useless piece of parchment called the Charter, and let's start again. Change the wording from "person" to "citizen", and don't extend ANY rights to non-citizens. If you're not Canadian, you don't get to share in our rights.

Freedom of Speech

Freedom of Religion

Freedom to Own Property

Freedom to Assemble and Drink Beer

That's about it.

Immigration is a whole other can of worms. Close the border to those that we do not need. ANY hint of criminal activity....here's your boat now. Bye. Enter the country under false pretenses or with fake documents....here's your boat. Bye. Marry a Canadian to stay in the country? Now both of you can have seats beside each other on the boat. Guess your new spouse is a citizen of YOUR country now.

Quote-

Thanks for telling us your priorities-Drinking beer and telling us your propaganda.

No innocent till proven guilty in a fair independent court.

no constitution for and by the people to control governments.

no right to have the politicians to obey the constitution as ratified by the sovereign people.

We don't need a charter of rights because we are born free sovereign people and have all the rights and the government has only the rights we give them in a democratic government.

Just look at Pakastan as an example of how government rights can be taken away.

In Canada Trudeau gave you rights which he got from alice in wonderland and then took them away with the nothwithstanding clause.

Federal personal income tax is a form of slavery-control by corrupt dictators, telling you you have a democrasy.

[Michael Bluth]

Federal personal income tax is a form of slavery-control by corrupt dictators, telling you you have a democrasy.

So you are saying you don't like income tax?

[Hydraboss]

It's kind of a veiled statement....but I agree. I don't think it likes income tax.

I could be wrong, though.

[Charles Anthony]

There have been some off-topic personal discussions in this thread that border on placing Maple Leaf Web in legal hot water. This thread was pulled temporarily from public view to evaluate the legal implications behind the posts. Some of those posts were deleted.

I suggest that all members use their best judgement to avoid any exchange of legal advice be it amateur or professional.

[Michael Bluth]

I suggest that all members use their best judgement to avoid any exchange of legal advice be it amateur or professional.

Is that your legal opinion?

[no queenslave]

It's kind of a veiled statement....but I agree. I don't think it likes income tax.

I could be wrong, though.

IT is not a veiled statement- Personal income tax as practiced by the federal government is a form of slavery-control by the federal government in the name of the queen.

If you want clarification from the queen ask her representive in your province . If you saw how the attorney general conducted himself on tv today you would understand he is just a puppet.

FEDERAL PERSONAL INCOME TAX IS A FORM OF SLAVERY_CONTROL practiced by the federal government.

"IT IS NOT A COURT CASE THAT DETERMINED YOU OWED MONEY" quote by bk 59

Just some corrupt government employ .

Edited November 15, 2007 by no queenslave

[DrGreenthumb]

What I find interesting is how often the immigrant bashing posts come from the conservative posters. Same with the gay bashing posts. Also the white race is under attack posts seem to come from the same faction. Do you people really wonder why most of us consider you redneck racist idiots? Listen to the garbage that comes out of your mouths. Just because somone is different than you does not mean they are attacking you. Fearful, small minded, cowards, is all I see. You racsist posters know who I am talking about, i'll not name you.

I do have to ask the Alberta redneck, Hydra is beer the only intoxicant people have a right to gather and consume, or does this freedom apply to less dangerous intoxicants like cannabis?

[M.Dancer]

He's different..and he attacks.....

+1 Irony

[no queenslave]

still no right of innocent in tax court. just corrupt judges.