Immigration a la Mark Steyn

[ScottSA]

This is a point often missed amidst the cacophany of platitudinous immigration-worship:

But here's the thing. Whatever the virtuousness of immigration, a dependence on it is a sign of profound structural weakness, and, when all the self-congratulation about celebrating diversity has died down, that weakness ought to be understood as such. For example, the other day Statistics Canada released its 2006 census figures, and the press coverage was mostly the usual boosterism--"Canadian Census Sees Cities Surging" (The Globe and Mail). This is true: we are an increasingly urban nation. But it is not the most salient fact from the numbers. Canada, reported the CBC, "had the highest population growth rate among G8 countries." Also true, and closer to the core statistic. Of the 1.6 million new Canadians added to the population between 2001 and 2006, only 400,000 came from natural growth--i.e., kids. The other 1.2 million--i.e., 75 per cent--came from immigration.

http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/inde...article_id=2412

[sharkman]

If we average 1.2 million a year from here out, added to our large immigration population already here, in ten years or so white Canadians will be a minority, and Canada will be much changed.

What a strange situation, but I prefer to see the glass half full. For instance, most of our immigration comes from the east rim nations which are known for their pro family conservative stance. A voting block to be listened to.

BTW, your link is asking for a password - no article.

[ScottSA]

If we average 1.2 million a year from here out, added to our large immigration population already here, in ten years or so white Canadians will be a minority, and Canada will be much changed.

What a strange situation, but I prefer to see the glass half full. For instance, most of our immigration comes from the east rim nations which are known for their pro family conservative stance. A voting block to be listened to.

BTW, your link is asking for a password - no article.

I would have printed the whole thing, but I understand it's against the rules. I think you can get a free membership to the western standard though.

[Wilber]

If we average 1.2 million a year from here out, added to our large immigration population already here, in ten years or so white Canadians will be a minority, and Canada will be much changed.

What a strange situation, but I prefer to see the glass half full. For instance, most of our immigration comes from the east rim nations which are known for their pro family conservative stance. A voting block to be listened to.

BTW, your link is asking for a password - no article.

I believe that was 1.2M between 2001 and 2006, not per year.

[sharkman]

whups, you are right, its over 5 or 6 years. But I believe my point still stands, if over a longer time period.

I think I'll try the free membership thing.

[guyser]

And our options for sustaining the growth are?

1.2M is a lot of people, but then we are losing some each year also . Thus the numbers of working immigrants is not in that figure.

What point is Steyn tryiong to make?

[JerrySeinfeld]

the general point of the article is an interesting one:

the tone of our country has changed from

"immigrants come here and integrate"

to one of:

"immigrants come here and Canada integrates"

I personally don't like that but some people think it's something to celebrate.

My opinion is that there are a lot of assbackward traditions and beliefs form many cultures that come here - many of which aren't pleasant and often contradict the other "progressive" values held by the many supporters of "cultural diversity at all costs".

I'd prefer to see a society where it's expceted that immigrants follow the basic values of the society we've built here - not viseversa.

The states is more that way - and I prefer it.

[Argus]

And our options for sustaining the growth are?

1.2M is a lot of people, but then we are losing some each year also . Thus the numbers of working immigrants is not in that figure.

What point is Steyn tryiong to make?

There is no economic justification for our high immigration rate. It is not needed to sustain our population. It is not needed for anything but political gain by the parties which cater to immigrants.

[ScottSA]

And our options for sustaining the growth are?

1.2M is a lot of people, but then we are losing some each year also . Thus the numbers of working immigrants is not in that figure.

What point is Steyn tryiong to make?

You should probably read the article.

[Figleaf]

While Steyn usually shows a notable lack of insight, perspective, empathy or talent, this is nevertheless and important topic for Canadians.

I don't think it is unreasonable for us to want to continue and improve our society along the lines which have served us so comparatively well over the last half century plus. It is questionable whether/how that can be done if our demographics skew markedly toward newcomers with little understanding or connection to how our society has succeeded so far. This is not racism or bigotry. Call it cultural chauvinism if you must, but it is justifiable.

The issue of declining birthrates among established Canadians and the concomitant reliance on immigration is a difficult challenge. But I must say we have not gotten serious yet about addressing the birthrate issue. If we want extant Canadians to have more children, wouldn't it make sense to discover and address the real negative incentives and hesitations that prevent it? So far there has been virtually no rational discourse on this subject. Token, haphazard tax credits are not a sensible response to the question.

Personally, I think some kind of reliable, accessible day care is going to be an ineluctible requirement. But that's probably only one of the ways we need to think about inspiring more childbearing. We should be able to assure prospective parents that their children will not have their prospects foreclosed by prohibitively priced university education, for example.

[mikedavid00]

If we average 1.2 million a year from here out, added to our large immigration population already here, in ten years or so white Canadians will be a minority, and Canada will be much changed.

Yes that's already known. 2025 will be the date.

What a strange situation, but I prefer to see the glass half full. For instance, most of our immigration comes from the east rim nations which are known for their pro family conservative stance. A voting block to be listened to.

That is false and proven false. Immigrants vote for parties that can 'get in' their relatives. Nothing else. They don't care for the most part to 'participate' and their votes are much different the meaning of your vote and mine. Yes many of the them are conservative in the home,

But this comes with xenephobia and sheer racism which I have been a victim of many times. I'm not talking about Lib, loser, CBC lefty racism which is not racism: I'm talking about sheer, pure, real racism.

[mikedavid00]

whups, you are right, its over 5 or 6 years. But I believe my point still stands, if over a longer time period.

The Liberals wanted to increase immigration to 800,000 a year before they were elected out of office.

I don't know if anyone has noticed, but Canada has a high natinoal unemployment rate.

We should not be letting people in the country - escpecially when 70% of them are through family sponsorship and even out of the skilled workers about half of them are actually working within their first year of being here.

Our system is meant to get votes for the Liberal party of Canada - nothing more.

[mikedavid00]

And our options for sustaining the growth are?

Let's see the full times jobs first then we can let people over on work permits to work our low wage jobs.

[mikedavid00]

I'd prefer to see a society where it's expceted that immigrants follow the basic values of the society we've built here - not viseversa.

The states is more that way - and I prefer it.

I completely agree.

The melting pot method has proven to work.

Cultural segregation has never proven to work - it only leeds to problems. Putting a name on it is still segragation.

It's a failed experminent.

[August1991]

Great, another immigration thread. And once again, the usual suspects will come out of the woodwork and blame all of the ills in Canada, from rising cancer rates to dying bees and global warming, on immigrants.

I'll quote myself as usual (with corrections for Argus):

In general, Canada takes in around 240,000 immigrants per year. Of these, about half (120,000) are admitted in the category of skilled workers, about a third (80,000) as family class and the rest (40,000) as refugees. Be cautious however. The 120,000 in the skilled worker categaory include dependants (children, spouse) so in fact, we only accept about 35,000 skilled workers.

In addition, Canada loses about 80,000 every year through emigration (primarily to the US). Hence, Canada's net immigration is around 160,000 each year. Statcan data

Incidentally, in per capita terms, we accepted more immigrants in the early 1900s than we do now.

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.

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

It is a credit to our societies that we allow individuals from around the world to come and live here and pursue their dreams in their own way.

The world's problem is not too few people; it has too many. North American society transmits well from generation to generation and to newcomers alike the basic values of a civilized society. We have been doing this successfully for centuries, largely because of the basic founding principles of the United States.

Steyn is wrong to claim that immigration is an indication of a society's failure. In the case of North America, it is rather a sign of success.

[mikedavid00]

I don't think it is unreasonable for us to want to continue and improve our society along the lines which have served us so comparatively well over the last half century plus.

That's the whole issues. It's not 'our' society anymore. It belongs to cultural special interest groups. 20 million dollars of Ontario's hard earned tax dollars got sent to immigrant groups that have 'ties to the Liberal party' while other groups did not get money. This is in the news here in Ontario. The Liberals voted down a motion to have an inquiry.

This is not our society. our society is about promoting stone-age idealism and culture which heavily relies on xenephobia, religion, and racsism.

If I had a dime for each time a first/second-gen south asian said the phrase "white girls are whores' i'd probably be rich. They think very, very lowely of Canadians for the most part and the net share of these groups have saturated our own culture to the point where we are not even allowed to say that it's 'our society' anymore. It now belongs to them. They will decide what their society is.

We just sit on the outside, bend over, and continue to fund them while looking on from the outside - never allowed in. One day we realize that we don't have a culture anymore.

It is questionable whether/how that can be done if our demographics skew markedly toward newcomers with little understanding or connection to how our society has succeeded so far. This is not racism or bigotry. Call it cultural chauvinism if you must, but it is justifiable.

Yes this thinking is the big thing in France and Europe these days. I'm suprised here in Canada we're still lagging behind and discussing whether ghettoziation is a good thing.

The issue of declining birthrates among establish Canadians and the concomitant reliance on immigration is a difficult challenge.

It's not difficult to challenge at all. About half of those coming here still aren't working after 5 years. They simply aren't here to partake in our workforce. This is why the US has a good policy and ours is bad.

Personally, I think some kind of reliable, accessible day care is going to be an ineluctible requirement.

For all the immigrants coming here who have never paid into the system and are already collecting tons of benefits?

[mikedavid00]

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

Lol.

The numbers you posted are highly missleading and you know it.

I proved previously that about 70% of immigrants are sponsored. Of those who are skilled, about half even work. I also proved that they used more social services and healthcare then the average Canadian.

You sit in montreal and see your multi-cultural society and like it.

You don't know real ghettoization. Come to Toronto and see the majority of Canada. When I go to Montreal (i'll be there in 2 weeks), I think 'wow look at all the white people'. And those immigrants that are there, are much, much more well integrated.

But you don't hold a candlstick to Vancouver and Southern Ontario as far as immigrants and ghettozation go.

So you really don't live in a ghettoized society.

[guyser]

I would read it , but a password is needed. I am challenged...

mikedavid, you have , well I was going to say never but somewhere in someplace I guess you have, virtually never proven anything with respect to immigration. I know it is your pet peeve, but really man you are like a broken 78 record .

So if immigration is not needed, then why is our employment level so low? If the USA doesnt need immigration why do they allow 12 million people to live in their country? I am guessing they get jobs and pay taxes, much the same as up here. Yes I understand the diffulculties in getting established, but they do and can get established. Hydraboss needs tons of people, he does the hiring so I have to believe him. He says there are not enough workers.....so are there or is he lying to us all.

Ghettos in Toronto...hmmmm.....care to show me exactly where? I know this city as well as anyone, and while their are some depressed pockets I am unaware of any ghettos. About the worst I can find is Vanauley Walk , which during day time I have been in and quite unafraid to be in. Perhaps at night I might say no way. VW does not have the ghetto image from looking at it. Maybe I dont know what a ghetto is? Tell me kind sir.

This fascination with immigrants , and immigrant bashing is pretty pathetic. It seems to stem from two camps, one being the the people who lost a job to an immigrant or were replaced by the better skilled immigrant, and the other camp are those that live in bucolic little towns that get upset when the town council puts in a new stop sign.

240,000 is gross newcomers. Whats the big deal? We lose 80G or so (Augusts post) and plenty more retiring,those that want to be stay at home moms, and then there are those that dont want to work, which is certainly not the immigrant nation.

Id love to see the stats done on a participant basis comparing the Canadian born vs the immigrant with respect to employment.

[Figleaf]

Yes that's already known. 2025 will be the date.

NO. The data you cited earlier in support of that date was for Muslim population overtaking Christian population around the whole world, not Canada.

[mikedavid00]

Yes that's already known. 2025 will be the date.

NO. The data you cited earlier in support of that date was for Muslim population overtaking Christian population around the whole world, not Canada.

Yes I was wrong about that because I got that link off a blog and didn't bother reading it. But 2025 is the time that Canada will have a majority of immigrants... or visible minorities.. can't remember now.

[Figleaf]

Yes I was wrong about that because I got that link off a blog and didn't bother reading it.

Um. Without trying to put too fine a point on this ... maybe there's a lesson for you.

[M.Dancer]

If we average 1.2 million a year from here out, added to our large immigration population already here, in ten years or so white Canadians will be a minority, and Canada will be much changed.

When I got married 10 years ago I retired from the exciting world of cross cultural polination, but if I remember correctly I had a very very good time......yes I say, there will be non white people out there who are yearning, hungaring, writhing even, to get to know us better...embrace them maKe them part of your family......

[geoffrey]

If we average 1.2 million a year from here out, added to our large immigration population already here, in ten years or so white Canadians will be a minority, and Canada will be much changed.

Why do you assume all immigrants are non-white?

[mikedavid00]

embrace them maKe them part of your family......

What??

You should ask THEM to make US part of THEIR families. That's where the real problem is.

[Figleaf]

...yes I say, there will be non white people out there who are yearning, hungaring, writhing even, to get to know us better...

Now you're talking -- Sample every hue and cry.