Harper hails opening of grand Hindu temple

[guyser]

That was Martin who encouraged Canadians to but new cars and homes.

Huh? He encouraged Canadians to buy cars and houses...so whats wrong with your fellow brethren doing just that? Oh wait you meant the non white non christians ,silly me.

So how does it feel to have made lots money from immigrant purchases, for you surely have done so.Every home sale generates $30,000 in incendiary income.

Hmm, talk out of one side and something else entirely out of the other side of the mouth.

Here we are struggling with the impact of high ratio foreign immigration in Canada and Renegade tries to counter the effects of ethnic immigration in Canada, to highly populated cities in the U.S. whereas a garbage collector in New York City makes 80k a year.

Who is struggling ?

High ratio...you think 240,000 in a nation of 30M is high ratio? Its not , but maybe your math sucks, I dont know.

80K a year for garbage men? I think renegade is right you did pull that out of your posterior. Kind of takes even more away from your arguement , and for what it is worth, there isnt much left considering there was precious little to start with.

How about $27,842 as a start , and with seniority it soars...I mean soars to $44,441 in five years. Let me guess, you quoted CDN dollars from 1998.

Whatever you consider the reason, they are destabilizing housing in major Canadian cities by creating an artificial growth factor that normally would take years, compared to Canadian couples raising families from birth to self sustaining adults.

This is what happens when the federal government allows high ratio immigration (grown up adults) to be unleashed on cities WITHOUT THE PROPER INFRASTRUCTURE, demand dramatically exceeds supply and housing cost skyrocket.

Infrastructure is already in place. Housing sales are up 26% in this city and everyone selling a house is quite happy with the prices. Make money, spend money. Again, if you own a house you have made money.

You have argued that this country does not need immigrants , and yet here you are concerned about infrastructure for the same people. Make up your mind.

[Leafless]

I care very little what words you use to describe me. It just clearly shows your ignorance of the use of the English language. The same language you treasure as part of Canadian culture. BTW, there are many remedial programs which will help you improve your grasp of the language.

You are the ignorant one.

An advocate is a "person who speaks in favour" and that my dear Renegade can refer to supporting the milking of cows or supporting chlorinated water etc, etc. An advocate is a general word to describe anything anyone might be in favour of.

A spokesman, contrary to an advocate is "a person who speaks on behalf of others esp. in the course of public relations" or "a person deputed to express the views of a group". Definition obtained from the hardcover edition of the 'Concise Oxford Dictionary'.

Pertaining to this thread and 'ethnics' and another thread to 'homosexuals' it is clear you are expressing the views associated with certain' GROUPS and not generalities BUT namely groups 'ethnics' and 'homosexuals'.

Therefore IMO it is more accurate to describe your efforts speaking on behalf of a groups interest as a spokesman.

You say that, you've even said goodbye, but yet you keep appearing in this thread.

I decided otherwise. Why should 'I allow a citizen of the world' to beat down Canadian culture.

OK, since you insist. I will make it a plain and simple as possible.

Nothing, not before the Charter or after, prevents English White Christian Canadians from practicing their culture. That applies to religion, language or cultural practices.

Why should it is since the creation of the country our Canadian culture.

The only limits to personal actions to enact cultural practices is if such a practice trangresses the rights of others.

According to math. Go ahead calculate it if you can.

That is BS and you know it, as there other factors related to excess immigration that can destroy a country.

The federal government has failed to properly supply the required infrastructure to accommodate the predicted 1% immigration rate of Canada's total population, which works out to about 330,000 new immigrants every year.

Who's houses are these immigrants buying from a housing supply not meant to accommodate full grown adult immigrants unleashed on Canadian cities? Who's subsided housing are these immigrants using from a supply not meant to accommodate hordes of new immigrants?

I'm sure if it was non-subjective I could look it up, however it is a subjective assessment so I ask you. When waves of immigrants came post-WWII did you consider that high-ratio ethnic immigration? Or do they only count as "ethnic" if they have darker skin.

I certainly don't consider post-WWII immigration excessive.

[Leafless]

Got any proof of this? Even if he did, do you not think that Canadians are capable of making up their own minds?

When Martin said this it was not a separate article and what that original article was, I don't remember. But the article in question was printed in the Ottawa Citizen, when martin was PM. This has got nothing to do with Canadians making up their own minds but that a PM was unethically pushing the interest of namely banks and big buisness.

Most of those who did buy houses are no doubt thankful as prices have increased over the last 10 years.

And the rate housing is increasing these house won't be resold to Whitey's, who won't be able to afford them, but ACTUALLY reserving them them to fulfill the interest of well heeled ethnics. Talk about a degenerated country!

Is that another figure you have pulled from your ass?

I would gladly supply the link, but with the courtesy and language you are using, you can FU%^K&*! well PISS* OFF.

Ok let me rephrase in language which is more to your liking.

UP YOURS, YOU ARROGANT, CONDESCENDING LITTLE MAN, OR WHATEVER YOU ARE!

Since you have indicated that you do not support the effects of poorer immigrants nor the effects of richer immigrants, is there any economic class of immigrants you do support?

I support regulated immigration to protect ALL AREAS of Canadian interest, unlike yourself.

If you think that there is onl a single reason for the pricing effect on housing, then you are economicly naive. I don't have the time or patience to explain it to you.

DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT IT.

And I, Leafless, am astounded at how you can narrowly focus so many problems of society and find a single group to act as a scapegoat for your percieved set of societal problems.

It is not my fault the federal government chose ethnics as the main source of immigration.

Like I previously said, what the government is doing to Canada in the way of immigration is a 'slap in the face' to organized Canadian society and a 'slap in the face' to the citizens of Canada who worked so hard to achieve this.

[Renegade]

A spokesman, contrary to an advocate is "a person who speaks on behalf of others esp. in the course of public relations" or "a person deputed to express the views of a group".

Soooo, who "deputed" me??? Funny I don't remember being "deputed".

Why should it is since the creation of the country our Canadian culture.

Ok, if we both agree that there is White English Christian Canadians have no restrictions on practiciing their culture, language and religion, there shouldn't be a complaint, right?

That is BS and you know it, as there other factors related to excess immigration that can destroy a country.

Actually I don't know it. Yes I agree too much immigration can overwhelm a country, however it is not clear what is "too much".

The federal government has failed to properly supply the required infrastructure to accommodate the predicted 1% immigration rate of Canada's total population, which works out to about 330,000 new immigrants every year.

What infrastructure are you expecting?

Who's houses are these immigrants buying from a housing supply not meant to accommodate full grown adult immigrants unleashed on Canadian cities?

Huh?? The housing supply is "not meant to accommodate full grown adult immigrants"??? Why are the houses only built for whites and kids?

Who's subsided housing are these immigrants using from a supply not meant to accommodate hordes of new immigrants?

Personally, I don't think subsidized housing should be made available to anyone.

I certainly don't consider post-WWII immigration excessive.

So then again, the question remains, when did the excessive immgration begin?

[Renegade]

When Martin said this it was not a separate article and what that original article was, I don't remember. But the article in question was printed in the Ottawa Citizen, when martin was PM. This has got nothing to do with Canadians making up their own minds but that a PM was unethically pushing the interest of namely banks and big buisness.

So, yet another allegation without a cite. I'll bet you though, that most Canadians who bought a house when Martin was PM are glad they did.

And the rate housing is increasing these house won't be resold to Whitey's, who won't be able to afford them, but ACTUALLY reserving them them to fulfill the interest of well heeled ethnics. Talk about a degenerated country!

Sooo, what's your theory of how "whiteys" got so poor and "ethnics" got so well-heeled?

I would gladly supply the link, but with the courtesy and language you are using, you can FU%^K&*! well PISS* OFF.

Oh please, please, please, Leafless, pretty please pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeese supply us a link...there is that better??

UP YOURS, YOU ARROGANT, CONDESCENDING LITTLE MAN, OR WHATEVER YOU ARE!

It seems Leafless is a littled pissed... Poor Leafless.

I support regulated immigration to protect ALL AREAS of Canadian interest, unlike yourself.

Actually you never asked me so you don't know what I would support, and acually, yes I do support tighter restrictions and regulations on immigrants. I do happen to believe that immigrants should be accepted based upon whether they serve the interest of Canada. I just happen to disagree with you on what those interest are.

DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT IT.

I'm not. It would be a waste of time and effort.

It is not my fault the federal government chose ethnics as the main source of immigration.

It's not the ethnic immigrant's fault either. I expect that ethnics make up the bulk of the applicants for immigration.

Like I previously said, what the government is doing to Canada in the way of immigration is a 'slap in the face' to organized Canadian society and a 'slap in the face' to the citizens of Canada who worked so hard to achieve this.

It appears there is a small racist minority which needs that slap in the face. They may need a kick in the rear to boot.

[Leafless]

Soooo, who "deputed" me??? Funny I don't remember being "deputed".

You appointed yourself, by your own hand, as a citizen of the world. You would not recognize that fact since you are oblivious to your own self righteousness.

Ok, if we both agree that there is White English Christian Canadians have no restrictions on practiciing their culture, language and religion, there shouldn't be a complaint, right?

What does that have to do with immigrants destroying Canadians quality of life and their current cultural status quo?

What infrastructure are you expecting?

Currently our infrastructure is being maxed out to the limit, including electric power generation, highways, streets, roads, water supply, waste management as well as existing infrastructure rapidly decaying.

But outside of infrastructure, housing is not being addressed in the proper manner to accommodate 330,000 new immigrants yearly. Lower interest rates is only a stop gap method of allowing people who can not afford higher priced housing into the market. Of course this includes immigrant and native Canadian but encourages even further hikes in housing prices.

Old existing housing and infrastructure common to our current cultural status quo is not the answer IMO to address these large numbers of immigrants.

Huh?? The housing supply is "not meant to accommodate full grown adult immigrants"??? Why are the houses only built for whites and kids?

My point is existing housing in Canada is meant to accommodate Canadians in our traditional, cultural manner, that is friendly to supply and demand and based on raising a child to adulthood until that person becomes self sustaining.

This is where mass immigration is a problem. The 1-25 years to raise a child is short circuited and immigrant adults are instantly thrown into the housing market creating a huge demand for housing that never existed previously.

Now of course with the advent of 330,000 immigrants a year and whether they buy existing or new housing or live in subsidized housing maxes the system right out, since the supply of housing to accommodate these large numbers does not exist and everyone cannot afford to buy new houses.

This situation will worsen yearly as 330,000 immigrants arrive yearly with no federal plan to properly accommodate these adult masses.

Personally, I don't think subsidized housing should be made available to anyone.

So then again, the question remains, when did the excessive immgration begin?

1990.

Here is an interesting link:

http://www.immigrationwatchcanada.org/

[guyser]

I guess facts have no basis in your arguement?

.

But outside of infrastructure, housing is not being addressed in the proper manner to accommodate 330,000 new immigrants yearly.

Here is an interesting link:

http://www.immigrationwatchcanada.org/

Interesting to say the least. It also blows your numbers up , but then reality has been lost on you for some time.

Here is what it says..."We believe Canada should have some immigration, but that immigration levels should be reduced to about 20% of the current annual 260,000 intake."

You know , as opposed as to what you keep stating....which is....

But outside of infrastructure, housing is not being addressed in the proper manner to accommodate 330,000 new immigrants yearly

Why not say 3,300,000 , after all , it does sound better, even though its not true.

Edited August 10, 2007 by guyser

[Leafless]

So, yet another allegation without a cite. I'll bet you though, that most Canadians who bought a house when Martin was PM are glad they did.

Not really.

Raise the interest rates and see what happens.

Canadians could be selling their homes at great losses simplt to get out of their binding mortgage obligations. Others who hold on to their existing high priced homes can sit back and watch their houses devalute to (who knows) overnight.

http://www.immigrationwatchcanada.org/

Sooo, what's your theory of how "whiteys" got so poor and "ethnics" got so well-heeled?

Considering the population factor of these Asian countries that their are many well heeled ethnics taking refuge or rather immigrating to Canada. It is not a question of 'how Whitey's got so poor' but why are we allowing the sell out of Canadian housing to foreigners.

http://www.immigrationwatchcanada.org/

Oh please, please, please, Leafless, pretty please pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeese supply us a link...there is that better??

For the interest of our other members only:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_money_d..._collector_earn

It seems Leafless is a littled pissed... Poor Leafless.

Actually you never asked me so you don't know what I would support, and acually, yes I do support tighter restrictions and regulations on immigrants. I do happen to believe that immigrants should be accepted based upon whether they serve the interest of Canada. I just happen to disagree with you on what those interest are.

I'm not. It would be a waste of time and effort.

It's not the ethnic immigrant's fault either. I expect that ethnics make up the bulk of the applicants for immigration.

It appears there is a small racist minority which needs that slap in the face. They may need a kick in the rear to boot.

This has got to do with destroying Canadian society, simple as that, no racism at all.

But I am going to look into the matter of your constant racist allegations.

[guyser]

But I am going to look into the matter of your constant racist allegations.

Dont bother, just get a mirror.

[Leafless]

I guess facts have no basis in your arguement?

Interesting to say the least. It also blows your numbers up , but then reality has been lost on you for some time.

Here is what it says..."We believe Canada should have some immigration, but that immigration levels should be reduced to about 20% of the current annual 260,000 intake."

You know , as opposed as to what you keep stating....which is....

Why not say 3,300,000 , after all , it does sound better, even though its not true.

You wonder why I don't respond to your uninformed posts even though I supplied the information for you.

Here is the link again:

http://www.immigrationwatchcanada.org/

And here in part is what it says:

"The Former Liberal government had a policy goal of admitting 1% of Canada's population annually.'

This equates to 330,000 immigrants. So what I said is the truth.

Here is another link from 2003 that says:

" Between this and the last conference the government has set an explicit annual targeted inflow of 1% of the population (approximately 300,000 immigrants a year). The adoption of this fixed target policy signalled a shift towards a longer-run view of how admission numbers should be managed. At the same time the selection process has become more focused on attracting young skilled workers to this country. The impacts that these changes have had on the Canadian economy are in the early stages of investigation. Some of this new work is included in this volume. "

http://jdi.econ.queensu.ca/Publications/Immigration.html

[guyser]

You wonder why I don't respond to your uninformed posts even though I supplied the information for you.

Here is the link again:

http://www.immigrationwatchcanada.org/

And here in part is what it says:

"The Former Liberal government had a policy goal of admitting 1% of Canada's population annually.'

This equates to 330,000 immigrants. So what I said is the truth.

No you are not telling the truth, you are deliberately misleading.

Come on leafless , lets look at your link.In fact , I shall quote from your own link and correct you, again.

It says , and in the second paragraph even , the following.............

We believe Canada should have some immigration, but that immigration levels should be reduced to about 20% of the current annual 260,000 intake.

260,000 does not = 330,000

A policy goal is just that, a goal. It says so many times on that website and also says three times on the first half of the page the number of immigrants.

Why would you deliberately alter the facts? Perhaps it does not fit with your views?

[Renegade]

You appointed yourself, by your own hand, as a citizen of the world. You would not recognize that fact since you are oblivious to your own self righteousness.

So, you consider me a self-appointed spokesman, even though I explicitly deny I undertake such a role? Sometimes I have doubts that English is your mother-tongue. FWIW, I don't consider you a spokesman for the White English Christian population because I don't believe the majority share your opinion nor have you been designated as the spokesman.

What does that have to do with immigrants destroying Canadians quality of life and their current cultural status quo?

It has everything to do with it. If English White Christian Canadians have no restriction on their cultural practices, you can't legimately claim that immigrants are destroying Canadian culture.

Currently our infrastructure is being maxed out to the limit, including electric power generation, highways, streets, roads, water supply, waste management as well as existing infrastructure rapidly decaying.

Geez, then how did the infrastructure sustain high levels of immigration for the last 100 years. You seem to think that the influx of immigrants since 1990 is a new event unprecedented in Canadian history. It is not. Canada has had waves of immigrants over the last 100 years. The biggest difference is that this wave is largely composed of visible minorities. 100 years of immigration

in Canada

Pay particular attention to the Chart on Pg 4 showing the number of immigrants over time, and the chart on Pg 6 showing the % of immigrants in the population over time.

But outside of infrastructure, housing is not being addressed in the proper manner to accommodate 330,000 new immigrants yearly. Lower interest rates is only a stop gap method of allowing people who can not afford higher priced housing into the market. Of course this includes immigrant and native Canadian but encourages even further hikes in housing prices.

The fact is that population growth drives up demand and because land is a fixed commodity it will go up in price as demand increases. But this is nothing new. In the past population growth has been driven by the birth rate. More recently the population growth has been driven by immigration. Are you against population growth, or only population growth driven by immigration?

Old existing housing and infrastructure common to our current cultural status quo is not the answer IMO to address these large numbers of immigrants.

Of course. That is why as the population grows, and infrastructure decays it will always need investment.

My point is existing housing in Canada is meant to accommodate Canadians in our traditional, cultural manner, that is friendly to supply and demand and based on raising a child to adulthood until that person becomes self sustaining.

Frankly I don't even undestand the distinction you are trying to make. Immigrants raise children to adulthood in the same way native-born Canadians do.

This is where mass immigration is a problem. The 1-25 years to raise a child is short circuited and immigrant adults are instantly thrown into the housing market creating a huge demand for housing that never existed previously.

Not really. The population growth trends have not really changed. The only real difference is that more of the growth has come from immigration. In addition, considerable housing stock has been built over the last 10 years esp in the condo market.

Now of course with the advent of 330,000 immigrants a year and whether they buy existing or new housing or live in subsidized housing maxes the system right out, since the supply of housing to accommodate these large numbers does not exist and everyone cannot afford to buy new houses.

This situation will worsen yearly as 330,000 immigrants arrive yearly with no federal plan to properly accommodate these adult masses.

1990.

If you sincerely believe this is true, then invest in real-estate because it will only go up. Personally I think it would foolish for the government to intervene in something the market is well capable of addressing.

[Renegade]

Raise the interest rates and see what happens.

Canadians could be selling their homes at great losses simplt to get out of their binding mortgage obligations. Others who hold on to their existing high priced homes can sit back and watch their houses devalute to (who knows) overnight.

You are really contridicting yourself. On one hand you claim that the constant flow of immigration drives up prices, on the other hand you claim that houses will be devalued as soon as interest rates go up. Frankly interest rates would need to be significantly higher than they are today for a price devaluation, and even then, unless they are recent buyers they would not likely lose the amount invested.

Considering the population factor of these Asian countries that their are many well heeled ethnics taking refuge or rather immigrating to Canada. It is not a question of 'how Whitey's got so poor' but why are we allowing the sell out of Canadian housing to foreigners.

I doubt that it is the "well heeled" ethnics who make up the bulk of the immigrant influx, and many come to Canada to improve their economic lot. Even it is, we should be grateful because the wealthier they are, the more they are likely to contribute in taxes.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_money_d..._collector_earn

Thanks for the link, but its source leads me to question its validity. Did you notice the small print "User-generated content; read this important disclaimer"? An anonomyous source entering an answer cannot be considered a reliable source. There also seems to be a discrepancy between answers as $18/hour is no where near $80K per year.

This has got to do with destroying Canadian society, simple as that, no racism at all.

Racism is inherent in an opinion which singles out the culture and religion of visible minorities as destructive factors.

But I am going to look into the matter of your constant racist allegations.

okey dokey. Let me know what you find.

[Leafless]

It says , and in the second paragraph even , the following.............

260,000 does not = 330,000

A policy goal is just that, a goal. It says so many times on that website and also says three times on the first half of the page the number of immigrants.

Why would you deliberately alter the facts? Perhaps it does not fit with your views?

So, what year does 260,000 equate to and who is the government of the day?

[guyser]

So, what year does 260,000 equate to and who is the government of the day?

Its your cite , why ask me?

Anyhow, it does state "current levels" so presumably it is 2006. That would be the NEW govt of Mr Stephen Harper and the CPC's.

Not sure why that matters , unless of course it fouls up the Liberal blame rant.

But to go a tad further.....

1990-1998 started at about 200,000 and peaked around 250,000 then dropped below 200,000 by decade end.

1970 to 1981 125,000 then up to 225, 000 before dropping below 100,000.

The cite is renegades and it is on pg 4 of his cite.

Quite interesting to say the least. Back in 1913-1914 we had over 400,000 immigrants come in. I can only assume they have set up and enjoyed, hell even proflagated the "Canadian Culture" you are so dearly hanging onto.

Those "people" you denigrate on a daily basis are the same people who in a past life helped make this country.

[Renegade]

Another interesting source of immigration statistics and data: IMMIGRATION & SKILL SHORTAGES

[Leafless]

Its your cite , why ask me?

Anyhow, it does state "current levels" so presumably it is 2006. That would be the NEW govt of Mr Stephen Harper and the CPC's.

Not sure why that matters , unless of course it fouls up the Liberal blame rant.

If you read the link the Liberals had a policy goal of 1% of the population of Canada annually.

So when Paul Martin was PM Canada's population is about the same as it is to-day 33 million and 1% of 33 million is 330,000 immigrants the Liberals allowed into the country.

We can thank Mr. Harper for the decrease down to 260,000 and hopefully as the suggest reduce that even further to 20% of that 260.000 immigrants.

Quite interesting to say the least. Back in 1913-1914 we had over 400,000 immigrants come in. I can only assume they have set up and enjoyed, hell even proflagated the "Canadian Culture" you are so dearly hanging onto.

Those "people" you denigrate on a daily basis are the same people who in a past life helped make this country.

In 1913 -14 immigrants earned their keep, no subsidized housing, no welfare or health care, very little of anything. they wanted to come here because of our freer democratic society.

These are the immigrants that built Canada to what it is to-day, unlike mass immigration that we allow into our ESTABLISHED country to-day equating to 1-million mostly ethnic immigrants in 3-4 years who basically only worry about setting up their religion and culture and segregating from from mainstream Canada.

Big difference and IMO a horrible difference.

Edited August 11, 2007 by Leafless

[Leafless]

So, you consider me a self-appointed spokesman, even though I explicitly deny I undertake such a role? Sometimes I have doubts that English is your mother-tongue.

Sometimes I DOUBTS if you can even spell.

Just to refresh your memory. an advocate (primary definition) "is one who speaks in favour".

A spokesman on the other hand, (primary definition) "is one who speaks on behalf of others, esp. public relations" and you are speaking on behalf of their group, culture and ethnicity.

FWIW, I don't consider you a spokesman for the White English Christian population because I don't believe the majority share your opinion nor have you been designated as the spokesman.

I simply refer to the majority 'White English speaking Christians' for reasons of identity to confirm that I am part of that majority in Canada.

I speak for myself as a ' White English speaking Christian, although I suspect many others would agree in what I am saying.

It has everything to do with it. If English White Christian Canadians have no restriction on their cultural practices, you can't legimately claim that immigrants are destroying Canadian culture.

How can you possibly say that when government has already stepped in to outlaw certain Christian cultural teachings in schools and especially when combined with Charter rights greatly dilutes Canadian culture and the ability to properly propagate Christian cultural traditions.

Frankly I don't even understand the distinction you are trying to make. Immigrants raise children to adulthood in the same way native-born Canadians do.

Previously before mass immigration, demand relating to housing was controlled as there was never any heavy demand for housing relating. Out of every 10 Canadian births to maturity, say 20-25 years old, out of those ten Canadians maybe only six would be able to afford housing.

To-day with mass immigration you have full grown adults, jumping of a plane with the proper funds and buying houses. Our system was never designed to accommodate this instant type of growth.

As a result housing as become unaffordable for many Canadians even with the low interest rates which could present a serious problem in the near future, if interest rates suddenly increase.

Not really. The population growth trends have not really changed. The only real difference is that more of the growth has come from immigration. In addition, considerable housing stock has been built over the last 10 years esp in the condo market.

If you sincerely believe this is true, then invest in real-estate because it will only go up. Personally I think it would foolish for the government to intervene in something the market is well capable of addressing.

I would not go near real estate to-day as we have the same problem as the U.S. with the middle class being wiped out by outsourcing to other countries and immigrants working for less money. This of course compounds matters relating to who can buy houses and who can't.

I think big problems lay ahead.

[Leafless]

You are really contridicting yourself. On one hand you claim that the constant flow of immigration drives up prices, on the other hand you claim that houses will be devalued as soon as interest rates go up. Frankly interest rates would need to be significantly higher than they are today for a price devaluation, and even then, unless they are recent buyers they would not likely lose the amount invested.

There are thousands of Canadians who have bought homes only because of low interest rates that have allowed them to this

and can barely afford their mortgage payments. It takes quite a long time before you see any real difference in your principle especially with 25-30 year mortgages and if interest rates rise could mean thousands of Canadians simply walking away from mortgages and homes.

This is a nightmare scenario.

I doubt that it is the "well heeled" ethnics who make up the bulk of the immigrant influx, and many come to Canada to improve their economic lot. Even it is, we should be grateful because the wealthier they are, the more they are likely to contribute in taxes.

That would require the kind of proof that is almost impossible to obtain.

Thanks for the link, but its source leads me to question its validity. Did you notice the small print "User-generated content; read this important disclaimer"? An anonomyous source entering an answer cannot be considered a reliable source. There also seems to be a discrepancy between answers as $18/hour is no where near $80K per year.

Wages are pretty high in New York City, especially in Manhattan.

http://www.bls.gov/ro2/qcew9310.htm

[Renegade]

Sometimes I DOUBTS if you can even spell.

Don't doubt it. My spelling is atrocious. That combined with my hasty typing and my unwillingness to go back and correct errors would compound the problem.

Just to refresh your memory. an advocate (primary definition) "is one who speaks in favour".

A spokesman on the other hand, (primary definition) "is one who speaks on behalf of others, esp. public relations" and you are speaking on behalf of their group, culture and ethnicity.

Since you have already admitted you are no English professor, I'm not about to take contexual advice from you especially when the distinctions between words are obvious to me.

I simply refer to the majority 'White English speaking Christians' for reasons of identity to confirm that I am part of that majority in Canada.

Lets just agree to call them WECCs (White English Christian Canadians) to save ourselves some typing, ok?

I speak for myself as a ' White English speaking Christian, although I suspect many others would agree in what I am saying.

So, you'd consider yourself spokesman for the WECCs?

How can you possibly say that when government has already stepped in to outlaw certain Christian cultural teachings in schools and especially when combined with Charter rights greatly dilutes Canadian culture and the ability to properly propagate Christian cultural traditions.

Religious teachings do not belong in public schools and the prohibition of these religious activities does not preclude the personal practice of those activities. You need to be specific on what Charter rights "greatly dilutes Canadian culture and the ability to properly propagate Christian cultural traditions" because I am not aware of what specifically you are talking about.

Previously before mass immigration, demand relating to housing was controlled as there was never any heavy demand for housing relating. Out of every 10 Canadian births to maturity, say 20-25 years old, out of those ten Canadians maybe only six would be able to afford housing.

To-day with mass immigration you have full grown adults, jumping of a plane with the proper funds and buying houses. Our system was never designed to accommodate this instant type of growth.

When exactly was "before mass immigration", before 1990? I have cited refrences which prove that large scale immigration is not new in Canada. Who exactly are you saying controlled housing demand?

As a result housing as become unaffordable for many Canadians even with the low interest rates which could present a serious problem in the near future, if interest rates suddenly increase.

The data disagrees with you:

As such, homeownership levels in Canada rank among the highest in the world. Statistics Canada pinpointed homeownership levels at just over 65 per cent from coast to coast in 2002. That figure continues to climb as favourable interest rates, strong consumer confidence, and solid economic fundamentals propel an increasing number of buyers into the housing market.

Decade in review - 1995-2005

I would not go near real estate to-day as we have the same problem as the U.S. with the middle class being wiped out by outsourcing to other countries and immigrants working for less money. This of course compounds matters relating to who can buy houses and who can't.

Well, that's the topic for a whole different thread, isn't it?

[Renegade]

There are thousands of Canadians who have bought homes only because of low interest rates that have allowed them to this

and can barely afford their mortgage payments. It takes quite a long time before you see any real difference in your principle especially with 25-30 year mortgages and if interest rates rise could mean thousands of Canadians simply walking away from mortgages and homes.

No one forces anyone else to buy a house. Canadians must make their own decisions on their financial investments including what is for many people the largest household asset, their residence. If they have bought houses based upon low rates without any tolerance for rate increases, they take a risk and must accept responsibility for the outcome.

This is a nightmare scenario.

It is a situation of ones own making. If they want to sleep better they could have chosen to buy a smaller property or not buy at all. The individual homeowners are the ones who willingly take on the risk. Many do so because of greed and so purchase the largest property they can afford without suitable consideration for the risk.

In any case, since you predict a housing collapse, you should be pleased that these "well heeled" immigrants are buying up houses at high prices, as when it collapses it will be they who incur the losses.

Wages are pretty high in New York City, especially in Manhattan.

No one said it wasn't, but wages are only one driver which affects property values.

[Renegade]

If you read the link the Liberals had a policy goal of 1% of the population of Canada annually.

1% is a policy goal and is not a specific yearly target.

So when Paul Martin was PM Canada's population is about the same as it is to-day 33 million and 1% of 33 million is 330,000 immigrants the Liberals allowed into the country.

Prove it. I am not aware of any recent year when 330,000 immigrants were allowed into the country.

We can thank Mr. Harper for the decrease down to 260,000 and hopefully as the suggest reduce that even further to 20% of that 260.000 immigrants.

In 1913 -14 immigrants earned their keep, no subsidized housing, no welfare or health care, very little of anything. they wanted to come here because of our freer democratic society.

Nonsense. Harper had nothing to do with it. Specificly yearly targets were never set at 330000.

In 2004, a total of 235,824 people were admitted to Canada as permanent residents. This was well within the target range of 220,000 to 245,000 immigrants projected in the 2003 Annual Report to Parliament on Immigration. This is the fifth consecutive year that CIC met or exceeded the government's immigration targets.

Achievement of target immigration levels

These are the immigrants that built Canada to what it is to-day, unlike mass immigration that we allow into our ESTABLISHED country to-day equating to 1-million mostly ethnic immigrants in 3-4 years who basically only worry about setting up their religion and culture and segregating from from mainstream Canada.

If those immigrants are the ones who built Canada to what it is today, then the current wave is who will build Canada into what it will be tomorrow. Do you have proof of your allegation that ethnic immigrans "basically only worry about setting up their religion and culture and segregating from from mainstream Canada." If you wonder why you position is considered racist, it is because of a multitude of statements such as this.

[Leafless]

No one forces anyone else to buy a house.

No, but the offer to own one's own home becomes irresistible and encourages one in doing so especially when banks offer ultra-low interest rates and extended long term mortgages.

Canadians must make their own decisions on their financial investments including what is for many people the largest household asset, their residence. If they have bought houses based upon low rates without any tolerance for rate increases, they take a risk and must accept responsibility for the outcome.

Sure, with financial institutions laughing in your face. Remember what I said Paul Martin when PM, suggested Canadians invest in new cars and homes.

Don't worry they will always find ways to make you blow every penny you earn. Hey don't forget the Fed's have to pay off people like Mr. Arar and need moola to support Charter related,federal cultural aspirations and obligations.

It is a situation of ones own making. If they want to sleep better they could have chosen to buy a smaller property or not buy at all. The individual homeowners are the ones who willingly take on the risk. Many do so because of greed and so purchase the largest property they can afford without suitable consideration for the risk.

Like I was saying previously the smallest property is expensive. We don't all work for the federal public service or live in Alberta.

In any case, since you predict a housing collapse, you should be pleased that these "well heeled" immigrants are buying up houses at high prices, as when it collapses it will be they who incur the losses.

I am not happy to give away the supply of traditional Canadian housing based on birth and not mass immigration to ethnic immigrants.

If they do loose their shirts it is because they were willing participants originally.

No one said it wasn't, but wages are only one driver which affects property values.

Yes I know and artificial demand from instant mass immigration is another. By artificial I mean it is not linked to the country's natural birth rate but from a source NOT PLANNED FOR.

[Leafless]

1% is a policy goal and is not a specific yearly target.

It could look like a yearly target when this link suggest, "Between July 1, 2005 and July 1, 2006, Canada's population increased by 324,000 to an estimated 32,623,500." But it appears this number is a mix of natural birth rate and immigration.

Under Harper and the Conservatives though, looks like we took in more immigrant than under the liberals, which means we are headinding towards that 1% of Canada's population immigration rate.

It is also worthwhile to note that Canada's tiny population compared to the U.S., international immigration accounted for two thirds of Canada's population growth, compared to 38% of U.S. growth despit the fact they have ten times the population.

If those immigrants are the ones who built Canada to what it is today, then the current wave is who will build Canada into what it will be tomorrow.

Canada is an established country

Your statement is nonsensical and will require proof.

There are factors you are totally overlooking that could actually spell the complete reverse from what you are saying.

Do you have proof of your allegation that ethnic immigrans "basically only worry about setting up their religion and culture and segregating from from mainstream Canada." If you wonder why you position is considered racist, it is because of a multitude of statements such as this.

This is not a racist statement is a factual one.

Ethnic immigrants are coming into Canada from a third world countries with all modern amenities at their fingertips all done for them thanks to native Canadians and their established country. There is nothing left to do but walk into a job and entertain their own cultural requirements.

The countries these ethnics come from have very few diversity's, with religion and culture being number one diversity.

The number of very expensive Mosques and temples in this country are forever increasing proving religion is a number one priority along with various cultural activities that encourage segregation.

I have heard about Whites being told to get out of their subsidized housing units as this is no longer a White neighbourhood.

[Moxie]

Leaf do you read the Globe and Mail? In today's addition there is an article on page 11 titled Bumbling along in search of the new "We" by Anthony Jenkins. It's a story about a leading left/leftest who did a study on Muliticulture and the out come of his study is: By allowing Diversity it has a negative impact on social cohesion. He's not happy with the out come apparently intigration isn't happening. Sigh like we didn't know that already. The story should help you in this thread. I don't want to sign up as a member to get a link, I buy the paper daily. I hope my posts helps, fight on.