Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Conservative
#2
RE: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 7th, 2006
Obviously, there are benefits to immigration but 'mass immigration' as employed by successive Canadian governments threatens the longterm stability of the country. Why aren't we given a larger say in the management of our own country? Who'll look out for us in the future if key infrastructure like health and education break down?
#3
RE: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 7th, 2006
the people that believes everything the government does is right and very correct will never go for anything like that
Conservative
#4
RE: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 7th, 2006
Well, if the Star contributor is correct, the stakes are very high and especially for people living in the GTA and close to it. I'm parked less than two hours away. When I visit Toronto I see a growing sprawl of communities tied together by little more than the geography they share. In good times things wiggle through. But if bad times come, and they surely will, will we see a nightmarish Third World city arise where once stood one of the continent's jewels?
Free Thinker
#5
RE: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 7th, 2006
I guess we should have a mandatory five child quota per couple? Enforced with the strictest measures.
#6
RE: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 7th, 2006
If the impact of immigration harm big cities, why don't governement restricts them to live in cities. They might promote some compasation for thouse who settle in rural areas.
#7
RE: Immigration: does Can
Jul 11th, 2006
The author of the article makes some excellent points. Though I fully support liberal immigration policies, we can't maintain levels that are unhealthy for the people coming as well as the people already here. I'm not going to go off on "they're takin' our jobs!", but an immigration policy that ignores the reality of job markets in Canada isn't going to help anyone, least of all the immigrants themselves (as the article points out).
I think the problem with attempting to discourage mass immigration to overstretched urban areas is that there isn't really anywhere else to go. With increasingly unpredictable weather and ever-greater efficiency in agriculture, Canadian farmers are growing fewer and fewer, and those who do best own or at least tenant-farm vast stretches of land. Encouraging immigrant farmers to take back up the rake (so to speak) probably wouldn't work very well, due to the changing dynamics of Canadian agriculture.
Further, where should we send them besides places like GTA, Vancouver, and Montréal? Calgary? A cheap house costs $350,000. Edmonton? Same troubles. Every major urban area is facing massive growth, and those that aren't are in economically weak areas like Nova Scotia or Newfoundland, and frankly, is an influx of immigrant labour going to help anyone in those areas either?
Rather than accepting so many immigrants from poorer countries, why don't we help them and us by simply accepting fewer and spending more on infrastructure development and basic aid to impoverished nations?
Seems that's a better plan in the long-term anyway. Bring developing nations up to speed, rather than watching population pressures destroy us from the inside.
I think the problem with attempting to discourage mass immigration to overstretched urban areas is that there isn't really anywhere else to go. With increasingly unpredictable weather and ever-greater efficiency in agriculture, Canadian farmers are growing fewer and fewer, and those who do best own or at least tenant-farm vast stretches of land. Encouraging immigrant farmers to take back up the rake (so to speak) probably wouldn't work very well, due to the changing dynamics of Canadian agriculture.
Further, where should we send them besides places like GTA, Vancouver, and Montréal? Calgary? A cheap house costs $350,000. Edmonton? Same troubles. Every major urban area is facing massive growth, and those that aren't are in economically weak areas like Nova Scotia or Newfoundland, and frankly, is an influx of immigrant labour going to help anyone in those areas either?
Rather than accepting so many immigrants from poorer countries, why don't we help them and us by simply accepting fewer and spending more on infrastructure development and basic aid to impoverished nations?
Seems that's a better plan in the long-term anyway. Bring developing nations up to speed, rather than watching population pressures destroy us from the inside.
#8
Re: RE: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 11th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by dekhqonbacha
Wait a minute. They come here to Canada from their own country and you want to 'compensate' them for moving into rural areas? We would need to bribe them to do so? Here is a better idea. If they do not wish to settle in rural areas then tell them they cannot come here. Is this too difficult a concept to grasp? Why would we actually beg them to blackmail us? These liberals... jeez.If the impact of immigration harm big cities, why don't governement restricts them to live in cities. They might promote some compasation for thouse who settle in rural areas.
#9
Re: RE: Immigration: does Can
Jul 11th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by LonelyWurm
Why should we send a single dime to impoverished nations? That money we currently have going out for foreign aid should be rerouted for our own people. We do have a homeless and poverty problem here. Take care of our own first. Do not bother with those nations outside of Canada. When it comes to our tax dollars, they are irrelevant.The author of the article makes some excellent points. Though I fully support liberal immigration policies, we can't maintain levels that are unhealthy for the people coming as well as the people already here. I'm not going to go off on "they're takin' our jobs!", but an immigration policy that ignores the reality of job markets in Canada isn't going to help anyone, least of all the immigrants themselves (as the article points out).
Quote has been trimmed
I think the problem with attempting to discourage mass immigration to overstretched urban areas is that there isn't really anywhere else to go. With increasingly unpredictable weather and ever-greater efficiency in agriculture, Canadian farmers are growing fewer and fewer, and those who do best own or at least tenant-farm vast stretches of land. Encouraging immigrant farmers to take back up the rake (so to speak) probably wouldn't work very well, due to the changing dynamics of Canadian agriculture.
Further, where should we send them besides places like GTA, Vancouver, and Montréal? Calgary? A cheap house costs $350,000. Edmonton? Same troubles. Every major urban area is facing massive growth, and those that aren't are in economically weak areas like Nova Scotia or Newfoundland, and frankly, is an influx of immigrant labour going to help anyone in those areas either?
Rather than accepting so many immigrants from poorer countries, why don't we help them and us by simply accepting fewer and spending more...
#10
RE: Immigration: does Can
Jul 11th, 2006
We should help to support the development of impoverished nations because, believe me, it will be in all our best interests in the long-run. Internationalism and globalization are scary words, but they're getting more and more powerful (globalization especially). And yes, we do have poverty and homlessness. Not so rarely amongst immigrant populations. As the world becomes more and more closely integrated, "taking care of our own" will become more and more a matter of ensuring others beyond us are doing well too.
Not by throwing money at ruthless dictatorships bent on genocide, but by providing know-how and support to democratic nations willing to accept help in their path to a Western standard of living.
Not by throwing money at ruthless dictatorships bent on genocide, but by providing know-how and support to democratic nations willing to accept help in their path to a Western standard of living.
#11
Re: RE: Immigration: does Can
Jul 11th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by LonelyWurm
Why? Why should you have to work much harder only to see your money go to faraway lands? Globalisation is precisely why you should not want your money to leave the country. Why would you seek to improve another country's ability to compete with Canada in world markets? Why would you want to do this and watch the costs for our social programs skyrocket out of control? Why not use that 'foreign aid' and turn it into Canadian aid? What do I care what happens to idiots in an African nation? AS you well know, most of those countries are foreign dictatorships anyway. Why should we give money to people who although poor continue to pop out babies with ridiculous regularity? The more they pop out the more money they will want thus the more we will give. This will create a further strain upon our economy.We should help to support the development of impoverished nations because, believe me, it will be in all our best interests in the long-run. Internationalism and globalization are scary words, but they're getting more and more powerful (globalization especially). And yes, we do have poverty and homlessness. Not so rarely amongst immigrant populations. As the world becomes more and more closely integrated, "taking care of our own" will become more and more a matter of ensuring others beyond us are doing well too.
Not by throwing money at ruthless dictatorships bent on genocide, but by providing know-how and support to democratic nations willing to accept help in their path to a Western standard of living.
I would ask that you remember by far the majority of those nations are civilisations much, much older than ours. Where were they when our people were living in caves starving or freezing to death? Did they send us 'aid'? No. It is our wealth and our time to enjoy that wealth. It is their turn to suffer as my people did. Works both ways.
Free Thinker
#12
Re: RE: Immigration: does Can
Jul 11th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by SaintLucifer
By the time many, many products etc are able to be produced in the developing world, they've reached their peek profit wise in the west. Their at the end of the technological life cycle.
Why? Why should you have to work much harder only to see your money go to faraway lands? Globalisation is precisely why you should not want your money to leave the country. Why would you seek to improve another country's ability to compete with Canada in world markets? Why would you want to do this and watch the costs for our social programs skyrocket out of control? Why not use that 'foreign aid' and turn it into Canadian aid? What do I care what happens to idiots in an African nation? AS you well know, most of those countries are foreign dictatorships anyway. Why should we give money to people who although poor continue to pop out babies with ridiculous regularity? The more they pop out the more money they will want thus the more we will give. This will create a further strain upon our economy.
I would ask that you remember by far the majority of those nations are civilisations much, much older than ours. Where were they when our people were living in caves starving or freezing to death? Did they send us 'aid'? No. It is our wealth and our time to enjoy that wealth. It is their turn to suffer as my people did. Works both ways.
While I tend to agree that throwing money at the problem isn't necessarily the answer, I think the key to a large part of the problem is education. When some of these countries have literacy rates as low as 40%, these people don't have a chance. Outsourcing and manufacturing still marginalizes a good chunck of the population and leaves very little backwards and forwards econcomic "flows" (did I say that right, Toro, bitwys?). Anyway, educate, educate, educate!
#13
Re: RE: Immigration: does Can
Jul 11th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by Said1
So we in the West should pay for their education? Why? Look at China as a perfect example. For many, many years we sent them economic aid. This caused them to become educated and their economy to grow. It is through Western education and influence that Deng Xiaoping realised the only thing that could save China was to open his country's economy to the West. After al those years of working our humps off aiding the poor Chinese population look at the result of our efforts! China's economic growth is outpacing our own! For almost a century we were the USA's greatest trading partner. Now China is fast catching up to us in that area and will soon bypass us as the USA's greatest trading partner! What do you think this means to Canadians? Loss of jobs. Bankruptcies left and right. All because bleeding heart lefties feel we should feel sorry for the poor nations just as we did to China. Now not only is China an economic powerhouse thanks to the West and our aid to their nation but they are now a military powerhouse. During WWII do you think the Chinese paid for their own military equipment? No. It was supplied to them by the Americans and British. Free of charge. This meant after the war China was free to do some growing without any debts. Here again the West has offered the noose to our foes with which they may hang us!Quote: Originally Posted by SaintLucifer
Quote has been trimmed
Why? Why should you have to work much harder only to see your money go to faraway lands? Globalisation is precisely why you should not want your money to leave the country. Why would you seek to improve another country's ability to compete with Canada in world markets? Why would you want to do this and watch the costs for our social programs skyrocket out of control? Why not use that 'foreign aid' and turn it into Canadian aid? What do I care what happens to idiots in an African nation? AS you well know, most of those countries are foreign dictatorships anyway. Why should we give money to people who although poor continue to pop out babies with ridiculous regularity? The more they pop out the more money they will want thus the more we will give. This will create a further strain upon our economy.
I would ask that you remember by far the majority of those nations are civilisations much, much older than ours. Where were they when our people were living in caves starving or freezing to death? Did they send us 'aid'? No. It is our wealth and our time to enjoy that wealth. It is their turn to suffer as my people did. Works both ways.By the time many, many products etc are able to be produced in the developing world, they've reached their peek profit wise in the west....
Free Thinker
#14
Re: RE: Immigration: does Can
Jul 11th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by SaintLucifer
I really don't think Ethiopia will surpass Canada or the US economically any time soon. And no, I have no problem contributing to implementation programs aimed at educating women and children in developing nations. When the need is no longer there, then I have a problem, as would be the case with China. Not that I'm privy to any information with respect to aid ear marked for education sent direct from Canada to the Chinese government. Are you? [
Quote has been trimmed
So we in the West should pay for their education? Why? Look at China as a perfect example. For many, many years we sent them economic aid. This caused them to become educated and their economy to grow. It is through Western education and influence that Deng Xiaoping realised the only thing that could save China was to open his country's economy to the West. After al those years of working our humps off aiding the poor Chinese population look at the result of our efforts! China's economic growth is outpacing our own! For almost a century we were the USA's greatest trading partner. Now China is fast catching up to us in that area and will soon bypass us as the USA's greatest trading partner! What do you think this means to Canadians? Loss of jobs. Bankruptcies left and right. All because bleeding heart lefties feel we should feel sorry for the poor nations just as we did to China. Now not only is China an economic powerhouse thanks to the West and our aid to their nation but they are now a military powerhouse. During WWII do you think the Chinese paid for their own military equipment? No. It was supplied to them by the Americans and British. Free of charge. This meant after the war China was free to do some growing without any debts. Here again the West has offered the noose to our foes with which they may hang us!
And, as I said, many products developed in developing nations have reached the end of their technological or product life cycle in the west, taking more inputs to produce than profits they are producing.
Free Thinker
#15
RE: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 11th, 2006
And Germany provided rhe largest part of China's arms prior to 1937, then Russia until '40 or '41. They didn't get any military aid until after 1945 from the allies. They had their share of debt from war with Japan up until that point. But anyway.
#16
Re: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 11th, 2006
quote: "And no, I have no problem contributing to implementation programs aimed at educating women and children in developing nations".
The only aid I agree with is condoms. Boat loads full of condoms. Whenever I get one of those envelopes in the mail requesting a donation I drop in the best aid you can give...a condom.
The only aid I agree with is condoms. Boat loads full of condoms. Whenever I get one of those envelopes in the mail requesting a donation I drop in the best aid you can give...a condom.
Free Thinker
#17
Re: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 11th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by athabaska
Those too. Still, it would help if those not able to attend the seminar could read the fliers.quote: "And no, I have no problem contributing to implementation programs aimed at educating women and children in developing nations".
The only aid I agree with is condoms. Boat loads full of condoms. Whenever I get one of those envelopes in the mail requesting a donation I drop in the best aid you can give...a condom.
#18
Re: RE: Immigration: does Can
Jul 11th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by Said1
China is a developing nation. What was that about their technological or product life cycle? The Chinese produce by far the majority of the world's products. So it takes more to produce than they are receiving in return? This is why they are by far the world's fastest-growing economy? Oooookkkkkk.Quote: Originally Posted by SaintLucifer[ So we in the West should pay for their education? Why? Look at China as a perfect example. For many, many years we sent them economic aid. This caused them to become educated and their economy to grow. It is through Western education and influence that Deng Xiaoping realised the only thing that could save China was to open his country's economy to the West. After al those years of working our humps off aiding the poor Chinese population look at the result of our efforts! China's economic growth is outpacing our own! For almost a century we were the USA's greatest trading partner. Now China is fast catching up to us in that area and will soon bypass us as the USA's greatest trading partner! What do you think this means to Canadians? Loss of jobs. Bankruptcies left and right. All because bleeding heart lefties feel we should feel sorry for the poor nations just as we did to China. Now not only is China an economic powerhouse thanks to the West and our aid to their nation but they are now a military powerhouse. During WWII do you think the Chinese paid for their own military equipment? No. It was supplied to them by the Americans and British. Free of charge. This meant after the war China was free to do some growing without any debts. Here again the West has offered the noose to our foes with which they may hang...
Quote has been trimmed
Ethiopia? You do realise China was not too far from being like Ethiopia yes? Where do you think all of our monetary aid to Ethiopa goes? Food? You wish. Think military. Think tinpot dictator. There you do. We are handing cash over to African military dictators who simply divert all of that Canadian cash aid to their bank accounts in Zurich. Do not believe me? Look it up on any site. It is fact.
#19
Re: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 11th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by Said1
why? are they stupid? Where does all that aid go? Send condoms with visual instructions. My guess is, however, that they are not too stupid to read but too stupid not to take responsibility for their own lives.Quote: Originally Posted by athabaskaThose too. Still, it would help if those not able to attend the seminar could read the fliers.quote: "And no, I have no problem contributing to implementation programs aimed at educating women and children in developing nations".
The only aid I agree with is condoms. Boat loads full of condoms. Whenever I get one of those envelopes in the mail requesting a donation I drop in the best aid you can give...a condom.
#20
Re: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 11th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by athabaska
No, no. That is not what it is all about. They realise if they actually took responsibility and use those condoms then they lose that aid because it will no longer be necessary. They would *gasp* have to work for themselves! *gasp*Quote: Originally Posted by Said1why? are they stupid? Where does all that aid go? Send condoms with visual instructions. My guess is, however, that they are not too stupid to read but too stupid not to take responsibility for their own lives.Quote: Originally Posted by athabaskaThose too. Still, it would help if those not able to attend the seminar could read the fliers.quote: "And no, I have no problem contributing to implementation programs aimed at educating women and children in developing nations".
The only aid I agree with is condoms. Boat loads full of condoms. Whenever I get one of those envelopes in the mail requesting a donation I drop in the best aid you can give...a condom.
Free Thinker
#21
Re: RE: Immigration: does Can
Jul 11th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by SaintLucifer
Google product life or technological life cycle. Not a country's product and technology life cycle. Ooooooook. [
China is a developing nation. What was that about their technological or product life cycle? The Chinese produce by far the majority of the world's products. So it takes more to produce than they are receiving in return? This is why they are by far the world's fastest-growing economy? Oooookkkkkk.
Now, I didn't say this is the case for each and every thing that is produced and manufactored in China. Many other factors contribute to lower production costs in China. However, the above mentioned is also a factor in outsourcing production and manufactoring of certain products.
Quote:
Good greif. I didn't say 'i have no problem handing over my tax dollars so our government can dole them out to any dicator they see fit'. What I said was "I have no problem contributing money.....' as in....I have no problem contributing personally to non-governmental organizations, for the purpose of educating women and children. I was unaware of the fact that our government gave aid specifically for this purpose. Unless you know other wise.Ethiopia? You do realise China was not too far from being like Ethiopia yes? Where do you think all of our monetary aid to Ethiopa goes? Food? You wish. Think military. Think tinpot dictator. There you do. We are handing cash over to African military dictators who simply divert all of that Canadian cash aid to their bank accounts in Zurich. Do not believe me? Look it up on any site. It is fact.
Free Thinker
#22
Re: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 11th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by athabaska
What aid?Quote: Originally Posted by Said1why? are they stupid? Where does all that aid go? Send condoms with visual instructions. My guess is, however, that they are not too stupid to read but too stupid not to take responsibility for their own lives.Quote: Originally Posted by athabaskaThose too. Still, it would help if those not able to attend the seminar could read the fliers.quote: "And no, I have no problem contributing to implementation programs aimed at educating women and children in developing nations".
The only aid I agree with is condoms. Boat loads full of condoms. Whenever I get one of those envelopes in the mail requesting a donation I drop in the best aid you can give...a condom.
Anyway, I think you missed my point about low literacy rates and being able to read fliers. Those numbers are twice as high for women.
#23
Re: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 12th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by Said1
???? Try billions and billions. Canada has a whole ministry set up to piss away billions.Quote: Originally Posted by athabaskaQuote: Originally Posted by Said1Quote: Originally Posted by athabaskaquote: "And no, I have no problem contributing to implementation programs aimed at educating women and children in developing nations".
Quote has been trimmed
The only aid I agree with is condoms. Boat loads full of condoms. Whenever I get one of those envelopes in the mail requesting a donation I drop in the best aid you can give...a condom.Those too. Still, it would help if those not able to attend the seminar could read the fliers.why? are they stupid? Where does all that aid go? Send condoms with visual instructions. My guess is, however, that they are not too stupid to read but too stupid not to take responsibility for their own lives.What aid?
Anyway, I think you missed my point about low literacy rates and being able to read fliers. Those numbers are twice as high for women.
If India can spend billions to develop nucler weapons I don't want my tax dollars sent to increase literacy in that country. If a country spends 25cents on a bullet for a gun (try 40 African basketcase states) then they can divert that 25 cents to buy a pencil before they get 2 cents from me.
Free Thinker
#24
Re: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 12th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by athabaska
Canada contributes billions in aid money, ear marked specifically for literacy programs for educating women and children? I know they have in the past given through the UN, for this purpose, but I've never heard of direct aid to any third world or developing nation's government for education. You do have links to support your claims, right? I'd be interested in reading all about it. Quote: Originally Posted by Said1Quote: Originally Posted by athabaskaQuote: Originally Posted by Said1Quote: Originally Posted by athabaskaquote: "And no, I have no problem contributing to implementation programs aimed at educating women and children in developing nations".The only aid I agree with is condoms. Boat loads full of condoms. Whenever I get one of those envelopes in the mail requesting a donation I drop in the best aid you can give...a condom.Those too. Still, it would help if those not able to attend the seminar could read the fliers.why? are they stupid? Where does all that aid go? Send condoms with visual instructions. My guess is, however, that they are not too stupid to read but too stupid not to take responsibility for their own lives.What aid?Anyway, I think you missed my point about low literacy rates and being able to read fliers. Those numbers are twice as high for women.Quote has been trimmed???? Try billions and billions. Canada has a whole ministry set up to piss away billions.
Quote has been trimmed
If India can spend billions to develop nucler weapons I don't want my tax dollars sent to increase literacy in that country. If a country spends 25cents on a bullet for a gun (try 40 African basketcase states) then they can divert that 25 cents to buy a pencil before they get 2 cents from...
#25
RE: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 12th, 2006
--
--
site that shows how stupid forein aids is and how much this money should be sspend on canadians
More than five million Canadians, or 17.9%, were living below the poverty line in 1996. These numbers underestimate the number of poor Canadians because they do not include Aboriginal people on reserves, residents of the Yukon and Northwest Territories, and people who live in institutions.
In 1996, child poverty reached 20.9 %, a 17-year peak.
61% of single mothers live in poverty.
Since 1989 the number of food banks has tripled and the proportion of the population relying on them has doubled.
One in five Canadians over 65 live below the poverty line.
The poverty rate for individuals with no family is 40.2%. If you’re young and single, the rate jumps to 63.7%.
The richest fifth of Canadians receives close to one half of all the income in Canada while the poorest fifth receive just 3.1%.
43.4% of Aboriginal people, 35.9% of visible minorities and 30.8 per cent of persons with disabilities were poor in 1995.
1.4 million Canadians, or 8.4 % of the population, are unemployed.
Jesus identified himself with the poor and hungry people, with those who suffer and are in need of help. Thus, we are presented with a profound mystery: God in Christ is present in a special way in poor and hungry people (see Matthew 25:31-46). Christ represents himself to us in a special way in the hungry, the naked and the sick. He is among us in the outcasts and the oppressed of our age. Their cry for justice is Christ’s cry for justice.
The Salvation Army’s Positional Statement on Poverty and Economic Justice reads in part: “The measure of any society is how well it cares for its weakest citizens. The persistence both of widespread poverty and indifference to that poverty in Canada and Bermuda is morally unacceptable. Jesus Christ motivates us to love our neighbour in practical ways. Our response to the poor is a measure of our obedience to and love for God.”
As Christians, we are called “to loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke, to set the oppressed free … to share your food with the hungry and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter-when you see the naked, to clothe him … Your people will rebuild the ancient ruins and will raise up the age-old foundations” (Isaiah 58:6,7,12).
8 Myths About Poverty
1. Poverty is the failure of the individual
Massive increases in unemployment in Canada in recent years have not resulted from personal inadequacy. Many workers have lost their jobs for reasons beyond their control (economic crisis, illness or disability) and cannot find work because it is not available.
2. The poor do not want to work
The fact is that most poor people do work full or part-time-over 60% of those heading poor families and over 70% of poor unattached individuals. Of people dependent on welfare, about 37% are children, 16% are single mothers and 24% are disabled.
3. Poor people do not pay taxes
Having to pay income tax starts far below the poverty line. A single mother with two children in 1991 started paying federal tax when her income reached $11,601; a single person without dependants was taxed at an income level of $6,532. And the poor still pay sales tax, GST and property taxes.
4. Welfare rates are too generous
All welfare rates are well below the poverty line. The highest rates are still 20% below; the lowest are 76% below the poverty line.
5. Poor people need to be taught basic life skills like budgeting
Many live far below the poverty line and must spend all or most of their income on basic needs. Anyone who manages to feed and clothe a family on a very limited income already has budgeting skills.
6. The welfare system is rife with cheating and fraud
A study conducted by a national auditing firm estimated fraud to be in the range of 3% of the welfare budget. On the other hand, there are estimates that income tax fraud is in the order of 20%.
7. Poor families are poor because they have too many children
Most poor families have less than two children. Only 15% have 3 or more children under 18. Recent studies show children in poor families are more likely to suffer chronic health problems and twice as likely to drop out of school.
8. We cannot afford the social programs needed to eliminate poverty
According to per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Canada is more prosperous than all European countries. However, Canada spends less on social security and other income support measures (including EI and welfare) as a share of GDP than most
--
--
site that shows how stupid forein aids is and how much this money should be sspend on canadians
More than five million Canadians, or 17.9%, were living below the poverty line in 1996. These numbers underestimate the number of poor Canadians because they do not include Aboriginal people on reserves, residents of the Yukon and Northwest Territories, and people who live in institutions.
In 1996, child poverty reached 20.9 %, a 17-year peak.
61% of single mothers live in poverty.
Since 1989 the number of food banks has tripled and the proportion of the population relying on them has doubled.
One in five Canadians over 65 live below the poverty line.
The poverty rate for individuals with no family is 40.2%. If you’re young and single, the rate jumps to 63.7%.
The richest fifth of Canadians receives close to one half of all the income in Canada while the poorest fifth receive just 3.1%.
43.4% of Aboriginal people, 35.9% of visible minorities and 30.8 per cent of persons with disabilities were poor in 1995.
1.4 million Canadians, or 8.4 % of the population, are unemployed.
Jesus identified himself with the poor and hungry people, with those who suffer and are in need of help. Thus, we are presented with a profound mystery: God in Christ is present in a special way in poor and hungry people (see Matthew 25:31-46). Christ represents himself to us in a special way in the hungry, the naked and the sick. He is among us in the outcasts and the oppressed of our age. Their cry for justice is Christ’s cry for justice.
The Salvation Army’s Positional Statement on Poverty and Economic Justice reads in part: “The measure of any society is how well it cares for its weakest citizens. The persistence both of widespread poverty and indifference to that poverty in Canada and Bermuda is morally unacceptable. Jesus Christ motivates us to love our neighbour in practical ways. Our response to the poor is a measure of our obedience to and love for God.”
As Christians, we are called “to loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke, to set the oppressed free … to share your food with the hungry and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter-when you see the naked, to clothe him … Your people will rebuild the ancient ruins and will raise up the age-old foundations” (Isaiah 58:6,7,12).
8 Myths About Poverty
1. Poverty is the failure of the individual
Massive increases in unemployment in Canada in recent years have not resulted from personal inadequacy. Many workers have lost their jobs for reasons beyond their control (economic crisis, illness or disability) and cannot find work because it is not available.
2. The poor do not want to work
The fact is that most poor people do work full or part-time-over 60% of those heading poor families and over 70% of poor unattached individuals. Of people dependent on welfare, about 37% are children, 16% are single mothers and 24% are disabled.
3. Poor people do not pay taxes
Having to pay income tax starts far below the poverty line. A single mother with two children in 1991 started paying federal tax when her income reached $11,601; a single person without dependants was taxed at an income level of $6,532. And the poor still pay sales tax, GST and property taxes.
4. Welfare rates are too generous
All welfare rates are well below the poverty line. The highest rates are still 20% below; the lowest are 76% below the poverty line.
5. Poor people need to be taught basic life skills like budgeting
Many live far below the poverty line and must spend all or most of their income on basic needs. Anyone who manages to feed and clothe a family on a very limited income already has budgeting skills.
6. The welfare system is rife with cheating and fraud
A study conducted by a national auditing firm estimated fraud to be in the range of 3% of the welfare budget. On the other hand, there are estimates that income tax fraud is in the order of 20%.
7. Poor families are poor because they have too many children
Most poor families have less than two children. Only 15% have 3 or more children under 18. Recent studies show children in poor families are more likely to suffer chronic health problems and twice as likely to drop out of school.
8. We cannot afford the social programs needed to eliminate poverty
According to per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Canada is more prosperous than all European countries. However, Canada spends less on social security and other income support measures (including EI and welfare) as a share of GDP than most
--
Free Thinker
#26
Re: RE: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 12th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by notme01
Anything mentioned about wasted aid money spent on education or literacy programs by our government or through the CIDA?http://www.tibet.ca/en/wtnarchive/2004/4/6_5.html
--
site that shows how stupid forein aids is and how much this money should be sspend on canadians
#27
Re: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 12th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by athabaska
Hear, hear!!Quote: Originally Posted by Said1Quote: Originally Posted by athabaskaQuote: Originally Posted by Said1Quote: Originally Posted by athabaskaquote: "And no, I have no problem contributing to implementation programs aimed at educating women and children in developing nations".The only aid I agree with is condoms. Boat loads full of condoms. Whenever I get one of those envelopes in the mail requesting a donation I drop in the best aid you can give...a condom.Those too. Still, it would help if those not able to attend the seminar could read the fliers.why? are they stupid? Where does all that aid go? Send condoms with visual instructions. My guess is, however, that they are not too stupid to read but too stupid not to take responsibility for their own lives.What aid?Anyway, I think you missed my point about low literacy rates and being able to read fliers. Those numbers are twice as high for women.Quote has been trimmed???? Try billions and billions. Canada has a whole ministry set up to piss away billions.
Quote has been trimmed
If India can spend billions to develop nucler weapons I don't want my tax dollars sent to increase literacy in that country. If a country spends 25cents on a bullet for a gun (try 40 African basketcase states) then they can divert that 25 cents to buy a pencil before they get 2 cents from...
#28
Re: RE: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 12th, 2006Quote: Originally Posted by notme01
Another liberal smoking too much weed. Where do you think much of our tax dollars go? Ever heard of our 'beloved' universal healthcare? Canada and Cuba are the only two nations that do not allow private health care of any kind. I would suggest our healthcare system is communistic in nature. This costs us staggering amounts of money.http://www.tibet.ca/en/wtnarchive/2004/4/6_5.html
--
site that shows how stupid forein aids is and how much this money should be sspend on canadians
More than five million Canadians, or 17.9%, were living below the poverty line in 1996. These numbers underestimate the number of poor Canadians because they do not include Aboriginal people on reserves, residents of the Yukon and Northwest Territories, and people who live in institutions.
In 1996, child poverty reached 20.9 %, a 17-year peak.
61% of single mothers live in poverty.
Since 1989 the number of food banks has tripled and the proportion of the population relying on them has doubled.
One in five Canadians over 65 live below the poverty line.
The poverty rate for individuals with no family is 40.2%. If you’re young and single, the rate jumps to 63.7%.
The richest fifth of Canadians receives close to one half of all the income in Canada while the poorest fifth receive just 3.1%.
43.4% of Aboriginal people, 35.9% of visible minorities and 30.8 per cent of persons with disabilities were poor in 1995.
1.4 million Canadians, or 8.4 % of the population, are unemployed.
Jesus identified himself with the poor and hungry people, with those who suffer and are in need of help. Thus, we are presented with a profound mystery: God in Christ is present in a special way in poor and hungry people (see Matthew 25:31-46). Christ represents himself to us in a special way in the hungry, the naked and the sick. He is among us in the outcasts and the oppressed of our age. Their cry for justice is Christ’s cry for justice.
The Salvation Army’s Positional Statement on Poverty and Economic Justice reads in part: “The measure of any society is how well it cares for its weakest citizens. The persistence both of widespread poverty and indifference to that poverty in Canada and Bermuda is morally unacceptable. Jesus Christ motivates us to love our neighbour in practical ways. Our response to the poor is a measure of our obedience to and love for God.”
As Christians, we are called “to loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke, to set the oppressed free … to share your food with the hungry and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter-when you see the naked, to clothe him … Your people will rebuild the ancient ruins and will raise up the age-old foundations” (Isaiah 58:6,7,12).
8 Myths About Poverty
1. Poverty is the failure of the individual
Massive increases in unemployment in Canada in recent years have not resulted from personal inadequacy. Many workers have lost their jobs for reasons beyond their control (economic crisis, illness or disability) and cannot find work because it is not available.
2. The poor do not want to work
The fact is that most poor people do work full or part-time-over 60% of those heading poor families and over 70% of poor unattached individuals. Of people dependent on welfare, about 37% are children, 16% are single mothers and 24% are disabled.
3. Poor people do not pay taxes
Having to pay income tax starts far below the poverty line. A single mother with two children in 1991 started paying federal tax when her income reached $11,601; a single person without dependants was taxed at an income level of $6,532. And the poor still pay sales tax, GST and property taxes.
4. Welfare rates are too generous
All welfare rates are well below the poverty line. The highest rates are still 20% below; the lowest are 76% below the poverty line.
5. Poor people need to be taught basic life skills like budgeting
Many live far below the poverty line and must spend all or most of their income on basic needs. Anyone who manages to feed and clothe a family on a very limited income already has budgeting skills.
6. The welfare system is rife with cheating and fraud
A study conducted by a national auditing firm estimated fraud to be in the range of 3% of the welfare budget. On the other hand, there are estimates that income tax fraud is in the order of 20%.
7. Poor families are poor because they have too many children
Most poor families have less than two children. Only 15% have 3 or more children under 18. Recent studies show children in poor families are more likely to suffer chronic health problems and twice as likely to drop out of school.
8. We cannot afford the social programs needed to eliminate poverty
According to per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Canada is more prosperous than all European countries. However, Canada spends less on social security and other income support measures (including EI and welfare) as a share of GDP than most
--
Those stats you put up there are full of crap. Canada is one of the big spenders when it comes to our social programs. Why do you think we are not even wealthier than we are? What were all those years about with Liberal government after Liberal government running budget deficits? If we are so bloody wealthy and are capable of having the social programs you are whining for, why did we run budget deficits so many years? Why does Canada have a massive debt? How did we obtain this debt? We took tax dollars and set matches to them then suddenly went to other nations and said 'oopsy but we need to borrow some cash. Seems we used all of our cash for bonfires along Lake Ontario'? Please man! Think before you post such crap.
#29
RE: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 13th, 2006
The article misses a few points:
1. Immigrants not only use health care, but also pay taxes. So that breaks even. Due to low birth rates in Canada, immigration is really just replacing population for the most part, along with some slack to allow for stable populaiotn growth. Asd for pollution, well what's the difference if one destrys the O-zone from Sao Paulo or Toronto? Same effect. So instead of beggar0thy-neighbour policies, how about promoting ecological conservation world-wide. Now there's a thought.
Now on the other hand, I will acknowledge the author has a few points. He mentinned the schools need extra resources for newly arrived migrant children who don't know English. Fair enough. From that standpoint, it would be reasonable to require immigrants to toronto to pass an IELTS test with an expected minimum score so as to ensure they can speak English well. Those immigrants who don't know English will naturally "Ghettoize" into their language communities, and those are in fact in the large citise such as Toronto. If all migrants are required to know English before comming, however, then those who don't know English wouldn't come to Canada in the first place, and those who do would in fact be capable of functioning outside their ethnic communities, thus not feeling such a need to trap lock themselves up into their respective Toronto Ghettoes.
Call it English Canada's Bill 101 if you will, but I do agree Quebec has handled immigration much more effectively if for no other reason than that it did ensure, with some exceptions, that all immigrants to Quebec would in fact know the common language, which was French. As a result, they don't all conglomerate around Montreal. You'll find them in Quebec city and even in places as small as Charlevoix county. Because French is given preference, most immigrants come from France, Belgium, Switzerland and French Africa. Chinese are few because most Chinese couldn't cut it in a French environment. But those who could were welcome. Therefore, they likewise don't Ghettoize so much.
If English Canada had its own Bill 101 of sorts, it could do the same by taking in those who know English, thus mostly from Ireland, the US, and Commonwealth nations. If a Frenchman wants to immigrate to TO, then he'd better know English, simple as that. That would help with eliminating Ghettos in To and allow immigrant populations to spread a little more.
In the meantime, perhaps instead of complaining, those in TO could gtive of their time to teach English to new arrivals.
1. Immigrants not only use health care, but also pay taxes. So that breaks even. Due to low birth rates in Canada, immigration is really just replacing population for the most part, along with some slack to allow for stable populaiotn growth. Asd for pollution, well what's the difference if one destrys the O-zone from Sao Paulo or Toronto? Same effect. So instead of beggar0thy-neighbour policies, how about promoting ecological conservation world-wide. Now there's a thought.
Now on the other hand, I will acknowledge the author has a few points. He mentinned the schools need extra resources for newly arrived migrant children who don't know English. Fair enough. From that standpoint, it would be reasonable to require immigrants to toronto to pass an IELTS test with an expected minimum score so as to ensure they can speak English well. Those immigrants who don't know English will naturally "Ghettoize" into their language communities, and those are in fact in the large citise such as Toronto. If all migrants are required to know English before comming, however, then those who don't know English wouldn't come to Canada in the first place, and those who do would in fact be capable of functioning outside their ethnic communities, thus not feeling such a need to trap lock themselves up into their respective Toronto Ghettoes.
Call it English Canada's Bill 101 if you will, but I do agree Quebec has handled immigration much more effectively if for no other reason than that it did ensure, with some exceptions, that all immigrants to Quebec would in fact know the common language, which was French. As a result, they don't all conglomerate around Montreal. You'll find them in Quebec city and even in places as small as Charlevoix county. Because French is given preference, most immigrants come from France, Belgium, Switzerland and French Africa. Chinese are few because most Chinese couldn't cut it in a French environment. But those who could were welcome. Therefore, they likewise don't Ghettoize so much.
If English Canada had its own Bill 101 of sorts, it could do the same by taking in those who know English, thus mostly from Ireland, the US, and Commonwealth nations. If a Frenchman wants to immigrate to TO, then he'd better know English, simple as that. That would help with eliminating Ghettos in To and allow immigrant populations to spread a little more.
In the meantime, perhaps instead of complaining, those in TO could gtive of their time to teach English to new arrivals.
#30
RE: Immigration: does Canada really get it?
Jul 13th, 2006
I suppose another possibility would be to adopt a "local population policy". An example of such might be the following:
Priority for citizenship goes to those who, bisides meeting all other requirements, including a language proficiency test, can meet the followinng criteria.
1. Take up residence in a local comunity in which according to statistice fewer than nine people speak the same native language you do unless it's English or French of course.
2. Take up residence in a community in which according to statistics fewer that nine people share the same faith you do.
Priority for citizenship goes to those who, bisides meeting all other requirements, including a language proficiency test, can meet the followinng criteria.
1. Take up residence in a local comunity in which according to statistice fewer than nine people speak the same native language you do unless it's English or French of course.
2. Take up residence in a community in which according to statistics fewer that nine people share the same faith you do.
Similar Threads
26
4
8
2