Left wing haste and wrecking ball

Vbeacher

Electoral Member
Sep 9, 2013
651
36
28
Ottawa
Canada has been taking refugees for over a century. Some times en mass during exceptional times. Canada's immigrational policies aren't new. The hysterics over it often come from right.

Canada used to take in immigrants who were of largely the same culture, values and skills as existed here, and we offered them nothing much in the way of government support. If they failed, in other words, it was no skin off our nose. It's not like they could go on welfare or pogey since those things didn't exist any more than public health care or pensions.

In the 1970s the Liberals expanded that to the third world, and in the 1980s the PCs tripled immigration to help their election chances. Now we have a growing population of foreigners who, in some cities, outnumber native-born Canadians. And a significant number of them in large groups have little interest in adapting Canadian values, especially the ones coming from Muslim countries.

What is worse these are also the groups which have the least economic success in Canada because of their generally poor skill level and language abilities. Which means they're not paying taxes but consuming them.

There is actually no economic support for immigration in the numbers we're getting from the places we're getting them. That's why the Fraser Institute said immigration is costing Canadian taxpayers over $30 billion a year in services to immigrants who don't pay enough in taxes to pay for those services.
 
Last edited:

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36
Chinese were coming to Canada even before Confederation. Nothing new there. We had Jews in New France.

Four years after Canada's founding in 1867, the 1871 Canadian Census found 13 European Muslims among the population.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Canada#History

Nothing new.

Now I'm no fanatical capitalist. That said, I do see one advantage to open borders. It applies pressure on the government to streamline the welfare state back to what we had pre-WWI.

the left often defends slightly open borders and big government. I can guarantee that if we opened the doors wide like pre-WWI, even the left would quickly rethink the welfare state since the left pays taxes too. So why not give the left what it wants on this?
 

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36
It is strange though that many peace movements and internationalist movements actually arose prior to WWI, perhaps in response to rising tensions at the time. In some ways (not to romanticize or exaggerate), the pre-WWI era might have been more progressive than today.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
You forgot Greenpeace, Forest Ethics, etc. et al.

.... Hell, the Left Coast is populated (almost) exclusively with leftard fanatics

I guess that explains Christy Clark.

Oh I know where our political parties stand. They start with the conservatives at middle of the road and head left with the NDP being far left and a few fringe parties like the greenies and various communist parties being extreme left.The closest we have to a right wing party would be the christian heritage party and they are only far right on social policy.



Wouldn't that be looking after your own best interests?

I am afraid your post reveals that you do not know where Canada's political parties stand. Labeling the NDP far left is equivalent to calling the PCs and Conservatives Nazis. What you have to understand is that over the last few decades the NDP has moved steadily to the right from its once more extreme position when it was the CCF. However, even during the 1930s the CCF was never communist. As a matter of fact it was founded as an alternative to communism.
 

Dixie Cup

Senate Member
Sep 16, 2006
6,555
4,134
113
Edmonton
Yep, and the right wing is "Oh, the only way to deal with terrorist threats is to ban all Muslims from coming to Canada ever, and expelling the ones who are here!"

I don't know if it's modern telecommunications or what, but it seems like leaping to extremes and howling, never giving an inch, is the modus operandi. Oh, that and accusing the "other side" of doing it and pretending "your side" is the voice of reason.



And you're a perfect example of exaggerating the other sides issues! Again, the hypocrisy is incredible.


I don't believe that anyone on this forum has ever said to "ban all Muslims and expelling the ones who are here". If they have, they're the exception. Common sense would dictate that ALL immigrants, refugees included, be vetted as best we can to ensure they're coming here for the right reason. Canada needs immigration. That's not in dispute. But we also have to be wary of those who come into our country with not our best interests at heart. The vast majority are more than welcome and add to our mosaic. But it would be stupid if not down right dangerous to simply open the doors (as Trudeau has done) with not a clue of who is actually coming in.


So you sir, are out-to-lunch in your assessment of those who are concerned about our immigration policies. Painting everyone with the same brush that you don't agree with is fool hearty and disingenuous and merely shows your prejudices. Shame on you!


JMHO
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
61,370
10,063
113
Washington DC
And you're a perfect example of exaggerating the other sides issues! Again, the hypocrisy is incredible.


I don't believe that anyone on this forum has ever said to "ban all Muslims and expelling the ones who are here". If they have, they're the exception. Common sense would dictate that ALL immigrants, refugees included, be vetted as best we can to ensure they're coming here for the right reason. Canada needs immigration. That's not in dispute. But we also have to be wary of those who come into our country with not our best interests at heart. The vast majority are more than welcome and add to our mosaic. But it would be stupid if not down right dangerous to simply open the doors (as Trudeau has done) with not a clue of who is actually coming in.


So you sir, are out-to-lunch in your assessment of those who are concerned about our immigration policies. Painting everyone with the same brush that you don't agree with is fool hearty and disingenuous and merely shows your prejudices. Shame on you!


JMHO

let's just say you missed the point. That's OK.
 

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
http://www.torontosun.com/2017/06/12/refugee-background-checks-may-have-been-flawed-memo

Justin Trudeau’s fast-tracked Syrian refugee program may not have conducted proper background checks in some cases, a government memo obtained by the Toronto Sun reveals.
The memo — dated November 2015 and compiled by civil servants in the department of Immigration, Refugee and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) — raises serious questions about the screening and vetting Syrian refugees received before coming to Canada.
While the Trudeau government has maintained that proper screening precautions and security checks were taken, information in the memo suggests otherwise.
The document reveals that Syrian refugees were issued government documents that included “misspellings, incorrect DOBs (date of births) and gender.”
This calls into question the thoroughness of the background checks conducted by the Trudeau government. Without vital information about a person, including his or her full name — with correct spelling — date of birth and gender, a background check would be futile.
The fact that Syrian refugees were issued government documents with errors is deeply troubling.
The internal memo — obtained through an Access to Information request and shared with the Sun — was produced by non-partisan civil servants within the federal immigration department.
The memo was based on a forum held with participants from various local, provincial and federal government departments to discuss Trudeau’s 2015 election pledge to admit over 25,000 Syrian refugees in just a few short weeks.
The forum was held on Nov. 28-29, 2015, in Toronto, in the midst of the turmoil of trying to implement Trudeau’s ambitious political promise.
While the Liberal government eventually abandoned its initial eight-week target for Trudeau’s resettlement pledge — extending the timeline by two months to Feb. 29, 2016 — the memo describes the chaos and confusion felt by those on the ground who were scrambling to implement this partisan pledge.
“Participants noted that the ambitious target and timeline put enormous pressure on financial and human resources,” the memo reads.
While much of the feedback and recommendations from the forum amount to simply throwing more resources and more money to various government agencies for their refugee budgets, another recurring theme is clear: that Trudeau’s refugee timeline was totally unmanageable.
The memo concedes “the challenges of an ambitious scope, scale and timeline of Trudeau’s Syrian refugee scheme” and lists two pages of “areas of improvements and feedback for consideration.”
The recommendations include “increased advance planning,” “early clarification of the roles and responsibilities” and “contingency plans for unexpected events.”
The “unexpected events” included cancelled flights, medical issues and no shows.
Many experts have alleged that Trudeau’s decision to resettle 25,000 on a fast-tracked timeline was based not on what’s best for Canada, but on short-term thinking and partisan gain.
The memo notes that future refugee efforts “need to think longer term.”
left haste and wrecking ball.
 

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,892
129
63
Have you noticed that on issues, easily demonstrated by most threads on this website, the left wing standard MO is one of haste then a race to an extreme reaction often advocating taking a wrecking ball to an existing system.

For example. It is not enough to say Canada needs to increase their intake of refugees. The left usually says "OMG! Somethings needs to be done right away and the only possible way to make it happen is if we pull out all the stops and safe guards. Lets take a wrecking ball to our immigration policies for the next 3 months."

Probably one of the biggest problems with this is their inability to have an intelligent and rational discussion once they have worked themselves into a frenzy.

Your thoughts on this?
Hence the name "drive-by media" given to the MSM by Rush Limbaugh.
 

Angstrom

Hall of Fame Member
May 8, 2011
10,659
0
36
Have you noticed that on issues, easily demonstrated by most threads on this website, the left wing standard MO is one of haste then a race to an extreme reaction often advocating taking a wrecking ball to an existing system.

For example. It is not enough to say Canada needs to increase their intake of refugees. The left usually says "OMG! Somethings needs to be done right away and the only possible way to make it happen is if we pull out all the stops and safe guards. Lets take a wrecking ball to our immigration policies for the next 3 months."

Probably one of the biggest problems with this is their inability to have an intelligent and rational discussion once they have worked themselves into a frenzy.

Your thoughts on this?

Its why it's called progressive. Most Liberals believe the best solution is to act swiftly & boldly to situations & adapting to the consequences. After the fact.

The conservatives, on the other hand prefer to protect & think, to detect possible consequences in a situations to hold on to what our country has already achieved and maintain it rather then having to adapt to new realities that could be less pleasant.