Immigration critical to Canadian population growth: census

[L Gilbert]

I wanna add an anecdote here: across the lake from me is a Swiss fella who wanted to move to Canada and set up a business and hire a few Canucks to work the business. It took him years (and a lot of money on LD phone calls, visas, permits, reports in quadruplicate, and 400 other hoops the gov't threw at him) to get here.
On the other hand, there's an "artist" from Spain across the lake, also, and he simply applied for immigrant status, passed the required spelling test, and now lives here happy as a clam, getting drunk when he wakes up, staying drunk all day, and once in a while actually doing something artistic.
As Ton said, it doesn't compute. Nor does it bode well for Canada's future.

 

[tamarin]

Gilbert, we do need to be more cautious. If Canada felt more like a democracy I might be more comfortable thinking local views would carry to parliament. But there is a divorce between Ottawa and the 300 odd ridings that contribute to it as wide as the Atlantic. Parliament is agenda driven but whose agenda is it?

 

[L Gilbert]

Gilbert, we do need to be more cautious. If Canada felt more like a democracy I might be more comfortable thinking local views would carry to parliament. But there is a divorce between Ottawa and the 300 odd ridings that contribute to it as wide as the Atlantic. Parliament is agenda driven but whose agenda is it?

Silly question. Parliamentarians have very little sense of service (except to themselves and their party), so because of that Parliament has little sense of service except to itself and whichever party is in it..

 

[tamarin]

And whose agenda are such parties in service to?

 

[L Gilbert]

I said "themselves".

 

[tamarin]

Sounds like parliament is a large, self-interested leech. If so, our democracy has been compromised. In techno terms, we've been corrupted. Maybe Canadians should simply boycott the electoral system then. There's little self-respect in maintaining a system that simply debauches its supporters. We'll take a leaf from the Yanks: no elections without representation!
My MP will like this letter: we've decided there will be no local federal election held until we've fixed the mess you and your party and fellow parties have created. It is unthinkable to drop a writ until we give you the go ahead.

 

[L Gilbert]

Boycott, no. Adopt a direct democracy or change electoral system, yes.

 

[tamarin]

I prefer a boycott. It'll be the easiest of the choices to implement. Like things simple.

 

[Tonington]

The easy way out is rarely the best way out. It's easy enough to depose leaders and implement democracy....There is something to be said for the hard fought battles. Change requires conviction and that conviction is not the easy way.

Edit: simple works for some things, I wouldn't say a change in governance is one of them.

 

[L Gilbert]

Boycott would be impossible to achieve. We almost have a boycott periodically. Pols and EC don't give a hoot. As long as there's a few who will vote anyway, the election will go forward.
Besides, what would happen after everyone boycotted? No elections ever again? Nice.

 

[s243a]

And do the census wonks give us a profile of Canada 25 and 50 years down the road as to what our population mix will look like if present immigration patterns continue? Surely, if we're baking a pie we should be entitled to see what the final product will look like. Those gungho on opening up the country have a responsibility to those here now as to what they're achieving by opening the gates. There should be a responsible immigration debate in the country and the 'reps' in Ottawa should be listening to what Canada's citizens want. And acting accordingly. And not. To put it bluntly, if current policy makers and their special interest buddies want the country to be 51% Chinese by 2075 I'd like to know about it.

I think it should be an equal amount of men and woman otherwise dating could end up very tough for single guys.

 

[L Gilbert]

I think it should be an equal amount of men and woman otherwise dating could end up very tough for single guys.

lol. Good idea.
But, what if there are lots of women married and lots of unmarried men in the country to begin with.?

 

[tamarin]

I think only metrosexual people should be allowed to immigrate. That way we'd all have a chance to be cool and happy.

 

[Kreskin]

100 years from now Canadians won't give a hoot what we some neanderthal white dead people of today felt the country should look like or how it should be governed in their time. It will be different than it is today. I wouldn't trade our societal values today for what were the norm 100 years ago.

 

[tamarin]

Kreskin, look at a map in 100 years and Canada won't be here. If global warming is right and the mid-century witnesses global turmoil and wars for water and fertile land I don't think we're going to make it through in anything like our present form.

 

[Zzarchov]

The biggest problem with our immigration system is we aren't taking people who want to be Canadians.

We are taking Brain Drain. Canadians flock south of the border to take work and good high paying jobs all the time. I've been offered a few.

But when we retire, we go back to Canada..and contribute our pensions to the Canadian economy..screwing the USA over.


Now we do the same thing. I am friends with Immigrants from China, India, Singapore and Russia...all of them plan to return home after they save up enough money..part of which they send home every month. Bleeding our economy.


We need to stop this brain drain policy and go back to an immigration policy that works, that worked on our country. Take in refugees.

Not the kind who show up on a plane, the type who flee in columns, wounded and sick with all their belongings in a backpack.

Those are people who will want to be part of Canada, who will have children that will think of themselves as Canadians first. Its what we have traditionally done.

Our other problem is the whole Urban/Rural issue, but thats another debate.

 

[Kreskin]

Kreskin, look at a map in 100 years and Canada won't be here. If global warming is right and the mid-century witnesses global turmoil and wars for water and fertile land I don't think we're going to make it through in anything like our present form.

So why bother reserving it for white guys only?

 

[karrie]

100 years from now Canadians won't give a hoot what we some neanderthal white dead people of today felt the country should look like or how it should be governed in their time. It will be different than it is today. I wouldn't trade our societal values today for what were the norm 100 years ago.

I agree Kreskin.

Few people I know sit around questioning how the First Nations people would like us to behave, yet this was their nation. We're the original immigrants. And it certainly won't stop with us. We're shrinking, and we need immigrants to pay for our social programs. End of story. The best we can do is work to ensure that the human rights we've put in place, stay in place. Other than that, what the country will 'be like' is irrelevant. Change is inevitable, even good sometimes.

 

[tamarin]

Why should any country think its traditions and heritage worth keeping? Is that what you're asking?

 

[tamarin]

Karrie, that is feel-goodism run amok.