JLM and Dump the Monarchy have hit the nail on the head... Canada already admits more than we should based on humanitarian and family reasons. The current trend is transforming Canada into a dumping ground for the sick and infirm. While the situation is fully deserving of sympathy, it is not this nation's responsibility to bend over backwards to provide healthcare to people that should been cared for in their home nation.
Immigration Policy
- Thread starter JLM
- Start date
JLM and Dump the Monarchy have hit the nail on the head... Canada already admits more than we should based on humanitarian and family reasons. The current trend is transforming Canada into a dumping ground for the sick and infirm. While the situation is fully deserving of sympathy, it is not this nation's responsibility to bend over backwards to provide healthcare to people that should been cared for in their home nation.
The problem we have is that our birth rate is very low, below replacement level (less than 2.1 children per couple). We need to admit immigrants just to keep our population from declining.
We have a scarcity of young people, and a surplus of older people. Young people generate tax revenue, older people consume it. To support the older population, we need younger population and we don't have enough of that.
Other than the refugees, most immigrants are professional class and their families. It is almost impossible for somebody who does menial work to get immigration to Canada (unless there is a dire shortage of such workers, like live in maids etc.).
The maid who cleans our house and my wife's office came here from Philippines. But this again reflects on our low birth rate.
Are you sure? I think it probably is India which has more English speaking people than any other nation. The medium of instruction in India is English at the university level, and I was told that almost anybody with high school education and up has a working knowledge of English.
Certainly the people who come here from Indian subcontinent seem quite proficient in English. Same cannot be said of the Chinese immigrants.
Quite so, I would like to see a website on this. If I had to guess, I would guess that India has more English speaking people than any other country.
Canada pays for the health care of its immigrants and citizens. So Canada wants to make sure that it won't be stuck with a large health care bill as soon as the immigrant comes to Canada. So it makes sense to keep the sick people out of Canada.
Not only that, but I was told that Canada sometimes requires medical examination from third world visitors, before they are granted the visitor or tourist visa.
Quite so. Unlike USA (where government is not responsible for the health care costs of an immigrant), Canadian government by law is required to cover all the health care costs of an immigrant. So it makes sense to keep the sick people out.
Quite so, Bar. I posted before I read your post, but my guess about India having the biggest number of English speaking people (next to USA of course, that goes without saying) was spot on.
India was under British rule, so Indians took to English in a big way. China really has no connection with English language, other than that it is needed for trade and commerce.
It is written at the Statue of Liberty Give us your "tired," the "poor" and the "huddled masses yearning to breath free." No one who follows proccedue is refusued for reasons of being sick as well.
Now could that be one of the reasons our health care is so high, we have a lot of people to take care of.
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
This is what Lazarus said. This is what we all believed. This is what made all American citizens feel great about our country.
Briefly, here is what I think should be in the bill:
It was mentioned earlier that bigotry grows within special clubs, I hope no country falls into that catagory.
Now could that be one of the reasons our health care is so high, we have a lot of people to take care of.
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
This is what Lazarus said. This is what we all believed. This is what made all American citizens feel great about our country.
Briefly, here is what I think should be in the bill:
- An amnesty period of about 2 years for illegal immigrants and for employers of illegal immigrants
- After the 2 year period, no guest workers
- After the 2 year period, knowingly employing illegal aliens brings jail time
- After the 2 year period, all illegal aliens are eligible to become citizens, provided they pass an English class and an American History class
- Border patrols are beefed up
It was mentioned earlier that bigotry grows within special clubs, I hope no country falls into that catagory.
The spirit of that statement was targeted at providing refuge for those that were subject to tyranny and oppression. The evolution of that statement morphed into "The land of opportunity".
Factor in the notion that there was no such thing as universal healthcare or anything that resembles the current system of social support/services and the opportunity to extrapolate innuendo into the original message is greatly reduced.
If you and your compatriots are willing to provide that service to all comers; my hat's-off to you.
Yes we do, someone has to. Yet they still come, universal health care must be not that important to them. Anyone would get the finest health care in the world if it was needed right here in the U,S. Cost with us is no object, and as to the cost to the patient we just write it off if need be. The only ones complaining about cost are the Democrats and it gets worse that farther left you go. This country has a long way to go before it gets so crowded we live in one mega city. Let the immigrants line up like everyone else and wait their turn to be admitted legally. The immigration policy now enforce is more than capable of doing its job. It is the politicians who have turned their backs upon us by not obeying it. Right now all this objecting to the present immigrations is to get people all worked up over what they don't know in order to hopefully get more democratic votes from the Hispanic community.
You have just confused the hell out of me.
Can you explain this? I'm getting a mixed message (below).
I am not American and therefore I'm on the outside looking in, but the US economy is perilously close to hitting the wall between the debt and the deficit. Assuming the position that you can spend more and "write it off" doesn't help that circumstance. Companies write off costs/expenses to defer payments made to the government.. Governments can't - or at least get no benefit from writing off these expenses... It's a straight cost.
The only ones complaining about cost are the Democrats and it gets worse that farther left you go.[/quote]
I thought that it was the republicans that were upset about the cost and Dems that wanted to keep spending.
Can you explain this? I'm getting a mixed message (below).
I am not American and therefore I'm on the outside looking in, but the US economy is perilously close to hitting the wall between the debt and the deficit. Assuming the position that you can spend more and "write it off" doesn't help that circumstance. Companies write off costs/expenses to defer payments made to the government.. Governments can't - or at least get no benefit from writing off these expenses... It's a straight cost.
The only ones complaining about cost are the Democrats and it gets worse that farther left you go.[/quote]
I thought that it was the republicans that were upset about the cost and Dems that wanted to keep spending.
"Unlike USA (where government is not responsible for the health care costs of an immigrant), Canadian government by law is required to cover all the health care costs of an immigrant. So it makes sense to keep the sick people out."
So, all the people of Mexico - you know, the people who have been betrayed, ignored, rejected and sold out by their own corrupt government, to the extent that they felt compelled to leave the country of their birth - snuck into the United States, because the knew that they will not get medical coverage?
SirJosephPorter, I am sure no matter where you live there is a Tim Horton's nearby.
So, all the people of Mexico - you know, the people who have been betrayed, ignored, rejected and sold out by their own corrupt government, to the extent that they felt compelled to leave the country of their birth - snuck into the United States, because the knew that they will not get medical coverage?
SirJosephPorter, I am sure no matter where you live there is a Tim Horton's nearby.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hong Kong was a British colony and not really part of China until recently. China was never a British colony, India was. So you are really comparing Hong Cong with India, not China with India.
Besides, population of Hong Cong is negligible compared to population of China. So I hardly think that Hong Cong being a British colony in the past really makes that much difference.
Which brings to mind another idea..........we know the Gov't spends ten of thousands of $ for each immigrant it lets in, they could save that money by just closing the gate and paying our own mothers to have kids. I suggest the Gov't pays mothers $10,000 to have a third child, $20, 000 to have fourth child and $30, 000 for a fifth child and each child thereafter. That would solve a multitude of problems- some womens best skills are the ability to have kids but can't afford to, others would but can't take time from the work place whereas if they were being paid for having kids that would free up jobs for other people who need them and reduce unemployment. The Gov't could layoff all immigration officers - that is an expense we don't need.
Last edited by a moderator:
What was it before and what is it now? Botswana? Why is english mandatory in Changzhou grade schools which is 1000km from Hong Kong or Shenzhen?
How come your link didn't included China?
BTW. Ever heard of the Raj?
What is more of an embarrassment is that the questionaire was apparently made by a Canadian...........as far as putting idiots in positions of authority we must be the laughing stalks of the world. :lol:
