Author Topic: Immigration policy  (Read 155 times)

Offline SirJohn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 465
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration policy
« Reply #15 on: March 05, 2017, 04:32:29 pm »
Sure, I like my job, but if money just magically appeared in my bank account, I'd probably be doing something different with my life.

I guess my point was that or every woman who got a career as a doctor, lawyer or accountant there are hundreds working at Wal-Mart or at fish factories.

Quote
Independence is a big deal for me. The idea of being financially dependent on a man to take care of me is pretty terrifying... it would be terrifying for me even if I were heterosexual.

That's because of the culture you were raised in. It wasn't considered important in the 50s. Of course EVERYONE was heterosexual in the 50s, even if they weren't.

Quote
Few men in their early twenties are able to support themselves financially, let alone a wife and a child.

Granted, though that was the introduction to this sort of sub-topic, ie whether the introduction of 100% more workers into an economy depressed wages. My mother's father worked as an elevator operator. On the princely salary this paid he supported a non-working wife (well, she did take in some laundry sometimes)  and eight children. They were poor but no one starved. My uncle worked as a armored car guard. He supported a non-working wife and three children, bought his own house with an in-ground swimming pool, and had a fairly comfortable time. But the economics of these lower skilled jobs have vastly changed in the intervening years.

Offline kimmy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 280
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration policy
« Reply #16 on: March 05, 2017, 06:26:58 pm »
I guess my point was that or every woman who got a career as a doctor, lawyer or accountant there are hundreds working at Wal-Mart or at fish factories.

And I'm sure a lot of men feel the same way, even if their jobs pay reasonably well.

That's because of the culture you were raised in. It wasn't considered important in the 50s. Of course EVERYONE was heterosexual in the 50s, even if they weren't.

I imagine that even in the idyllic days of yesteryear there were women who stayed in terrifying abusive relationships because they financially had no other option.  Independence, for me, isn't just a little trophy I can stick on a shelf.  It's being able to provide for my own security and live the life I want to.

Granted, though that was the introduction to this sort of sub-topic, ie whether the introduction of 100% more workers into an economy depressed wages. My mother's father worked as an elevator operator. On the princely salary this paid he supported a non-working wife (well, she did take in some laundry sometimes)  and eight children. They were poor but no one starved. My uncle worked as a armored car guard. He supported a non-working wife and three children, bought his own house with an in-ground swimming pool, and had a fairly comfortable time. But the economics of these lower skilled jobs have vastly changed in the intervening years.

30 years ago, my dad was making money roughly comparable to what I'm making now, adjusted for inflation, and he was supporting a stay at home wife, toddlers, and had a 3 bedroom house with a yard and a garage. Today on a similar income I've got 2 plants and a 1 bedroom apartment the size of a phonebooth, and I'm still strapped for cash.

The economics have definitely changed, and these "when I was your age..." anecdotes tend to reinforce the point.

 -k
Agree Agree x 4 View List

Offline SirJohn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 465
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration policy
« Reply #17 on: March 06, 2017, 12:27:40 pm »
The economics have definitely changed, and these "when I was your age..." anecdotes tend to reinforce the point.

 -k

Granted. The question is, what changed them?

Offline cybercoma

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 384
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration policy
« Reply #18 on: March 06, 2017, 03:19:38 pm »
Granted. The question is, what changed them?
Politicians genuflecting at the altar of supply-side economics.

Offline dia

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 164
  • Location: Fraser Valley
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration policy
« Reply #19 on: April 04, 2017, 08:02:40 am »
CBC criticizes JT for misleading people about the ease of relocating to Canada; turns out its not so easy.
Quote
This year, the government says it plans to take in 40,000 refugees within the total target number of 300,000 new immigrants in 2017. These numbers sound generous, but the reality is that Canada's immigration policy is very selective in terms of who gets citizenship. Our nation's immigration process involves a point system that scoops the cream of the crop from a long queue of applicants, which is hardly the wide-open door implied by Trudeau.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/trudeau-message-to-refugees-1.4051008
“Neither a man nor a crowd nor a nation can be trusted to act humanely or to think sanely under the influence of a great fear.”
Bertrand Russell, Unpopular Essays

Offline SirJohn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 465
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration policy
« Reply #20 on: April 04, 2017, 09:22:42 am »
CBC criticizes JT for misleading people about the ease of relocating to Canada; turns out its not so easy. http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/trudeau-message-to-refugees-1.4051008

That we turn down one third of in-country asylum seekers is hardly reassuring. In most countries it's more like 90%. The fact is tact is that by the time someone gets this far they're country shopping, not fleeing persecution. That's what the safe third country measures recognize. All those Africans and Mexicans, soon to be joined by Romanians coming into Canada are doing so because they are economic migrants who don't qualify or who don't want to spend the time immigrating by the normal route.

Offline wilber

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 162
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration policy
« Reply #21 on: April 04, 2017, 09:23:26 am »
Refugees and immigrants are two different animals. The same rules do not apply  to both.

Offline SirJohn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 465
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration policy
« Reply #22 on: April 04, 2017, 09:30:48 am »
Refugees and immigrants are two different animals. The same rules do not apply  to both.

Granted, the article was confused on that matter. It spoke of both. On the other hand, refugees are a large segment of our immigration stream.

Offline jmt18325

  • Moderator in Chief
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 589
  • Location: Waterhen, Manitoba
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration policy
« Reply #23 on: April 04, 2017, 02:11:49 pm »
That we turn down one third of in-country asylum seekers is hardly reassuring. In most countries it's more like 90%. The fact is tact is that by the time someone gets this far they're country shopping, not fleeing persecution. That's what the safe third country measures recognize. All those Africans and Mexicans, soon to be joined by Romanians coming into Canada are doing so because they are economic migrants who don't qualify or who don't want to spend the time immigrating by the normal route.

I'd like a citation on that 90% figure.

Offline dia

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 164
  • Location: Fraser Valley
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration policy
« Reply #24 on: April 04, 2017, 11:28:39 pm »
I'd like a citation on that 90% figure.

You beat me to it.   :)
“Neither a man nor a crowd nor a nation can be trusted to act humanely or to think sanely under the influence of a great fear.”
Bertrand Russell, Unpopular Essays

Offline dia

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 164
  • Location: Fraser Valley
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration policy
« Reply #25 on: April 05, 2017, 12:08:38 am »
That we turn down one third of in-country asylum seekers is hardly reassuring. In most countries it's more like 90%.

According to DHS, they accepted 47% of their asylum seekers in 2015.   http://tinyurl.com/m4uoope

The European Union accepted 61% of asylum seekers in 2016, on first review.  http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Asylum_statistics

Russia accepts between 2% and 5% of asylum seekers.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_and_asylum_in_Russia

Isreal accepts about 1% ... http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.600617

Harder to get figures for Middle East and Africa.   Japan doesn't seem to accept any refugees and China does, although not Syrians.
“Neither a man nor a crowd nor a nation can be trusted to act humanely or to think sanely under the influence of a great fear.”
Bertrand Russell, Unpopular Essays

Offline Moonlight Graham

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 86
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration policy
« Reply #26 on: April 05, 2017, 12:16:55 am »
CBC criticizes JT for misleading people about the ease of relocating to Canada; turns out its not so easy. http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/trudeau-message-to-refugees-1.4051008

Quote
Our nation's immigration process involves a point system that scoops the cream of the crop from a long queue of applicants, which is hardly the wide-open door implied by Trudeau.

The points system is only for skilled workers.  Roughly half of the immigrants who are coming into Canada are specifically for economic/skilled benefit to the country.  The rest are spousal applications, "humanitarian and compassionate" cases, refugees, family reunification etc.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.

Offline SirJohn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 465
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration policy
« Reply #27 on: April 05, 2017, 03:23:33 pm »
The points system is only for skilled workers.  Roughly half of the immigrants who are coming into Canada are specifically for economic/skilled benefit to the country.  The rest are spousal applications, "humanitarian and compassionate" cases, refugees, family reunification etc.

In reality, most of those who come in under the skilled worker program are not skilled workers but their families. After that comes the 'family reunification program' where potential immigrants do not face screening for language, education or job skills, then refugees, who likewise face no such screening, then a few obscenely rich people, mostly Chinese and Russians, permitted to buy passports to keep in their wall safes at home. They don't intend to move here but just want the passports in case needed.

Also, immigrants entering the US under their skilled worker program must have a job offer in advance, we make no such demand.