Canada To Bring in 1 Million Immigrants In Next Three Years - One Of Most Aggessive Increases Ever

People from the better places should be encouraged to move to the places having trouble in order to teach them.the way things work. We are doing it backwards. The genes and culture of the people who do it better should be injected into places that haven't made it so well.. Aliens would tell us we are doing it all backwards.

I saw on one of those homebuying programs where this girl from the US met some guy in a small country I believe in Africa that the average person hasn't heard of (I can't even remember the name now). Anyway, they could buy a nice house for a fraction of what they would spend in the US and really the standard of living wasn't half bad. It' like being okay with a 7/10 level of living without all the negative drama for a fraction of the cost. It made me think.
 
Those leafs sure do love them some "cultural enrichment".
 
This woke bitch is going to go down as the worst ever mayor of Canada.
 
That's almost a 3 percent population growth.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/immigration-canada-2018-1.4371146

Ahmed Hussen tabled the Liberal government's plan on Nov. 1st:

"Canada will welcome nearly one million immigrants over the next three years, according to the multi-year strategy tabled by the Liberal government today in what it calls "the most ambitious immigration levels in recent history."

>

"Hussen said immigration drives innovation and strengthens the economy, rejecting some claims that newcomers drain Canada's resources and become a burden on society."

>

"Conservative immigration critic Michelle Rempel was critical of the plan, suggesting the government needs to do a better job of integrating newcomers.

'It is not enough for this government to table the number of people that they are bringing to this country. Frankly the Liberals need to stop using numbers of refugees, amount of money spent, feel-good tweets and photo ops for metrics of success in Canada's immigration system.'"

>

"During the government's consultation period, the Canadian Immigrant Settlement Sector Alliance presented "Vision 2020," what it called a "bold" three-year plan to address growing demographic shifts underway in the country, calling for increased numbers in the economic, family and refugee categories.

It recommended a target of 350,000 people in 2018, which climbs to 400,000 in 2019 and 450,000 by 2020.

Chris Friesen, the organization's director of settlement services, said it's time for a white paper or royal commission on immigration to develop a comprehensive approach to future immigration.

"Nothing is going to impact this country [more] besides increased automation and technology than immigration will and this impact will grow in response to [the] declining birth rate, aging population and accelerated retirements," he told CBC News."

________

On related notes.

Canada has the highest number of foreign-born citizens of the G8 countries at 20.6% of the population.

http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/99-010-x/99-010-x2011001-eng.cfm

  • In 2011, Canada had a foreign-born populationFootnote 1 of about 6,775,800 people. They represented 20.6% of the total population, the highest proportion among the G8 countries.

  • Between 2006 and 2011, around 1,162,900 foreign-born people immigrated to Canada. These recent immigrants made up 17.2% of the foreign-born population and 3.5% of the total population in Canada.

  • Asia (including the Middle East) was Canada's largest source of immigrants during the past five years, although the share of immigration from Africa, Caribbean, Central and South America increased slightly.

  • The vast majority of the foreign-born population lived in four provinces: Ontario, British Columbia, Quebec and Alberta, and most lived in the nation's largest urban centres.








Way to scaremonger, you cretin.

Reading the actual article, rather than your carefully curated "tuk arr yobs !" scenario, one can make out a couple of things.

1) The Canadian Immigrant Settlement Sector Alliance presented "Vision 2020" is an immigration industry organization. Of course they want 400k immigrants BUT the government's numbers are a good 100k a year less.

2) Canada needs immigrants to fund Social Security, Medicare and other social programs as just internal demographic growth isn't enough. In 1970 we had 6.6 ppl contributing for every senior citizen. By 2020 it'll be down to TWO.
Do the math.

3) Not all are poor immigrants from 3rd world countries. Immigrants come from all walks of life and from all over the world. You don't meet them because the only ones you see are the cab drivers and waiters.
Take a drive up to British Properties in Vancouver and tell me about these "poor" immigrants some more.

4) The overall number of refugees allowed in is only increasing by ONE PERCENT.
That's your war torn Somalians, Afghanis, Syrians etc you're so worried are going to grab your women.
A ONE PERCENT increase.

5) and finally, immigration is a net positive for a country......ALWAYS.
One only has to look at the examples of the US and Japan to see examples at either end of the paradigm.

While there may be problems in assimilating a minority of these, most do assimilate quite nicely. And while there is some initial expense involved with SOME of them, it's the second and third generations that give the modt benefit and contribute to public taxes.
Countries should (and do) take a long term view of public finances and immigration.
Demagogues and rednecks don't.

But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of a good whinging.

<LikeReally5>
 
Way to scaremonger, you cretin.

Reading the actual article, rather than your carefully curated "tuk arr yobs !" scenario, one can make out a couple of things.

1) The Canadian Immigrant Settlement Sector Alliance presented "Vision 2020" is an immigration industry organization. Of course they want 400k immigrants BUT the government's numbers are a good 100k a year less.

2) Canada needs immigrants to fund Social Security, Medicare and other social programs as just internal demographic growth isn't enough. In 1970 we had 6.6 ppl contributing for every senior citizen. By 2020 it'll be down to TWO.
Do the math.

3) Not all are poor immigrants from 3rd world countries. Immigrants come from all walks of life and from all over the world. You don't meet them because the only ones you see are the cab drivers and waiters.
Take a drive up to British Properties in Vancouver and tell me about these "poor" immigrants some more.

4) The overall number of refugees allowed in is only increasing by ONE PERCENT.
That's your war torn Somalians, Afghanis, Syrians etc you're so worried are going to grab your women.
A ONE PERCENT increase.

5) and finally, immigration is a net positive for a country......ALWAYS.
One only has to look at the examples of the US and Japan to see examples at either end of the paradigm.

While there may be problems in assimilating a minority of these, most do assimilate quite nicely. And while there is some initial expense involved with SOME of them, it's the second and third generations that give the modt benefit and contribute to public taxes.
Countries should (and do) take a long term view of public finances and immigration.
Demagogues and rednecks don't.

But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of a good whinging.

<LikeReally5>
Please provide links to peer reviewed research supporting your claims. Thanks.
 
20% of Canadians aren't from Canada?
Wow.

It's sad. Canada used to be on my short list of potential countries to emigrate to.
 
Toronto is amazing. I love it. The only place I like better is California.
 


Swedens government is an example of what our government is doing now, some controversial language in the vid

how can you sit through that whole video though?
 
20% of Canadians aren't from Canada?
Wow.

It's sad. Canada used to be on my short list of potential countries to emigrate to.
The immigration used to be controlled. Not so much these days
 
Australia had 28.2% born overseas in 2015, so it would be higher now.

Shit is pretty damn good here.
 
It has all the drawbacks of a big city with few of the benefits.

Cost of living is way too high while salaries are way too low. Prices have driven most of the sane people out.
It's a city of immigrants, so they naturally segregate themselves into separate groups.
Getting too crowded, traffic is horrible and with the continuous immigration it will just keep getting worse and worse.
For a big city, the women are nothing to write home about, while at the same time being ridiculously stuck up.
People are rude just like in any big city, always laugh when my friends expect nice and respectful Canadians and go to Toronto.
Last call is at 2am (even earlier for people who have to catch the subway), but most places are empty till midnight.
The people are just lifeless, way more than other big cities I've been to or lived in. Walking around, riding the subway, it just feels like everyone has been drained of their energy.
Also the worst SJWs in the world come out of Toronto.

IMO Vancouver is superior in every way to Toronto, and even that has it's issues with costs. At least you get what you pay for in Vancouver.


Most of that isn't true.

Housign is not cheap, but itw now a condo city similar to NYC or Paris.
People are crazy friendly.
Lots of after hours places if you want to keep going.
Traffic sucks, for sure. take the TTC.
We do need more hot latinas fro sure, so you are okay with that one.
The city is lively with tons of stuff to do.
Agreed that most new immigrants self segregate, which is imo the biggest problem with immigration; however, 2nd and 3rd generations have traditionally moved out of that neighbourhood. My kid goes to school with pretty much every colour of kid .... except black.

Sounds like you have a very small town mentality which I am not judging. btw.

on and lol Vancouver meets more of your criteria above than Toronto
 
Back
Top