Close Reading

Immigration is being reduced by Carney. We’re all good

I’m a proud Indian who is now a Canadian citizen, and I’ve made a conscious effort to assimilate into Canadian culture and values. What bothers me is how this conversation has been reduced to blaming one group. The reality is that the Canadian government failed first by not properly managing immigration volumes, not enforcing document verification, and not honestly assessing whether the country could support such rapid population growth. That policy failure created pressure on housing, jobs, and social systems long before resentment followed. We also need honesty within the Indian community. Some Indians struggle to adapt being overly loud, culturally rigid, and sometimes lacking empathy for Canadian norms and shared public spaces. I studied Canadian and Indigenous history in school, and respecting that history matters. Assimilation doesn’t mean abandoning your culture, but it does mean understanding and respecting the society you chose to join. Cultural education should be expected, not optional. That said, one Indian doing something wrong does not make all Indians bad. Most Indian students and workers I know are hardworking, punctual, and serious about contributing. I’ve personally worked minimum-wage jobs for years, and what I noticed was not jobs being “taken,” but fewer Canadian youth willing to stay in or commit to these roles long-term. Indians didn’t replace Canadians, they filled vacancies that already existed. I also briefly volunteered helping the homeless, and what I saw was honestly shocking. It’s not that the government isn’t trying to help there are rehabilitation programs and support systems in place. The difficult truth is that a significant portion of the homeless population struggles with substance abuse and refuses treatment because it requires giving up drugs. Over time, homelessness itself starts to function like a culture, where benefits and assistance unintentionally enable continued substance use rather than recovery. This is an uncomfortable reality people don’t like to talk about. None of this is simple. Immigration didn’t break Canada, and neither did one community. Poor policy, weak enforcement, lack of accountability, and refusal from governments and individuals to adapt responsibly is what brought us here. Blame is easy. Honest solutions are not.

I think due to the prosperity and stability Canada has enjoyed for so long Canadians have developed a certain standard of living and expectations in regards to that. So no, we don't want to have to work 2-3 minimum wage paying jobs to get by, no we don't want to live 4 or more to a 400 sqft studio apartment, yes we want to be able to afford our own homes, yes we want to be able to achieve a stable middle class lifestyle. That doesn't work for the crony capitalists who's greed and lust for power always needs satiating. So we have the Liberal government bringing in more immigrants than we have infrastructure to accommodate in an effort to keep wages down so profits can always be up. Immigrants who are willing to accept a lower quality of life than what most Canadians expect/accustom to because it's still superior to where they came from. So the quality of life for all Canadians is exponentially reduced. We are to accept a lower quality of life and if we resist then we are branded with all kinds of derogatory names; racist, xenophobe, fascist, unacceptable fringe, far-right extremists, et al. What's undeniable is that before the Liberals took power in 2015 we had an immigration system in Canada that worked quite well and that since the Liberals took power our immigration system is a destructive mess. This isn't by accident or incompetence, it's intentional, by design. Unfortunately Canada has a problem with so much of our population being ideologically blind, willingly ignorant, easily manipulated, cowardly staying in an abusive relation with our current oppressive government. Question is can the country be saved before too much damage is done?

Trudeau has the same mental defect Trump has. He's a raging malignant narcissist, criminal and fraud. He just happens to be at the opposite end of the political spectrum. This is what happens when you elect a spoiled, silver spoon nepo-baby who has never had a job in his life that wasn't handed to him on silver platter. I will NEVER forgive the LPC for this worthless POS. He has destroyed Canada! Immigration doesn't need to be reduced 20%, it needs to STOP until we clean up the mess Trudeau has made! He's let millions enter Canada, half of the them illegally, and hasn't built a single hospital, a single prison, hired a single doctor, border agent or police officer. We are all drowning in debt while being victimized by Trudeau's migrants who he's let just walk across our border, for years! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

@TheGuardian: Your title is misleading (at best). When given circumstances of true immigration are present, a majority of Canadians (or any other country, for that matter) have proved to be accepting. This is not the current situation, hence my noting that your title is misleading. Multiple countries are, during economic strife, being inundated with individuals perporting to be immigrants and stretching an already bad situation to breaking point. One questions the logic behind such decisions as can be illustrated thusly. A family is struggling with funds so decides to advertise a space in return for income and an understanding/expectation of contributing towards the general upkeep of said space. This would be mutually agreeable. The family would increase the hardships AND the effort they would be responsible for by taking in someone when they are at breaking point. They might, upon better circumstances, invite someone in to help bridge that guests progress... but not indefinitely. Now let's return to the current situation, shall we? It is not one but many. There is increased, NOT REDUCED, burden of effort. Some are not abiding to the general agreements of the house and, at least, doing their *fair* share. So, coming back to your title of this misleading piece, it is disingenuous and sonewhat preaching to present either the question or an argument without being cognizant of these relevant facts.

There are now quite a few news stories in Canada of immigrants leaving the country - some back home and others to the USA and other places. Many just get a Canadian passport and then leave. There are public health care and pensions, so it can be an asset and also a convenient travel document to have. A lot of Canadian university graduates have a very hard time finding work in their fields and a lot of them look to the US for a better future. Both immigration and unemployment in Canada are much higher that in the US - so more people are chasing fewer jobs that often pay less and are taxed more than in the USA. Opportunities are generally a lot fewer in Canada than the US, and the business environment is not as favourable, and taxes significantly higher. You would be getting some of the entrepreneurs from Canada moving to the US for more favourable conditions as well to launch a business and also now a lot more rich investor types, so-called high net worth individuals wanting to relocate, because they just raised the capital gains tax in Canada. Capital gains is also triggered on inheritance in Canada with a deemed sale of property and assets, so rich people would prefer the American system and want to be residents there for tax purposes and have their assets grow in value in the US compared to Canada. There are very large numbers of foreign students and other categories of immigrants which may have as their goal going to the US after getting a temporary visa to Canada which is easy to get - maybe something like half a million to a million people in those categories depending on the year, plus around another half million regular immigrants and refugees now. The Trudeau administration has increased immigration to record numbers. It has been steadily going up over the years for several decades since 1990. Because of family re-unification it can have a snowball effect and could significantly exceed 1 million per year. A lot of the sending countries have much larger populations than Canada, so there are a lot more that can be potentially sent to Canada in the future. About 1/4 of the population of Canada has been added in the past few decades. Add to that visitors and temporary visas - that is a lot of people potentially moving to the US. Before the 1990s Canadians visiting the US were not required to have a passport and a drivers' license or birth certificate was adequate. Now a passport is required. It is impossible to effectively control the long Canada-US border, so there could be some unified policies in that area agreed on between Canada and the USA on immigration and refugees. Canada currently has a very open immigration policy with the government actively seeking out more immigration beyond its current processing capacity and trying to take rejected immigrants from other countries. The Canadian government, especially in recent years under Trudeau is immigration hungry. It might be the only country in the world doing that. What some news reports are now saying is that some immigrants are actually leaving, since they find it so difficult in Canada and some are worse off than they were in the countries they came from, which were considered to be less developed than Canada. \nWashington currently has more immigration controls and administrative competencies than Ottawa, so US pressure and influence is a faster way to get reforms into the system than waiting for local politicians to do anything, which is unlikely. Canada is seen by some as a backdoor into the US. Biden's immigration policies could be seen as very conservative in Canada compared to Trudeau's. It used to be in the news about how refugees were trying to get to Canada and walking across the border in Quebec and out west from the US earlier, but now there are more news stories of immigrants leaving Canada trying to go the other way, probably due to high costs and unemployment because the government took in more people than it could absorb into the economy. They have the idea that immigration drives GDP growth so that they can borrow and spend more, expand the civil service, etc. without making any cutbacks or efficiencies, supposedly without the Debt to GDP ratio getting worse, just by bringing in more people as if that would drive the economy. A lot depends on who you bring in as well. Are they going to go on welfare, are they going to increase crime, will they somehow contribute to society, are they a net tax benefit or cost in terms of government services, will they invest money, will they start a business and create jobs for others ? Those issues do not factor into government decision making in Canada for the most part. Ontario Premier Doug Ford did say there were too many foreign students. It is bad planning not to consider those factors since there are other costs that grow with those policies as well, and infrastructure has to be expanded. I think that the real immigration numbers to Canada are not transparent or made public, nor are the costs involved, if anyone even knows what they are. Nor is the impact on crime. You can guess from what the reports are in other countries. The Fraser Institute has made some estimates on the net costs of immigration to the government budget a few years ago, which were very high and which by now have increased - the cost equivalent of several new aircraft carriers each year. They are big numbers which are not publicized, but it amounts to the fact that immigration is subsidized by the taxpayers in Canada and it is not paying for our pensions as an ageing society as has been claimed. There is less money for education, health care and pensions per person, and those social benefits will probably have to be reduced over time. Social programs can only be delivered to the extent that the government has money. The bigger social system a county has, the more such immigration policies are going to cost. Trudeau has been expanding various social programs as well, so higher taxes and debt are likely with that approach. Then more productive people and companies will want to leave Canada and go to the US. Probably the government does not know what the actual numbers and costs are and doesn't actively keep track of that information beyond what is required. Probably nobody knows what the true immigration figures and their associated costs are in Canada, and hardly anyone has even studied those issues. If they can just walk across the US border and get papers so easily making an asylum claim, it is not surprising, since it would take them longer to get a regular visa and work permit if they did it legally. You could call that a loophole in the US immigration system which is being exploited. The US is better governed in general and has a better system in many ways, but I am not sure if it is the same on that. People have arrived on boats and have not been sent back. At least in the US you have more open information about those issues. In Canada it is hard to find out anything about it. Deportations from Canada are very few. \nOn other issues in Canada when voting in federal elections you have to show a government issued photo ID like a drivers' license or passport to vote and bring a card that was mailed out to eligible voters that gets updated addresses when a person files their taxes. I have never heard of mail-in ballots in Canada, but there are remote areas of the country in the far north who may have special system for voting. It is easier to get a Canadian citizenship than US and many more citizenships are handed out in Canada each year in proportion to the population than in the US. Canadian might be one of the easiest citizenships to get in the world. The official line now is that it is a country of immigrants. Based on current trends, will very little opposition to it in the parliament and most MPs supporting it, future immigration to Canada could increase to several million per year because of the rapid growth of population in the world, and the momentum already growing of immigration to Canada, so it may change significantly in the future. Historically around the world you can see many examples that country names, borders, flags and languages change over time with population changes, so it might not be called Canada anymore in 50-100 years. For example, Bulgaria used to be called Thrace which had been a powerful kingdom in antiquity and had a different language which is barely known about anymore. Over the past 2,000 years it has gone through a number of changes and had various regimes governing it, has been independent and also part of several different empires. Canada has only been a country for a short time in comparison and has been been going through significant changes. Trudeau has said that Canada is a post-national country. Canada is also going through a period of critical self-examination and deconstruction-revisionism. A lot of what had been viewed as positive from its history now is seen more critically, with re-naming and removing historical figures now seen as negative.\nDiscussing immigration policy critically is considered by many to be taboo in Canada, unless a person is saying good things about it in general. You can hear people say that the government isn't processing enough people, for example, but not often that there are too many or that it costs a lot of money. The trend of migration from Canada to the US would only increase much more in the future as it is going currently, and its role as a stepping stone to migration to the US could increase. The way this would be seen by many in Canada is that they are losing valuable people to the USA whom they consider assets, since a lot of officials have been trying to bring in more people into the country, but not everyone wants to stay in Canada nowadays because of a lack of jobs and opportunities. Canada is quite laissez-faire about migration, with Toronto being a sanctuary city as well.

Ironically due to the economic conditions and mass immigration, younger Canadians aren’t having children anymore due to it being hard enough to get by without any dependents. I’m in my mid 20s, lots of married friends, none will entertain the idea of kids.\n\nWhat I would prioritize changing:\nA more thorough immigration process that does not favour any country over another. And spread the people out to the smaller communities that need workers instead of turning Toronto into whatever it is. An end to the corporate alliance price fixing on things like insurance, cell phones, and air travel. Reduced taxes for your first property, but additional if you own several (a system similar to what Norway does). Reduced foreign ownership in our home real estate market (home should be for families, and not financial assets for international businesses).\n\nAnd like the video said some more darn infrastructure. In my childhood, I saw entire neighbourhoods being built in - timely fashions. Now it’s rare to see a single home under construction in my home city. Some smaller Canadian towns I know even lack potable water.\n\nWith the market so bad no one wants to build or buy which is just amplifying the issue.\n\nAnd no carbon tax. I apologize for getting political, but the last 10 years the federal government seems to be more concerned with values and foreign intervention than fiscally responsible decisions. The culture can dictate the values, I just want the government to make the trains run on time.\n\nI hope it gets better soon but I think we are cooked. Least for the foreseeable future.\n\nIt’s ludicrous to be taxed as much as we are here as well. If ur gonna take 40% of my paycheck least make sure its being put to good use. Had to do a double take last time I was in BC and the bill included a “carbonated beverage tax”

In 1968, in the city of Birmingham, Enoch Powell, delivered his warnings that dismantling Britain’s borders, and allowing mass numbers of non-Caucasian, and non-Christians to enter would culminate with a ‘Rivers of Blood’ scenario. At that time, the percentage of Birmingham’s population that was non-white, was less than 3 percent. Now, some 55 years later, in 2024, non-whites are a slight majority of Birmingham’s population. The great preponderance of whom are also non-Christians. Conversely, at that same point in time, London’s non-white demographic was slightly higher at 5 percent. Whereas now, white-British have also been reduced to nearing minority status.\n \nFive years after Enoch Powell delivered that address in Birmingham, the novel, Camp of the Saints, by Frenchman Jean Raspail, was published. In this work, Raspail duly warned of the immense danger that would befall France, by allowing unfettered numbers of immigrants from Third World cradles (ostensibly from its former African colonies) to swarm in. However, what he also correctly predicted was with guilt-ridden/self-hating/bleeding-heart liberals would willfully facilitate culturally unassimilable interlopers from the Third World to transgress Europe’s shores. \n \nBut it would be three and half decades before the dire predictions Enoch Powell espoused in 1968, would come to pass. And this cavalcade of horrors first emerged on March 11, 2004, in Madrid, when a group of Islamic fundamentalists systematically detonated 10 bombs on four trains approaching the city’s main CBD railway station, at Atocha. Those instances callously claimed the lives of 192 innocent people, and injured another 1800. \nThen, 16 months later in London, on July 7, 2005, another group of Islamic fundamentalists replicated the Atocha event detonating bombs on trains and buses slaughtering a total of 52 people, and injuring about 800 others. In the subsequent 16 years after the London bombings, another 288 (accruing to be 532) innocent people were slaughtered, in a Reign of Terror, across Britain and Europe, which was callously inflicted by Islamic fundamentalists. \nNow, in Australia, on April 15, 2024, in the Sydney suburb of Wakely (Fairfield), a 16-year-old Islamic terrorist strolled into the Assyrian Orthodox Church, of The Good Shepherd, and stabbed its bishop. This dreadful event culminated with up to 500 of its parishioners gathering outside the church to stage a very violent riot in the subsequent hours. Their sole objective was seeking to get hold of the perpetrator, and exact their revenge upon him for this atrocity. \n \nWhilst being detained by churchgoers shortly after the attack, the 16-year-old assailant can be distinctly heard saying on a video clip that he had stabbed the bishop, because he’d “insulted my prophet”. Therefore, those few words, indisputably designate that this assault was premeditated: and, therefore an act of terrorism. Yet, in spite of him saying these words, the usual suspects have emerged in the past few days downplaying affairs. Some of them (all Muslims) are querying how authorities had been so quick, and eager to call this an act of terrorism.\n \nNeedless to say, it’s an absolute certainty that in the coming weeks that the ‘system’ will surreptitiously maneuver, and manipulate circumstances to cast this goon as being a mere aberration within Australia’s Islamic community. Rather, than him being reflective of a significant component of the Muslims here. To garner the reality that there’s no shortage of Muslims in Australia whose prime allegiance is to Islam, merely requires perusing photos, and video clips appearing in media coverages depicting Muslims congregating outside Mosques. Most of them will be clad in some form of traditional attire, praying to Allah. What this all amounts to is to prove there are no shortage of Muslims here in Australia (and, indeed, Britain, France, and Belgium/Holland, or Canada, and the US), who consider themselves answerable to the teachings of the Quran, before the society they’re in. \nIn the near future, we will be constantly bombarded with the line that this 16-year-old terrorist is not representative of Muslims, which of course is correct. However, the most ominous concern is that, there needs only to be a couple of hundred fundamentalist Muslims in the country who hold extreme views to wreak havoc. \n \nTragically, mass intakes of people from a bevy of non-Anglo/European cradles over the past 30-35 years has radically transmogrified Australia’s two largest metropolises of Sydney, and Melbourne. So much so that, within the short space of a bit more than three decades (1990), Anglo/Europeans have been reduced from being 94 percent of these cities’ populations, to now becoming the ‘collective’ minorities: at around 47 percent. \nTo ascertain this glaring reality, merely requires travelling on any train, at any part of the day that runs through the corridor of 20 stations between Burwood/Strathfield, Granville and down to Liverpool. By doing so, you will quickly realise that people of non-Anglo/European extractions will account for at least, 80 percent of all those people you will observe, either standing on platforms or travelling in carriages. \n \nFor the record, of the 400,000 net-increase of Sydney’s population in the decade up until February 2024, 280,000 of them have been immigrants (either permanent or temporary) who are sourced from non-AE, and non-Christian societies. But what’s strikingly apparent about any of the main business districts of places which have an array of different ethnocultural entities traversing the streets (such as Bankstown), is with how none of them interact with each other: let alone do they have a connection to Australia. \nAs of Saturday morning on April 20, less than 290 hours after the attack at Wakley, there have been many media stories analysing how this heinous event could have come to fruition. Their essences range from querying if intelligence bureaus had any prior knowledge of the assailant: and, if so, then why wasn’t he intercepted earlier. Well, to be fair to law-enforcement, and intelligence entities, keeping tabs on anyone dabbling googling up any facet of extremism, is nigh on impossible to achieve. So, engaging in a blame game on this is futile. \n \nTragically, what the media should be pondering, is the immense sociological cataclysm that Australia is sinking into. All of which is due to the insanity of successive governments from the late 1980s, rapidly drawing in millions of culturally unassimilable immigrants from a large array of non-AE ethnicities? The culmination of this madness has ultimately destroyed the host’s culture. And, moreover, with these immigrants forming culturally-insular enclaves/colonies.\n \nSo, it now comes to pass all these years after Enoch Powell, and Jean Raspail, warned us of would eventuate with dismantling borders, concludes with scores of acts of vile terrorism from 2004, being perpetrated by rabid Islamic fundamentalists. But, in spite of it being patently obvious to any halfwit that, mass-non-discriminatory immigration programs have destroyed the cultures of the host-societies, politicians in Britain, Canada, NZ, and of course, Australia, are totally committed to perpetuating large scale immigration intakes.

Liberals might be told what to do (influenced and bossed around) by the IMF, WEF, and UN “agendas” into taking all this very massive overload of the over amount of “unskilled Immigrants” being way, way too many in way too short of a time which should cut-off and stopped immediately. But rather instead “permanent immigration” should be reduced to 250,000 per year for about 90% “highly skilled” Immigrants only. Temporary Foreign Workers should “have to” go home after their work permit expires “and” International Students should “not” be allowed to work in Canada then they “have to” go home after their University Degree is finished.

ISLAMISATION OF EUROPE, ENGLAND AND AMERICA. Actually, we see in Sueden, Denmark, Germany, England, Australia, New Zeland and other countries, the fiascos, promoted by MERCKEL for immigration. In all those countries, by millions, the Muslims are making pressure to introduce the Shariah Law and, for one, MERCKEL let them to. Pretty soon, we will see those countries, introduce representations in their government and, it will be the end of them. As drastic a measure, by all means, those Muslims must be reduced by numbers. Statistics don't lie. While the average children birth, represent 1.5 per couple, we see rates of 4 to 16children per man in Muslims communities. On top of being in tandem with islamism, they are supported by social programs, where they can benefit of all the ressources of SOCIAL SECURITY, PUTTING UNDER THE NATIONALS. In Canada, their population is 1,053,945 or 3.2% . In USA, their population is 3,450,000 or 1.1%. \nWe observe in Canada, a government representation of Muslims in strategic positions. The same is observe in USA. As a matter of facts, the usual patterns of infiltration is in progress and, we even see COURTS referring to the Shariah Law as weight on our regular administration of JUSTICE. THERE COULD NOT BE TWO (2) SYSTEM OF JUSTICE for our citizens. IMMIGRANTS HAVE TO CONFORMED TO THE LAW OF THE LAND, not to the SHARIAH. The operating system among democratic countries cannot be base on the Quran (Coran) and, the prescriptions of their Prophet MOHAMED. Those archaic systems were designed to control human activities in the Arab World, not in the WEST. It is at work since the 7th century. At the speed they go, Canada will be a Muslim State in 30 years. I said it before, Canada must joined the United States as fast as possible, to reduce the muslim influence or, drastic measures be introduce to reduce their number. In Quebec, for exemple, the LAW is in process to reduce their influence and, many muslims already think to move West of Quebec. That's a society very flexible to change of perceptions. Our LAW must not show any flexibility to the application of the Sharia Law and our understanding of liberty of religion, must stay private if need to. Moskes liberty must be stop at all costs and, no permit delivered. Those moskes are serving the only purpose of endoctrination and, make undue pressures on american values. Gerry