Toxicity Scores & Embeddings

Please help me understand why mass migration is considered beneficial. I believe globalization has very significant drawbacks. My primary concern is for my fellow Canadians "ONLY." It seems that the increase in new residents is driven largely by political motives, as new migrants often support the Liberal Party due to the benefits they receive upon arrival. Both the Liberal government in Canada and the Democrats in the United States appear to be aware of this trend. Regardless of political affiliation—whether Liberal, Conservative, Green, or any other party—if my party were to adopt such a policy, I would oppose it. Canadians really need to wake up. We need responsible citizenship that upholds and strengthens our Canadian culture and values.

Canada needs more MPs like this Lady. She is competent + genuinely concerned for the mess + taking concrete measures in her power/actions and not mere lip service or condemnation

These financial INCENTIVES are PULL FACTORS that draw them here. No wonder they are pouring over the borders looking for handouts. Who pays for legal aid, translating fees, public schooling, job training, food stamps, house subsidizing and uninsured hospital stays? Tax payers who’ve been paying in for years. So yeah.. that’s why they’re concerned...

i have a strong suspicion the deportees surrendered willingly. it's the ones who don't show up that are of very high concern. there are 4.7 million expired visas where ppl have never kept their promise.

I LOVE Indians. They're great and amazing people. The concerns are influences and ideology, as what's currently ongoing in the west - but doesn't have to do with them, necessarily much at all. God bless Indians. They push themselves hard in order to improve their lives and the lives of others around them.

WE HAVE A LOT OF ISSUES AND CONCERNS TO FIX AND ADDRESS IN OUR COUNTRY, INFLATION, LOTS OF PROTEST STRIKES, AND MORE, CANADIAN FIRST, CANADIAN ECONOMY, IMMIGRATION MUST CHANGE ASAP,

I am supportive of immigration, but I believe there should be a cap of no more than 1-2.5% annually. A significant number of migrants moving to Canada from the same region or country could cause issues, as this can lead to the formation of "mini-bubble" societies within Canada. These groups may sometimes become the dominant demographic and undermine the existing communities that have contributed to building Canada for decades. We cannot expect new immigrants to seamlessly merge into Canadian society. This is a major oversight by Canada’s Immigration Department. Digital applications from foreign nations may play a role in this phenomenon. There should also be regulations concerning how many new immigrants can be brought in by family members. For instance, one new citizen can legally bring both of their parents and their spouse, which is fair. However, there have been cases where this process is repeated multiple times within ten years, leading to a 1:15 ratio, where one person can bring in six to eight relatives. If there is a labor shortage in essential fields, Canada can offer long-term residency to those who continue to work in those sectors, such as caretakers. However, the pathway to citizenship could be lengthened or require a higher standard. For instance, the requirements could extend from X years of living in Canada to X+5 years, as well as passing a basic Canadian citizenship test, either written or verbal. While an increase of five years may seem unfair or lengthy, it is essential. A newborn child from a Canadian family requires 18 years to gain voting rights in elections, whereas new immigrants—especially those who come for study for four to six years—can potentially gain both citizenship and voting rights sooner if they meet the previous administration's standard. Children under the age of 18 can gain citizenship in as little as X-4 years, regardless of their full integration into Canadian society. This loophole is sometimes abused and provides preferential treatment that favors this process over existing Canadian. In my opinion, it would be fairer to calculate the duration of "living in Canada" based on the number of years they have paid "income taxes" in Canada. This is important because many individuals with multiple passports pay taxes elsewhere while benefiting from Canadian healthcare and other services. The investment in home buying as a pathway to citizenship has contributed to the housing crisis, resulting in numerous empty homes in various regions. While it may offer short-term economic benefits that some politicians favor, it is detrimental to Canada as a whole. If buying a house is the only requirement for citizenship, wouldn't a large portion of the global population be eligible for U.S. citizenship just by investing in U.S. businesses or stocks? This perspective may seem illogical when looking at it from outside the box. Apologies for being a bit wordy; I had much more to say. Nonetheless, I also support temporary residency for up to 6-9 months for those who have been evacuated due to war, natural disasters, or similar circumstances. Special exceptions can be granted for families with members working in critical fields that merit such considerations (high-end industry).