Toxicity Scores & Embeddings

The Liberals and their woke ideology are ruining Canada. Canada's aging population means we need immigration, but not when things like housing, jobs, and healthcare etc are already beyond maxed out. They've been bringing in too many 'refugees'-unvetted and likely a large portion of which may not actually be refugees, and then there's the ridiculously high number of 'temporary foreign workers' - the majority of these are people with values, hygiene and morals that are not acceptable or cohesive in our country. Unfortunately many are muslim and have beliefs in sharia law which dates back to the 1400's and is primitive and contrary to our Western values and morals. I am hoping Canada is not too far gone to save (although I have my doubts).

Now that a large portion of us real Canadians are starting to feel the negative effects of this 3rd invasion we are enduring the agencies responsible for protecting our borders are NOW going to start doing their jobs eh? But let me guess. It will be half measures and a half assed commitment with no real enforcement. I have zero faith in this country.

Canada has changed significantly in recent years, and I believe our post-COVID immigration policies have played a major role in the challenges we’re facing today. Here’s how things went off track: Many individuals who couldn’t pass the IELTS (English proficiency test) entered the country on visitor visas or through spousal sponsorships—some of which were questionable or fraudulent. During that time, the government was converting visitor visas into work permits with little to no scrutiny. Background checks and rejections were rare. Meanwhile, colleges rapidly expanded their intake capacity—understandably so, since international students pay three to four times more in tuition. At the same time, due to inflationary pressures, the government allowed international students to work 40 hours per week instead of the previous 20-hour limit. This created a new, ready-to-work labor force in just a year or two, heavily impacting the retail sector. As a result, a large portion of retail jobs shifted toward a single ethnic group, while many Canadian citizens found themselves sidelined. One key factor was flexibility. Many immigrant communities—particularly Indian—were more willing to accept irregular hours and last-minute shifts, often adopting a more compliant, “yes sir” attitude that employers found appealing. However, I’m already beginning to notice changes in the retail landscape, likely due to the government finally tightening immigration rules. Going forward, we don’t need to close our doors—but we do need smarter immigration policies, with proper checks and balances, to ensure fairness and sustainability for everyone.

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).