Monday, 28 January 2008

Enough with foreign ownership? I agree. Canada should nationalize its economy and its public spaces.

Here is another diatribe against foreign ownership from the Canadian left which can be read here care of The Toronto Star.

I happen to agree with them. NAFTA is hogwash and a mistake for Canada. The soft wood lumber dispute exposed NAFTA for the fraud that it is. Also, you only see strong economies seeking free trade agreements with weaker economies that can bullied. You don't see the United States and Japan engaging in any free trade talks though both countries are actively seeking free trade agreements with weaker countries. Also, the United States and Japan account for almost half of all global economic activity. They are also two of the most protectionist economies in the world. Coincidence? China is also extremely protectionist and that country is being hailed as the next super power though that remains to be seen. But this is all a digression.

If foreign ownership of Canada's economy is a bad thing then why is the foreign ownership of Canada's public spaces a good thing? What I mean by this are neighbourhoods that have effectively been transformed to reflect foreign societies due to the settlement of a foreign people into them. These neighborhoods become de facto colonies of foreign nations. They can be of any nationality; Italian, Ukrainian, Chinese, Indian. These spaces, these neighbourhoods, cease to be Canadian and when you are in them you are practically no longer in Canada. The land has effectively been surrendered. You see this in the very common Toronto expression "I can visit the entire world simply by walking outside my house." So why is this a good thing? If this trend spreads to the whole of Canada any uniqueness that was Canada is erased forever. Is a unique Canadian identity not worth cultivating and preserving? Are Canadians not allowed a country to call their own or are we somehow compelled to share this country with the entire world to colonize how they see fit?

Southern Ontarians can look forward to a tax increase due to mass immigration.

The implementation of road tolls, congestion fees and gas levies is effectively a tax increase for the average Canadian. The residents of the city of Toronto and the surrounding area known as the GTA (Greater Toronto Area) may see these tax increases in their future. The reasons for this is to help fund public transit and necessary highway upgrades among other things. The Toronto Star published two articles adressing this issue which can be read here and here.

Here are some excerpts from the first article.

Tolls, gas taxes urged to fund roads, transit

Jan 21, 2008 03:48 PM

Ontario should follow the example set by some European countries and charge drivers road tolls, congestion fees and gas levies to pay for necessary highway upgrades and improved public transit, a study released today recommends.

Although the province’s former finance minister is already putting the brakes on the proposal, the study’s author said the extra charges on southern Ontario’s 400-series highways and major thoroughfares would help reduce both greenhouse gas emissions and traffic jams by getting people off the roads.


A toll of seven cents per kilometre of travel would generate $700 million in revenue each year and drivers could be billed by mail, Kitchen said. A fuel tax of about six cents a litre could generate up to $420 million per year to relieve gridlock and improve public transit without raising property taxes, he added.


“It’s not necessarily all about raising revenue,” he said. ``It’s about getting efficient use of it. What (tolls) are effectively doing is keeping cars off the road — reduce congestion and reduce their environmental problem. That is a value too.”

So apparently road tolls, gas levies, and congestion fees are about getting people off the road. It seems there are too many cars on the road. Anyone living in Toronto and the GTA can tell you that. The question you have to ask yourself is where did all of that traffic come from?

Here is the second one.

Tolls strike fear, loathing in hearts of car junkies

Jan 23, 2008 04:30 AM
Christopher Hume

Public transit riders have been familiar with the concept since the beginning; they're called fares, and everyone who rides the rails pays them. In Toronto, fares on the much-unfunded TTC rank among the highest in North America.

But for some reason, those who ride the roads have always been exempt from almost any sort of user fee beyond gas taxes, which, conveniently, are about half what they are in Europe and much of the civilized world. (This doesn't include the U.S., a country so addicted to petroleum that even failed oilman-turned-president George W. Bush admits his people need help.)

That's why long faces greeted Kitchen's suggestion that we might want to consider putting tolls on the 400-series highways and others including the QEW, the Don Valley Parkway and the Gardiner Expressway. He also proposes increasing the fuel tax. And in a move that can be counted on to strike fear and loathing into the heart of every driver in the region, Kitchen recommends municipalities levy a tax on non-residential parking spaces. About time, too.

In many parts of the world, such notions are acceptable, if not popular, because they're necessary. By reducing the number of cars and trucks, we help clean the air and alleviate the growing congestion crisis. It's true the other side of this coin is adequate public transit, something we let go 30 years ago. But as Kitchen argues, the $1 billion-plus raised by the taxes could go straight to the Better Way(s).

It is clear that these moves are to get cars off the road and people onto public transit. I have no problem with that. I loath North American car culture. But the real question is would these taxes and levies be necessary if Toronto and the surrounding area didn't import over 1 million people every ten years? Toronto and the GTA have seen increasing traffic congestion because of mass immigration. Houses in Toronto are becoming increasing unfordable because of mass immigration causing home buyers, which includes immigrants, to look outside of Toronto. This contributes to urban sprawl and forces people to become more dependent on cars thus increasing congestion and green house gas emissions. Also, the TTC (Toronto public transit) is under considerable strain because of mass immigration as well for obvious reasons. It is under funded because the rapid influx of immigrants into the city has created greater demand for its services and thus needs to be upgraded to accommodate this demand.

These tax increases are just another cost to Canadians to fund Canada's ridiculous mass immigration policy. It's the cost of multiculturalism. But hey isn't it worth it? You know, when you're backed up in a queue waiting to drop some change in a toll booth, after crawling through heavy traffic, trying to get home from a long days work, just think of all the ethnic restaurants you can eat at. That'll ease the pain, I hope.

Saturday, 26 January 2008

File this under DUH! American, European immigrants most likely to settle in smaller cities and towns and succeed.

Why do you think that is? Is it because they are culturally and/or ethnically the most similar to the majority of Canadians and actually possess job skills this country need? Nah, couldn't be.

The following is from The Toronto Star which can be read in its entirety here.

Small is better for immigrants

Newcomers who settle in towns earn more than big-city peers, StatsCan finds
Jan 26, 2008 04:30 AM
Nicholas Keung

Contrary to conventional wisdom, immigrants in smaller Canadian cities and rural areas fare better financially than those who flock to Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal.

Newcomers to small towns earned on average 14 per cent less than native-born residents during their first three years in Canada, a Statistics Canada study released yesterday found. But their big-city peers earned 37 per cent less.

The small-town advantage became more pronounced over time. Not only did the income gap narrow in small urban centres, by the fourth year immigrants earned slightly more on average than the native-born population. By the 11th year, their earnings were 18 per cent above the median.

Big-city immigrants earned 22 per cent less than Canadian-born workers after four years, and almost 10 per cent less after 12 years.

This statistic shouldn't be used to distract us from the other Statistic that reminds us that over all immigrants earn less than Canadians and immigrant productivity levels have been decreasing for the past 20-25 years. To assume that all an immigrant has to do to improve his or her lot in Canada is to move to a smaller city or town is nonsense. But there is something else to this that needs consideration.
Demographics explain some of the disparity, said Margaret Walton-Roberts, geography professor at Wilfrid Laurier University. Three-quarters of immigrants in smaller cities were fluent in an official language, compared with 61.5 per cent of those in large cities.

While 61 per cent of the small-town immigrants were from Europe and the United States, those groups represented only 24 per cent of the big-city newcomers.

So 75% of immigrants who settled to smaller towns were fluent in either English or French and 61% were from either the United States or Europe. This would explain why they move to smaller cities and towns. It's because they are more comfortable doing so because they are the most culturally and ethnically similar to us. This may also explain their relative success. These immigrants may most likely be entering the country as a skilled immigrant and not some sponsored relative. This means that they have a University education or in some applied trade. For instance you rarely, if ever, see anyone of Asian or South Asian extraction working on a construction site or in a related field of work. Also we should note that American and European immigrants are not flooding our immigration system like Asian and South Asian immigrants are. Indian and Chinese immigrants, the top two immigrant groups to this country respectively, make a disproportionate amount of immigrants to this country seemingly in a steeple chase to see who can displace the host population first. A lot of this has to do with family sponsorships which is especially true for South Asian immigrants. Also, Asian and South Asian immigrants are most likely to use Canada's refugee system as another avenue to entry. The refugee stream, it should be noted, does not place any emphasis on job skills or language skills.

This news article supports what I advocate for our immigration system. First, we should decrease the immigration numbers to around 60-80,000 immigrants a year focusing exclusively on job skills and language skills. Second, and equally important, we should favour immigrants who are the most culturally and ethnically similar to us (I advocate this for any country mind you). The reduced numbers and culturally and ethnically similar immigrants will take the pressure of our large cities, curb urban sprawl, and combat ethnic enclaving and ghettoizing and growing poverty trends. I can see nothing but good things happening if we do so. Right now nothing but the opposite is happening.

However the article does have this to add.
Despite their success in small centres, Jacquie Rumiel, who heads the Y's New Canadians program, said many of her clients struggle with job barriers.

"I have mixed response to the report findings," she said. "Their success very much depends on labour market trends and the willingness of employers to recognize their education and job experience."

Canada imports 250,000-300,000 people are year irrespective of labour market trends. This is why we need reform.

The Toronto Star thinks it's time to debate the economy. How about immigration while we're at it?

Immigration cannot be estranged from the economy. That is the simple truth whether you wish to acknowledge it or not. Ignoring it or pretending it doesn't exist will not make that truth go away.

In this editorial The Toronto Star thinks it is time to debate the economy. You can read it all here.

Time for debate on the economy

Jan 26, 2008 04:30 AM

As this week of financial turbulence came to a close, Canadians were offered solace in a prediction by outgoing Bank of Canada Governor David Dodge that the economy will not be hit by a recession, although growth this year will slow to 1.8 per cent.

That forecast, however, hinges on Dodge's sanguine view that the United States will also manage to skirt a recession. For the year as a whole, he sees growth in the U.S. trailing only slightly behind Canada, with an annual gain of 1.5 per cent.

While we hope Dodge is right, we fear he is wrong. A souring of sentiment is clearly evident on Wall Street, where Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch and Citigroup are now all predicting a U.S. recession this year, with growth about half of what Dodge is predicting.

The forces of recession in the U.S. would certainly spill over into Canada, and particularly into Ontario and Quebec, which are much more likely to follow a downturn in U.S. than the pattern of continuing growth in the more robust Western provinces.

And yet Ottawa has shown neither a concern over the possibility of such a scenario nor a readiness to take action to counter a slump. All the Harper government has put on the table is a five-year, $1 billion package to retrain workers in already hard-hit, one-industry towns.

The rest of the editorial focuses on budgets and aid packages but what is missing is immigration (no surprise there). If The Toronto Star feels that David Dodge is wrong and a recession, or a downturn at least if there is a difference, is in the forecast for Canada then how is the importation of 250,000-300,000 people into Canada going to make things any better? How is this going to help laid off workers? How does this help landed immigrants? How are these people going to find work in such an environment and by work I mean decent paying jobs with benefits not counter help at fast food restaurants and other low paying jobs? It won't.

At one time Canada's immigration policy was tied to the nation's expected economic performance. The math was simple. In good times we allow in so many. In bad times we bring in less and maybe none at all. And it wasn't such a long time ago that we did this. In the early 1980s the Liberal government of Pierre Elliot Trudeau decreased immigration targets in relation to the economy. This made perfect sense because mass immigration will most likely make things worse for Canadians in a weak economic environment. Now that is no longer the case and you will be castigated as a racist if you think immigration levels should reflect economic performance. This is what happened to the Reform party when it suggested such a heresy.

As immigration reformers we need to pressure our government and our officials to return to such a policy. You cannot expect The Toronto Star to do it because it won't. It has a vested interest in keeping immigration levels ridiculously high no matter what the cost is to Canada and Canadians. It looks like it is going to take a grass roots effort to bring sanity back to this nation's immigration system.

Tuesday, 22 January 2008

Seriously! You really think Muslim immigration is nothing to be concerned about?

Then you must be looking forward to the day when you can take the family to watch these Muslims parade down Yonge Street in downtown Toronto as they exercise their freedom of religious expression and add to the the cultural mosaic that is Canada.

To be clear it is Shia Muslims who do this and they shouldn't be confused with the other 70 odd sects of Islam. They are celebrating the Day of Ashurah, that is if you call that celebrating. Wouldn't it be a triumph of multiculturalism to have that as a Canadian national holiday, to be televised on the CBC as we watch these fellow "Canadians" crack their skulls and the skulls of their children open? Multiculturalism, Sieg Heil!!!

Seriously folks what civil minded Canadian wants to tolerate that? I don't and I don't want to see it in my country. There are limits to multiculturalism and this Shia celebration is way past it. However, how can we stop it? Isn't it their Charter right to religious expression? How about their children? What right do we have to intervene? If we do then isn't that an overt declaration of cultural intolerance and superiority? After all, doesn't multiculturalism restrict us to cultural relativism, where all cultures are equal and deserve unconditional tolerance? If so then who are we to say anything negative about Ashurah festivities let alone stop it on Canadian streets?

Saturday, 19 January 2008

You still think Muslim immigration is nothing to worry about?

This is from The Toronto Star which can be read in whole here.

Canadian gets life in terror plot

St. Catharines man met with top Al Qaeda officials in devising plan to bomb U.S. embassies

Jan 19, 2008 04:30 AM
michelle shephard
national security reporter

He was the perfect Al Qaeda recruit.

The young Kuwaiti-born Canadian spoke English, was impressionable, and unsure of what to do with his life after leaving his St. Catharines home in the summer of 2000.

Even though Canada recognizes dual citizenship, a fact not lost on many immigrants who see Canada as nothing more than a hotel and shopping mall, I just love it how immigrants are recognized as Canadians by default even though they were not born here. When and when are they not Canadian?
Mohammed Mansour Jabarah's journey in the seven years since landed him in Al Qaeda's camps, introduced him to Osama bin Laden and sent him a mission he said was organized by the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

It brought him to Singapore where he went by the code name of "Sammy" and took surveillance video of the U.S. and Israeli embassies he planned to bomb.

In early 2002, he was arrested in Oman and brought to Canada before finally ending up in a U.S. jail.


He had already secretly pleaded guilty to four charges of conspiring to kill Americans and destroy U.S. property and one charge of giving the FBI a false statement.

At the time, he was promised a reduced sentence in return for his co-operation, but documents unsealed this week state that the deal was abandoned when authorities discovered he was plotting to kill his FBI handlers.

Authorities uncovered "a secret plan to murder FBI agents and prosecutors with whom he feigned co-operation," a sentencing report stated. They said Jabarah wrote a letter that claimed if he were released he would kill "until I am killed."

Jabarah told the court yesterday he had been "brainwashed" by terrorists and now wanted to see his family and go to school. "I've already applied to several Canadian universities," he said during a 25-minute speech.

Jabarah has not seen his parents, who alternate their time between Canada and Kuwait, since he was captured.

Alternate their time between Canada and Kuwait? Are they Canadians or are they just Kuwaitis with Canadian citizenship? I don't need an answer to that one. Actions speak louder than words.

These stories should not be used to generalize all Muslims. Most Muslims are law abiding citizens as the obligatory statement that accompanies such stories tell us. However, there is nothing against the law regarding the constant influx of Muslims into Canada and increasing the Muslim population in Canadian society who can dominate electoral ridings and constantly send Muslim MPs to Ottawa. There is nothing against the law regarding the formation of an Islamic political party in Canada and there is nothing against the law regarding the transformation of Canada into an Islamic state one mosque at a time. You don't think Muslims in Canada have these kinds of aspirations? Still think Muslim immigration is a good thing?

As I said before most Muslims in Canada are law abiding citizens to which I say so what? Even though the vast majority obey the law you only need a handful to be a real problem. What's stopping Muslim fanatics from bombing U.S. and Israeli embassies on Canadian soil and killing Canadians in the process? Are we so naive and full of ourselves to believe that the Madrid, London, and Bali bombings will not happen here just because we are Canadians and everyone loves us (at least that's what we tell ourselves)? These kinds of questions should be raised when considering Muslim immigration to Canada. It's unfortunate that many good Muslims, most Muslims in fact, have to live with the stigma of terrorism brought upon it by the actions of a few fellow Muslims. But that few have done a lot of damage and killed a lot of people and it just happens to be the reality of the world that Canada does not need to invite into its house. I'm sorry but its a problem Muslims have brought upon themselves and seem to be unable to solve let alone police.

It is wrong to brush aside the security concerns of Canada just to satisfy the materialist fantasies of some Muslim immigrants and the short term political aspirations of ethnic pandering urban politicians. Hand picking Muslim immigrants in their countries of origin coupled with a stringent security check should be satisfactory. I know there will be cries of discrimination but that's the whole point. Canada's current mass immigration policy is inadequate in sifting the wheat from the tares. The lives of Canadians may be the price we pay if we do not and the avoidable death of one Canadian is a price too high.

Housing boom artificially supported by mass immigration is hurting the poor, study should say.

The Toronto Star reported on a study that suggests Canada's poor are being hurt by the housing boom. The entire article can be found here.

Housing boom hurts the poor, study warns

Jan 17, 2008 04:30 AM
Laurie Monsebraaten
Staff Reporter

Housing in Canada's 22 largest cities is becoming increasingly unaffordable and the risk of homelessness is growing, a report warns.


"Many people in Canada's large cities struggle to find decent, affordable housing as they move from living on the street, living in emergency shelters and living in short-term transitional housing," said Richmond Hill Deputy Mayor Brenda Hogg, who oversaw the report for the federation.

Meanwhile, significantly more low-income families, many of them with children, are living on the brink of homelessness or in substandard housing, she said.

The report, which looks at trends in affordable housing and homelessness from 2001 to 2006, is based on data from Statistics Canada, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp., Citizenship and Immigration and Human Resources Canada.

Do you think the importation of 250,000(officially)-300,000(unofficially) immigrants a year has anything to do with it? Nah. Probably not.

If the NDP want to help Canadian workers and the poor it should pressure the government for lower immigration targets.

NDP leader Jack Layton talks a lot about helping Canadian workers and curbing poverty in this country but is he willing to do what is really necessary to accomplish this? Mass immigration has not been good to Canadian workers nor the poor. It has not raised the standard of living in this country for the average Canadian. It has not ameliorated Canada's poverty rate but has made it worse by importing an underclass into Canadian society and swelling the ranks of the poor. It has flooded the job market with superfluous labour keeping wages, benefits, and salaries down while gas prices, public transit fares, and the overall cost of living increases. How the importation of 250,000 (300,000 if we include illegal immigration) help Canadian workers and the poor, no one has explained and I doubt Jack Layton could either.

Here are a couple of Toronto Star articles where Jack Layton can be seen playing the role of social advocate.

The first one can be read here. Here are the key paragraphs.
The growing ranks of the unemployed and poor in Canada have lost their voice while the Conservative government speaks loudly for its corporate friends, NDP Leader Jack Layton says.


Layton said the front page of the Toronto Star's business section on Saturday told the story. One story reported that 18,700 manufacturing jobs disappeared in December, while another detailed "what the Bay Street boys were going to do with their big bonuses," Layton said.

The second one can be read here.
Stephen Harper needs to put himself in the shoes of the growing numbers of laid-off workers and take more aggressive action to tackle a brewing economic crisis, says NDP Leader Jack Layton.

Layton issued his own financial warning yesterday, grimly predicting 2008 will be the year when the "squeeze" on the middle class becomes more intense.

"We can see working people just losing their jobs by the thousands in the manufacturing, the forestry sectors," Layton told reporters.

"We can see it with people having a tougher and tougher time just trying to make ends meet," he said.

"There's that sense of economic insecurity and of course it affects people with the lowest incomes very seriously."


With recession fears heating up in the United States and provinces such as Quebec and Ontario raising a red flag about the loss of manufacturing jobs, the economy could emerge as a key issue if a spring election does happen.

Apparently Jack Layton is very well aware of the current economic climate. He knows that Canadian manufacturing jobs are being lost in the thousands. He is predicting tougher times for working Canadians. How does mass immigration help them? How is the importation of 250,000 people into a recessive Canadian economy going to see Canadians through it? It won't but the NDP will not seek lowered immigration targets because it is ideologically committed to helping working Canadians while supporting mass immigration which doesn't help working Canadians but mostly helps Bay Street boys who haven't decided what to do with their big bonuses.

What I want to stress on this blog, and I will stress it time and time again, is that immigration is estranged from meeting any real needs of this country aside from delivering votes to the federal parties. Everything else is secondary. The NDP party is just another flavour of political ice cream and it needs customers to buy its product to survive. The NDP have a hard enough time attracting enough votes to form the official opposition. It needs the immigrant and ethnic vote more so than the Liberal party. That's why the NDP will not pressure the government for lower immigration targets even in a weak economic environment though such a measure will benefit working Canadians and poor Canadians. The NDP is in the business of getting elected and that is more important to them than some Canadian who lost his job and can no longer support himself or his family.

Wednesday, 16 January 2008

Another white male, another conservative, another Human Rights Commission, another defendant, another attack on freedom speech.

Ezra Levant is another target of the Orwellian named Canadian Human Rights Commission. I call it Orwellian because in order to protect human rights these commissions restrict the most fundamental human right of all: freedom of speech. To deny us that right, or to severely limit it, is an attack on democracy.

Democracy works when we can speak freely without fear of being punished by the state or anyone else for that matter. How can we function as free individuals when we feel compelled to look over our shoulders every time we say something? What does it say about Canadian society when its citizens live in constant fear of saying or doing the "wrong thing"?

I will not go into details about Ezra Levant's case because there are blogs that are covering it particularly Ezra Levant's which you can go to here. But I will provide some background info. Ezra Levant was publisher of the now defunct Western Standard magazine when those infamous Danish Mohammad cartoons were making headlines and inciting riots and death threats from adherents of the alleged religion of peace. Long story short, Ezra Levant republished them in the Western Standard, the only journal in Canada to do so, some Muslims got "offended", and you get the idea.

Here's a National Post article about the Ezra Levant case. It's worth the read. It gives you an idea of how these commissions work. Here are some excerpts.
Ironically, human rights commissions are the best examples of just how many rights we have lost. They follow none of the rules of evidence built up over centuries to assure the accused of a fair hearing. Many commissions will hear plaintiff 's testimony in secret, violating the protection of being able to confront one's accusers. Most admit hearsay and limit the right of the accused to counsel or to call his own witnesses and experts.

Whether they will admit it or not, most also employ reverse onus: Before them, the accused is presumed guilty of racism, sexism, homophobia or general insensitivity if someone from a favoured minority claims to have been offended. It is the responsibility of the accused to prove he is not.

Unlike in a defamation court, at a human rights show trial truth is no defence. What's more, the accuser will be represented by the tax-funded officers of the commission, sometimes even by government-paid lawyers, while the defendant will have to pay his own way.

Canadian Human Rights Commissions were born out of the Liberal 60s and 70s and have evolved into these kangaroo courts. Initially conceived to curb discrimination that may deny an individual's basic human rights - such as employment and housing - they are now avenues to curb dissent towards liberal orthodoxy such as immigration, multiculturalism, homosexuality, abortion, etc. This is why people on the left support these CHRCs. It's a state sanctioned tool to enforce leftist ideology on the Canadian public. It's leftist hypocrisy at its best. They claim to be champions of free speech yet limit it wherever they can under the guise of altruism, tolerance, multiculturalism, and justice when in really it is leftist fascism. Dictators support freedom of speech so long as you agree with the dictator. The Canadian left are no different.

Here is a National Post article that illustrate the frivolous nature of many of the cases that are brought before a CHRC. It's about a Sikh patron at a Canadian theme park who felt his human rights were violated because he wasn't allowed to ride a go-kart attraction since his turban prevented him from wearing a helmet. Ontario has mandatory helmet laws and for insurance reasons as well the theme park was right to deny the Sikh the opportunity to ride. The Sikh gentleman believes his human right to ride the go kart without a helmet was violated and hence the case. It's ridiculous.

On a more serious note attempts were made to shut down a Canadian conservative forum called Free Dominion via a Human Rights complaint. The site had to be sold to an offshore interest to circumvent the repeated harassment.

All of this follows on an earlier post where I mentioned that three other individuals faced similar harassment because of their conservative beliefs and audacity to question Canada's state religion of multiculturalism.

I am going to add links to Ezra Levant and Free Mark Steyn! I encourage you to educate yourself on the current nature of Canada's Human Rights Commissions. It seems these things need to be stopped because you may find yourself the object of a complaint just for having an opinion. I have that fear myself for the obvious reasons and fear is a great tool of control and mechanism of self censorship.

Sunday, 13 January 2008

Possible recession in the forecast, a downturn in the economy. Lower immigration targets? Don't count on it.

Here are a couple business news reports concerning the Canadian economy. Both are from The Toronto Star.

The first one can be read in its entirety here.

Recession fears grow in Ontario

Pessimistic forecasts about slowing U.S. economy mean Ontario is at risk as well in the coming year

Jan 10, 2008 04:30 AM
Madhavi Acharya-Tom Yew
Les Whittington
staff reporters

There is growing concern among economists that Ontario is teetering on the brink of a recession.

Several analysts yesterday issued pessimistic predictions about the U.S. economy, and the impact it will have on the province this year.

"Ontario is already struggling with the high Canadian dollar and the problems in the auto industry. A U.S. recession would be a triple whammy for the Ontario economy," said Sal Guatieri, senior economist at BMO Capital Markets in Toronto. "(Ontario) might avoid recession because interest rates are low in Canada, but it would be touch and go."

The second one can be read in full here.

18,700 Canadian jobs lost in December

Manufacturing buckles under weight of dollar, but jobless rate holds steady at 5.9 per cent
Jan 12, 2008 04:30 AM

OTTAWA–Canada shed 18,700 jobs in December after seven months of rising employment, but economists doubt the pullback means the economy is about to take a sharp turn for the worse.

The jobs data released yesterday by Statistics Canada were a surprise, reversing economists' consensus forecast for a gain of 15,000 jobs. The private sector cut 51,000 jobs last month while the public sector kept hiring and self-employment continued increasing.

The month's net loss of 18,700 jobs was the worst in 3 1/2 years, but the overall unemployment rate held steady at 5.9 per cent, leading many economists to speculate that the retraction was a blip.

For starters, economists are useless when it comes to making forecasts. They just make educated guesses. That's why they have to boast about their track record to convince people to believe them on anything. If you have ever taken an economics course you'd realize that economics has no practical application outside of a university class room. Once you get an economics related job in the real world you should throw everything you ever learned out the window. Economic history, psychology, and that good ol' fashioned "gut feeling" are more practical in economics than supply and demand graphs. The only thing economists are good for is trying to make sense of what the hell just happened. That being said, notice how the loss of 18,700 jobs took them by surprise. They were in fact predicting a gain of 15,000 jobs. When it comes to economists and their analysis its buyer beware. But I am digressing here.

Given the hint of a possible slow down in the Ontario economy - the province that receives the bulk of Canada's immigrants and the so-called "economic engine of Canada" - and that Canada has shed 18,700 jobs should we still be bringing in 250,000 immigrants a year, possibly more? No we shouldn't never mind the fact that no real justification ever existed for introducing 250,000 immigrants into Canada in the first place.

When job growth is mentioned, absent from such reports are what kinds of jobs Canada is producing. This is where you have to keep an eye and ear out for further details. In one interview I caught on a business news channel the one being interviewed mentioned as a passing comment that most of the jobs being produced in Alberta's job-boom that are going unfilled are service sector jobs like Tim Horton's counter help. I think that is the case for most of Canada actually. Part time help is considered job growth. Temp help is considered job growth and 1/3 of all jobs - in Ontario at least - are temp jobs. The second news article mentions an increase in self employment. Part time help, temp help, and self employment are unstable, do not pay as well in most cases, and do not have benefits. If this is the crux of Canada's job growth then this is not good news. Also, a significant portion of full time employment is service sector related such as counter help, wait staff, custodial, bus drivers, security guards, etc.

Canada has suffered a terrible blow to its manufacturing sector. These jobs provided a middle class income for those with just a high school education. News reports come out on occasion concerning the shedding of more manufacturing jobs to be relocated over seas. Recently a moratorium on the hiring of new teachers was called for. There is an apparent glut of teachers in the Canadian labour market. The Toronto Star published an article reporting that new teaching graduates can expect to look years for that full time teaching position. The number of engineers seeking work each year is doubled because of immigration making it more difficult for some to find steady work.

To continue to introduce 250,000 - 300,000 if illegal immigration is included - into the Canadian economy given these economic conditions is insane! This does not benefit Canadians at all and it is an assault on their standard of living.

There was a time when immigration numbers fluctuated based on economic need but no more. Canada's immigration system has nothing to do with benefiting Canada and Canadians. It benefits Canada's political parties who abuse it to pander to ethnic voters in urban ridings. It also benefits those who make a living in what has been called, correctly so, Canada immigration industry. These include chiefly immigration lawyers and immigration consultants as well as social workers, banks to sell services to new clients, housing developers who need immigrants to sell houses to, and ethnic communities who want the steady importation of their people to colonize Canada and swell their numbers so as to command a greater share of economic and political power within Canada.

Canada's immigration are targets are too high and will make the effects of a recession worse if immigration numbers remain at its current level. Immigration should compliment the standard of living of Canadians, not attack it.

Saturday, 12 January 2008

Is greed and petty jealously the driving force behind Indian immigration?

The following if from the Toronto Star and it can be read in its entirety here. It's a damage control piece posing as news content for Liberal MP Ruby Dhalla (Brampton—Springdale) who found herself in a public relations disaster when it was reported that she expressed indifference to the beating of a child by Indian police after the child was caught stealing a purse belonging to an aide of Ms. Dhalla's.

I don't really know what happened and I am going to believe that she didn't act as calloused towards those kids as reported. However if the arrogant indifference she allegedly expressed is true than I wouldn't be surprised. Such smug indifference to India's lower castes is characteristic of upper caste Indians, those who I am certain Ms. Dhalla shares an ancestry and affinity with and the ones who predominately immigrate to Canada and the west in general. Besides, Ms. Dhalla insists on being referred to as a doctor when she is just a chiropractor by profession which is a doctor of sorts I guess. I also suspect she has aspirations to become PM of Canada one day. Not for the benefit of Canadians mind you and not because she loves Canada but for her own vain glory; to be a hero and trail blazer for South Asians and South Asian women everywhere. For the glory of herself, for the glory of India, and if there's time then the glory of Canada. It's just the vibe I get from her when I see her in interviews. That being the case then she will be a terrible PM just like Brian Mulroney was.

Anyways here is what I got from the article:
Underlying the incident is the complex relationship between Indians and Indians who have migrated to the West and made their homes there. They are known here as "non-resident Indians" and this is the time of year that many of them visit their homeland.


While many Indians genuinely admire successful NRIs, there is often an undercurrent of envy, a heightened sensitivity to imagined slights and instant indignation at the slightest whiff of arrogance on the part of the visitor.

This would explain why many South Asian immigrants line up to immigrate to Canada despite warnings that they may be ruining their careers and lives in the process. Greed and social status compels them to throw everything away to live in mediocrity in Canada. Frankly they deserve it. You have to understand that upper Caste Indians live very comfortable lives in India. Just ask one of them here in Canada (the majority of Indian immigrants to Canada are upper Caste Indians). In India, many have lower Caste servants (no Dalits though) to wait on them and their children hand and foot. They have enviable careers and professions. By virtue of being upper Caste they enjoy a type of "white male privilege" in India that allows them to benefit from and participate in an economic and political system that excludes the vast majority of Indian society. That's why I can't help but laugh when I hear upper Caste Indian immigrants in Canada bitch and moan about "systemic discrimination" when "systemic discrimination" is what allowed them their privileged positions back in India. It's hypocritical.

Why do they come to Canada to live in mediocrity when they had "the better life" back in India? The only reason I can think of is greed and greed can make you do stupid things. They chase after western citizenship the way some covet designer labels and if Canadian citizenship is just a fashion label and a shopping mall to them then I don't want them coming here thank you very much. Canada doesn't exist to satisfy upper Caste Indian arrogance and to bring to fruition their materialistic fantasies and social climbing ambitions. Stay in India please if that's all the Canada means to you. You insult me and my country if you do think that.

NRI means Non Resident Indian by the way. This is how the Indian government officially recognizes expatriate Indians and their children. In other words the Indian government doesn't see them as Canadians. They are Indians who happen to live in Canada and frankly that's exactly what they are. Sorry, but that's how it is. The Indian government knows it, the people of India know it, I know it and you do to so stop kidding yourself and everyone else.

Another thing I got from this incident as well. The following can be found in a Toronto Star article that can be read here.
Dhalla was in a delegation that included Ontario Small Business Minister Harinder Takhar, and Liberal MPs Ujjal Dosanjh, Gurbax Malhi and Jim Karygiannis. They were guests of the Punjab government and were attending a conference to promote investment in the state by Indians living abroad.

This got me thinking. Does India intend to use Indian born Canadian MPs, with their cooperation, in Ottawa as a means to influence Canadian politics? How about China? Sri Lankan Tamils? You immigrate to Canada, you run for office in a riding where Indians control the party riding association and can deliver you votes come election time. Then in Ottawa press India's interests. It's not illegal. You don't think Mumbai doesn't think of ways to use NRIs in foreign countries to advance India's interests? You don't think China doesn't? Food for thought.

The brain drain may be reversed for now but Canada continues to poach the developing world of its much needed talent.

Remember the brain drain to the United States that Canada was suffering from in the 1990s? Well, here is a Toronto Star piece about the end of the brain drain or at least the reversal of it.

The "brain drain" to the United States should have alerted a sensible person to the fact that Canada was producing more talent than its economy could handle and thus Canada should have reduced its immigrant intake but didn't. Canada continued to pile in 230-250,000 immigrants a year when it was evident that there were no jobs for them since Canadians had to leave Canada to find work in their field. Canada should have reduced its immigrant intake based on this knowledge but didn't and now we are suffering the repercussions of it to this day. This is why Toronto has the highest concentration of over educated taxi cab drivers in the world. This is why productivity levels for immigrants has been steadily decreasing for the past 25 year.

But if the "brain drain" to the United States is over then why the talk of increasing immigration targets? If immigration at one time was a tool to compensate for the loss of skilled talent to the United States then shouldn't we reduce immigration numbers because it is no longer needed in this area? By continuing to import more immigrants than this country needs and by increasing immigration numbers Canada is just practicing a type of brain drain by poaching the developing world of its skilled labourers and the developing world need them more than we do. And the ones who are cheer leading this poaching the loudest tend to be the "progressive" left. I find this bizarre. These self-proclaimed "progressives" denounce the rape of third world resources by multi-national corporations yet encourage the Canadian rape of the developing world's most valuable resource: its human resource. I think the silence has to do more with the left's hatred of anything traditionally Canadian and they use mass third world immigration as a weapon to attack it (but more on that at another time).

This news will not affect immigration levels at all and in fact we can expect to see an increase in immigration levels. This just shows that Canada's immigration policy is estranged from reality, having more to do with importing Liberal party supporters than with anything else. It also reveals the hypocrisy that is the Canadian left but don't remind them of that. They'll probably haul you before a human rights tribunal. It's their human right to be idiots and a violation of the Charter to remind the Canadian left they're wrong.

And another thing. What does it say about an immigrant from the developing world who feels the need to abandon his nation of birth and his people to come and contribute to the economy of the wealthy industrialized world? What does it say about a doctor from India who comes to Canada to practice medicine when the poor and starving of Calcutta could use his or her talents more so than us? Is greed spelled with two ees or one?

The Islamification of Britain: Muhammad is the second most popular boys name in the U.K. after Jack.

The world caliphate is coming to a neighbourhood near you.

This is from WorldNetDaily.

'Muhammad boys' prove 'Islam will enter every house in Europe'

Terror leader boastful after British government lists most popular baby names
Posted: December 19, 2007
4:46 p.m. Eastern

JERUSALEM – Statistical information released yesterday showing Muhammad is the second most popular boys name in Britain "proves Islam is becoming the majority in the UK and will one day enter every house in Europe," a senior terror leader told WND in an interview.

"We see from this study of Muhammad's name that Islam is on the rise and cannot be stopped no matter what your crusader governments do," said Muhammad Abdel-Al, spokesman and a leader of the Popular Resistance Committees terror group.


According to statistics released yesterday by Britain's Office of National Statistics, Muhammad was the most popular boys name in the UK when all of its spellings are accounted for. Jack, cited as the most popular boy's name, fell from last year by 156 babies, while Muhammad showed a regular spike. If trends continue, Muhammad could be the most popular boys name in Britain next year.

Abdel-Al is known for his fiery threats against Western targets, but he said statistical trends indicating Muslims are gaining a major foothold in the UK show there is no need for violence to spread Islam.

"In Europe there is no need for war because if people keep on joining Islam in these countries then Islam will become the majority, which I think is the process that is taking place now, so there will not be any necessity to have war with [non-Muslims]," he said.

I checked online for the most popular boy names in Canada. Muhammad barely broke the 100 cut off mark on one list but it was absent on most others (phew!). But my relief may be premature. Given Canada's demographic shift due to immigration and that Muslims in Canada have the highest birth rates among all ethnic groups it is only a matter of time before Muhammad rockets to the top.

The popularity of Muhammad as a name for boys acts as a social indicator to the dominance of Islam in a society. The words of the Islamic extremist I highlighted above shouldn't be dismissed as alarmist. He is right and he is saying openly what is on the minds of some Muslims in Canada who are savvy enough to know that these opinions are to be kept to themselves - for now.

Islam is more than a religion. It is a political force as well. Do you want Canada to turn into an Islamic society? Is that the kind of country you want your children and you children's children to inherit? Canadians should be discussing these things because Islamic immigration is a matter of domestic policy and national security. The silence on this issue by our politicians and chattering classes is quite unnerving because it plays into the hands of the expansionist fantasies of fundamentalist Muslims who are not all terrorists or violent but do dream of a future world caliphate.

It appears Islam is using western immigration polices as a vehicle for colonization but then again which immigrant group isn't?

Friday, 11 January 2008

Sikhs obstruct the enforcement of Canadian laws, yet again!

If the obstruction of justice is an arrestable offense then the Sikhs who are actively obstructing the enforcement of Canadian immigration laws should be arrested as well and put on a plane back to India with Laibar Singh. If not that then they should be fined.

This is from The Toronto Star.

Protesters prevent move to deport man

250 join pre-dawn rally at Sikh temple in B.C. to back failed refugee claimant disabled by stroke

Jan 10, 2008 04:30 AM
Petti Fong
Western Canada Bureau Chief

Vancouver–Hundreds of supporters of a paralyzed man, ordered deported to India, blocked Canadian Border Services Agency officers yesterday from entering a Sikh temple where the man is holed up.

Laibar Singh, 48, who became a quadriplegic after suffering a stroke and an aneurysm while in Canada illegally, sought sanctuary in Surrey's Guru Nanak Temple last month.

He was ordered removed last June after his refugee claim failed.

"It was their (border agency officers') intention to collect him at 4:30 this morning," said Zool Suleman, Singh's lawyer. "They understand now there is a strong community will for him not to be removed."

The Canadian government must deport Laibar Sihgh because of the illegal actions of these Sikh "protesters". If it backs down it will send a clear message to every ethnic community in Canada who wishes to harbour illegal immigrants that these illegal actions work. It will leave Canada even more vulnerable to immigration abuse schemes that Laibar Singh tried to do. It also effectively cripples the enforcement of our immigration laws causing Canada to lose even more control of its borders.

Last month, about 2,000 supporters stopped a taxi carrying Singh and forced the rerouting of traffic at the Vancouver International Airport when officials tried to place him on a flight to India.


Singh, a widower who has four children in India, arrived in Canada in 2003 using forged documents. He then sought refugee status.

Immigration adjudicators ruled that Singh, who found work as a labourer in Canada, did not face danger of physical harm, as he claimed he would, if forced to return to India. He has been in the Surrey temple since Dec. 15.

What disappoints me the most about this is that the Sikhs in B.C. - these alleged "Canadians" - are willing supporters of Laibar Singh's illegal behaviour. If they were true law abiding Canadians then why are they acting this way? If they were loyal to Canada then they would not support someone like Laibar Singh who made it quite clear by his actions that he intended to defraud Canada. They shouldn't tolerate people like this whether he is Sikh or not and neither should any Canada

This was a great opportunity for Canadians Sikhs to show their respect and loyalty to Canada but they threw it away because what is really at the root of all of this is race. You do not see Sikhs coming to the defense of deported Colombians or Tamils. Racial minorities in Canada are just as race conscious as anyone else and perhaps even more so than the white majority. Every Sikh in this country - be it legal or illegal - is one more to tip the ethnic balance in their favour, to swell the numbers so that they can wrestle away political and economic power from the host population. That's why minority groups in Canada support mass immigration. It is a mechanism for the continued influx of their people. That's why it is tantamount to colonization.

See also:
Sikhs in Vancouver obstruct Canadian immigration laws. Foil attempt to deport failed Sikh refugee claimant.
Deport Laibar Singh Now!
Immigration fraud alert: Indian (Sikh) immigrants seek to exploit/abuse Canadian visa office

Sunday, 6 January 2008

In Britain 80% of new jobs go to foreigners according to one study.

Like I said before and I will say again: Britain warrants our attention because our immigration policies are similar as well as the immigrants our nations attract. Therefore immigration trends in Britain and the effects it is having on British society can be applied to Canada as well, to varying degrees, to give an idea of what may be happening here as well as offer some foresight as to what is in store for Canada's future. It's like the canary in the well so to speak. We have to do this because unlike Britain, Canada's immigration policy is not up for discussion. PERIOD! Certain effects and trends may be occurring here in Canada that most Canadians, myself included, are not aware of because such issues are suppressed by our government with tacit cooperation from the mass media. They just don't bother to cover these issues and commission studies. This is unethical and a disservice to Canadians because we have every right to know what immigration is doing to our country and decide whether we wish to allow it or stop it.

The following is from the Telegraph.

Study finds foreigners in 80pc of new jobs

By Robert Winnett, Deputy Political Editor
Last Updated: 2:41am GMT 12/12/2007

More than 80 per cent of new jobs created by Labour over the last decade have gone to foreign-born workers, a new analysis of official figures claims.

The Statistics Commission found in a study that 1.4 million of the 1.7 million jobs created since 1997 had been filled by those born overseas.

Chris Grayling, the shadow work and pensions secretary, said last night: "The reality is that for all the billions spent by Gordon Brown on welfare-to-work programmes all he actually seems to be doing is creating British jobs for foreign workers."

The Statistics Commission was asked to study the proportion of foreign workers filling new jobs in Britain following confusion over Government statistics released in the autumn.

After publishing incorrect data, ministers said that 2.1 million jobs had been created in the past decade - 54 per cent of which, or 1.1 million, had gone to foreign workers.

However, the Statistics Commission said the proportion of new jobs going to foreigners was as high as 81 per cent.

I don't know what the proportion is here in Canada. I'll chose to be optimistic and assume that it is not as high as 80%. But what we can assume is that the importation of 250,000 people a year has not contributed to job growth as promised. Nor has the Canadian standard of living improved since when Canada had a population of 25 million.

Many argue that Canada needs these immigrants because they will take the jobs Canadians will not do but they always stop that sentence prematurely so this is where you need to finish it for them. These immigrants will take jobs that Canadians will not do AT THAT PAY! Mass immigration tends to place downward pressures on pay and benefits or keep pay and benefits stagnant at best. It's simple supply and demand economics. The flooding of the Canadian labour market with a superfluous population can only hurt the most vulnerable of Canadians. I do not understand why the Canadian government and the political left take sadistic pleasure in attacking economically the poorest of Canadians by cheer leading the mass importation of immigrants primarily third world immigrants.

If many of the new jobs being created in Canada are going to recent immigrants and foreigners then how does this help Canadians get a job if a job created one day goes to an immigrant who arrived in Canada that very day. It's job created, job filled and the Canadian is still unemployed or underemployed. This is not job creation. Shouldn't the needs of Canadians come first?

In any event most of the jobs going unfilled are low skilled jobs anyways such as counter help or custodial work. It is difficult to raise families on the incomes these jobs provide. In effect what Canada is doing is creating an underclass for itself by importing 250,000 immigrants a year. You want to tackle the poverty problem then let's start by reducing Canada's immigration intake.

Saturday, 5 January 2008

Multiculturalism is attacking free speech in Canada.

Three recent examples have arisen that should be of concern to any Canadian who values his and her freedom of speech.

The first example concerns popular conservative political commentator Mark Steyn and Macleans magazine. Macleans magazine published an extract from Mark Steyn's book America Alone. The article in question can be read here.

Here are some sample paragraphs.

The future belongs to Islam

The Muslim world has youth, numbers and global ambitions. The West is growing old and enfeebled, and lacks the will to rebuff those who would supplant it. It's the end of the world as we've known it. An excerpt from 'America Alone'.

MARK STEYN | Oct 20, 2006

Sept. 11, 2001, was not "the day everything changed," but the day that revealed how much had already changed. On Sept. 10, how many journalists had the Council of American-Islamic Relations or the Canadian Islamic Congress or the Muslim Council of Britain in their Rolodexes? If you'd said that whether something does or does not cause offence to Muslims would be the early 21st century's principal political dynamic in Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands, Belgium, France and the United Kingdom, most folks would have thought you were crazy. Yet on that Tuesday morning the top of the iceberg bobbed up and toppled the Twin Towers.

This is about the seven-eighths below the surface -- the larger forces at play in the developed world that have left Europe too enfeebled to resist its remorseless transformation into Eurabia and that call into question the future of much of the rest of the world. The key factors are: demographic decline; the unsustainability of the social democratic state; and civilizational exhaustion.

As you can tell Mark Steyn is writing about Islamic expansionism of which I share equal concern. As an immigrant receiving nation Canada should be considering such commentary as a matter of domestic policy and national security. We do not have to agree with Mark Steyn but his words of caution and others like it should be taken under advisement.

But some do not think Mark Steyn, and by implication others like him, should be allowed to say anything at all on the matter. Right now Mark Steyn and Macleans magazine have a date with the B.C. human rights commission because some Muslim law students filed a complaint against Mark Steyn and Macleans magazine because Macleans refused these Muslims space to publish a rebuttal citing the fact that they - Macleans - published more than enough letters of objection to the article. I will not go into much detail on the subject since the conservative blogs are all over this thing. Visit this blog for more commentary on the matter albeit colourful commentary at that (in other words be prepared to be, God forbid this is Canada after all, offended).

Another example, equally pertinent in my view, concerns a man named Bruce Allen of which i blogged about before. You can read it here.

The third example is a man named Paul Fromm who lost his teaching license because of his political views. Those who revoked his license, the Peel Board of Education, could not cite any evidence of Mr. Fromm of bringing his views into the class room but they revoked it anyway. I blogged about it before and you can read it here.

All three cases involve white males. All three of them are guilty of heresy because they challenged the state religion of multiculturalism. In all three examples punishment of some fashion was demanded. In Bruce Allen's example the Indo-Canadian community wanted him removed from Vancouver's Olympic committee. Paul Fromm lost his teaching license. Mark Steyn and Macleans magazine are to suffer a financially taxing and time consuming human rights commission. By financially taxing I mean for the defendants. It cost the complainant nothing in time or money to lodge a complaint, the tax payer carries this burden.

Is free speech the price we Canadians have to pay for the sake of multiculturalism? If so then price is too high.

Wednesday, 2 January 2008

Royal Bank of Canada wants Ottawa to introduce 400,000 potential RBC clients into Canada each year.

This is a companion post to the one below where I state that Canada's financial institutions' primary concern with mass immigration is to use it as a vehicle to increase their client base. Any real economic benefits to Canada are secondary even though they mask their self-interest by using language and rhetoric that suggests that they are truly concerned about Canada's economic growth. The whole press release can be read here.

Canada must fully leverage diversity if living standards are to grow, according to RBC's Nixon

Challenges government and business to raise the bar

TORONTO, October 20, 2005 — Canada must do more to capitalize on immigration and unleash the power of diversity if it wants to improve productivity and increase its high standard of living according to Gordon M. Nixon, president and chief executive officer of RBC Financial Group.

"We believe that no country in the entire world stands to gain as much economic benefit from diversity as Canada," said Nixon at the 10th Metropolis Conference, an international gathering focused on diverse cities and hosted by Toronto Mayor David Miller. "If we succeed, we will have an unrivalled advantage. But the flipside is also true. If we fail, we will pay a heavy cost in lost opportunity."

"Unleash the power of diversity"? What does that even mean? What power is he even taking about? Does he know what he is talking about?

Take note how the sky is going to fall if we Canadians do not embrace diversity. How are productivity levels and the Canadian standard of living going to decrease if we fail to "unleash the power of diversity"? This is exemplary of the nonsensical rhetoric and scare mongering that typifies the language of pro mass immigration advocates that should illicit laughter but instead gets serious consideration from the like thinking so-called journalists at The Toronto Star.

And how does diversity give us "unrivaled advantage"? Please, I really do want to know and so would the Japanese and Chinese where the lack of diversity has apparently hindered their technological and economic achievements.

"We believe that Canada must target future workforce challenges, not only by raising immigration targets in key sectors, but also by making a concerted effort to release the untapped potential in our current workforce," Nixon said.

The report highlights that new Canadians currently make up about 70 per cent of the growth in the Canadian labour force, and by 2011 will account for all the growth in Canada's workforce, as Canada's population growth stagnates. While the government is considering increasing the number of immigrants from its current levels ranging from 220,000-245,000, the study recommends raising its target to between 300,000 to 400,000 immigrants per year, if Canada is to continue to grow its living standards.

Again, note how the future health of the Canadian standard of living is tied to increasing mass immigration targets. This is a scare tactic to compel Canadians to accept immigration numbers that they are otherwise uncomfortable with.

According to a Statistics Canada survey, the integration of immigrants is a key barrier to success. "It's no secret that we don't have the best track record in this area," said Nixon. "Our most recent immigrants arrive in Canada better educated and at similar stages in their careers as those born in Canada, but evidence suggests that they have not found jobs that match their skill levels, are earning less than those born in Canada, or are experiencing higher unemployment rates. This represents a direct hit to our economy."

This has been the general trend for immigrants for the past 25 years now. The main reason for this is not the failure to recognize foreign credentials but the fact that there are no jobs for them in the first place. For instance Canada imports just as many engineers into the job market each year as those who graduate from Canadian engineering schools thus doubling the number of job seekers for engineering positions each year.

Furthermore, according to the report, if foreign-born workers were as successful in the Canadian workforce as those born in the country, personal incomes would be about $13 billion higher each year than at present. And if women had identical labour market opportunities available to them as men, then personal incomes would be $168 billion higher each year. All told, if we achieved identical labour market outcomes for men and women, regardless of their birthplace, then personal incomes would be 21 per cent or $174 billion higher, and 1.6 million more working age Canadians would be employed.

Foreign-born workers are doing poorly compared to their Canadian born counter parts because of mass immigration. Most of the immigrants Canada imports do not enter as skilled immigrants. Only 20-25% of immigrants enter Canada this way. Most are the sponsored relatives of landed immigrants and refugees as well as self selecting immigrants posing as bogus refugees. You do not need any pertinent job skills or language skills to get into Canada via these streams. Also, many immigrants enter via the investor class which is essentially a scheme by which they buy Canadian citizenship. By agreeing to "invest" a specified amount in some form of economic activity and employing at least one Canadian then an immigrant can get in this way. This hasn't produced any jobs because the investment can be a corner store and the employee can be a sponsored relative. It's a scam really.

The bottom line is that Canada is flooding its work force with a superfluous population compounded yearly to fill jobs that don't exist and to take jobs that they are over qualified for (the "skills shortage" is really a shortage in counter help at fast food restaurants and as custodial help). This wouldn't be a problem if Canada did not import as many people as it does. This is why Canada's immigration policy hurts immigrants as well.

Canada should be decreasing it's immigrant intake not increasing it as this RBC report suggests but this report is not about tackling Canada's economic future. It's about importing potential RBC clients. As noted in the post below Canada's financial institutions realize that future client growth, thus profits, resides in immigration. No CEO wants to be in charge when share prices decline or remain stagnant. Thus Gordon M. Nixon is not only trying to secure greater market share for RBC, which is his job after all, but he is also looking out for his career.

When reading reports on immigration you have to look at who produced it. You should then ask what do they have to gain or lose when it comes to immigration. This will tell you if the report is unbiased and impartial or if it is not. In this case RBC stands to financially gain as an institution if immigration numbers are increased thus we should take this study with some health skepticism and regard mostly as propaganda.