Thursday, 23 October 2008

Importing the Third World Model: Mass Immigration Contributes to Canada's Income and Inequality Gap.

Canada's well indoctrinated journalists always fail to connect increasing poverty rates with Canada's mass immigration numbers even though there is much evidence to connect the two. That's because their brains have been programed not to. That's why they are working journalists. Canadian newspapers are first and foremost profit maximizing businesses overseen by a board of directors that pays close attention to stock quotes. And a newspaper's audience base is it's prime revenue generator becuase it is these figures coupled with circulation numbers that a daily uses to set prices to charge to potential advertisers.

Mass immigration increases population numbers and thus is a source of potential growth for Canada's journals of record. That's why they are almost all pro mass immigration and rarely offer dissenting views that have the potential to influence public opinion and policy makers that will result in lower immigration numbers. No journalist critical of mass immigration will get his or her work regularly published, let alone get hired, in any of Canada's newspapers becuase opinions supporting the reduction of immigration numbers is an attack on profits. That's why in this Toronto Star article no mention is made of how mass immigration may be contributing to the growing income gap.

Income gap growing wider

Canada lags behind 17 developed countries; has no detailed plan to fight poverty, study finds
Oct 21, 2008 04:30 AM
Laurie Monsebraaten
Social Justice Reporter

Poverty and inequality rates in Canada have been on the rise since 1995 and are now higher than the average developed nation, according to a new study.

The income gap is growing throughout the developed world, but the gap between rich and poor in Canada widened more dramatically than in most countries between 1995 and 2005, according to the report released in Paris today.

The above is made all the more clearer when mass immigration is taken into account. Over the past twenty years Canadian immigration policy has shifted away from meeting Canada's real economic needs and more to a humanitarian program where more unskilled immigrants enter the country than skilled immigrants. Canadian immigration policy is effectively divorced from economic necessity where downturns in the economy no longer compel governments to lower immigration targets. It was in the late 1980s (1988 I believe) when the Progressive Conservative government upped the immigration levels by 100,000 a year. It was also in the 1980s (1985 I believe) when the Singh decision was made granting Charter protection to anyone on Canadian soil prompting a flood of economic migrants to Canada's shores to pose as bogus refugees and abuse the asylum system. Being flooded with waves of superfluous people imported to fill vacancies in low wage part time and temp jobs, effectively attacking any gains made by the labour movement for fair pay and pay equity, it should be no surprise to learn that poverty and inequality rates have been on the increase since 1995. And now Canadian rates are higher than the average industrial nation. This too is no surprise. Canada has the highest immigration intake in the world doling out citizenship the way treats are given away on Halloween. If we include foreign workers and illegal immigrants (which includes failed refugees and those who have no intention of leaving after their visa expires) then it is likely Canada is taking in between 350,000 to 400,000 people a year.

"After 20 years of continuous decline, both inequality and poverty rates (in Canada) have increased rapidly in the past 10 years, now reaching levels above the OECD average," says the report.

As in other countries, more single-parent households and people living alone are contributing to income inequality in Canada.

And wages for the rich are increasing, while they have been stagnating or dropping for middle and lower income workers, the report says.

Most affected have been young adults and families with children.

Canada spends less on cash transfers, such as unemployment and family benefits, than other OECD countries and that may be one of the reasons the country fares worse than others, the report suggests.

The report echoes concerns raised by Canadian social research groups about growing income disparity in Canada at a time of strong economic growth.

What do I mean by "importing the third world model"? It is something I have borrowed from American lefty dissident Noam Chomsky and applied it to Canada. What it means is that advanced industrialized countries such as the United States and Canada are adopting the characteristics familiar with third world countries and their economies.

One key characteristic of the third world model is the high amount of foreign ownership of a third world economy. Here Canada can consider itself an honorary member as our country's economy is the most foreign owned of all the G8 nations.

The other key characteristic is great wealth disparity and it seems Canada is on track to satisfy this one as well. It is more than accepted now that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer in this country. The attack on the middle class is happening on several fronts and one of the key weapons is mass immigration. It makes no sense to be importing people into Canada's economy when all that awaits them are insecure jobs and poverty wages. It makes no sense to import people who flood labour markets and hinder or reverse wage and salary gains. It makes no sense to keep immigration levels high when poverty rates and inequality rates have been consistently increasing for the past ten years. It makes no sense to keep immigration levels high when the economic outlook is gloomy.

Such a study by the OECD should stop one to think about the situation and look to see what are its causes so the problem can be rectified. One of the major causes for Canada's poor performance is becuase of mass immigration. A chart accompanied the print edition of this piece and all the major immigration receiving nations (the U.K., the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, and Canada) fared relatively poorly. We are importing poverty.

If poverty activists are serious they should pressure the government to reduce immigration targets because large immigration levels hurt the most economically vulnerable of Canadians. Wages can be kept low, illegals can be exploited, and immigrants lured here on lies and materialistic fantasies of excess often find themselves in desperate situations when the harsh reality of Canada's labour market forces them to take any job just to survive. If Canada maintains its high intake of immigrants despite the warning signs suggesting that the numbers are too many then poverty rates will barely change and most likely keep increasing. Reducing immigration numbers is one of the issues we must address if we wish to get serious about poverty.


Toronto realtor said...

You are right, this connection is not so often mentioned, immigration is usually connected "only" with the crime level. On the other hand, criminality and poverty are like brother and sister. On the other hand, how do you want to "sort out" the immigrants? I think we still need fresh workforce, Canada has tradition of being immigrant-friendly and our economy was built on immigrant workforce...
Take care

Rohan Swee said...

I think we still need fresh workforce...

Why? Because otherwise you might have to either find a new occupation, or offer higher wages to compete for good workers in the existing labor market?

...Canada has tradition of being immigrant-friendly...

So? Canada once had a "tradition" of discriminating against or excluding non-European immigrants. What makes one "tradition" sacred and another disposable?

...and our economy was built on immigrant workforce...

Again, so what? It does not follow that because immigration worked well in the past that it is beneficial now and forever.

P.S. The "economy" is but one, albeit an important, aspect of national life. The "economy" is not the nation. A nation can "grow the economy", in spreadsheet terms, while at the same time abetting the deterioration of the standard of living to Third World levels. "Building the economy" is not an end in itself.

PaxCanadiana said...

how do you want to "sort out" the immigrants?

You can hand pick them to satisfy immediate job shortages as opposed to the outdated points system we currently have that imports people irrespective of labour market realities. Diane Finley has pushed for a hand picking system but has irrationally come under attack for it.

I think we still need fresh workforce

To fill what jobs? If all the jobs going unfilled are low waged jobs then not only will you have a fresh workforce but an impoverished one that cannot afford to buy houses.

Canada has tradition of being immigrant-friendly and our economy was built on immigrant workforce...

Being immigrant friendly is no reason to maintain unacceptably high immigrant numbers. And to group recent immigrant cohorts with the first European immigrants to this country is disingenuous. There is no comparison to be made. Immigration should satisfy the current needs of the country, not be based on tradition.

Anonymous said...

The pro-immigration argument is deeply flawed in many ways.

For example, former economics professor Herbert Grubel calculated that, given the poor economic performance of immigrants in recent decades, the cost to Canadian taxpayers amounted to tens of billions of dollars per year.

Obviously, this is counter-productive to Canada's economic interests and would not bode well for any company following the same disastrous lead.

"Immigrants", in today's parlance, usually refer to NON-Whites or 3rd world people, so as not to be confused with the earlier wave of European immigrants lasting from about 1945 to 1970.

Thereafter, plans were implemented to flood our country with an over-populated and impoverished 3rd world that has only proven to be an unmitigated disaster that Canada will never recover from.

The world's population now sits at 6,700,000,000 (Billion) people. The vast majority of these population increases are occurring in 3rd world countries where poverty has been a way of life for thousands of years, yet these are the source countries of new immigrants that don't "enrich" our way of life, but only cause racial and religious strife that we hadn't experienced to this degree before.

I contend that a conspiratorial plan to dilute our traditional population was the base reason for this immigration policy shift. How else can anyone explain a non-stop immigrant/refugee inflow amounting to 85% from developing countries. "Divide and conquer" is the master plan to help us on our way to a one world government.

What have we gained in this unwarranted immigration policy that was thrust upon us without our permission?

Multiculturalism, employment-equity (reverse racism), imported victim groups, political-correctness, "special" interest groups, race-based associations, etc. etc.

....and, so not to appear "racist", we subject ourselves to feelings of unnecessary guilt aligned with acts of shameless pandering to these different groups. What we have really become is a nation of emasculated, lying hypocrites.

Here's a world population map of 1960 showing how 3,000,000,000 populated the world at that time. And, they further state "The Western European proportion of the world population began to decline in 1900 when it was 15%, to 11% in 1960 and then 6% in 2000."

We can readily see how White Canadians are fast becoming a minority in our major cities. How much longer before Canadians become strangers in our own country??