It's gotten to the point now that after reading the headline of an immigration related story in the news I jump to the comments first before I read the article, that is if commenting is allowed. It mostly has to do with the fact that pro mass immigration opinion has become so dependant on discredited assumptions that they have become predictable and boring. It's almost the equivalent of reading studies by scientists who still believe the sun and moon revolve around the earth. Eventually you start to lose patience with what is clearly nonsense but I guess they believe that if they repeat that nonsense often enough others will start to believe it too. If the comments section are any indication of their success, however, then they need to work harder.
For instance this Globe and Mail opinion piece tells us that "More immigrants are in Canada's national interest." The reasons given are, as is typical, assumptive while ignoring the negative impact immigration has on the host society.
For example the authors tells us that "migrants stand to earn as much as 15 times more by moving to another country to work" while not telling us that by moving abroad immigrants decease the earning capacity of those who live in the receiving countries. It's the standard case of "better life for them, worse life for us." That being the case then why should we, as members of the host society, be receptive to existing excessively high immigration levels and the prospects of more?
The authors also utilize the debunked assumption that "Those with the greatest propensity to move are educated young people with access to resources and networks for migration." This is gibberish in the face of reality. It may have been true at one time but it is clearly not true today. Using official Canadian government data we know that less than 25% of immigrants who come to Canada are assessed for any real marketable job skills. The Centre For Immigration Policy Reform puts that figure as low as 17%. The rest are either spouses and dependants, aged relatives who will never work a day in Canada, unskilled sponsored family members, refugees, or the bogus investor class which is nothing more than citizenship for hire, all of whom require no pertinent job or language skills to enter Canada. As for being young, that has been less the case since the 1990s when immigration laws were relaxed and when intake numbers were inflated. As a result the average age of immigrants has increased to the mid 30s, up from the mid 20s when Canada had a sane immigration system. This is mostly due to the fact that Canada is not attracting young skilled workers as the authors want us to believe but rather is importing ageing and aged immigrants instead, made worse by the importation of aged relative imported by the immigrants to attract social benefits unto themselves - like Old Aged Security - while dumping them on our health care system.
It became clear to me, half way through the piece, that the authors were talking out of their asses and if you read the comments to the piece its clear the readers arrived at the same conclusion as well.
In another Globe and Mail article we are informed about Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney's meeting in Vancouver with the usual suspects of parasites and rent seekers of the immigration industry. As is expected we are entreated to the usual cry of "more, more, more" from those who make their living off the immigration system while those of us who have to live with the consequences of their selfish motives cry "less, less, less."
For as long as I have been following immigration issues in the "main stream media" it has become increasingly apparent to me that what is presented as consensus opinion in the editorials and op-ed pieces in the nation's major news media outlets and journals of record (which also includes the editorializing embedded in news reports of alleged objectivity) it rarely gels with majority opinion. Indeed, this was the conclusion of a recent Sun TV opinion poll on immigration. Yet despite this the bien pensant still dismiss it as marginal thought on the fringes of debate. This isn't of any surprise since they surround themselves with like thinking individuals and from an optics point of view it would appear to them that they are the majority but in reality they are like the ostrich that hides its head in the sand whereas instead of sand think academia or journalism.
The comments section illustrate that Canadian tendency to say one thing in the public square but the opposite among the "just between you and me" crowd. It provides someone with a comfortable level of anonymity to say what they really think. If a survey of the comments to immigration related news stories over the past few years can be taken as a reading of the pulse of the nation then a majority of Canadians are saying they are displeased with the immigration system and what it is doing to their country. They want change.