Tuesday, 30 October 2012

Just Because You're Born In Canada Doesn't Mean You're A Canadian.

Take these brats for example.

We need to change the citizenship laws to prevent the production of these "anchor babies."  They're not Canadians and shouldn't be considered as such.  They're just pawns in a game to play Canada's immigration system by their deceitful parents.

I posit that the laws should be changed so that citizenship is granted only to those children born of parents whose long-term residency status is assured.  This would include Canadian citizens, those with permanent residency status, and refugees whose claims have been accepted and are not being contested in the courts.

Those whose permanent residency is not guaranteed; like temporary foreign workers, those in Canada on a visitor's visa or student visa, or refugees whose claims have not been determined; should not have Canadian citizenship bestowed on their children born on Canadian territory.

Some may now be asking what would happen to the children if the laws were changed as per my suggestion.  My answer is I don't know but that's not our problem.  Somewhere here the parents need to take responsibility for themselves and their actions because rewarding the cheating of the immigration system by abusing Canada's birthright citizenship laws has to stop.  The most absurd example of this was when a Ugandan woman gave birth mid-flight over Canadian airspace on a plane trip destined for Boston.  In the end the little spawn was given Canadian citizenship just because it was born in Canadian airspace.  What a joke!

The law as it stands now is absurd.  Legally it makes Canada responsible for the care of the children on non-citizens.  This is like finding yourself being forced to take care of some stranger's child just because it was born in your house.  You wouldn't accept that now would you, so why should Canada?

Sunday, 21 October 2012

Who Needs An Army To Invade And Capture A Country?

When trade agreements and an immigration system will do just fine.

The deal will tie the hands of Canadian governments, especially in the resource sector, once Chinese firms buy Canadian assets. It allows Chinese companies to sue Canada outside of Canadian courts. Remarkably, the lawsuits can proceed behind closed doors. This shift to secrecy reverses a long-standing policy of the Canadian government. 
Under the deal, Chinese firms can sue in special tribunals to protect themselves from Canadian government decisions. Canadian companies can do the same against China. The technical name for this is “investor-state arbitration.” In Canada, it has been in operation since NAFTA. 
In turn, any decision by any state entity in Canada — from federal or provincial legislation to a Supreme Court of Canada decision — can be challenged by a Chinese investor. The arbitrators, if they conclude that the decision violates flexible standards of investor protection, can issue orders and award damages against a country. 
On the other hand, no one in Canada including the government will be able, under the deal, to sue a Chinese investor for breaking any laws. The claims are one-way. Also, only the federal government can participate in the arbitrations. Provincial governments, Canadian companies and other constituencies have no right of standing even if their interests are affected directly. 
There is reason to doubt the independence of the arbitration process. Unlike judges, the arbitrators do not have secure tenure and set salaries. They depend for business on investors (to bring the claims) and on arbitration houses (to choose the arbitrators when the disputing parties disagree). Further, the arbitrators’ decisions on legal issues are not subject to judicial review. 
So, it is prudent to ask, who are the arbitrators more likely to see as the major country, Canada or China?
We've been down this road twice before.  The first time it was called the FTA (the Free Trade Agreement with the U.S.).  The second time is was called NAFTA (the FTA expanded to included Mexico).

And how has that worked out for us?

Canada has a mixed record in investor-state arbitration. We have lost about half of the decided cases against the government, all by U.S. companies under NAFTA. Canada has had to pay about $160 million in compensation, with another award pending in a case involving research and development rules for the Hibernia and Terra Nova offshore projects. 
Worse, Canadian investors have sued other countries, usually the U.S., 16 times and lost every case. We have lost on softwood lumber, cattle and gold mining. We have lost on gasoline additives, hemp and funeral homes. We have lost on a lot of things. 
And this is the best part:
Most surprisingly, the Chinese lawsuits can be kept secret. This is in stark contrast to other treaties signed by Canada. Under NAFTA, since 2001, Canada and the U.S. have ensured that investor-state arbitrations were open. 
Under the Canada-China deal, the arbitration hearings and all documents, except an actual award, can be kept confidential at the discretion of the country that is sued. This suggests that China objected to disclosure of Canadian lawsuits against it. More importantly for Canadians, the Harper government did not insist on disclosure when Canada is sued by the Chinese. 
By implication, we shall have to assume in time that there are hidden Chinese lawsuits against Canada. We will not know why we have been sued or who is deciding the case. We will not know what the government is arguing on our behalf. And we will not know if Canada has been ordered to change government decisions.
I sit in wonder considering the minds of our leaders in Ottawa, elected to represent our best interests, who agree to what is clearly a raw deal for Canada and ask "what the hell were they thinking?"; a question that can be resolved by answering the question "what's in it for them?" because there is no way this can be good for Canada as a nation and us Canadians as people.  Bay Street firms will make a killing which is where most of those in elected office hope to end up in their post-public office careers, which is probably why they're going along with this agreement.

When the FTA was passed by the corrupt regime of the Mulroney Conservatives Canada lost nearly half a million manufacturing jobs to the U.S. between 1989 and 1991 which was exacerbated by the accelerated take-over of Canadian companies by American ones.  Few, if any, new jobs were created and the prosperity promised by the FTA eluded us.

NAFTA is just the FTA expanded to include Mexico.

With both deals we were told it would grant greater access for Canadian companies to the larger markets in the U.S. and Mexico.  What happened was the expanded take-over the the Canadian and Mexican economies by mostly U.S. interests.

Do you think this will be any different?  We're told it would grant greater access to the Chinese market but who are we kidding?  It will only mean the greater control of the Canadian economy by Chinese interests.

What China has at it's disposal that the U.S. doesn't is a large and growing exported population that has effectively colonized parts of Canada's major cities.  Due to it's size all the political parties are sensitive to their demands in return for votes.  To think that China will not exploit this population to influence Canadian foreign and social policy is naive.  China has already been accused of spying on Canada and influence peddling in B.C.  Do you think that's going stop any time soon?

I don't think I'm stepping out of line when I think in Beijing's eyes it sees the emigration of it's people as a form of overseas colonization.  After all, China does not recognize dual citizenship and it has been flooding Tibet with ethnic Han Chinese with what one could arguably consider an act of soft cultural and ethnic genocide to pacify the once former sovereign nation.  Though a restrictive country I don't see China being very restrictive when it comes to allowing its citizens to move and live abroad.

This is colonialism in the modern age.  Gone are the need for gunboats and soldiers.  All you need now are pen and paper and an immigration system guided by naivety and baseless assumptions.  And the men and women stupid or selfish enough to let it all happen.

For more reading on the Canada-China Investment Treaty the Green Party of Canada has this page about it.  I don't support or endorse the Green Party but I provide the link, which was brought to my attention, for information purposes.

PS: We need another head tax!

Sunday, 14 October 2012

Help Save The Life Of A Muslim Woman.

Ban Muslim immigration to Canada.

In fact, let's just ban Muslim immigration to the west altogether.

Think of the many female lives we can save by doing so.

Look, Canada is guilt-tripped over the memory of the S.S. St. Louis.  This was the turning away of a passenger ship full of Jewish refugees fleeing pre-war antisemitism in Germany in 1939.  After being rejected by Cuba, the U.S., and eventually Canada the ship had little choice but to return to Europe.

The Jewish refugees were eventually resettled in various European states outside of Germany but war broke out, Germany invaded, the Jews were rounded up, were sent to concentration camps and ultimately to their deaths.  Presumably most of the passengers of the S.S. St. Louis were among those captured and executed.  And since Canada turned the ship away the nation is somehow to blame for their deaths, or so it is implied.

So following that line of thinking Canada is complicit in the deaths of these Muslim women.  Had we refused them entry and they stayed in their Muslim societies they'd never have been corrupted by western influences, would have remained good Muslims, and would still be alive today.

So, in a sense we forced the hands of their killers.  Because of their culture (and remember all cultures are equal) the women had to be corrected with the most capital of punishments.

Canada killed them.

So, to prevent future deaths of innocent Muslim women in Canada we should ban Muslim immigration outright.

Hell, it's not like Islam has anything to offer Canadian society anyway so what have we got to lose?  And we get to save the lives of so many Muslim women.  So, Canada doesn't lose anything of value and Muslim women don't lose their lives.  It's win/win!

"Skills Shortage" Is Code For "Cheap Labour Shortage" (and also we need another head tax).

Continuing on the topic of the skills shortage myth comes this Toronto Star column on the Chinese owned (but Canadian headquartered) Canadian Dehua mining company's intention to import Chinese miners into north-eastern B.C. to work in the coal mines.  The question being raised is are there not enough workers available in Canada right now to necessitate the importation miners from China?
The latest and most bizarre example comes from British Columbia where, as the Vancouver Sun has reported, four brand new coal mines in the province’s northeast are bringing in just under 2,000 temporary Chinese migrants to do most of the work. 
The ostensible reason, a spokesman for Canadian Dehua International Mines Group Inc. is reported as saying, is that not enough Canadians are skilled enough to do underground mining. 
Let me repeat that. Not enough underground miners. In Canada. 
Those who spent their working lives underground in Northern Ontario, or Quebec or Saskatchewan or Cape Breton would be surprised to hear this. 
And while mining has changed from the days of pick and shovel, it is hard to believe that only temporary migrant workers are clever enough to run the new machinery used to extract coal. 
I expect the real reason that Canadian Dehua and its Chinese partners want to bring in Chinese miners is because they figure on getting more work for less money from them.
Though Canadian Dehua International Mines Group Inc. is located in downtown Vancouver my gut feeling is the company is Canadian in name only being founded and run by the Chinese.  (Dehua is a county located in Fujian province in China).

The intention to import Chinese labourers to work in the company's coal mines in B.C. irrespective of the claims there's a skill shortage has Chinese scheming written all over it.  They pull this kind of sh*t in Africa all the time where Chinese money buys up the continents' resources and then imports Chinese workers to extract it ignoring an able bodied host population who could do the work just as well.

But here's the reason why the snubbing of Canadians by the Chinese:
As temporary migrants dependent on their employer for work visas, the Chinese workers will be less likely to complain. They also will be reluctant to join a union.
In other words union busting but Canada's unions have been so quite on immigration as a union busting weapon I don't expect them to say much about this either.

What makes this all the more insulting is that it's a snubbing of Canadians by the Chinese on Canadian land.  This is like inviting someone into your home and your guest spits in your face, urinates on the carpet in your den, takes a crap on your bed, and then expects you to thank them for it.  But when a lot of Chinese interest in Canada is parasitic in character should we be shocked?  Not having accepted this by now we're pretty much asking for it from this point on now aren't we?  And we deserve it too.

This is reminiscent of the importation of Chinese labourers to construct the railroad and the eventual imposition of a head-tax as the steady influx of Chinese workers into B.C. by Canadian based Chinese human-traffickers post-railway construction was driving down the wages and living standards of Canadians living in B.C. at the time.  Looks like we need another head tax.

Furthermore Thomas Walkom has this to add:

Theoretically, temporary work visas are supposed to be reserved for those with unique skills.But increasingly, the notion of skill has been stretched to the extreme. In Alberta, some temporary skilled workers serve coffee in doughnut shops. Others heave around beef carcasses in slaughterhouses like the Brooks XL Foods meat-packing plant — now the epicentre of an E. coli food scare. 
In the fruit and vegetable fields of Ontario, the unique skill that temporary migrant workers from the Caribbean or South America bring is their willingness to do back-breaking work for low wages. 
Employers say they need foreign temporary labour because they can’t find Canadians willing to work. What they mean is that they can’t find Canadians willing to work at the wages being offered.
That's something reformers have been saying for years now; that immigrants do jobs Canadians won't do at that pay.  Pay someone enough money and they'll do almost any job.

I think we can agree that, for the most part, the "skills shortage" is a lie.  And if there is how hard could it be to train a local population to do much of the work being offered?  Can a local population not be trained to do the coal mining being done in north-eastern B.C.?  And why exclusively Chinese miners?  This is racist hiring practices being done by a Chinese owned business but what else is new under the sun?  Canada and Canadians need to come first.

Monday, 8 October 2012

On XL Foods, Migrant Labour, Being Halal, and the E. Coli Breakout.

A comment by someone on this Blazing Cat Fur blog post got me thinking about a possible connection between XL Foods, it's use (abuse?) of migrant labour, the ritual Islamic slaughter of animals (Halal), and the E. Coli breakout at XL Foods that is spreading across the nation.  After all, the plant does process more than a third of all beef for the Canadian market.

While media attention is focusing on the government's failure to detect the tainted meat before it went to market this comment in the Toronto Star reminds us that the problem starts at the beginning of the processing the beef and with the plant itself.  Therefore it's not the government's fault for failing to detect the E. Coli tainted beef but XL Foods failure to maintain quality assurance that would have prevented it or at least contained it.

But since XL Foods imports migrant labour from Sudan, the Philippines, Mexico, and all points in between it appears quality control isn't on it's priority list.  If it were it would mean paying decent wages to retain an experienced workforce and maintain quality and safety standards that would attract Canadian workers to produce a quality product.  XL Foods is given licence to produce food for our consumption and this E. Coli breakout is not on unacceptable but also scary.

But the government isn't wholly off the hook.  As long as it allows companies like XL Foods to import cheap, unskilled labour to work in it's food processing plants it shares some of the blame.  While we take the government and XL Foods to task for this health scare, and rightly so, we should consider how immigration and the lowering of standards played their parts.

What's even more disconcerting is that this will probable happen again.

Yet Another Post On The Myth Of The Skills Shortage.

We're routinely bombarded by the statement that Canada faces a skills shortage and we need a large and an increasing number of immigrants to meet the shortfalls.  Before we can accept this claim at face value we need to consider some details first.

The Toronto Star reported on a recent OECD study on education among it's member states.  It found that Canada displayed a "paradox" not seen in the other member nations.
A unique Canadian paradox means Canada has the best educated adults in the industrialized world, but a baffling chunk of them earn well below the median wage.{...} 
The youngest and oldest extremes of the workforce comprise most of the paradox: 25-34 year olds who say they are still studying, and 55-65 year olds who say they are retired or semi-retired. 
But that doesn’t explain it all, said de Broucker, who is also chief of a working group for the 34-country Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.“We need to understand why there is a paradox: if there is a Lost Generation.” 
More than 17 per cent of working-age Canadians with education beyond high school earned less than half the national median employment income in 2009, de Broucker reported. 
Is it because Canada is producing more college and university graduates than it has jobs for? Are there too many humanities and fitness grads, who typically make up more of the under-earners? 
Are vast numbers of Canadians over 55 finding themselves in lower-paying jobs, or taking buyouts to retire early?
This part is important:
Immigration status was also a factor, said de Broucker, who discovered the Canadian paradox and brought it to the OECD’s attention. This was true not only for recent immigrants but for those in Canada from 10 to 29 years, who were more likely to be earning way below their education levels.  
Furthermore we have this to ponder:
Indeed, Canada spends the third highest amount on college and university students among the OECD countries, after Switzerland and the United States: approximately $20,600 per student,the report said. 
Canada ranked first in the proportion of adults with a college or university education, with double the average of highly educated people over 55 among the OECD countries. 
That strength is beginning to fray, however: Canada is falling behind in numbers of younger people getting a college or university degree, the report said. 
Canada has spawned a paradox at the other end of the education scale as well, de Broucker said. 
Compared with other industrialized countries, a high number of Canadians with a high school diploma or less are earning very good incomes. 
“We have an economy that allows some people to earn a significant amount of money through jobs that don’t require a tertiary education. This would be driven by our resource economy.”
So Canada has the highest proportion of its workforce with a college or university education out of all OECD countries; more so than the U.S., Japan, the U.K., or Germany.  Also, Canada ranks third in spending on education just behind Switzerland and the U.S.  It seems we're doing more than enough in comparison to other OECD nations in meeting the "skills shortage" Canada allegedly suffers from.

It can be argued that it's a skills mismatch that is occurring and that, indeed, Canada is producing "too many humanities and fitness grads" instead of tradesmen and STEM graduates (science, technology, engineering, mathematics).  There may be some truth in this but I don't think it's wholly accurate.

Norman Matloff  is a computer science professor at UC, Davis and has been commenting on the state the U.S.'s high-tech industry for the past several years particularly that of the computer industry.  In this New York Times op-ed piece from 2011 he writes:
Now, as in 2000, companies are complaining of dire shortages of people with computer science degrees. How about a reality check? 
In spring 2011, starting salaries for computer science grads were only up 3 percent from a year ago. A widely publicized report in May by Dice, the big online job board, claims a "tech talent crunch" in its title, yet concedes that salaries for tech workers (overall, that is, both new and experienced) are up less than 1 percent. These numbers obviously don't indicate a shortage. And those over 35 still face a tough market. 
Yes, some students today are indeed captivated by the Facebook phenomenon, captured in "The Social Network." But the savvier college students, especially those whose parents have been squeezed out of tech by age discrimination, are understandably skeptical. Indeed, many of the best and the brightest, exactly the ones the industry ought to keep, have sought greener pastures. In 2007, 29 percent of M.I.T. grads went to Wall Street rather than Silicon Valley, at far higher wages, a disparity that continued even after the financial crisis.
That being the case then why are U.S. companies "complaining of dire shortages of people with computer science degrees" if in actuality one doesn't exist?  The simply truth is that if a skills shortage exists as they allege then they can abuse the H-1B visa program (a work visa for the U.S.) to import younger and cheaper labour from overseas.

The notion that the U.S., with it's well funded and extensive education system, is not producing enough STEM graduates to meet it's labour market needs is absurd!  And for Canada, with it's smaller market and near non-existent high-tech sector, to make a similar claim is an absolute joke and an insult to our intelligence!
What we have then is not a paradox but an issue of over-supply of skilled labour.  Canadians are finding themselves facing a precarious labour market and are staying in school longer and later in life to improve their prospects.  Or they are forced into taking early retirement since the jobs they once performed no longer exist having been outsourced abroad and are not coming back anytime soon. Canada has more skilled workers than it knows what to do with.  This point is further made by the fact that immigrants, those who were imported to address the "skills shortage" problem, are themselves likely to be earning way below their education levels even after spending 10 to 29 years in Canada.

But the beat goes on.  In the Toronto Star we are told Ontario needs to attract at least 135,000 newcomers a year "to keep its economic engine running beyond 2014" or so says a panel of "experts" who also warn the province will suffer a "skills shortage" in 2025 instead of 2020 or 2015 or whatever year they need it to be to make their projections believable.

And who are these "experts"?  A 13 member panel composed of economists, people working in immigrant settlement, and corporate and industry "leaders".  Economists are just crystal ball gazers whose only real purpose in life is to make astrology look respectable.  As for the people working in immigrant settlement and for the corporate and industry leaders their self-interest in maintaining high immigration levels is so apparent it need not be pointed out.  When Ontario is losing it's manufacturing capacity and the well paying jobs that go with it there is no sense in pursuing increasing population growth in the province when the jobs are not there to support it.  Ontario losing it's attractiveness to immigrants is a good thing but don't expect these dimwits on this 13 member panel to realize it.  Their advice should be taken with a grain of salt.

And recently Jason Kenney enjoyed a photo-op to mark the 20,000th immigrant imported under the Canadian Experience Class while announcing the shortening of time a temporary foreign worker can apply for permanent residency status from two years down to one.  Why this is something to celebrate is beyond me but when the 20,000th CEC immigrant got a job in a bank it makes sense since the financial sector in Canada is a major player in the Canadian economy and a  major beneficiary of mass immigration since to them immigrants are not people but bank accounts, mortgages, and small business loans.  They bring money with them quite possibly to launder if it comes from corrupt countries like China and India where few people get rich without greasing a few palms here and there.  Undoubtedly Canada's "big five" (or "big six" if you include National Bank of Canada) have been pressuring Ottawa to keep immigration levels high and to keep increasing them since it's good for business (and I guess what's good for the "big six" banks is good for Canada right?).  And to attract the business of "new Canadians" they have been going on a hiring blitz where the colour of one's skin and ethnic background are more important than one's credentials.

So to recap Canada has the highest proportion of its workforce with a college or university education out of all OECD countries; ranks third in spending on education among all OECD nations; has the best educated adults in the industrialized world, but a baffling chunk of them earn well below the median wage which is especially true for immigrants, even those who have been in Canada for 10 to 29 years; that a high number of Canadians with a high school diploma or less are earning very good incomes; yet we have have a "skills shortage."  Highly educated Canadians, including immigrants, are earning well below the median wage while those with just a high school education or less are earning very good incomes.  But we have a "skills shortage."  Really!!! Are you kidding me!?

Fortunately it seems few people are buying it as the comments to this Toronto Star article suggest but that's to be expected from us rabble who have to witness and experience the immigration debacle first hand.

The "skills shortage" myth is a scare tactic to pacify Canadians into embracing an immigration system that works against their interests.  When the Toronto Star editorializes and trumpets the dubious claim that Ontario needs to attract 135,000 immigrants a year what it's really saying is the Toronto Star needs 135,000 potential readers each year to sell their eyeballs to advertisers so that the journalists can keep their jobs and TorStar shareholders happy.  When the business lobby cries of a "skills shortage" what it's really saying is there is a shortage of cheap skilled labour and that they're too stingy and lazy to invest in and train and retain a workforce.  When politicians uncritically accept these claims they are just using it as a means to pad their resumes for post public-office employment by cozzying up to the business lobby and to import votes while pandering to ethnic/immigrant vote blocs to stay in power.  Ultimately Canadians realize few if any real benefits from the immigration system but it isn't designed to benefit us anyway.

Sunday, 7 October 2012

Draper St., Toronto.

Where multiculturalism and the "new Canada™" can go f**k themselves.

While we're constantly told that "diversity is our strength" the linked article reminds us that familiarity, homogeneity, and a proud and shared history, all acting together, make something a lot more stronger.  This is what I took away from the piece.  It is these things that give the residents of Draper St. their sense of community and belonging.

Just something to think about as we recklessly destroy these building blocks of communities to make way for the "new Canada™."

Tuesday, 2 October 2012

Like I Said Before...

Beware men from China bearing gifts.

Last month, Dr. Kwok Chu-Lee and his wife Grace made a blockbuster donation to the Richmond Public Library: a collection of 46,730 Chinese books appraised at $1,194,000. 
On Aug. 29, the library held an official ceremony to recognize Lee's philanthropy. It was attended by library officials and representatives from the city, the province and the federal government, plus assorted other dignitaries. The book collection was repeatedly described as a "national treasure." 
In an interview, chief librarian Greg Buss confirmed the library gave Lee and his wife tax receipts for the full amount of the appraised value. 
Those receipts could potentially generate $521,778 worth of tax credits, assuming the Lees are taxed at the highest marginal rate of 43.7 per cent. 
Lee would have to pay capital gains tax on any difference between his purchase price and the donation value, but he would still enjoy a substantial saving, because only half the difference is taxable at the highest marginal rate. 
So what the library got for free, will potentially cost tax-payers several hundred thou-sand dollars in foregone tax revenue. That raises the question, did taxpayers get value for their money? 
          The answer is, we don't know.{...}

As for Lee, Buss rejected any suggestion that his donations were motivated by tax considerations.: "I have known the man over the last 17 years and I have a good sense of his attitude toward books, education and philanthropy."
A Chinese national's actions not motivated by money but by charity?  I find that hard to believe.

Hat Tip ImmigrationWatchCanada.org.


Diabetes Plus Urban Sprawl.

I hope the contributions of "new Canadians" to our society never cease.

From the Toronto Star:

New immigrants in Toronto’s low-income neighbourhoods are 50 per cent more likely to develop diabetes than long-term residents in areas that are more walking- and cycling-friendly, says a new study. 
For recent newcomers, environment is a crucial factor in accelerating the risk of obesity-related conditions such as diabetes, says the study by St. Michael’s Hospital endocrinologist and researcher Dr. Gillian Booth, published in the Diabetes Journal on Monday. 
Least walkable neighbourhoods are often newly developed areas characterized by urban sprawl and heavy reliance on cars. 
“Adding poverty to the mix, new immigrants in less walkable neighbourhoods have a far higher risk of developing diabetes than those in highly walkable, high-income neighbourhoods,” said Booth, an adjunct scientist at the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences.
In response to the above a reader to the Star had this to say:

Re: Newcomers face higher risk, Sept. 18
The article by Nicholas Keung on the relationship between unhealthy immigrants and the walkability of neighbourhoods is an issue that strikes close to home. I am a daughter of immigrants, and I live in Richmond Hill, near Markham. 
My family chose this neighbourhood for a whole host of reasons, including cultural homogeneity — the surrounding area is dominated by Chinese businesses, restaurants, and similar residents. 
Unfortunately, our neighbourhood has suffered from some of the worst symptoms of urban sprawl: big-box stores in centralized locations, infrequent and undependable public transport, and an astonishing lack of bike lanes. As a result, we are a four-car household, drive nearly everywhere, and I feel our health and community has suffered for it. 
However, things are starting to change, and the original nature of the urban sprawl development does not have to define a neighbourhood for good. 
Markham has advanced its transit system by leaps and bounds with the new upgrades to the VIVA system, upgrades to bus shelters and pedestrian walkways, and the new construction of the Markham downtown. 
But as drivers are swearing all up and down through the construction traffic along Highway 7, only time will tell how a community so entrenched in its car-use will react to these transformations. 
Jennifer Ng, Richmond Hill
How about that!

Chinese nationals move to multicultural Canada so that they can live in a culturally homogeneous Chinese neighbourhood.

From this we can deduce that 1) that immigrants too don't care for the multiculturalism Canada has to offer, 2) Canada has well established Chinese colonies on Canadian soil, 3) Chinese are racists since they prefer to live among their own in a multi-racial society.

If they wanted to stay in a culturally homogeneous Chinese neighbourhood they should have stayed in China.  Since they didn't and immigrated to one of China's colonies in Canada instead it seems to me they're not here to live in Canada but live off of the country.  That being the case their relationship to Canada is not symbiotic but parasitic but isn't that how it is for most immigrants to Canada these days?

Also, what she wrote reinforces what should already be apparent: mass immigration is to blame for the culture-less, ugly, banal, big-box store infested, urban sprawl wastelands surrounding Canada's major cities devastating prime agricultural farmland and destroying Canada's natural heritage in the process.  If immigrants have made any real cultural contributions to Canada it is this.