Saturday, 30 March 2019

Enough With The Third-World Immigrants Already! They Didn't Prosper Their Countries and They Won't Prosper Ours.


Canada's imbecilic PM appointed a Somali refugee with a law degree from the University of Ottawa to Minister of Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship and it's going along as well as you'd expect it.

When I first read of his appointment my hope sank to new depths it's now finding undiscovered life forms in the deepest parts of the Pacific Ocean.  It’s not like he’s the latest in a long line of illustrious and well reasoned men and women rationally guiding the demographic future of this country.  His predecessor was a former bank shill who came off as one third Jim Lahey, one third Mr. Magoo, and one third that mayor from Jaws.  He characteristically dismissed any legitimate concern of the immigration system with a flippant wave of the hand while carelessly increasing immigration quotas and that seems to be what the minister for immigration’s job is nowadays;  just increase immigration quotas and call it a day.  No consideration of whether we need more immigrants at all, no consideration of the social consequences of mass immigration, no consultation of the people sought, no forethought on technology’s impact on the labour market, no real work whatsoever.  You just show up to the office, increase the numbers, and spend the rest of your time warming a seat in Parliament with an occasional visit to an ethnic folk festival if only to go outside to get some fresh air.  

Indeed, the position is more liaison officer of the sitting government to the country’s kingmaker immigrant/ethnic vote banks than it is a cabinet minister shaping policy.  From Barbara McDougall to Ahmed Hussen; a long line of pension chasing mediocrities whose only accomplishment in office is ensuring the demographic replacement of the founding peoples of this country (but don’t call it a genocide) and the sustained theft of "stolen native land."  

But if you insist on shoveling in as many people as you can into the country from anywhere in the world are the people from the third world the ones to choose from?  Since the internet loves its listicles I present to you my list of reasons why Canada should stop immigration from the third world.

1. They’re From The Third World.

The people make the country, the country does not make the people and the third-world is the third-world because it’s full of third-world people.  Somalia is Somalia because it’s full of Somalis.  The Philippines is the Philippines because it’s full of Filipinos.  Mexico is Mexico because it’s full of Mexicans.  And so on.  “You will know them by their fruits” and their fruits are the societies they made for themselves.
 
European colonialism is often blamed for their lack of economic advancement but that can only take you so far and, besides, it’s been so long now you’re just making excuses for their failings.  Even so colonialism did bring modernity and functional government along with it which some utilized to their benefit post-colonialism while others let it rot.  For those of the later it says a lot about them as a people.  And we’re bringing them here in large numbers.
 
When you import the third-world the third-world is what you’ll get.  Magic-dirt thinking is of the liberal, naïve, idealistic mind convinced that someone will have their third-world essence exorcised from their being simply by having two feet planted on Western territory.  It’s nonsense.  

Genetic factors play a determinant role in shaping us as individuals and collectively as a people and it is apparent large swaths of humanity find themselves swimming in the shallow end of the gene pool.  This is why it doesn’t matter where you were born.  A Somali born in Canada is no different than a Somali born in Somalia.  A bundle of genes doesn’t behave differently because of what piece of land it was pooped out on.  Whether or not you believe in IQ as a valid metric of cognitive ability it’s clear some people are smarter than others and there are genetic reasons for it.  We’re not all equal.  

The mass importation of the third-world into Western civilization doesn’t enrich it and raise it up but brings it down to lower levels in an equalizing effect like when a gust of cold air rushes in and makes uncomfortable a once comfortably warm room.  And considering it is Western civilization that is propelling humanity forward diluting it with third-world populations will not only retard the progress of Western societies, if it doesn’t destroy it outright, it will take the rest of humanity with it.

2. We’re Poaching.

More Canadians move to the U.S. than Americans move north.  It’s a long established phenomenon where only a couple of times in history has that not been the case.  The reason is obvious.  By most metrics the U.S. is a better country than Canada specifically the U.S. offers a greater array of economic opportunities due to its highly diversified economy.  You can tell the level of a Canadian’s success by whether or not he lives here or in the U.S. since the most successful of Canadians tend to live in America.  It truly is the land of opportunity and a magnet for top Canadian talent causing many to lament of a “brain drain.”  But fear not.  What we lose to the U.S. we replace with immigrants not from the U.S., or Britain, or France, or Germany, or Australia, or Japan, for that matter, but immigrants from…the third world.

If the “brain drain” to the U.S. is cause for concern on how it affects the Canadian economy and its ability to compete internationally then Canada is, in practice, exercising its own “brain drain” of the third world and undermining its ability to develop its economies and ability to compete internationally.   We’re hypocrites to complain.  And we’re poaching.  In fact Canada has been singled out by WHO for doing just that.

The third-world needs its talented people more than we need them and oftentimes immigrating to Canada is career suicide.  Stories of “I was an MD in my country and now I’m a cabbie in Canada” are so commonplace now they deserve their own heritage minute.

To ameliorate this wasteful spending of human capital it is suggested Canada expedites the recognition of their professional bona fides to get them quickly engaged in the Canadian labour market but I have a better idea.  How about they stay home and build their countries instead?  A third world education is not on par with Western standards leading many to engage in multiple years of additional training in Canada just catch up.  But imagine what they could accomplish for their native lands had they stayed there or returned with the skills upgrade.  Here they’re just banalities but “back home” they can make a difference which leads me to my next point.

3. Because The Developing World Will Always Remain The Developing World.

The third world is the third world because the people of the third world can’t be bothered to do anything about it.  They just seem to accept it for what it is with a shrug of the shoulders.  But why should they do anything about it at all?  All they have to do is walk off a plane in some Western nation and suddenly their circumstances have changed for the better.  

What they fail to appreciate is that high standard of living, the one they want to obtain instantly from walking off a plane (or illegally crossing aborder) came about through effort, struggle, and sacrifice over generations.  If the developing world wants to get out of the developing phase and into the developed part it’s going to have to make the same effort, struggle, and sacrifice but no one in the third world has the patience for that.  Like impatient demanding children they want it now!  Also it’s too hard.  They want to come to the West to obtain instantaneously the society they can’t be bothered to build for themselves “back home.”

If we close the border to third world immigrants then they’ll be forced to confront the unpleasantness of their societies and be forced to do something about it that future generations can benefit from.  As long as the West allows itself to be open to third world immigration then few, if any, in the third world will be incentivized to make the changes in their countries to correct the conditions that compel them to want to leave in the first place leaving the developing world forever in the state of being the developing world.  Consider closing the borders to them to be an act of tough love.

4. If They Can’t Prosper Their Countries Then They Won’t Prosper Ours.

If third world immigrants were worth a damn then their native countries wouldn’t be in the mess that they are in.  But they are.  Why is that?  It’s because they’re third-worlders and need to go abroad to obtain another’s prosperous society since they can’t create one for themselves.

It’s laughable to hear third world immigrants talk of how they make a contribution to Canada as if the country would fall apart without their help.  To this I say “Look around.  Does it look like we need your help?”  Canada was getting along fine before they arrived and would still do so if they weren’t here.  But you know who could use their contribution?  Their people back in their home countries!

If third world immigrants prospered societies then why is Peel Region so poor?  To think third world immigration will not only maintain the prosperity that exists here but also grow it is borderline lunacy and if you do think so there’s a room at CAMH that’s feeling lonely right now without you.

5. It Makes Third World Governments Lazy.

Some CDN$24 billion is removed from the Canadian economy each year in the form of remittances.  This is money sent abroad to add liquidity to third world economies.  (And this is how third world immigrants contribute to the Canadian economy; by taking money out of it but this isn’t the real problem here.)  This nurtures remittance dependency for third world governments making them lazy to crafting policy that would encourage domestic job growth and long-term sustainable development to tackle poverty reduction.
 
One of the main exports of the Philippines is her people because Manila has become quite comfortable leaving job creation duties to other countries creating a remittance dependant economy.  Even China and India experience heavy inflows of remittances making the three Asian countries the top three largest recipients of remittance money in the world.  (Incidentally they’re also the top three source nations of immigrants to Canada.)  Mind you as a percentage of GDP they’re not as bad as Tonga, Kyrgyzstan, or Tajikistan but that isn’t saying a lot.
 
There are several problems with having a remittance dependant economy but chief among them is there is little evidence to suggest it positively contributes to economic growth and poverty reduction.  The primary benefits of remittances are the people receiving them. It’s not a long-term strategy for sustainable economic prosperity and by allowing third-world immigration we’re just enabling this dependency.

6. Even They Don’t Want To Do The Jobs Canadians Don’t Want To Do.

To say immigrants do the jobs “people X” don’t want to do insults two groups of people; one intentionally the other unintentionally.

The intentional group are the working class schmucks who experience the most adverse of “benefits” mass immigration brings.  It’s meant to shame them into accepting terrible jobs that don’t pay a living wage by a people of better upbringing who are so well connected from birth that if they ever found themselves doing “the jobs Canadians don’t want to do” it would mean they f**ked up so badly in life no one would risk reputation by setting them up with even the most measly do nothing, overpaid, public sector sinecure.

The unintentional group is the immigrants themselves since it presupposes they’re good for little else.
 
But even third world immigrants don’t want to do those jobs.

If you’re going to be poor in life then it’s best to be poor in a developed nation like Canada but being poor here isn’t much fun.  Third world immigrants didn’t come to Canada for the weather, or culture, or cuisine, or anything definitively Canadian really, and they definitely didn’t come to Canada to be poor even by first world standards.  They came to Canada to shop in its malls (Canada, to them, is just a mall and to be a Canadian is to be a shopper) but it’s hard to do so by “doing a job Canadians don’t want to do.”  If the high turnover rate of imported nannies tells us anything it’s just that: third world immigrants don’t want to do the jobs Canadians don’t want to do either.

7. They Contribute To Climate Change.

Canada has one of the highest carbon footprints per capita in the world.  No matter what ranking you look at Canada consistently lists high as one of the most polluting countries in the world on a per capita basis.  This is because Canada is a sparsely populated northern country of mostly inhospitable terrain that experiences the hottest of hot and the coldest of cold weather.  If the government were serious about combating climate change it would look at stabilizing the population, perhaps allow it to decline, but it isn’t.  It wants to increase the population mostly through mass third-world immigration while increasing our cost of living through an ineffective carbon tax; a carbon tax, I should add, whose efficacy would be frustrated by the negating effects immigrant driven population growth would have on any realized carbon reductions.  

How much more of a polluter will Canada be with a population of 100 million?   A carbon tax and mass immigration work at cross purposes.

Most of the immigrants we import come from the third world where they have lower carbon footprints.  China, for example, is a top global polluter but due to its large population the average Chinese national in China has a lower carbon footprint than the average Canadian.  Their carbon footprint more than doubles, triples, quadruples when they come to Canada to reside here permanently.  Canada would be fighting climate change if it discouraged third-world immigration and left those people to remain in the third-world.

Conclusion.

Third-world immigrants need to stay home and fix their s**t and Canada would be wise to deny them residency until they do so.  They’ve proven themselves unfit for immigration because if they couldn’t do anything for themselves in their native countries, and for their native countries, then they’re not going to do anything for us.  They didn’t come to Canada to solve our problems, they came to Canada to have Canada solve theirs.  The third-world is the third-world because of the people of the third-world and by bringing them here you’re inviting what makes the third-world with them.  There is no benefit to be had, not real ones anyway, by Canada in allowing mass sustained third-world immigration and if there are any benefits they’re mostly novel, superficial, or fleeting mostly being eaten up by the immigrants themselves.  Third-worlders need to stay where they are and fix their countries, not come here and colonize mine.  Had they collectively invested the effort and resources they expend immigrating to the West into their native lands instead then perhaps they could affect positive change there and direct their countries to a brighter more prosperous future so that future generations wouldn’t feel compelled to move abroad at all.

Sunday, 25 February 2018

Diasporas Don’t Improve Trade Relations So Stop Saying They Do.

One of the selling points of immigration enthusiasts is that Diasporas improve bilateral trade relations but an interesting comment made by Ujjal Dosanjh - a Sikh in Canada who was bloc voted into becoming the first Indo-Canadian premier of a province - warrants some attention.

Commenting on Justin Sandiego’s family vacation to India he had the following to say to the CBC regarding trade relations between India and Canada:

"Trade still doesn't amount to much," he said. "Since the time I was premier, prime ministers and premiers have been going over and yet trade just hasn't grown as much as it could."

The article goes on to note how two-way trade between the two nations is a paltry $8 billion despite Canada hosting 1.4 million Indians which includes their Canadian born decedents or, as the Indian government considers them, Non-resident Indians and persons of Indian origin (NRI-PIOs).

Dosanjh further notes:

"The people-to-people links just haven't translated into strong economic links," said Dosanjh. "You've got grains and pulses, some pulp. But India's needs are mostly met by other markets."

The article then quotes some Indian at Carlton University who does some crystal-ball gazing anticipating the materialization of opportunities just over the horizon but isn’t that always the case regarding the economic benefits of mass immigration: speculation and assumption making with some "it's going to happen just be patient" promises thrown in?

To put this in perspective trade between Canada and the United States totaled $627.8 billion in 2016  making it the second largest trading relationship in the world albeit one where the U.S. enjoys a trade surplus.  Nevertheless trade with the U.S. is central to Canada’s economic success and why Canadians enjoy such a high quality of life.  And there are approximately 327,575 American-Canadians.  If Diaspora’s improve trade relations then why aren’t we importing more Americans?  (Conversely there are approximately a little over 1 million Canadian-Americans; 400,000 less than there are Indians in Canada.  Indeed, there are more Indians in Canada than there are American-Canadians and Canadian-Americans combined).

Even the trade announcement made by Trudeau is lopsided with $750 million dollars going to India and India sending a measly $250 million Canada’s way but that’s typical of Indo-Canadian trade relations with investment being heavily weighted in India's favour.  And half of that $750 million investment is from one company, Toronto based Brookfield Asset Management, that is buying an office complex in Mumbai.

India is a country of 300 million households where 73% live in rural villages.  And of that 73% only 5% earn enough to pay taxes and 35.7% are illiterate.  There’s little to gain by investing in India except as a place to outsource jobs.  As for Indians the only thing they want from us is our citizenship and the ability to immigrate here.  Other than that they’re of little use to us and we’re just giving our country away to them because they can’t seem to make a country worth living in for themselves.

The truth is Diaspora’s don’t improve trade relations and the fact that 1.4 million Indians in Canada only translates into $8 billion worth of trade proves it doesn’t.  You don’t need to host an overseas Diaspora to enjoy a good trading relationship with a country.  If India wants something from Canada it will buy it from us.  We don’t need 1.4 million Indians in the country to entice them to do so and from the looks of things haven't done so.  In fact having 1.4 million Indians in the country, most of which are Sikh, is proving to be a headache for Canada but that’s for another post.

Tuesday, 16 January 2018

But They Are Shithole Countries And Why Do You Think That Is?

Looks like Trump is taking flack for stating the obvious.  He called shithole countries shithole countries and the grandstanding left is in a huff.

Again.
 
The man can say the sky is blue and his enemies will personally take offense for the other wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum for not being acknowledged.  He can’t win.

The question is why are they shithole countries and the compassionate progressive left will tell you colonialism, corporations, blah, blah, blah, white people.  I won’t completely dismiss the lingering effects of colonialism and the wealth sucking power of multinational corporations but sooner or later you have to take responsibility for yourself.  It’s “current year” and the colonialism card has been overplayed.

The reason why shithole countries are shithole countries is because the people who live there make them shithole countries.  The Philippines is a shithole country because Filipinos.  Somalia is a shithole country because Somalis.  Haiti is a shithole country because Haitians.  And so on.

Some countries are literal shitholes.  In India nearly half the population openly defecates in the streets.  The country is practically an open air public toilet.

I used to believe in the equality of man and the culpability of the West in the impoverishment of the developing world.  I used to believe we had some sort of duty to improve the lives of those of the Third World since I lived a relatively comfortable life at their expense.  And supporting mass immigration was part of that.  Then I grew up and wised up by moving to and living in Toronto.  If living in Toronto hasn’t taught you the cold hard reality that the Third World is a shithole because Third-Worlders then you should leave your gentrified white middle class enclave some time and talk to the people you say you love to have in Canada just not exactly living in your neighbourhood.

I’ve worked with these people.  I went to Church with these people.  I went to school with their kids and other than being nice people, most of them anyway, they’re extremely unremarkable and will remove any wonderment to why the shithole country they left is a shithole.  I no longer saw letting them immigrate to Canada as an act of reconciliation but as an act of charity.


And we’re importing them into the country by the hundreds of thousands each year.  Doing so is like willfully infecting yourself with the AIDS virus.

Call me a racist; call me a xenophobe I simply don’t care anymore.  But importing by the millions the “darkies” of the developing world into the white West on the presumption that they will prosper not only themselves but the West as well is just the progressive-left version of the white man’s burden.  We assume that deep down all men are equal and that when in the white West the “darkies” will do as whitey does and become indistinguishable from anyone and everyone skin colour aside.  This is what Peter Brimelow referred to as the “magic soil theory” in an interview with Jared Taylor.  It assumes bringing in hordes of Third Worlders into a Western society will magically change them into something better just because they happen to be in the West.  It’s the same faulty reasoning that believes that the magical incantations of the citizenship oath turns a man or woman into a Canadian on the spot, indistinguishable from a maple syrup bleeding, hockey puck shitting Canuck.  Instinctively we know that’s not true and my lived experience shouts at me that it’s not true.

Ask yourself this: if the people we’re importing en masse from the developing world were unable to prosper themselves and their society in their native countries what do you think they’re going to do for us here?  And if you counter that Canada is specifically targeting the Third World’s most ambitious “best and brightest” then we’re robbing the Third World of its most precious resource condemning it to a state of perpetual poverty and forever a shithole.  As long as the West provides itself as an escape route to the "better life" for the people of the Third World they will feel no compulsion to do anything to change the societies and the countries they live in.  All they have to do is hop on plane and go to the West leaving their fellow countrymen to rot in the shithole of a country they’re leaving behind.  It’s an act of instant gratification where others have done all the hard work and then you suddenly show up to reap the rewards.

Not letting these people come here is an act of moral duty.  It’s tough love.  If they don’t like the country they were born in then they should do something about to make it one worth living in.  They should build their countries by following the West’s example, not immigrate there and colonize it.  They may not realize that better country in their lifetime but future generations will.  I know it’s easy for me to say this but that’s life and I, like hundreds of millions of people, were fortunate enough to be born in a prosperous Western state.  But that prosperity was built over generations and it didn’t come easy but nothing worth having comes easy.   And it’s a prosperity Filipinos, Indians, Syrians, Haitians, Somalis, Sri Lankans, Nigerians and their fellow Third Worlders want through the simple easy act of walking off a plane.  Had they spent the effort and resources they used to immigrate to the West to make their lives better for themselves in their respective shithole countries then perhaps their countries, in time, wouldn’t be shitholes.

We have no obligation, be it moral or economic, to let these people settle here.  We do have an obligation to future generations of Canadians to leave the country in a better shape than the one we were born into.  But mass Third World immigration is making that difficult to achieve.  We may have inherited a stable prosperous country from our parents and our parents’ parents but by allowing mass Third World immigration into Canada we will be bequeathing a shithole country to those who follow.  Canada isn't our country to give away like that.

Tuesday, 9 January 2018

Diversity Ruins Everything: Star Wars Edition or Star Wars Has Become Privileged White Female Fanfiction.

I saw the new Star Wars movie and it’s an SJW POS.  I was still entertained by it but in a jaw dropping “What the hell are they doing here?” kind of way.  As a movie spectacle it works.  The space battle scenes are engaging but plot wise the movie goes nowhere and it’s burdened by uninteresting characters and a superfluous subplot that extends the run-time beyond patience.  And the rammed-down-your-throat diversity doesn’t help either because diversity is bullshit.

It was clear from the start that diversity would be a guiding principal in the creation of the now Disney owned Star Wars universe.  The writers, directors, and producers were quite clear on this.  In fact the woman running Star Wars into the ground with her ham-fisted direction of it owes her entire career to diversity quotas (and riding the coattails of much more talented and ambitious people like Frank Marshall and Steven Spielberg).

So how’s that diversity thing working out so far for the new Star Wars film?  Box office sales are strong albeit only for the first week of release.  And in the lucrative Chinese market Star Wars: The Last Jedi struggles against a “meh” receptionToy sales are weak which should be alarming because this is what this is all about.  Star Wars was always about selling toys and that’s why Disney bought it.
 
Oh, and the fans hate it!  Now I don’t consider myself a Star Wars fan.  Like many adults my age I grew up on Star Wars collecting the toys and playing the video games but any emotional attachment I had to the movies is long gone.  I grew out of it.  I had no intention of seeing the latest installment of Star Wars because I just don’t care anymore and only went because my ticket was paid for.  But the fans!  They’re the ones buying the toys and seeing the films more than once taking their kids along with them creating a new generation of Star Wars toy buyers.  When you’ve lost them you’ve lost your real market.

Some people claim George Lucas ruined their childhood with the prequels.  He may have ruined it but diversity is killing it.  There’s no reason for any of the characters to be who they are in the film except for diversity.  Rey doesn’t have to be a female but she is because vagina.  The Storm Trooper with a conscience, Finn, doesn’t have to be black but he is because black which is odd since the First Order is obviously an imagination of a white supremacy movement.  And the Rose character in Star Wars: The Last Jedi doesn’t have to be Asian but she is because Asian.  In fact she doesn’t have to be in the film at all and I hazard to guess the meandering subplot was written just to stick her in the story somewhere.

The original Star Wars trilogy worked because it was a simple tale of good vs. evil with a small cast of characters that allowed the films to tease out their personalities so the audience can care about them and their struggle.  Back then the politics of diversity wasn’t an issue allowing the film’s creators to concentrate on telling a story.  Now the films are distracted by diversity where every check-box of identities needs to be represented creating a cast of characters the audience is given no time to get to know or give a damn about.
 
And the infusion of SJW ideology makes it worse.  The feminist propaganda in the movies is so blatant it’s obvious they’re not even trying to hide it.  In all the Disney Star Wars movies released thus far it’s a white woman (not a black woman or an Asian woman but a white one) leading a rag tag group of diverse freedom fighters against a powerful galactic force of evil guided by white men because white women will lead the world to peace and harmony against the true destabilizing global force of toxic white male patriarchy.  Yes, the leaders of the evil First Order and Empire are white males.  

In fact there are no positive male characters in the new Star Wars movies at least not white ones.  Kylo Ren is an emotionally unstable manchild with mommy and daddy issues.  In The Last Jedi Luke is a brooding MGTOW, Poe Dameron is a reckless Alpha Male who is cut down to size and put in his place like a misbehaving child by women, and Finn is essentially the Jar Jar Binks of the new trilogy.  There's even a minor character in the new film played by Benicio del Toro, a male, who turns out to be a two-faced huckster.  It’s Kathleen Kennedy's feminist Star Wars fan fiction on the big screen, with the essential Mary Sue lead, where women are empowered by attacking the male identity (kind of like in real life).  All three of the films are white female empowerment fantasies where white women occupy positions of leadership, undoubtedly through merit and not quotas, helping lost and hopeless men find themselves while shepherding the galaxy into a multi-cultural, multi-racial Utopia which is why these films belong in the realm of science-fantasy.  In the real world white women in leadership positions, often put there through quotas and not merit, have proven to be instrumental in the decline of companies and countries, destabilizing Western nations through social re-engineering schemes and the cheerleading of mass immigration.

Diversity is mediocrity and Star Wars is just one cultural proof of it.  It’s not just me saying it.  It’s the poor fan reception and the lackluster toy sales.  Star Wars has enjoyed box office success not because they’re good movies but because it’s Star WarsStar Wars: The Force Awakens is a competent movie but an uninspiring one, retelling A New Hope and doesn’t reward successive viewings.  Rogue One: A Star Wars Tale is an unnecessary and messy addition to the Star Wars canon.   Star Wars: The Last Jedi is too long being weighed down by SJW activism, feminism, and the diversity agenda.  These films have failed to capture the magic of the original trilogy.  They look like Star Wars but don’t feel like it.  Perhaps the original Star Wars trilogy was just lightning in a bottle but I can return to those movies and watch them again with the same amount of enjoyment I had when I saw them the first time.  And I repeat I don’t consider myself a fan having abandoned any emotional attachment to the films long ago.  The new films feel like product created by a committee guided by the reigning progressive agenda of the Hollywood elite to pander to as many people as possible.  The original trilogy encapsulated universal themes of good vs. evil, hope, destiny, fate, and family and you don’t need diversity to express any of that.  It seems diversity just gets in the way and f**ks it up.

Blade Runner 2049 on the other hand...

Sunday, 19 November 2017

If Immigrants Prosper Canada Then Why Is Peel Region So Damn Poor?

So Trudeau appointed a Somali refugee/immigration lawyer/criminal lawyer as Minister for Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship because conflict of interest is apparently not a thing with this government.  (And that Ahmed Hussen is a Somali who specializes in immigration and criminal law shows the man knows his community very well).  In the latest announcement by this government that inspires even less confidence in it, if there was any left to give, we learned of its plan to flood the country with 1 million immigrants in three years because importing millions of immigrants from the dysfunctional third world will somehow, fingers-crossed make Canada prosperous and competitive.  It hasn't worked out that way yet but I guess the strategy is if we make the pile of third world immigrants high enough it will magically birth economic prosperity from within.  Anyhow, the usual excuses were paraded to an increasingly immigrant weary Canadian populace being told that “immigrants are key to Canada’s prosperity.”  If that’s true then why is Peel Region so damn poor?

Peel Region is one of three Regional Municipalities bordering Toronto and, along with Halton Region, makes up what is called the Greater Toronto Area (GTA).  Peel encompasses the cities of Mississauga, Brampton, and Caledon having a collective population of approximately 1.4 million of whom over half of those are non-whites and recent immigrants arriving mostly from the Middle East and Asia.  And 47% of Peel Region’s residents are considered poor with 4% considered extremely poor.

It wasn’t always like this.  Back in the bad old days of 1980 when Peel, indeed Toronto and the whole of the GTA, was mostly white and stable and therefore awful places to live and raise a family only 2% of Peel residents were considered low-income.  It was also a time when Canada wasn’t burdened with out of control immigration.  All it took was 35 years of massive third world immigration to f**k that up didn’t it?  Thank you immigration industry!  You really know what’s best for this country.

It’s not like they didn’t see it coming.  Poverty was increasing in Peel in tandem with immigrant driven population growth yet those in power did nothing.  Even Mississauga’s celebrated Hazel McCallion did nothing as she presided over the increasing impoverishment of her city.  They chose to distract themselves and the public with bromides to diversity and ethnic festivals.  Meanwhile none of the economic prosperity immigration allegedly brings to a society came to fruition.  What happened was predictable and could have been avoided if anyone was brave enough to tell it like it is: too many immigrants, not enough jobs.  And not just any jobs but ones that pay a livable income.

Peel Region became reliant on housing to drive the economy foolishly believing a growing population brings prosperity.  But apparently that’s not true.  Building houses and filling them with people isn’t a good model for an economy with a long-term outlook.  It’s a lesson Peel learned the hard way and it’s a problem they allowed to happen and now have to deal with.

Their solutions are laughably naïve.  They think easier access to services for the poor will alleviate their poverty woes but no it won’t.  This is the solution the usual parasites in the social service sector give because it means sustained funding and employment for them but not so much for their clients.  It’s also the career friendly answer for a hack urban politician dependent on immigrant votes to keep her pathetic political career alive.  What are needed are good paying jobs but there aren’t many of those going around are there?  And it’s apparent immigrants don’t create them either.

Peel Region is a case example contesting the erroneous proclamation that “immigration is key to Canada’s prosperity.”  Peel hasn’t benefited from Canada’s reckless immigration system in the least.  It’s become a victim of it and a canary in the coal mine for the rest of the country.  If we don’t get immigration under control, if we don’t lower the numbers, if we don’t become more selective in who we let in then we can see the face of New Canada already in Peel and frankly it’s a very, very ugly and a very, very poor one.

Monday, 3 April 2017

Robots, Not Immigrants, Can Combat Canada's Ageing Demographic.

One of the major selling points used to sell weary Canadians on the necessity of mass (third world) immigration is that without it our ageing demographic will sink the economy and consequently our standard of living.  However, a study published this year by two MIT economists challenges this conventional wisdom; that an aging population negatively affects a country’s economic growth leading to lowered GDP per capita and what is termed “secular stagnation.”  On the contrary they conclude that there is “no such negative relationship in the data” and that “countries experiencing more rapid aging have grown more in recent decades.”

It’s a short study (only 10 pages) but the tl;dr version of it simply states that the reason they found no negative correlation between a country’s aging society and its economic output is that the economy adapted to it by implementing labour saving technology.

It’s a timely study considering the AI revolution looming on the horizon and one Canadian government officials should know about.  If Canada’s labour market challenges can be met with algorithms it makes no sense to keep shoveling people into the country who will in time become redundant, superfluous, surplus labour dependent of some form of government aid.  And considering immigration isn't even effective at marginally reversing an ageing demographic trend, for the simple reason that immigrants age too, I think it's more reasonable to look at technology, not immigrants, as the proper response to it.

Tuesday, 14 March 2017

Diversity Is Mediocrity.

We don’t need a self-promoting blowhard telling us how mediocre Justin Trudeau’s cabinet is.  I think it does a pretty good job of speaking for itself.  When you have a former ski instructor and substitute drama teacher of generational wealth possessing an undeserved sense of self-importance acting as the effective “leader” of your country what can you expect?  We’re not talking Winston Churchill here.  More like Kim Jong Un minus all that evil stuff.  However it’s worth noting his reason for saying it which is to pursue diversity for diversity sake you sacrifice competency and inevitably quality producing an inferior outcome to what you could have had.  When diversity is your maxim you’re practically capitulating to being second best almost all the time.  In fact, "diversity means second (or even last) place" is truer to reality than "diversity is our strength" which is more at home in ideological fantasy-land.

And I could stop there because I think it’s so self-evident that diversity is mediocrity that elaboration is not needed.  I guess I could provide some examples.

New York state is planning on scrapping a literacy test it used to screen teachers because too many minorities, primarily blacks and Hispanics, were failing it.  This means the standards of the New York state education system will suffer as will the education of the pupils forced to be taught by unqualified teachers.  All for the sake of diversity.

Journalistic standards have been further diminished by the diversity agenda.  Ever cognizant of the effect their words may have on the minds of the reading public journalists have engaged in self-censorship and spin when reporting the news.  Objectivity and truth have given way to misinformation, half-truths, or just spiking a story if it doesn't conform to the "diversity is our strength" narrative.  This has created a demoralized journalistic class and the misleading of the public by contributing to its collective ignorance.

Diversity is such a strength for Canadian society unemployment is one its great gifts to the host white majority.

Ottawa policing standards were given a brief relief of duty to hire an unqualified Somali immigrant. Because diversity.

Diversity provides a great cover to mask the more pressing social concern which is income inequality.  This is why the ruling class love it so much.  Diversity isn't a threat to the power structure so long as they can control it and contain its ill effects to the lower classes.  This is one of my main criticisms of diversity and multiculturalism, it's partner in crime.  They're frivolous concerns we can live without (and have done so before quite nicely, thank you) but make convenient political distractions to keep us from speaking about what really matters to us and making real social progress. Diversity and multiculturalism are wastes of our time.

"Diversity is our strength" is a stupid slogan.  You can easily say the opposite and it still rings true.  That’s because diversity is an abstract noun that needs clarification and "diversity is our strength” is a slogan that needs qualifying.   We need to know what kind of diversity we’re talking about to decide whether or not it’s a strength because I don’t think a diversity of diseases is a strength.  And just saying “diversity is our strength” without backing that statement up doesn’t make it true.

So what kind of diversity are we talking about? 

Are we talking about racial diversity?  How is that our strength?  How does one’s particular skin colour endow that person with unique skills and talents that that can’t be replicated by others of a different racial composition?  How does one’s skin colour bestow gifts unto the society they happen to inhabit?  If we’re honest with ourselves we can see that racial diversity is not our strength.  It’s pursued more as a moral obligation if anything while ignoring all of the undesirable social problems it creates.  Indeed, racial diversity is bullshit!

Is religious diversity our strength?  Do I need to go there?

How about cultural diversity?  That I can agree with but a cultural diversity that is produced domestically not a cultural diversity fabricated by governmental decree under the guise of multiculturalism which entails the importation and promotion of foreign cultures in a domestic setting.  The latter has the effect of culturally colonizing a people and marginalizing or even erasing their cultural existence altogether.  I doubt very much the First Nations peoples of Canada celebrate the cultural diversity brought to them by the European settlers.   Likewise, Canadians today don’t give two flying f**ks about Diwali, Eid, Khalsa, Chinese New Year, Cinco de Mayo, or what have you.  We don’t celebrate these things because they’re not Canadian cultural traditions and we don’t have much of an interest in them in the first place.  In fact, the imposition of these foreign practices onto the collective cultural psyche of the nation elicits mostly irritation instead of celebration.

The diversity of ideas is our strength.  It promotes forward thinking allowing societies to grow philosophically, scientifically, technologically, politically, culturally, and socially.   You can’t have freedom and democracy without the uninhibited flow of ideas.  However the Canadian government thinks the diversity of ideas is a weakness so it must be constrained through legislation, vague “hate crime” laws, and an Orwellian kangaroo court system called Human Rights Tribunals.

So there you have it.  Out of all the diversity the government chooses to promote it champions the ones that inherently make us weaker while actively suffocating the one that makes us stronger.  Welcome to the New Canada folks.

Diversity is, for the most part, mediocrity.  This is why professional sports teams don't give it much consideration when recruiting talent.  When quality takes a back seat to the ideological driven agenda of diversity you're looking at second, third, fourth, or even last place.  While corporations have deep enough pockets to eat the costs of diversity professional sports teams use a business model that necessitates the need to win games to maximize profits.  And if a roster of mostly all white males is needed to take you to the championship game then so be it.

And in the realm of politics, particularly Canadian politics where you're already starting with one of the greatest collections of the most mediocre men and women society has to offer, letting diversity choose your cabinet ministers just increases the mediocrity factor twofold.  So Kevin O'leary was just pointing out the obvious, vocalizing what everyone already knew.

Monday, 20 February 2017

No Future For You.

Back in late October of 2016 Finance Minister Bill “there’s no future for you” Morneau made comments at a meeting of the Liberal Party’s Ontario wing basically telling Canadians there’s no future you.  When asked to clarify these comments a few days later at a youth labour forum Prime Minister Trust Fund Man-Child reinforced what his finance Minister said unwittingly giving a verbal middle-finger to the economic futures of the youth across the country.  Their comments reveal that they’re aware of the weak labour market today and into the years to come yet the governing Liberal Party has set immigration targets at a base of 300,000 while indicating intentions of increasing it into the foreseeable future.  This is worrying as there are indicators that would compel a more prudent government to exercise a conservative approach to immigration.


Canadians are at record levels of debt, pushing past the $2 trillion mark in December of 2016, masking our debt driven economy with the illusion of prosperity.

Need I say anything about the housing market?  If interest rates were to rise, as they inevitably will since there’s almost nowhere else to go but up, how will that affect it?  How can Canadians carry these mortgages if they need to amass a burdensome debt-load just to get by?  How will this affect the service sector, some 70% Canada's GDP of which retail employs 12% of Canadians, if Canadians are forced to cut back on consumption so that they can keep their house?



The poor performance of men in the job market should sound alarm bells.  Men are typically attracted to higher paying jobs whereas women tend to concentrate in lower paying occupations (which is why there is a wage gap).  If men are performing poorly it means well paying occupations are disappearing.

Automation and advances in A.I. may eliminate 40% of jobs within the next few years with even more job losses to come as the technology becomes more advanced.  Now, I’m enough of a skeptic to take these dire predictions with a grain of salt since we’re not clairvoyants and we can’t predict the future.  And they’ve been saying this for decades.  Remember the predictions of the paperless office?  For years immigration proponents have been making apocalyptic predictions about job shortages in the labour market , and still do, yet here we are in 2017 and it’s just as tough to find decent employment as it’s ever been.  The great flood of retiring boomers is set to happen ten years ago, five years ago, two years ago, this year, last month, any day now.   But the predictions about A.I. may be truer than most predictions about the future.  An insurance company in Japan replaced 34 of its employees with A.I. technology and self-driving vehicles may very well put truck-drivers out of work.

What's more is that Bill Morneau is aware of a possible low-growth future of continued deficits until mid century and where the national debt reaches one trillion in the next fifteen years.  It's not exactly "sunny ways" which is why he quietly published the report hoping it wouldn't draw much attention.

Mass immigration may have worked at particular times in the nation’s history but as PM Potato Head likes to remind us “it’s current year.”  Times are different.  We're living in a period of low growth, low income, record debt, high unemployment, and high deficits.  Mass immigration is a twentieth century program that hasn’t been updated to reflect the realities of the twenty-first.  After all, if the Prime Minister and his finance Minister know the labour market is weak and precarious employment is the new norm then what future do they think these immigrants will have in Canada if they essentially told Canadians they don’t have economic futures themselves?

Tuesday, 7 February 2017

Looks Like Canada Has Become a Dangerous Place for Muslims.

So they'll be leaving I guess?

Probably not.  Life's too good here compared to countries created by Muslims.  They'll want us to double-down on the Muslim immigration while attacking our cherished Canadian value of free speech with anti-blasphemy laws so Canada becomes more hospitable for Muslims while becoming more inhospitable for the rest of us.

However, I propose a better solution.

Ban all Muslim immigration to Canada.

And help the Muslims here resettle in Muslim majority countries where they can openly practice their religion free of discrimination and fear of violent intent; and where, sadly, non-Muslims can't.  But we have to make sure we help them resettle in the right Muslim majority country because if we end up sending, say, Sunni's to Shiite lands, or Ahmadis to anywhere, we'd probably see a body-count worse than a Nigerian village massacre that will push Christians from the number one spot as the world's most persecuted religious group.  And boy, won't our faces be red!

It's for their own well being you understand. Canada has apparently become as insensitive to it's Muslim religious minority as Muslims are to religious minorities in their midst.  Or as insensitive as Muslims are to Canadian norms and traditions. 

And their exodus from Canada is the apt punishment this "Islmaphobic" country deserves.  When Muslims leave Canada and take all their, uh, stuff, I guess (I was going to say contributions but we all know there aren't any) then we'll be sorry.

They can think of it as a learning experience.  The intolerance they encountered here will grant them the perspective they'll need to champion for the basic human rights denied non-Muslims in Muslim majority countries.  It's where their pleas for pluralism, tolerance, and acceptance are needed the most because it's obvious Muslims are so concerned about the basic human rights of religious minorities everywhere in the world expect, of course, in Muslim countries.

So, Muslims, sorry things couldn't work out.  We tried our best but it turns out our relationship was doomed from the start.  Don't feel bad.  It's not you.  It's us, I swear.

Monday, 23 January 2017

Logical Fallacies of Mass Immigration Supporters: Cherry Picking.

Cherry Picking.

The CBC published a story about a Syrian refugee family in Nova Scotia who found success and self sufficiency one year on after arriving in the province.  They did so by starting a small family run chocolatier business in the community of Antigonish that now employs ten people.  It’s a Syrian refugee “success story” that attracted the attention of Justin Trudeau who referenced their entrepreneurship at the UN as an example of Canada’s welcoming spirit and the rewards refugees and immigrants bring to the country.  It’s an awesome feel good story.  So what about the other 39,499 Syrian refugees?

This is an example of cherry picking.  It’s a logical fallacy where favourable examples are given particular attention to support one’s argument but those that invalidate it are conveniently ignored and swept under the rug. 

It’s one of the more common logical fallacies one encounters in debates and comment sections of internet articles.  When one employs this fallacy they typically do so by stating “My neighbour from India…” or “I work with someone from China…” or “My doctor is a Muslim…” or statements of that nature.  Not only are their debate points anecdotal but are also isolated cherry picked examples that can’t be used to argue the successes or failings of the immigration and refugee systems.  If all it takes is one positive story to show “the system works” then I guess the Toronto Police Services most wanted page irrefutably shows that it doesn’t.

One Syrian refugee family finding success in Canada is not a validation that the government’s approach to the Syrian refugee crisis was the correct one (or proof that our refugee system in general is not a lax mess of a system that doesn’t help legitimate refugees for the most part and is of little benefit to the country).  It’s just a story of a Syrian family who came to Canada as refugees and started a small business in Nova Scotia.  And that’s it!

Cherry picking is a cheap and easy debate tactic.  It’s meant to lead one to agree to a preconceived conclusion based on a select sample size.  In this case the CBC and Justin Trudeau want us to believe that because this Syrian refugee family found success all immigrants and refugees will do so as well by implication.  It’s just a matter of time.  But though this one Syrian refugee family found success in the country it’s realistic to assume others probably won’t.  Indeed, perhaps hundreds if not thousands of Syrian refugees will not find an adequate foothold in the country at all, lingering in economic limbo contributing to Canada’s ever growing immigrant underclass like the tens of thousands of immigrants and refugees who came before them.

By the way, rumour has it the Liberal Party of Canada is the chocolate factory's biggest customer.  If that's true then this "success story" was paid for by the LPC.