Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Government listening to concerns so that they arrive at a point of mixed optimism and caution. By all means maintain Canada's welcome mat to newcomers but do so with a goodly amount of investigation, oversight and support for each and every one.
Maintain preference for entire families over single males and once they arrive maintain adequate support systems for them so that they assimilate with cooperation rather than reluctantly. We're all seeing plenty of the good stories in the news but I'm sure there are bad ones too that need pre-emptive attention.
It's all in the application of our largesse being used as a photo op by Trudeau and perhaps getting forgotten about before he's back in his office versus them being quietly welcomed into a community to have neighbours and others prepared to provide long term assistance of more than just the charitable kind. A baked pie at the front door ain't gonna cut it.
I hate the thought of them arriving to fanfare at the airport with a big grinning PM taking selfies only to later being given the keys to some slum lord's idea of an apartment with no hot water and full of rats with everyone in their immediate surroundings already remote enough from each other that they're looked upon as just another turd in the already full-of-turds punchbowl.
Given similar treatment I'd probably think of some applied terrorism myself.
Well this is the whole thing about terrorism in some of these Euro countries. Is it all or even fundamentally about simply radical islam, or is it more a statement about systemic failure both governmental and societal when it comes to integration. Its fine to bring in X amount as an inaugural political statement that I'm here and different than the last guy, but if you can't properly get these people on their feet and you do nothing to screen the type of people coming in than its just a photo op and credibility lost is the least of your concerns!
Anyway, its Christmas eve I think i'm going to park further discussion on terrorism at this point.. Besides, I gotta do typical last minute shopping Merry Christmas to you and yours Bru!
That we should react to what people actually say and do instead to what we expect or assume them to.
I agree with that. We need to do that with everyone. Whether they're new immigrants, or our neighbours south of the border (which is what this thread started off to be about), or other countries around the world, and even the people that live next door to us in our own home communities.
I have to say I am a little surprised at how hostile some of you are are at the idea of joining with the west coast of the USA. Some of you made valid points but others just went off on defensive rants. We welcome everyone into Canada, Muslims, sikhs etc and others we don't have much in common with yet the idea of joining with our good friends and liberal neighbors means the end of the world?
We welcome American immigrants to Canada already. This isn't about welcoming people, but totally redefining Canada in an instant.
As has been pointed out here several times, the population majority by far in this new Canada would be Americans. Which means the ending of Canada.
Just being the devil's advocate, but what happens if immigrants don't shed their many of their old ways and integrate, and change Canada in a way that's way more alien than an Americanized Canada could ever be?
Looking at the last 150 years of Canada, it seems that first generation Canadians are able to shed their old ways, and second generation is completely Canadian. There are still problems with honour killings across the country, obviously committed by immigrants who have transplanted an alien, foreign culture to Canada. It will be interesting to see whether the number of honour killings increases or decreases with the recent influx of new Canadians from the Middle East.
I'm not so sure about that. Given that the Queen has very carefully circumscribed powers constitutionally (i.e. she can only use her extraordinary reserve powers on her own initiative in extreme situations, none of which have come to pass in 150 years of Canadian history), I doubt that Canadians would prefer an elected head of state who threatens religious groups (Muslims), who threatens other countries (Mexico, and a wall), and who threatens women ("Grab them by the _____.").
QEII is doing a good job, by my estimation: unelected sure, but not prone to doing anything outside her powers, or indeed, doing anything unconstitutional by Canadian standards.
Or doing anything at all. Quite a nice gig: Get paid $20 million a year to live in ostentatious wealth and do absolutely nothing. Which is why Americans would never go for it. We value meritocracy over aristocratic tradition.
Or doing anything at all. Quite a nice gig: Get paid $20 million a year to live in ostentatious wealth and do absolutely nothing. Which is why Americans would never go for it. We value meritocracy over aristocratic tradition.
Americans wouldn't mind, as long as it wasn't their taxes that went to support it. It's the Brit budget that pays for that, right? The Commonwealth countries don't contribute, do they?
Americans wouldn't mind, as long as it wasn't their taxes that went to support it. It's the Brit budget that pays for that, right? The Commonwealth countries don't contribute, do they?
No, the Commonwealth realms don't pay anything to the Queen; the UK taxpayer supports her.
Mind, the Queen's representatives in the Commonwealth realms (i.e. Governors-General, which are basically substitute heads-of-state who can act in the Queen's absence, which is most of the time) are supported by their respective countries' taxpayers. But then, Americans' tax dollars contribute to supporting their Head of State too, so it all works out.
No, the Commonwealth realms don't pay anything to the Queen; the UK taxpayer supports her.
Mind, the Queen's representatives in the Commonwealth realms (i.e. Governors-General, which are basically substitute heads-of-state who can act in the Queen's absence, which is most of the time) are supported by their respective countries' taxpayers. But then, Americans' tax dollars contribute to supporting their Head of State too, so it all works out.
The difference being, of course, that the public has no say into their Head of State in Canada (or the UK or Australia, etc).
It's quite an undemocratic and backward system to put people on your money whose only claim to power is being birthed into a diamond-encrusted crib. And there are no democratic means to get rid of them. Queen Elizabeth has been at the helm for 64 years. Remind me again how that's democratic or meritocratic? Remind me again why having family of multimillionaire, inbred royals with overbites in charge for centuries and centuries is considered progressive and positive? Nothing to me says 'out-of-touch' elites than having a family who does literally nothing feasting off the taxpayer dime while demanding they bow down as subordinate subjects.
The American people would never go for monarchy. I'm surprised that left-wing, progressives are so cool with such a regressive institution.
A Catholic can also still not ascend to the throne (so the Head of State plays a religious litmus test as well). Quite an abhorrently undemocratic and backward institution. And let's not even get into the hypothetical of a Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist or LGBT royal. The King/Queen of the Commonwealth is the head of a religion. So Canada is, by extension, a theocracy. America 240 years ago(!) was more religiously progressive than the royal family is in 2016, with a religious litmus test.
Or doing anything at all. Quite a nice gig: Get paid $20 million a year to live in ostentatious wealth and do absolutely nothing. Which is why Americans would never go for it. We value meritocracy over aristocratic tradition.
Almost sounds like some US celebrities ....famous for being famous
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Merry Christmas to you and yours Bru!
