PL1
Active Member
Oh, I'll read it because I like to keep my finger on the pulse as it were. But they have been beating this drum for years, warranted or not.
|
|
|
- Thread starter King of Kensington
- Start date
evandyk
Senior Member
I never heard about anyone canceling Halloween. But I did see a bunch of Diwalloween postings on Facebook from friends of mine enjoying the two being on the same day this year.
PL1
Active Member
Some parts of these pieces smack of being mad at "the other", i.e. non-UK immigrants. Cantin-Nantel's statement "Our political leaders must reinstate the notion that immigrants leave behind ideas that conflict with Canadian values when they move to our great country" ignores things like the annual Orange Order March.
Yes, I'd prefer immigrants leave old world issues there.
(My parents came to Canada from very different parts of Europe, so I'm familiar with people sometimes clawing onto the past)
Yes, I'd prefer immigrants leave old world issues there.
(My parents came to Canada from very different parts of Europe, so I'm familiar with people sometimes clawing onto the past)
jje1000
Senior Member
Exactly, ignore at one's peril- for instance, no one was expecting our much-admired immigration system to basically become dysfunctional under Trudeau's watch, but here we are.
Northern Light
Superstar
I will say.........my mother was French Catholic and her family came to Toronto shortly after WWII. The Orange Order and its anti-Catholic/Anti-French views were far more of an issue then, than now.
I think the key is where they escalate into violence/property damage or threats of same.
Whether that's violence at a Temple in Brampton or shooting up a South Asian cinema in Scarborough.
The issue isn't unto itself that people's traditions or beliefs vary, nor even that they may come from disparate communities that historically don't get along.......its when those now here actively take up a real fight, with others also here, to the detriment of both, and the rest of us.
Last edited:
picard102
Senior Member
81-717
Active Member
I'm gonna try to be as moderate as possible here.
@picard102 what part of the above do you have a problem with?
This right here is why unchecked/illegal mass immigration is BAD (worse than however bad some people think 2016–2020 was for the US), and why more stringent immigration policies MUST be kept in place, and consistently enforced, in all developed countries (thorough background checks, requirement to learn the local language, respecting and accepting local culture/values, etc). If someone comes to another country (no matter their country of origin / culture / belief system) intent on causing violence against the local population, or property damage, there needs to be a very clear message that they are not welcome there, and will be dealt with accordingly.
@picard102 what part of the above do you have a problem with?
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
Tell me where you think the line should be drawn. We have people of Ukrainian heritage who are advocating for Canadian support to Ukraine. We have people of Jewish heritage pushing support and protection of Israel. Very few people really question these and call for these "old world issues" to be left behind. But if you're of Arab or Palestinian heritage, you're issue is "old world" or if you're Sikh or Hindu, that's "old world". Why the double standard? And I say this as someone who is sympathetic to the Ukrainian cause and not very sympathetic to the Khalistani cause. Picking and choosing what cause is considered "old world" and should be excluded is basically a call for Eurocentric policy alone. And that's going to be exceptionally tough to maintain in a world where fewer Europeans are moving to Canada. You can argue there are certain conflicts that shouldn't involve Canada, based on national interest. But arguing this on cultural legacy is a bit of a reach.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Let's hear your specific definitions of the terms here.
Cause to my knowledge, Canada doesn't have a huge issue with illegal immigration. We may have a problem with too much of an intake. But most of those are here legally. So yes, let's hear your definitions.
lenaitch
Senior Member
Certainly not in comparison. Although there are obviously no accurate figures, the government estimates range in the area of 350,000-500,000, compared to approximately 12 million in the US. I suspect most 'illegals' have either overstayed or are operating outside of their lawful entry.
81-717
Active Member
I was talking not just Canada, but Western countries in general (don't tell me the US doesn't have a problem with illegal immigration either).
But yes, if immigration doesn't meet the criteria I stated in my previous post, it *should* be illegal.
Saying "all developed countries" is not clear enough?...
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
I was referring to our discussion diverging to complaints about Canada. If we're going back to talking about the US, make that clear.....
Northern Light
Superstar
So,....the Federal NDP are unveiling their first campaign plank for an election............and its a tax cut?
www.thestar.com
The proposal is to remove HST from a host of 'essentials' ranging from Diapers, to children's clothes aimed at those 15 and under, to internet and cell phone bills.
While at one level, I'm sympathetic to this...........the problem is the HST made sense as a tax because it wasn't 'Swiss Cheese'.
That is to say the holes in it were few and far between, mainly straight-up grocery and residential rent, and most other things were taxed.
This idea makes the tax more like income tax, with loopholes left, right and centre.
On top of that, it will cost the Federal Treasury ~5B per year, when we already have a substantial deficit.
This seems to me a very odd play; and one I have difficulty endorsing.
Above and beyond the obvious, this is a cut that will also benefit many upper-middle and high income Canadians. Not that they would notice, but the Treasury will.
If the problem is not lack of access to good or service, but lack of money, doesn't it make more sense to transfer the money, such as through an enhanced HST Tax Credit?
Jagmeet Singh promises tax cuts on ‘essential’ items like home heating, internet and cellphone bills
Singh promised to remove the GST on "essential" items like home heating, internet and cellphone bills, children's clothes, diapers, and pre-made meals and make large corporations pay.
www.thestar.com
The proposal is to remove HST from a host of 'essentials' ranging from Diapers, to children's clothes aimed at those 15 and under, to internet and cell phone bills.
While at one level, I'm sympathetic to this...........the problem is the HST made sense as a tax because it wasn't 'Swiss Cheese'.
That is to say the holes in it were few and far between, mainly straight-up grocery and residential rent, and most other things were taxed.
This idea makes the tax more like income tax, with loopholes left, right and centre.
On top of that, it will cost the Federal Treasury ~5B per year, when we already have a substantial deficit.
This seems to me a very odd play; and one I have difficulty endorsing.
Above and beyond the obvious, this is a cut that will also benefit many upper-middle and high income Canadians. Not that they would notice, but the Treasury will.
If the problem is not lack of access to good or service, but lack of money, doesn't it make more sense to transfer the money, such as through an enhanced HST Tax Credit?
afransen
Senior Member
We no longer make policy in this country. Everything is just vibes. If we were worried about reducing the regressivity of the HST, we would increase the rebate by $5B, rather than giving a tax break to everyone.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Not odd at all. Unserious party comes up with unserious proposal. The other parties that have to govern, actually have to think about Trump's demands ($20+ billion more in defence spending) and Trump's threats ($10+ billion in corporate tax cuts).