Million Immigrants in 2022 - Thanks Fidel

[JohnLarue]

So are all your posts.

then you should do one of the following

1. provide logical well thought out counter arguments (its not my fault if you are incapable of this)
2. do not read my posts
3. get lost

 

[JohnLarue]

Those who freak about number of immigrants canada took would shit their pants seeing how much european countries get!

1. European countries are responsible for their immigration policies, Canadians are responsible for ours
2. All is not going well with the Europeans open boarder experiment
3 Canada is one of the most ethnically diverse countries in the world

 

[JohnLarue]

Some figures from the happiest country on earth.

Immigration statistics 2021: A record-high number of applications for residence permits on the basis of work | Maahanmuuttovirasto

migri.fi

In 2021, the Finnish Immigration Service received more applications for a residence permit on the basis of work than ever before, whereas the number of asylum applications was exceptionally low.

The most common reasons for moving to Finland are work, family and studies. A first residence permit is a permit that immigrants usually apply from abroad before they move to Finland.

By next year, the processing time of applications for a residence permit on the basis of employment and studies will be a maximum of one month. The fast track service, starting in June, will help specialists and start-up entrepreneurs to start working in Finland more quickly.

Finland is not confused about the objectives

 

[krealtarron]

wrong
we have positive population growth
canada death rate - Google Search





you were confused about relative % (grade 5 math)
you were confused about housing supply
and now you are confused about population growth

i suspect if you were to review your sources you will find the 2.1 value is what is required to sustain positive GDP growth i.e. economic growth

.

not at all
#1. your human capital criteria ARE all requirements for a job offer. this is obvious when you list them and you have provided no counter argument other than to deny the obvious, in a rather obnoxious manner as well
#2 watering down that job offer criteria will guarantee fewer of those in demand positions are filled



it happens all the time.
our Canadian Doctors, nurses get offers for international positions on a regular basis
international job offers are available for engineers, scientists, finance, heath care, technology professional and skilled trades persons
it is a two way trade, Canadian corporations do the same
the thousands of international students studying in Canada also located perfectly to seek a Canadian job offer prior to applying for immigration



see above, we do not have a population decline, we likely have a workforce decline , with specific gaps requiring specific skills (Health Care, trades, IT, fiancé)

again it is economic issue that required targeted economic criteria to address




not when the objective is to fulfill in-demand positions
serving double doubles at Tim Horton's or driving an uber vehicle is not going to cut it when we need welders, electricians, doctors and nurses



wrong
The absolute number of immigrants admitted under Prime Minister Steven Harper was the highest in 90 years
Admen Hussein messed with what worked well for all parties and he did this for ideological reasons/ at the demand of the UN

i have seen cases where this is true,
i have also seen examples of lazy assed immigrants who avoid work like the plague
that happens when you observe a large enough sample size

generally speaking, most immigrants i have encounter are decent, intelligent , hard working and family orientated
welcome to Canada

that does not change our economic requirements , nor the objective of the immigration system



All that is missing is a job offer
- Immigrants are not getting anything for free.
budget of the ministry of immigration and citizenship canada - Google Search

they also use public infrastructure and have access to public health care
So arriving with out a job offer does cost the Canadian taxpayer





your confusion never ends

you were confused about relative % (grade 5 math)
you were confused about housing supply
and you were confused about population growth

and you are most definitely confused about watered down criteria

reducing the value of a job offer from 600 to 50 points is watered down criteria
it is a statistical certainty that altering this criteria will reduce the number of placements into in demand positions
which is the primary objective of our immigration system

only a fool or a uncompromising partisan ideologue (a fool by any other name) would argue it is not watered down criteria

Dead wrong and idiotic to the max. This is nothing more than a word salad vomit.

You were right about one thing, that the weights of factors should add up to 100%. Other than that you are wrong about everything else. And you are harping on that over and over again. You are dazed, confused and contradicting yourself in every sentence.

1. We need a birth rate of 2.1 births per woman to sustain a population. We currently have 1.4. Canada's positive population growth is attributed to increased immigration. On the one hand you complain immigration is too much and on the other hand you point to a positive population growth rate which is directly impacted BY IMMIGRATION. Using the very same fact to both support your position and argue against it! Laughable, idiotic and dishonest to the max.

2. Human capital factors determine whether a person is skilled enough to be productive in any society. You agree on that. We are prioritizing these skills. You acknowledge that these skills are necessary to procure jobs. YET you are against people with the same skills coming in to the country. Amazing! Contradicting yourself and dumb.

3. NO. Canadian employers do not give jobs to people who are not even in Canada yet. Doctors dont get to just get here and secure a job. They need to go through a few certifications, get their licenses etc before they can be employed. They can only do that once they get here. Again, when someone is coming here to live for a lifetime, they can come here and search for a job. There is no need or even a possibility that they can get a job from outside Canada. Again, dumb, ignorant and idiotic to suggest that.

4. When someone gets here they need to show a) Proof of funds to sustain themselves (immigration rules) b) They do not qualify for unemployment or any type of government assistance until they have paid into EI (government rules) for a few years (22 months in Toronto I think). So no, they either get part time jobs or use their savings to live. They DO NOT get anything for free from the govt or Canadian tax payers. Infact, the only thing they get is healthcare access 3 months after coming here - and given most of them are young and have to go through a medical test to prove that they are not a burden on the system before coming, unless something disastrous happens after they get here, they are not likely to even use healthcare. Instead they add to the economy by increasing consumption and therefore our GDP. To suggest that immigrants are somehow a drain on society or are lazy and using free stuff is ignorant, dumb, dishonest and plain idiotic.

In short there has been no watering down of anything, immigration is based on merit and working as it should, the things that need to be prioritized are being prioritized.

There is no watering down of any criteria and the right criteria are being prioritized.
Only a boneheaded and foolish partisan ideologue (a fool by any other name) would lie that it is.

 

[JohnLarue]

You are not capable of understanding logical counter arguments. So I will take your advice 2) & 3).

thanks for the grade 2 level copy cat response. It's right up there with "no I am not, you are"


Adios

 

[JohnLarue]

Dead wrong and idiotic to the max. This is nothing more than a word salad vomit.

You were right about one thing, that the weights of factors should add up to 100%. Other than that you are wrong about everything else. And you are harping on that over and over again. You are dazed, confused and contradicting yourself in every sentence.

1. We need a birth rate of 2.1 births per woman to sustain a population. We currently have 1.4.

no we need birth rates to exceed death rates to sustain a population & we have that

Canada's positive population growth is attributed to increased immigration.

No
Canada's positive population growth is attributed to birth rates exceeding death rates

On the one hand you complain immigration is too much and on the other hand you point to a positive population growth rate which is directly impacted BY IMMIGRATION.

wrong
the growth rates are based on existing Canadian citizens

canada death rate - Google Search

What is the death and birth rate in Canada?

The crude birth rate is 10.18 per 1000 people. There are 0.3 million deaths in Canada in 2021. That is 821 per day, which is ranked 33rd. The crude death rate is 7.88 per 1000 people.

as long as a net emigration from Canada is less than 2.18 per 1000 the population we will have positive population growth
we have this (birth rate > death rate) so still positive population growth even if there is only one net immigrant

what have is an aging workforce problem and a labor shortage of specific in-demand skill
and that requires targeted economic criteria .. a job offer


i know math/ logic is not your strength, but please try to keep up
I suggest you start with a net immigration into Canada vs.a net emigration from Canada
you also confused your self about the difference between

1. population growth vs. workforce growth
2. sustainable population growth vs sustainable positive GDP growth

Using the very same fact to both support your position and argue against it! Laughable, idiotic and dishonest to the max.

wrong
you dismiss what you do not understand without a logical counter argument & the have the gall to call what you did not understand as Laughable, idiotic and dishonest to the max.
what is wrong with you?

2. Human capital factors determine whether a person is skilled enough to be productive in any society. You agree on that.

work experience, skills, age, communication skills are all initial requirements that proceed a job offer
the employer ultimately determines whether a person is skilled enough to be productive and thus merits a job offer,

We are prioritizing these skills.

A job offer by definition prioritizes these requirements, as per the employer unique needs
all you are doing is watering down the criteria and fulfilling less in-demand positions, while admitting more people.
that is watering down by any definition and it is bad economic policy driven by ideology

how would your cup of coffee taste if 92% of the coffee beans were removed, while you keep the amount of water, milk and sugar the same?
it would be called 'watered -down'

You acknowledge that these skills are necessary to procure jobs. YET you are against people with the same skills coming in to the country.

So Wrong

it is not the same people , not the same skills
change the criteria & you change the result, the people and thus their skill set
high volume does not replace in-demand skill sets

what part of
reducing the value of a job offer from 600 to 50 points is watered down criteria
it is a statistical certainty that altering this criteria will reduce the number of placements into in demand positions
did you not understand ??
what is wrong with you?

the results speak for themselves , a big increase in the volumes admitted, yet we still have acute labor shortages in key positions

Amazing! Contradicting yourself and dumb.

try drill down deeper and applying objective logic & you will confuse yourself less

]

3. NO. Canadian employers do not give jobs to people who are not even in Canada yet. Doctors dont get to just get here and secure a job.

yes it is called a job interview and precludes a job offer
easily done via a trip here or teleconference
if the demand is strong enough the employer will pay for a trip to Canada for the interview

They need to go through a few certifications, get their licenses etc before they can be employed. They can only do that once they get here.

wrong
if the certification / license is transferable , that is simple administrative work the employer can help facilitate
if the certification / license is not transferable ,they are not getting the position.. period
right or wrong they will not fill that in-demand position

you can make a justifiable argument , more certification / license should be transferable
however
1. speak to the unions / red tape loving loonie left who put those barriers in place
2. standards are important

Again, when someone is coming here to live for a lifetime, they can come here and search for a job. There is no need or even a possibility that they can get a job from outside Canada. Again, dumb, ignorant and idiotic to suggest that.

do not be ridiculous
perhaps you can call one of the numerous international employment agencies and allow them to help you sort out of your confusion

international job placement agencies in canada - Google Search

4. When someone gets here they need to show a) Proof of funds to sustain themselves (immigration rules) b) They do not qualify for unemployment or any type of government assistance until they have paid into EI (government rules) for a few years (22 months in Toronto I think). So no, they either get part time jobs or use their savings to live. They DO NOT get anything for free from the govt or Canadian tax payers. Infact, the only thing they get is healthcare access 3 months after coming here - and given most of them are young and have to go through a medical test to prove that they are not a burden on the system before coming, unless something disastrous happens after they get here, they are not likely to even use healthcare. Instead they add to the economy by increasing consumption and therefore our GDP. To suggest that immigrants are somehow a drain on society or are lazy and using free stuff is ignorant, dumb, dishonest and plain idiotic.

lets get to the point from that pile

the only thing they get is healthcare access

gee free health care
only the largest public expense
their kids will not be denied access to education
only the second largest public expense
they will use subsidized public transport or drive on public roads & use other subsidized infrastructure
probably the fourth largest public expense

In short there has been no watering down of anything,

of course there has been . see above

immigration is based on merit and working as it should, the things that need to be prioritized are being prioritized.

there was 600 points of merit in a job offer
now there is 50 points
it is a statistical certainty that altering this criteria will reduce the number of placements into in demand positions
which is the primary objective of our immigration system



reducing the value of a job offer from 600 to 50 points is watered down criteria


only a fool or a uncompromising partisan ideologue (a fool by any other name) would argue it is not watered down criteria

 

[JohnLarue]

Exhibit B.

I rest my case.

You should be ashamed of yourself for writing such drivel John Larue.

again you did not provide logical counter argument, just personal attack.
that is the calling card of the loonie left

i thought you agreed you were going to either ignore my posts or get lost??

and her you are quoting and then attacking me
well, ...i guess that defines the value of your statements .. worthless
run away now

adios

 

[krealtarron]

no we need birth rates to exceed death rates to sustain a population & we have that


No
Canada's positive population growth is attributed to birth rates exceeding death rates



wrong
the growth rates are based on existing Canadian citizens

canada death rate - Google Search




as long as a net emigration from Canada is less than 2.18 per 1000 the population we will have positive population growth
we have this (birth rate > death rate) so still positive population growth even if there is only one net immigrant

what have is an aging workforce problem and a labor shortage of specific in-demand skill
and that requires targeted economic criteria .. a job offer


i know math/ logic is not your strength, but please try to keep up
I suggest you start with a net immigration into Canada vs.a net emigration from Canada
you also confused your self about the difference between

1. population growth vs. workforce growth
2. sustainable population growth vs sustainable positive GDP growth

wrong
you dismiss what you do not understand without a logical counter argument & the have the gall to call what you did not understand as Laughable, idiotic and dishonest to the max.
what is wrong with you?


work experience, skills, age, communication skills are all initial requirements that proceed a job offer
the employer ultimately determines whether a person is skilled enough to be productive and thus merits a job offer,


A job offer by definition prioritizes these requirements, as per the employer unique needs
all you are doing is watering down the criteria and fulfilling less in-demand positions, while admitting more people.
that is watering down by any definition and it is bad economic policy driven by ideology

how would your cup of coffee taste if 92% of the coffee beans were removed, while you keep the amount of water, milk and sugar the same?
it would be called 'watered -down'


So Wrong

it is not the same people , not the same skills
change the criteria & you change the result, the people and thus their skill set
high volume does not replace in-demand skill sets

what part of
reducing the value of a job offer from 600 to 50 points is watered down criteria
it is a statistical certainty that altering this criteria will reduce the number of placements into in demand positions
did you not understand ??
what is wrong with you?

the results speak for themselves , a big increase in the volumes admitted, yet we still have acute labor shortages in key positions



try drill down deeper and applying objective logic & you will confuse yourself less

]
yes it is called a job interview and precludes a job offer
easily done via a trip here or teleconference
if the demand is strong enough the employer will pay for a trip to Canada for the interview



wrong
if the certification / license is transferable , that is simple administrative work the employer can help facilitate
if the certification / license is not transferable ,they are not getting the position.. period
right or wrong they will not fill that in-demand position

you can make a justifiable argument , more certification / license should be transferable
however
1. speak to the unions / red tape loving loonie left who put those barriers in place
2. standards are important



do not be ridiculous
perhaps you can call one of the numerous international employment agencies and allow them to help you sort out of your confusion

international job placement agencies in canada - Google Search



lets get to the point from that pile

gee free health care
only the largest public expense
their kids will not be denied access to education
only the second largest public expense
they will use subsidized public transport or drive on public roads & use other subsidized infrastructure
probably the fourth largest public expense



of course there has been . see above


there was 600 points of merit in a job offer
now there is 50 points
it is a statistical certainty that altering this criteria will reduce the number of placements into in demand positions
which is the primary objective of our immigration system



reducing the value of a job offer from 600 to 50 points is watered down criteria


only a fool or a uncompromising partisan ideologue (a fool by any other name) would argue it is not watered down criteria

Absolute word vomit.

Fact: Almost half a million immigrants come in in 2022 significantly contributing to population growth.
JL: Oh look too many immigrants!
Also JL: Oh look our population has gone up so we dont need so many immigrants.

Fact: Immigrants with skills come in.
JL: We need to prioritize immigrants with skills.
Also JL: Those skills are useless!

Fact: Immigrants come in and work hard and dont get anything for free.
JL: Most immigrants are decent and hard working.
Also JL: Immigrants are lazy!

Fact: Human capital factors such as age, skills, work experience are being prioritized by immigration. The Immigrants then go on to secure jobs and live successful lives.
JL: Age, skills and work experience are required to secure jobs!
Also JL: Age, skills and work experience dont matter.

Fact: Due to immigration the nature of Canada will change over time.
JL: I dont have a problem with societal changes.
Also JL: You are trying to socially engineer change!

Very logical argument indeed!

 

[Valcazar]

You are arguing very poorly.

Have you met LaRue before?

 

[krealtarron]

Absolute word vomit.

Fact: Almost half a million immigrants come in in 2022 significantly contributing to population growth.

incremental to births less deaths

JL: Oh look too many immigrants!
Also JL: Oh look our population has gone up so we dont need so many immigrants.

do not misquote me

Fact: Immigrants with skills come in.

apprently not enough to secure a job offer first

JL: We need to prioritize immigrants with skills.

correct

Also JL: Those skills are useless!

if the skills are not the ones in demand , . it is what it is

you have a skill for spinning bullshit, yet no one will pay for that skill

Fact: Immigrants come in and work hard and don't get anything for free.

Fact: they get access to health care , access to the education system for their kids , access to subsidized public transportation & access to public infrastructure

JL: Most immigrants are decent and hard working.

generally yes

Also JL: Immigrants are lazy!

there will be lazy people in any population
what is wrong with you

Fact: Human capital factors such as age, skills, work experience are being prioritized by immigration.

while de-prioritizing the economic factor ie a job offer

The Immigrants then go on to secure jobs and live successful lives.

apparently not given your persistent whining

JL: Age, skills and work experience are required to secure jobs!

they are requirements to secure a job offer

Also JL: Age, skills and work experience don't matter.[/QUOTE

correct if they do not produce a job offer, Age, skills and work experience of an immigrant have zero value to canada

Fact: Due to immigration the nature of Canada will change over time.

JL: I dont have a problem with societal changes.

I dont have a problem with naturally occurring societal changes

Also JL: You are trying to socially engineer change!
that appears to be your motivation for ignoring straight forward cause and effect logic & supporting watered down entrance criteria

Very logical argument indeed!

there was 600 points of merit in a job offer
now there is 50 points
it is a statistical certainty that altering this criteria will reduce the number of placements into in demand positions
which is the primary objective of our immigration system

reducing the value of a job offer from 600 to 50 points is watered down criteria
only a fool or a uncompromising partisan ideologue (a fool by any other name) would argue it is not watered down criteria

Absolute word vomit.

Fact: Almost half a million immigrants come in in 2022 significantly contributing to population growth.
JL: Oh look too many immigrants!
Also JL: Oh look our population has gone up so we dont need so many immigrants.

Fact: Immigrants with skills come in.
JL: We need to prioritize immigrants with skills.
Also JL: Those skills are useless!

Fact: Immigrants come in and work hard and dont get anything for free.
JL: Most immigrants are decent and hard working.
Also JL: Immigrants are lazy!

Fact: Human capital factors such as age, skills, work experience are being prioritized by immigration. The Immigrants then go on to secure jobs and live successful lives.
JL: Age, skills and work experience are required to secure jobs!
Also JL: Age, skills and work experience dont matter.

Fact: Due to immigration the nature of Canada will change over time.
JL: I dont have a problem with societal changes.
Also JL: You are trying to socially engineer change!

Very logical argument indeed!

 

[JohnLarue]

Have you met LaRue before?

i wondered how long before you would arrive to take a cheap ass pot shot
you can run away now

actually slither away is a better description

 

[JohnLarue]

Absolute word vomit.

thanks for the warning
yes your posts are rather putrid

Fact: Almost half a million immigrants come in in 2022 significantly contributing to population growth.

fact this is incremental to births offset by deaths

JL: Oh look too many immigrants!
Also JL: Oh look our population has gone up so we don't need so many immigrants.

do not misquote me
that is a slimy bullshit move made by an ignorant fool who is losing the argument
what is wrong with you?

i have been very clear we need immigration for economic reasons , specifically to fill positions with in demand skills

Fact: Immigrants with skills come in.

apparently not enough skills to have secured a job offer

JL: We need to prioritize immigrants with skills.

correct

Also JL: Those skills are useless!

apparently the skills are not the skills in-demand, or they could secure a job offer
then the skills are of zero value to Canada

have you seen may job postings for buggy whip makers ?

Fact: Immigrants come in and work hard and dont get anything for free.

fact they get access to health care, education for their kids, subsidized public transportation and all of the public infratruture
do not state clear falsehoods as facts
what is wrong with you?

JL: Most immigrants are decent and hard working.

generally correct

Also JL: Immigrants are lazy!

do not misquote me
that is a slimy bullshit move made by an ignorant fool who is losing the argument
what is wrong with you?

here is the proper quote

some immigrants are lazy, similar to any other population group

quite a difference ... do not mis-represent me

Fact: Human capital factors such as age, skills, work experience are being prioritized by immigration.

fact those are pre-requirements to obtaining a job offer
the requirements are prioritized already by the employer seeking an employee, and willing to make a job offer
government will make a mess prioritizing these requirements

The Immigrants then go on to secure jobs and live successful lives.

Apparently not , given your persistent whining

JL: Age, skills and work experience are required to secure jobs!

they are requirements to obtaining a job offer

Also JL: Age, skills and work experience dont matter.

if the skills/ work experience are not the in demand skills / work experience, then the skills / work experience are of zero value to Canada

Fact: Due to immigration the nature of Canada will change over time.

correct

JL: I dont have a problem with societal changes.

I don't have a problem with naturally evolving societal changes.

Also JL: You are trying to socially engineer change!

too bad you were stupid enough to inject race into the discussion & made your objectives clear

'white Anglo Saxon society will not last

Very logical argument indeed!

my position is quite logical
your misquoting it shows you do not understand or prefer to mislead others
either way you are one who is having logic or ethical issues


there was 600 points of merit in a job offer
now there is 50 points
it is a statistical certainty that altering this criteria will reduce the number of placements into in demand positions
which is the primary objective of our immigration system

reducing the value of a job offer from 600 to 50 points is watered down criteria
only a fool or a uncompromising partisan ideologue (a fool by any other name) would argue it is not watered down criteria

 

[krealtarron]

thanks for the warning
yes your posts are rather putrid


fact this is incremental to births offset by deaths



do not misquote me
that is a slimy bullshit move made by an ignorant fool who is losing the argument
what is wrong with you?

i have been very clear we need immigration for economic reasons , specifically to fill positions with in demand skills


apparently not enough skills to have secured a job offer


correct
Also JL: Those skills are useless!
apparently the skills are not the skills in-demand, or they could secure a job offer
then the skills are of zero value to Canada

have you seen may job postings for buggy whip makers ?



fact that get access to health care, education for their kids, subsidized public transportation and all of the public infratruture
do not state clear falsehoods as factually correct


generally correct


do not misquote me
that is a slimy bullshit move made by an ignorant fool who is losing the argument
what is wrong with you?


fact those are pre-requirements to obtaining a job offer

Apparently not , given your persistent whining




they are requirements to obtaining a job offer

if the skills/ work experience are not the in demand skills / work experience, then the skills / work experience are of zero value to Canada


correct

I don't have a problem with naturally evolving societal changes.



too bad you were stupid enough to inject race into the discussion



my position is quite logical
you misquoting of it shows you do not understand or prefer to mislead others
either way you are one who is having logic issues


there was 600 points of merit in a job offer
now there is 50 points
it is a statistical certainty that altering this criteria will reduce the number of placements into in demand positions
which is the primary objective of our immigration system

reducing the value of a job offer from 600 to 50 points is watered down criteria
only a fool or a uncompromising partisan ideologue (a fool by any other name) would argue it is not watered down criteria

Absolute word vomit.

Fact: Almost half a million immigrants come in in 2022 significantly contributing to population growth.
JL: Oh look too many immigrants!
Also JL: Oh look our population has gone up so we dont need so many immigrants.

Fact: Immigrants with skills come in.
JL: We need to prioritize immigrants with skills.
Also JL: Those skills are useless!

Fact: Immigrants come in and work hard and dont get anything for free.
JL: Most immigrants are decent and hard working.
Also JL: Immigrants are lazy!

Fact: Human capital factors such as age, skills, work experience are being prioritized by immigration. The Immigrants then go on to secure jobs and live successful lives.
JL: Age, skills and work experience are required to secure jobs!
Also JL: Age, skills and work experience dont matter.

Fact: Due to immigration the nature of Canada will change over time.
JL: I dont have a problem with societal changes.
Also JL: You are trying to socially engineer change!

Very logical argument indeed!

 

[JohnLarue]

Absolute word vomit.

Fact: Almost half a million immigrants come in in 2022 significantly contributing to population growth.
JL: Oh look too many immigrants!
Also JL: Oh look our population has gone up so we dont need so many immigrants.

Fact: Immigrants with skills come in.
JL: We need to prioritize immigrants with skills.
Also JL: Those skills are useless!

Fact: Immigrants come in and work hard and dont get anything for free.
JL: Most immigrants are decent and hard working.
Also JL: Immigrants are lazy!

Fact: Human capital factors such as age, skills, work experience are being prioritized by immigration. The Immigrants then go on to secure jobs and live successful lives.
JL: Age, skills and work experience are required to secure jobs!
Also JL: Age, skills and work experience dont matter.

Fact: Due to immigration the nature of Canada will change over time.
JL: I dont have a problem with societal changes.
Also JL: You are trying to socially engineer change!

Very logical argument indeed!

see post 217

 

[krealtarron]

see post 217

 

[JohnLarue]

what the hell is that suppose to mean ?

you do not like mayonnaise?

no wonder you have such a difficult time with logic

there was 600 points of merit in a job offer
now there is 50 points
it is a statistical certainty that altering this criteria will reduce the number of placements into in demand positions
which is the primary objective of our immigration system

reducing the value of a job offer from 600 to 50 points is watered down criteria
only a fool or a uncompromising partisan ideologue (a fool by any other name) would argue it is not watered down criteria

 

[jcpro]

The bottom line is this: there should not be ANY increases to the immigration levels as long as our shelter system in Toronto is forced to house them.

 

[oil&gas]

It'd be great if immigration quota can be made a function
of the quality of the immigrants coming here.
For the quality of the immigrants we are getting one half
of the current level is good enough IMO. I suggest looking
to New Zealand as the country to fashion our immigration
policy after. Jacinda Ardern is the best.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Zealand Labour government targets rich investors in immigration “reset”
20 May 2021

New Zealand’s Labour Party-led government, which includes the Greens, has escalated its attacks on the working class with an impending “reset” of immigration policy to target wealthy investors while limiting entry for those classed as “low-skill” and low-wage workers.

In a May 17 speech setting out the government’s intentions for immigration, Economic Development Minister Stuart Nash said its policies would include making it harder for employers to take on workers from overseas, other than in areas of “genuine skills shortages.”

Nash, who was filling in for Immigration Minister Kris Faafoi, said once the borders fully open after COVID-19 shutdowns there will be no return to previous immigration settings. “That path is a continuation of pressures on our infrastructure, like transport, accommodation, and downward pressure on wages,” he declared. The government would “encourage employers to hire, train and upskill more New Zealanders to fill skill shortages.”

The move is in line with Labour’s 2017 immigration policy, carried through with its then-coalition partner, the right-wing anti-immigrant NZ First Party, to slash net migration—at that time around 70,000 a year—by up to 30,000 by cutting back on international students and “low skilled” workers. Labour has simultaneously kept New Zealand’s annual refugee intake at just 1,500, one of the lowest in the world.

In October 2019, Labour introduced new class-based restrictions on immigration, blocking thousands of parents from joining their adult children in New Zealand. Under changes to visa requirements, a resident or citizen must now earn over $106,000 a year to bring one parent, or $159,000—more than three times the median salary—to bring two. Officials estimated that 85 percent of parents on the waiting list were ineligible for residency under the new rules.

Until the border closed in March 2020, there was a policy in place to import temporary workers and fee-paying students while making it much harder for migrants to gain permanent residency. In the past decade, the number of people on temporary work visas doubled from fewer than 100,000 to more than 200,000. There was a huge increase in demand for residency, with around 80 percent of applications under the
Skilled Migrant Category coming from onshore applicants.

While tightly controlled, immigration has contributed to 30 percent of the total population growth since the early 1990s. Currently one in four New Zealand residents was born abroad. Temporary migrant workers make up almost five percent of New Zealand’s labour force—the highest share compared to other OECD countries. Entire industries, such as tourism, retail, hospitality and agriculture, have become dependent on these highly-exploited workers, who have no rights to unemployment and other benefits.

COVID-19 has seen immigration grind to a halt. The country had a net migration gain of just 6,600 people last year. This has, according to Nash, given a “once-in-a-generation” chance for sweeping policy change. The “reset” threatens to force thousands of visa holders and current residents into a no-man’s land. Those targeted for restrictions are on the two lowest “skill level” bands. The only ones unaffected are low paid “fly-in-fly-out” seasonal workers from Pacific island countries.

Like governments internationally, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s government is responding to the social crisis triggered by COVID-19 by scapegoating immigrants and
stoking nationalism. The economy’s “reliance” on low-wage workers is presented as the fault of immigrants, when in fact it is due to policies imposed by successive governments and trade unions, who have suppressed wages and attacked living standards over the past three decades.

On May 12 and 13 hundreds of migrants rallied in Wellington, Auckland, Christchurch and regional centres to protest their dire situation. Many have relatives who have been stranded for more than a year outside the country, separated from their families, jobs and homes. Thousands, including many designated as skilled workers, are facing delays of two years or longer after applying for residency. Those who are turning eighteen face losing their current status and becoming non-persons in the complex immigration system.

Many migrants hit back publicly at the government. Aeron Davis, a doctor who moved from London last year, told Radio NZ he feared it would take years to obtain permanent residency. His two teenage children cannot get jobs or go to university without paying exorbitant international fees. Davis fears thousands of families are similarly waiting in limbo with fewer employment rights, social benefits and less
security.

The government has already created border exceptions to allow more than 200 wealthy international investors to enter the country over the next 12 months. Under the so-called Innovative Partnerships Programme and Trade and Enterprise Investor Programme, representatives from global companies are given open entry, purportedly to encourage “direct investment, job creation and skills.”

Defending the new immigration regime, Ardern said the use of migrant labour had been “a type of exploitation by some employers” and served to suppress wages, which was “unfair to migrants and New Zealander workers.”

The line was echoed by the trade union funded Daily Blog, which declared that “mass immigration… has undermined domestic wages, created a housing crisis and put enormous stress on our infrastructure while contributing to climate change and migration worker exploitation.” Fewer migrants “means less competition for jobs and houses for the domestic working classes,” it falsely claimed.

In fact, the move has nothing to do with eliminating rampant exploitation but is aimed at dividing workers and suppressing resistance to deepening austerity measures. The Labour government has just imposed a three-year wage freeze across the public sector and changed industrial laws to put the trade unions at the centre of policing the lowest paid workers, including tens of thousands of non-union members, through mis-named Fair Pay Agreements.

Anti-immigrant demands have been a cornerstone of the Labour Party and the trade unions for over a century. From its founding in 1916, Labour was fiercely nationalist and stoked divisions in the working class by encouraging racism and xenophobia. Like its Australian counterpart, Labour supported what was widely known as the “white New Zealand” policy, which imposed drastic restrictions on immigration from China and other Asian countries. The restrictions remained, in one form or another, until the 1970s.

The trade unions continue to agitate against foreign workers. The Maritime Union and E tū have both used the COVID-19 pandemic to insist on protecting the jobs of New Zealanders “first.” In 2018, Unite applauded a government decision to temporarily ban migrants from working at Burger King. Last year, FIRST Union sought to divert attention from its role in defending the company in a pay dispute by criticising the government for allowing NZ Bus to bring in foreign drivers.

Anti-China rhetoric is meanwhile being stepped up to prepare the population for a looming US-led war against China. Between 2017 and 2020, Labour and the Greens were in government with the NZ First Party, which regularly demonised Chinese, Indian and Muslim immigrants. This year has seen a sharp increase in attacks against Asian immigrants, amid a propaganda offensive over Beijing’s purported “influence” in the country’s politics, businesses and academia and bogus claims that China’s Wuhan laboratory was responsible for the outbreak of COVID-19.

New Zealand Labour government targets rich investors in immigration “reset”

Labour’s class-based immigration policy is part of a sweeping attack on the social position of the entire working class.

www.wsws.org

 

[krealtarron]

It'd be great if immigration quota can be made a function
of the quality of the immigrants coming here.
For the quality of the immigrants we are getting one half
of the current level is good enough IMO. I suggest looking
to New Zealand as the country to fashion our immigration
policy after. Jacinda Ardern is the best.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Zealand Labour government targets rich investors in immigration “reset”
20 May 2021

New Zealand’s Labour Party-led government, which includes the Greens, has escalated its attacks on the working class with an impending “reset” of immigration policy to target wealthy investors while limiting entry for those classed as “low-skill” and low-wage workers.

In a May 17 speech setting out the government’s intentions for immigration, Economic Development Minister Stuart Nash said its policies would include making it harder for employers to take on workers from overseas, other than in areas of “genuine skills shortages.”

Nash, who was filling in for Immigration Minister Kris Faafoi, said once the borders fully open after COVID-19 shutdowns there will be no return to previous immigration settings. “That path is a continuation of pressures on our infrastructure, like transport, accommodation, and downward pressure on wages,” he declared. The government would “encourage employers to hire, train and upskill more New Zealanders to fill skill shortages.”

The move is in line with Labour’s 2017 immigration policy, carried through with its then-coalition partner, the right-wing anti-immigrant NZ First Party, to slash net migration—at that time around 70,000 a year—by up to 30,000 by cutting back on international students and “low skilled” workers. Labour has simultaneously kept New Zealand’s annual refugee intake at just 1,500, one of the lowest in the world.

In October 2019, Labour introduced new class-based restrictions on immigration, blocking thousands of parents from joining their adult children in New Zealand. Under changes to visa requirements, a resident or citizen must now earn over $106,000 a year to bring one parent, or $159,000—more than three times the median salary—to bring two. Officials estimated that 85 percent of parents on the waiting list were ineligible for residency under the new rules.

Until the border closed in March 2020, there was a policy in place to import temporary workers and fee-paying students while making it much harder for migrants to gain permanent residency. In the past decade, the number of people on temporary work visas doubled from fewer than 100,000 to more than 200,000. There was a huge increase in demand for residency, with around 80 percent of applications under the
Skilled Migrant Category coming from onshore applicants.

While tightly controlled, immigration has contributed to 30 percent of the total population growth since the early 1990s. Currently one in four New Zealand residents was born abroad. Temporary migrant workers make up almost five percent of New Zealand’s labour force—the highest share compared to other OECD countries. Entire industries, such as tourism, retail, hospitality and agriculture, have become dependent on these highly-exploited workers, who have no rights to unemployment and other benefits.

COVID-19 has seen immigration grind to a halt. The country had a net migration gain of just 6,600 people last year. This has, according to Nash, given a “once-in-a-generation” chance for sweeping policy change. The “reset” threatens to force thousands of visa holders and current residents into a no-man’s land. Those targeted for restrictions are on the two lowest “skill level” bands. The only ones unaffected are low paid “fly-in-fly-out” seasonal workers from Pacific island countries.

Like governments internationally, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s government is responding to the social crisis triggered by COVID-19 by scapegoating immigrants and
stoking nationalism. The economy’s “reliance” on low-wage workers is presented as the fault of immigrants, when in fact it is due to policies imposed by successive governments and trade unions, who have suppressed wages and attacked living standards over the past three decades.

On May 12 and 13 hundreds of migrants rallied in Wellington, Auckland, Christchurch and regional centres to protest their dire situation. Many have relatives who have been stranded for more than a year outside the country, separated from their families, jobs and homes. Thousands, including many designated as skilled workers, are facing delays of two years or longer after applying for residency. Those who are turning eighteen face losing their current status and becoming non-persons in the complex immigration system.

Many migrants hit back publicly at the government. Aeron Davis, a doctor who moved from London last year, told Radio NZ he feared it would take years to obtain permanent residency. His two teenage children cannot get jobs or go to university without paying exorbitant international fees. Davis fears thousands of families are similarly waiting in limbo with fewer employment rights, social benefits and less
security.

The government has already created border exceptions to allow more than 200 wealthy international investors to enter the country over the next 12 months. Under the so-called Innovative Partnerships Programme and Trade and Enterprise Investor Programme, representatives from global companies are given open entry, purportedly to encourage “direct investment, job creation and skills.”

Defending the new immigration regime, Ardern said the use of migrant labour had been “a type of exploitation by some employers” and served to suppress wages, which was “unfair to migrants and New Zealander workers.”

The line was echoed by the trade union funded Daily Blog, which declared that “mass immigration… has undermined domestic wages, created a housing crisis and put enormous stress on our infrastructure while contributing to climate change and migration worker exploitation.” Fewer migrants “means less competition for jobs and houses for the domestic working classes,” it falsely claimed.

In fact, the move has nothing to do with eliminating rampant exploitation but is aimed at dividing workers and suppressing resistance to deepening austerity measures. The Labour government has just imposed a three-year wage freeze across the public sector and changed industrial laws to put the trade unions at the centre of policing the lowest paid workers, including tens of thousands of non-union members, through mis-named Fair Pay Agreements.

Anti-immigrant demands have been a cornerstone of the Labour Party and the trade unions for over a century. From its founding in 1916, Labour was fiercely nationalist and stoked divisions in the working class by encouraging racism and xenophobia. Like its Australian counterpart, Labour supported what was widely known as the “white New Zealand” policy, which imposed drastic restrictions on immigration from China and other Asian countries. The restrictions remained, in one form or another, until the 1970s.

The trade unions continue to agitate against foreign workers. The Maritime Union and E tū have both used the COVID-19 pandemic to insist on protecting the jobs of New Zealanders “first.” In 2018, Unite applauded a government decision to temporarily ban migrants from working at Burger King. Last year, FIRST Union sought to divert attention from its role in defending the company in a pay dispute by criticising the government for allowing NZ Bus to bring in foreign drivers.

Anti-China rhetoric is meanwhile being stepped up to prepare the population for a looming US-led war against China. Between 2017 and 2020, Labour and the Greens were in government with the NZ First Party, which regularly demonised Chinese, Indian and Muslim immigrants. This year has seen a sharp increase in attacks against Asian immigrants, amid a propaganda offensive over Beijing’s purported “influence” in the country’s politics, businesses and academia and bogus claims that China’s Wuhan laboratory was responsible for the outbreak of COVID-19.

New Zealand Labour government targets rich investors in immigration “reset”

Labour’s class-based immigration policy is part of a sweeping attack on the social position of the entire working class.

www.wsws.org

What do you know about the "quality" of immigrants coming here? How did you assess that quality?

 

[krealtarron]

The bottom line is this: there should not be ANY increases to the immigration levels as long as our shelter system in Toronto is forced to house them.

Immigrants rent their accommodation. What shelter system are you even talking about? Are you conflating asylum seekers with immigrants who come via express entry?