Results 1 to 79 of 79

Thread: Edmonton to become sanctuary city for illegal immigrants

  1. #1

    Thumbs down Edmonton to become sanctuary city for illegal immigrants

    When was the public's vote for this?

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...nted-1.4829020

    https://edmontonjournal.com/news/loc...nted-residents

    Don't use taxpayer money to shelter criminals. Want to help them? Donate YOUR money from YOUR paycheque and invite them to live in YOUR house.

    I'd like to know where the mayor and some of these councillors live, and I wonder how they would like it if we bought or rented out houses on their street, and sublet rooms for rent for cheap for these immigrants. Would they like that? I don't think so. They broke the law to enter the country, so how can you think they won't break other laws?

    There's no such thing as an "irregular immigrant". If you walked across and are undocumented, you are an illegal immigrant. Calling them "irregular immigrants" is like say there's no criminals in jail, they're just "irregularly lawful".

  2. #2

    Default

    As a former immigrant and 1st generation here, I say no. We are opening a big Pandora's box here... My friend told me that there was a channel on YouTube he saw where the immigrants in Quebec complained that the "FREE" cellphone they got were not up their standards. As to its validity, I can't confirm, but my friend wouldn't lie to me. I do know the older immigrants would most likely coach the others before they come over on how to drain our resources. I have had one too many experiences at work over these games when I chose to do the trades. I'm all for immigration, BUT I SUPPORT A PROPER AND LEGAL PROCESS. My tax money is not to get someone out of poverty. HELP YOUR CHILDREN FIRST CANADA FFS!!!
    Last edited by ctzn-Ed; 19-09-2018 at 10:47 PM.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  3. #3
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Where ever the pilot takes me
    Posts
    2,225

    Default

    The use of the word criminal to describe irregular asylum applicants is a bit inflammatory. While crossing the border in such a manner is illegal that status changes when they claim asylum. Such are our laws. If you don't like it get the politicians to change the law.

    National Post


    By doing this, their crossing is still illegal, but Canadian law stops considering them a criminal the moment they claim to be a refugee.

    Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (section 133, to be precise), a refugee claimant is explicitly “deferred” from prosecution for a variety of illegal measures that they may have used to enter Canada for claiming asylum.
    Did my dog just fall into a pothole???

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norwoodguy View Post
    The use of the word criminal to describe irregular asylum applicants is a bit inflammatory. While crossing the border in such a manner is illegal that status changes when they claim asylum. Such are our laws. If you don't like it get the politicians to change the law.

    National Post


    By doing this, their crossing is still illegal, but Canadian law stops considering them a criminal the moment they claim to be a refugee.

    Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (section 133, to be precise), a refugee claimant is explicitly “deferred” from prosecution for a variety of illegal measures that they may have used to enter Canada for claiming asylum.
    U.S. Vietnam war draft dodgers left their mark on Canada - Macleans.ca

    While it is still unclear how many men and women sought sanctuary in Canada – the country labelled draft dodgers as immigrants, as opposed to refugees – the federal government estimates up to 40,000 made the journey.

    Most stayed after the war, “making up the largest, best-educated group this country ever received,” says an archived report on the Citizenship and Immigration website.


    https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/...ark-on-canada/


    Iraq war resisters who fled to Canada ask Justin Trudeau to allow them to stay | World news | The Guardian

    “He arrived in Canada in 2005 – soon after Canada’s then government declared it would not actively participate in the US-led war in Iraq – following in the footsteps of the up to 90,000 Americans who sought refuge in Canada during the Vietnam war era.

    But unlike those who poured into Canada in the 1960s and 70s, the estimated 200 Iraq war resisters who arrived decades later found little government support in their bid to stay in Canada. Years after crossing the border, the 15 or so known resisters who remain in Canada live lives coloured with uncertainty, the threat of being deported home to face potential jail time for desertion looming constantly over their new lives”


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...au-us-military
    Last edited by KC; 20-09-2018 at 01:10 AM.

  5. #5

    Default

    The status of immigrants in Canada comes down to this:

    If their family arrived here before yours, they are the ***-****** elite.

    If their family arrived here after yours, they are ***-****** moochers, crims, and welfare scum.

    Before you mouth-breathe a word about immigrants, refugees, and border-crossing, look in the mirror.

  6. #6

    Default

    I'm confused about two points as per the EJ article in the OP.

    It states that only Caterina voted against the motion. I read elsewhere that 3 voted against the motion and that one other alderman was yelled at by another councillor who voiced that the opposition of this was deplorable and that "these people pay taxes"

    Myself I am unaware. I simply don't know. Do people that are here illegally, pay taxes? I'm asking honestly because I don't know how that would work or if it actually occurs.
    Last edited by Replacement; 20-09-2018 at 09:27 AM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  7. #7
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,645

    Default

    I think the use of the term "sanctuary city" in media reports is unfortunate and inaccurate.

    Sanctuary cities are those in the U.S. where city governments refuse to cooperate with federal government authorities to remove undocumented immigrants.

    The policy passed by Council has nothing whatsoever to do with immigration enforcement by federal authorities. The policy only ensures that all Edmontonians have access to City services regardless of immigration status.

  8. #8
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,645

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    I'm confused about two points as per the EJ article in the OP.

    It states that only Caterina voted against the motion. I read elsewhere that 3 voted against the motion and that one other alderman was yelled at by another councillor who voiced that the opposition of this was deplorable and that "these people pay taxes"

    Myself I am unaware. I simply don't know. Do people that are here illegally, pay taxes? I'm asking honestly because I don't know how that would work or if it actually occurs.
    Back in the 1990s I worked as a manager for an immigration and refugee serving agency. During that time, the federal government changed the rules to allow those claiming refugee status to work and file taxes in the formal economy. Because the refugee determination process can take a lot time, allowing them to legally work was seen as preferable to having them go onto social assistance and/or working in the underground economy.

    It is important to understand how most refugee claimants end up here. While the media focuses on those crossing the border, in Alberta at least, most enter Canada on approved visitor, student or work visas and subsequently claim refugee status. While they are waiting for their claims to be adjudicated, their visas run out and they therefore become undocumented.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    I'm confused about two points as per the EJ article in the OP.

    It states that only Caterina voted against the motion. I read elsewhere that 3 voted against the motion and that one other alderman was yelled at by another councillor who voiced that the opposition of this was deplorable and that "these people pay taxes"

    Myself I am unaware. I simply don't know. Do people that are here illegally, pay taxes? I'm asking honestly because I don't know how that would work or if it actually occurs.
    I caught that before I finished reading your statement. They may pay sales tax if they're working; otherwise, it is tax payers money that are essentially paying all.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  10. #10
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    5,416

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    I'm confused about two points as per the EJ article in the OP.

    It states that only Caterina voted against the motion. I read elsewhere that 3 voted against the motion and that one other alderman was yelled at by another councillor who voiced that the opposition of this was deplorable and that "these people pay taxes"

    Myself I am unaware. I simply don't know. Do people that are here illegally, pay taxes? I'm asking honestly because I don't know how that would work or if it actually occurs.
    I caught that before I finished reading your statement. They may pay sales tax if they're working; otherwise, it is tax payers money that are essentially paying all.
    As far as Edmonton taxes go, those are property taxes. If you own a property then you pay property taxes. If you rent a place then you pay rent, and the owner pays property taxes. In terms of the City of Edmonton taxes, people who live here whether they rent or own pay taxes.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    The status of immigrants in Canada comes down to this:

    If their family arrived here before yours, they are the ***-****** elite.

    If their family arrived here after yours, they are ***-****** moochers, crims, and welfare scum.

    Before you mouth-breathe a word about immigrants, refugees, and border-crossing, look in the mirror.
    Was that a jab at me? Yes,I was an immigrant ,and I don't think immigrants are scums, moochers. I just want our ways to be respected. Does anyone force themselves into your home? Would you appreciate that? How many homeless people will you sponsor into your home tonight seeing as how you flex your precipitous laurel. Can we also witness your kindness or would you appreciate some time to figure out righteous or mischievious personals first prior to admittance? No pointing a gun at "any faithfuls ,"do you care if certain characters intend to harm us physical; and will you volunteer to stand in innocent peoples'position should a maniac decide to ram people with their vehicles? Where were you the other day when that collegiate was stabbed at the LRT? That Pandora's box could be what I just mentioned...
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gord Lacey View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    I'm confused about two points as per the EJ article in the OP.

    It states that only Caterina voted against the motion. I read elsewhere that 3 voted against the motion and that one other alderman was yelled at by another councillor who voiced that the opposition of this was deplorable and that "these people pay taxes"

    Myself I am unaware. I simply don't know. Do people that are here illegally, pay taxes? I'm asking honestly because I don't know how that would work or if it actually occurs.
    I caught that before I finished reading your statement. They may pay sales tax if they're working; otherwise, it is tax payers money that are essentially paying all.
    As far as Edmonton taxes go, those are property taxes. If you own a property then you pay property taxes. If you rent a place then you pay rent, and the owner pays property taxes. In terms of the City of Edmonton taxes, people who live here whether they rent or own pay taxes.
    Potentially it gets more complicated than that though. The argument that was applied by councillors at City hall was that "these people pay taxes" and so should be eligible for use of Public transit and COE facilities and all benefits of those facilities.
    Property tax is one type of tax, and on a municipal level. The issue is that some of the facilities and Edmonton Transit infrastructure are cost shared municipal, provincial, and federal funded developments.

    Its not clear that an individual illegally residing in this country would pay provincial, or federal tax and yet the argument made in council was that they pay taxes (with that word also connoting plurally, and in context used, that they pay various or all taxes) .

    I raise this because one of the logical arguments that can be used against the usage is that illegal immigrants do not pay all taxes. Or possibly any if they are simply residing with acquaintance, friend, family.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  13. #13

    Default

    How did our intellectual leaders of council came up to such alienated concept? How do "fresh of the boat" contribute to taxes when they have yet to garner jobs? Incase city council forgot, last I heard, they were sleeping at student residents courtesy of tax payers; they ate food and used necessities paid by tax payers; transportation and other freebies all contributed by tax payers; and that is just to start. I was in the exact same situation almost 40 years ago, so my perspective is quite close to this realm; and, possibly, more in depth than multi generation Canadians' point of view. We went through legal process, we were sponsored by a church group- which I'm forever indebted and thankful for- but we didn't burden tax payers. We paid back the church of the airfare cost and other expenditures endured. I expect the respect of our traditions and laws. Blindly taking in strangers has consequences. If you think I'm wrong, step up and take in our population of homelessness tonight starting with AShetsen, and my mouth will be zipped. Decent Canadians have no problem with immigration as everyone is associated to immigration one form or another.
    Last edited by ctzn-Ed; 20-09-2018 at 11:42 AM.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norwoodguy View Post
    The use of the word criminal to describe irregular asylum applicants is a bit inflammatory. While crossing the border in such a manner is illegal that status changes when they claim asylum. Such are our laws. If you don't like it get the politicians to change the law.

    National Post


    By doing this, their crossing is still illegal, but Canadian law stops considering them a criminal the moment they claim to be a refugee.

    Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (section 133, to be precise), a refugee claimant is explicitly “deferred” from prosecution for a variety of illegal measures that they may have used to enter Canada for claiming asylum.
    As the article states, this is in regards to undocumented immigrants, and those who have disappeared within the country. Therefore, it IS illegal and they ARE criminals.

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    The status of immigrants in Canada comes down to this:

    If their family arrived here before yours, they are the ***-****** elite.

    If their family arrived here after yours, they are ***-****** moochers, crims, and welfare scum.

    Before you mouth-breathe a word about immigrants, refugees, and border-crossing, look in the mirror.
    I don't have an issue with anyone coming to Canada LEGALLY and going through the PROPER LEGAL channels. The issue is with sheltering those who didn't, which isn't right. Illegal is illegal, period. Don't try to twist my words. I never said anything about LEGAL immigrants.

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    How did our intellectual leaders of council came up to such alienated concept? How do "fresh of the boat" contribute to taxes when they have yet to garner jobs? Incase city council forgot, last I heard, they were sleeping at student residents courtesy of tax payers; they ate food and used necessities paid by tax payers; transportation and other freebies all contributed by tax payers; and that is just to start. I was in the exact same situation almost 40 years ago, so my perspective is quite close to this realm; and, possibly, more in depth than multi generation Canadians' point of view. We went through legal process, we were sponsored by a church group- which I'm forever indebted and thankful for- but we didn't burden tax payers. We paid back the church of the airfare cost and other expenditures endured. I expect the respect of our traditions and laws. Blindly taking in strangers has consequences. If you think I'm wrong, step up and take in our population of homelessness tonight starting with AShetsen, and my mouth will be zipped. Decent Canadians have no problem with immigration as everyone is associated to immigration one form or another.
    I think is a completely reasonable view, and you would be be in an informed position to make it. I wouldn't take what one poster here says on it too seriously. Thank you for your thoughts on this issue. We haven't always agreed but what you state on this resonates with me.
    Last edited by Replacement; 20-09-2018 at 12:43 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alkeli View Post
    I don't have an issue with anyone coming to Canada LEGALLY and going through the PROPER LEGAL channels. The issue is with sheltering those who didn't, which isn't right. Illegal is illegal, period. Don't try to twist my words. I never said anything about LEGAL immigrants.
    Telling this poster not to twist is akin to telling the wind not to blow.


    Or in my experience.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  17. #17

    Default

    Some more articles. who are these people representing us. Sarah Hamilton comes off as particularly harsh and off the mark

    https://edmontonjournal.com/news/loc...nctuary-cities

    :But Hamilton was so upset, she searched for words. “For shame. For shame,” she said. “Forgive me because I’m furious right now.”

    “I’ve seen first-hand how the immigration system grinds people down to nothing, to nothing,” she said. “The federal and provincial governments have a ton of things they should be doing but this is fundamentally, fundamentally about affording people the right to live in a city without fear.

    “To grandstand on dignity, basic human dignity is appalling. I am absolutely furious about this.”


    The irony being Hamilton was accusing other councillor of grandstanding and she was furious from her own statements. Is fury not grandstanding? Or is it OK if its first person used? Her depiction of rights for those that are illegally here is also at potential odds with what civic administration ought to be.


    Aaron Paquette, taken from the article is the one saying, and I quote "they are paying taxes, they are paying taxes, they are contributing to our society, they are our neighbors" Such an odd view of illegal individuals entitlements or contributions.


    Heres another article. Sarah Hamilton, apparently still frothing in this article;

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...nted-1.4829020


    "The federal and provincial government have a ton of things they should be doing but this is fundamentally, fundamentally about affording people the right to live in the city without fear," said Hamilton. "It's about safety and security and to grandstand on dignity, basic human dignity, is appalling."


    Lets be clear here, she is referring to her peer, Councillor Dziadyk's assertions as "appalling" and was "Furious" about it.

    What a pleasure Hamilton must be on council. (sarcasm)

    This is Dziadyks assertion, its better thought out than Hamiltons outraged reaction;

    "If we go through with this, we're pushing people further underground by sanctioning subversion of federal law," said Dziadyk, "And really we should be spending our efforts to try and get people to have a legal status in Canada, in Edmonton, so they can participate meaningfully in society and feel safe here through legal means."


    Important to note that Dziadyk is actually voicing a pragmatic, and rational view. A defensible position. Hamilton is going right off the rails on what her anecdotal, emotive, first experience is.

    Both should have a say. But one tried to accost the others right to say it, in council proceedings..

    I feel that Dziadyk was attacked.
    Last edited by Replacement; 20-09-2018 at 02:29 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  18. #18
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Beverly Heights in a small house with a large lot!!
    Posts
    2,056

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alkeli View Post
    When was the public's vote for this?

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...nted-1.4829020

    https://edmontonjournal.com/news/loc...nted-residents

    Don't use taxpayer money to shelter criminals. Want to help them? Donate YOUR money from YOUR paycheque and invite them to live in YOUR house.

    I'd like to know where the mayor and some of these councillors live, and I wonder how they would like it if we bought or rented out houses on their street, and sublet rooms for rent for cheap for these immigrants. Would they like that? I don't think so. They broke the law to enter the country, so how can you think they won't break other laws?

    There's no such thing as an "irregular immigrant". If you walked across and are undocumented, you are an illegal immigrant. Calling them "irregular immigrants" is like say there's no criminals in jail, they're just "irregularly lawful".
    I couldn't agree more. What a TRUDEAU/Democrat ideology.
    Make the RIGHT choice before you take your last breath......

  19. #19
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Beverly Heights in a small house with a large lot!!
    Posts
    2,056

    Default

    We have over a thousand homeless in this city alone. Of that, many are vets and the elderly. https://www.endpovertyedmonton.ca/ne...homeless-count NEVER,repeat NEVER will i ever support such an egregious idea. Canadian MUST come ahead of all immigrants and refugees OR they DON"T come here.
    Make the RIGHT choice before you take your last breath......

  20. #20

    Default

    It is no different than your own personal family. Would you starve and leave your own kids on the street to take on someone else children? That is the case here.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  21. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    I'm confused about two points as per the EJ article in the OP.

    It states that only Caterina voted against the motion. I read elsewhere that 3 voted against the motion and that one other alderman was yelled at by another councillor who voiced that the opposition of this was deplorable and that "these people pay taxes"

    Myself I am unaware. I simply don't know. Do people that are here illegally, pay taxes? I'm asking honestly because I don't know how that would work or if it actually occurs.
    Certainly anyone here pays GST on their purchases, and, through rent, their share of property tax.

  22. #22

    Default

    Do they have a job to start, and, if they don't, whose money will that come out off? Our taxes to recirculate back into our tax pool and Yeah! Meanwhile, on Global National about two hours ago, a woman is shown in rage in Ottawa after the government denied help for her husband and other military personels from their service in Afghanistan in which they suffered PTSD; then, the icing on the cake took place on Global Local where Gord Steinke eloquently expounded that roughly 130k EDMONTONIANS ARE LIVING IN POVERTY. I'll make this clear, I'm neither Caucasian, I'm a first generation Canadian, I'm not a racist, and I'm compassipnate; but FGS! Help them first on behalf of my tax dollar!!!
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  23. #23
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Where ever the pilot takes me
    Posts
    2,225

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alkeli View Post
    As the article states, this is in regards to undocumented immigrants, and those who have disappeared within the country. Therefore, it IS illegal and they ARE criminals.
    Yes, but you made a blanket statement that if you walked across and are undocumented, you are an illegal immigrant. When it is quite possible to enter Canada without documentation and can still make an asylum claim.

    There's no such thing as an "irregular immigrant". If you walked across and are undocumented, you are an illegal immigrant. Calling them "irregular immigrants" is like say there's no criminals in jail, they're just "irregularly lawful".
    Did my dog just fall into a pothole???

  24. #24
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Where ever the pilot takes me
    Posts
    2,225

    Default

    One issue I have with harboring undocumented immigrants is whether the agencies and individuals that do are under any obligation to report them to the government. I'm all for enforcing the law but at the same time each case has to be handled on an individual basis with some degree of compassion when warranted.
    Did my dog just fall into a pothole???

  25. #25

    Default

    What would those compassion be? My father and I came from a third world nation almost 40 yrs ago; we fled for our dear lives with guns after us, yet we had all documents from birth certificates and all. Most of these third world countries have cell phones but no documents? Back then,in 1978, if we had an anolog radio, we were above average and there were few to go around. A town of 500 people, maybe one would have it as an example. These countries can't be as backwards as then. This Im nervous about, but I'm willing to compassionate. I just wish our government can show the same for our injured soldiers or our impoverished kids in this country. You just came here so here is money, cell phones etc, etc;young children of Canada, are you hungry? Here is the address to the food bank. I don't know if I want to cry or be angry. I'm OK for helping, but I'm not OK that our children are hungry in front of my face; nor was I OK watching that lady so angry at our government denying help to her military husband. No individual should be defeated from the core like that when they paid taxes and stepped up to do the dirty deads of politics for these "BASTARDS- Pardo moi Francais" I was embarrassed and felt defeated with her at that moment. I question if we are the great country we claim we are now. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  26. #26

    Default

    I have known dozens of people like the person who wrote the preceding post #25.They are first-generation Canadians, but they sharply disassociate themselves from people who came here as desperately as they once did.

    And what they say is always the same: these newcomers cannot possibly have had it worse than me; think of the children; I don't know whether to cry or to be angry.

    Their emotions are as poorly controlled as their grammar.

    And all because their relative affluence made them lose the one thing they especially should have been ashamed of losing: the understanding that human desperation is not a measurable or a quantifiable -- it merely exists, or it does not.

    Pathetic.

  27. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norwoodguy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by alkeli View Post
    As the article states, this is in regards to undocumented immigrants, and those who have disappeared within the country. Therefore, it IS illegal and they ARE criminals.
    Yes, but you made a blanket statement that if you walked across and are undocumented, you are an illegal immigrant. When it is quite possible to enter Canada without documentation and can still make an asylum claim.

    There's no such thing as an "irregular immigrant". If you walked across and are undocumented, you are an illegal immigrant. Calling them "irregular immigrants" is like say there's no criminals in jail, they're just "irregularly lawful".
    If you make an asylum claim, then you're NOT undocumented. However, those who have disappeared afterwards are not following the rules.

    Glad you mentioned asylum, because that's just a loophole. Those walking across the border and claiming asylum are playing the system, and the government is letting it happen. Our border to the south is NOT the border into Syria! It's the USA. There is NO war, there is NO persecution, and most are only leaving because Canada is allowing them to enter, and giving them homes and money.

    Either that, or they're part of a group like the Haitians, who have been told that they now have to return home to their country, but they just don't want to. They were ALWAYS only allowed into the states on a TEMPORARY basis. This was ALWAYS the deal, and they KNEW they had to return at some point. And now that the time has come, they're playing the Canadian government and taxpayers like fools. If they cared at all about their roots and their way of life, their HOME, they would return to their home and rebuild, make it good again, help improve their economy. But no, it's much easier to just take a taxi to the border, walk across, and then get free accommodations and handouts.

    I wonder how many would change their mind if they were told that once they get an income, they need to start paying back all the money that was spend on their housing, and all the money they were given to start off. Instead of a handout, it's a loan, and if it's not paid back, they're deported. Why not do it like this? If I want money, I can get it, but I have to pay it back. I don't get anything free, and I never have. Any benefits a Canadian gets is from having 40% of their paycheques taken away in taxes, and paying taxes on purchases and land. You better believe that I expect benefits for having almost half my paycheque taken away! So if these people aren't working, why get it for free? Make it a loan then. Just like you, me and all the other Canadian have to do when we have no money. You want to live like a Canadian and be a Canadian? That's what we do.
    Last edited by alkeli; 21-09-2018 at 08:31 AM.

  28. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    I have known dozens of people like the person who wrote the preceding post #25.They are first-generation Canadians, but they sharply disassociate themselves from people who came here as desperately as they once did.

    And what they say is always the same: these newcomers cannot possibly have had it worse than me; think of the children; I don't know whether to cry or to be angry.

    Their emotions are as poorly controlled as their grammar.

    And all because their relative affluence made them lose the one thing they especially should have been ashamed of losing: the understanding that human desperation is not a measurable or a quantifiable -- it merely exists, or it does not.

    Pathetic.
    “Their emotions are as poorly controlled as their grammar.”

    Control? I suspect your observation, which looks like an insult to me, has mixed with your lost appreciation of communicating with non native English speakers.

  29. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    I have known dozens of people like the person who wrote the preceding post #25.They are first-generation Canadians, but they sharply disassociate themselves from people who came here as desperately as they once did.

    And what they say is always the same: these newcomers cannot possibly have had it worse than me; think of the children; I don't know whether to cry or to be angry.

    Their emotions are as poorly controlled as their grammar.

    And all because their relative affluence made them lose the one thing they especially should have been ashamed of losing: the understanding that human desperation is not a measurable or a quantifiable -- it merely exists, or it does not.

    Pathetic.
    Here’s my understanding of the breadth of refugee’ism: Evacuations like that out of Uganda came with lots of advance warning to allow people to be somewhat prepared though I’m sure the actual move was sudden. Other situations are far more sudden. Bombs raining down or rebels or soldiers rushing into villages and people leaving with nothing at all. Moreover anyone in established modern societal positions has documented paperwork and treasures them. Millions of people though in traditional societal positions have no need for paperwork. Born at home in a village and will work in the fields, forests... thousands of years surviving without any paperwork - or radios. Then some power seeking group overruns innocent villages trying to rake everything, destroy everything or impose a new belief system on everyone. Any old paperwork is seized or destroyed.
    Last edited by KC; 21-09-2018 at 10:48 AM.

  30. #30
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,743

    Default

    from my perspective those opposed to this because taxes are not being paid but benefits are being received are either mistaken or missing the point or both. i would posit that no direct benefits are being received by these individuals because those would come from federal or provincial agencies that would indeed pursue their being deported. from that perspective, they are not taking anything of financial substance away from "other real canadians who should come first".

    at the local level which is what started this discussion and is all that is under discussion, what is it that these individuals would be using that would therefor not be available to "other real canadians"? a seat on a bus that would otherwise be empty? a locker in a rec centre and enough room in the pool to swim? a position on a rec soccer team that might not otherwise have enough people to play?

    directly or indirectly these individuals are contributing even if "under the table" and possibly while being taken advantage of while doing so. they pay rent, they purchase groceries and clothing etc., all resulting in the payment of property taxes and income taxes and gst.

    as for those insisting their objections aren't racist or somehow don't speak to their compassion, i was always of the opinion that you are either compassionate or you're not. i'm not sure how you can be compassionate "sometimes" or with preconditions.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  31. #31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    I have known dozens of people like the person who wrote the preceding post #25.They are first-generation Canadians, but they sharply disassociate themselves from people who came here as desperately as they once did.

    And what they say is always the same: these newcomers cannot possibly have had it worse than me; think of the children; I don't know whether to cry or to be angry.

    Their emotions are as poorly controlled as their grammar.

    And all because their relative affluence made them lose the one thing they especially should have been ashamed of losing: the understanding that human desperation is not a measurable or a quantifiable -- it merely exists, or it does not.

    Pathetic.
    Here’s my understanding of the breadth of refugee’ism: Evacuations like that out of Uganda came with lots of advance warning to allow people to be somewhat prepared though I’m sure the actual move was sudden. Other situations are far more sudden. Bombs raining down or rebels or soldiers rushing into villages and people leaving with nothing at all. Moreover anyone in established modern societal positions has documented paperwork and treasures them. Millions of people though in traditional societal positions have no need for paperwork. Born at home in a village and will work in the fields, forests... thousands of years surviving without any paperwork - or radios. Then some power seeking group overruns innocent villages trying to rake everything, destroy everything or impose a new belief system on everyone. Any old paperwork is seized or destroyed.
    Well, obviously history never repeats exactly, does it -- so someone desperate to reach Canada in, say 1938 from X, had somewhat different circumstances than in 1947 from X or Y, than 1979 from Z, than 1993 from W, than 2016 from S...

    My point is that all these human beings -- human beings! -- were desperate. And always they had to contend with voices discounting their desperation. Now, someone who never was desperate in that way at least has the half-excuse of ignorance. But someone who went through all that, the desperation, uprooting, loss of property, uncertainty, faint hope... -- has no excuse when it comes to denying others the possibility for what they lived through next themselves: hard work and the building of a new life.

    And that's why it is truly pathetic to read such things from people who have forgotten what they once knew better. That is the most civilized way I can frame it.

  32. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    The status of immigrants in Canada comes down to this:

    If their family arrived here before yours, they are the ***-****** elite.

    If their family arrived here after yours, they are ***-****** moochers, crims, and welfare scum.

    Before you mouth-breathe a word about immigrants, refugees, and border-crossing, look in the mirror.
    Was that a jab at me? Yes,I was an immigrant ,and I don't think immigrants are scums, moochers. I just want our ways to be respected. Does anyone force themselves into your home? Would you appreciate that? How many homeless people will you sponsor into your home tonight seeing as how you flex your precipitous laurel. Can we also witness your kindness or would you appreciate some time to figure out righteous or mischievious personals first prior to admittance? No pointing a gun at "any faithfuls ,"do you care if certain characters intend to harm us physical; and will you volunteer to stand in innocent peoples'position should a maniac decide to ram people with their vehicles? Where were you the other day when that collegiate was stabbed at the LRT? That Pandora's box could be what I just mentioned...


    I'm assuming that you're referring to Alek Minassian, who drove his van down the sidewalk in Toronto and to Mario Bigchild, who stabbed the student at the LRT station. Neither of whom were immigrants, legal or otherwise.

  33. #33

    Default

    The fear about criminals among immigrants is cowardly bigotry.

    A certain percentage of ANY population is always criminal. What matters is the net balance.

    Foreign born in Canada have higher employment and lower crime rates than the native born. They are, in the aggregate, better contributors to the country than the people born here.
    Last edited by AShetsen; 21-09-2018 at 05:40 PM.

  34. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    The status of immigrants in Canada comes down to this:

    If their family arrived here before yours, they are the ***-****** eliteimmigrant. their family arrived here after yours, they are ***-****** moochers, crims, and welfare scum.

    Before you mouth-breathe a word about immigrants, refugees, and border-crossing, look in the mirror.
    Was that a jab at me? Yes,I was an immigrant ,and I don't think immigrants are scums, moochers. I just want our ways to be respected. Does anyone force themselves into your home? Would you appreciate that? How many homeless people will you sponsor into your home tonight seeing as how you flex your precipitous laurel. Can we also witness your kindness or would you appreciate some time to figure out righteous or mischievious personals first prior to admittance? No pointing a gun at "any faithfuls ,"do you care if certain characters intend to harm us physical; and will you volunteer to stand in innocent peoples'position should a maniac decide to ram people with their vehicles? Where were you the other day when that collegiate was stabbed at the LRT? That Pandora's box could be what I just mentioned...


    I'm assuming that you're referring to Alek Minassian, who drove his van down the sidewalk in Toronto and to Mario Bigchild, who stabbed the student at the LRT station. Neither of whom were immigrants, legal or otherwise.
    No! Did you not remember our version of that 1 year ago which started the sequence of event that saw the officer down at commonwealth then innocent people on Jasper became bowling ��? He was an immigrant. That statement was not a jab at Muslims as I have friends who are of that faith even though I don't practice any doctrine
    Last edited by ctzn-Ed; 21-09-2018 at 06:49 PM.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  35. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    from my perspective those opposed to this because taxes are not being paid but benefits are being received are either mistaken or missing the point or both. i would posit that no direct benefits are being received by these individuals because those would come from federal or provincial agencies that would indeed pursue their being deported. from that perspective, they are not taking anything of financial substance away from "other real canadians who should come first".

    at the local level which is what started this discussion and is all that is under discussion, what is it that these individuals would be using that would therefor not be available to "other real canadians"? a seat on a bus that would otherwise be empty? a locker in a rec centre and enough room in the pool to swim? a position on a rec soccer team that might not otherwise have enough people to play?

    directly or indirectly these individuals are contributing even if "under the table" and possibly while being taken advantage of while doing so. they pay rent, they purchase groceries and clothing etc., all resulting in the payment of property taxes and income taxes and gst.

    as for those insisting their objections aren't racist or somehow don't speak to their compassion, i was always of the opinion that you are either compassionate or you're not. i'm not sure how you can be compassionate "sometimes" or with preconditions.
    Money being spent on the border crossers who have no claim to legitimate asylum doesn't come out of thin air.

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    Well, obviously history never repeats exactly, does it -- so someone desperate to reach Canada in, say 1938 from X, had somewhat different circumstances than in 1947 from X or Y, than 1979 from Z, than 1993 from W, than 2016 from S...

    My point is that all these human beings -- human beings! -- were desperate. And always they had to contend with voices discounting their desperation. Now, someone who never was desperate in that way at least has the half-excuse of ignorance. But someone who went through all that, the desperation, uprooting, loss of property, uncertainty, faint hope... -- has no excuse when it comes to denying others the possibility for what they lived through next themselves: hard work and the building of a new life.

    And that's why it is truly pathetic to read such things from people who have forgotten what they once knew better. That is the most civilized way I can frame it.
    What's pathetic is people like you who believe these people are escaping war and persecution and have the gall to compare it to people who REALLY NEED asylum to escape horrible places. NOT THE UNITED STATES. I'm shocked that someone can even lack that much intelligence to believe these things are equal.


    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    The fear about criminals among immigrants is cowardly bigotry.

    A certain percentage of ANY population is always criminal. What matters is the net balance.

    Foreign born in Canada have higher employment and lower crime rates than the native born. They are, in the aggregate, better contributors to the country than the people born here.
    It's fear about criminals among criminals. Illegal border crossers are criminals, claiming asylum WHICH GETS PROPERLY PROCESSED grants them freedoms, but those who are undocumented and who are disappeared ARE criminals.

    Becoming a "sanctuary city" to shelter criminals is not right. And if they AREN'T doing anything wrong and have nothing to fear legally, the WHY would they flee to a known sanctuary city to begin with? What would then be the point of a sanctuary city? Right. "Come live here and spend money, we promise you won't get arrested or deported." Pathetic.

  36. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    The fear about criminals among immigrants is cowardly bigotry.

    A certain percentage of ANY population is always criminal. What matters is the net balance.

    Foreign born in Canada have higher employment and lower crime rates than the native born. They are, in the aggregate, better contributors to the country than the people born here.
    Sorry but I’m going to pick on another one of your comments:

    “Foreign born in Canada have higher employment and lower crime rates than the native born. They are, in the aggregate, better contributors to the country than the people born here.“

    “employment” and “better contributors” We have an indigenous population that play a big role in unemployment, crime rates and lost potential contribution to the country - as we’d define it. Likely unfathomable and inexplicable lost opportunity to better contribute to this country as they’d see it. A potential contribution often stifled and rejected by the modern entrenched society. As a country we’ve utterly failed to spend the effort, let alone recognize the lost opportunity under our noses while instead pursuing and poaching from other countries via standard immigration policy.

    The refugees? Minor numbers overall - not here for economic reasons as would many formal (“foreign born”) applicants but for reasons of survival. I’d rather see 100% of our immigration be made up of near randomly selected refugees.

    Then, as it seems financial aid is always limited, I’d like lower numbers of immigrants altogether with more of the freed up financial expenditure being re-proportioned towards those non-contributing native born (old and new indigenous) that could and should be contributory-matches to any economic-immigrant we attract (poach) and I’d like to see refugee-immigration numbers set based on some fully transparent analyses of need for Canada.

    With automation accelerating job obsolescence across the country and into the future, free-trade narrowing the breadth of enterprise putting more eggs in fewer most-efficient, least-labourious baskets, international product competition and technological advances making some core Canadian exports obsolete, we can only pray that the growing population will be employable in the future. Assuming all will be better if we have an ever growing population assured through immigration is a great leap of faith.
    Last edited by KC; 21-09-2018 at 11:40 PM.

  37. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alkeli View Post


    What's pathetic is people like you who believe these people are escaping war and persecution and have the gall to compare it to people who REALLY NEED asylum to escape horrible places. NOT THE UNITED STATES. I'm shocked that someone can even lack that much intelligence to believe these things are equal.

    Yeah, it's not like they're trying to get away from a country where the president calls huge swaths of people criminals based solely on their national origin. Or where they're banning people from entering based solely on their faith. Or where they're taking children from their parents and locking them in what are essentially chain link cages? Or where Nazis and white supremacists macrch with torches and chants last used against the Jews and yet the leader of the country calls them "Good people".

    Yeah, it's nothing like that at all.

  38. #38

    Default

    I've read empathetic point of view that are ligit to some degree such as , "people fleeing atrocities at the very last minute so no ducumentation could be presented..." which would be valid if that situation applied. We are talking about people crossing the border of a "first class nation" to a " first class nation." I don't recall Trump sending warplanes and tanks at these people. They came to America via passports or illegal borders then through Mexico, so why are there some of you folks giving reasoning to them having no identifications? How do we know there are no drug rings entering our country to establish bases here. Our children are not addicted enough from meth, bath salt , coke and other illicit drugs. Folks, I'm not advocating "stop immigration, " but I enjoy what is left of a decent secured country. I remain firmed that we cherish our traditional system of a proper ad judicial process to immigration. If we don't, we will foster a path in which Europe does not know how to deal with.
    As per the tax issue, some believe that is a short sighted view, so I would like to know why are Quebec and Toronto seeking compensations in the amount hundred of millions that it accrued to them over this ordeal; How many additional hirings occurred for patrollings and processings as there has to be additional stress to the original system. Who paid the rent costs for those dorms, food, security, medical assistance, medicine, and what ever else? Who will pay for those requiring permanent medicine since they will make minimum wage without health bennifits? Toronto , alone, sought from the federal government in the tune of over 100 million for their lost, so what was Quebec 's cost? I would gather it would be in the similiar range.That is already 200 million+ and the flood gate has just begun. More will come , so mark my word on this. What do you all suspect that tally will be? If we don't maintain the course of our legal system to immigration, we are going to pay dearly. What is our country's debt; what is our province debt; and what is our city's debt? Add those three elements together and I'm already shaking let alone this process. What if there are drug lords in the herd? What is our cost to fix our children when they come to destroy them in the long run? Drug addiction has not cost society dearly already?

    Add on: Does anyone, but me, believe that the drug epidemic ocurring in the US and Canada is solely monetary greed? Well, I don't as some countries loathe America and its allies; they know they don't have the military might to defend America's aggression, so what and how would they combat us? Send in drugs which our children will consume, and kill them from inside out; apparently the news reports indicates that they are winning. What are the affect of our children's offsprings from their addictions? If "fetal alcohol syndrome" is any indication of addiction, I don't even want to fathom the consequences of the drugs our kids are addicted to. Some claim I have forgotten my roots, but I beg to differ... my roots are more intact right now than ever, and I welcome those that enter Canada legally with open arms. We can't save everybody's poverty delima, so if we allow this to happen, we must open the door for the rest of the 6 billion people on this planet whom lives are impoverished as there is no indication of war atrocities happening in America...
    Last edited by ctzn-Ed; 22-09-2018 at 09:46 AM. Reason: add on
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  39. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    The fear about criminals among immigrants is cowardly bigotry.

    A certain percentage of ANY population is always criminal. What matters is the net balance.

    Foreign born in Canada have higher employment and lower crime rates than the native born. They are, in the aggregate, better contributors to the country than the people born here.
    While you chastised me of forgetting my root, uncontrolled emotion and grammar, you seem to believe you are an exception to the rule. Natives were atrociously killed, raped (think of the children), physically and mentally abused (perhaps tortured) which caused them severe long term affects hence their problems; where is your compassion that you so willingly give to others? AShetsen, I can deal with a " black kettle", but I don't know how to deal with a " burnt kettle". You used the word "pathetic" , but there is no terminology to describe you. Go buy yourself a hugh MIRROR please! False pretense of compassion is quite EVIL!
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  40. #40

    Default

    You're much, MUCH more likely to be assaulted by someone who was born here, particularly a male, than you are from any of these people coming here from the States.

    As far as drug addition, there's plenty of addicts here that are homegrown. The idea that these immigrants are somehow actually undercover agents for the drug cartels is laughable. These are people that are fleeing the cartels. The same cartels that Canadian addicts help keep in business.

  41. #41

    Default

    I'm not saying the mass, but the few will use this angle and please don't be naive. I bought up a concept didn't I, so wouldn't a smart Drug lord be capable of that hypothesis? You need to research my friend as that is what is happening in America.

    This part is not directed at you KK, but you folks who are seasoned generates are quite naive in your glass house. People that live in third world are extremely creatively intelligent as they have to for survival. Certainly we have homegrown drug gangs, but how do you think these drugs enter into our country. New gangs pop up daily in Mexico where in some cities (primarily south Mexico) people are scared to leave their homes because of the violence that even the Mexican government ar helpless. KK you need to wake up.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  42. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    The fear about criminals among immigrants is cowardly bigotry.

    A certain percentage of ANY population is always criminal. What matters is the net balance.

    Foreign born in Canada have higher employment and lower crime rates than the native born. They are, in the aggregate, better contributors to the country than the people born here.
    While you chastised me of forgetting my root, uncontrolled emotion and grammar, you seem to believe you are an exception to the rule. Natives were atrociously killed, raped (think of the children), physically and mentally abused (perhaps tortured) which caused them severe long term affects hence their problems; where is your compassion that you so willingly give to others? AShetsen, I can deal with a " black kettle", but I don't know how to deal with a " burnt kettle". You used the word "pathetic" , but there is no terminology to describe you. Go buy yourself a hugh MIRROR please! False pretense of compassion is quite EVIL!
    I will apologize for this particuliar comment as I misinterpreted the comment as " aboriginal native" when it was " native born".
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  43. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    from my perspective those opposed to this because taxes are not being paid but benefits are being received are either mistaken or missing the point or both. i would posit that no direct benefits are being received by these individuals because those would come from federal or provincial agencies that would indeed pursue their being deported. from that perspective, they are not taking anything of financial substance away from "other real canadians who should come first".

    .
    Why would you posit that? Is it speculation? I happen to have been front center in what is provided. Through an agency that provides it. I won't go into great detail here as to do so would be to inflame the debate. But your supposition of "no direct benefits" is quite simply false.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  44. #44
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,743

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    from my perspective those opposed to this because taxes are not being paid but benefits are being received are either mistaken or missing the point or both. i would posit that no direct benefits are being received by these individuals because those would come from federal or provincial agencies that would indeed pursue their being deported. from that perspective, they are not taking anything of financial substance away from "other real canadians who should come first".

    .
    Why would you posit that? Is it speculation? I happen to have been front center in what is provided. Through an agency that provides it. I won't go into great detail here as to do so would be to inflame the debate. But your supposition of "no direct benefits" is quite simply false.
    if someone is going to be deported if the federal government is able to locate them, i’m assuming that individual would not be disclosing their location to the federal government or someone else who would report them to the federal government. what you’re describing would mean there are federal and/or provincial agencies providing benefits that are “sanctuary departments”. don’t get me wrong, i’m not sure i would be totally opposed to that but if that’s the case the opposition to the city’s taking a similar position is a bit strange in that it would be misdirected even if not misguided would it not?
    Last edited by kcantor; 23-09-2018 at 08:37 AM. Reason: typo
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  45. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    president calls huge swaths of people criminals based solely on their national origin.
    banning people from entering based solely on their faith
    taking children from their parents
    locking them in what are essentially chain link cages
    Nazis and white supremacists macrch with torches and chants last used against the Jews and yet the leader of the country calls them "Good people".
    Even worse is that Canadian law protects Canadians who tolerate, justify, and support all that openly.

  46. #46

    Default

    Actually just the opposite. Your statement is factually inaccurate.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  47. #47

    Default

    ^The constitution provides some protection of people espousing intolerance but with limits such as hate speech and then there’s always the notwithstanding clause.

    As for Canadian law protecting “Canadians who tolerate”... “all that openly” I’m not sure what the alternative is. Who is to decide when intolerance should be individually undertaken? At every chant?

  48. #48

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    I'm not saying the mass, but the few will use this angle and please don't be naive. I bought up a concept didn't I, so wouldn't a smart Drug lord be capable of that hypothesis? You need to research my friend as that is what is happening in America.

    This part is not directed at you KK, but you folks who are seasoned generates are quite naive in your glass house. People that live in third world are extremely creatively intelligent as they have to for survival. Certainly we have homegrown drug gangs, but how do you think these drugs enter into our country. New gangs pop up daily in Mexico where in some cities (primarily south Mexico) people are scared to leave their homes because of the violence that even the Mexican government ar helpless. KK you need to wake up.
    So, the people that are fleeing the drug lords and the violence are to be feared even more than the drug lords because they want to go to a country where they won't face the drug lords and the violence?

    Yeah, makes perfect sense.

    And why are the drug lords so successful? Because there's a market in the very countries that you claim need to be protected. Get rid of the demand, you get rid of the supply. Simple economics.

  49. #49

    Default

    No KK! The mass that wish to come are most likely decent people, but there will be a few out of the group that are nefarious with intent to establish links up here much like any legal enterprise expansion.

    As per attempts to rid drugs, get out of that glass house or stop attempting to be naive.... they're 10 steps ahead with new designer drugs on the way, and that is reality. Our only thin layer of safeguard is if we follow our tradition of the immigration proces.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  50. #50

    Default

    If there is no demand, the is no need for supply. Don't put all the blame on the suppliers for our drug problems. You need both sides for the drug trade to work.

    And, as far as
    there will be a few out of the group that are nefarious
    , We've got quite enough nefarious types here already without them needing to bring in somebody new. Or do you believe that if we shut down all immigration (not saying that you are, just a hypothetical) then our drug problems would evaporate overnight?

    If you saw a house on fire or a traffic accident, would you refuse to help the injured just in case some of them were "nefarious"?

  51. #51

    Default

    Demand can be abated if we teach our kids; that means, as parents ,we have to be involved with our kids. Here, we ignore our kids as our priorities are to keep up with the Jones and their white picket fences. We showed them a wreckless life style and no one blinks an eye. Our government and law expects us to obedient to the law, yet they break every law in the books for our children to see for their bennifits. When society worships idiotic behavior and put them on the pedestal as celebrities, what is our children to think. Does Kardashian mean anything? We let these people guide our children because we are too lazy to be involved in their lives . Afterwards, instead of taking ownership to our faults, we start the "blame game ". This does not mean everyone, but it is the masses mentality. When are you ready to participate instead of blaming? I'm not perfect, but I recognized that long ago when I adopted two kids( while single ) at a young age as they had no one to help them. Every individual has to play there part, and, if they dont, the DEVIL come out to " Play and Prey" on our children .

    The Question is , do we offer compassion in hopes the Devil don't come; or, do we offer compassion with respect and thought to our family? Every individual has to decipher this for themselves rather like some accusing others of lack of compassion without due process.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  52. #52
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,743

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    Demand can be abated if we teach our kids; that means, as parents ,we have to be involved with our kids. Here, we ignore our kids as our priorities are to keep up with the Jones and their white picket fences. We showed them a wreckless life style and no one blinks an eye. Our government and law expects us to obedient to the law, yet they break every law in the books for our children to see for their bennifits. When society worships idiotic behavior and put them on the pedestal as celebrities, what is our children to think. Does Kardashian mean anything? We let these people guide our children because we are too lazy to be involved in their lives . Afterwards, instead of taking ownership to our faults, we start the "blame game ". This does not mean everyone, but it is the masses mentality. When are you ready to participate instead of blaming? I'm not perfect, but I recognized that long ago when I adopted two kids( while single ) at a young age as they had no one to help them. Every individual has to play there part, and, if they dont, the DEVIL come out to " Play and Prey" on our children .

    The Question is , do we offer compassion in hopes the Devil don't come; or, do we offer compassion with respect and thought to our family? Every individual has to decipher this for themselves rather like some accusing others of lack of compassion without due process.
    the devil will do his damnest to come without relying on our compassion to enable him to get here. in a metaphorical sense - to which i assume you were referring - sacrificing our compassion means ceding to the devil, not keeping him at bay. as i said previously, i don’t believe compassion can be selective or conditioned.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  53. #53

    Default

    100% and metaphorical. Ken, we both know nothing is black or white, but to not process a system with thorough thoughts to help people and open the flood gate, the Devil's offsprings could strengthen the Devil's stance. You are so correct that Devil don't need our compassion. This would be much like having a party where you didn't specified rules, invited friends, and the friends invite other friends which in turn invited more friends; and, in the end, you have a house that is destroyed. Mom and dad comes home and asked what happen? We didn't think mom and dad , and we are sorry...
    Last edited by ctzn-Ed; 23-09-2018 at 06:30 PM. Reason: add on
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  54. #54

    Default

    Is this not ironic. Two days after I spoke of potential nefarious acts from improper adjudication of the immigration process, the news exposed what I hypothesized. A pharmacist , clearly firstt generation immigrant with a an incredible income and profession- is caught doing "DEVIL DEEDS". I would now invite and expect AShetsen to come and explain to me how this happened?
    Also, please explain to me how my "UNCONTROLLED EMOTION AND GRAMMAR" pushed this man to his greed and attempt to destroy our population? I'm very interested in learning the correct "controlled grammar and emotion" seeing as how I pulled everything out from between my legs...
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  55. #55

    Default

    And how many "DEVIL DEEDS" have other people committed during the same time? First generation? Second? Third? How about First Nations who have been here longer than anyone? What about crimes committed by visitors?

  56. #56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    And how many "DEVIL DEEDS" have other people committed during the same time? First generation? Second? Third? How about First Nations who have been here longer than anyone? What about crimes committed by visitors?
    You just answered my point as we dont need more. This is why we need a proper process to potential new comers to our country rather than at the border where we have to take them in. This will only encourage others to fly to the US-Canada major centres and enter through our borders. Should they get deported, who pays for that? Do we get ,compensation from Trump who will pay us with the wall money he'll receive from Mexico? WHO?
    Last edited by ctzn-Ed; 26-09-2018 at 06:21 AM.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  57. #57

    Default

    Wall money from Mexico?

    Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!!!!!

    For a moment there, I thought you were serious.

    You are?

    BWAH-HA-HA-HA!!!!

    Are you aware that people from Leduc, Red Deer & Calgary have committed crimes in Edmonton. Time to build a wall across Highway 2 and get those cities to pay for it.

  58. #58
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    1,179

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    And how many "DEVIL DEEDS" have other people committed during the same time? First generation? Second? Third? How about First Nations who have been here longer than anyone? What about crimes committed by visitors?
    You just answered my point as we dont need more. This is why we need a proper process to potential new comers to our country rather than at the border where we have to take them in. This will only encourage others to fly to the US-Canada major centres and enter through our borders. Should they get deported, who pays for that? Do we get ,compensation from Trump who will pay us with the wall money he'll receive from Mexico? WHO?
    So your stance is that we shouldn't grow our population at all because more people=more crime?

    Unless you have something specifically against people who haven't been here for an amount of time you deem long enough ("a first generation Canadian committed a crime, the horror!"), you should be equally mad at mothers who decide to have children right?

    Are you saying don't like new Canadians because they commit crimes, even though you haven't shown anything to suggest that they commit crimes at a higher rate than other Canadians? You can try and reword your point because right now it sounds like you don't like certain groups because of where they are from (ie. not Canada), which is pretty xenophobic.

  59. #59

    Default

    No! What I'm saying is, if we make it that easy for them to enter, we will increase the criminal element within a population that may truly need help. What i'm also saying is, we have enough of the criminal element already that exiist in our country that we have a hard time dealing with right now; we have to do our best to prevent anymore. Will we be perfect in preventing that? No! What we did , however, is we have given than additional method to do business. Did you watch the news regarding Petels' intricate process that allowed him to distribute so much lethal drugs to street crimes?
    Last edited by ctzn-Ed; 26-09-2018 at 11:40 AM.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  60. #60
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    1,179

    Default

    I don't get why you keep insisting that one persons actions are relevant to the behavior and actions of the entire immigrant/refugee population. Especially when the person you refer to is a pharmacist, who would have easily gotten into Canada through any immigration policy (save a closed door one).
    Last edited by seamusmcduffs; 26-09-2018 at 02:13 PM.

  61. #61

    Default

    How old are you may I ask before I answer that part for you?
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  62. #62

    Default

    If you're really concerned about crime, we should be stopping men from entering the country. Immigrants, tourists, business people, etc. If you want to point the finger at the source of crime, it's the population with the y chromosome by far.

  63. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seamusmcduffs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    And how many "DEVIL DEEDS" have other people committed during the same time? First generation? Second? Third? How about First Nations who have been here longer than anyone? What about crimes committed by visitors?
    You just answered my point as we dont need more. This is why we need a proper process to potential new comers to our country rather than at the border where we have to take them in. This will only encourage others to fly to the US-Canada major centres and enter through our borders. Should they get deported, who pays for that? Do we get ,compensation from Trump who will pay us with the wall money he'll receive from Mexico? WHO?
    So your stance is that we shouldn't grow our population at all because more people=more crime?

    Unless you have something specifically against people who haven't been here for an amount of time you deem long enough ("a first generation Canadian committed a crime, the horror!"), you should be equally mad at mothers who decide to have children right?

    Are you saying don't like new Canadians because they commit crimes, even though you haven't shown anything to suggest that they commit crimes at a higher rate than other Canadians? You can try and reword your point because right now it sounds like you don't like certain groups because of where they are from (ie. not Canada), which is pretty xenophobic.
    Its fair to say that people coming here from war torn countries represents a continuation of chaos and crime and misfortune, only, taking place now in Canada. Individuals that have had extended traumatic lives in other countries have difficulties adapting to peaceful society or even being law abiding. But its often the next generation, displaced, and with limited supports and social fabric that become an absolute mess


    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...rticle4365992/

    Then you get responses like this from the Somali community blaming everybody but the Somali community.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...gton-1.4351462

    I'll go as far as to say I find it offputting that individuals from war torn countries are telling us how we should run a country. Its not a good look for the Somali community, and that isn't understood either.

    Its hard to argue other than that this community has brought their learned strife and violence onto our streets. They then blame Canada for that violence.
    Last edited by Replacement; 27-09-2018 at 04:29 AM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  64. #64
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    1,179

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    How old are you may I ask before I answer that part for you?
    How is my age relevant?

    I'm not against sharing my age but I'm not going to if your intent is to tell me that I don't have enough real world experience to understand, or whatever.

  65. #65

    Default

    I have witnessed over time , as an immigrant of all immigration waves since i arrived to Canada to now how the immigration factor has contributed into the criminal layers here. It involves every color race and backgrounds, so no one group is excluded. The problem is the super few nefarious individuals have the ability to taint the mass of the same act. I get stereotyped into that realm quite often when I'm up north. I would get questions like inquiring which affiliate I have association to, or I should know a good source for this or that because of my Asian ethnicity. Is that fair for good human being such as myself? We have the responsibility to ensure for every Canadian and new comer an utmost sheltered view as possible from this. What do you suppose could happen if America is able to control it's border with Mexico? Will Vancouver and BC be ready for boat loads from South& Central America, and Mexico to land on their ocean fronts? We can't endorse ambiguity or we have Europe's delima. My heart and beliefs are for immigration, but a procedural immigration where we do our best to ensure we have the best humans- not monetary value. The last thing we need is an open door for the few to expand their existing networks here. We have enough of that problem with multi and first generations here already and adding layers to that cake will only create further problems that our tax money is already stretched thin. Your point, and a couple of others are short sighted with added perspectives. You folks are not wrong, you just saw it from a sheltered point of view; I saw this from the perspective of having gone through it... The amount Toronto and Quebec had to spend could have easily been a fraction of the cost to hire additional staffs to process paperwork. Our government didn't think this through, and I'm afraid the gate has already open which only time will tell. I hope I'm wrong.

    ^
    Your age factor has no baring on a perspective, but a perspective is more broaden if you knew the pattern over history which many don't see; or, they chose not to see or learn from.
    Last edited by ctzn-Ed; 27-09-2018 at 01:42 PM.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  66. #66
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    1,179

    Default

    I've spent more time than I care to admit making sure I understand issues from as broad of a perspective as possible, and age doesn't change that.

    In fact, I would argue my age gives me a perspective that you may not see, the state of immigrant population that is just entering the workforce. I have spent my entire life interacting with first and second generation immigrants who went through the Canadian school system, or arrived here for school. I don't see anything you talk about in your post at all, just Canadians who happen to be from somewhere else.

    I started writing more discussing what you said in your post, but I'll be honest I don't really see it worth my time seeing as I apparently can't see patterns without physically being present. I'll just say most of what I see is patterns of integration and acceptance and leave it at that.

  67. #67

    Default

    By all means open up. That is the whole issue of such dialogue in a civil manner. What would you like to understand from my perspective on that?
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  68. #68

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    If you want to point the finger at the source of crime, it's the population with the y chromosome by far.
    That's largely because men are used and abused more than any other demographic.

    Men get harsher prison sentences than women do (for similar crimes), men work themselves to death at society's most dangerous jobs, men pay the most taxes, men get financially cleaned-out by gold-digging or vindictive women, men lose custody of their own children due to biased family law, men have more addiction problems than women, more men are homeless than women (men get far less social support than women), men are degraded in all media more than women (men are always "stupid" in advertisements and TV shows, and are constantly being spoken down to by the "smart and wise" women), young boys in school who have lots of energy or aren't "feminine" enough are drugged-up on psych meds, men who get falsely accused by a woman for assaulting her have their entire lives ruined.

    And despite ALL of this, and despite women and men having equal rights in our society, men still unfairly shoulder more blame for society's ills than women ever will.

    If you are a man and you think men are a "problem", then YOU should set the example for everyone else and remove yourself from society first.

  69. #69
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,743

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    If you want to point the finger at the source of crime, it's the population with the y chromosome by far.
    That's largely because men are used and abused more than any other demographic.

    Men get harsher prison sentences than women do (for similar crimes), men work themselves to death at society's most dangerous jobs, men pay the most taxes, men get financially cleaned-out by gold-digging or vindictive women, men lose custody of their own children due to biased family law, men have more addiction problems than women, more men are homeless than women (men get far less social support than women), men are degraded in all media more than women (men are always "stupid" in advertisements and TV shows, and are constantly being spoken down to by the "smart and wise" women), young boys in school who have lots of energy or aren't "feminine" enough are drugged-up on psych meds, men who get falsely accused by a woman for assaulting her have their entire lives ruined.

    And despite ALL of this, and despite women and men having equal rights in our society, men still unfairly shoulder more blame for society's ills than women ever will.

    If you are a man and you think men are a "problem", then YOU should set the example for everyone else and remove yourself from society first.
    in what city in what province or state in what country on what continent on what planet are men "used and abused more than any other demographic"?

    your examples of what you consider "abuse" are nothing short of nonsense.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  70. #70

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    If you want to point the finger at the source of crime, it's the population with the y chromosome by far.
    That's largely because men are used and abused more than any other demographic.

    Men get harsher prison sentences than women do (for similar crimes), men work themselves to death at society's most dangerous jobs, men pay the most taxes, men get financially cleaned-out by gold-digging or vindictive women, men lose custody of their own children due to biased family law, men have more addiction problems than women, more men are homeless than women (men get far less social support than women), men are degraded in all media more than women (men are always "stupid" in advertisements and TV shows, and are constantly being spoken down to by the "smart and wise" women), young boys in school who have lots of energy or aren't "feminine" enough are drugged-up on psych meds, men who get falsely accused by a woman for assaulting her have their entire lives ruined.

    And despite ALL of this, and despite women and men having equal rights in our society, men still unfairly shoulder more blame for society's ills than women ever will.

    If you are a man and you think men are a "problem", then YOU should set the example for everyone else and remove yourself from society first.
    Interesting perspective. Seems very selective though. A woe is me view maybe?

    For instance, regarding men being more “used and abused“, I think you are ignoring the historic pressures on women to wilfully accept all the risks to them that were and are part and parcel of sex and pregnancy. The morbidity and mortality long associated with child birth seems to have long been ignored by men. Unless that is, that it was on balance the women that were demanding ever more sex and commensurate pregnancies. (Society often assigned such pragmatic specializations to the males and females, with the men assigned to die hunting, fishing, etc. but society often willfully worked women to their death as well. Many men also died fighting other men - still do. I doubt many tribal battles, like WWII had a strong underlying female influence. Most tribes fight out of the decisions of males.)

    I think you are also ignoring the centuries when women lacked any legal rights in marriage, property, etc. and consequently suffered abuse at their husband’s hands and glands.

    I think you are also ignoring a disproportionately higher frequency of male attacks on females (from younger relatives to strangers) compared to females attacking males. Here again, male predation includes using and abuses young males.

    On prison sentences, historically it’s been men passing judgement.
    On jobs, historically it’s been men making the hiring decisions.
    On taxes, historically it’s been men legislating the tax, inheritance and many other laws.



    “If you are a man and you think men are a "problem", then YOU should set the example for everyone else and remove yourself from society first.”
    As a man, I see no logical reason to remove myself from society. Men are part of the problem(s), a large maybe dispropartionate part, but they are not the only problem and because not all men engage in identical behaviour, it is flawed thinking to generalize across an entity that has spectrums of conditions.

    Nonetheless, with males it’s the difference from females in some or all of genes/testosterone/chromosome/expectations that indicate males have greater tendencies towards violence. Similarly, having had dogs as pets, I see some generizable differences in different breeds’ aggressiveness. The stats on Pitbulls indicate that that breed is more strongly associated with violent attacks. By far most are good pets but special rules are warranted. Same for men I’d say. Equal in theory is not the same as equal in reality.
    Last edited by KC; 28-09-2018 at 05:30 PM.

  71. #71

    Default

    Oh look, a drug kingpin. We should deport him back to his home country.

    Oh, wait...

    I guess this means we have to ban all people from Nova Scotia

    N.S. man accused of murder was a drug cartel kingpin, Colombian officials say

    Officials in South America say a Nova Scotia man accused of murder was allegedly one of the kingpins of a Colombian drug cartel before he was arrested on a Venezuelan beach and extradited back to Canada.


    The Office of the Attorney General of Colombia says in a press release that Steven Douglas Skinner, a former MMA fighter from the Halifax area awaiting trial on second-degree murder, organized a drug trafficking network called Morfhox with Daniel "El Loco" Barrera.



    https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/n-s-ma...-say-1.4113854

  72. #72

    Default

    I am OK with that. Ban all those eastern creeps and bums.

    LOL
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  73. #73
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,541

    Default

    ^^ I don't think there is any contradiction in saying that a country can deport foreigners who commit crimes, while also saying that they are obligated to continue housing their own citizens who commit similar crimes. That's pretty much the way it works everywhere in the world.

  74. #74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    ^^ I don't think there is any contradiction in saying that a country can deport foreigners who commit crimes, while also saying that they are obligated to continue housing their own citizens who commit similar crimes. That's pretty much the way it works everywhere in the world.
    But he's not saying deport people who commit crimes. He's saying that all immigrants should be banned because a very few of them commit crimes here.

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    I have witnessed over time , as an immigrant of all immigration waves since i arrived to Canada to now how the immigration factor has contributed into the criminal layers here.

  75. #75
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,541

    Default

    ^ Fair enough, but I still don't think we can extrapolate from how Canadians are treated to how foreigners should be treated.

    I don't think we should block immigration from the homelands of immigrants who have commited crimes in Canada. But that's NOT because we wouldn't do the same thing to people from Nova Scotia. There are all sorts of restrictions we place on foreigners coming into the country, that we don't place on Canadians migrating internally.

  76. #76

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    ^^ I don't think there is any contradiction in saying that a country can deport foreigners who commit crimes, while also saying that they are obligated to continue housing their own citizens who commit similar crimes. That's pretty much the way it works everywhere in the world.
    But he's not saying deport people who commit crimes. He's saying that all immigrants should be banned because a very few of them commit crimes here.

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    I have witnessed over time , as an immigrant of all immigration waves since i arrived to Canada to now how the immigration factor has contributed into the criminal layers here.
    What are you reading and what grade did you accomplished? "The immigrant factor" is classified as all immigrants. You need to stop your pathetic little applications of psychosis. My theme has been to continue a process in which it helps everyone and that includes immigrants. Don't ever go on a tangent on here again about us having to spent our tax dollar to fix your family addiction issues then. Incase you forgot, it's on the 'McDonald .Loft' issue. If you want the acute time line, it would have been when Katz purchased that building
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  77. #77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    ^ Fair enough, but I still don't think we can extrapolate from how Canadians are treated to how foreigners should be treated.

    I don't think we should block immigration from the homelands of immigrants who have commited crimes in Canada. But that's NOT because we wouldn't do the same thing to people from Nova Scotia. There are all sorts of restrictions we place on foreigners coming into the country, that we don't place on Canadians migrating internally.
    True but I prefer to treat people as people, not just as Canadian or Somali or Syrian or whatever. That includes not punishing the innocent for the crimes of others.

  78. #78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    If you want to point the finger at the source of crime, it's the population with the y chromosome by far.
    That's largely because men are used and abused more than any other demographic.

    Men get harsher prison sentences than women do (for similar crimes), men work themselves to death at society's most dangerous jobs, men pay the most taxes, men get financially cleaned-out by gold-digging or vindictive women, men lose custody of their own children due to biased family law, men have more addiction problems than women, more men are homeless than women (men get far less social support than women), men are degraded in all media more than women (men are always "stupid" in advertisements and TV shows, and are constantly being spoken down to by the "smart and wise" women), young boys in school who have lots of energy or aren't "feminine" enough are drugged-up on psych meds, men who get falsely accused by a woman for assaulting her have their entire lives ruined.

    And despite ALL of this, and despite women and men having equal rights in our society, men still unfairly shoulder more blame for society's ills than women ever will.

    If you are a man and you think men are a "problem", then YOU should set the example for everyone else and remove yourself from society first.
    Bette Midler would likely disagree with MrOilers:

    Bette Midler apologizes for calling women 'the n-word of the world'

    “She continued: "Raped, beaten, enslaved, married off, worked like dumb animals; denied education and inheritance; enduring the pain and danger of childbirth and life IN SILENCE for THOUSANDS of years They are the most disrespected creatures on earth." “

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/...ld/1529279002/
    Bolding mine

  79. #79

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •