REVscene Automotive Forum
Page 19 of 469 « First 9101112131415161718 19 2021222324252627282969119 Last »
Show 25 post(s) from this thread on one page

REVscene Automotive Forum (https://www.revscene.net/forums/)
-   Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events (https://www.revscene.net/forums/vancouver-off-topic-current-events_50/)
-   -   Canadian politics thread (https://www.revscene.net/forums/715648-canadian-politics-thread.html)

Hondaracer 08-16-2019 06:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.HappySilp (Post 8956935)
Don't worry people will vote base of the PM's new look. All JT have to do is get a new haircut put on a pair of different socks and people will vote for him.

Last elections I literally have co workers and friends voted for JT base on his looks......
At least they voted, I guess

welfare 08-27-2019 05:30 AM
So it looks like questioning the number of migrants the country takes in is too controversial a subject and won't be tolerated in the current year

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...nier-1.5259538

Quote:
The owner of billboards currently showcasing ads that seek to promote the People's Party of Canada's controversial stance on immigration reversed course on Sunday, saying the company would take the material down in response to "overwhelming" criticism.

The ads, featuring a photo of party leader Maxime Bernier, the slogan "Say NO to mass immigration" and a call to vote for his party, started popping up across the country late last week. They were criticized nearly immediately as promoting anti-immigrant rhetoric.

Petitions have since sprung up calling on billboard owners Pattison Outdoor Advertising to take the ads down, arguing that they violate the company's own code of conduct.


The company released two statements on Sunday, the first of which said that people who have a problem with the ads should take it up with the advertiser, True North Strong & Free Advertising Corp. The statement suggested they reviewed the ad content and it did not violate the Ad Standards of Canada (ASC) code or their own policies.

"We take a neutral position on ads that comply with the ASC code as we believe Canadians do not want us to be the judge or arbiter of what the public can or cannot see," the company said in a statement circulated on their social media accounts.

"Should advertising elicit a public debate, we encourage Canadians to voice their opinions directly to the advertiser who placed the message as it is our policy that their contact information must be a legible part of the ad."

2nd company statement
But later in the day, the company issued a second statement saying that while the billboards didn't violate any policy, they would come down nonetheless.

Manic! 08-27-2019 09:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by welfare (Post 8958217)
So it looks like questioning the number of migrants the country takes in is too controversial a subject and won't be tolerated in the current year

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...nier-1.5259538
And you are surprised? LOL. Cons are done.

https://scontent.fyvr4-1.fna.fbcdn.n...b5&oe=5DD521EC

Traum 08-27-2019 10:02 AM
I dunno who within the People's Party approved that ad -- I dunno what their original intention might be, but the presentation totally came out wrong.

What the heck does Bernier / People's Party mean by "no to mass immigration" anyway?
Canada is a country built on immigration, and will continue to be a country that relies on immigration to keep the country going. So why is Bernier / People's Party against immigration?

Manic! 08-27-2019 10:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Traum (Post 8958239)
I dunno who within the People's Party approved that ad -- I dunno what their original intention might be, but the presentation totally came out wrong.

What the heck does Bernier / People's Party mean by "no to mass immigration" anyway?
Canada is a country built on immigration, and will continue to be a country that relies on immigration to keep the country going. So why is Bernier / People's Party against immigration?
No one in the party approved it. It was done by a group called True North Strong & Free Advertising. Mad Max does agree with message.

https://www.nationalobserver.com/201...ion-billboards

welfare 08-27-2019 11:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Traum (Post 8958239)
I dunno who within the People's Party approved that ad -- I dunno what their original intention might be, but the presentation totally came out wrong.

What the heck does Bernier / People's Party mean by "no to mass immigration" anyway?
Canada is a country built on immigration, and will continue to be a country that relies on immigration to keep the country going. So why is Bernier / People's Party against immigration?
By 2041 metro vancouver will have an estimated population increase of 1 million. If you think infrastructure, housing, cost of living, and healthcare are strained now, wait until you see what over 1/3 increase does.

Maybe a discussion on sustainable immigration is warranted

Manic! 08-27-2019 11:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by welfare (Post 8958248)
By 2041 metro vancouver will have an estimated population increase of 1 million. If you think infrastructure, housing, cost of living, and healthcare are strained now, wait until you see what over 1/3 increase does.

Maybe a discussion on sustainable immigration is warranted
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dn5sad4UwAA0d-X.jpg

Jmac 08-27-2019 01:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Traum (Post 8958239)
I dunno who within the People's Party approved that ad -- I dunno what their original intention might be, but the presentation totally came out wrong.

What the heck does Bernier / People's Party mean by "no to mass immigration" anyway?
Canada is a country built on immigration, and will continue to be a country that relies on immigration to keep the country going. So why is Bernier / People's Party against immigration?
I think it’s more in reference to the mass refugee influx that Trudeau took on in his first year that was overly ambitious and not particularly well executed.

Canada needs immigration to survive, especially as the baby boomers enter retirement and many millennials/post-millennials aren’t able to afford to have families.

Controlled immigration is a given. You wouldn’t want to double the population in a decade as infrastructure, economy, etc simply wouldn’t support it and you’d have absolute chaos. But I don’t think any party is proposing that?

Infiniti 08-27-2019 01:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by welfare (Post 8958248)
Maybe a discussion on sustainable immigration is warranted
Define "sustainable" immigration.

welfare 08-27-2019 02:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infiniti (Post 8958273)
Define "sustainable" immigration.
Do you think increasing immigration to one million every three years is sustainable? With how unaffordable housing is already?
67% of Canadians polled don't believe so.
So why is it even "controversial" to question?

If you believe more immigration is needed, fine. You vote for that. But it shouldn't be a controversial discussion to have. It's not an immoral thing to be weary of.

Bouncing Bettys 08-27-2019 02:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Traum (Post 8958239)
I dunno who within the People's Party approved that ad -- I dunno what their original intention might be, but the presentation totally came out wrong.

What the heck does Bernier / People's Party mean by "no to mass immigration" anyway?
Canada is a country built on immigration, and will continue to be a country that relies on immigration to keep the country going. So why is Bernier / People's Party against immigration?
Why do so many people miss or dishonestly omit the word "mass" and then go on to ask why Bernier and the PPC are against immigration, as if it means all immigration?

A good many people are all for immigration of people who go through the proper channels, are educated/skilled and of immediate use in Canada, and who wish to participate and endorse Canadian ideals and laws.

BIC_BAWS 08-27-2019 05:05 PM


Is he high? LMFAO


Also, interestingly, sounds like there's not much news about the upcoming election. Previously, there were breakdowns of the different platforms. I can't seem to find those for the upcoming election.

Infiniti 08-28-2019 03:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by welfare (Post 8958276)
Do you think increasing immigration to one million every three years is sustainable? With how unaffordable housing is already?
67% of Canadians polled don't believe so.
So why is it even "controversial" to question?

If you believe more immigration is needed, fine. You vote for that. But it shouldn't be a controversial discussion to have. It's not an immoral thing to be weary of.
I never took a stance on immigration. I merely asked you to define "sustainable" immigration.

underscore 08-28-2019 04:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by welfare (Post 8958248)
By 2041 metro vancouver will have an estimated population increase of 1 million. If you think infrastructure, housing, cost of living, and healthcare are strained now, wait until you see what over 1/3 increase does.

Maybe a discussion on sustainable immigration is warranted
Canada exists beyond the GVRD, and not everyone is moving there anyways. The birth rate has dropped to 1.6, we need immigrants.

welfare 08-28-2019 09:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infiniti (Post 8958410)
I never took a stance on immigration. I merely asked you to define "sustainable" immigration.
Quote:
Originally Posted by underscore (Post 8958412)
Canada exists beyond the GVRD, and not everyone is moving there anyways. The birth rate has dropped to 1.6, we need immigrants.
Majority of immigrants settle in one of three places; Toronto, Montreal, or Vancouver. Given the percentage of Vancouver that is composed of immigrants (40%), of the three, I'd bet Vancouver is the main destination.

No one is implying that immigration isn't needed (though it is debatable whether lowering population equals lower gdp per capita).

Some quick math:
In order to sustain the population figures you need a birthrate of 2.1. We're at 1.6. The average annual number of deaths in Canada is between 250-300,000. We'll go the high end and say 3. 300,000 x .5 = 150,000.
Oddly enough,the exact immigration figures that Bernier is proposing.
So I'd say 150 would be a sustainable number.

welfare 08-28-2019 11:06 PM
Here's some billboards no one will complain about Kappa

https://www.narcity.com/u/2019/08/28..._1200x630.jpeg

https://postmediatorontosun.files.wo...billboards.jpg

Bouncing Bettys 08-29-2019 12:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by underscore (Post 8958412)
Canada exists beyond the GVRD, and not everyone is moving there anyways. The birth rate has dropped to 1.6, we need immigrants.
Thought this thread when Bernier retweeted this recently:
Quote:
"Save the planet and don't have children" - The left

"Canadians aren't having enough children and we need mass immigration" - also the left
One of the responses:
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v...psd6wp21wb.jpg

Manic! 08-29-2019 12:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by welfare (Post 8958453)
Here's some billboards no one will complain about Kappa



https://postmediatorontosun.files.wo...billboards.jpg
Bullshit

https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...eau-government

Ontario watch is actually the The Canada Growth Council. Why the 2 names? What are they hiding?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EADdsG1U4AA9IrT.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EADdytrU0AA27Aw.jpg

welfare 08-29-2019 05:22 AM
Increased immigration presents real problems for everyone. Including those that immigrate here.

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/col...al-report-says

Quote:

Douglas Todd: Canada struggling to 'absorb' immigrants, internal report says

Assimilation? Integration? Absorption?

There’s nothing like a dispute over words to get Canadians to pay attention – and in this case that might not be a bad thing.

This month Manitoba responded to two complaints by barring a driver from continuing to use his two-year-old licence plate “ASIMIL8.”

The word “assimilate” has been used to describe the process by which Indigenous people and immigrants could mix into the larger culture. Some Canadians consider it offensive, arguing it doesn’t allow room for cultural differences.

Assimilation has been largely superseded by the word “integration.” And now Canadian government immigration officials are talking about a new concept: “absorptive capacity.”

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada officials are digesting a significant report that defines absorptive capacity as “a two-way process that encourages adjustment on the part of both the newcomer and the receiving society.”

Indeed, the internal report, obtained under an access to information request, shows that immigration analysts are worried that the “absorptive capacity” of Canada is going down.

“Declining outcomes of recent immigrants have shown that integration is not automatic,” says the report, which surveys emerging problems with immigration flows and the pressure it’s putting on Canadian sectors.

While some Canadians behave as if it’s xenophobic to question immigration policy, immigration rates and their results, the sweeping in-house government report, titled Evidence-Based Levels and Mix: Absorptive Capacity, does exactly that.

The report, obtained by Vancouver lawyer Richard Kurland, shows integration of immigrants into Canada, despite relative success here compared to most countries, is faltering $– in regards to housing, jobs, health care, education, religious tensions, ethnic enclaves and transit.

With Canada now accepting 300,000 immigrants a year, in addition to accommodating 700,000 international students and temporary foreign workers, the 2014 report, which has no listed author, recognizes real problems...

westopher 08-29-2019 07:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouncing Bettys (Post 8958458)
Thought this thread when Bernier retweeted this recently:
One of the responses:
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v...psd6wp21wb.jpg
I wonder what contributes more to consumption of resources. Someone who already lives on this planet moving somewhere else, or an entirely new human existing in addition to the person staying in their country of origin?
Just kidding I don’t wonder that because I understand the absolute lower level basics of human existence.

unit 08-29-2019 07:31 AM
conservatives bashing liberals for poor treatment of women? :awwyeah:

Manic! 08-29-2019 10:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by welfare (Post 8958460)
Increased immigration presents real problems for everyone. Including those that immigrate here.

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/col...al-report-says


https://vancouversun.com/opinion/col...after-25-years

Quote:

An internal immigration department document shows that, after 25 years in the country, a typical refugee is earning as much or more than the Canadian norm, which is about $45,000 a year.

welfare 08-29-2019 10:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manic! (Post 8958479)
That's great but it doesn't refute the concerns of integration or population increase at our rate

Manic! 08-29-2019 11:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by welfare (Post 8958482)
That's great but it doesn't refute the concerns of integration or population increase at our rate
Instead of trying to get immigrants to integrate maybe Canadians should try being more like them. They seem to be doing pretty well for themselves.

welfare 08-29-2019 01:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manic! (Post 8958489)
Instead of trying to get immigrants to integrate maybe Canadians should try being more like them. They seem to be doing pretty well for themselves.
Yea why bother having any common culture, language, values or identity at all? Not like any of that matters for a country.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:02 AM.
Page 19 of 469 « First 9101112131415161718 19 2021222324252627282969119 Last »
Show 25 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net