5 ms·

Don't see much insight here. Canadians love immigrants (apparently more than the US, but do numbers really play that out)? Canadians love to travel, too, appare

Don't see much insight here. Canadians love immigrants (apparently more than the US, but do numbers really play that out)? Canadians love to travel, too, apparently. It's a lot of vague rah-rah PR between Trudeau (who is the master of that) and a major CEO.

throwaway613834 9y ago
I'm worried Canada is just going to go the same direction the US went w.r.t. immigrants, just with a delay. Edit: Seems people are misinterpreting what I wrote. I'm referring to the public's view of immigration, not immigration or immigration policy itself.
- nerdponx 9y ago
  What direction is that? Visa abuse by tech employers to bring in highly educated but cheap immigrants, xenophobia by the masses, and wage-enslavement of less-educated immigrants?
- Mikeb85 9y ago
  Go the same direction? Our (Canada) immigration laws have always been much tougher, and illegal immigration is treated like the crime that it actually is... Not to mention there's very real penalties for hiring workers that aren't legally allowed to work, and the authorities regularly enforce them.
  - deadmetheny 9y ago
    Canada's laws on immigration are sensible. If anything, the USA should be following their lead on actually enforcing the law and bringing the hammer down on people hiring illegal workers.
- sumitgt 9y ago
  One important thing that Canada gets right is the process to get PR. If you are well qualified, its dead simple to get a Green Card. As opposed to the US where if you are born from India, you have to wait 15-20 years for a Green Card due to country quotas.
  - ng12 9y ago
    What is "wrong" about that? It's a simple reality: there are way more people desiring to immigrate to the USA than the government thinks it can handle.
    - sumitgt 9y ago
      Yeah, but why not make it merit based? Currently it uses an arbitrary value of where you are born. This forces people from India to stay on H1-B for 15-20 years, and prevents them from easily changing jobs or opening a business.
      - ng12 9y ago
        There are lots of merit-based immigration programs (EB1, EB2, EB3, O1, etc). H1-B is a lottery by design; it's supposed to be the "labor pool" visa.
        sumitgt 9y ago
        I don't think you understand. EB2 actually has per-country caps. Once you are in the Eb2 queue, you have to wait 15-20 years if you were born in India. That is what needs to be fixed. The process should be completely merit based.
        throwaway613834 9y ago
        > EB2 actually has per-country caps. Once you are in the Eb2 queue, you have to wait 15-20 years if you were born in India. [...] The process should be completely merit based. Because... can I ask why, exactly?
        sumitgt 9y ago
        why what? Not sure which part of that quote you are referring to.
alva 9y ago
Canadian reputation as a haven for immigration is a very well engineered and effective meme. Child has autism? No immigration for you. They have pretty severe criteria for immigrants compared to other western countries. After the '16 election it was all out PR stating how open they are to immigrants, but look how they have very quietly been handling illegal crossings. The Canadian government deserves a lot of credit for this sleight of hand. They have been unbelievably effective in their PR.
- derefr 9y ago
  > Child has autism? No immigration for you. Is that unusual? I would expect most countries with both public healthcare, and disability assistance programs, to not let people immigrate if they have a pre-existing medical condition that will either cost the public healthcare system boatloads of money, or will mean that they'll never be able to hold down a productive (i.e. tax-paying) job, thus putting them "on the dole" of the disability assistance program for the rest of their lives. Not saying it's a nice stance—but it's the norm, not the exception, in welfare states, no?
  - alva 9y ago
    > Is that unusual? That specific Canadian criteria is particularly strict compared to others. In the UK an immigrant is allowed in even if they may place a larger than average burden on health/social services (autism would be covered usually in this case), but may face rejection if they are highly likely to require "major medical treatment" or infectious. It is quite fuzzy, but far more liberal than the Canadian system. > or will mean that they'll never be able to hold down a productive (i.e. tax-paying) job When you look carefully at a number of Western countries, this is not as important as you think it might be! In the short/medium term (up to 20 years), many countries are not expecting the 1st generation to be anywhere close to net-contributors. The hope is to compensate for the major age demographic shifts in the west, 2nd gen. immigrants might be able to compensate for the huge welfare state. Of course, the 1st gen will also be eligible for pensions/social security/healthcare etc. It is a gamble.
- 52-6F-62 9y ago
0xbear 9y ago
Canada basically has the immigration regime Trump is proposing: strictly skill based, no illegals allowed. I know, because before immigrating to the US I’ve looked into it, and the US was markedly easier for a skilled immigrant (and I suspect for anyone unskilled who can cross the border from the south).
graeme 9y ago
Per capita, Canada takes far more immigrants than the US. I believe it’s 300,000 vs the US with 1,000,000. But Canada has 1/10th the population, so per capita it’s about 3x. Massive difference over time.
- busterarm 9y ago
  Canada also has about 1/3 of its population living in the area around Toronto and smartly realizes that if they want any kind of serious development of this massive mass of land they have, they're going to need outside help.

throwaway613834 9y ago

I'm worried Canada is just going to go the same direction the US went w.r.t. immigrants, just with a delay. Edit: Seems people are misinterpreting what I wrote. I'm referring to the public's view of immigration, not immigration or immigration policy itself.

nerdponx 9y ago
What direction is that? Visa abuse by tech employers to bring in highly educated but cheap immigrants, xenophobia by the masses, and wage-enslavement of less-educated immigrants?
Mikeb85 9y ago
Go the same direction? Our (Canada) immigration laws have always been much tougher, and illegal immigration is treated like the crime that it actually is... Not to mention there's very real penalties for hiring workers that aren't legally allowed to work, and the authorities regularly enforce them.
- deadmetheny 9y ago
  Canada's laws on immigration are sensible. If anything, the USA should be following their lead on actually enforcing the law and bringing the hammer down on people hiring illegal workers.
sumitgt 9y ago
One important thing that Canada gets right is the process to get PR. If you are well qualified, its dead simple to get a Green Card. As opposed to the US where if you are born from India, you have to wait 15-20 years for a Green Card due to country quotas.
- ng12 9y ago
  What is "wrong" about that? It's a simple reality: there are way more people desiring to immigrate to the USA than the government thinks it can handle.
  - sumitgt 9y ago
    Yeah, but why not make it merit based? Currently it uses an arbitrary value of where you are born. This forces people from India to stay on H1-B for 15-20 years, and prevents them from easily changing jobs or opening a business.
    - ng12 9y ago
      There are lots of merit-based immigration programs (EB1, EB2, EB3, O1, etc). H1-B is a lottery by design; it's supposed to be the "labor pool" visa.
      - sumitgt 9y ago
        I don't think you understand. EB2 actually has per-country caps. Once you are in the Eb2 queue, you have to wait 15-20 years if you were born in India. That is what needs to be fixed. The process should be completely merit based.
        throwaway613834 9y ago
        > EB2 actually has per-country caps. Once you are in the Eb2 queue, you have to wait 15-20 years if you were born in India. [...] The process should be completely merit based. Because... can I ask why, exactly?
        sumitgt 9y ago
        why what? Not sure which part of that quote you are referring to.

alva 9y ago

Canadian reputation as a haven for immigration is a very well engineered and effective meme. Child has autism? No immigration for you. They have pretty severe criteria for immigrants compared to other western countries. After the '16 election it was all out PR stating how open they are to immigrants, but look how they have very quietly been handling illegal crossings. The Canadian government deserves a lot of credit for this sleight of hand. They have been unbelievably effective in their PR.

derefr 9y ago
> Child has autism? No immigration for you. Is that unusual? I would expect most countries with both public healthcare, and disability assistance programs, to not let people immigrate if they have a pre-existing medical condition that will either cost the public healthcare system boatloads of money, or will mean that they'll never be able to hold down a productive (i.e. tax-paying) job, thus putting them "on the dole" of the disability assistance program for the rest of their lives. Not saying it's a nice stance—but it's the norm, not the exception, in welfare states, no?
- alva 9y ago
  > Is that unusual? That specific Canadian criteria is particularly strict compared to others. In the UK an immigrant is allowed in even if they may place a larger than average burden on health/social services (autism would be covered usually in this case), but may face rejection if they are highly likely to require "major medical treatment" or infectious. It is quite fuzzy, but far more liberal than the Canadian system. > or will mean that they'll never be able to hold down a productive (i.e. tax-paying) job When you look carefully at a number of Western countries, this is not as important as you think it might be! In the short/medium term (up to 20 years), many countries are not expecting the 1st generation to be anywhere close to net-contributors. The hope is to compensate for the major age demographic shifts in the west, 2nd gen. immigrants might be able to compensate for the huge welfare state. Of course, the 1st gen will also be eligible for pensions/social security/healthcare etc. It is a gamble.
52-6F-62 9y ago

0xbear 9y ago

Canada basically has the immigration regime Trump is proposing: strictly skill based, no illegals allowed. I know, because before immigrating to the US I’ve looked into it, and the US was markedly easier for a skilled immigrant (and I suspect for anyone unskilled who can cross the border from the south).

graeme 9y ago

Per capita, Canada takes far more immigrants than the US. I believe it’s 300,000 vs the US with 1,000,000. But Canada has 1/10th the population, so per capita it’s about 3x. Massive difference over time.

busterarm 9y ago
Canada also has about 1/3 of its population living in the area around Toronto and smartly realizes that if they want any kind of serious development of this massive mass of land they have, they're going to need outside help.