Category Archives: Uncategorized

The Vancouver Sun & Self Censorship — Challenging the Cult of “Diversity”

Posted on by
The Vancouver Sun & Self Censorship — Challenging the Cult of “Diversity”
The Vancouver Sun published this article, then retracted it within hours. I got this URL from Duck Duck Go … Google shows links to the controversy, but doesn’t show the bit of “bad-think” !! — Gordon Watson

 

EXCELLENT OP ED in the Vancouver Sun on how “Ethnic diversity harms a country’s social trust and economic well-being” was scrubbed from the internet in less than 24 hours

Thankfully, an archived version still exists. Canada should say goodbye to diversity, tolerance and inclusion to rebuild trust in one another and start accepting a new norm for immigration policy — compatibility, cohesion and social trust, says professor Mark Hecht.

(Am posting the entire article in case the archived version also disappears)

Archive (h/t Marvin W) Sometimes they get too much publicity, but can you blame them? The Danes just seem to get things right. But even the Danes can make mistakes. A decade ago the fundamental belief among Danes toward Muslim immigrants was that these newcomers would see how wonderful Denmark was and naturally want to become Danish as quickly as possible.
This turned out to be naively wrong. At least half of all Muslims polled across various western European countries believe today that their Shariah law is more important than national law, according to the Gatestone Institute. In other words, a not insignificant proportion of Muslim immigrants have no intention of assimilating into any western society, including Denmark.
Danes have pushed back.
Losing the integrity of their society — one of the best in the world by all measures — was on the line. Requirements to obtain citizenship increased. A new insistence that immigrant children go to Danish public schools instead of religious schools was implemented. Social benefits were rescinded for those who didn’t comply. This was only the beginning. But the Danes are not alone.
Many western nations assumed that increasing ethnic and cultural diversity through immigration would be beneficial. The dogma of diversity, tolerance and inclusion assumed that all members of the society wanted to be included as equal citizens. Yet, instead of diversity being a blessing, many found that they’ve ended up with a lot of arrogant people living in their countries with no intention of letting go of their previous cultures, animosities, preferences, and pretensions.

Let’s give the devil his due. Diversity, tolerance and inclusion was actually a commendable perspective. It assumed the dominant society was leaving people out of full participation. It was a valid critique. In response to inequalities, real or otherwise, measures were taken that would include everyone.
Affirmative action, political correctness and anti-bias training became the tools for inculcating tolerance and inclusion. Helpful? Somewhat. Yet, the most important question was overlooked: What if some did not actually want to be included?
Denmark recognized this problem long ago, and is now finding practical solutions. It knows what it was — a country that worked very well when it was homogeneous, where everyone wanted to be and was a part of the society. They spoke the same language, understood the same customs and traditions, and held the same beliefs. The result was that people trusted each other and the economy flourished.
In fact, social trust corresponds more closely than any other factor to predicting economic prosperity. Harvard economists Alberto Alesina and co-authors from a paper titled, Fractionalization, argued that greater diversity leads to stunted economic growth. In other words, diversity is a weakness as far as the economy is concerned.

In 1981 The World Values Survey began an investigation into cross-cultural beliefs, values and motivations, and has since shown that societies with high social trust are not only more economically productive but also happier. The most successful are homogeneous countries, not the diverse ones.
Denmark and the rest of Scandinavia is always at the top of those rankings. They, shine a beacon on the fact that trust is what makes society great. Interestingly, Scandinavian countries are becoming even more trusting. Canada, Great Britain, the U.S. and Australia are all going in the opposite direction. In Canada, we are becoming less trusting of one other.
If a society wants high social trust and the benefits of stability, productivity, and happiness, there are apparently two factors that stand out. According to macrosociology researcher Jan Delhey at Otto von Geuricke University in Magdeburg, Germany — Protestantism and low ethnic diversity — are the top two criteria.

Setting aside the part about Protestantism, low ethnic diversity as a single factor fits Denmark, Japan and Hungary quite well. Social trust is, unsurprisingly, relatively high in all. But not all those countries are Protestant. There are other factors at work.
So is it possible for a country to have diversity and social trust at the same time? Studies by researchers Hooghe, Reeskens and Stolle in a 2008 paper indicate that ethnic diversity in and of itself is not inherently destabilizing, at a national level. A country can indeed have multiple ethnicities and still have high social trust. But there is a catch.
It is at the neighbourhood scale where high ethnic diversity erodes trust, according to researchers Peter Thisted Dinesson and Kim Mannemar Sønderskov from 2015. The more direct the interaction with diversity, the more social trust drops. This accounts for why people segregate themselves into ethnic enclaves. People like to be around others who are the same as them. Those overwhelmed by newcomers that are not like themselves, lose trust and soon move out.

This is quite a paradox. Diversity at a national level does not necessarily erode trust but at the neighbourhood level it does. How can this be?
Switzerland is a good example of this paradox in action. With four recognized ethnicities — German, French, Italian and Romansh — they also have high levels of social trust. How? It’s simple. Each ethnicity has its own geography and government. It does not mix ethnicities, nor does one try to control the others.
If a country wants diversity, expect enclaves to form. This may work out fine in the long run, as it has in Switzerland. Or it may turn into a bloody mess, as it repeatedly does in the Balkans. The other option is low diversity. Denmark had the latter. It worked well. Now, it wants it back again and that will require its immigrants to integrate. Those who don’t will have to leave.

So, is excluding certain people from one’s society a requirement? The short answer is  absolutely. The long and more reasonable answer is if you do let people into your country then make sure they hold similar values — compatibility. Make sure they want to fit into your society fully and completely — cohesion. With these two requirements satisfied, and with a sprinkle of Protestantism, the country will be well on its way to generating high levels of social trust.
Can Canada learn from Denmark? The jury is out. But the minimum requirement is that we say goodbye to diversity, tolerance and inclusion if we wish to be a society that can rebuild the trust we used to have in one another and start accepting a new norm for immigration policy — compatibility, cohesion and social trust.

Mark Hecht teaches human, political, and conservation geography at Mount Royal University in Calgary and has written extensively on issues of national identity and resource conflict.

Trudeau’s Multiculturalism “HARMING Canada” Says Muslim-Canadian Journalist

Posted on by

Trudeau’s Multiculturalism “HARMING Canada” Says Muslim-Canadian Journalist

Trudeau’s Multiculturalism “HARMING Canada” Says Muslim-Canadian Journalist

“Unfortunately, when multiculturalism becomes the foundation of politics, the very essence of debate gets relegated from the common good of the country to the medieval instinct OF THE TRIBE.”

What!?  Who made this statement– the leader of a white supremacy party in Canada? Not at all–these words come from Tarek Fatah, conservative Muslim and Canadian social critic.

This fellow is on the right track. CAP commend Mr. Fatah for this statement. The man is non-white, and non-Christian. Do we therefore default to the position that he is a trouble-maker within our society? No, we do not. Yet, organizations such as ours are constantly branded racists and bigots. Whatever–CAP do not give a damn.

Liberal MP Ramesh Sangha, who represents Ontario’s Brampton Centre riding, dropped a bombshell during a recent Punjabi-language television interview where he was quoted as saying: “There cannot be two opinions that the Liberal party is pandering (to) Khalistan supporters.”

The interviewer asked Sangha – himself a Sikh – if he thought the party had a “soft corner” for Khalistanis(Sikh National separatists. Sangha replied that “it does.”

Multiculturalism is Canada’s most overlooked social ideology, as well as  the most profound vehicle for social change in the history of Canada. Amount of press dedicated to the subject? In 40 years, almost NOTHING at all.

Canada happens to be one of the very few nations on earth with a policy of multiculturalism referenced within its constitution. The related piece of government legislation is the Multicultural  Act of 1988.

As an aside, within Chinese numerology, the number “8” means wealth and financial prosperity. Did government plan in advance to pass the legislation in the year 1988? Would not surprise CAP in the least– Multiculturalism is a product of Trudeau-family Liberal-Globalism, after all.

What is it about the “multicult,” or diversity which has been held back from the purview of millions of Canadians for the past forty years? Let’s take a quick look:

For one thing, Multicult policy from a financial view is a giant-sized transfer of Canadian tax-dollars. Hundreds of million– BILLIONS over the decades, has been passed to Third World immigration, multicultural, and refugee non-profit organizations.

This is how Chinese, Sikh, and Muslim organizations succeeded in establishing themselves as “power-players” within Canadian society. One organization, SUCCESS Immigrant Services of Vancouver, BC, receives $23 Million per year from the provincial government alone. They are funded by all three levels of government–municipal, provincial and federal.

Despite their appearance at present, for at least 30 years this group focused exclusively on migrants from China. One group, one focus, one mission--to import Chinese migrants to Canada. A report from their website(they removed it) boasted about the percentage of European migrants they have assisted– a whopping 1% of their clientele.  There’s multiculturalism for you– SUCCESS for decades was 100% uni-cultural. 

There are thousands of groups like this in Canada. Then, we turn to the b-side. CAP once worked with a Polish-Canadian non-profit. We viewed one request for government funding for their non-profit. $8,000 dollarsdenied

 

Darn, that multicult stuff really leads to social equality, eh? The whole affair is a farce. CAP will tell you why: Because there is NOTHING multicultural about Canadian multiculturalism.

Huh? What is this guy on? Let us explain. This concept means “multi”— as in, “many, manifold, a variety. Now, the fact is that the ideology is in no way inclusive of European Canada. No pride in being a Canadian of Ukrainian, German, or Polish Canadian. No money either.

Okay, so whitey is OUT. That’s a big segment of society, no? Then we consider the communities who are a component of this anti-European diversity movement. Does this adhere to authentic diversity? After all, that was the goal of the program after Pierre Trudeau FORCED the policy on Canada in the first place.

Not really. The main players are three: Sikh, Muslim and Chinese-Canada. What is so diverse about this? Not much. Rather, what we have here is a license for these wealthy and powerful communities to battle it out for power and control within society. Under Justin Trudeau, this is what is occurring as we speak.

Then, Trudeau puts on a Silk Sikh outfit, does a few Bollywood dance moves, and shouts “Diversity Is Our Strength.”

CAP will amend this by one word- “Diversity is A strength.” Big difference.  Yes, it is a strength–for some. Who are the “some?” They are the most well-funded, organized, wealthy and powerful special interest ethnic communities in Canada. The ones with the hundreds of multicult organizations sucking up the most tax dollars.

This is Multicult in the real world. It is not Trudeau, Hussen, Butts, Morneau and Khalid multiculturalism. This brand is a giant LIE. A deception designed to empower some, and DISEMPOWER others.

Multiculturalism as a political ideology began in 1971— a full 47 years ago. Think back–have you ever ONCE read anything like this within Canadian media? CAP knows that the answer is “no”–because we have followed these issues for the past 37 years.

We have now discussed who benefits. Now, let’s look at who suffers. Anglophone Canada, because we are being trans-itioned into minority status by government. Christian Canada, because Justin Trudeau is dedicated to one religion only-Islam. Nationalists, Patriots, Conservatives, Francophones– white people, basically.

To add insult-to-injury, PM Trudeau has personally trans-itioned Anglophone Canada into a motley gang of racists, bigots and xenophobes. Would this be anywhere near as extreme if Papa Pierre had not unilaterally forced the policy upon society?

Yes, much less–in fact the branding-like-cattle racist tag of Trudeau, may not have occurred at all.  This is the story of multiculturalism in Canada. It is NOTHING like the manner in which the ideology is portrayed by government and media.

It is, in fact, a stone-cold deception of the people of Canada. Those portrayed as victims are in reality, the privileged. Those branded as oppressors are in reality the victims.

Canada–you have been hood-winked. Multiculturalism is destructive for specific segments of society. The policy was founded by Pierre Trudeau, and hit out of the ball-park by Justin Trudeau.

Then, Justin gets elected for a second term. Insane, isn’t it?

— BRAD SALZBERG

 

“When the godfather of the European Union, Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, published the plan for a united Europe and the ethnocide of the peoples of Europe, the encouragement of mass non-white immigration was central to the plot. — Nick Griffin

Posted on by
“When the godfather of the European Union, Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, published the plan for a united Europe and the ethnocide of the peoples of Europe, the encouragement of mass non-white immigration was central to the plot. — Nick Griffin
Nick Griffin blasts EU over European genocide
 
North West England MEP and British National Party Chairman Nick Griffin tells the truth on immigration sparking huge row with Portuguese Socialist MEP during debate on Asylum “When the godfather of the European Union, Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, published the plan for a united Europe and the ethnocide of the peoples of Europe, the encouragement of mass non-white immigration was central to the plot. Since then, an unholy alliance of leftists, capitalists and Zionist supremacists has schemed to promote immigration and miscegenation with the deliberate aim of breeding us out of existence in our homelands. As indigenous resistance to this human genetic-modification industry grows, the criminal elite seeks new ways to camouflage their project. First, their immigrant pawns were temporary guest workers; then it was a multiracial experiment; then they were refugees, and then the answer to a shrinking population. Different excuses, different lies — and asylum is just another one. But the real aim stays the same: the biggest genocide in human history, the final solution to the Christian European problem. This crime demands a new set of Nuremberg trials, and you people will be in the dock.” Nobody else would dare tell it how it is like this.

Behind the Smiling Mask of Andrew Scheer’s Conservative Party

Posted on by

Behind the Smiling Mask of Andrew Scheer’s Conservative Party

             Scheer and muzzies

 

You might recall seeing a photo months ago (above) of Andrew Scheer standing with— reportedly—some of the most dangerous Islamic leaders in the country. Of course, many of Scheer’s apologists would dismiss the embarrassing photo op by saying that he was simply unaware of the sordid connections of the people posing next to him.  But this video indicates that Mr. Scheer was not only aware of who these people are, but he has maintained close personal contact with them:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOfyR-nmmEE

 

http://www.riseoftheislamist.com/

 

After seeing this photo and viewing the video, one is moved to ask some serious questions. Questions like:

 

Is this what a leader of a so called “Conservative” Party looks like?

 

Is this what a “Conservative” Party stands for?

 

In my estimation, a “conservative” should want to conserve our Western, European and Christian heritage—not the culture of Islam, a totalitarian blend of religion and politics, an ideology whose holy text prescribes “hijra”, conquest by immigration.  https://www.cspii.org/blog/immigration-islamic-doctrine-and-history

 

Islamophobia? A phobia is an irrational fear. Let’s not fool ourselves. A fear of this ideology is entirely rational, as 1400 years of history attests.  It should be pointed out, however, that there is a difference between attacking an ideology and maligning all of its adherents. Most adherents are ordinary law-abiding folk who, like all citizens, deserve full protection from harm or discrimination under the law. But while individuals deserve protection, ideas and ideologies don’t.  Belief systems are fair game. It took a long time for Western democracies to dispatch laws against blasphemy, but it seems that politicians and the lobbies they pander to are intent on resurrecting them. Ironically they are quick to warn us of the spectre of violent “white nationalist” extremism while simultaneously courting the votes of the apostles of violent extremism in mosques.

 

As an indefatigable  researcher noted several months ago, the “Conservative” Party has approved three current federal candidates with ties to Islamic extremism (and a sitting Conservative Senator as well). “The party has been well advised of the background of these individuals and yet, to date, have not taken action to remove them. The recent report of Andrew Scheer’s alignment with radical Imams is of growing concern.”

 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1kGOTvZxaKiYVAOpLhWXxC07x0HBA0AJ4

 

She further notes that “A Conservative Candidate, Ghada Melek, is a Coptic Christian currently being unfairly targeted by the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM) who are calling on Melek to drop out of the race “following reports about her past social media posts,” which the NCCM deems to be “Islamophobic.”   

https://www.nccm.ca/nccm-calls-for-conservative-candidate-ghada-meleks-resignation/

 

The story by Christine Williams can be found here:

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2019/08/canada-under-siege-islamic-supremacist-onslaught-against-christian-federal-conservative-candidate

 

After reading this account one is moved to ask “What position will Andrew Scheer take?”  Now that is the $64,000 question, isn’t it?

 

The federal election is fast approaching and many longstanding Conservative members have been fearful of splitting the vote since Maxime Bernier decided to step away from the party a year ago, a decision that most pundits described as foolhardy and suicidal.  But as we bear witness to the shameless pandering, opportunism and corruption unfolding among the top echelons of the Conservative,  Mr. Bernier’s decision to form a party is looking more and more like a courageous demonstration of integrity and principle.  

 

Bernier’s conspicuous disregard for political correctness and clear articulation of what many ordinary Canadians believe has attracted supporters from across the political spectrum, but many traditional Conservative voters hesitate to make the leap because they hear the voice of the Conservative Party establishment whispering in their ears : “A vote for Bernier is  a vote for Trudeau”, or in the case of my own constituency, “A vote for the Peoples’ Party of Canada is a vote for the despicable NDP incumbent, Rachel Blainey.”

 

 The time-worn rationalization for strategic voting simply put is that we must not “split the vote” because dethroning (fill in the blank) is paramount. We must pinch our noses and choose the lesser of the evils.

 

 The problem with this conventional  view is two-fold. One is that when all is said and done, there is little to choose between the major parties. Upon closer examination, the Conservative Party looks like a Liberal Party that happens to believe in balanced budgets.  But life is not just about numbers.  It is, among other things, about the maintenance of our sovereignty, ethno-cultural heritage, family structure and most importantly, the freedom to speak our minds, including the right to criticize any religion.  In an authentic democracy, there can be no right “not to be offended.”

 

 

 Secondly, we must consider the broader moral question.  If we always choose the lesser of evils we will be guaranteeing the perpetual reign of evil. At some point, we must be prepared to say “None of the above”.  But it seems that whenever we consider voting for our principles, we are told that “this is not the time… our most urgent mission is to rid the country of Trudeau, and once that mission is accomplished, then we can do the fine tuning.”  But history suggests that the time for fine tuning never comes, because there is always a new devil on the scene that we must unite against.

 

We must bite the bullet. We must risk the re-election of Boy Wonder in order to establish a beach head for a party of principle that can keep building its base so that it can be in a position to form a government four years from now.  We must be patient. Growing a fledgling party takes time, and in less than a year, Maxime Bernier has made enormous strides—as have the passionately patriotic people who have made his cause their cause. Bernier leads, but he also listens. Bernier launched the People’s Party of Canada, but the  PPC is not a “top down” party, but a “bottom up” organization where members feel like participants rather simple foot soldiers.  It’s populism in action.

 

Meanwhile, we will continue to work tirelessly in our endeavour to do the homework and keep Canadians informed.  In return, our only request is that once apprised of the facts, each of us must find the courage to share them with all the people in our respective social networks. Our workmates, our neighbours, our friends and especially the members of our own families.   Surely that is the least we can do.

 

Knowledge is Power. You have it. Now share it!

 

Tim Murray

 

Additional information about Maxime Bernier

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVwo0yp01y

https://twitter.com/maximebernier/status/1124003082780782594

https://www.peoplespartyofcanada.ca/canadian_identity_ending_official_multiculturalism_and_preserving_canadian_values_and_culture

Critical Reflections on Canadian Multiculturalism w/ Prof. Ricardo Duchesne

Posted on by
8:46 AM (1 hour ago)

Illegals Arriving from Turkey Sleep on the Streets on Greece’s Symi

Posted on by

Illegals Arriving from Turkey Sleep on the Streets on Greece’s Symi

 87  6 Google +0  0  0  105


The problem of the increasing migrant flows from Turkey to European shores was recently highlighted by the local authorities of the island of Symi.

Symi is a small, picturesque island in the Dodecanese archipelago, that doesn’t have any facilities to accommodate refugees and migrants, who illegally arrive from the opposite Turkish coast.

Thus, most of them have nowhere to go when they set foot on the small Greek island.

Scenes of people sleeping and living on the streets have become pretty common on Symi over the last several days, raising concerns about what might happen in the near future.

For this reason, the mayor of the island and other island officials have asked that the Greek authorities take care of the migrants, by transferring them to organized facilities on other islands or the country’s mainland.

Stolen Yacht of Turkish official used to transfer migrants found on Kos

While the migrant flows from Turkey to Greece continue to rise, smugglers have found a new way to transfer refugees and migrants to the country, without being spotted by the authorities.

This was revealed after the stolen yacht of the President of the Turkish Besiktas football club was found docked at the port of the island of Kos a few days ago.

Smugglers stole the yacht from the Turkish city of Bodrum (Halicarnassus) and used it to bring migrants to Greece, by pretending they were tourists.

The yacht docked at the Greek island, without anyone realizing that the people who disembarked were not tourists but illegal migrants.

After the incident, the yacht was left at the port, and the smugglers disappeared.

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: , , ,

AustralianGroceryShowsHowtoDealWithPressuretoGoHalal

Posted on by
 AustralianGroceryShowsHowtoDealWithPressuretoGoHalal
Description:<br />
mailbox:///C:/Users/Robert/AppData/Roaming/Thunderbird/Profiles/w6mrwckz.default/Mail/pop.cox.net/Inbox?number=44&part=1.2&filename=Image1.jpg

A WARNING FROM DICK SMITH: 
You may be aware that ” Dick Smith ” chain franchise stores are being pressured by the Islamic Council of Australia to gain ‘Halal Certification’ otherwise they will be proscribed and banned from Muslim custom.

This is their response:

A MESSAGE FROM DICK SMITH. 
“We at Dick Smith ‘s have received a number of letters from people asking if we will be putting the Muslim Halal logo on our food.

To acquire Halal certification, payment is required to the endorsing body (the Islamic Council) and involves a number of site inspections of both our growers and processors in order to ensure that our practices comply with the conditions of Halal certification.

It is important to note that this does not reflect the quality of the food being processed or sold – it only means that the products are approved as being prepared in accordance with the traditions of the Muslim faith.

We are aware of an increasing number of large companies both in  Australia and overseas, such as Kraft and Cadbury, who have obtained accreditation to use the Halal logo. We don’t believe they have done this because of any religious commitment but rather for purely commercial reasons.

Perhaps these large organizations can afford to do this.

While we have a choice however, we would prefer to avoid unnecessarily increasing the cost of our products in order to pay for Halal accreditation when this money would be better spent continuing to support important charitable causes where assistance is greatly needed.

We point out that we have never been asked to put a Christian symbol (or any other religious symbol) on our food requiring that we send money to a Christian organization for the right to do so.
Others would add that money paid to ANY Muslim ‘organization’ (and you had better believe it: these people ARE ‘organized’) can easily find its way into the hands of Islamic extremist-fanatics and murderers, irrespective of assurances to the contrary.

What other assurances do we accept from Muslims? Oh, that’s right, ‘Islam is a religion of PEACE’!  How less Australian can companies get, than to place money into the hands of those who seek to exploit us?”

This is an example of how the leaders of Muslims in Aus./NZ. Are bullying large commercial organizations (especially in the food industry) into paying what is no more than blatant extortion money. The amazing part is that these weak-kneed organizations (Cadbury/ Schweppes/ Nestles/ Kraft etc.) actually pay the large sums demanded by these self-appointed religious bureaucrats.

Of course, the manufacturers promptly pass this levy on to unwitting consumers as cost increases. Next time you buy a block of Cadbury’s chocolate, look for the Halal Certification seal on the wrapper. So, regardless of your own religious faith, you end up subsidizing Islam.
The Council also controls the Muslim voter bloc which, as yet, does not have sufficient critical mass to make a difference – but give them time.

Several state jurisdictions are under pressure to adopt or permit Sharia Law in Marriage, Family and Property matters and some, under the delusion that they are being progressively liberal, are permitting this. This has already happened in some local authorities in the U.K. Google the U.K. Education Department’s current investigation into the conduct of Muslim-run schools in the  Birmingham area of  England .

How many more warnings do people need?
Check the produce on the shelf and don’t buy anything Muslim extorted.

Description:<br />
mailbox:///C:/Users/Robert/AppData/Roaming/Thunderbird/Profiles/w6mrwckz.default/Mail/pop.cox.net/Inbox?number=44&part=1.3&filename=Image2.gif

THANK YOU FOR READING THIS RIGHT THROUGH TO THE END.

You’ll forward, yes?????????????

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: ,

Setting the record straight on the benefits, and heavy costs, of immigration to Canada Opinion: The average recent immigrant in Canada imposes a fiscal burden of $5,300 annually

Posted on by

Setting the record straight on the benefits, and heavy costs, of immigration to Canada

Opinion: The average recent immigrant in Canada imposes a fiscal burden of $5,300 annually 

A lot of roads, affordable housing and cleaner environment could be purchased with the money spent on poorly selected new immigrants who don’t carry their share of the fiscal load.Peter J. Thompson/National Post files

By Herbert Grubel and Patrick Grady

In a recent campaign speech, Maxime Bernier, leader of the People’s Party of Canada, cited the results of one of our studies, which showed that recent immigrants are imposing a heavy fiscal burden on Canadians. He used this information to justify his plan to reduce future levels of immigration.

The CBC had journalist Jonathon Gatehouse do a “fact check” of Bernier’s claim about the fiscal burden. In a publication sponsored by the CBC, he concludes that this claim is “false.” Since this verdict implies that our study also reached false conclusions, we feel compelled to do our own fact check of the analysis produced by Gatehouse.

The author makes much of the well-known fact that immigrants have a positive effect on aggregate national income (GDP), which says nothing about the fiscal burden. He also fails to note that recent immigrants have lowered Canada’s per capita income since, according to official statistics, they have lower average incomes than other Canadians.

He also cites a number of published studies and data he considers relevant. They involve well-known facts and again tell us nothing about the fiscal burden. For example, he notes that the gap in the unemployment rate between recent immigrants and native-born Canadian males has narrowed, but neglects to mention that this always happens when an economic boom creates increased demand for labour and leads to the hiring of previously unemployable workers.

Another statistic Gatehouse cited is that the wages received by immigrants who entered the labour market in 2017 were the highest ever. These wages have indeed been increasing every year, along with the wages of all new labour force entrants. The fact that the average incomes of immigrants who arrived in 2006 increased consistently over the following 10 years simply reflects the normal increase in incomes of all workers through time due to increased skills and work experience. As working immigrants go through this cycle, their average income rises relative to the average income of Canadians of all ages.

Estimating the fiscal burden immigrants impose on Canadians requires data on the average taxes paid and government benefits received by immigrants. Data from the 2016 Census also cited by Gatehouse shows that the average income of recent immigrants aged 25-54 continues to fall short of that of non-immigrants, which means they continue to pay less in taxes on average.

In our most recent study we used basic statistics from the previous census and the National Household Survey to estimate that because of Canada’s progressive income tax system, recent immigrants paid much lower income taxes than non-immigrants. We added to this amount other taxes related to income and wealth, such as the GST and capital gains taxes, and concluded that in 2008-09, recent immigrants on average paid $13,100 in tax compared with $18,000 paid by other Canadians, yielding a shortfall of $4,900 per year.HERB GRUBEL 2

 

The government publishes statistics on how much it spends to provide different types of benefits. In the absence of all the required information, we assumed that immigrants received the same benefits on average as did other Canadians. This assumption seems reasonable since nearly all spending was on universal health care, social insurance, education, security and conservation of the environment.

In response to criticism, we estimated that with their lower incomes immigrants benefit less from government spending on protection but, because they have more children on average, benefit more from spending on education. The net effect of these adjustments is that immigrants on average receive $414 more than non-immigrants in benefits.

Gatehouse noted that in our study we had not taken account of welfare and other social benefits received by immigrants, which some believe to be excessive and others believe to be less than what non-immigrants receive. We deliberately avoided this controversial issue and assumed simply that both groups received the same average amount of such benefits. The greatest differences between recent immigrants and others is on the tax, not the spending side of the government accounts.

When we combined our estimates of taxes paid and benefits received we found that the average recent immigrant in Canada imposes a fiscal burden of $5,300 annually.

According to government statistics, in 2010 the number of recent immigrants (since 1985) was about 3.7 million. Multiplying this number by $5,300 brings the estimated fiscal burden that year to $20 billion. Since then the stock of immigrants has increased by 250,000 a year and raised the annual fiscal burden in 2018 to over $30 billion.

Canada needs a full discussion of its immigration policy that considers both its benefits, which are discussed by politicians and the media all the time, but also its very real costs, which involve not just the fiscal burden but also traffic congestion, overcrowding of hospitals, schools and recreational facilities, deteriorating environment and lack of affordable housing, which governments cannot address in part because of the fiscal burden. A lot of roads, affordable housing and cleaner environment could be purchased with that $30 billion.

Herbert Grubel is professor emeritus of economics at Simon Fraser University. Patrick Grady is with global-economics.ca

Former Diplomat Corrects NATIONAL POST Nonsense on Immigration: Another Letter The Fake News Media Will Never Publish

Posted on by
Former Diplomat Corrects NATIONAL POST Nonsense on Immigration: Another Letter The Fake News Media Will Never Publish
August 28, 2019

 
 
Editor                                      
NATIONAL POST
Toronto
ian macdonald
Dear Sir,
 
Re: “Why immigrants are good for the economy after all” (Matthew Lau) NP August 27, 2019
 
Quoting statistics on immigrants arriving in Canada without a clear reference to their qualifications and ethnicity, is both fruitless and misleading, as experience and logic make clear.  This common, specious practice obscures the issue since it fails to emphasize the important fact that some immigrants make an eminently positive contribution and readily adapt, while others, whether ignorant, criminal or unassimilable (IQ-bereft negroes) have a wholly negative impact. The totals do not reveal this vital factor. Therefore, to use simply numbers and averages to justify the disastrous open-door immigration policy of recent decades, is both pointless and deceptive. 
 
Immigration policy since 1970 could have strengthened Canada’s economy, raised living standard and international status immeasurably through attracting to our shores eager, enterprising millions of the best that Britain and other advanced countries, notably of Eastern Europe, could offer  Inexplicably, and tragically, venal politicians rejected this golden opportunity in favour of millions of far less suitable, unprocessed Third World migrants, almost all rejects from grateful, more astute original host countries. When N.Y. State cut off welfare for illegal aliens (mostly Nigerians) in the ’90’s, the offending migrants moved en masse to Quebec and Ontario where they were recklessly declared eligible for benefits and even given public housing in preference to native-born Canadians who had waited for years. When I asked the local Director of Placement why the Nigerians were so favoured he said “It was purely a matter of economics – it was much cheaper to give them the new public housing than to keep them in hotels”. When I asked how he knew the Africans were eligible (they were not), he said he had no idea since he was barred from asking pertinent questions, under “Human Rights” legislation.
 
Deplorably, successive Canadian governments, on secret instructions from a demanding paymaster bent on destroying our nationhood, not only shunned the epic opportunity to “Make Canada Great Again” but compounded the folly by offering open access to incompatible people especially primitive Africans who, in many cases could be seen as the “worst and the dumbest” as opposed to the “best and the brightest”  Most, not surprisingly, immediately became wards of the state, at multi-billion dollar cost to the Native-born and incalculable damage to our gene pool. Some will become independent but many, lacking superior intelligence, and their burgeoning progeny could remain on public assistance for generations, as in the U.S.A.  The problem could be solved readily by deportation and restoration of the Canada Immigration Act, with acceptance based on merit and, above all, assimilability.  Don’t expect lobby-bought politicians to lead the way, however!
 
As ever,
 
Ian V. Macdonald
OTTAWA

All white people are being removed from history as revisionists rewrite science, medicine and technology to eliminate pioneers based on the color of their skin

Posted on by

All white people are being removed from history as revisionists rewrite science, medicine and technology to eliminate pioneers based on the color of their skin

Image: All white people are being removed from history as revisionists rewrite science, medicine and technology to eliminate pioneers based on the color of their skin

(Natural News) In case you haven’t noticed, anti-white racism is rapidly becoming an accepted cultural norm throughout the United States and much of the Western world.

Mainstream entertainment, news, education, and even science and medicine, have all but completely been infiltrated and subverted by nefarious entities that are hellbent on pushing endless, white-hating propaganda and revisionist, anti-white history on the masses – their goal being, well, you can probably figure it out.

It’s suddenly no longer okay to be white in countries where white people are the majority, as the subverters that now control the narrative have successfully brainwashed and indoctrinated a sizable segment of their populations into believing that being white automatically means that you’re evil, and being black or brown automatically means that you’re good.

Using lies and deception as their catalysts for change, these wicked subverters have successfully poisoned the well. They’ve convinced a disturbing number of useful idiots, many of whom are white themselves, that all white people are inherently racist against black and brown people, and have systematically taken advantage of these people groups all throughout history in order to build thriving civilizations.

All of it is a complete lie, of course. But this is what’s being taught to the next generation of “open” minds through movies, television, and in the classroom, with little resistance from guilt-complexed whites, many of whom seem to be accepting the lie that they’re evil because of the color of their skin.

Get CLEAN FOOD and help support our mission to keep you informed: The Health Ranger Store lab verifies everything we sell with accredited testing for heavy metals, microbiology and food safety. Certified organic facility, ISO-accredited on-site laboratory, no GMOs or synthetic ingredients. The world’s #1 source of lab-verified clean foods and superfoods for nutritional healing. 600+ products available. Explore now.

“The Western presstitutes and politicians have demonized Putin, Maduro, Iran, and Trump to the same extent as the patriotic propagandistic Western court historians have demonized Adolf Hitler,” writes Paul Craig Roberts from the Institute for Political Economy.

“But no one is as demonized as white people, and the curious thing is that it is self-demonization – whites demonizing whites.”

In Scandinavia, white people can’t even report crimes committed against them by third-world migrant invaders for fear of being dubbed “racists”

As horrific as the situation has become for white people living in the U.S. who don’t hate themselves for having white skin, it’s in many ways even worse for white people living in Western Europe – and especially in Scandinavia, which is being completely taken over by white-hating, brown “migrants.”

As Roberts explains, native white people living in places like Scandinavia are becoming increasingly fearful about reporting crimes committed against themselves by brown migrants because they don’t want to be falsely accused of committing a “hate crime.”

That’s right: If you’re victimized as a white person by a brown or black person while existing in Sweden, you could be accused of “racism” for reporting it and seeking justice.

We can expect this same type of anti-white racism to eventually reach the U.S., should things continue on as they’ve been going without organized pushback.

Schoolchildren are already being taught lies about American history that paint white people as the sole racist aggressors responsible for black slavery, when in fact it was actually other blacks, Jews, and various other non-whites who were, in many cases, the real perpetrators.

“Black studies avoids the fact that the British sea captains who brought African slaves to the British colonies that later became the United States purchased the black slaves from the black king of Dahomey, who captured his fellow blacks in slave wars against other black tribes,” Roberts explains.

“The United States has raised entire generations on the fake history that white people hated blacks and decided to capture them in Africa and make slaves of them in order to beat and abuse them.”

Be sure to read Roberts’ full article, “White Peoples and Their Achievements Are Headed for the Trash Bin of History,” at this link.

You can also read more stories about the systemic, anti-white racism that’s taking over America at LiberalMob.com.

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: