Skip Navigation

Comments

3
    1. Immigration does not bring wages down. The increase in productivity and consumer demand (ie profit) offset that potential impact and the largest study showed that immigrants have a net neutral or positive effect on locals wages. If wages do go down when immigrants are hired at an organisation, someone is pocketing that difference and they are the source of the problem.
    2. Immigrants do not increase the cost of housing and this can be best conceptualized in the context of local outmigrations. Locals have a tendency to move out of neighbourhoods when immigrants move in, out of a desire to continue living in a homogenous space. There was actually a common phrase for this during less open minded times: "There goes the neighbourhood" implying that property values would drop when people of color or immigrants moved in. Only in the era of housing commodification and artificially perpetuated housing scarcity has that narrative been flipped on its head. Either way, unsurprisingly, the immigrant is the scapegoat.
    3. This is a reiteration from the posted article but immigrants consume healthcare resources at a lower rate for a variety of factors (a major one being age). Despite consuming less, they pay taxes into the system proportional to their income. With that in mind, we are not subsidizing their. In fact, they are subsidizing our care by paying more into the system than they take out.

  • "Us versus them" is a concept as old as time, and if you can twist your political rhetoric around to fit it, there's always a segment of the population that will lap it up. That the current generation of politicians is making use of that is disgusting, but not at all surprising.

  • Removed by Moderator — Modlog

    • There's no question that immigration is to the economic benefit of a nation, particularly those with advanced economies like Canada. There is data that it increases both GDP and GDP per capita.

      Many such countries are facing challenges with demographic skews towards older age. The fastest way to correct that is with immigration.

      But that should also be met with providing Canadians with the necessary circumstances to have children. The fertility rate in Canada and many other nations has dropped for a variety of reasons but a recent study revealed that the most important reason is housing. People do not want to being new life into this world without secure housing.

      1. Immigrants do not being wages down. The increase in productivity and consumer demand (ie profit) offset that potential impact and the largest study showed that immigrants have a net neutral or positive effect on locals wages. If wages do go down when immigrants are hired at an organisation, someone is pocketing that difference and they are the source of the problem.
      2. Immigrants do not increase the cost of housing and this can be best conceptualized by the concept of local outmigrations. Locals have a tendency to move out of neighbourhoods when immigrants move in, out of a desire to continue living in a homogenous space. There was actually a common phrase for this during less open minded times: "There goes the neighbourhood" implying that property values would drop when people of color or immigrants moved in. Only in the era of housing commodification and arricifcially perpetuated housing scarcity based that narrative been flipped on its head.
      3. This is a reiteration from the posted article but immigrants consume healthcare resources at a lower rate for a variety of factors (a major one being age). Despite consuming less, they pay taxes into the system proportional to their income. With that in mind, we are not subsidizing them. In fact,they are subsidizing us.