Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan
Fyp. These things go both ways.
And yeah, I'm not a member of Kenney's fan club. He is, after all--the guy who tried to increase civic responsibility among Canadian citizens by requiring new Canadians to take a citizenship test. He's obviously operating on a much higher mental plane than mere mortals such as myself--since he clearly understands that the best way to address a problem with Group A is to create a policy that applies only to Group B.
And as I've said a million times: I don't object in principle. I just think it's a bit silly. I don't think 5500 asylum applicants (of whom at most 4900ish are what we term "fraudulent," though these applications can be rejected for a lot of different reasons) is a very good cause for a moral panic. Certainly it's not a reason to start alienating allied nations. We live in a nation of 33 million people--and we're engaging in all this needless handwringing over what is a very tiny group of people.
Let's even assume that somehow, for some reason, this really is a pressing problem that we must address lest our nation fall into chaos and poverty. This policy is the equivalent of driving a nail into a board by driving over it with a pickup truck. Sure--it did the trick--but a hammer would probably have worked just fine.
|
^ One of the few posts in this thread that makes sense.