Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Firebot]

The CBC continuing to campaign on behalf of the Liberals with their rather dubious reporting practices to control the narrative.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/gst...-ndp-1.7394578

Liberals' promise of GST break, $250 cheques in jeopardy as opponents demand costly changes

It's not clear how the Liberal government is going to salvage its plan to deliver on its promise of a GST holiday and $250 cheques for some Canadians now that some opposition parties are demanding changes that could dramatically increase the cost.

'Canadians are depending on this relief:' Gould

Good grief can it be any more blatant with the headlines and sub-headlines used and inserting their own take? The CBC is actively pushing the Liberal narrative of guilt tripping the NDP for not getting this rammed through without 'costly changes' (and of course omitting they would be pushing aside the current Liberal corruption impasse that has put Parliament at a standstill for months to get it in).

As if the GST break already planned isn't a costly and shortsighted election buyout?

And before we get the usual: "But but Firebot, here you go off doing your deranged CBC conspiracies again, here's article xxx proving you wrong and being critical of Liberals"...

Here's the thumbnail on their video talking in depth about the GST break.



I mean...

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Sheer won the popular vote too. Trudeau only won the popular vote in 2015 when he was fresh-faced, ran left of Mulcair and people were tired of Harper.

No part has "won" the popular vote with a majority in decades, methinks. What I do know is that left of centre parties have had the majority of the vote consistently. Which no one seems to realize.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Yes but as Pepsifree says, it would be unpleasant. You have no regular healthcare, no insurance, no driver's license etc...

Unpleasant compared to what? Where they were prior to coming to Canada?

[Wormius]

@firebot, Are you quoting from more than one article?

[Doctorfever]

I don’t think the CBC is as friendly to the Liberals as you think, Firebot.

The CBC is actually supporting CPC campaign efforts to defund the CBC.

https://torontosun.com/news/national...nd-broadcaster

While Tait asked the Liberal government for even more tax dollars during the committee hearing, the Conservatives pointed out the last time the CBC received an emergency $42 million taxpayer-funded top-up she quickly paid out $18.4 million in bonuses, with $3.3 million of it awarded to 45 executives, which averaged out to $73,000 per executive.

“This is more money than the typical working Canadian will see in an entire year,” the Tories said.

“I think outside of the Conservative caucus, you have been the most successful person in creating the demand to defund the CBC,” Scheer said.

He pointed how “out of touch the CBC can be with Canadians,” saying Tait gave out executive and senior management bonuses during “an affordability crisis” while laying off frontline workers.

“Something that even Peter Mansbridge called out the CBC for,” said Scheer.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Azure

Unpleasant compared to what? Where they were prior to coming to Canada?

No. Unpleasant in general, living in the shadows with no documents or social net.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Firebot

The CBC continuing to campaign on behalf of the Liberals with their rather dubious reporting practices to control the narrative.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/gst...-ndp-1.7394578









Good grief can it be any more blatant with the headlines and sub-headlines used and inserting their own take? The CBC is actively pushing the Liberal narrative of guilt tripping the NDP for not getting this rammed through without 'costly changes' (and of course omitting they would be pushing aside the current Liberal corruption impasse that has put Parliament at a standstill for months to get it in).

As if the GST break already planned isn't a costly and shortsighted election buyout?

And before we get the usual: "But but Firebot, here you go off doing your deranged CBC conspiracies again, here's article xxx proving you wrong and being critical of Liberals"...

Here's the thumbnail on their video talking in depth about the GST break.



I mean...

I don't see how any of what you posted here supports your conclusion. For example, the image of Trudeau and Freeland is, to me, clearly satirizing them and their promise of a tax-free Christmas. It is not at all flattering.

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by SebC

Umm what? What about when they're not on the clock? When about when their interests conflict with those of Canada? When they conflict with the environment? Are they not supposed to whistleblow if Domtar is engaging in illegal conduct? Does their employment supersede their agency as individuals with their own interests?

What in the fascist dystopian hell is this?

I would say the Liberals couldn’t see the forest for the trees on this deal, but soon they probably won’t have to worry about seeing either the forest, or the trees.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Wormius

@firebot, Are you quoting from more than one article?

Nope.

CBC News · Posted: Nov 27, 2024 10:32 AM MST | Last Updated: 6 minutes ago


Title was just recently changed, as it was likely way too pro Liberal even for the CBC's standards, or maybe they saw my calling out

The original title was my first quote, and the 2nd quote was the first paragraph that has since being modified for the Singh blurb now present.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

No part has "won" the popular vote with a majority in decades, methinks. What I do know is that left of centre parties have had the majority of the vote consistently. Which no one seems to realize.

Does that matter though? What % of liberal voters are voting for the NDP 2nd? Based on history probably less than those that are voting conservative.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by opendoor

If significant numbers of lapsed visa holders stayed in Canada, then wouldn't we have a huge population of undocumented workers similar to the US?

Historically, about 75% of temporary work permit holders in Canada (inclusive of Temporary Foreign Workers and the International Mobility Program) have not transitioned to Permanent Residency. So if the vast majority of those people left the country (which would seem to be the case based on estimates of undocumented worker numbers) then why wouldn't the same apply now?

We didn’t have a huge population of undocumented workers because historically we had only a small number of visa holders to begin with. There’s a huge difference between tracking and managing 300-400k visa holders and 4 million visa holders. Most will leave. Some will not.

Edit: The federal government estimates there are 300k-600k undocumented migrants already living in Canada. According to Marc Miler himself, many have lived here for decades and have children. Given the unprecedented cohort of visas set to expire over the next two years, we can expect that figure to double or triple.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...ering-amnesty/

From the article:

As the Liberal government increased the number of permanent residents, temporary foreign workers and international students entering Canada, the number of undocumented migrants appears to have increased as well. Although no one knows for sure, Mr. Miller believes there are between 300,000 and 600,000 undocumented residents.

One major reason for the uncertainty: Ottawa does not keep track of when people voluntarily leave the country. According to data from the Canada Border Services Agency, there are 21,236 people whose refugee claims had been denied prior to 2015, but who may still be in the country. The agency is not able to say whether those people – who should have departed Canada nearly a decade ago, or longer – had left on their own, or had remained here illegally. That’s just one facet of a yawning data gap that needs to be closed so the government can enforce Canada’s immigration laws.

Just the fact the federal government admits they don’t know how many undocumented residents we have in Canada - might be 300k, might be 600k, nobody really knows - doesn’t inspire me with a lot of confidence that this is something the government had a handle on before the huge wave of visas set to expire, let alone going forward.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Sure, but if you’re going to focus on progressively narrowing examples, aren’t you basically admitting this is a non-issue?

Yes, if there happens to be someone from rural Bengal who has literally nothing to go back to and yet still managed to secure a visa to come here… sure, they may say the risks and drawbacks of living without status are worth the reward of just being in Canada at all.

How many people do you honestly think match that description out of the 4.9 million?



Of course they get emergency health care. And the bill that comes with it.

The underground economy is relatively small (2.7% GDP compared to the US which sits closer to 12%) and while these people can’t find cash work, they lack all of the protections around working conditions and workers rights that everyone else enjoys.

I agree with Cliff's take- I don't think this has historically been an issue as you point out, but I think it will become one when you have this amount of people who's status is expiring around the same time.

300k new undocumented immigrants would essentially double the size of that underground economy. A paltry 6% of the total amount set to expire.

[blender]

I find the hand-wringing about the immigration and undocumented illegals to be darkly comical.

When there is a major climate change-related event(s)in the next decade that forces an unprecedented refugee emergency onto the northern nations, this little drama will seem like a happy memory of better times.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

We didn’t have a huge population of undocumented workers because historically we had only a small number of visa holders to begin with. There’s a huge difference between tracking and managing 300-400k visa holders and 4 million visa holders. Most will leave. Some will not.

Edit: The federal government estimates there are 300k-600k undocumented migrants already living in Canada. According to Marc Miler himself, many have lived here for decades and have children. Given the unprecedented cohort of visas set to expire over the next two years, we can expect that figure to double or triple.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...ering-amnesty/

From the article:

Considering immigration has not suddenly increased by 10x in any given year and has, instead, only around doubled over the last 15 years, can you provide any evidence to back up your assertion that they are going from dealing with “300-400k temporary residents” (something they’ve been well over for decades) to millions essentially overnight?

I’m assuming because you did not know that Canada had a system to track exits your information in this is likely far out of date.

And to your article, part of the reason they don’t know if those people left is that they did not track exits until 2019/20, 4-5 years after those people were to leave.

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I agree with Cliff's take- I don't think this has historically been an issue as you point out, but I think it will become one when you have this amount of people who's status is expiring around the same time.

300k new undocumented immigrants would essentially double the size of that underground economy. A paltry 6% of the total amount set to expire.

How many visas expire in a typical year, and how many stay?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by blender

I find the hand-wringing about the immigration and undocumented illegals to be darkly comical.

When there is a major climate change-related event(s)in the next decade that forces an unprecedented refugee emergency onto the northern nations, this little drama will seem like a happy memory of better times.

They’ll likely just blame the same types of people anyway.

The topic is so loaded with people’s personal baggage that it’s difficult to have a straight coversation. Nobody seems to know what Canada is or isn’t able to do, how many expiring visas is a typical number, how many temporary residents there are or were or how easy or difficult it is to live without status.

Instead it’s talk of criminals hiding out in Canada, roaming the streets chanting “death to Canada” instead of going back to India (because obviously they’re all from there and that place sucks the worst), and the problem they cause by… not being able to hold a legal job, access free healthcare or government services, or otherwise be any kind of burden on society at all.

Sure makes them sound like a deeply nefarious bunch. And there will be hundreds of thousands more them! Because… well, we don’t know exactly, but that sounds like a lot and that’s scary.

[Monahammer]

I don't recall ever saying that was a scary scenario. The same people we're talking about are already here, after all!

My point is entirely around the government's expectation that these people will just leave as their visas expire. I disagree with that notion, and that shouldnt be the expectation.

The main problem is that we don't have a cogent strategy for addressing these people, and simply hoping they all abide perfectly by the term of their visa is... well, dumb.

No one agrees with my actual immigration proposal anyways :P

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by Makarov

I don't see how any of what you posted here supports your conclusion. For example, the image of Trudeau and Freeland is, to me, clearly satirizing them and their promise of a tax-free Christmas. It is not at all flattering.

I can't imagine how exhausting it must be to be that openly paranoid all the time.

[Harry Lime]

If people believe that the CBC is an arm of government propaganda, then I'm not sure why they would be dead set on defunding or destroying it. All they need to do is win the election, and it becomes their tool.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Does that matter though? What % of liberal voters are voting for the NDP 2nd? Based on history probably less than those that are voting conservative.

No, I suspect anyone voting NDP would vote Liberal under a 2 party system.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I don't recall ever saying that was a scary scenario. The same people we're talking about are already here, after all!

My point is entirely around the government's expectation that these people will just leave as their visas expire. I disagree with that notion, and that shouldnt be the expectation.

The main problem is that we don't have a cogent strategy for addressing these people, and simply hoping they all abide perfectly by the term of their visa is... well, dumb.

No one agrees with my actual immigration proposal anyways :P

Their expectation that these people will just leave is because the vast majority just leave. Why would that not be the expectation?

Your point is flawed because it isn’t based on anything real. Or would you like to illuminate why the strategy, processes, and laws in place that have effectively managed millions of expiries to date is “not cogent” and “dumb” in your opinion?