plan to deliver baby in canada

[canuck_in_uk]

Yes, but 2 things to clarify: 1- Their children are Canadian so they are entitled to education. 2- As for the 2 out of 5 yrs, that's just to keep the PR, not to receive healthcare or any benefits. And to be a citizen they need at least 3 of 5 and the intent to stay after citizenship (and citizenship processing takes a year easy) so basically they're stuck for 5 years of physical presence.

A Canadian meanwhile just flees right after their subsidized education and make loads of money in the US or the Gulf, without paying a penny back. That's especially true of "Canadian" Canadians (as this discussion shows, many Canadians do not see immigrants as equally Canadian entitled to all rights). But as you pointed out, it's not sustainable. In fact, the only way it's still going on is through more and more immigration. You'll see that plain clear if/when Canadians elect their own conservative populist (Max?). Entitlements & benefits need an increasing tax base, and if the workforce isn't expanding accordingly, then the rates will.

Based on these "facts" you keep spouting, you really seem to have a bias against "Canadian" Canadians, as you call them.

Immigrants choose to come to Canada knowing that there are residency obligations. Choice.

It is very possible to live here for 3 years, apply for citizenship and leave. Citizenship doesn't take a year. Submission to approval took less than 6 months for my spouse; the oath ceremony took a bit longer because we live in an area where they are only held a few times a year.

 

[unlucky_chaser]

Based on these "facts" you keep spouting, you really seem to have a bias against "Canadian" Canadians, as you call them.

Immigrants choose to come to Canada knowing that there are residency obligations. Choice.

It is very possible to live here for 3 years, apply for citizenship and leave. Citizenship doesn't take a year. Submission to approval took less than 6 months for my spouse; the oath ceremony took a bit longer because we live in an area where they are only held a few times a year.

1- So I was right...takes almost a year just to process citizenship. If I remember correctly, near the end days of Haprer & bill C-24 they took away citizenship from some who left Canada right away after citizenship. Might have been revoked but last I heard is that "intent to stay" is a requirement.

2- For my "bias", OK let's debunk that quick...One, I guess it's not me who started expressions like "Old Stock Canadians", "Quebecois de Souche" - nor am I the one who is taking a very protective stance thinking that immigrants are taking away their cookies rather than increase the pie.

I'm not really interested in debating "my bias". Rather, let's talk about the facts - no quotes. If you don't think they are facts, please, by all means, show where I'm wrong. Note though that my only problem is that Canadians somehow get to be called tolerant/open etc or better than other nations. And I'm saying that having never had trouble with visas or permits etc, except the current visitor visa which was really for my wife's sake not mine. I moved from Canada for good.

3- A key point I'd like to raise is "Choice". This very attitude of these are our rules, they choose to follow them are just so incredibly arrogant I have to respond. Some choose, like me (I'm incredibly fortunate to have the opportunity to choose where to go, but that's just because I was lucky enough to be in the right time at the right place,-- most don't have options. Some live under oppressive regimes or unable to make it through corrupt systems that they have to migrate elsewhere. I am lucky enough to be sought after and pick jobs in the country I want but that's not the norm. Most are suffering and really most people don't like to immigrate. They are just forced to. Before the mid 20th century and even in the 70s immigration was so easy. It's only after Harper that it became this rat race of Express Entry and "we should only pick the best of the best". I'm sorry, in all likelihood your grand grand daddy who moved to Canada wasn't the best or brightest..It's jsut that there wasn't yet an old stock to look down on them.

 

[Biyarajaz]

I don’t want anything from Canadian government I just want to be with my kids and husband . I can earn and pay for anything health and education ready to pay taxes but I can’t live with out my family . I wish Immigration would understand my point. I don’t want to be there for benefits I want to be there because my husband is settled and work there

 

[canuck_in_uk]

1- So I was right...takes almost a year just to process citizenship. If I remember correctly, near the end days of Haprer & bill C-24 they took away citizenship from some who left Canada right away after citizenship. Might have been revoked but last I heard is that "intent to stay" is a requirement.

2- For my "bias", OK let's debunk that quick...One, I guess it's not me who started expressions like "Old Stock Canadians", "Quebecois de Souche" - nor am I the one who is taking a very protective stance thinking that immigrants are taking away their cookies rather than increase the pie.

I'm not really interested in debating "my bias". Rather, let's talk about the facts - no quotes. If you don't think they are facts, please, by all means, show where I'm wrong. Note though that my only problem is that Canadians somehow get to be called tolerant/open etc or better than other nations. And I'm saying that having never had trouble with visas or permits etc, except the current visitor visa which was really for my wife's sake not mine. I moved from Canada for good.

3- A key point I'd like to raise is "Choice". This very attitude of these are our rules, they choose to follow them are just so incredibly arrogant I have to respond. Some choose, like me (I'm incredibly fortunate to have the opportunity to choose where to go, but that's just because I was lucky enough to be in the right time at the right place,-- most don't have options. Some live under oppressive regimes or unable to make it through corrupt systems that they have to migrate elsewhere. I am lucky enough to be sought after and pick jobs in the country I want but that's not the norm. Most are suffering and really most people don't like to immigrate. They are just forced to. Before the mid 20th century and even in the 70s immigration was so easy. It's only after Harper that it became this rat race of Express Entry and "we should only pick the best of the best". I'm sorry, in all likelihood your grand grand daddy who moved to Canada wasn't the best or brightest..It's jsut that there wasn't yet an old stock to look down on them.

1. No. If we lived In Vancouver, it would have taken less than 6 months. Intent to stay is not a requirement.

2. Ah, so it's OK to perpetuate the bias because you didn't create it. Makes sense....

No, I'm not going to take the time to research something that you should have verified before posting.

3. It is not arrogant. A very small portion of immigrants come here out of necessity and most of them never leave. The rest choose. Big leap straight from the seventies to Harper; there were a few years and major changes in between. I actually have a set of immigrant grandparents; grandma was an educated and experienced airplane mechanic who would have had no issues immigrating as a skilled worker.

 

[unlucky_chaser]

1. No. If we lived In Vancouver, it would have taken less than 6 months. Intent to stay is not a requirement.

2. Ah, so it's OK to perpetuate the bias because you didn't create it. Makes sense....

No, I'm not going to take the time to research something that you should have verified before posting.

3. It is not arrogant. A very small portion of immigrants come here out of necessity and most of them never leave. The rest choose. Big leap straight from the seventies to Harper; there were a few years and major changes in between. I actually have a set of immigrant grandparents; grandma was an educated and experienced airplane mechanic who would have had no issues immigrating as a skilled worker.

1. Thanks for correcting me there. I admittedly barely visited at all since I left and revocation of this didn't make it in the news. Last I heard in that matter was a Jordanian family stripped from their new citizenship because they went right away to the UAE. For 6 months, OK. Correct my statement above to be "Immigrants are stuck for 4.5 years", instead of 5.

2. Not sure where you jumped to the conclusion that there is a bias or that I'm perpetuating. It was a vast sector of the Canadian electorate that resonated with these Conservative dog whistles. How am I perpetuating it?

3. Then allow me to share a new insight with you. So many of the "economic" migrants are only moving for a better life and not for money (freedom of speech, freedom of religion etc). And in fact, it just so happens that if they have the right education/job etc, it's easier and faster than the refugee way (which I assume you're using to measure the percentage of desperate) and due to the brutal treatment of IRCC (incredible delays, must have a TRV first, high rejection rates, the "tolerant" Canadian populace seething at the few millions used to process & reject their claims etc). The refugee stream are just the ones who are: 1- desperate enough to go through it 2- Are still rich/etc enough to be able to land as visitors first (the really really poor are either dying in their war zones or drowning in the Mediterranean, or stuck in Turkish refugee camps for years).

Sure. Your family are awesome. Let's now see the grandparents of the other 34,999,999. And FYI, mechanical engineers AFAIK do not have an easy time in EE, unlike Software Engineers, Doctors or Pharmacists.

Back in the 70 and pretty much until Harper, people could immigrate with barely any qualifications (I know of people who applied to PR in their first year of Grad school). Same applies to the US BTW. The time jump is to just illustrate contrast as it was gradual. Like, back then, people would basically just show up, ask for a passport and get one free. And btw, this is how Canada (and all other Western countries) became prosperous today. Give it 10 years and you'll see the effect of restrictionism. The US already signed up for entitlements that cannot be funded with all the money in circulation today, will run out in 2040 sth. That means that they need incredible economic growth to match it in time, and there is no way to do that without immigration. Even if each family gets 10 babies today, they won't grow up in time (as growth is exponential and compounding, meaning you better start yesterday).

 

[canuck_in_uk]

1. Thanks for correcting me there. I admittedly barely visited at all since I left and revocation of this didn't make it in the news. Last I heard in that matter was a Jordanian family stripped from their new citizenship because they went right away to the UAE. For 6 months, OK. Correct my statement above to be "Immigrants are stuck for 4.5 years", instead of 5.

2. Not sure where you jumped to the conclusion that there is a bias or that I'm perpetuating. It was a vast sector of the Canadian electorate that resonated with these Conservative dog whistles. How am I perpetuating it?

3. Then allow me to share a new insight with you. So many of the "economic" migrants are only moving for a better life and not for money (freedom of speech, freedom of religion etc). And in fact, it just so happens that if they have the right education/job etc, it's easier and faster than the refugee way (which I assume you're using to measure the percentage of desperate) and due to the brutal treatment of IRCC (incredible delays, must have a TRV first, high rejection rates, the "tolerant" Canadian populace seething at the few millions used to process & reject their claims etc). The refugee stream are just the ones who are: 1- desperate enough to go through it 2- Are still rich/etc enough to be able to land as visitors first (the really really poor are either dying in their war zones or drowning in the Mediterranean, or stuck in Turkish refugee camps for years).

Sure. Your family are awesome. Let's now see the grandparents of the other 34,999,999. And FYI, mechanical engineers AFAIK do not have an easy time in EE, unlike Software Engineers, Doctors or Pharmacists.

Back in the 70 and pretty much until Harper, people could immigrate with barely any qualifications (I know of people who applied to PR in their first year of Grad school). Same applies to the US BTW. The time jump is to just illustrate contrast as it was gradual. Like, back then, people would basically just show up, ask for a passport and get one free. And btw, this is how Canada (and all other Western countries) became prosperous today. Give it 10 years and you'll see the effect of restrictionism. The US already signed up for entitlements that cannot be funded with all the money in circulation today, will run out in 2040 sth. That means that they need incredible economic growth to match it in time, and there is no way to do that without immigration. Even if each family gets 10 babies today, they won't grow up in time (as growth is exponential and compounding, meaning you better start yesterday).

1. Again, a person can stay for 3 years and leave, only returning for the test and oath.

2. Read your previous statements about how it's especially true that "Canadian" Canadians "flee after getting their subsidized education".

3. Sure, many move for a better job, education, cleaner air, better medical system, better laws and on and on. It is still a choice to immigrate to Canada. Syrians bombed out of their homes don't have a choice. IRCC isn't brutal; it is a typical immigration agency.

No need for the sarcastic attitude. Age, language scores, skilled work experience, a degree, they all are scored the same regardless of whether it is a software engineer or mechanical engineer.

 

[unlucky_chaser]

1. Again, a person can stay for 3 years and leave, only returning for the test and oath.

2. Read your previous statements about how it's especially true that "Canadian" Canadians "flee after getting their subsidized education".

3. Sure, many move for a better job, education, cleaner air, better medical system, better laws and on and on. It is still a choice to immigrate to Canada. Syrians bombed out of their homes don't have a choice. IRCC isn't brutal; it is a typical immigration agency.

No need for the sarcastic attitude. Age, language scores, skilled work experience, a degree, they all are scored the same regardless of whether it is a software engineer or mechanical engineer.

You're wrong on 2 & 3 but I (and probably you) are too busy for that. This forum is mostly the poor souls who need to deal with IRCC's crap so there is little need for me to explain as they are all so well aware of how IRCC compares to other systems (that btw don't boast about being "open").

No. 2 is irking me so much though that I HAVE to respond. I honestly do not know if you're trolling or actually believing what you're saying. For one, you YOURSELF are one of those Canadians who got the free stuff and immediately left and I bet you plan to retire in Canada relying on a welfare system you paid nothing in?

As for your grandma, which for some reason you seem to make her representative of all her generation (did all immigrants back then have degrees? obviously not). The point was that before Harper you literally needed virtually no requirements. Just be young and able. Now it's "ewww, no. We only take the best of the best." literally, back then people just show up. So even if she didn't have the degree she would've immigrated. Please stop squirming away from this point as it is not about how many degrees your great grandma had. Dude, until 2015 it was literally a queue. Today if you don't have the highest points you're out. before you could always sponsor your parents. Today some canadians who will PAY for everything for their parents will never be able to bring them over, because now it is a lottery.

Suffice it to say that I found immigration in Trump's America easier than IRCC. My "Canadian" Canadian wife agrees btw. She has seen it first hand with me. For choice, I had a choice, because I had other options so I could afford to just dump Canada. Most of the applicants are not so fortunate. The only difference between you and me is empathy. I do not consider access and privilege as an inherent right to me, where I deserve to live in a first-world country while the others being rejected are any less than me. Even my credentials are just because I was born in the right place at the right time. You seem to view it like "sucks to be them. I have mine" with zero empathy, apparent from your claim that people come to Canada because they "choose" so. Trust me, if Denmark or Germany or Australia weren't as anal regarding immigration, Canada would have struggled to get any of those people (if only for closer distances). There is no real choice or freedom unless you can indeed afford to refuse, and most are not. If they cannot find a job in their poor country and their only hope is indentured service in Qatar or Saudi Arabia, doing all the paperwork & jumping through hoops for Canada is not really what they want to do. They just have zero choice.

Finally, sure, I agree that IRCC is a typical immigration agency. So please let's stop the weird pretense that Canadians are welcoming or open or any better of other nations. Trudeau's welcoming mat is just a trap, Unless he meant "welcome to apply and get rejected". And please, Doug Ford & the Quebecois not only want to stop accepting refugees, they do not even want to let people come in to apply and get their claims processed.

You should watch the movie Elysium, if you never did.

 

[Bryanna]

@unlucky_chaser

The comments are getting personal. It would be polite to keep to the original points for discussion.

The discussion veered towards 'anchor babies'. So, if someone wants to respond then the responses must not be personal.

And, to add @canuck_in_uk is not a recent immigrant. She was born in Canada. Her posts reflect a strong sense of ethics. Also, not someone who is likely to depend on welfare at any point in life

 

[canuck_in_uk]

No. 2 is irking me so much though that I HAVE to respond. I honestly do not know if you're trolling or actually believing what you're saying. For one, you YOURSELF are one of those Canadians who got the free stuff and immediately left and I bet you plan to retire in Canada relying on a welfare system you paid nothing in?

Because you know my entire life by looking at my username? I live in Canada and have for most of my life. Yes, I will retire here and it will be after paying into the system for a good 35-40 years; however, I won't have to rely on welfare because I will have a damn good pension and savings.

As for your grandma, which for some reason you seem to make her representative of all her generation (did all immigrants back then have degrees? obviously not). The point was that before Harper you literally needed virtually no requirements. Just be young and able. Now it's "ewww, no. We only take the best of the best." literally, back then people just show up. So even if she didn't have the degree she would've immigrated. Please stop squirming away from this point as it is not about how many degrees your great grandma had. Dude, until 2015 it was literally a queue. Today if you don't have the highest points you're out. before you could always sponsor your parents. Today some canadians who will PAY for everything for their parents will never be able to bring them over, because now it is a lottery.

How did I make her representative of a generation? You bashed my family history, I responded with information about my family.

Not squirming away from anything. Yes, it is harder to immigrate now, as it should be. There are a lot more people wanting to come here now than there were 40 years ago. It was not a queue up until 2015. There were still strict requirements to immigrate before EE.

The lottery is ending. Again, choice to immigrate knowing there is no guarantee you can bring your parents.

Suffice it to say that I found immigration in Trump's America easier than IRCC. My "Canadian" Canadian wife agrees btw. She has seen it first hand with me. For choice, I had a choice, because I had other options so I could afford to just dump Canada. Most of the applicants are not so fortunate. The only difference between you and me is empathy. I do not consider access and privilege as an inherent right to me, where I deserve to live in a first-world country while the others being rejected are any less than me. Even my credentials are just because I was born in the right place at the right time. You seem to view it like "sucks to be them. I have mine" with zero empathy, apparent from your claim that people come to Canada because they "choose" so. Trust me, if Denmark or Germany or Australia weren't as anal regarding immigration, Canada would have struggled to get any of those people (if only for closer distances). There is no real choice or freedom unless you can indeed afford to refuse, and most are not. If they cannot find a job in their poor country and their only hope is indentured service in Qatar or Saudi Arabia, doing all the paperwork & jumping through hoops for Canada is not really what they want to do. They just have zero choice.

Yeah, immigration to Trump's America is easier. Just go ask a Syrian how much easier it is.

Again, making assumptions about me. You choose to believe that people don't have a choice in coming to Canada. I disagree. That does not mean I have no empathy.

Finally, sure, I agree that IRCC is a typical immigration agency. So please let's stop the weird pretense that Canadians are welcoming or open or any better of other nations. Trudeau's welcoming mat is just a trap, Unless he meant "welcome to apply and get rejected". And please, Doug Ford & the Quebecois not only want to stop accepting refugees, they do not even want to let people come in to apply and get their claims processed.

Not sure what point you are trying to make. Fairly well-known that there is a lot of anti-immigrant mentality, especially in Quebec and other areas of the country. Like every other country in the world, Canada isn't perfect.

You should watch the movie Elysium, if you never did.

Can't stand Matt Damon.

 

[canuck_in_uk]

@unlucky_chaser

The comments are getting personal. It would be polite to keep to the original points for discussion.

The discussion veered towards 'anchor babies'. So, if someone wants to respond then the responses must not be personal.

And, to add @canuck_in_uk is not a recent immigrant. She was born in Canada. Her posts reflect a strong sense of ethics. Also, not someone who is likely to depend on welfare at any point in life

Thanks Bryanna .

And thanks for the reminder of veering off the thread topic. Back to it: anchor babies. The ethics of it. Possible negative effect it can have on our healthcare system.

 

[unlucky_chaser]

@unlucky_chaser

The comments are getting personal. It would be polite to keep to the original points for discussion.

The discussion veered towards 'anchor babies'. So, if someone wants to respond then the responses must not be personal.

And, to add @canuck_in_uk is not a recent immigrant. She was born in Canada. Her posts reflect a strong sense of ethics. Also, not someone who is likely to depend on welfare at any point in life

My bad. I apologize for veering. Thank you for keeping a close eye, Bryanna.

Just to clarify, I never spoke to canuck_in_uk as an immigrant. I was assuming from the user name that s/he is a Canadian living in the UK. not sure where this confusion came from (The only welfare I meant was the pensions and free healthcare for Canadian seniors even if they lived out of Canada their whole life, never paying taxes into the system).

I'd like to debunk the latest reply, but I'll stop arguing out of respect for others as I do not think it'll help people here, so it's veering away from the purpose of the forum.

Good luck everyone!