Canada and the DREAMers

[Adelaide]

Three days after suggesting Canada give special consideration to 10,000 to 30,000 undocumented immigrants from the United States, Senator Ratna Omidvar says the government should "wait and see what happens in the United States first."

Omidvar urged patience when speaking to CBC News on Friday, saying immigrants "would like nothing better than to stay in the United States and I certainly hope that the United States can sort out its various issues to bring some closure to this."

Omidvar said Canada could benefit from the Trump administration's decision to end a program that allowed young, undocumented immigrants to remain in the United States for years.

"These individuals are low-hanging fruit for us," Omidvar told host Rosemary Barton. "They speak fluent English, they've been educated in the U.S., most of them have been to college or university, some of them have work experience. They understand the North American working culture."




Canada should "wait and see" before welcoming DREAMers, senator says - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/dreamers-senator-ratna-omidvar-canada-1.4281558)

Omidvar sees this as an opportunity to gain well-educated, English-speaking university students or individuals with strong work experience. Why not? It makes some sense. They won't be dependent on the government the way some refugees and asylum seekers do.

Kind of an extreme view, as she proposes changing the federal forecasting system to a 3 year one in order to accommodate DREAMers into the numbers that determine how many immigrants Canada can take in for a given year (and how many should be educated, have desired skills, or refugees, so on).

[pragmatic]

Canada should "wait and see" before welcoming DREAMers, senator says - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/dreamers-senator-ratna-omidvar-canada-1.4281558)

Omidvar sees this as an opportunity to gain well-educated, English-speaking university students or individuals with strong work experience. Why not? It makes some sense. They won't be dependent on the government the way some refugees and asylum seekers do.

Kind of an extreme view, as she proposes changing the federal forecasting system to a 3 year one in order to accommodate DREAMers into the numbers that determine how many immigrants Canada can take in for a given year (and how many should be educated, have desired skills, or refugees, so on).


Selectively cherry picking the most attractive candidates is just good business sense.

Would need to be carefully evaluated though to make sure they aren't squeezing Canadians out of their existing jobs.

[Mister D]

It makes "good business sense" because Canadian employers pay them less than their native born counterparts. Same shit, different country.

[Adelaide]

It makes "good business sense" because Canadian employers pay them less than their native born counterparts. Same shit, different country.

Not actually true.

[Mister D]

Not actually true.
Sure it is. Look it up. There is a substantial wage gap in Canada just like there is in the US. What distinguishes Canada is that the wage gap is actually higher for highly educated immigrants.

[Mister D]

Granted, some of that gap is caused by underemployment.

[stjames1_53]

you do know that the key word in DACA is "Deferred".....that means their status has yet to be determined. Our Congress had enough time to do something more permanent. It might appear they didn't want it at all since they "failed" to please the Great Interloper on his quest to eliminate our borders.
It would appear, that since Trump has demanded they take action, that this program will meet it demise because Congress is want to do nothing, this time, again.
It was only due to a few people who were "guilted" into this that it lasted this long.

[Mister D]

you do know that the key word in DACA is "Deferred".....that means their status has yet to be determined. Our Congress had enough time to do something more permanent. It might appear they didn't want it at all since they "failed" to please the Great Interloper on his quest to eliminate our borders.
It would appear, that since Trump has demanded they take action, that this program will meet it demise because Congress is want to do nothing, this time, again.
It was only due to a few people who were "guilted" into this that it lasted this long.
Let Canada have them. They'll be driving cabs and selling kebabs on Toronto street corners. We wish them luck in their future endeavors. CYA!

[MisterVeritis]

Canada should "wait and see" before welcoming DREAMers, senator says - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/dreamers-senator-ratna-omidvar-canada-1.4281558)

Omidvar sees this as an opportunity to gain well-educated, English-speaking university students or individuals with strong work experience. Why not? It makes some sense. They won't be dependent on the government the way some refugees and asylum seekers do.

Kind of an extreme view, as she proposes changing the federal forecasting system to a 3 year one in order to accommodate DREAMers into the numbers that determine how many immigrants Canada can take in for a given year (and how many should be educated, have desired skills, or refugees, so on).
We apparently have 800,000. Canada is welcome to have them all.

[resister]

We apparently have 800,000. Canada is welcome to have them all.
I will even donate some winter clothes!

[Kalkin]

Canada discriminates against the crappy uneducated refugees.

[stjames1_53]

Canada discriminates against the crappy uneducated refugees.

yeah, They can cherry pick who they want, but we can't without coming under attack....................we're the haters, donjano

[Adelaide]

yeah, They can cherry pick who they want, but we can't without coming under attack....................we're the haters, donjano
Well, we do not discriminate based on ethnicity/race/religion. There is a difference. And Canada still does allow in a lot of uneducated refugees and asylum seekers that are unlikely to contribute in any substantial way to the country.

[Kalkin]

Canada still does allow in a lot of uneducated refugees and asylum seekers that are unlikely to contribute in any substantial way to the country.
Dumb move, that.

[Abby08]

Dumb move, that.

But, we do the same thing.

[Kalkin]

But, we do the same thing.

Sadly true. We shouldn't.

[Adelaide]

Dumb move, that.
Helping other people when you're able is a good trait. And most refugees make a shot at it. They get language training. I knew a lot of kids of refugees growing up and they obviously had more opportunity.

[stjames1_53]

Well, we do not discriminate based on ethnicity/race/religion. There is a difference. And Canada still does allow in a lot of uneducated refugees and asylum seekers that are unlikely to contribute in any substantial way to the country.
and neither do we. It isn't just the Mexicans we have here illegally.
They came here illegally. Now we want a legal status, and they run for Canada. AT least your country will vet them, where ours just let them walk in and apply for all kinds of free stuff.
So let's see......they came here cover of darkness, bringing in the drug cartels product, raping and murdering our citizens, some not once, but multiple occasions, then bilk our system for billions a year, and occupying 24% of our prison population......
.....and I'm not talking about migrant farmers, here. They tend to be here legally (green cards)
So, an intense question for you: What are you going to do with those "refugees" that arrive at your border that can't pass vetting? Throw them back across our border? Send them back to where?
The current population of Canada is 36.5 million, ours is about 345 million. You can't take in 21 million refugees, so you're not about to take in all of them. It would destroy your country. You have to be very selective about how many you take in. Again, what are you going to do about those that are "left over," those you don't want?

[donttread]

Sure it is. Look it up. There is a substantial wage gap in Canada just like there is in the US. What distinguishes Canada is that the wage gap is actually higher for highly educated immigrants.


Both are modern western countries who's politicians can benefit from keeping the price of various types of labor artifically low via immigration. Too bad that's not a disclaimer on the paperwork when our kids take out their college loans.

[Ransom]

Well, we do not discriminate based on ethnicity/race/religion. There is a difference. And Canada still does allow in a lot of uneducated refugees and asylum seekers that are unlikely to contribute in any substantial way to the country.
Not the way it works. Because there are races and ethnicities who on average lack an education or abilities to contribute, your policy then results in a disproportional number of poorer unskilled 'workers' being turned away. The Left here and our media and our Democrats here call that racism. How do you respond?

[JVV]

Canada will be getting a rich resource -- with education we paid for, and with gratitude for the country who took them in when we turned them away.

[Abby08]

Canada will be getting a rich resource -- with education we paid for, and with gratitude for the country who took them in when we turned them away.

They aren't all educated and, they aren't all grateful.

Canada is going to end up supporting the majority of them, just like us.

[Captain Obvious]

Goat herders, prostitutes and drug runners.

Canada can have them.

In fact, we should throw in all of those asshole, bedshitting snowflakes who keep threatening to move there but are pussies and don't.

America - becoming great again one less roach at a time.

[MisterVeritis]

Canada will be getting a rich resource -- with education we paid for, and with gratitude for the country who took them in when we turned them away.
Sounds good. Please sell the entire 800K to the Canadians.

[Kalkin]

Helping other people when you're able is a good trait. And most refugees make a shot at it. They get language training. I knew a lot of kids of refugees growing up and they obviously had more opportunity.
It may be an admirable trait from a moral perspective, but it's a dumb move both financially and as a nation. If you can choose to bring more skill and wealth into your country or more poverty and welfare burden, which would you choose?

[stjames1_53]

It may be an admirable trait from a moral perspective, but it's a dumb move both financially and as a nation. If you can choose to bring more skill and wealth into your country or more poverty and welfare burden, which would you choose?

IMO, they have to take the bad with the good.

[Abby08]

IMO, they have to take the bad with the good.

Yeah, just like us.

[Kalkin]

IMO, they have to take the bad with the good.
Why? Let's say I'm renting out two rooms in my house. Should I have to accept an unemployed high school dropout just because I've accepted an employed graduate?

[Mister D]

It may be an admirable trait from a moral perspective, but it's a dumb move both financially and as a nation. If you can choose to bring more skill and wealth into your country or more poverty and welfare burden, which would you choose?
Speaking of which, these people moralize a bit too much for people who tell me to keep my morality in church and out of the public sphere.

This is not a comment about Adelaide but a general comment about the progressive left.

[Kalkin]

Speaking of which, these people moralize a bit too much for people who tell me to keep my morality in church and out of the public sphere.

This is not a comment about Adelaide but a general comment about the progressive left.

Selective morality is a hallmark of the modern liberal.

[Captain Obvious]

Selective morality is a hallmark of the modern liberal.

Progressive morality is institution agenda driven.

Not driven by norms or logic even.

[Abby08]

Why? Let's say I'm renting out two rooms in my house. Should I have to accept an unemployed high school dropout just because I've accepted an employed graduate?

Because, they think WE should take everyone, no matter their status. Time for them to put their money, where their mouth is.

[JVV]

They aren't all educated and, they aren't all grateful.

Canada is going to end up supporting the majority of them, just like us.


DACA recipients are educated.

We've spent 15 or 20 years paying for that education.

So Canada would reap the tax revenues which you want us to reject.


Too bad for you though. Trump has already indicated that he'll probably just do a new DACA executive order if Congress doesn't formalize it with an official law.

You're not going to get what you want, because the majority of the country, including a lot of Trump voters, don't think it's right to send young people away from the only country they've ever known.

[Abby08]

DACA recipients are educated.

We've spent 15 or 20 years paying for that education.

So Canada would reap the tax revenues which you want us to reject.


Too bad for you though. Trump has already indicated that he'll probably just do a new DACA executive order if Congress doesn't formalize it with an official law.

You're not going to get what you want, because the majority of the country, including a lot of Trump voters, don't think it's right to send young people away from the only country they've ever known.

There's no way, you know that all 800,00 are educated, now, do you? That, is a big, improbability.

As for getting what I want? You don't know that either. I'm of the opinion, Trump is going to do exactly as you have said.... It's always been my opinion..... I never thought Trump would actually deport all 800,000, but, if some choose to go to Canada or, their birth countries, I won't lose sleep over it, either..... same for the ones who ARE deported because they didn't take advantage of the conditions set forth by DACA and, instead getting an education, chose to be gang bangers and thugs.

[Captain Obvious]

DACA recipients are educated.

We've spent 15 or 20 years paying for that education.

So Canada would reap the tax revenues which you want us to reject.


Too bad for you though. Trump has already indicated that he'll probably just do a new DACA executive order if Congress doesn't formalize it with an official law.

You're not going to get what you want, because the majority of the country, including a lot of Trump voters, don't think it's right to send young people away from the only country they've ever known.

Educated in what? Reading their welfare benefits statements and counting how many six packs and packs of cigarettes they can buy with them?

[The Xl]

What a messy situation. Our governments inability to secure its border has created this shit show.

[pragmatic]

They aren't all educated and, they aren't all grateful.

Canada is going to end up supporting the majority of them, just like us.

You may have missed the point of Canada watching and waiting. And then being selective about who they allow in.

They aren't just "opening the gates".

[Mister D]

Educated in what? Reading their welfare benefits statements and counting how many six packs and packs of cigarettes they can buy with them?
Seriously. It's like we emptied Princeton and Yale.

[Mister D]

You may have missed the point of Canada watching and waiting. And then being selective about who they allow in.

They aren't just "opening the gates".

Of course. Now it will be easier to catch a cab in Toronto. The joke really is on us.

[pragmatic]

There's no way, you know that all 800,00 are educated, now, do you? That, is a big, improbability.

As for getting what I want? You don't know that either. I'm of the opinion, Trump is going to do exactly as you have said.... It's always been my opinion..... I never thought Trump would actually deport all 800,000, but, if some choose to go to Canada or, their birth countries, I won't lose sleep over it, either..... same for the ones who ARE deported because they didn't take advantage of the conditions set forth by DACA and, instead getting an education, chose to be gang bangers and thugs.


Educated in what? Reading their welfare benefits statements and counting how many six packs and packs of cigarettes they can buy with them?

Here are the stated requirements to qualify for DACA enrollment. No idea how rigidly the rules are enforced, but education is part of the package.


To qualify for DACA, applicants must meet the following major requirements, although meeting them does not guarantee approval:[58] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferred_Action_for_Childhood_Arrivals#cite_note-uscis-59)


Came to the United States before their 16th birthday
Have lived continuously in the United States since June 15, 2007
Were under age 31 on June 15, 2012 (i.e., born on June 16, 1981 or after)
Were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012, and at the time of making their request for consideration of deferred action with USCIS
Had no lawful status on June 15, 2012
Have completed high school (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_school) or a GED (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Educational_Development), have been honorably discharged (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorable_discharge) from the armed forces (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Armed_Forces), or are enrolled in school
Have not been convicted of a felony (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony) or serious misdemeanors (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misdemeanor), or three or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety

[Abby08]

Yes, I know the guidelines, that's not to say, all 800,000, did/will comply......800,000 people, there is no way, they all did..... wasn't there an incident a while back, regarding one of these, DACA people getting into trouble and, everyone all up in arms because there was talk of sending him back to his country of origin?

[Captain Obvious]

Here are the stated requirements to qualify for DACA enrollment. No idea how rigidly the rules are enforced, but education is part of the package.


To qualify for DACA, applicants must meet the following major requirements, although meeting them does not guarantee approval:[58] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferred_Action_for_Childhood_Arrivals#cite_note-uscis-59)


Came to the United States before their 16th birthday
Have lived continuously in the United States since June 15, 2007
Were under age 31 on June 15, 2012 (i.e., born on June 16, 1981 or after)
Were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012, and at the time of making their request for consideration of deferred action with USCIS
Had no lawful status on June 15, 2012
Have completed high school (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_school) or a GED (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Educational_Development), have been honorably discharged (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorable_discharge) from the armed forces (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Armed_Forces), or are enrolled in school
Have not been convicted of a felony (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony) or serious misdemeanors (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misdemeanor), or three or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety


Canada's economy is going to boom with this influx of GED's, I can see the Big Macs flowing like Niagara Falls.

:biglaugh:

[pragmatic]

Yes, I know the guidelines, that's not to say, all 800,000, did/will comply......800,000 people, there is no way, they all did..... wasn't there an incident a while back, regarding one of these, DACA people getting into trouble and, everyone all up in arms because there was talk of sending him back to his country of origin?


Yeah, several DACA were appropriately sent back. Criminal activity and gang affiliation.

Don't remember any outcry protesting those deportations. (could have happened, just not recalling that....)

[pragmatic]

Canada's economy is going to boom with this influx of GED's, I can see the Big Macs flowing like Niagara Falls.

:biglaugh:

Yeah, don't know what thresholds Canada is going to apply/enforce for entry. At this point they haven't agreed to take anyone.

But got the impression they aren't really looking for burger flippers.


Guess we'll have to wait and see...

[Abby08]

Yeah, several DACA were appropriately sent back. Criminal activity and gang affiliation.

Don't remember any outcry protesting those deportations. (could have happened, just not recalling that....)

Maybe, it was just his family/lawyer making the fuss. Over 2000 DACA 'kids', have either committed or, have been accused of crimes ....most of them being, trafficking of illegals, drugs and, assault.

[stjames1_53]

Why? Let's say I'm renting out two rooms in my house. Should I have to accept an unemployed high school dropout just because I've accepted an employed graduate?
This theory is one that engages personal choice. You can opt out as it is your right. We are addressing the nation as a whole. We are being forced to take the families of those who would deem essential contributors. While your analogy is nicely tucked, let's look at it this way. You have two rooms. One you rent to a guy such as you described, the other to a broke dick, but, he moves 7 of his friends in during the night Do you have to let them stay?
Canada neither has the resources to take too many in than it has the means to support this increase in its population.
If they take only those they decide to let in, what are we to do about the ones left behind?
But it's ok if they get to vet them. but we can't...........
Leave us with the leftovers has such a nice ring to it