Immigration: The United States v Canada

[^_^ 5,021]

As a matter of national policy, Canada actively solicits immigrants and has done so for years. The public supports this and the default political assumption is in support of continued immigration. According to a recent poll, only a third of Canadians believe immigration is more of a problem than an opportunity, far fewer than any other country included in the survey. Rather, Canadians are concerned about "brain waste" and ensuring that foreign credentials are appropriately recognised and rewarded in the job market? Being an immigrant is also no barrier to being a proper Canadian; in parliamentary elections earlier this month, 11% of the people elected were not native. This warm embrace isn't just a liberal abstraction; 20% of Canadians are foreign-born.

...

Why is Canadian public opinion so different from views in United States?

At a conference yesterday, Jeffrey Reitz, a sociologist at the University of Toronto, cited two big explanations for the difference. The first was that Canadians are convinced of the positive economic benefits of immigration—to the extent that towns under economic duress are especially keen to promote immigration, because they believe immigrants will create jobs. Even unemployed Canadians will stoutly insist that immigrants do not take work away from the native born. This makes sense, as most immigrants to Canada are authorised under a "points" system tied to their credentials and employment potential. About half of Canadian immigrants have bachelor's degrees. They may have a higher unemployment rate than native-born workers, Mr Reitz said, and they benefit from programmes and services created specially for immigrants, such as language training. But the preponderance of evidence suggests that Canada's immigrants, being high-skilled, are net contributors.

Mr Reitz's second explanation was that Canadians see multiculturalism as an important component of national identity. In one public opinion poll, Mr Reitz said, multiculturalism was deemed less important than national health care but more important than the flag, the Mounties, and hockey. Irene Bloemraad, a sociologist at the University of California at Berkeley, picked up this theme. There wasn't such a thing as a purely Canadian passport, she said, until 1947. Canada was, psychosocially, very much a part of the British commonwealth until quite recently. When it came time to create a distinctively Canadian identity, the country included a large and vocal Francophone minority (as well as a considerable number of first peoples). The necessity of bilingualism contributed to a broader public commitment to multiculturalism, which persists today.

Other factors allow Canada to be more inviting. The country has little reason to worry about illegal immigration. Like the United States, it shares a long southern border with a country suffering from high levels of crime, unemployment and income inequality. But there aren't millions of Americans yearning to get into Canada. To put it another way, the United States's buffer zone from the eager masses is a shallow river. Canada's is the United States.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/05/immigration?fsrc=scn/fb/wl/bl/unitedstatesandcanada

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

As a matter of national policy, Canada actively solicits immigrants and has done so for years. The public supports this and the default political assumption is in support of continued immigration. According to a recent poll, only a third of Canadians believe immigration is more of a problem than an opportunity, far fewer than any other country included in the survey. Rather, Canadians are concerned about "brain waste" and ensuring that foreign credentials are appropriately recognised and rewarded in the job market? Being an immigrant is also no barrier to being a proper Canadian; in parliamentary elections earlier this month, 11% of the people elected were not native. This warm embrace isn't just a liberal abstraction; 20% of Canadians are foreign-born.

...

Why is Canadian public opinion so different from views in United States?

At a conference yesterday, Jeffrey Reitz, a sociologist at the University of Toronto, cited two big explanations for the difference. The first was that Canadians are convinced of the positive economic benefits of immigration—to the extent that towns under economic duress are especially keen to promote immigration, because they believe immigrants will create jobs. Even unemployed Canadians will stoutly insist that immigrants do not take work away from the native born. This makes sense, as most immigrants to Canada are authorised under a "points" system tied to their credentials and employment potential. About half of Canadian immigrants have bachelor's degrees. They may have a higher unemployment rate than native-born workers, Mr Reitz said, and they benefit from programmes and services created specially for immigrants, such as language training. But the preponderance of evidence suggests that Canada's immigrants, being high-skilled, are net contributors.

Mr Reitz's second explanation was that Canadians see multiculturalism as an important component of national identity. In one public opinion poll, Mr Reitz said, multiculturalism was deemed less important than national health care but more important than the flag, the Mounties, and hockey. Irene Bloemraad, a sociologist at the University of California at Berkeley, picked up this theme. There wasn't such a thing as a purely Canadian passport, she said, until 1947. Canada was, psychosocially, very much a part of the British commonwealth until quite recently. When it came time to create a distinctively Canadian identity, the country included a large and vocal Francophone minority (as well as a considerable number of first peoples). The necessity of bilingualism contributed to a broader public commitment to multiculturalism, which persists today.

Other factors allow Canada to be more inviting. The country has little reason to worry about illegal immigration. Like the United States, it shares a long southern border with a country suffering from high levels of crime, unemployment and income inequality. But there aren't millions of Americans yearning to get into Canada. To put it another way, the United States's buffer zone from the eager masses is a shallow river. Canada's is the United States.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/05/immigration?fsrc=scn/fb/wl/bl/unitedstatesandcanada

#

Canada has less population than California. The vast majority live within easy driving distance of the USA so they can get medical care and buy stuff without paying the 15% sales tax. It is cold. They are annoyingly polite. If they were allowed to carry guns they would pull them out and force you to have a nice day! Bascially, they need to tie pork chops around their neck to get dogs to play with them. That is why they have a loose immigration policy. A lot of the immigrants only use their policy to get within walking disatnce of the USA anyway. Since we ended the draft the population has probably declined.

[^_^ 5,021]

Since we ended the draft the population has probably declined.

not even close to being true. sorry, you lose again.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

My wife has several relatives that have immigrated to Canada in the last 4 years and they are now trying to get us to move up there as well. I'd consider it under the right circumstances.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

As a matter of national policy, Canada actively solicits immigrants and has done so for years. The public supports this and the default political assumption is in support of continued immigration. According to a recent poll, only a third of Canadians believe immigration is more of a problem than an opportunity, far fewer than any other country included in the survey. Rather, Canadians are concerned about "brain waste" and ensuring that foreign credentials are appropriately recognised and rewarded in the job market? Being an immigrant is also no barrier to being a proper Canadian; in parliamentary elections earlier this month, 11% of the people elected were not native. This warm embrace isn't just a liberal abstraction; 20% of Canadians are foreign-born.

...

Why is Canadian public opinion so different from views in United States?

At a conference yesterday, Jeffrey Reitz, a sociologist at the University of Toronto, cited two big explanations for the difference. The first was that Canadians are convinced of the positive economic benefits of immigration—to the extent that towns under economic duress are especially keen to promote immigration, because they believe immigrants will create jobs. Even unemployed Canadians will stoutly insist that immigrants do not take work away from the native born. This makes sense, as most immigrants to Canada are authorised under a "points" system tied to their credentials and employment potential. About half of Canadian immigrants have bachelor's degrees. They may have a higher unemployment rate than native-born workers, Mr Reitz said, and they benefit from programmes and services created specially for immigrants, such as language training. But the preponderance of evidence suggests that Canada's immigrants, being high-skilled, are net contributors.

Mr Reitz's second explanation was that Canadians see multiculturalism as an important component of national identity. In one public opinion poll, Mr Reitz said, multiculturalism was deemed less important than national health care but more important than the flag, the Mounties, and hockey. Irene Bloemraad, a sociologist at the University of California at Berkeley, picked up this theme. There wasn't such a thing as a purely Canadian passport, she said, until 1947. Canada was, psychosocially, very much a part of the British commonwealth until quite recently. When it came time to create a distinctively Canadian identity, the country included a large and vocal Francophone minority (as well as a considerable number of first peoples). The necessity of bilingualism contributed to a broader public commitment to multiculturalism, which persists today.

Other factors allow Canada to be more inviting. The country has little reason to worry about illegal immigration. Like the United States, it shares a long southern border with a country suffering from high levels of crime, unemployment and income inequality. But there aren't millions of Americans yearning to get into Canada. To put it another way, the United States's buffer zone from the eager masses is a shallow river. Canada's is the United States.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/05/immigration?fsrc=scn/fb/wl/bl/unitedstatesandcanada

OMG! Unless of course you live in Vancouver or Toronto. It's like Asian illegal hell there.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Unless of course you live in Vancouver or Toronto. It's like Asian illegal hell there.

Too Asian for your tastes, eh?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

My wife has several relatives that have immigrated to Canada in the last 4 years and they are now trying to get us to move up there as well. I'd consider it under the right circumstances.

Global warming? Privatized health care?

not even close to being true. sorry, you lose again.

Did you think I was being serious? Seriously?

Edited May 22, 2011 by Gary and Alla

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Too Asian for your tastes, eh?

nah, nothing is too asian for my tastes actually. I'm just saying their Asian problem is like our Latino problem.

[Ban Hammer 13,403]

My wife has several relatives that have immigrated to Canada in the last 4 years and they are now trying to get us to move up there as well. I'd consider it under the right circumstances.

how about national health care?

[sly_wolf 199]

how about national health care?

Yes, that is a very good reason to move back.

[sly_wolf 199]

As a matter of national policy, Canada actively solicits immigrants and has done so for years. The public supports this and the default political assumption is in support of continued immigration. According to a recent poll, only a third of Canadians believe immigration is more of a problem than an opportunity, far fewer than any other country included in the survey. Rather, Canadians are concerned about "brain waste" and ensuring that foreign credentials are appropriately recognised and rewarded in the job market? Being an immigrant is also no barrier to being a proper Canadian; in parliamentary elections earlier this month, 11% of the people elected were not native. This warm embrace isn't just a liberal abstraction; 20% of Canadians are foreign-born.

...

Why is Canadian public opinion so different from views in United States?

At a conference yesterday, Jeffrey Reitz, a sociologist at the University of Toronto, cited two big explanations for the difference. The first was that Canadians are convinced of the positive economic benefits of immigration—to the extent that towns under economic duress are especially keen to promote immigration, because they believe immigrants will create jobs. Even unemployed Canadians will stoutly insist that immigrants do not take work away from the native born. This makes sense, as most immigrants to Canada are authorised under a "points" system tied to their credentials and employment potential. About half of Canadian immigrants have bachelor's degrees. They may have a higher unemployment rate than native-born workers, Mr Reitz said, and they benefit from programmes and services created specially for immigrants, such as language training. But the preponderance of evidence suggests that Canada's immigrants, being high-skilled, are net contributors.

Mr Reitz's second explanation was that Canadians see multiculturalism as an important component of national identity. In one public opinion poll, Mr Reitz said, multiculturalism was deemed less important than national health care but more important than the flag, the Mounties, and hockey. Irene Bloemraad, a sociologist at the University of California at Berkeley, picked up this theme. There wasn't such a thing as a purely Canadian passport, she said, until 1947. Canada was, psychosocially, very much a part of the British commonwealth until quite recently. When it came time to create a distinctively Canadian identity, the country included a large and vocal Francophone minority (as well as a considerable number of first peoples). The necessity of bilingualism contributed to a broader public commitment to multiculturalism, which persists today.

Other factors allow Canada to be more inviting. The country has little reason to worry about illegal immigration. Like the United States, it shares a long southern border with a country suffering from high levels of crime, unemployment and income inequality. But there aren't millions of Americans yearning to get into Canada. To put it another way, the United States's buffer zone from the eager masses is a shallow river. Canada's is the United States.

http://www.economist...statesandcanada

Mostly political propaganda. Canada has 2 countries within (Quebec and the rest of Canada) ... somewhat like the US. The opinions and views are different within each.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Mostly political propaganda. Canada has 2 countries within (Quebec and the rest of Canada) ... somewhat like the US. The opinions and views are different within each.

And people from both countries flood into the US for health care.

Vermont is moving toward a single payer health plan for its residents and immediately the Quebec premier had to meet with our governor to determine if Quebecois would still be able to escape to Vermont for medical care or if he would have to have 30% sales tax to cover the people who could no longer go elsewhere. Not to worry...we need them to support our medical infrastructure so we don;t have to go to Boston. The pro-forma for a hospital here includes 2 million hungry Quebecois just across the border. Some of the people from the Ottowa area of Ontario also come here, but most of them go to New York.

[Brother Hesekiel 2,236]

Is it Spring already?

Hard to tell for me, as we have nice weather all year round: never cold, never really hot, but sunshine and blue skies about 330 days a year. I don't need a heater nor do I need air conditioning. Yesterday we had 80 degrees and I rode my Harley Road King around Lake Casitas, which is only 15 minutes away from my house. A couple of weeks ago my wife and I rented a small boat there and had a champagne brunch right on the lake in one of the hidden coves. We actually spotted a pair of wild Bald Eagles while relaxing and enjoying the privilege of living here. My house is only 5 minutes away from the beach and I can't imagine a better place to live than right here on the American Rivera. Monaco comes close, and there are some lovely places in the South of France and some other parts of the world, but taking everything into consideration, I think I hit the jackpot.

Would I move to Canada? No. How about if somebody offered me a job for $1,000,000 per year? No.

Not that I don't like money or could use more of it, or wouldn't like a bigger house, but there are things in life that money cannot make up for. Imagine somebody offered you $10,000,000 per year if you moved to Siberia. Would you do that? Could you really live there?

I wouldn't and I couldn't.

That's why Canada is nothing but a great place to ride the Rocky Mountaineer. That about covers it.

[scandal 951]

The city is named "Ottawa", not "Ottowa". This has been pointed out in the past, but the Vermint poster who insists on misspelling the name of the capital city of the nation just to his north, a city of 800,000, demonstrates his ignorance of all things Canadian not least of which where and how Canadians access their healthcare.

Vermint, I rather like that.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

The city is named "Ottawa", not "Ottowa". This has been pointed out in the past, but the Vermint poster who insists on misspelling the name of the capital city of the nation just to his north, a city of 800,000, demonstrates his ignorance of all things Canadian not least of which where and how Canadians access their healthcare.

Vermint, I rather like that.

A mis-spelling means all that? WOW!

I will be sure to let the Premier of Quebec know so that he doesn't have to confer with the Vermont Governor regarding the health care changes coming in Vermont and how they will affect the healthcare access of residents of Quebec. Why would he need to?

Incredible that you base the entire argument on the spelling of a city..if it is all you have, go with it.