HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2018, 11:40 PM
Docere Docere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,068
2nd generation Canadians earn the most

https://www.thestar.com/news/immigra...ch-as-you.html

Not surprising really. I don't doubt there's a certain "drive" in immigrant families that likely gets lost after multiple generations in Canada or pressure to go into lucrative occupations. That being said the interpretation of the article as it ignores the changing class composition of Canadian immigration and overplays the "lazy, comfortable milennials too busy playing on their IPhones and spending their money on avocado toast" angle. Third generation+ adults aren't descended from the post-1967 cohort, and besides Japanese Canadians only a small percentage of visible minorities are third generation+, so the data on how the third generation is doing now may not tell us much about the future.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2018, 12:09 AM
Capsicum's Avatar
Capsicum Capsicum is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Western Hemisphere
Posts: 1,023
Surprised at West Asians making the least in terms of income. Doesn't this group include Persians, Lebanese (unless they self-identify as Arab), Israelis etc.?

Unless there's a lot of new refugees among this group (such as Afghans). Also, the newest wave of Syrian refugees would be probably in the Arab category right?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2018, 12:16 AM
Docere Docere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capsicum View Post
Surprised at West Asians making the least in terms of income. Doesn't this group include Persians, Lebanese (unless they self-identify as Arab), Israelis etc.?

Unless there's a lot of new refugees among this group (such as Afghans). Also, the newest wave of Syrian refugees would be probably in the Arab category right?
A lot of people who are "supposed to" identify as Arab or West Asian VM don't.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2018, 8:54 PM
Capsicum's Avatar
Capsicum Capsicum is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Western Hemisphere
Posts: 1,023
Is Canada really that different though from other countries in this way though? Isn't the "successful children-of-immigrants success story" kind of a mainstay of "American dream", social mobility stories?

I'd imagine other immigrant-receiving countries also have this kind of thing going on.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2018, 9:01 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is offline
I used to be THAT guy
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 30,561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Docere View Post
A lot of people who are "supposed to" identify as Arab or West Asian VM don't.
That's very true. I have a lot of Lebanese friends and acquaintances, and a good number don't really consider themselves to be "Arabs". I hear the term "Phoenician" from time to time. They also more frequently refer to their language as "Lebanese" as opposed to "Arabic". (It's the Lebanese variant of Arabic. It would be like saying I speak "Québécois instead of "French".)
__________________
Is it him or is it me?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2018, 9:08 PM
Capsicum's Avatar
Capsicum Capsicum is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Western Hemisphere
Posts: 1,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
I hear the term "Phoenician" from time to time.
Using older or ancient names of countries/empires/peoples that existed before the modern nation state as ethnic group names seems really popular in the Middle East.

Eg. Persian-identified people who may be Iranians or people of that descent outside Iran, Chaldeans or Assyrians for the (often Christian) group living in Iraq/Syria and their descendants.

Then again, you do have that kind of thing going on for Europe too, with terms like "Anglo-Saxon" for English-descended peoples, Irish/Scottish people identifying as Celts or Celtic, French people being called Gallic. etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2018, 9:15 PM
Capsicum's Avatar
Capsicum Capsicum is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Western Hemisphere
Posts: 1,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
They also more frequently refer to their language as "Lebanese" as opposed to "Arabic". (It's the Lebanese variant of Arabic. It would be like saying I speak "Québécois instead of "French".)
I don't know anything about what level of distinctiveness is needed for a language to be called its own rather than a variant, but there are gray areas when it comes to self-identity versus, mutual intelligibility. Jamaican patois exists on a continuum from close to, to far apart from standard English, and likewise French-based creole is treated often separately from French (I was noticing it in the thread in city discussions about European influence in NYC, when it came to stats of what languages are spoken in NYC that French and French Creole are seen differently), generally Afrikaans is considered a separate language from Dutch but earlier in the 20th century it was considered a dialect.

Early Italian immigrants often didn't speak Italian as spoken today, but "dialects" like Sicilian. Canada considers Mandarin, Cantonese and maybe a few other Chinese languages separately, but the US doesn't in its stats -- "Chinese" as spoken by immigrants used to refer to Cantonese to most westerners in past generations but Mandarin now.

Sometimes linguists will argue something is a language/dialect while the people who speak/identify with it will argue something else.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2018, 9:40 PM
saffronleaf saffronleaf is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,539
Totally anecdotal, but I've noticed that educated immigrants work hard, their children are forced to work hard by their parents and may or may not work hard (at least once they're off the leash and in college). After that it's all the same. Few children of immigrant parents become the same sort of tiger parents that their own parents are/were.

But the points system kind of ensures that descendants of immigrants have a leg up because just to get in the country you often need some college experience.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2018, 9:43 PM
saffronleaf saffronleaf is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,539
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capsicum View Post
Is Canada really that different though from other countries in this way though? Isn't the "successful children-of-immigrants success story" kind of a mainstay of "American dream", social mobility stories?

I'd imagine other immigrant-receiving countries also have this kind of thing going on.
It's kind of BS though because it just depends on how restrictive you make immigration. It speaks nothing of upward mobility and equality of opportunity, which are the kind of things the "American dream" or whatever tends to represent.

Indian Americans have among the highest education levels and incomes. Pretty much the only reason for that is that, because of the 12+ year green card backlog for Indian nationals (thanks to per country caps), Indians will only be able to come to the US as high skilled workers or as international students (who then adjust status to high skilled worker visas).

Immigrants who come to the US (and presumably Canada) as poor people likely remain that way for many generations. In the US, I read somewhere that it often takes up to 10 generations to escape poverty. I wouldn't be surprised if it were largely similar for immigrants who come to the US poor.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2018, 10:46 PM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 8,481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capsicum View Post
Sometimes linguists will argue something is a language/dialect while the people who speak/identify with it will argue something else.
One example of this 'language confusion' in the anglosphere is the language spoken by the people of Scotland. Most linguists believe that Scottish is a separate language from English, that is closely related to English, but nonetheless just distinct enough to be considered a separate language. Most people in Scotland today speak a combination of this Scottish language and British English.. however, 'linguistic self-awareness' is quite low, most Scots believe they are just speaking a variant of English.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capsicum View Post
Sometimes linguists will argue something is a language/dialect while the people who speak/identify with it will argue something else.
One example of this 'language confusion' in the anglosphere is the language spoken by the people of Scotland. Most linguists believe that Scottish is a separate language from English, that is closely related to English, but nonetheless just distinct enough to be considered a separate language. Most people in Scotland today speak a combination of this Scottish language and British English.. however, 'linguistic self-awareness' is quite low, most Scots believe they are just speaking a variant of English. One piece of key evidence for Scottish being a separate language is the fact that many phrases and structures from other Germanic languages survive more closely Scottish than in English; ie. the Scottish word for church is 'kirk'... which happens to be extremely similar to the words for church in Dutch (kerk), German (kiche), and Danish (kirke).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Jan 27, 2018, 5:53 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is offline
I used to be THAT guy
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 30,561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capsicum View Post
I don't know anything about what level of distinctiveness is needed for a language to be called its own rather than a variant, but there are gray areas when it comes to self-identity versus, mutual intelligibility. Jamaican patois exists on a continuum from close to, to far apart from standard English, and likewise French-based creole is treated often separately from French (I was noticing it in the thread in city discussions about European influence in NYC, when it came to stats of what languages are spoken in NYC that French and French Creole are seen differently), generally Afrikaans is considered a separate language from Dutch but earlier in the 20th century it was considered a dialect.

Early Italian immigrants often didn't speak Italian as spoken today, but "dialects" like Sicilian. Canada considers Mandarin, Cantonese and maybe a few other Chinese languages separately, but the US doesn't in its stats -- "Chinese" as spoken by immigrants used to refer to Cantonese to most westerners in past generations but Mandarin now.

Sometimes linguists will argue something is a language/dialect while the people who speak/identify with it will argue something else.
Haitian Creole is considered its own language by linguists. As a native French speaker with no training in it I can usually decipher what is meant or at the very least the topic. Of course I am a bit special and always concentrate hard to try and understand languages I don't know. Probably more than the average person.

On the other hand, Flemish is not considered a separate language from Dutch, and when in Belgium it is referred to as "néerlandais" or "Nederlands" which basically means Dutch.
__________________
Is it him or is it me?
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:58 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.