The Changing Face Of Toronto

[dc_denizen]

^ Quit that Toronto bashing, son. In fact, Toronto is now the center of the global film industry. Also filmmaking started in Toronto in 1883, with the landmark early silent movie ‘birth of a province’, five years before it did ‘down south’.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Capsicum

New York City, the Bay Area or LA can't decide to have Canada's immigration system either. Cities can't control immigration policy federally of course but they can still make decisions to attract a larger share of the immigrants that the nation decides to take in.

You seem to be implying that Toronto has made some deliberate moves to attract immigrants. Can you be more specific?

I can assure you that NYC, LA, and SF aren't doing a damn thing to attract immigrants. If anything, they do everything in their power to keep them out. The reason they get tons of immigrants is because they're traditional gateways with good economies. That's it. It has nothing to do with city-specific public policy. It isn't like immigrants are coming to NYC because Mayor DeBlasio is cheerleading for immigrants.

If immigrants went where they were wanted, and where public policy specifically encourages them, they would all be in Flint or Youngstown. Those places bend over backwards, begging for immigrants, offering free housing, working with refugee organizations, etc. I am extremely skeptical that immigrants go to Toronto because of anything Toronto actually does.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Crawford

You seem to be implying that Toronto has made some deliberate moves to attract immigrants. Can you be more specific?

I can assure you that NYC, LA, and SF aren't doing a damn thing to attract immigrants. If anything, they do everything in their power to keep them out. The reason they get tons of immigrants is because they're traditional gateways with good economies. That's it. It has nothing to do with city-specific public policy. It isn't like immigrants are coming to NYC because Mayor DeBlasio is cheerleading for immigrants.

If immigrants went where they were wanted, and where public policy specifically encourages them, they would all be in Flint or Youngstown. Those places bend over backwards, begging for immigrants, offering free housing, working with refugee organizations, etc. I am extremely skeptical that immigrants go to Toronto because of anything Toronto actually does.

The answer is right there in what you wrote but you don't see it.

'The reason they get tons of immigrants is because they're traditional gateways with good economies.'

Why are they gateways? And why do they have good economies? Because the people of San Francisco, New York, Toronto spent many decades building their cities into what they are today. It's very much about what SF does, or NYC does, or Toronto does.

Toronto is a traditional gateway, has a good economy, but it's more than just that. With Toronto you get low crime, clean air, a tolerant accepting society that likes immigration, relatively little racial tension, a city that's built quality education available to ALL, a city that benefits from being situation in a country with quality health care available to ALL, a liberal progressive city with booming cultural industries and lots of marvelous entertainment options, its anglophone, and it's a large metropolis with established immigrant communities of every kind imaginable. Every single last one of them is due to what Torontonians or other Canadians have done. They didn't appear out of thin air.

This is what separates Toronto from the rest and it's very much a result of what Toronto and Canada have done. This isn't an overnight success but 150 years in the making. You can't just replicate that in Cleveland, St. Louis, or Mobile. They're also not in Canada so they're starting off at a disadvantage as far as immigration is concerned.

[the urban politician]

I think cities/Governments can do things to attract immigrants

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Mister F

Ugh, that Hollywood North label always made me cringe, regardless of which city it's been applied to.

Me too. Makes us sound like an appendage of some place else. How very colonial. Nothing against Hollywood but labels like 'Hollywood North' are a slap in the face to Toronto's film industry and the talented people who work in it. It makes it sound like Toronto is just a branch plant which couldn't be further from the truth. The majority of production is domestic and has been for years.

[Gresto]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

^ Quit that Toronto bashing, son. In fact, Toronto is now the center of the global film industry. Also filmmaking started in Toronto in 1883, with the landmark early silent movie ‘birth of a province’, five years before it did ‘down south’.

You sure seem like a troll.

[TownGuy]

He and Crawford have a mission to post nonsense in every single Toronto thread.

[north 42]

Yep, it's rather entertaining!

[Capsicum]

Originally Posted by Crawford

You seem to be implying that Toronto has made some deliberate moves to attract immigrants. Can you be more specific?

I can assure you that NYC, LA, and SF aren't doing a damn thing to attract immigrants. If anything, they do everything in their power to keep them out. The reason they get tons of immigrants is because they're traditional gateways with good economies. That's it. It has nothing to do with city-specific public policy. It isn't like immigrants are coming to NYC because Mayor DeBlasio is cheerleading for immigrants.

If immigrants went where they were wanted, and where public policy specifically encourages them, they would all be in Flint or Youngstown. Those places bend over backwards, begging for immigrants, offering free housing, working with refugee organizations, etc. I am extremely skeptical that immigrants go to Toronto because of anything Toronto actually does.

Originally Posted by isaidso

The answer is right there in what you wrote but you don't see it.

'The reason they get tons of immigrants is because they're traditional gateways with good economies.'

Why are they gateways? And why do they have good economies? Because the people of San Francisco, New York, Toronto spent many decades building their cities into what they are today. It's very much about what SF does, or NYC does, or Toronto does.

Toronto is a traditional gateway, has a good economy, but it's more than just that. With Toronto you get low crime, clean air, a tolerant accepting society that likes immigration, relatively little racial tension, a city that's built quality education available to ALL, a city that benefits from being situation in a country with quality health care available to ALL, a liberal progressive city with booming cultural industries and lots of marvelous entertainment options, its anglophone, and it's a large metropolis with established immigrant communities of every kind imaginable. Every single last one of them is due to what Torontonians or other Canadians have done. They didn't appear out of thin air.

This is what separates Toronto from the rest and it's very much a result of what Toronto and Canada have done. This isn't an overnight success but 150 years in the making. You can't just replicate that in Cleveland, St. Louis, or Mobile. They're also not in Canada so they're starting off at a disadvantage as far as immigration is concerned.

A city can be more or less attractive to immigrants, economically, socially, politically or culturally etc.

If being a traditional immigration gateway was all that was needed to stay being an immigration gateway, then the places immigrants find attractive to go to would never change over time.

But they do. The cities often cited today as having low immigrant numbers and are not gateways like Cleveland and St. Louis were once major immigrant gateways in the 20th century. They stopped becoming immigrant gateways.

Plus, Toronto didn't always have the bustling, booming, and culturally diverse reputation it did in the past. Even around 50 years ago, it was seen as a boring, culturally homogeneous staid, uptight city. A hundred years ago, the same Rust belt cities, like Buffalo, were seen as more exciting and full of potential than Toronto. Montreal was also Canada's big city long before Toronto too.

[Capsicum]

Also, Canada's high immigration rate isn't a new thing. What is new is the fact that immigrants now come from all over the world.

In terms of immigrant percentages, it's been higher in the past, just that those immigrants were British, Europeans and Americans, with few Africans or Asians etc.





Source: Statistics Canada

[isaidso]

^^ 2 great posts. I do feel that Canada will soon set a new record for the number of immigrants taken in one year. The all time high was in 1913, like the graph shows, when just over 400,870 arrived.

Originally Posted by north 42

Yep, it's rather entertaining!

20 years ago comments/opinions like theirs would have riled people in Toronto but not any more. People who've spent time in the city or live in the GGH know it's one of the world's great cities. Those that mock/make ignorant comments just look ridiculous.

Entertaining? It's more akin to listening to a Trump supporter: absurd to the point one wonders why we wasted time on it.

[PFloyd]

Originally Posted by TownGuy

He and Crawford have a mission to post nonsense in every single Toronto thread.

Come on guys, I would expect that by now you would know that those two losers are the worst anti-Toronto trolls in this forum. Just ignore them, and remember the universal rule of thumb when dealing with that kind: don't feed them!

[Mister F]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Me too. Makes us sound like an appendage of some place else. How very colonial. Nothing against Hollywood but labels like 'Hollywood North' are a slap in the face to Toronto's film industry and the talented people who work in it. It makes it sound like Toronto is just a branch plant which couldn't be further from the truth. The majority of production is domestic and has been for years.

It happens all over the world. "Paris of the East", "Venice of the North", etc.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by isaidso

The answer is right there in what you wrote but you don't see it.
'The reason they get tons of immigrants is because they're traditional gateways with good economies.'

Um, this is exactly my point. It has nothing to do with anything Toronto is actively doing. You think SF has a better economy than Detroit because the mayor is smarter? LOL. Rob Ford? The mayors of NYC and SF are complete ciphers.

Originally Posted by isaidso

Why are they gateways? And why do they have good economies? Because the people of San Francisco, New York, Toronto spent many decades building their cities into what they are today. It's very much about what SF does, or NYC does, or Toronto does.

Nonsense. These cities have such characteristics because of long-term macro factors. If you think Miami gets more immigrants than Cleveland because of local public policy decisions, you're living in fantasyland.

Originally Posted by isaidso

With Toronto you get low crime, clean air, a tolerant accepting society that likes immigration, relatively little racial tension, a city that's built quality education available to ALL, a city that benefits from being situation in a country with quality health care available to ALL, a liberal progressive city with booming cultural industries and lots of marvelous entertainment options,

And here is the inevitably absurd SSP boosterism. This is pretty much all nonsense, as if an immigrant is headed to Toronto over Montreal or Ottawa over crime, racial tension, quality education, healthcare, liberalism, cultural industries or "marvelous entertainment options", LOL. Ridiculous. It must be the umpteenth Cats revival that's drawing Pakistanis to Brampton.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Entertaining? It's more akin to listening to a Trump supporter: absurd to the point one wonders why we wasted time on it.

Now this is a post I can agree with. Utterly delusional Toronto boosterism.

Especially loving the most extreme Toronto boosters calling everyone else "trolls", and claiming that Syrians are flocking to 905 sprawl for bike lanes and Hello Dolly revivals.

[montréaliste]

dcdenizen and crawford are both major pains in the butt. I'm not a Toronto booster by any stretch, but these obsessive potshots at T.O. are aggravating.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by isaidso

The answer is right there in what you wrote but you don't see it.

'The reason they get tons of immigrants is because they're traditional gateways with good economies.'

Why are they gateways? And why do they have good economies? Because the people of San Francisco, New York, Toronto spent many decades building their cities into what they are today. It's very much about what SF does, or NYC does, or Toronto does.

Toronto is a traditional gateway, has a good economy, but it's more than just that. With Toronto you get low crime, clean air, a tolerant accepting society that likes immigration, relatively little racial tension, a city that's built quality education available to ALL, a city that benefits from being situation in a country with quality health care available to ALL, a liberal progressive city with booming cultural industries and lots of marvelous entertainment options, its anglophone, and it's a large metropolis with established immigrant communities of every kind imaginable. Every single last one of them is due to what Torontonians or other Canadians have done. They didn't appear out of thin air.

This is what separates Toronto from the rest and it's very much a result of what Toronto and Canada have done. This isn't an overnight success but 150 years in the making. You can't just replicate that in Cleveland, St. Louis, or Mobile. They're also not in Canada so they're starting off at a disadvantage as far as immigration is concerned.

Even taking all of that into account the US is still a much more sought-after place to immigrate to than Canada.

Discrepancies in relative numbers that favour Canada are due to public policy decisions on quotas.

[M II A II R II K]

And being colder and with no warm paradises all year round.

[dc_denizen]

Originally Posted by montréaliste

dcdenizen and crawford are both major pains in the butt. I'm not a Toronto booster by any stretch, but these obsessive potshots at T.O. are aggravating.

I have long found the Ontarian/Torontonian (haven't really run into it elsewhere) nation-building attitude utterly fascinating, as evidenced by the posts of isaidso and a couple others here. I have already noted how I find the city the opposite of boring for this reason. Seems there are people that truly believe that life 'down south' resembles the republic of Gilead.

My other posts on this thread were in response to a somewhat ridiculous comparison of Nassau county (a 1960s suburb with an old, rich established population and plenty of heavy rail transit) with Scarborough (a low-income immigrant-dominated suburb of Toronto). I noted that the silver line in DC is a far better comparison than nassau's bus funding.

It's also not trolling to take issue with the elevation of quality of life in Toronto above all other cities.

You'll note that I have no issue bashing New York or Brooklyn when the need arises. Too much of Brooklyn's downtown is redolent of Newark; the subway is a disgrace and an embarassment; new york is too expensive for the payoff of living here. Our toronto booster contingent would view negative statements about their own city as some kind of violation of the city's/nation's civic creed.

[Northern Light]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

I have long found the Ontarian/Torontonian (haven't really run into it elsewhere) nation-building attitude utterly fascinating, as evidenced by the posts of isaidso and a couple others here. I have already noted how I find the city the opposite of boring for this reason. Seems there are people that truly believe that life 'down south' resembles the republic of Gilead.

....

It's also not trolling to take issue with the elevation of quality of life in Toronto above all other cities.

I'll take issue w/your reply in the following fashion.

As a relatively quiet poster in this forum; who doesn't mindlessly booster or bash, I do find your tone to be very consistently negative.

I also find a disproportionate amount of that negativity comes Toronto's way.

***

I find 'boosterism' and bragging (for any city/state/province/region) mostly cringe-worthy.

For the simple reason that it is often not designed to enlighten or inform, but rather preach.

It also often comes from a myopic view point, one that has not been properly tempered by education or travel.

That said, it is understandable as a defensive reaction to what feels like ill-informed insults.

Toronto is far from perfect, the same may be said of Canada.

Even when we are 'best in the world' at something, there is surely, one hopes, always room to improve.

Needless to say, there are plenty of things where we are nowhere near the best.

BUT, your posts often fail to acknowledge where there has been outsized achievement.

They show too little balance.

First I'll use Canada as an example, pointing out that the Toronto region represents nearly 25% of the entire country's population.

Canada is tied for #1 in the world in post-secondary attainment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ion_attainment

The U.S. is at #7

Canada has the #12 longest life expectancy in the world.

The U.S. is at #31

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ife_expectancy

Canada is #4 in social mobility in the developed world
(the ability to advance beyond the economic strata of one's parents)

The U.S. is #13

***

In noting the above, I am neither denigrating the United States, its past achievements or current successes. I am merely pointing out Canada is on a roll, so to speak and yes, it IS, at least partly, the result of conscious policy choices at all levels of government, not merely an accident of geography or history.

I can likewise point out Toronto's achievements, economic and social, but those have been well documented above.

You seem to suggest there is little to take credit for; and that for that matter big, successful, US cities haven't done things materially different than their less successful peers.

I would beg to differ.

I would note that both Toronto and NYC are amalgamated cities which evens out resources to various neighbourhoods and allow for better regional planning.

I would offer that both have stronger than typical municipal governments, and that broadly as could be said of SF those governments skew to the political left within their respective state/provincial contexts.

Ideas matter.

Toronto is growing exponentially.

It won't go on forever.

But is now, and that is at least partly the result of both differential policy and investment choices as well as a different political climate.

One should never overplay these things.

But neither should one reflexively dismiss them as you seem wont to do.