Multiculturalism in Canada

[Architype]

^ On the one hand that sounds good, but on the other, with massive unemplyment, it's not really the responsibility of the Nfld. Govt. to provide jobs for people from other countries.

[SignalHillHiker]

What comes first, the chicken or the egg? Giving any job here to an international student or graduate is not, in and of itself, causing us any harm. We have Thai workers being flown in by the dozens to work in fish plants in communities where the neighbouring houses are inhabited by fish plant workers who are on EI.

All things considered, I'd rather do what we can to keep the Thai people here instead.

And this is beyond that. The businesses that were at the announcement were all tech and genetics and the like. It's things that the local competition for is very limited.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

We have Thai workers being flown in by the dozens to work in fish plants in communities where the neighbouring houses are inhabited by fish plant workers who are on EI.

All things considered, I'd rather do what we can to keep the Thai people here instead.

That sounds.. sub-optimal. In an alternate arrangement you could have the workers on EI working in the fish plant and leave the Thais in Thailand. If you were worried about the Thai workers, you could send them a small fraction of the money spent on EI, health care, travel, etc. and they could have a really good standard of living in Thailand.

Sometimes it makes sense to bring in skilled workers but it is important to take care of the people who already live in Canada. Middle and lower class Canadians aren't actually doing very well; their wages are not keeping up with the cost of living and productivity gains in the economy.

[SignalHillHiker]

I wasn't clear enough - these positions had to be advertised locally before anyone could be brought in. And weren't taken. Competing against that? Frustrating.

*****

This was cute. We get such a slow trickle of immigrants they can be welcomed individually in the House of Assembly, and get a standing ovation from our MHAs.



Kind of in love with the Australian guy. He looks like he's here on a drunken bet and just got paid.

[Acajack]

Colour me shocked that this wasn't already allowed, and that the Wynne Liberals said no and the Ford Tories said yes.

https://www.thestar.com/news/queensp...elmet-law.html

[kwoldtimer]

I didn't realize that this had been a Ford campaign promise.

[milomilo]

I thought Canada was against religious discrimination? Is a Sikh's life less valuable?

[Franco401]

Originally Posted by milomilo

I thought Canada was against religious discrimination? Is a Sikh's life less valuable?

Thanks so much for trying your best to start shit. Your smartass remark is greatly appreciated.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Franco401

Thanks so much for trying your best to start shit. Your smartass remark is greatly appreciated.

Well it's true, isn't it? Just people choose to have double standards. Either allow anyone to not wear a helmet, or none. Anything else is objectively discriminatory.

[Mikemike]

Absolutely. Progressive society has a very strange idea of what religious discrimination is.... treating people differently and giving them different rules based on religion is absolutely religious discrimination.

[mistercorporate]

Sikhs have been wearing helmets for centuries, this is a political move. Maybe they can wear helmets like the ones they had in the film Breakaway:


pic courtesy Asian art museum


courtesy film Breakaway

The Indian army also has some round helmets that have been specially designed for Sikhs to wear:

[saffronleaf]

I am willing to exempt the Sikhs from any measures intended to improve their safety and security if that's what they want.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Mikemike

Absolutely. Progressive society has a very strange idea of what religious discrimination is.... treating people differently and giving them different rules based on religion is absolutely religious discrimination.

And your point is?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

I am willing to exempt the Sikhs from any measures intended to improve their safety and security if that's what they want.

So it would also be ok for any other group?

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by Acajack

So it would also be ok for any other group?

no

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

I am willing to exempt the Sikhs from any measures intended to improve their safety and security if that's what they want.

As long as you're also willing to exempt us from paying for their hospital care should they get serious head injuries.

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by mistercorporate

As long as you're also willing to exempt us from paying for their hospital care should they get serious head injuries.

Most of our healthcare expenditure is on old age issues. A crash on a motorcycle that affects the head will likely lead to death. This could be of considerable savings due to higher Sikh mortality at younger ages.

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

Most of our healthcare expenditure is on old age issues. A crash on a motorcycle that affects the head will likely lead to death. This could be of considerable savings due to higher Sikh mortality at younger ages.

Well, since you put it that way, sounds good to me!

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

no

Why not?

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

And your point is?

Exactly what he said. Issues like this show the awkward hypocrisy of 'tolerance'. Either the rules apply regardless of religion or they do not, anything else is discrimination and goes against the principals of a secular state. This is crystal clear, but gets ignored by those peddling these policies for political reasons.