Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    20 Mar '17 17:382 edits
    https://www.yahoo.com/news/almost-half-canadians-want-illegal-134734239.html

    Looks like Canada needs to build a wall themselves.

    Almost half of Canadians believe that migrants who are illegally crossing into Canada from the USA should be deported, according to a Reuters Ipsos opinion poll.

    48% of the 1,001 people polled said they supported "increasing the deportation of people living in Canada illegally", while 41% think that illegal migrants will make Canada "less safe."

    At least 36% believe that Canada should accept migrants coming from the US and allow them to apply for refugee status.

    Canadians are just as concerned about illegal immigration as their neighbours, the poll reveals. 50% of US adults support deporting illegal immigrants, according to a Reuters Ipsos poll conducted at the same time (8-9 March).


    Canada has seen a major influx of asylum-seekers entering the country in the past few months, since President Trump introduced a travel ban on refugees and migrants from seven majority-Muslim countries.

    In the first two months of 2017 around 1,700 refugee claims were filed at the Canadian-US border, according to the Canada Border Services Agency. More than 7,000 refugees entered the country by land in 2016, an increase of 63% compared with the previous year.

    Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is facing increasing pressure to address the steady flow of illegal migrants entering the country. The Conservative opposition have called on him to enforce stricter border controls and to suspend the Safe Third Country Agreement which prohibits most migrants in the US from making a refugee claim at an official border post and forces them to enter the country via dangerous routes.

    46% of those polled by Reuters said they disagreed with the way the Trudeau government has handled the influx of migrants entering Canada from the US. 37% said they agreed with government's current immigration policy.

    Despite growing political pressure and public dissatisfaction, Trudeau has refused to stem irregular migration across the border. "One of the reasons why Canada remains an open country is Canadians trust our immigration system and the integrity of our borders and the help we provide people who are looking for safety," he told Parliament last month. "We will continue to strike a balance between a rigorous system and accepting people who need help," he said as he announced a plan to resettle 1,200 Yazidi women.

    The Canadian government has set an immigration target of 300,000 for 2017, comprising 1% of the population. The 2017 target for resettling refugees is 25,000, significantly lower than in 2016 when the country welcomed 44,800 refugees.
  2. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    20 Mar '17 18:56
    So who will give Trudeau the boot and make Canada great again?
  3. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    9780
    20 Mar '17 19:492 edits
    I'm pretty sure most people support stopping illegal immigration. The problem is what lengths we go to in order to do so. For example, kicking out people who have been here for years and have a family, got an education here, Etc. It's when no discretion is the used during these times that's there's an issue.

    If it's just a matter of stopping illegals at the border, I'm all for it. Just as long as no one is discriminated against, like with the Muslim.
  4. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    20 Mar '17 20:372 edits
    Originally posted by vivify
    I'm pretty sure most people support stopping illegal immigration. The problem is what lengths we go to in order to do so. For example, kicking out people who have been here for years and have a family, got an education here, Etc. It's when no discretion is the used during these times that's there's an issue.

    If it's just a matter of stopping illegals at the border, I'm all for it. Just as long as no one is discriminated against, like with the Muslim.
    So you are in favor of Trump's wall?


    Also, you would not discriminate against anyone, including criminals?

    If not, why even have a border?
  5. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    9780
    20 Mar '17 21:13
    Originally posted by whodey
    So you are in favor of Trump's wall?


    Also, you would not discriminate against anyone, including criminals?

    If not, why even have a border?
    Wall: not a bad idea in of itself, but it's not worth the costs right now. Far more illegals enter through the legal border checkpoints.

    Discrimination: don't be stupid. "Criminal" is not a legally protected status.
  6. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    20 Mar '17 21:381 edit
    Originally posted by vivify
    Wall: not a bad idea in of itself, but it's not worth the costs right now. Far more illegals enter through the legal border checkpoints.

    Discrimination: don't be stupid. "Criminal" is not a legally protected status.
    So as long as they are not criminals is immigration to the US a natural right?

    I tend to get that vibe from most Progs even though they won't admit it.
  7. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    9780
    20 Mar '17 21:46
    Originally posted by whodey
    So as long as they are not criminals is immigration to the US a natural right?

    I tend to get that vibe from most Progs even though they won't admit it.
    It's not a "right". Everyone knows that. The only issue of contention is *why* we choose to limit immigration, which is usually a result of right-wing fear-mongering, bigotry and xenophobia.
  8. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    20 Mar '17 22:40
    Originally posted by vivify
    It's not a "right". Everyone knows that. The only issue of contention is *why* we choose to limit immigration, which is usually a result of right-wing fear-mongering, bigotry and xenophobia.
    So you have mentioned criminal records as being a reason to deny entrance.

    What about if they are sick? What if they are not educated and poor? What if the country simply feels as though they need to limit the numbers coming in because it is becoming too burdensome on the nanny state, etc.?
  9. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    9780
    20 Mar '17 22:581 edit
    Originally posted by whodey
    What about if they are sick? What if they are not educated and poor?
    “Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

    What if the country simply feels as though they need to limit the numbers coming in because it is becoming too burdensome on the nanny state, etc.?
    Then immigration should be limited. This is not yet the case, though.
  10. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    21 Mar '17 08:57
    Originally posted by whodey
    So as long as they are not criminals is immigration to the US a natural right?

    I tend to get that vibe from most Progs even though they won't admit it.
    I don't know whether you consider me a Prog, but I readily admit that I believe borders to be discriminatory. I do believe that freedom of movement should be a human right.
  11. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    21 Mar '17 09:49
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    I don't know whether you consider me a Prog, but I readily admit that I believe borders to be discriminatory. I do believe that freedom of movement should be a human right.
    Humans have always lived in groups and those groups reserved the legitimate power to restrict outsiders from joining. This occurred in the Natural State so I fail to see how doing so now that there exist States with defined borders can possibly violate any "human/natural right".
  12. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    21 Mar '17 12:12
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    I don't know whether you consider me a Prog, but I readily admit that I believe borders to be discriminatory. I do believe that freedom of movement should be a human right.
    So you had no problems with the Europeans coming to America and taking over.

    Got it!
  13. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    21 Mar '17 12:131 edit
    Originally posted by vivify
    “Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

    [b]What if the country simply feels as though they need to limit the numbers coming in because it is becoming too burdensome on the nanny state, etc.?

    Then immigration should be limited. This is not yet the case, though.[/b]
    Even at Ellis Island, people were discriminated against. If they were too sick, or just plain stupid, they were denied entrance. Anyone that was deemed unable to contribute to American society was turned away.

    I suppose you disagree with this as well.

    Why not just come out and say that immigration is a natural right?
  14. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    9780
    21 Mar '17 13:50
    Originally posted by whodey
    Even at Ellis Island, people were discriminated against. If they were too sick, or just plain stupid, they were denied entrance. Anyone that was deemed unable to contribute to American society was turned away.

    I suppose you disagree with this as well.

    Why not just come out and say that immigration is a natural right?
    What's "too sick"? Unless someone has a disease that can be spread, I don't see a reason why "sick" people can't enter. What if someone with cancer wants to come to the U.S. for treatment that's not available in their country? Would you deny them entrance?

    What's "too stupid"? Would that included developmentally disabled people? How do you test for "stupid"? Should they submit an IQ test, even such a thing isn't really available where they come from?
  15. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    22 Mar '17 01:572 edits
    Originally posted by vivify
    What's "too sick"? Unless someone has a disease that can be spread, I don't see a reason why "sick" people can't enter. What if someone with cancer wants to come to the U.S. for treatment that's not available in their country? Would you deny them entrance?

    What's "too stupid"? Would that included developmentally disabled people? How do you test for "s ...[text shortened]... ? Should they submit an IQ test, even such a thing isn't really available where they come from?
    Human beings are all the time evaluating human value. Are you the right color? Do you have the right political ideology? Is your IQ a certain level? Would you make a good worker, will you call off sick a lot? Can you support yourself? Can you live independently outside your parents house? Can you live independently outside your mother's womb? What baby can even if they are born healthy? It's not like they can get up and make eggs and bacon for themselves in the morning. Some think that babies are not worth anything if they require medical aid outside the womb. Then again, some only think that the unborn have value if they cannot live outside the womb even with medical intervention.

    Really it's just an opinion contest full of poo on who is worth more. All that can be known is, the person with the opinion thinks they are of value.

    Unfortunately, we all play this game to some extent. If I befriend this person, will it benefit me? Are they worth my while? If I marry this person, will I regret it? If I let this person work for me, will they cost me more money than they will make me? If I have this baby, will it impede my career or will I suffer too much financially, etc.?

    What is odd to me is, left wingers will puncture the brains of their own flesh and blood so it can be sucked out by a vacuum cuz they feel that they cannot support them and society cannot as well, but will then praise total strangers coming into their country who are welfare cases who will take jobs away from their own children that happen to have survived the abortion mills instead of just turning them away back to their country.

    So what say you? It used to be that people who had TB would be turned away. They are infectious and cost money to treat. Would you turn them away?

    What if an immigrant had a Trump hat on and was dumb as a brick? Would you turn them away?
Back to Top