Let us be clear on the narrative surrounding Quebec: Gavin McInnes' position is the cuckservative position.

As MrRoundtree notes, Quebec nationalism is something that nationalists across the Western world should appreciate. Quebec is a society that is determined to speak its language and see its institutions benefit its own people.

I do not love the fact it is a left-nationalism, but there are reasons for this. First of all, it came of age in the 1960s and this was the dominant ethos for nationalist movements at that time. Secondly, it had an anti-clerical element that was due in part to the accommodations made between the Catholic church and the English Canadian regimes of Montreal (then the nation's financial capital) and Ottawa.

I am a child of English Montreal and the rise of Quebec nationalism saw that strange, florid and divided metropolis – the most interesting city Canada has ever produced – fall into a Quebec-for-Quebec mediocrity from which it is only now just beginning to recover as it finds its niche as one of the great cities of the international francophonie.

(And for those who think Quebecers idolise the French, you should hear them talk about the tens of thousands that are now arriving each year. The relationship is closer to the one between Texans and Englishmen than anything more adulatory...)

So I have seen the costs of this nationalism fall upon my own people. But in all honesty, the Anglophone regime of Montreal was foredoomed. It was propped up by an anti-commercial religiosity that the late 20th century eroded, and a sort of self-stratification that rising living/education standards and a democratic political process wore down to nothing. Although I thrill to the descriptions of '50s Montreal in Leonard Cohen or Mordecai Richler's works, it was an unstable creation at its core. It could never have survived the social changes of the 20th century intact.

(Interestingly, before the left-nationalism that led to Bill 101, the two referenda and all the rest, Quebec nationalism produced fascists rather reliably, Adrien Arcand and Lionel Groulx being two of note.)

I understand when Canadians and particularly Westerners resent equalisation payments. It is a system bound to produce rancor. I can even understand Canadians resenting Quebec for its tenuous and unstable link to the federation – you are trying to be Canadians while they/we are trying to be Quebecers... it's a bit of a slight.

But what Quebec is doing is positive. It knows who and what it is. It advocates for its own. It defends its traditions, even when this defence flies in the face of contemporary globalist politeness and is termed racist by the Toronto media.

Quebec is self-oriented, resolute on its identity, intransigent. It will not allow itself to be a mere globalist node. It is the seat of the French fact in North America and has defended its language and culture against a whole tide of forces that would have rather it gone the way of Louisiana.

I am proud of it.

Natives are almost the African Americans of Canada. I remember having hockey practices very seldomly on the reserve and I would skip every time because it was like a third world country. The whole system needs to be abolished and they need to understand that via working and getting educated they can get out of the issues that plague the culture. I know some hard working and wealthy native people: they never lived on a reserve, they know there's nothing there for them.

(03-07-2016 06:22 AM)richler Wrote:  Let us be clear on the narrative surrounding Quebec: Gavin McInnes' position is the cuckservative position.

I don't think McInnes presented a position. He presented anecdotes and some analysis, and it was bang on. Facts are facts, and facts and logic are what McInnes brought to the table. Reed Scowen presented a position, which I agree with. So if you're saying that Scowen's position is the cuckservative position, you're constructing a false narrative to suit your argument using the buzzwords of the day. The cuckservative position is the old Progressive Conservative (PC) position of "my Canada includes Quebec" that Brian Mulroney espoused and used to woo Lucien Bouchard into his federal PC government. The PC voters got cucked by Bouchard and Quebec when he splintered off and formed the Bloc Quebecois, a disgusting parody of a federal political party that only ran members in Quebec ridings and whose sole mission was the breakup of the country. I appreciate the eloquent rhetoric you've brought here in making your argument, but you've got it flipped upside down bro. Kissing Quebec's arse is the cuckservative position. Harper still did it, but he began the slow process of changing the tactics by winning elections without Quebec, and without Toronto. Harper proved that it can be done, western Canada can seize control of its destiny away from the Laurentian elites, just like Trump is seizing control of America away from the GOP establishment. Western Canada will rise again. The price of oil won't stay in the basement forever. And Troolander will make a proper mess of things, just like Chretien and Martin did with the sponsorship scandal. It's time for western Canada get tough. And I've lived out there, I know, they've got enough brass in their balls to do it. Time to say goodbye. You have actually succeeded in proving my point sir. Your pride in Quebec nationalism further proves to me that, if Quebeckers are presented with Mr. Scowen's planned choice, they will finally, once and for all, decide to leave Canada. And it'll be about time.

(03-07-2016 06:56 AM)TheFinalEpic Wrote:  Natives are almost the African Americans of Canada. I remember having hockey practices very seldomly on the reserve and I would skip every time because it was like a third world country. The whole system needs to be abolished and they need to understand that via working and getting educated they can get out of the issues that plague the culture. I know some hard working and wealthy native people: they never lived on a reserve, they know there's nothing there for them.

It's funny you say that, because a little-known fact about Canadian history is that there were some African slaves owned by Canadians (most people think that Candians never owned slaves), but the reason you NEVER hear about it is because the slave owners were not white, so the story doesn't help the currently trendy "let's get whitey" narrative. The slave owners were, in fact, natives. It wasn't on as grand a scale as in the cotton fields of the American south, but it happened, and our school systems ignore it, because it's kind of icky and the teachers don't like it. What they did ram down my throat, however, as a young boy in the Canadian public school system, was poor miserable Louis Riel... all day... every day. I wanted to go back in a time machine and hang the bastard myself I got so sick of hearing about him. The point of that, you see, was to instil white guilt into us privileged little whiteys, because, you know, as Bernie Sanders just told us, us whiteys don't even know poverty. But you're right, the natives here in Canada do know poverty, but the reason they know it so well was elucidated by Benjamin Franklin in an article he wrote for The London Chronicle in November of 1766 entitled, "On the Price of Corn, and Management of the Poor" in which Benjamin Franklin articulated the following...

Benjamin Franklin Wrote:I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.

Canada provides too much to its poor, and so, as Benjamin Franklin predicted, they become poorer, especially the natives. Canada is a welfare state, and the problem is at its worst on the native reserves. Harper was trying to fix this by increasing the transparency of the financial affairs of the reserves (a small first step) and he was met with the resistance of the "Idle No More" protest movement, most of whose protesters couldn't even tell you WHY they were protesting, because they were just astroturf sponsored by the globalists (like Soros' Tides Foundation for example) who want the welfare state to continue, because it provides a YUGE supply of Liberal voters, and Troolander is just the kind of Prime Minister that Soros wants.

.

I think the native indians would have been better off if the 1969 white paper proposal had gone through. The free handouts and separateness from Canadian society is not helping them. The reality of what happened to the natives when Europeans came is unfortunate. However, it is what happens when one side conquers another. It is not something to feel any sort of personal guilt or need for atonement for today; it has happened throughout history.

The native situation is a lesson in what happens when you don't finish the job. Native reserves should never have been set up or allowed, and there should have been forced integration. Instead, now you have Canadian taxpayers milked to maintain an Indian identity that they don't care about, and you have native peoples continuing to live in squalor - a lose lose for both sides.

Implementation of the white paper recommendations today would be the biggest help for native people in the long run. Namely, ending Indian status and any preferential treatment, conversion of reserve land to private property. These people need to get working and providing for themselves, just like other Canadians. There is no reason why they can't hold onto their culture while integrating. And let's say I'm wrong, and they would lose some elements of their culture, I say so be it. At least they would be living better and providing for themselves.

(03-07-2016 09:13 AM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 06:22 AM)richler Wrote:  Let us be clear on the narrative surrounding Quebec: Gavin McInnes' position is the cuckservative position.

Western Canada will rise again. The price of oil won't stay in the basement forever. And Troolander will make a proper mess of things, just like Chretien and Martin did with the sponsorship scandal. It's time for western Canada get tough. And I've lived out there, I know, they've got enough brass in their balls to do it. Time to say goodbye. You have actually succeeded in proving my point sir. Your pride in Quebec nationalism further proves to me that, if Quebeckers are presented with Mr. Scowen's planned choice, they will finally, once and for all, decide to leave Canada. And it'll be about time.

Unfortunately, I don't have time to get into McInnes' position on Quebec and Montreal too deeply right now, but I hope to later. It is essentially the position that is my birthright as a Montreal Anglo: the English built Montreal into a commercial powerhouse and then the French voted it away. Let's just say that the basic outline is true. It ignores a lot of other developments that undermined Montreal's commercial prowess (it was the metropolis of a sea-trading nation connected to the British Empire while Toronto is that of the land-trading one connected to the United States; the Toronto Stock Exchange outstripped Montreal's by the '30s; the Saint Lawrence Seaway...), but it's not wrong. There just weren't enough Anglos, and they didn't fight hard enough for it. I've grieved over that enough already, and I don't think the creation of a French-flavoured New York Junior would have been worth the loss of a whole people anyway.

(The other thing here is that it wasn't zero sum; English Canadians mostly drifted to their other power centres in Toronto and west of that. Quebecers had their backs against the wall and knew that if they lost Montreal, they'd lose the province and ultimately what they were as a people. Louisiana and all that.)

To me, it sounds like you expect me to be opposed to you. In fact, my stance is "good on ya". I hope you guys in the West get more control over your resources and more freedom to use them to benefit your families and cities. I support locally centred authority and smaller political groupings based on shared histories; if I was out West and felt like I was kissing Quebec's arse, I'd be appalled and I'd be calling for it to change.

French Quebec is what it is. It has a strong identity and sense of self (much stronger than the English Canada of 1960 onward, which often relies on comparisons with the US or globalist talking-points for its identity). I'm not too worried about things like equalization or getting Western money because Quebec should run its own house. And if it doesn't, I've lived in countries with per capita GDPs a fraction of Canada's and I've gotten by. I'd rather get by on less than be part of some massive empire for which I had to make compromises about who I am.

I don't live in Canada anymore, but my emotional attachment is to Montreal and Quebec. That's home. But I hear your points and hope you are able to resolve them. Quebec will be Quebec and will act in Quebec's interests, however perfidious that may seem in Calgary or Ottawa. Whatever that means in terms of ultimate political realities, we'll find out.

But I damn sure don't oppose some Western guys for trying to make sure they are maîtres chez eux.

(oh, and I used "cuck" due to placing an emphasis on economics and wealth over culture and ancestry).

(03-07-2016 09:37 AM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  Canada provides too much to its poor, and so, as Benjamin Franklin predicted, they become poorer, especially the natives. Canada is a welfare state, and the problem is at its worst on the native reserves. Harper was trying to fix this by increasing the transparency of the financial affairs of the reserves (a small first step) and he was met with the resistance of the "Idle No More" protest movement, most of whose protesters couldn't even tell you WHY they were protesting, because they were just astroturf sponsored by the globalists (like Soros' Tides Foundation for example) who want the welfare state to continue, because it provides a YUGE supply of Liberal voters, and Troolander is just the kind of Prime Minister that Soros wants.

.

Very well said. I want to add some insight into this, as I mentioned earlier of my interest in getting some Chief blood conservatives to start challenging this Liberal loving system.

When Europeans ran into my ancestors in the northern plains and Rocky mountains of Alberta they were at a height of power and confidence not even rivaled by the Haida people. They fought the Europeans many times and lost. Many saw the writing on the wall and integrated as much as possible into some European ways of life. My family became Horseman and Ghostkeeper and had nothing to do with reserves. They are far better off than our relatives who stayed, both economically and spiritually.

They were a defeated peoples. And as a warring people, they understand the idea of no mercy, probably better than Europeans. So by dragging on a system of reparations over the course of a hundred years does nothing for closure in the Indian psyche. Instead of moving on, they get wrapped up in another Liberal politicians wet dream of engaging the Indian vote. Trudeau promising to open up the "Missing Womens Inquiry" is a great example. Its a money pit of epic proportions that just facilitates the buying of votes.

Everyone in the community knows where the missing women are, and how to stop it from happening. Getting shitfaced and going for drug runs at 3am with a bunch of strangers in the middle of nowhere is never going to end well. Selling your body in the midst of Picktons purge of prostitutes, despite all the warnings, is a terrible idea.

There is a lot of spiritual pain in the northern Indian forests of Canada, and some take it out on themselves, their kids, a bottle or a woman. Its sad.

(03-07-2016 10:40 AM)richler Wrote:  (oh, and I used "cuck" due to placing an emphasis on economics and wealth over culture and ancestry).

Oh so you're an anglo Montrealer. Then you have a similar experience to Reed Scowen. Have you read his book, "Time to Say Goodbye"? If not, I would highly recommend it. He is an anglo from Notre-dame-de-Grace (NDG) neighbourhood in Montreal where he went on to become a member of the Quebec provincial parliament for a number of years.

And yeah sorry, I thought you were opposing Scowen's proposal because you quoted MrRoundtree, who does seem to oppose it (maybe, he plays it close to the vest, like most francophone Quebeckers do). Quebec is complicated for sure, and I thank you for sharing your own perspective on the history of the region, that was fascinating. But Quebec is NOT Canada, not any more, and that's because it doesn't WANT to be Canada, and we need to accept that and move on. It may have been Canada prior to the 1960's, which you have correctly identified as a point in time where a very fundamental transformation of Quebec took place, but that was a very long time ago. Canada won't be able to move on with life as a sovereign nation unless and until it resolves this issue. Time to say goodbye indeed.

WRT "cuckservative", I see that word as a combination of the word "cuckold" and the word "conservative". So, as a cuckold is a married man who has an insufficiently masculine reaction to his wife's discovered infidelity, a cuckservative is a conservative who has an insufficiently masculine reaction to liberal treachery and general rule-breaking and hypocrisy. Joe Clark was the prototypical cuckservative. English Canada supported Joe Clark as their champion and representative in Ottawa and he came straight outta Calgary. But then he learned French and he got used to the soft life in Ottawa and cucked out to Quebec interests. Clark became a "Laurentian elite", which is a great phrase that I picked up from Ezra Levant, God bless his shitlord heart. So I don't see how you can consider McInnes a cuckservative. I think you are mistaking him for a Montreal anglo who laments the fall of the anglo commercial hegemony in Montreal. That's not who McInnes is. He was born in Scotland and immigrated to Canada as a child, but he grew up in the Ottawa area, not Montreal. He later moved to Montreal when he launched his "Voice of Montreal" magazine there, and when it became successful he and his partners moved the operation to New York City and renamed it Vice. McInnes is simply commenting on how the government of Quebec acts like a tin-pot dictator when it comes to language law enforcement and how it reminds him of Chilean dictator Pinochet. It's an analysis I agree with and I lived in Quebec City for 6 years, so I have street cred, as does McInnes. Neither McInnes nor I could give possibly give less fucks about the history of anglo influence in Montreal. The point McInnes made very clearly is that Quebec is like a bratty teenager who has been threatening to leave home for 400 years. McInnes' answer is the same as mine and Scowen's: "OK FINE! GO! BYE!" Time to say goodbye. They can have Montreal. Fucks given = precisely zero. I know they'll still want my money enough that they'll let me in to check out their main industry: strip bars.

The reason it seems contradictory and erratic is because it's a society divided on the issue. It's eight million people, not one petulant teenager, and the issue of separation is not like one person's choice, spitefully withheld, but something that emerges and dies away in response to a collected multitude of little currents and political maneuvers.

I agree it's exhausting. Looks a bit different from inside but still exhausting. These sorts of things can ebb and flow over centuries.

Now enough Quebec from me for now. I left.

(03-07-2016 03:56 PM)richler Wrote:  Now enough Quebec from me for now. I left.

You and me both brother.

My Canadian brothers, the time to rejoice is upon us. You have been saved. Unconditional free money is here:

Canada plans to experiment with giving people unconditional free money

http://www.businessinsider.com/ontario-a...ign=buffer

Quote:Finland and The Netherlands have already shown their interest in giving people a regular monthly allowance regardless of working status, and now Ontario, Canada, is onboard.

Ontario's government announced in February that a pilot program will be coming to the Canadian province sometime later this year.

The premise: Send people monthly checks to cover living expenses such as food, transportation, clothing, and utilities — no questions asked.

It's a radical idea, and one that has been around since the 1960s. It's called "basic income." In the decades since it was first proposed, various researchers and government officials have given basic income experiments a try, with mixed results.

Folks at the Basic Income Canada Network, the national organization promoting basic income, have high hopes.

"We need it rolled out across Canada, and Quebec, too, is in the game," said chair of BICN, Sheila Regehr, in a statement. "So there's no reason why people and governments in other parts of this country need sit on the sidelines – it's time for us all to get to work."

Ontario officials haven't decided when or where exactly it'll roll out the program, nor how much each person will receive. When it does start, the money will come from a portion of Ontario's budget set aside for the experiment.

In Finland, a small social-democratic country, people will receive an additional 800 euros, or just shy of $900. In various cities throughout The Netherlands, people receive an extra $1,000.

Ontario at least doesn't seem to be spinning its wheels. Canada's federal minister of families, children, and social development, Jean-Yves Duclos, formally endorsed the experiment early last month, saying that basic income merits a genuine discussion.

"There are many different types of guaranteed minimum income," Duclos told The Globe and Mail. "I'm personally pleased that people are interested in the idea."

In theory, basic income should work.

While one knee-jerk reaction is to argue that free money creates a lazy working class, research suggests the opposite is true. Supported by the financial safety net, people in one 2013 study actually worked 17% longer hours and received 38% higher earnings when basic income was given a shot.

In a country like Canada, where healthcare and retirement savings are already highly socialized, it isn't far-fetched to think a steady income paid for by the taxpayers could roll out smoothly.

Never fear. Even if Canadian outsources all of it's labor, the peasants will still be given a paycheck to buy their bread and circuses with. Obviously this is completely sustainable. Canada will now enter 1000 years of peace and prosperity.

(03-07-2016 05:54 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Quote:When it does start, the money will come from a portion of Ontario's budget set aside for the experiment.

LOL. What budget? This coming from the most indebted province, having debt almost equal to that of California but with 1/10th the population.

The friend I was talking about earlier, the welfare seeking bum, is going to be thrilled. He was disappointed how refugees were getting $60/day per person just for meals, but I suppose this will get him closer to even with the refugees.

(03-07-2016 06:08 PM)Mojambo Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 05:54 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Quote:When it does start, the money will come from a portion of Ontario's budget set aside for the experiment.

LOL. What budget? This coming from the most indebted province, having debt almost equal to that of California but with 1/10th the population.

The friend I was talking about earlier, the welfare seeking bum, is going to be thrilled. He was disappointed how refugees were getting $60/day per person just for meals, but I suppose this will get him closer to even with the refugees.

Haha yeah good luck Ontario. Haven't you heard? The west is broke now too. So good luck with getting Alberta and SK to pay for your ridiculous experiment.

But you know what? I doubt it would change things in Vancouver or my home town in Alberta. Everyone around me works and enjoys doing it. The ones who are too wasted to work, will continue doing that too. So it might just work.

Granted my sample pool is made up of European whites, Indian Browns and Asian Chinese, Korean and Japanese. Trying to get these people to stop working is going to be harder.

(03-07-2016 05:54 PM)Samseau Wrote:  My Canadian brothers, the time to rejoice is upon us. You have been saved. Unconditional free money is here:

All aboard the commie train. This is what happens when liberals with political power go COMPLETELY unchallenged by local area cuckservatives. The only thing that will save Ontario is the fact that Ottawa is in it. So therefore they will keep pumping equalization transfers into the Ontario budget. But the rest of Canada... is proper fucked.

At first glance this seems to be a ridiculous plan however, from what I can gather from other sources this plan will send a cheque to every household regardless of income no questions asked. If this is true it might improve the current system for the following reasons:

1. Eliminate welfare, old age security and employment insurance.
2. Make hundreds of government workers redundant, reducing the size of government.
3. Removing the bureaucracy and red tape associated with point 1.

Assuming the tax rate stays the same, wishful thinking I know, and that the working population remains the same. This would basically amount to a tax rebate for people who are not at the edge of poverty. But it'll probably just cause landlords to raise the rent, I know that's what I will do. The devil will be in the details.

Quote:While one knee-jerk reaction is to argue that free money creates a lazy working class, research suggests the opposite is true. Supported by the financial safety net, people in one 2013 study actually worked 17% longer hours and received 38% higher earnings when basic income was given a shot.

They are supporting this using a study from Uganda, where people:

A) aren't entitled cunts,
B) have plenty of motivation to improve themselves and
C) are getting the money as a subsidy for a specific business project rather than as a basic income

Quote:Second, groups had to submit a written proposal stating how they would use the grant for non- agricultural skills training and enterprise start-up costs. They could request up to $10,000. The
proposal specified member names, a management committee of five, the proposed trade(s), and
the assets to purchase

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?a...id=2268552
(just click on the "Open PDF" button to view the whole study)

Let me just emphasize again: to justify basic income in Canada, they are using an unrelated study from Uganda!



Someone kill me now!!!

(03-08-2016 04:17 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  Let me just emphasize again: to justify basic income in Canada, they are using an unrelated study from Uganda!

Just what are you trying to imply? That Canadians are somehow DIFFERENT from Ugandans? Sounds like you've had a little too much to think young man. Can I get some thought police muscle over here? Somebody call Anita Sarkeesian STAT!!!

Quote:New Quebec immigration policy aimed at attracting, retaining foreign talent


In a news conference today, Quebec Immigration Minister Kathleen Weil outlined a new policy aimed at attracting strategic talent to the province.

Weil said this new plan, called Together, We Are Quebec, will take into account changing labour trends and streamline the immigration process.

Another key aim of the plan is to retain immigrants who are here on temporary visas as students or temporary workers.

Weil said Quebec must do better to not lose top talent to other countries.

"People have a lot of choices right now," Weil said. "Many European countries and the U.S. are interesting [places] to potential immigrants and we want to do as well, or better, than our competitors."

A faster system

Weil said the current immigration system can take up to four years for a person to be approved to immigrate to Quebec.

"By the time [immigrants] get here, the labour market has changed."

The process will be sped up by using digital technology in the immigration process.

Competition for highly-trained immigrants

ndividuals trained in job sectors that are in high-demand will be targeted for immigration first.

When asked about what can be done for highly-trained workers like doctors and engineers to get their qualification recognized, Weil said the government and employers will have to step up.

"It's our objective to do much better.[…] We seek to have their qualification partially or fully recognized before they get here. We need to solve these problems. We have to mobilize all the players."

Learning French is seen as integral to having the program work.

"We need to be more flexible to open more French courses. We are going to offer it to foreign students and temporary workers. […] It's the first sense of insecurity new immigrants have."

Foreign students

Weil stressed the importance of retaining foreign students.

"Everyone is after them. We are the second largest university city in North America. These people are well-integrated, they have a degree, they bring incredible diversity."

Temporary workers are also seen as being well-integrated and valuable to Quebec.

Weil said retention of foreign workers is going well at about 20 to 30 per cent. But that this number still lags far behind places like New Zealand where retention is close to 90 per cent.

In Quebec's 2015-2016 economic plan, the province earmarked $42.5 million over five years to help immigrants and ethnocultural minorities contribute more to Quebec's development.

The new policy is accompanied by a five-year action strategy from 2016-2021.

Syrian refugees

Weil said the integration of Syrian refugees has gone very well in Quebec, partly because of the government's partnership with community organizations that help guide the new arrivals.

"We never lived what Vancouver, Ottawa, and Toronto lived because in Quebec, the province is responsible for settling refugees."

Weil said finding apartments and language courses for these refugees has gone smoothly.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/q...-1.3479558

Some points:

1) Seriously, what could go Wrong?
2) check your privilege if you think Canadians are different than Ugandans.
3) I cannot wait to collect my tax free 10k CAD check from overseas. I knew if I survived long enough good things would come.
4)You are haters if you don't want this for your fellow Canadians.
5)please also throw in free dental

I find it hilarious that Americans can have an opinion on Canada, when they have never stepped foot in the country.

America has enough problems to worry about.

(03-08-2016 02:49 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  I find it hilarious that Americans can have an opinion on Canada, when they have never stepped foot in the country.

America has enough problems to worry about.

It's probably fair to say though that Canadians sure do have an opinion of America without having been an American resident. Although it's a bit different since the US has a global influence whereas Canada does not really, in my opinion.

But I think the US have some reasons to worry about Canadian politics now, particularly because of the unvetted migrant rush that appears eerily similar to that of Europe. And now with what Samseau points out with the basic income experiment in Ontario, Canada is competing with Europe in offering the most freebies to these migrants. Canada's traditional immigrants, like my folks, used to be those that worked hard to integrate into Canada and make a living, and understood that requirement when they moved here for a chance at a better life. Now those incentives to being a contributor are disappearing and we may be importing freeloaders instead. This encourages extremists to hide amongst the 50,000 refugees (or even the traditional immigration line), knowing they can live comfortably in Canada without having to do an iota of work, and then strike at the US from a closer distance at any time.

Not saying I know that this has happened or is happening right now, but I would guess that this is now much more within the realm of possibility, and that it should cause Americans to worry about Canadian policy.

^ This is all rhetoric.

This is of more concern to me. A flat rate income sounds like Communism.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-07...experiment

(03-08-2016 02:49 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  I find it hilarious that Americans can have an opinion on Canada, when they have never stepped foot in the country.

America has enough problems to worry about.

To be fair, I don´t out much weight into what most Canadians say about US politics, especially my fellow east coasters, the average person in Canada has no concept of how bad things like illegal immigration are for the average person down there. Canada doesnt have tons of illegal riff raff in our cities, your average person in a place like Nova Scotia has probably never met a Latino in their life unless they took a trip down south. A lot of my friends are blue collar workers and many run businesses that if they were in the US, they would be competing with cheap, Latino labour (landscapíng, masonry, roofing, etc). Many of these same people are posting memes on FB comparing Trump to Hitler and cant understand why the US would ever consider voting him in.

We did import a bunch of low skilled Filipinos and others over the past few years under the TFW program but that got so out of hand that the Harper government kiboshed it, Im not sure whats happening now under Trudeau in regards to that, maybe the Syrians will be pouring our coffee at Tim Hortons soon.

(03-09-2016 01:37 PM)scotian Wrote:  Canada doesnt have tons of illegal riff raff in our cities

That's true, but here is a story by one of my all-time favourite ROK writers, Billy Chubbs...

http://www.returnofkings.com/18028/my-fi...experience

Billy Chubbs Wrote:A bit of background on my city first. For most of the 20th century my city was predominantly full of evil white men. It was truly a hell hole; no, there wasn’t much in the way of crime or uncomfortable experiences, but what we had in safety we lost in soul. The city council, baby boomer dreamers that they are, decided to do something about this. The 90s and early 00s were a rough period for the innocent parts of the world. Wars and genocides in African and the Middle East – caused by us evil white men of course – were ravaging the disenfranchised 2nd and 3rd worlds.

Realizing something needed to be done to help their fellow man, and to give our city some much needed culture, our council held several closed door meetings in their suburban McMansions and agreed to accept a lot of refugees from these culturally superior countries.

Our first big slice of multicultural utopia arrived in 1999 in the form of several hundred Somalians.

Does anyone out there know which Canadian city Billy Chubbs is writing about?

Here is what happened to him while walking to school in the 1st grade and encountering a migrant...

Billy Chubbs Wrote:I reached into my pocket and took out my two loonies for milk money (one dollar coins for the 98% of you reading this who aren’t Canadians) and happily held them out to the man.

The nice man then gave me a Somalian goodbye by kicking me in the stomach with his engineer boot before prying open my hand and taking my two dollars. I tried not to cry as the wind was knocked out of me.

There's your Canadian multiculturalism for you. Beautiful piece of shitlord trolling by the irrepressible Billy Chubbs.