[Newsbot]

Title: Recent immigrants a 'huge burden' on taxpayers
Category: Economics
Posted By: Canadiana55
Date: 2012-03-15 06:48:50
Canadian

[Lemmy]

That's one of the poorest "studies" I've ever read. I guess the authors forgot to consider that immigrants spend money in the economy. If a grad student submitted this to me, I'd tell them to go back and think it over some more. Here's the full paper.

[Regina]

The ones that immigrate on their own merit and skill should be fine. The ones the churches sponsor and support for a short time...........not so much.

[Brenda]

Yep. We're evil and bring the country to bankruptcy.

[martin14]

Regina Regina:

The ones that immigrate on their own merit and skill should be fine. The ones the churches sponsor and support for a short time...........not so much.

Or Grandma and Grandpa... that needs to be stopped.

Churches, yeah, Vince is costing us a pretty penny indeed.

[Lemmy]

martin14 martin14:

Or Grandma and Grandpa... that needs to be stopped..

Yeah, there should be some sort of check in place that if you haven't worked in Canada you should have to pay for services like healthcare. We have provincial residency requirements specifically allowed under the Charter of Rights. Those should be enforced on grandma and grandpa, giving the burdens that already exist on our healthcare system.

[andyt]

Lemmy Lemmy:

That's one of the poorest "studies" I've ever read. I guess the authors forgot to consider that immigrants spend money in the economy. If a grad student submitted this to me, I'd tell them to go back and think it over some more. Here's the full paper.

$1:

Immigrants who arrived in Canada between 1987 and 2004 received about $6,000 more in government services per per person in 2005 than they paid in taxes, according to a new report from the Fraser Institute.

It's about government services, not how much money they spent. What you're saying is that immigrants add to GDP. But, since immigrants have been under performing compared to native born Canadians (even second generation immigrants to some degree) GDP/per person based on GDP growth from immigration has declined. We're importing a bunch of people who aren't contributing to the economy all that much, unless you consider depressing wages a plus.

That's why Kenney wants to eliminate the 1 million immigrant backlog by allowing the choosing of immigrants who will actually be productive in Canada. It would of course mean saying fuck you to people who have applied and waited in line for years, so there's a predictable outcry.

In a time of high unemployment, why do we need 250,000 immigrants a year, only 17% of whom have been fully vetted for skills, and another 250,000 temp workers? That's 500,000 people we take in every year - are we growing enough jobs for all of them?

[Regina]

Brenda Brenda:

Yep. We're evil and bring the country to bankruptcy.

Not bankruptcy at all. They do however bring expensive social baggage with them without being able to contribute to our economy or taxation system. The church is supposed to look after them till they get on their feet. The problem is that when they become an economic burden to them, they are dumped and left to our social programs. Yet the churches are allowed to start over and bring more in.

[andyt]

Regina Regina:

Brenda Brenda:

Yep. We're evil and bring the country to bankruptcy.

Not bankruptcy at all. They do however bring expensive social baggage with them without being able to contribute to our economy or taxation system. The church is supposed to look after them till they get on their feet. The problem is that when they become an economic burden to them, they are dumped and left to our social programs. Yet the churches are allowed to start over and bring more in.

Your mistake is using the term they with Brenda. Not all immigrants are the same - some come here with language and skills that they can immediately be productive. Many do not. But Brenda doesn't understand averages, so when the report talks about the average immigrant being a drain on government spending, she thinks they are talking about her and her family, that she is representative of recent immigration. And it's not the churches that are bringing them in. Churches bring in refugees, not immigrants.

[Brenda]

Regina Regina:

Brenda Brenda:

Yep. We're evil and bring the country to bankruptcy.

Not bankruptcy at all. They do however bring expensive social baggage with them without being able to contribute to our economy or taxation system. The church is supposed to look after them till they get on their feet. The problem is that when they become an economic burden to them, they are dumped and left to our social programs. Yet the churches are allowed to start over and bring more in.

Maybe I didn't read the same article you did, but the article I read mentioned NOTHING about churches. Only about "IMMIGRANTS BEING SUCH A BURDEN" that even their children will not make enough money to bring in enough tax-revenue.

That's discriminatory and VERY insulting.

[andyt]

Brenda Brenda:

Regina Regina:

Brenda Brenda:

Yep. We're evil and bring the country to bankruptcy.

Not bankruptcy at all. They do however bring expensive social baggage with them without being able to contribute to our economy or taxation system. The church is supposed to look after them till they get on their feet. The problem is that when they become an economic burden to them, they are dumped and left to our social programs. Yet the churches are allowed to start over and bring more in.

Maybe I didn't read the same article you did, but the article I read mentioned NOTHING about churches. Only about "IMMIGRANTS BEING SUCH A BURDEN" that even their children will not make enough money to bring in enough tax-revenue.

That's discriminatory and VERY insulting.

Maybe, but what if it's true. Gruebel isn't the first guy to point out that since we changed our immigrant stream to Asia from Europe, immigrants, instead of doing better than native born Canadians, are doing worse. He's just the only guy audacious, discriminantly, and insulting enough to actually sit down and figure out what that costs in government spending vs intake in taxes.

The same is true of poor native born Canadians - they also take in more in services than they pay in taxes. It's a good reason to pay people adequate wages. This is something that hoary old rightie Grueble has pointed out - he advocated for a min wage of $12 and that was some years ago. How he got that past his rightie brethren at the Fraser Institute, I'll never know.

[Regina]

I don't care about averages either and my comment was directed at other sources of our immigration that skirt our immigration laws and add a disproportionate amount of cost to us.
Churches only bring refugees?? Really? Since when are Mexican citizens considered refugees?

[Lemmy]

andyt andyt:

It's about government services, not how much money they spent.

Yeah? You must be some kind of speed-reader. It took me an hour to read it and I just posted it 20 minutes ago.

andy andy:

What you're saying is that immigrants add to GDP. But, since immigrants have been under performing compared to native born Canadians (even second generation immigrants to some degree) GDP/per person based on GDP growth from immigration has declined. We're importing a bunch of people who aren't contributing to the economy all that much, unless you consider depressing wages a plus.

Even if a new immigrant only adds $5 to the economy, that's still an addition. "Not all that much" isn't a meaningful number. Contribution is either positive or negative.

[Regina]

Brenda Brenda:

Maybe I didn't read the same article you did, but the article I read mentioned NOTHING about churches. Only about "IMMIGRANTS BEING SUCH A BURDEN" that even their children will not make enough money to bring in enough tax-revenue.

That's discriminatory and VERY insulting.

I was the one who brought up the churches and offered my opinion on it. My comment was an aside to the article you read. I wasn't interjecting churches to the article.

[andyt]

Lemmy Lemmy:

andyt andyt:

It's about government services, not how much money they spent.

Yeah? You must be some kind of speed-reader. It took me an hour to read it and I just posted it 20 minutes ago.

andy andy:

What you're saying is that immigrants add to GDP. But, since immigrants have been under performing compared to native born Canadians (even second generation immigrants to some degree) GDP/per person based on GDP growth from immigration has declined. We're importing a bunch of people who aren't contributing to the economy all that much, unless you consider depressing wages a plus.

Even if a new immigrant only adds $5 to the economy, that's still an addition. "Not all that much" isn't a meaningful number. Contribution is either positive or negative.

I've posted Gruebels stuff here many times.

The immigrant adds $5 to the economy. But now the economy is divided among one more person, so net effect is we're poorer per person. I mean if immigrants are a net plus to our wealth, why aren't we bringing in millions every year? We've got plenty of space up north, could build immigrant villes (increase in GDP from building those) and they'd each contribute their $5 and we'd be rich. Rich I tell you.