National Economy

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

There's no universal law that 1.2 jobs must be created per 1 immigrant in every context in every place forever - that study is referencing a very specific time, place, and economic conditions that don't necessarily apply to us.

In the case of Canada in 2023, we got 1.2 million new immigrants while only 400,000 jobs were created (0.33 new jobs/immigrant).

There is a segment of the left throughout the Anglo world that has this weird obsession with being dogmatically pro-immigration no matter what and will simply refuse to acknowledge or accept that any mindset other than "more immigration always equals more good!" can ever possibly be true, despite the inherently left-wing thinking associated with concerns about wage suppression. In Canada at least this obsessive mindset seems to be falling apart as our insanely high immigration rates post-covid have caused a lot of people to realize this is not true. But it remains a prominent line of thinking for a lot of people.

One of my American cousins once pithily observed that when it comes to political discourse, immigration is the "gun control of the left".

[RHINO]

Nothing is funnier then a Liberal screaming how a carbon tax is a good thing and actually helping the world. If the money collected was put towards new tech, that would be a good start. However its not. The money collected was also supposed to go back to small business in order to help them diversify work towards lowering their carbon output. The money still hasn't been distributed. So yes, I know normal peoples thoughts seem funny and a simple approach seems " laughable " to some. But acting like the Liberals have helped anyone comes across as tone deaf out right dishonest. The fact is, a conservative can look at a another conservative breaking the law and hold him or her accountable. A liberal looks at a liberal doing harm and they make excuses for them or pretend it isn't happening. That's how you know if your on the good team or not. You look at how policy is effecting the entire nation not just a small minority of people. REAL facts. Not convenient ones.

[Nite]

Originally Posted by savevp

I would question the relevance of the quoted US study in the current Canadian context, where many/most immigrants are temporary foreign students working menial gig jobs, if any. Maybe that 1.2 number is more relevant with skilled immigrants.

The US system is not and was not geared to mostly take in skilled immigrants during the time of the study however. In this regard Canada is much more focused on skilled immigrants than the US has eve been.

[Nite]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

There's no universal law that 1.2 jobs must be created per 1 immigrant in every context in every place forever - that study is referencing a very specific time, place, and economic conditions that don't necessarily apply to us.

In the case of Canada in 2023, we got 1.2 million new immigrants while only 400,000 jobs were created (0.33 new jobs/immigrant).

Well you would have to know what perfect of the 1.2 were workers and also would canada have lost a significant amount of jobs in 2023 instead of creating 400,000 as well to do a proper calculation. Most likely Canada would have gone into a pretty deep recession and see 100,000's of job loss last year instead of creating 400,000 new jobs it 5% interest rates without those 1.2 million people.

The study also covered a 20 year period (1980 to 2000) over many business cycles so i don't think 1 year only can show the full effects of employment for those who just arrived.

If you believe the study is bullshit it should be easy for you to prove with a similar comprehensive study that shows the opposite results.

[Nite]

Originally Posted by lio45

Nite's bullshit didn't even deserve an answer, IMO.

If we import ~1M FNSs per year, ~1.2M new permanent jobs appear out of thin air;
If we import ~2M FNSs per year, ~2.4M new permanent jobs appear out of thin air;
How many jobs did Canada create last year? I mean, this theory is such obvious BS it's not even worth considering.

If you are so sure lets see a study in the North America that shows immigrants workers take up more jobs than they create then

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Nite

If you are so sure lets see a study in the North America that shows immigrants workers take up more jobs than they create then

Why are you trying to muddy the waters with "North America" when Lio gave you StatsCan data? That's some bad faith BS.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Nite

The US system is not and was not geared to mostly take in skilled immigrants during the time of the study however. In this regard Canada is much more focused on skilled immigrants than the US has eve been.

Glad to hear have the most skilled drive-thru window operators and Doordashers.

[casper]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Glad to hear have the most skilled drive-thru window operators and Doordashers.

I think your talking about students who are doing doordashing and fast food to make a little extra money while they go to school.

The real problem is the accredited academic institutions that are taking their money and failing their student by not giving them a job.

[Hecate]

Originally Posted by casper

I think your talking about students who are doing doordashing and fast food to make a little extra money while they go to school.

The real problem is the accredited academic institutions that are taking their money and failing their student by not giving them a job.

So it’s the schools job to get them employment??? WTF. THEY ARE NOT CITIZENS!

[casper]

Originally Posted by Hecate

So it’s the schools job to get them employment??? WTF. THEY ARE NOT CITIZENS!

No. If they here on a student visa, it is the schools jobs to give them an education. They should only be working in their spare time.

Lets go back to basics. Student visas are for students to go to school in Canada and get an education. They are not their to bring people in the country to be "independent contractors" working for Uber.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by casper

I think your talking about students who are doing doordashing and fast food to make a little extra money while they go to school.

The real problem is the accredited academic institutions that are taking their money and failing their student by not giving them a job.

The real problem is a government that basically gave these (mostly) colleges a blank cheque with student visas. And then further incentivized immigration fraud with the LMIA system which perversely rewards the least specialized education and training. We have a system where it's easier to win residency with a one year marketing diploma selling cellphones in the mall (relevant experience) vs say an IT student that might take longer to find qualifying work.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by casper

No. If they here on a student visa, it is the schools jobs to give them an education. They should only be working in their spare time.

Lets go back to basics. Student visas are for students to go to school in Canada and get an education. They are not their to bring people in the country to be "independent contractors" working for Uber.

They were working in their spare time before Trudeau lifted the work limits during the school year. The million new “students” here to “take” very questionable college and career college programs are not here for an education.

[casper]

Originally Posted by acottawa

They were working in their spare time before Trudeau lifted the work limits during the school year. The million new “students” here to “take” very questionable college and career college programs are not here for an education.

Those questionable college and career college simple should have not been accredited by provincial authorities in the first place.

Student visas are temporary. If you graduated from a "real college" or university in a legitimate program I think it is reasonable that there is a path to permanent status.

What was happening was nonsense and undermining the credibility of our immigration and education systems.

The feds have cracked down and now require a letter from the province with their applicants. I think the provinces also need to crack down and suspend the accreditation of some of these schools. In BC that has started to do that. Have the other more conservative provinces done the same?

[theman23]

This nationwide problem that was the direct result of a policy change by the federal government should never have been allowed by the provinces.

State the obvious to appear to acknowledge the problem (ideally after years of pretending it didn't exist).

The feds have made a meaningless announcement that will have a negligible impact. The BC government has also done the same. Have other provinces done the same (the answer is almost always yes)?

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by theman23

This nationwide problem that was the direct result of a policy change by the federal government should never have been allowed by the provinces.

State the obvious to appear to acknowledge the problem (ideally after years of pretending it didn't exist).

The feds have made a meaningless announcement that will have a negligible impact. The BC government has also done the same. Have other provinces done the same (the answer is almost always yes)?

They’re all political whores for the quick buck.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by casper

Those questionable college and career college simple should have not been accredited by provincial authorities in the first place.

You mean virtually every public college in the country and some universities? Did you forget that some of the biggest beneficiaries / abusers were institutions like Conestoga College and Cape Breton University? Or the schools who opened GTA campuses with private career colleges just to get in on the racket, like Sault College. These schools reacted logically to the federal government putting serving up a cash cow as a buffet item to them.

Originally Posted by casper

Student visas are temporary. If you graduated from a "real college" or university in a legitimate program I think it is reasonable that there is a path to permanent status.

The vast majority of these students do graduate from "real" schools in "real" programs. The problem is that, in responding to federal policy, these schools all created 1 year (8-12 month) programs of questionable value as a path to residency. It's seen as such by those who enroll. Many of them arrive with undergraduate degrees and simply take the most generic and easy college program they can, that will let them work while studying and get residency. For example, sign up for a marketing diploma while having an undergraduate business degree, work at Tim Hortons or retail part time and then look for qualifying office work once they have a work permit.

We aren't getting IIT and IIM grads from India. They go to Silicon Valley and Wall Street. We're getting the people who would never have qualified for immigration normally, even if they had completed a degree in India. The government created a way to let them buy their way into Canada.

Originally Posted by casper

What was happening was nonsense and undermining the credibility of our immigration and education systems.

And it's still happening. With the change in policy, all the government has done is change the programs that need to be offered. Instead of diplomas, now they have to call them Master's degrees, since graduate studies are exempt from limits. Can't wait to hear about Conestoga and Sault College's executive MBA programs.

Originally Posted by casper

The feds have cracked down and now require a letter from the province with their applicants. I think the provinces also need to crack down and suspend the accreditation of some of these schools. In BC that has started to do that. Have the other more conservative provinces done the same?

No crackdown will really solve what is a fundamentally broken policy as I described above. And I say this as somebody who really believes that students make the best immigrants. If the government was sincere they would institute these changes immediately:

1) Minimum 2 yrs of study for college and undergraduate programs and 1 yr for postgraduate programs.

2) Graduate work permits restricted to areas of study where we face known shortages. Healthcare, engineering/tech, construction, etc. You can study marketing at Conestoga if you want. You won't be staying in Canada after graduation.

3) Full program duration housing requirements for international students. Institution has to offer housing placement with admission to all internationals. We probably need to impose a cost limit too to stop bad faith offers here.

4) I would suggest a reduced work requirement to 20 hrs. Though I'm not sure how enforceable this is with under the table work.

5) Higher monetary requirements. Students should be required to show funds equal to the first year of tuition and living expenses for the institution they are attending and city they are living in up front.

The above requirements could be implemented immediately and would eliminate most of the scrubs you see taking advantage of the system. That would definitely mean fewer students of higher quality. But then the schools would actually have to offer relevant (and expensive) programs and actually start housing students instead of imposing externalities on their communities while they get fat. And the federal government would probably see notable drops in numbers nationally, less wage suppression (higher inflation), reduced housing pressure and lower GDP growth immediately (better in the long run). It's doubtful whether this government wants that.

[P'tit Renard]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

You mean virtually every public college in the country and some universities? Did you forget that some of the biggest beneficiaries / abusers were institutions like Conestoga College and Cape Breton University? Or the schools who opened GTA campuses with private career colleges just to get in on the racket, like Sault College. These schools reacted logically to the federal government putting serving up a cash cow as a buffet item to them.

We aren't getting IIT and IIM grads from India. They go to Silicon Valley and Wall Street. We're getting the people who would never have qualified for immigration normally, even if they had completed a degree in India. The government created a way to let them buy their way into Canada.

Amazing that Casper can still call these so-called students "higher skilled". The quality of these hundreds of thousands of international students is so abysmal that it has turned Conestoga college into an international laughing-stock. At least they're a step up from the strip mall college intakes.


Some international students lack basic computer and academic skills, Conestoga College unions claim
https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/some-in...clipId%3D68596

Local union presidents, Leopold Koff and Vikki Poirier, estimate that that 85 to 90 per cent of the student population comes from outside Canada. They told CTV News that some of those students just aren’t ready for college-level learning.

“Basic skill sets like arithmetical skills [and] computer skills, even knowing how to turn on a computer, how to even operate within a network. They’re lacking those basic skills that we would take for granted,” said Koff, who represents faculty, librarians and counsellors with Local 237 OPSEU.

He added that some students want landed immigrant status and, as a result, they become desperate to pass their courses.

“The academic integrity issues are massive in terms of students trying to find easier ways to get through and to cheat, basically,” Koff explained.


Conestoga is a foreign student mecca. Is its climb to riches leading it off a cliff?
https://globalnews.ca/news/10459197/...t-off-a-cliff/

Instructors are complaining that many students lack fundamental skills, which in turn makes their jobs more difficult, said Koff.

“They don’t have the basic three Rs: reading, writing, arithmetic,” he said.

[P'tit Renard]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

There's no universal law that 1.2 jobs must be created per 1 immigrant in every context in every place forever - that study is referencing a very specific time, place, and economic conditions that don't necessarily apply to us.

In the case of Canada in 2023, we got 1.2 million new immigrants while only 400,000 jobs were created (0.33 new jobs/immigrant).

Exactly. Also, due to it being the biggest economy in the world, as well as a very favourable tax and business incentives system, America attracts the lion's share of the world's most dynamic enterpreneurs. America basically gets the cream of the crop when it comes to high skilled immigration, and these top-tier immigrants create an extraordinary amount of jobs in the US with their new ventures, that Canada can never hope to replicate especially with Trudeau's current policies.

Entrepreneurship and job creation has always been super spiky, and can't be reduced to an average. Attracting one of these dynamic world-class enterpreneurs is worth more to the economy than the equivalent of 10,000 Timmies cashiers with a Conestoga degree.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

You mean virtually every public college in the country and some universities? Did you forget that some of the biggest beneficiaries / abusers were institutions like Conestoga College and Cape Breton University? Or the schools who opened GTA campuses with private career colleges just to get in on the racket, like Sault College. These schools reacted logically to the federal government putting serving up a cash cow as a buffet item to them.

Lets step back and ask the question. "Is this an education that justifies flying halfway around the world for?" Getting into a major Canadian university to a MSc or PhD? Yes. To get a one-year Marketing diploma from the outlet in the local strip mall? Probably not.

The public institutions behaved as businesses. They are not businesses they are public institutions that have a mandate that they put aside to make money.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

The vast majority of these students do graduate from "real" schools in "real" programs. The problem is that, in responding to federal policy, these schools all created 1 year (8-12 month) programs of questionable value as a path to residency. It's seen as such by those who enroll. Many of them arrive with undergraduate degrees and simply take the most generic and easy college program they can, that will let them work while studying and get residency. For example, sign up for a marketing diploma while having an undergraduate business degree, work at Tim Hortons or retail part time and then look for qualifying office work once they have a work permit.

I am ok with that as long as it is capped. At that point they are better educated that the average high-school graduate in Canada.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

We aren't getting IIT and IIM grads from India. They go to Silicon Valley and Wall Street. We're getting the people who would never have qualified for immigration normally, even if they had completed a degree in India. The government created a way to let them buy their way into Canada.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

And it's still happening. With the change in policy, all the government has done is change the programs that need to be offered. Instead of diplomas, now they have to call them Master's degrees, since graduate studies are exempt from limits. Can't wait to hear about Conestoga and Sault College's executive MBA programs.

No crackdown will really solve what is a fundamentally broken policy as I described above. And I say this as somebody who really believes that students make the best immigrants. If the government was sincere they would institute these changes immediately:

1) Minimum 2 yrs of study for college and undergraduate programs and 1 yr for postgraduate programs.

2) Graduate work permits restricted to areas of study where we face known shortages. Healthcare, engineering/tech, construction, etc. You can study marketing at Conestoga if you want. You won't be staying in Canada after graduation.

3) Full program duration housing requirements for international students. Institution has to offer housing placement with admission to all internationals. We probably need to impose a cost limit too to stop bad faith offers here.

4) I would suggest a reduced work requirement to 20 hrs. Though I'm not sure how enforceable this is with under the table work.

5) Higher monetary requirements. Students should be required to show funds equal to the first year of tuition and living expenses for the institution they are attending and city they are living in up front.

The above requirements could be implemented immediately and would eliminate most of the scrubs you see taking advantage of the system. That would definitely mean fewer students of higher quality. But then the schools would actually have to offer relevant (and expensive) programs and actually start housing students instead of imposing externalities on their communities while they get fat. And the federal government would probably see notable drops in numbers nationally, less wage suppression (higher inflation), reduced housing pressure and lower GDP growth immediately (better in the long run). It's doubtful whether this government wants that.

Those are all reasonable ideas. I don't know if its has changed, but Quebec use to be the only province where if you completed a graduate degree you were basically guaranteed nomination through the provincial program for permanent status. Not certain if over time the other provinces followed suit. Either way, with a Canadian degree you should have a higher chance of acceptance, but there should be no guarantee.

Originally Posted by P'tit Renard

Amazing that Casper can still call these so-called students "higher skilled". The quality of these hundreds of thousands of international students is so abysmal that it has turned Conestoga college into an international laughing-stock. At least they're a step up from the strip mall college intakes.


Some international students lack basic computer and academic skills, Conestoga College unions claim
https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/some-in...clipId%3D68596

[I]Local union presidents, Leopold Koff and Vikki Poirier, estimate that that 85 to 90 per cent of the student population comes from outside Canada. They told CTV News that some of those students just aren’t ready for college-level learning.

The feds don't do accreditation of these schools. That is a provincial government responsibility. (As an aside, most of those provinces have conservative governments).

The schools are suppose to establish and enforce entrance requirements. What you are basically pointing out a failure of the provincial government.

Under the old system they required an acceptance letter from the "provincially accredited" post secondary institution. Now they also require a letter from the provincial government.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by casper

Lets step back and ask the question. "Is this an education that justifies flying halfway around the world for?" Getting into a major Canadian university to a MSc or PhD? Yes. To get a one-year Marketing diploma from the outlet in the local strip mall? Probably not.

This is evasive. Once again, the vast, vast, vast majority of these "students" were not hear for graduate or professional degrees. Like the LPC, you're using the legitimate small minority to defend the abuses of what is a large minority (if not outright majority) at this point.

Originally Posted by casper

The public institutions behaved as businesses. They are not businesses they are public institutions that have a mandate that they put aside to make money.

Institutions, like people, respond to incentives. The government laid out a buffet in front of them and told them there would be zero consequences. Their administrators all get great bonuses for growing their schools. Quality of education mattered very little. Conestoga used to have one of the best reputations in the country. They'll never recover now. The federal government shares the blame for enabling this, especially after complaints started coming in.

Originally Posted by casper

I am ok with that as long as it is capped. At that point they are better educated that the average high-school graduate in Canada.

Vehemently disagree. Being better than a high school graduate means nothing when they are no more employable than those high school graduates. See basic literacy issues cited by Petit Renard for example. These kinds of students bring all the externalities of immigration and very little of the benefit. And you can bet that if we started insisting that they had to work as healthcare aides or construction workers before getting residency, a lot of them wouldn't be here to begin with.

Originally Posted by casper

Those are all reasonable ideas. I don't know if its has changed, but Quebec use to be the only province where if you completed a graduate degree you were basically guaranteed nomination through the provincial program for permanent status. Not certain if over time the other provinces followed suit. Either way, with a Canadian degree you should have a higher chance of acceptance, but there should be no guarantee.



The feds don't do accreditation of these schools. That is a provincial government responsibility. (As an aside, most of those provinces have conservative governments).

The schools are suppose to establish and enforce entrance requirements. What you are basically pointing out a failure of the provincial government.

Under the old system they required an acceptance letter from the "provincially accredited" post secondary institution. Now they also require a letter from the provincial government.

The jurisdictional blame game has limits. And that limit is when they don't act despite knowing about abuse and then when they do act, it's not nearly enough. They have known about all the abuse (it's been covered in the press for at least 3 years). They only acted after this school year had already begun and won't put in cuts till the next academic year. And even then that 35% cut (basically going back to pre-Covid levels which were already too high) is pledged for only two years. So really, if the LPC is re-elected they could simply let the cuts expire. Why should voters trust them?