HawkShack.com

The Great White North is boosting immigration in order to cover gaps in their labor market:

Canada plans to welcome a record 500,000 new permanent residents in 2025 and has boosted its targets over the next two years as the country looks to ramp up arrivals to address an acute labour shortage, Immigration Minister Sean Fraser said on Tuesday.

Canada now expects to welcome 465,000 new permanent residents in 2023, up 4% from a previous target, and 485,000 in 2024, up 7.5%.

"This year's immigration levels plan will help businesses find the workers they need," said Fraser in a statement.

Canada is struggling with an acute shortage of workers, particularly in skilled trades and industries like healthcare. The most recent job vacancy data showed there were 958,500 open roles in Canada in August and 1.0 million unemployed people.

https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/ ... 000166a03c

This is something that I've been arguing about for years, long before the pandemic turned the labor market upside down. Even before the pandemic, we had an acute labor shortage, with over a million more job openings than unemployed. It's one way of addressing one of the main drivers of our current economic problems that isn't going to go away.

But immigration in the United States is a highly politicized subject that is rife with thinly veiled racism that apparently doesn't exist in Canada, or at least not to the same degree that it does down here.

I'd be curious to hear from our Canadian posters, if they're good with what their government is doing.

The same people griping about labor shortages because the lazy welfare people won’t enter the workforce are the same ones campaigning against open border policies . It’s racist isolationist thinking and not too bright either . But it’s in part because the democrats have allowed utter chaos at the border , in our city streets . We will never figure it out . Both are completely Fd.
I hate both parties . Detest them . America is a rotten apple .

Hawktawk wrote:The same people griping about labor shortages because the lazy welfare people won’t enter the workforce are the same ones campaigning against open border policies . It’s racist isolationist thinking and not too bright either . But it’s in part because the democrats have allowed utter chaos at the border , in our city streets . We will never figure it out . Both are completely Fd.
I hate both parties . Detest them . America is a rotten apple .

I agree completely.

The Dems are almost as guilty as the R's at polarizing the issue, going to the extremes of wanting to abolish ICE, open the borders, etc. There needs to be a rational immigration reform that allows more law-abiding immigrants to enter the country, providing a pathway to citizenship to those here illegally that have jobs and have obeyed the law, while maintaining or enhancing border security, particularly at our ports of entry (except for Trump's hideous border wall), reducing illegal immigration and addressing the shortage of immigration judges/administrators.

There's plenty of room for compromise, but neither side seems interested. They'd rather not fix it and rather keep it alive as a campaign issue.

In Canada, our population is getting old pretty fast so we won't have the younger workers to support businesses, pay taxes, or work in different fields of science and so forth not to mention taking care of the generations like mine
who are heading into their final years.
As well, by adding more immigrants it takes some of the pressure off of existing businesses to pay more in wages as many immigrants will take lower paying jobs. Hopefully that will hold some of the prices down a little
or at least mitigate some of the upside push in prices from inflation.

The big problem is we don't have enough housing for people today and we won't have anywhere to put them while we build more even if we can build ourselves out of this problem.
But immigration in general is a good thing for all countries as it brings a new energy and outlook from people many of whom have not experienced the freedoms we have here in the west.

NorthHawk wrote:In Canada, our population is getting old pretty fast so we won't have the younger workers to support businesses, pay taxes, or work in different fields of science and so forth not to mention taking care of the generations like mine
who are heading into their final years.
As well, by adding more immigrants it takes some of the pressure off of existing businesses to pay more in wages as many immigrants will take lower paying jobs. Hopefully that will hold some of the prices down a little
or at least mitigate some of the upside push in prices from inflation.

The big problem is we don't have enough housing for people today and we won't have anywhere to put them while we build more even if we can build ourselves out of this problem.
But immigration in general is a good thing for all countries as it brings a new energy and outlook from people many of whom have not experienced the freedoms we have here in the west.

It sounds like the demographics up there are very similar to what they are here, which shouldn't be too surprising as the two countries have so much in common. The skyrocketing birth rate in the late 40's and 50's, ie the Baby Boomers, was followed by a very sharp, continuous decline once "the pill" became available, together with the increase in life expectancy, has led to a huge imbalance between young and old. I'm surprised at how people can't figure that out, that we have a shortage of young people and that immigration is one way to solve it.

I hadn't thought about the housing situation. From my experience, most immigrants have families already here that they stay with, either on a permanent basis or until they can afford housing of their own. But that may not be the case up there. I don't see any easy solution as the one industry that is getting hit hard by rising interest rates is housing.

I'm a very strong advocate of immigration, and not just to solve our labor situation. IMO it's one way to prevent wars. We'll never go to war with Japan again, simply because the two countries are so intertwined. Diversity promotes a better understanding of other countries and cultures. And you're right about the energy part. The immigrants I've dealt with are extremely eager to work, less likely to argue or complain, and extremely grateful for even the slightest act of kindness. Native born individuals are more likely to have an entitlement attitude about them, less likely to accept authority.

Governments are not allowing housing to be built fast enough from what I understand. Some of it for environmental reasons, the catch all justification you can use for just about anything nowadays.

A lot of companies are building apartments too. Apartments can house more people in a smaller area and rent is an continuous income stream which can be adjusted with inflation. Thus apartments can be more profitable than building permanent housing.

There are factors encouraging apartment building over house building. And there is an expectation of a huge housing surplus as the previous generation dies off leaving their houses open for another family. As RD stated, there is an imbalance between young and old that as the older generation dies off, will be "fixed." China is supposedly going to experience the largest population contraction once their Demographic Dividend is used up.

Immigration will almost be required by most first world nations to maintain populations and standards of livings to drive the consumer culture necessary to sustain them. This will drastically change the population make up and likely the culture of each nation.

Canada has strong ties to Asia. I expect them to draw most of their immigration from Asia and perhaps Eastern Europe given the current situation there.

Aseahawkfan wrote:Governments are not allowing housing to be built fast enough from what I understand. Some of it for environmental reasons, the catch all justification you can use for just about anything nowadays.

A lot of companies are building apartments too. Apartments can house more people in a smaller area and rent is an continuous income stream which can be adjusted with inflation. Thus apartments can be more profitable than building permanent housing.

There are factors encouraging apartment building over house building. And there is an expectation of a huge housing surplus as the previous generation dies off leaving their houses open for another family. As RD stated, there is an imbalance between young and old that as the older generation dies off, will be "fixed." China is supposedly going to experience the largest population contraction once their Demographic Dividend is used up.

Immigration will almost be required by most first world nations to maintain populations and standards of livings to drive the consumer culture necessary to sustain them. This will drastically change the population make up and likely the culture of each nation.

Canada has strong ties to Asia. I expect them to draw most of their immigration from Asia and perhaps Eastern Europe given the current situation there.

You're right, the age problem will be 'fixed' once the older generation dies off. But that won't happen in enough numbers to make a huge difference for another 5-10 years. The last of the baby boomers won't hit full retirement for another four years.

I'm not sure what Canada's situation is, but there's things down here that they could do to help ease the labor market besides immigration. One is to relax the child labor laws and let teenage minors work longer hours and in more diverse occupations. We could not employ a minor to do something like drive a forklift yet 16 year olds have been driving cars for ever. They could also work on the other end of the age spectrum and encourage older folks to work longer. Closing out the early retirement option for age 62-67 would kill two birds with one stone: Not only would it result in more workers, it would also make SS more sustainable. Same way with Medicare. Extend the minimum age to 67, same as SS. But, of course, that would be politically unpopular.

As far as where Canada will draw their immigrants from, I would imagine that they'd get a lot from Mexico and central America in addition to Asia and eastern Europe. I'd be curious to know what kinds of entry requirements they have, if they are any more or less restrictive. I had a former co-worker that was going to go to work in England and they wanted to know how much money he had in his bank account just to get a work permit as they didn't want him going on welfare.

Canada has strong ties to Asia. I expect them to draw most of their immigration from Asia and perhaps Eastern Europe given the current situation there

Very true about the Asia links. There are a lot of enquiries from Hong Kong as people try to leave after the crackdown by
the Chinese government. There are also a lot of people who became Canadian citizens when the Brits handed HK back but then returned to continue their lives. Somewhere around 40% of the population is of Asian descent and an article from a couple of years ago said 54% did not have English as their native tongue with Chinese being the dominant non english language. Another article from a few years ago suggested that Asian would be the dominant ethnicity by 2030.
(Asian was defined as Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Filipino, and others)

RiverDog wrote:You're right, the age problem will be 'fixed' once the older generation dies off. But that won't happen in enough numbers to make a huge difference for another 5-10 years. The last of the baby boomers won't hit full retirement for another four years.

I'm not sure what Canada's situation is, but there's things down here that they could do to help ease the labor market besides immigration. One is to relax the child labor laws and let teenage minors work longer hours and in more diverse occupations. We could not employ a minor to do something like drive a forklift yet 16 year olds have been driving cars for ever. They could also work on the other end of the age spectrum and encourage older folks to work longer. Closing out the early retirement option for age 62-67 would kill two birds with one stone: Not only would it result in more workers, it would also make SS more sustainable. Same way with Medicare. Extend the minimum age to 67, same as SS. But, of course, that would be politically unpopular.

As far as where Canada will draw their immigrants from, I would imagine that they'd get a lot from Mexico and central America in addition to Asia and eastern Europe. I'd be curious to know what kinds of entry requirements they have, if they are any more or less restrictive. I had a former co-worker that was going to go to work in England and they wanted to know how much money he had in his bank account just to get a work permit as they didn't want him going on welfare.

Canada has more stringent immigration requirements to the United States like most nations do. They have a stronger and more costly social services system than we do, so taking in more immigrants is a higher taxpayer cost than immigrants coming to America who get almost nothing. Canada has focused their immigration on Asia rather than Central and South America for reasons that don't get openly discussed, but have to do with education levels and the quality of the immigrant.

When everyone was holding up Trudeau as some beacon of goodness when he was taking in Afghan immigrants while attacking the United States for Trump's harsh immigration viewpoints, they never openly discussed how nations like Canada and many if not all European nations have much higher immigration requirements and standards than the United States. They take in fewer immigrants by number. They focus their immigration on certain areas for qualification reasons.

No one takes in more unskilled labor immigrants and immigrants in general than America. We would populate other nations with the number of immigrants we have in America even when Donald Trump was peddling his anti-immigrant propaganda, we were taking in tons of immigrants.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/immigration-by-country

Seems Canada attracts a lot of folks from India:

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-canadas-immigration-policy

General information from Wiki:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Canada

NorthHawk wrote:Very true about the Asia links. There are a lot of enquiries from Hong Kong as people try to leave after the crackdown by
the Chinese government. There are also a lot of people who became Canadian citizens when the Brits handed HK back but then returned to continue their lives. Somewhere around 40% of the population is of Asian descent and an article from a couple of years ago said 54% did not have English as their native tongue with Chinese being the dominant non english language. Another article from a few years ago suggested that Asian would be the dominant ethnicity by 2030.
(Asian was defined as Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Filipino, and others)

Some of my buddies say you can get absolutely amazing Asian food in Canada, especially Western Canada like Vancouver. He said all kinds. Filipino, Chinese, and Vietnamese restaurants everywhere. We don't have many Filipino restaurants in Washington State, but I love Filipino food. So that has to be cool.

NorthHawk wrote:Very true about the Asia links. There are a lot of enquiries from Hong Kong as people try to leave after the crackdown by
the Chinese government. There are also a lot of people who became Canadian citizens when the Brits handed HK back but then returned to continue their lives. Somewhere around 40% of the population is of Asian descent and an article from a couple of years ago said 54% did not have English as their native tongue with Chinese being the dominant non english language. Another article from a few years ago suggested that Asian would be the dominant ethnicity by 2030.
(Asian was defined as Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Filipino, and others)

Aseahawkfan wrote:Some of my buddies say you can get absolutely amazing Asian food in Canada, especially Western Canada like Vancouver. He said all kinds. Filipino, Chinese, and Vietnamese restaurants everywhere. We don't have many Filipino restaurants in Washington State, but I love Filipino food. So that has to be cool.

Interesting that you mention Filipinos. We have a plant near Pocatello, ID that is expanding, and they don't have near enough workers to staff it. They're talking about bringing in immigrants on green cards from the Philippines. Why there and not some other country, I haven't a clue. How would you like to be a minority dumped into the middle of nowhere in MAGA land?

RiverDog wrote:Interesting that you mention Filipinos. We have a plant near Pocatello, ID that is expanding, and they don't have near enough workers to staff it. They're talking about bringing in immigrants on green cards from the Philippines. Why there and not some other country, I haven't a clue. How would you like to be a minority dumped into the middle of nowhere in MAGA land?

Filipinos tend to be too likeable for anyone to really hate, even MAGA people. I have Trump voting friends that married Filipino women. Filipinos are some of the most relaxed and friendly people you could ever meet. You have to be a really evil person to hate Filipino people. They are usually hard working, Christian, and fairly conservative financially and morally themselves. They don't like conflict and aren't loud or obnoxious.

I can see why a company would recruit Filipinos. They are hard working, super friendly, don't cause headaches, and get along with everyone.

RiverDog wrote:Interesting that you mention Filipinos. We have a plant near Pocatello, ID that is expanding, and they don't have near enough workers to staff it. They're talking about bringing in immigrants on green cards from the Philippines. Why there and not some other country, I haven't a clue. How would you like to be a minority dumped into the middle of nowhere in MAGA land?

Aseahawkfan wrote:Filipinos tend to be too likeable for anyone to really hate, even MAGA people. I have Trump voting friends that married Filipino women. Filipinos are some of the most relaxed and friendly people you could ever meet. You have to be a really evil person to hate Filipino people. They are usually hard working, Christian, and fairly conservative financially and morally themselves. They don't like conflict and aren't loud or obnoxious.

I can see why a company would recruit Filipinos. They are hard working, super friendly, don't cause headaches, and get along with everyone.

Oh, I agree with your characterizations of Filipinos. I've known a number of them and haven't met a one that I didn't like.

But there has to be some other reason, perhaps a country quota, some sort of agreement between governments, etc. Companies aren't just going to say "let's recruit some Filipinos, they're nice people". There has to be a more tangible, practical reason.

RiverDog wrote:Oh, I agree with your characterizations of Filipinos. I've known a number of them and haven't met a one that I didn't like.

But there has to be some other reason, perhaps a country quota, some sort of agreement between governments, etc. Companies aren't just going to say "let's recruit some Filipinos, they're nice people". There has to be a more tangible, practical reason.

A lot of nations recruit from the Philippines including Middle Eastern and Asian nations. Probably has something to do with Filipinos work ethic, ability to blend in in a new country, poverty levels, and the governments easy laws for mass emigration.

Additionally, Filipinos usually pursue education, aren't associated with criminal activity like cartels or drug running, don't follow a polarizing religion, and aren't known for being violent or for gang associations.

Filipinos have a lot of advantages that people interested in importing workers can look at in a very positive manner.

RiverDog wrote:Oh, I agree with your characterizations of Filipinos. I've known a number of them and haven't met a one that I didn't like.

But there has to be some other reason, perhaps a country quota, some sort of agreement between governments, etc. Companies aren't just going to say "let's recruit some Filipinos, they're nice people". There has to be a more tangible, practical reason.

Aseahawkfan wrote:A lot of nations recruit from the Philippines including Middle Eastern and Asian nations. Probably has something to do with Filipinos work ethic, ability to blend in in a new country, poverty levels, and the governments easy laws for mass emigration.

Additionally, Filipinos usually pursue education, aren't associated with criminal activity like cartels or drug running, don't follow a polarizing religion, and aren't known for being violent or for gang associations.

Filipinos have a lot of advantages that people interested in importing workers can look at in a very positive manner.

I'm still not buying that as a reason for our recruiting that specific nationality. There has to be some type of agreement between the governments involved, some type of quid pro quo, something. I know my employer, and they're not going to single out one nationality as being preferred over another for an intangible reason like work ethic because it would be very difficult to rationalize their decision to the 8-10k employees that come from all corners of the world. How would you like it if you were from Kenya and had been trying to get your family over here for years then your own employer told you that Filipinos had a better work ethic or could blend in better with our society?

This company is extremely image conscious. They are not going to be seen as preferring one race or nationality over another.

RiverDog wrote:I'm still not buying that as a reason for our recruiting that specific nationality. There has to be some type of agreement between the governments involved, some type of quid pro quo, something. I know our company, and they're not going to single out one nationality as being preferred over another for an intangible reason like work ethic because it would be very difficult to rationalize their decision to the 8-10k employees that come from all corners of the world. How would you like it if you were from Kenya and had been trying to get your family over here for years then your own employer told you that Filipinos had a better work ethic?

This company is extremely image conscious. They are not going to be seen as preferring one race or nationality over another.

The Philippines does make a lot of deals. That's why Filipinos are in high demand around the world. I know a lot of wealthy Middle Eastern nations employ a lot of Filipinos. There are a lot of Filipinos in China, specifically Hong Kong.

RiverDog wrote:I'm still not buying that as a reason for our recruiting that specific nationality. There has to be some type of agreement between the governments involved, some type of quid pro quo, something. I know our company, and they're not going to single out one nationality as being preferred over another for an intangible reason like work ethic because it would be very difficult to rationalize their decision to the 8-10k employees that come from all corners of the world. How would you like it if you were from Kenya and had been trying to get your family over here for years then your own employer told you that Filipinos had a better work ethic?

This company is extremely image conscious. They are not going to be seen as preferring one race or nationality over another.

Aseahawkfan wrote:The Philippines does make a lot of deals. That's why Filipinos are in high demand around the world. I know a lot of wealthy Middle Eastern nations employ a lot of Filipinos. There are a lot of Filipinos in China, specifically Hong Kong.

They must have some sort of an arrangement with the Philippine government through our state department. I can't imagine any other way, especially as bad as conditions are at the southern border and how politicized it's become.

There are always anti-immigration voices everywhere, including Canada, but the immigration issue is not nearly as politicized here as in the US. Keep in mind Canada has 38 million population, so labor shortage is a real issue. Bottom line, a majority of Canadians understand and welcome immigrants. Just to give a side story, during the Syrian crisis (which is not over), the government asked individual citizens if they'd be willing to host a refugee family for a few weeks if necessary until they could be settled. My wife and I signed up for the program; that's how we found out that there was a WAITING LIST to volunteer to host a refugee family. Tells you something about the Canadian attitude towards not just immigrants, but refugees. Canada is far nfrom perfect, but for an American, it's been pretty refreshing. The things I hear Canadians complain about are pretty tame comparatively speaking.

Having said that, ASF is right that Canada welcomes immigrants but has stringent rules you have to pass to get in. I myself had to go through quite a process to become a permanent resident of Canada even after my wife sponsored me, including getting a criminal background check, fingerprinted, health check including lung xray to determine my risk factor for their healthcare system...not to mention listing my education, professional skill, financial health. Took almost a year to get approved.

By the way, before I married a Canadian, I remember having to fly to Edmonton to direct a photoshoot, and my agency had to have our lawyer draft a letter stating that I was doing business in a way that wasn't taking a job away from a Canadian, just in case I got asked at customs. Ha!

I-5 wrote:There are always anti-immigration voices everywhere, including Canada, but the immigration issue is not nearly as politicized here as in the US. Keep in mind Canada has 38 million population, so labor shortage is a real issue. Bottom line, a majority of Canadians understand and welcome immigrants. Just to give a side story, during the Syrian crisis (which is not over), the government asked individual citizens if they'd be willing to host a refugee family for a few weeks if necessary until they could be settled. My wife and I signed up for the program; that's how we found out that there was a WAITING LIST to volunteer to host a refugee family. Tells you something about the Canadian attitude towards not just immigrants, but refugees. Canada is far nfrom perfect, but for an American, it's been pretty refreshing. The things I hear Canadians complain about are pretty tame comparatively speaking.

Having said that, ASF is right that Canada welcomes immigrants but has stringent rules you have to pass to get in. I myself had to go through quite a process to become a permanent resident of Canada even after my wife sponsored me, including getting a criminal background check, fingerprinted, health check including lung xray to determine my risk factor for their healthcare system...not to mention listing my education, professional skill, financial health. Took almost a year to get approved.

By the way, before I married a Canadian, I remember having to fly to Edmonton to direct a photoshoot, and my agency had to have our lawyer draft a letter stating that I was doing business in a way that wasn't taking a job away from a Canadian, just in case I got asked at customs. Ha!

That is very much what I want to see happen here, although to be that stringent, it would require quite an investment as the US would be processing millions. I'm also in favor of allowing companies to go into foreign countries to their high schools and colleges on recruiting missions/job fairs.

Canada has always been more racially tolerant. When Jackie Robinson first signed with the Brooklyn Dodgers, rather than bring him straight into the majors, Branch Rickey sent him to their minor league franchise in Montreal, where race was much less of an issue. We're still a couple of generations away from achieving that kind of tolerance in this country.

RiverDog wrote:That is very much what I want to see happen here, although to be that stringent, it would require quite an investment as the US would be processing millions. I'm also in favor of allowing companies to go into foreign countries to their high schools and colleges on recruiting missions/job fairs.

Canada has always been more racially tolerant. When Jackie Robinson first signed with the Brooklyn Dodgers, rather than bring him straight into the majors, Branch Rickey sent him to their minor league franchise in Montreal, where race was much less of an issue. We're still a couple of generations away from achieving that kind of tolerance in this country.

Canada had some leaders with power who did not care for slavery that decided against slavery on many cases and the type of racism required to make it work in their nation.

A bit of interesting information on the Wiki. I read James Jewitt's book about when he was taken as a captive slave by the natives. Books like this are eye opening when so many people try to paint slavery as this "white" only activity, when it was very widespread and depended on what tribal group or culture you were a part of.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Canada

As far as the entire United States, I don't know that I agree with RD's assessment. There are a lot of American families that take in immigrants when they come over and organizations in America that assist immigrants. It depends on the state. We have states more populous than Canada. Making sweeping assertions about a nation as vast and varied as the United States is difficult at best as we can differ from State to State and person to person. If we were as racist as some like to make it seem, we would not have the level of diversity we have in the United States. I would even venture to say we have groups of people from every single place in the world in the United States living and prospering. It shows in every institution and every aspect of American society.

Though if Canada were a state, it would be one of the more tolerant states like California or Washington State.

I think I shared this before, but I remember talking to a black guy at a salsa club here in Vancouver a few years ago. He was from Seattle, which is considered a racially tolerant US city, but he was telling how much more relaxed he feels when he's in Canada. It's almost like he can breathe deeper. There's just less angst for blacks because Canada is very different historically than the US and doesn't have nearly the baggage that race has in the US.

Of course, Canada has been exposed lately for its harsh treatment of the indigenous population over the past 100 years - mostly at the hands of the Catholic Church. Surprise surprise. As I said, it's far from perfect. To their credit, the government has recognized that parts of BC have never officially been ceded to the Crown, and this recognition is now stated verbally before most public events you might attend in BC. They also are starting to teach the true history of the treatment of indigenous tribes of Canada. It's a start.

https://vancouver.ca/people-programs/land-acknowledgement.aspx

RiverDog wrote:That is very much what I want to see happen here, although to be that stringent, it would require quite an investment as the US would be processing millions. I'm also in favor of allowing companies to go into foreign countries to their high schools and colleges on recruiting missions/job fairs.

Canada has always been more racially tolerant. When Jackie Robinson first signed with the Brooklyn Dodgers, rather than bring him straight into the majors, Branch Rickey sent him to their minor league franchise in Montreal, where race was much less of an issue. We're still a couple of generations away from achieving that kind of tolerance in this country.

Aseahawkfan wrote:Canada had some leaders with power who did not care for slavery that decided against slavery on many cases and the type of racism required to make it work in their nation.

A bit of interesting information on the Wiki. I read James Jewitt's book about when he was taken as a captive slave by the natives. Books like this are eye opening when so many people try to paint slavery as this "white" only activity, when it was very widespread and depended on what tribal group or culture you were a part of.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Canada

As far as the entire United States, I don't know that I agree with RD's assessment. There are a lot of American families that take in immigrants when they come over and organizations in America that assist immigrants. It depends on the state. We have states more populous than Canada. Making sweeping assertions about a nation as vast and varied as the United States is difficult at best as we can differ from State to State and person to person. If we were as racist as some like to make it seem, we would not have the level of diversity we have in the United States. I would even venture to say we have groups of people from every single place in the world in the United States living and prospering. It shows in every institution and every aspect of American society.

Though if Canada were a state, it would be one of the more tolerant states like California or Washington State.

I don't understand what it is that you don't agree with regarding my assessment that "Canada has always been more racially tolerant" than the US. You even stated that if Canada were a state that it would be one of the more tolerant ones. That alone indicates that the US on the whole isn't as racially tolerant as Canada.

But I do agree with your statement. I just don't understand how it differs from mine.

Do Canadians even have that many people of African descent? I always hear this anecdotal evidence of the one African ancestry guy they all know who feels less pressure in Canada, but rarely see a large representation of African folk in Canada.

I noticed there are not many Latin Americans there either.

For all the talk of their immigration, they don't seem very diverse to look at Canada. Mostly European and Asian ancestry including Indian folk. Maybe it's changing, but Canadian diversity is not large looking at Canada. I always wonder why if Canadians are tolerant of immigrants.

The numbers do not fit the narrative. I've always wondered why since most Canadians I've met are very relaxed people. Must be the difficulty of immigrating to Canada and the small size which can't absorb large scale immigration.

RiverDog wrote:I don't understand what it is that you don't agree with regarding my assessment that "Canada has always been more racially tolerant" than the US. You even stated that if Canada were a state that it would be one of the more tolerant ones. That alone indicates that the US on the whole isn't as racially tolerant as Canada.

But I do agree with your statement. I just don't understand how it differs from mine.

The part I don't agree with is that Canada is more racially tolerant as a whole to the United States. We have an immigrant population that could displace Canada. We have roughly 44 million people of African descent in America. 19 million people of Asian descent. 60 million people of Latin American descent.

Do you think a nation that wasn't racially tolerant would have demographics like we have? You really have to understand that the media has by far hyped up the level of intolerance by Americans. They have sensationalized it and politicized it to make it seem far worse than it is. Yet a nation that was painted as this racially intolerant nation would not have the demographics we have.

You can find pockets of racists, no doubt. You can find that anywhere. But we take in huge numbers of immigrants and almost always have. They have learned to live together and build up strength.

The most difficult racial situation was against folk of African descent which is well documented. As far as other groups, it's kind of varied over time depending on where you live. Mexicans and Latin Americans been in Texas as the Southern United States along the border since the nation was formed. Prior to World War 2 Japanese immigrants prospered in America.

I think it is a false idea to supposed that America isn't a racially tolerant nation because the media paints it as such given the sheer number of immigrants we have here and the level of prosperity attained. America is quite an amazing nation in regards to its diversity. I would not get caught up in the rhetoric to overlook this nation has been an extraordinary story of immigrants coming together in a land to prosper in a way not many other nations on earth can claim. The numbers very much bear this out.

Canadians are nice people and do have a different history. But they have never really had the kind of diversity America has had or in the same numbers. I even watch a few Canadian TV shows, you don't see a whole lot of diversity in their shows. It's usually funny white Canadians in comedies.

You're kind of underselling America's tolerance. I guarantee you few nations in history have had their tolerance tested more than America because we have immigrant populations the size of countries in America. The fact that they are all living within this nation and thriving is downright amazing. You see this in our sports teams, our movies and TV shows, our music scene, our government, and just about every aspect of American society. I doubt you see the same level of diversity in every aspect of society as you see in America. You just don't see that in truly racially intolerant society like say a Japan or China or Russia. Even in places like Canada you don't see the diversity you see here across the nation.

The main reason you see this idea hyped up is because of politics, not the reality of intolerant Americans. Immigrants wouldn't even come here if Americans as a whole lacked tolerance.

You also don't vote in a president named Barack Obama who is the son of an African Muslim immigrant from Kenya and an American woman of European descent in an intolerant nation. It is a further example of the reality of America and the press selling us a version of America that is purposefully focusing on intolerant groups to sell a vision that does not fit the reality we live in. Very few nations supposedly more tolerant than us have had such a leader voted in. America is one of the most diverse and tolerant nations on the planet, which is why the national dialogue is as diverse and open as it is.