Oh given the high-ish standards we place on immigrant I doubt they are the ones becoming homeless. It’s more likely to be the displaced Canadians who can no longer afford rent.
And I think the mental gymnastics required to think bringing record levels of people into a country who can’t house those already here is insane. You want to breed actual anti-immigration sentiment? That’s a great way to do it. I don’t think ensuring the people entering Canada have an even somewhat affordable place to live is “anti-immigration”. Again, just look at average incomes vs rents. I think a lot (most) of people with your view simply aren’t aware of the current rental (let alone sale) market situation.
It depends on which kind of debate you’re having and which definitions you’re starting from.
I’d say that most people who would call themselves pro-immigration don’t go as far as saying that absolutely anyone should be allowed immigrant status, so I wouldn’t call being against that position anti-immigration.
I do think that most people who would call themselves pro-immigration would agree that it’s understandable that provinces can dial up or down on immigration programs of skilled labor depending on economic circumstances. So I wouldn’t say that reducing immigration numbers in any form is an inherently anti-immigration stance either.
I do think, however, that saying that we should reduce immigration because immigrants are making housing unaffordable is solidly on the anti-immigration side. There’s a pretty intuitive divide here.
Oh given the high-ish standards we place on immigrant I doubt they are the ones becoming homeless. It’s more likely to be the displaced Canadians who can no longer afford rent.
And I think the mental gymnastics required to think bringing record levels of people into a country who can’t house those already here is insane. You want to breed actual anti-immigration sentiment? That’s a great way to do it. I don’t think ensuring the people entering Canada have an even somewhat affordable place to live is “anti-immigration”. Again, just look at average incomes vs rents. I think a lot (most) of people with your view simply aren’t aware of the current rental (let alone sale) market situation.
What is my view, again? I think I am pretty aware of the rental market situation as I’m a renter myself, with a very recent contract.
If the path to ensure that is not allowing them to immigrate, it really is impossible to spin this as anything else than anti-immigration…
By that logic why not raise the immigration targets to 10 million a year? 20? 50?
By which logic? What specific sentence gave you the impression that I think we should increase immigration targets?
If you’re not allowing everyone who wants to immigrate here the opportunity - isn’t that anti-immigration?
It depends on which kind of debate you’re having and which definitions you’re starting from.
I’d say that most people who would call themselves pro-immigration don’t go as far as saying that absolutely anyone should be allowed immigrant status, so I wouldn’t call being against that position anti-immigration.
I do think that most people who would call themselves pro-immigration would agree that it’s understandable that provinces can dial up or down on immigration programs of skilled labor depending on economic circumstances. So I wouldn’t say that reducing immigration numbers in any form is an inherently anti-immigration stance either.
I do think, however, that saying that we should reduce immigration because immigrants are making housing unaffordable is solidly on the anti-immigration side. There’s a pretty intuitive divide here.