Toxicity Scores & Embeddings

In the UK if you don't show up, you breach the terms of your student visa and they will revoke the vis after a prior warning.

There never was a clear path to permanent residency, hence the term "temporary foreign worker" and "international student program." Permanent residency was simply something these immigrant classes hoped for but were never promised. Quebec saw that these programs were being abused as backdoor efforts to gain permanent residency and have shut tte loopholes. The Canadisn Government should follow suit.

So, I am applying to TEMPORARY working visa, and when that term is finished, and the government decides not to extend my TEMPORARY visa, I say, oh, wait, I invested so much money in this to be PERMANENT, nobody does such an investment to COME BACK to my country... Interesting.

Good video, but the use of the term managed integration is problematic. It was managed admission, integration is not part of Canadian immigration.

Folk may think this reduction in immigration is far from any "slash" in numbers. Consider (search the web for "Is Canada's aging population an issue ?"): "Canada's aging population is a significant issue, creating major challenges for the economy, healthcare, and social services, as more seniors require care while fewer younger workers support them, leading to potential labor shortages, strained budgets, and increased demand for healthcare and long-term support. The trend of more seniors than children under 15 puts pressure on economic growth and government finances, requiring substantial funding increases for health and care services. " For every positive to reduced immigration numbers, Canadians are going to discover that there will be negatives. The negatives might very well justify using the word "slash". Time will tell.

Why are they using the term slash for PR when the change is minuscule.

We have unlocked the coded media term "Brampton Driver"

I don't hink they are doing their job properly. And this will be a good chance to examine what is really happening, what are they doing. Canada needs to get fixed in terms of this situation.

Immigrants are vital to Canada's economic growth and demographic health. The challenges often attributed to them are largely consequences of policy gaps in integration, settlement support, and long-term infrastructure planning. Improving the system involves refining immigrant selection and focusing on successful inclusion rather than reducing numbers.

Long term consequences? We're in the middle of present consequences that have been raging for years now.

Question now is how do we correct this. Judicial , Education, Health, social and cultural balance all got to be corrected. How can any political party in a 4 year or 5 year term correct it?

The term is called private equity companies.

Few years ago, Brampton overtook Mississauga in terms of population growth, also highest auto insurance rates in the country, my uncle pays 5k a year for Lexus insurance

I doubt this. Especially if the liberals win a fourth term, it’ll be back to mass immigration in no time.

GDP growth from mass immigration is not the same as economic growth. Canada's economic growth was sacrificed for medium term expansion based on upward pressure on real estate.

I am supportive of immigration, but I believe there should be a cap of no more than 1-2.5% annually. A significant number of migrants moving to Canada from the same region or country could cause issues, as this can lead to the formation of "mini-bubble" societies within Canada. These groups may sometimes become the dominant demographic and undermine the existing communities that have contributed to building Canada for decades. We cannot expect new immigrants to seamlessly merge into Canadian society. This is a major oversight by Canada’s Immigration Department. Digital applications from foreign nations may play a role in this phenomenon. There should also be regulations concerning how many new immigrants can be brought in by family members. For instance, one new citizen can legally bring both of their parents and their spouse, which is fair. However, there have been cases where this process is repeated multiple times within ten years, leading to a 1:15 ratio, where one person can bring in six to eight relatives. If there is a labor shortage in essential fields, Canada can offer long-term residency to those who continue to work in those sectors, such as caretakers. However, the pathway to citizenship could be lengthened or require a higher standard. For instance, the requirements could extend from X years of living in Canada to X+5 years, as well as passing a basic Canadian citizenship test, either written or verbal. While an increase of five years may seem unfair or lengthy, it is essential. A newborn child from a Canadian family requires 18 years to gain voting rights in elections, whereas new immigrants—especially those who come for study for four to six years—can potentially gain both citizenship and voting rights sooner if they meet the previous administration's standard. Children under the age of 18 can gain citizenship in as little as X-4 years, regardless of their full integration into Canadian society. This loophole is sometimes abused and provides preferential treatment that favors this process over existing Canadian. In my opinion, it would be fairer to calculate the duration of "living in Canada" based on the number of years they have paid "income taxes" in Canada. This is important because many individuals with multiple passports pay taxes elsewhere while benefiting from Canadian healthcare and other services. The investment in home buying as a pathway to citizenship has contributed to the housing crisis, resulting in numerous empty homes in various regions. While it may offer short-term economic benefits that some politicians favor, it is detrimental to Canada as a whole. If buying a house is the only requirement for citizenship, wouldn't a large portion of the global population be eligible for U.S. citizenship just by investing in U.S. businesses or stocks? This perspective may seem illogical when looking at it from outside the box. Apologies for being a bit wordy; I had much more to say. Nonetheless, I also support temporary residency for up to 6-9 months for those who have been evacuated due to war, natural disasters, or similar circumstances. Special exceptions can be granted for families with members working in critical fields that merit such considerations (high-end industry).