this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2023
258 points (94.2% liked)

CanadaPolitics

1874 readers
1 users here now

Placeholder for any r/CanadaPolitics refugees

Rules:

All of Lemmy.ca's rules apply

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Some folks on here have been repeating this garbage as well

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BedSharkPal@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

By that logic why not raise the immigration targets to 10 million a year? 20? 50?

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

By which logic? What specific sentence gave you the impression that I think we should increase immigration targets?

[–] BedSharkPal@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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…

If you're not allowing everyone who wants to immigrate here the opportunity - isn't that anti-immigration?

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

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.