population of Toronto CANADA

[Mike K]

Hi Jon,

Touchy topic isn't it . I'm not against migration as a concept . My grandfather was born in British colony known as Victoria , where I now live .This country has evolved from a motely collection of criminals, misfits , the dregs of British society some say . Irish rebels too, transported to the colonies . The British army actually tried to gain control of the NSW colony at one stage , the rum rebellion , they tried to overthrow the governor , the Kings man here . There are bad eggs in every culture , from any historical age or geographic location , it's been going on since we lived in caves , human nature . It's always the mad minority that cause the trouble . Christianity has had its mad zealots too .The present Catholic church is wholly hypoctical in practice .


The current mass migration trend , is crazy . Transplanting large numbers of people from A to B solves nothing in the long run. Tim Flannery , noted scientist , ( Australian of the year last year ), my old school friend , says Australia's population should be about 10 million max. Polititians want it to be 50 million . They are having major problems with water here , lots of debate over Melbourne's water supply , and the population is growing by 60K each year. Bob Birrell from Monash uni , predicted all this 30 years ago . In 1973 I attended a lecture by him , his foresight was ignored . Much land here is salt affected too , they try to farm land that isn't viable . Growing rice and cotten uses large amounts of water , madness . Why grow rice here .

Mike

Originally Posted by Mike Kelly

Hi Jon,

Tim Flannery , noted scientist , ( Australian of the year last year ), my old school friend , says Australia's population should be about 10 million max. Polititians want it to be 50 million .

Hold that thought for a moment. . . . . . . .

Perhaps its fair to say Oz is big. (over 7.5 million km²)

Perhaps its fair to say the UK is small therefore. (0.242 million km² - slightly smaller than Oregon)

From the (UK) Office of National Statistics:

UK population 2006 - 60,587,000
UK immigration 2006 - 591,000 of which 510,000 are non-British.

Like I said Mike, hold that thought.

Sources:
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?ID=6
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=260

R.

[cletrac (RIP)]

Here's some tidbits about Canada from this site.
http://atlas.nrcan.gc.ca/site/englis...ergeneral.html
The total area of Canada is 9 984 670 square kilometres
The Great Lakes - Superior, Michigan, Huron, Erie and Ontario - are the largest group of freshwater lakes in the world. They have a total surface area of 245 000 square kilometres.
That puts the Great Lakes just a little bigger than the UK.

[chris vickery]

I read recently that the population of Toronto now consists of > 50% foreigners. That is to say, non-native born Canadians.

Good luck to our Conservative government who wants to try and undo some of the Liberal pro-refugee mess that was created.
Best I can tell, the PC Gov»'t wants to fast track immigrants by picking and choosing who we accept, regardless of their place on the waiting list. If we need to have immigrants, picking people by skill, ability and need sounds a whole lot better than letting in refugee deadbeats by the boatload.

I remember my father saying that in the 1960's, immigration policy was to accept 90% skilled labour and 10% refugees with little or no skill. Now in the year 2008, we let almost anyone in to become a burden to an already overloaded system, all on the backs of Canadian taxpayers. What really burns my a** is when Foreign Affairs acts to protect and bend over backwards to support "citizens" of Canada who perpitrate crimes etc on foreign soil. Hey, wake up, these citizenships were "granted" and as far as I'm concerned should be stripped just as quickly in extreme cases. Anyone heard of the Khadr case??? Glad we're paying to support the rest of his proven Al-qaida
family in Toronto...

Originally Posted by chris vickery

I read recently that the population of Toronto now consists of > 50% foreigners. That is to say, non-native born Canadians.

sounds a whole lot better than letting in refugee deadbeats by the boatload.

Luxury.

We have a drain pipe discharging in Dover.

I remember my father saying that in the 1960's, immigration policy was to accept 90% skilled labour and 10% refugees with little or no skill. Now in the year 2008, we let almost anyone in to become a burden to an already overloaded system,

Ah, he knew of Enoch Powell too then.

"Its like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre" - 21 April 1968

R.

[Mike K]

Hi All

Yes I can see Richards point . But land mass versus population size can be a little misleading . I can only comment on what I see here . If you drive out to North Western Victoria .. 6 hours from Melbourne .. you'll see an endless horizon of dry , semi arid land . They grow cereals , wheat . Go further inland and its about 1 sheep per acre .. further inland ,then it's 1 sheep per 5 acres .. the land is sooo barren . We have highly leached soils here .. that means little nutrients in the ground . It's a miracle how they grow anything out there .... but they do , to varying success and a lot of failure also , they are wholly dependant on the unreliable rainfall . Modern machinery and fertilisers pushes things along .

Check out Tims Wiki page :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Flannery

[chris vickery]

Mike and Richard;

Here in Canada we have vast areas, millions of sq kilometers. When the government and the UN start doing studies as to per capita ratios, it too seems as if we are "under populated".

What fails to be seen though, is that most of the newcomers are allowed to settle in overly populated areas such as the large centers, Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver.

Much of our large land mass is dense forests, open plain, mountains and arctic tundra in the north. Most of these areas are quite sparely populated as they are without infrastructure. Who wants to live a Canadian winter in the sub-zero north in the middle of the bush??? (other than me)

Like I mentioned earlier, we need to base our immigration policies on a "need" basis. Leave the bleeding hearts at the door. To build this country and make it prosper requires tradespeople, doctors and the like, not a bunch of welfare bums.

I realize that we are a nation of immigrants. Heck, my own family has WASP roots in the British Ilses. The difference between immigrants of old vs today;
My grandfather, like many others, came here with a suitcase and a dollar in the pocket. It was do or die, no social support, no hand outs, no special treatment. Work and prosper, make a home, have a family.
My grandfather was a Bernado Home child, an orphan and was only 10 1/2 years old when he came. He worked on a farm, then as a lumberjack and finally in a tannery before passing at the ripe age of 57. He had a home, raised a family and never asked for anything. All that I can think of is PRIDE.

Today's immigrant; refugee for the most part, huge family waiting to be sponsored only to follow later, unskilled, possibly criminal. Has hand out as soon as they arrive, are protected by the CANADIAN Charter of Rights, are immediately assigned immigration lawyers, know their "rights", expect to be accomodated in whatever ways they feel (religious, cultural, etc)

On another note, after the war, when immigration took off in this country, one had to acquire a certain number of points to be accepted. This was based on country of origin (preferencial treatment to our Commonwealth friends), skills, financial status, schooling etc. Oh yeah, and you required a whole regimen of vaccinations to boot as well as proper documentation when you arrived. No points, no vaccinations, no papers, NO ENTRY.
Of course trying to use this type of system in today's PC world would be totally inappropriate, afterall it would be deemed as being racist or whathaveyou....

[Alex Blair (RIP)]

Originally Posted by chris vickery

I read recently that the population of Toronto now consists of > 50% foreigners. That is to say, non-native born Canadians.

Good luck to our Conservative government who wants to try and undo some of the Liberal pro-refugee mess that was created.
Best I can tell, the PC Gov»'t wants to fast track immigrants by picking and choosing who we accept, regardless of their place on the waiting list. If we need to have immigrants, picking people by skill, ability and need sounds a whole lot better than letting in refugee deadbeats by the boatload.

I remember my father saying that in the 1960's, immigration policy was to accept 90% skilled labour and 10% refugees with little or no skill. Now in the year 2008, we let almost anyone in to become a burden to an already overloaded system, all on the backs of Canadian taxpayers. What really burns my a** is when Foreign Affairs acts to protect and bend over backwards to support "citizens" of Canada who perpitrate crimes etc on foreign soil. Hey, wake up, these citizenships were "granted" and as far as I'm concerned should be stripped just as quickly in extreme cases. Anyone heard of the Khadr case??? Glad we're paying to support the rest of his proven Al-qaida
family in Toronto...

Chris..
and in Canada ,where the chances of growing old are very good,the birth rate is now bringing on second generation children that still consider them selves to be (Fill in the Blank) citizens,not Canadian,but where ever they crawled in from...and they breed like flies.....and survive....
Not like back in (Fill in The Blank) where the Four Horsemen are doing their job...

[Jon Skagfeld]

Have any of you guys read Mark Steyn's "America Alone"?

In a nutshell, Steyn makes the point that immigrants of the Islamic bent procreate at a rate of about 5.5 live births per fertile female.

Canada's rate is about 2.1.

Do the math. Who's going to be overwhelmed?

Originally Posted by Jon Skagfeld

Have any of you guys read Mark Steyn's "America Alone"?

In a nutshell, Steyn makes the point that immigrants of the Islamic bent procreate at a rate of about 5.5 live births per fertile female.

Canada's rate is about 2.1.

Do the math. Who's going to be overwhelmed?

Quite so, I attempted to be a little more diplomatic a ways back in this thread for fear of overstepping the official mark here which seems to be at a very low level when applied to what you might reasonably imagine to be a natural Briton, I said:
"plus even more hidden is the 5:1 apparent breeding ratio increase of many classes of immigrants here."

"Do the math. Who's going to be overwhelmed?" Jon rightly said, and personally I can and am more than somewhat apprehensive to tell the truth; perhaps bear in mind that on this island you cannot ever be more than 70 miles from the sea. Leaving out the odd inland lake, how is it in Canada I wonder?

R.

Originally Posted by cletrac

Here's some tidbits about Canada from this site.
http://atlas.nrcan.gc.ca/site/englis...ergeneral.html
That puts the Great Lakes just a little bigger than the UK.

Q.E.D.

The defence rests its case.

R.