Support NeoGAF

[Guevara]

...when it comes to immigration, Canada's policies are anything but effete. Instead, they're ruthlessly rational, which is why Canada now claims the world's most prosperous and successful immigrant population.

The numbers tell the tale. Last year, Canada admitted more than 320,000 newcomers — the most on record. Canada boasts one of the highest per-capita immigration rates in the world, about three times higher than the United States. More than 20 percent of Canadians are foreign-born; that's almost twice the American total, even if you include undocumented migrants. And Ottawa plans to increase the number in the years ahead.

Far from producing a backlash, Canadian voters couldn't be happier about it. Recent polls show that 82 percent think immigration has a positive impact on the economy, and two-thirds see multiculturalism as one of Canada's key positive features. (They rank it higher than hockey. Hockey!) Support for immigration has actually increased in recent years, despite a slow economy and the specter of terrorism. Today in Canada, the share of people who approve of the way their government handles the issue is twice as high as it is in the United States.

...

But Canada's hospitable attitude is not innate; it is, rather, the product of very hardheaded government policies. Ever since the mid-1960s, the majority of immigrants to the country (about 65 percent in 2015) have been admitted on purely economic grounds, having been evaluated under a nine-point rubric that ignores their race, religion and ethnicity and instead looks at their age, education, job skills, language ability and other attributes that define their potential contribution to the national work force.

No wonder this approach appeals to President Trump. He's right to complain that America's system makes no sense. The majority (about two-thirds in 2015) of immigrants to the United States are admitted under a program known as family reunification — in other words, their fate depends on whether they already have relatives in the country. Family reunification sounds nice on an emotional level (who doesn't want to unite families?). But it's a lousy basis for government policy, since it lets dumb luck — that is, whether some relative of yours had the good fortune to get here before you — shape the immigrant population.

The result? Well, contrary to popular myth (and Mr. Trump's rhetoric), immigrants to the United States also outperform native-born Americans in some ways, including business creation and obedience to the law. But their achievements pale next to those of first-generation Canadians.

For example, about half of all Canadian immigrants arrive with a college degree, while the figure in the United States is just 27 percent. Immigrant children in Canadian schools read at the same level as the native born, while the gap is huge in the United States. Canadian immigrants are almost 20 percent more likely to own their own homes and 7 percent less likely to live in poverty than their American equivalents.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/06/28/opinion/canada-immigration-policy-trump.html

Send your best, if old.

 

[Napalm_Frank]

having been evaluated under a nine-point rubric that ignores their race, religion and ethnicity and instead looks at their age, education, job skills, language ability and other attributes that define their potential contribution to the national work force.

Ruthlessly smart immigration policy, huh? Over here we call it facism.

 

[Stinkles]

Ruthlessly smart immigration policy, huh? Over here we call it facism.

I'm juggling this but I appear to be missing either a satire ball or a data pin.

 

[Zophar]

Ruthlessly smart immigration policy, huh? Over here we call it facism.

This might be the first ever linking of Canada to fascist politics I've ever seen.

 

[ClosingADoor]

This is why I always find it strange when people applaud Canada's immigration system while complaining about the EU and US, while Canada has some of the strictest rules and easiest geographical locations to decide who to let in their country and not. And big surprise: letting in mostly highly educated and wealthy people doesn't lead to many problems.

Ruthlessly smart immigration policy, huh? Over here we call it facism.

Where is here? Because this has nothing to do with facism.

 

[Hycran]

Ruthlessly smart immigration policy, huh? Over here we call it facism.

I have never, EVER, heard someone speak of our immigration rubric as fascist. You are either being overly dramatic, straight up lying, or are mad about something and trying to couch it, rather unconvincingly.

I'm familiar with the scoring criteria and the only thing that really blows is that if you've got a lot of cash, its a lot easier to get in (as your cash horde tends to give you more access to education and the like). This is part of where a lot of the resentment comes in regarding immigrants who come to Canada and buy houses and other assets in crowded markets, such as those in Vancouver or Toronto.

 

[NeOak]

Ruthlessly smart immigration policy, huh? Over here we call it facism.

Huh?

 

[Napalm_Frank]

I'm juggling this but I appear to be missing either a satire ball or a data pin.

This might be the first ever linking of Canada to fascist politics I've ever seen.

This is why I always find it strange when people applaud Canada's immigration system while complaining about the EU and US, while Canada has some of the strictest rules and easiest geographical locations to decide who to let in their country and not. And big surprise: letting in mostly highly educated and wealthy people doesn't lead to many problems.


Where is here? Because this has nothing to do with facism.

Just a joke, fellas. Over here in northern europe suggesting anything close to canadian style cherry picking is being referred to with all kinds of colourful words.

 

[Alavard]

This might be the first ever linking of Canada to fascist politics I've ever seen.

Well, there were the Republican lies about Canadian 'death panels'... They didn't outright use the word fascism, but it was pretty implied.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

Ruthlessly smart immigration policy, huh? Over here we call it facism.

Wut

Edit: oh, a joke. Ok then. But maybe next time, specify where "over here" is, because that was easily misconstrued

 

[spelen]

While this is good policy for Canada as a whole speaking from experience I can tell you that the immigration system has made it impossible for my mother to bring her aging grandmother over. Also it ruthlessly discriminates against older ones (I believe ppl over 24yrs old) looking to study in Canada. Lastly, Canada deals with less illigal immigrants and terrorist threat (historically) so perhaps comparing USA To Canada is more of an apples to oranges comparison. I should add that most Canadian residents recognize that immigration is absolutely mandatory for our country.

 

[Regulus Tera]

Godwin's Law strikes again

 

[djkimothy]

I have a feeling reunification may be in the cards with the influx of syrian refugees. Which i hope we do since a lot of families had to split up to come to canada.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

While this is good policy for Canada as a whole speaking from experience I can tell you that the immigration system has made it impossible for my mother to bring her aging grandmother over. Also it ruthlessly discriminates against older ones (I believe ppl over 24yrs old) looking to study in Canada. Lastly, Canada deals with less illigal immigrants and terrorist threat (historically) so perhaps comparing USA To Canada is more of an apples to oranges comparison. I should add that most Canadian residents recognize that immigration is absolutely mandatory for our country.

Really? I know it's anecdotal but I know a couple of Japanese-Brazilians who came here a few years ago, the woman came here to study (she was doing a certificate in psychology IIRC) and she was in her mid to late thirties. I never heard of this particular form of discrimination... any citation on that?

 

[CrudeDiatribe]

This article neglects to mention that Canada also allows immigration based on family reunification— of course the first family member had to get in through the usual variety of citizenship/residency/immigration/refugee channels.

I have a feeling reunification may be in the cards with the influx of syrian refugees. Which i hope we do since a lot of families had to split up to come to canada.

It's already a policy.

Just a joke, fellas. Over here in northern europe suggesting anything close to canadian style cherry picking is being referred to with all kinds of colourful words.

The article is about immigration policy and not refugee settling, which are different— are they different there?

 

[spelen]

Really? I know it's anecdotal but I know a couple of Japanese-Brazilians who came here a few years ago, the woman came here to study (she was doing a certificate in psychology IIRC) and she was in her mid to late thirties. I never heard of this particular form of discrimination... any citation on that?

Perhaps discrimination is a poor choice of words. What I mean is that after a certain age you get placed into a different category. One which requires you have assets in your country of origin. I.e. a wife, children, or property etc. Before they allow you to study in Canada. In our particular situation it was my mother's brother who already had his school fees paid only to recieve notice 2 weeks before he was to nsgin that he would not be allowed to study in canada. A lack of assets was qouted as the deciding factor

 

[Jebusman]

Recent polls show that 82 percent think immigration has a positive impact on the economy, and two-thirds see multiculturalism as one of Canada's key positive features.

This checks out, as about ~18% of the people I know think immigrants do nothing but steal our jobs and money.

We got into Canada because my dad was quite qualified in Pakistan but he ended up just working security jobs and similar low income jobs that made little to no use of his knowledge or skills.

This is the other thing that doesn't get mentioned enough. Yes you'll likely get a job immigrating over here. It's likely not the job you want, and it likely won't pay to the level that your skills would imply.

We had a work term student from China who told us he was only going to community college because he needed some sort of canadian education to get attention, otherwise the skills he had learned in China likely outpaced all of ours.

 

[Primethius]

It's an interesting policy. It's a huge reason why my family decided to move to Canada in the first place but then later opted to go to the U.S.

We got into Canada because my dad was quite qualified in Pakistan but he ended up just working security jobs and similar low income jobs that made little to no use of his knowledge or skills. And at that point, it was easier to find a cheaper place to migrate to in the US (which also had extended family/community) then stay in Canada.

 

[Oppo]

While this is good policy for Canada as a whole speaking from experience I can tell you that the immigration system has made it impossible for my mother to bring her aging grandmother over. Also it ruthlessly discriminates against older ones (I believe ppl over 24yrs old) looking to study in Canada. Lastly, Canada deals with less illigal immigrants and terrorist threat (historically) so perhaps comparing USA To Canada is more of an apples to oranges comparison. I should add that most Canadian residents recognize that immigration is absolutely mandatory for our country.

That's not discrimination, though. This is literally a meritocratic system.

The problem is, we've got brain surgeons and highly skilled engineers from other countries who have to sometimes resort to driving an uber or whatever.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Just a joke, fellas. Over here in northern europe suggesting anything close to canadian style of cherry picking is being referred to with all kinds of colourful words.

To clarify, the article is discussing Canada's conventional immigration process. Separately, refugees can come to Canada regardless of point score. Refugees are given government funding while awaiting a preliminary hearing as to their status. You can also apply for Canadian refugees status from outside Canada. You are eligible to apply as a refugee if either you are part of a group facing credible threat, or you are fleeing a country where all people face a credible thread. The government also pays for programs designed to help refugees integrate and offers continued income support for refugees once admitted. Individual Canadians can also sponsor refugees, which makes the process easier, so family reunification type programs occur in Canada primarily under the guise of sponsorship of refugee claims. Although sponsors are on the hook financially for a year of funding, this is a relatively low bar to clear.

 

[CitizenVectron]

And because immigrants in Canada tend to be more educated and well-off, their kids integrate well into the country and take up the nation's values more easily. This is why, even though the number of foreign-born people is on the rise, the 'values' of Canada have held firm (liberalism, progressiveness, etc).

I also read recently that Canada will be one of the few western nations to not face a declining population by mid-to-late century. It's even projected that Canada will have a larger population than any European nation by 2100. Obviously this is assuming that current political policies remain close to what they are now, which could change.

As long as the values of acceptance, progressiveness, and secularism remain, then I think most Canadians don't really care about the ethnic makeup of the country.

 

[CrudeDiatribe]

We got into Canada because my dad was quite qualified in Pakistan but he ended up just working security jobs and similar low income jobs that made little to no use of his knowledge or skills. And at that point, it was easier to find a cheaper place to migrate to in the US (which also had extended family/community) then stay in Canada.

This is absolutely a problem in Canada— we screen based on education then don't let a bunch of those immigrants with professional educations work in those professions under the notion that their training isn't up to our standards. In recent years, at least some provinces have created programmes to certify and train these people that would otherwise become the world's most educated taxi drivers.

 

[spelen]

That's not discrimination, though. This is literally a meritocratic system.

The problem is, we've got brain surgeons and highly skilled engineers from other countries who have to sometimes resort to driving an uber or whatever.

First, discrimination was poor choice of words on my part. Let's call it harsh vetting

Second, I'm specifically referring to study permit not a residence permit.

Thirdly, reason we had smart ppl driving Ubers and whatnot is because Candian jobs usually requires you gain 6 months of "candian" work experience. And in many cases they are forced to take courses to match candian standards (understandably)

 

[nocturnalis]

Canada also has no moral obligation because they aren't creating refugees by running gung-ho into foreign countries and fucking them up.

 

[SomTervo]

Ruthlessly smart immigration policy, huh? Over here we call it facism.

Ignoring race and origin is fascism? Waitwhat.gif

Just a joke, fellas. Over here in northern europe suggesting anything close to canadian style cherry picking is being referred to with all kinds of colourful words.

Ah lol

 

[prophetvx]

While this is good policy for Canada as a whole speaking from experience I can tell you that the immigration system has made it impossible for my mother to bring her aging grandmother over. Also it ruthlessly discriminates against older ones (I believe ppl over 24yrs old) looking to study in Canada. Lastly, Canada deals with less illigal immigrants and terrorist threat (historically) so perhaps comparing USA To Canada is more of an apples to oranges comparison. I should add that most Canadian residents recognize that immigration is absolutely mandatory for our country.

I'm pretty sure the cut off is 30, not 24.

I'm an Australian born, Canadian permanent resident (1 year away from citizenship). I came over on a working holiday visa which is valid until 30, and gained permanent resident through spousal sponsorship as my wife is a Canadian citizen.

In my experience, it's been pretty easy to gain access to Canada, but I believe Australia is a unique case. The working holiday visa program is unique to a select number of countries, from there you can renew indefinitely until you are 30 and if you've been in Canada for 3 years, you are eligible to apply for PR.

Applying for permanent residence is quite the process, it takes up to 18 months for them to even acknowledge your application. Although it has improved drastically under Trudeau. As far as I'm aware, you can still apply for parents to immigrate to Canada, that process is ridiculous as it takes 5-6 years for those applications to be processed unless it is on humanitarian grounds.

Funnily enough I lived in the US for a while as well, having a masters degree, over 10 years of industry experience, a sponsored job and earning over 6 figures still wasn't enough for me to avoid a lottery to work in the US beyond a couple of years.

 

[numble]

My pet peeve. Do not attribute an Op-Ed to the newspaper. The NYT also does not encourage such action:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/06/28/opinion/canada-immigration-policy-trump.html

Op-Ed Contribution: An article by a person not on the staff of The Times, reflecting opinions about a topic on which the author is an expert or has provocative and well-reasoned ideas. These articles, most of which are solicited by the editors, are not intended to reflect the positions of the editorial board. Indeed, the Op-Ed page is seen as a forum to air diverse and challenging viewpoints.

 

[LinkAndEpona]

Ruthlessly smart immigration policy, huh? Over here we call it facism.

Until we get things like fusion powerplants that make unlimited energy, and thus nearly free means of production and neecities, having an immigration based on such a rubric is necessary to avoid poverty and creating slums all for the sake of raising population.

Edit: Maybe it sounds cruel to not just let anyone in, but a country has a responsibility to maintain sustainability, at least, imo

 

[PumpkinSpice]

Applying for permanent residence is quite the process, it takes up to 18 months for them to even acknowledge your application. Although it has improved drastically under Trudeau.

Did you apply under "in Canada" or "outside Canada?" Even if you live in Canada you can do the latter and it's a much, much faster process. Like card in hand within 2-3 months.

 

[Dies Iræ]

And because immigrants in Canada tend to be more educated and well-off, their kids integrate well into the country and take up the nation's values more easily. This is why, even though the number of foreign-born people is on the rise, the 'values' of Canada have held firm (liberalism, progressiveness, etc).

I also read recently that Canada will be one of the few western nations to not face a declining population by mid-to-late century. It's even projected that Canada will have a larger population than any European nation by 2100. Obviously this is assuming that current political policies remain close to what they are now, which could change.

As long as the values of acceptance, progressiveness, and secularism remain, then I think most Canadians don't really care about the ethnic makeup of the country.

This is really important.

Canada's immigration policy is biased towards highly educated immigrants. Most of them are secular and, if religious, they are still humanists (in some Western sense). This results in a high rate of acculturation.

Canadians don't like to think of Canada as a melting pot (which is how we view the United States). And Canada isn't a melting pot. But you need a base level of cultural integration to occur or else you start looking like Europe.

Our immigration policy is still far from perfect. We have so many cab drivers with foreign PhDs. It's unfortunate. Many Uber drivers too. They're such good people to talk to and struggle once they're here. It's a shame. Thankfully, their children have access to all of the opportunities of being Canadian. It's an accreditation issue, I guess.

 

[Grudy]

I'm in the process of applying to Canada (currently in the draw for FSW) and it really has been quite easy so far (I got an almost full grade on the IELTS so the rest were a breeze). I see complaints on some forums about the background checks taking several months, seemingly hanging in limbo but I'm not sure how common that is.

It's kinda reassuring that people there are accepting of immigrants at least, it's something I'm always anxious about. I just hope that I can start an engineering career in Ontario within 3 years or ill be quite sad

But honestly props to their immigration system. They provide a wealth of information online and I never felt like I had to talk to consultants or pay expensive lawyers just because everything is so clear. They even mention how many people were invited with each draw and the minimum points and such. Dunno how common that is but the transperancy is appreciated.

 

[spelen]

I'm pretty sure the cut off is 30, not 24.

I'm an Australian born, Canadian permanent resident (1 year away from citizenship). I came over on a working holiday visa which is valid until 30, and gained permanent resident through spousal sponsorship as my wife is a Canadian citizen.

In my experience, it's been pretty easy to gain access to Canada, but I believe Australia is a unique case. The working holiday visa program is unique to a select number of countries, from there you can renew indefinitely until you are 30 and if you've been in Canada for 3 years, you are eligible to apply for PR.

Applying for permanent residence is quite the process, it takes up to 18 months for them to even acknowledge your application. Although it has improved drastically under Trudeau. As far as I'm aware, you can still apply for parents to immigrate to Canada, that process is ridiculous as it takes 5-6 years for those applications to be processed unless it is on humanitarian grounds.

Funnily enough I lived in the US for a while as well, having a masters degree, over 10 years of industry experience, a sponsored job and earning over 6 figures still wasn't enough for me to avoid a lottery to work in the US beyond a couple of years.

Specifically referring to the study permit with that particualr statement.

 

[WaterAstro]

I've been familiarizing myself with immigration because of a friend, and it's not that "ruthless".

If you have a visa or permit and manage to stay in Canada for 2 years and work on your English skills to pass some English evaluation tests, you're good to go for Permanent Residency.

After 3-5 years (forgot how many) of Permanent Residency, you can apply for Citizenship. A that point, you can sponsor family to immigrate to Canada as well.

 

[AbortedWalrusFetus]

I am a fan of this immigration policy and I think the US should embrace it.

 

[prophetvx]

Specifically referring to the study permit with that particualr statement.

I know. I thought it was 30, as it was something I looked into when living in Australia (it may have changed or been specific to Australia). The rest of the post was talking about my actual experiences.

 

[Steel]

I am a fan of this immigration policy and I think the US should embrace it.

The US's policy does a lot better than European country's for integrating immigrants, and our immigrant populations aren't doing badly economically. The article itself recognizes this. That's never been our problem.

Our problem is actually more related to Trump.

 

[prophetvx]

Did you apply under "in Canada" or "outside Canada?" Even if you live in Canada you can do the latter and it's a much, much faster process. Like card in hand within 2-3 months.

Applied within Canada. I had my card in hand within about 14 months, but I was lucky to be in the expedited processing lane.

Looked into applying outside Canada, processing time back home was about 9 months. My issue was that I was in Canada on a tourist visa when I applied. I had previously had a number of working visas in Canada, but I moved down to Colorado for 2 years and my Canadian working visa expired. Got married, then immigrated back to Canada, at which point I was too old to apply for anything but a skilled workers visa. I didn't want to do offshore processing as if there was an issue, I wouldn't be able to re-enter Canada.

Most places in the US still have 12 months+ processing times. It's completely dependent on country. At least now you can get a working permit while applying for spousal sponsorship, it was ridiculous under harper that you had to wait up to two years and couldn't work, I can't imagine going through that.

 

[JoeBoy101]

I am a fan of this immigration policy and I think the US should embrace it.

No thank you. The US policy suffers from bloat and execution, but not in concept. I would rather have doors open regardless of economic standpoint, than the Canada version of we'll let you in only if you meet economic criteria.

 

[entremet]

I am a fan of this immigration policy and I think the US should embrace it.

Same. But it’s funny because many progressive type would criticize such a policy. You hear the open border nonsense spewed a lot of late.

I do think refugees are a different story.

My proposal would not be as strict as Canada’s though.

 

[Napalm_Frank]

The article is about immigration policy and not refugee settling, which are different— are they different there?

To clarify, the article is discussing Canada's conventional immigration process. Separately, refugees can come to Canada regardless of point score. Refugees are given government funding while awaiting a preliminary hearing as to their status. You can also apply for Canadian refugees status from outside Canada. You are eligible to apply as a refugee if either you are part of a group facing credible threat, or you are fleeing a country where all people face a credible thread. The government also pays for programs designed to help refugees integrate and offers continued income support for refugees once admitted. Individual Canadians can also sponsor refugees, which makes the process easier, so family reunification type programs occur in Canada primarily under the guise of sponsorship of refugee claims. Although sponsors are on the hook financially for a year of funding, this is a relatively low bar to clear.

Yes, humanitarian and ''regular'' immigration are totally different things to be sure. The not explained part of the joke here is that every so often you hear Canada used as an example why the local refugee immigration policies are a good thing or why the amount of immigrants should be increased even tho the type of immigration and the numbers are very different over there. IIRC the northern EU countries (especially Sweden) these past years have taken in way more refugees per capita than Canada. That's fine and all but the funny thing is the same people who want to use Canada as a shining example would be the first to lose their shit if we actually adapted similar politics.

Now if you think Canada is the one that is on the wrong here and should increase the amount of refugees coming in, that is a whole other topic.

 

[SRG01]

Wanted to chime in on the professional front: just because the immigration rubric values professional degrees and careers does not mean the immigrant can actually land the same job. Our professional organizations can be extremely picky towards foreign applicants -- even with other Commonwealth countries. In many cases, it is a two-tiered system that heavily favors local graduates that have gone through accredited schools, instead of a standardized testing system that puts everyone on a level playing field.

edit: IIRC, nursing is one of the few that is extremely progressive on this front, and has national, competency-based exams.

 

[jstripes]

I am a fan of this immigration policy and I think the US should embrace it.

Under the US' current political climate I wouldn't recommend starting any sort of immigration reform. You're just asking for a hyper-partisan shit show to erupt.

 

[AbortedWalrusFetus]

Same. But it's funny because many progressive type would criticize such a policy. You hear the open border nonsense spewed a lot of late.

I do think refugees are a different story.

My proposal would not be as strict as Canada's though.

Yeah, you can have an immigration policy and a refugee resettlement policy. They aren't mutually exclusive. I think the policy should be as strict as Canada's though, I'd just make it far more expansive because the US can handle a larger influx of people.

Under the US' current political climate I wouldn't recommend starting any sort of immigration reform. You're just asking for a hyper-partisan shit show to erupt.

Yeah it's certainly something that would have to wait for more of a centrist government at the very least.

 

[HeatBoost]

The distinction between immigrants and refugees is that immigrants intend on staying 100%, right? I think read somewhere that something like 60% of refugees don't want to stay in their host countries if they have a choice (granted, that's a pretty fucking big if)

 

[Royal_Phalanx]

Good thing about Canada is that you can acquire permanent residence immediately if you get through the application process. To go work in Germany etc. you need to get a work permit first then wait 5 years for PR.

I think the world should move towards freedom of movement for similarly wealthy countries eventually. With automation happening this will become a necessity I feel. I'm a citizen of a country with the same Queen yet I can't move there freely, lel

Would getting a Working Holiday work permit make it easier to move? Seems like you need to gather a lot of points to get through the lottery.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

I think the world should move towards freedom of movement for similarly wealthy countries eventually. With automation happening this will become a necessity I feel. I'm a citizen of a country with the same Queen yet I can't move there freely, lel

Would getting a Working Holiday work permit make it easier to move? Seems like you need to gather a lot of points to get through the lottery.

The issue with this is that people in poor countries will all move to the richer countries in hopes of getting a better life. Then it'll create situations where people are amassed in one location, not want to move to a, comparatively, poorer location due to poor services, and thus create alot of issues with over-population.

Freedom of movement just isn't feasible.

 

[djkimothy]

The issue with this is that people in poor countries will all move to the richer countries in hopes of getting a better life. Then it'll create situations where people are amassed in one location, not want to move to a, comparatively, poorer location due to poor services, and thus create alot of issues with over-population.

Freedom of movement just isn't feasible.

I think he was referring to movement between wealthy nations. Like it would be nice to have the big 4 commonwealth nations to have an arrangement.

 

[Royal_Phalanx]

The issue with this is that people in poor countries will all move to the richer countries in hopes of getting a better life. Then it'll create situations where people are amassed in one location, not want to move to a, comparatively, poorer location due to poor services, and thus create alot of issues with over-population.

Freedom of movement just isn't feasible.

I mentioned "similarly wealthy countries", so that wouldn't be a problem really? People would move because they want to and enjoy it in that scenario.

I would love to see free movement between CANZUK, and with Western Europe as well.

 

[Sapiens]

Ruthlessly smart immigration policy, huh? Over here we call it facism.

Over where? What fantasy world?

 

[BreezyLimbo]

I think he was referring to movement between wealthy nations. Like it would be nice to have the big 4 commonwealth nations to have an arrangement.

I mentioned "similarly wealthy countries", so that wouldn't be a problem really? People would move because they want to and enjoy it in that scenario.

I would love to see free movement between CANZUK, and with Western Europe as well.

Maybe, but then that creates the clear distinct separation of class which will undoubtedly lead to political tension between those who think EVERYONE should be able to travel somewhere and those who want to separate the poor and the rich.

And then there's the fact that a 'wealthy' country isn't equally wealthy amongs all its denizens. For example, can't really lump the 'USA' and 'Canada' as wealthy nations with free travel with each other, since both countries are hugely diverse and the wealth isn't 1:1 across each country.

Sure you can start doing things like 'California can free travel with Canada because Californians will probably be most likely have more money than someone in Idaho', but that has it's own issues.

Basically, even the richest countries still have their poor that would make this hard to implement. Unless you discriminate based on wealth, and well...class wars aren't fun.