• 76 Posts
  • 235 Comments
Joined 1 month ago
cake
Cake day: October 1st, 2026

help-circle





  • Politics in general serves corporations. The only thing that might change if the NDP somehow got elected is the corporations politics is serving, and even that’s up for debate. But there’s a reason all three parties are pro-immigration, and there’s a reason the NDP’s calling the Conservatives’ BS messaging on immigration racist. That new pathway the LPC is taking to convert TFWs to permanent residents? That was an NDP idea.


  • Does our immigration policy include educating people on Canadian values? Do those Canadian values include not fat shaming? If not, that’s a policy failure.

    I’m not saying shitty people don’t exist in Canada. In fact you probably right now have the opinion that I am one. I’m saying, and have been saying, it is more common and very normalized in the middle-east, including Iraq. And I’m saying that if we’re going to let people like that doctor into Canada, it’s on us to make sure they understand that. She’s old enough to have graduated from Baghdad University in the 80’s, so this is not “you should know better”. This is “we should have taught you better”. Somebody involved in her ending up in Canada failed.


  • Oh, they were definitely taken to the accreditation authority. As for the connection, it’s really quite simple. If that behaviour is considered acceptable where you come from, and you refuse to leave that behaviour behind, you should be left behind. It is apparently common in Iraq and other Arab countries to shame people for being fat (particularly women), so this doctor absolutely saw nothing wrong with insisting her patient (not me, but a relative) agree to gastric bypass surgery or be dropped as a patient. The patient didn’t need gastric bypass surgery, and that wasn’t what she was there for. If her training in Canada didn’t include explanations that that behaviour is not appropriate, that’s on the accreditation authority. If it did and she chose to ignore it because that’s not how they do it back home, then send her back home.



  • You’re not wrong. But the problems are two-fold with the latter.

    1. We’re fighting with other countries over the same pool of people, and eventually, that pool is going to run out.

    2. Even if you ignore 1, you do need to bring people in at a pace that allows your infrastructure to keep up. We’re not doing that. So you either slow immigration or increase infrastructure spending, and the latter costs money.










  • Most of the people complaining probably know someone who did. Picture, if you will.

    1. Employer hires someone for cheaper. Doesn’t need to be an immigrant, but for the sake of what we’re discussing, assume it is.

    2. Employer gradually reduces the hours of a current employee for pick your reason. Likely current employee is part-time because they have few protections.

    3. Current employee’s hours reach 0.

    4. Current employee quits because well, they’re not getting hours.

    That employee has successfully been replaced. Legally.