Ray of hope - FSW - 1

[NavjotS123]

Guys, especially those who are applying under OINP, if you are married, include your spouse and select the IELTS exam as NA. Then, If your score is 472 it will come down to 454 which is good enough for the tech draws. This can be applied to french stream as well. Thank me later.

 

[Deleted member 1006777]

Up for debate but there's an underlying assumption that diversity leads to un-quantifiable good too - studies showing the correlation between diversity & better ideation/problem solving blah blah (not to mention homogenous societies usually leading to close-mindedness). Also, do we want a system where one immigrant community grows so large that they dominate a country's political systems?

Regardless of benefits of diversity, country caps will make PRs more easily attainable for average people from some countries and impossible for those from others. I'm not arguing for or against country caps or 'diversity', just pointing out the undeniable truth that this would by default make it a less level playing field. It's already something we've seen with the whole CEC vs FSW deal. Adding countries caps will make 500s from one country equivalent to 300s from another, just owing to population sizes. Whether or not that is good is up for debate. We can either have equal opportunity for all or we can have equal outcome. We cannot have both.

 

[Igethope]

When is CEC Applicants going finish in this pool. Lol.

 

[dankboi]

Regardless of benefits of diversity, country caps will make PRs more easily attainable for average people from some countries and impossible for those from others. I'm not arguing for or against country caps or 'diversity', just pointing out the undeniable truth that this would by default make it a less level playing field. It's already something we've seen with the whole CEC vs FSW deal. Adding countries caps will make 500s from one country equivalent to 300s from another, just owing to population sizes. Whether or not that is good is up for debate. We can either have equal opportunity for all or we can have equal outcome. We cannot have both.

There won't ever be a balance, is a fact. No matter what capping strategies an authority is implementing.
for instance , the government capped and finally created a balance and therefore there is no dominant community , after a while some terrorists bomb an entire area literally sweeping 20% of a particular community and TA-DA now some other community is dominant . hehe my silly counter opinion.

 

[dankboi]

When is CEC Applicants going finish in this pool. Lol.

i sincerely understand that feeling but dang you were brave enough to ask that mate !!!

 

[Emil1]

Guys, especially those who are applying under OINP, if you are married, include your spouse and select the IELTS exam as NA. Then, If your score is 472 it will come down to 454 which is good enough for the tech draws. This can be applied to french stream as well. Thank me later.

Talking about OINP, it is weird that there hasn't been a "humans capital priority stream" draw yet this month.

 

[NavjotS123]

Talking about OINP, it is weird that there hasn't been a "humans capital priority stream" draw yet this month.

alternate months; expect a big draw in June

 

[dankboi]

Guys, especially those who are applying under OINP, if you are married, include your spouse and select the IELTS exam as NA. Then, If your score is 472 it will come down to 454 which is good enough for the tech draws. This can be applied to french stream as well. Thank me later.

 

[arvind92]

Although i beleive, this is not the right place to ask this question,


But still,


1)I had a fully paid internship at a private employer( not a part of my education) for 9 months in March 2016- December 2016...Rank held was Trainee Engineer.

2) Then i had a study leave with a fixed stipend for the first 9 months of 2017, Again i held this trainee rank with the employer. My stipend was a fifth of my salary during the internship, but still a sum was paid. This study leave is an integral part of my employment as well where i do many courses and attend seminars.
3)
Then i started working full time between
October 2017 till September 2020.


Do you think I should include this paid study leave as well in my EE profile? My employer has issued me a letter which says i was a full time employee right from March 2016 till September 2020...?

I may include this and then explain it in my Letter of explanation that this part too was an integral part of my employment etc

Or should i just avoid this?

 

[dankboi]

Although i beleive, this is not the right place to ask this question,


But still,


1)I had a fully paid internship at a private employer( not a part of my education) for 9 months in March 2016- December 2016...Rank held was Trainee Engineer.

2) Then i had a study leave with a fixed stipend for the first 9 months of 2017, Again i held this trainee rank with the employer. My stipend was a fifth of my salary during the internship, but still a sum was paid. This study leave is an integral part of my employment as well where i do many courses and attend seminars.
3)
Then i started working full time between
October 2017 till September 2020.


Do you think I should include this paid study leave as well in my EE profile? My employer has issued me a letter which says i was a full time employee right from March 2016 till September 2020...?

I may include this and then explain it in my Letter of explanation that this part too was an integral part of my employment etc

Or should i just avoid this?

If it's me I'd not include anything that's not claiming the CRS, or i shall put it in personal history. why make things complex, even IRCC states "If your application is complex, it may take us longer to process it" so why do this ? why ?

 

[arvind92]

If it's me I'd not include anything that's not claiming the CRS, or i shall put it in personal history. why make things complex, even IRCC states "If your application is complex, it may take us longer to process it" so why do this ? why ?

I think i will skip this paid study leave then..

What is your thought about the internship part? I have seen numerous instances when they do count it as work experience...I hope they do count it as an internship..

 

[txlonghorn]

Gotta say man, I enjoy your memes & gifs. Adds some welcome levity to this thread.

 

[Emil1]

You are looking at from the perspective of countries that are immigrating, you might wanna think from the country what is accepting. Because they allow immigration for their own benefit. And diversity is one of them. I have been to Australia and Canada, and the lack of diversity is going to be a problem in the future for both. Probably already has been.

I agree with this... In Vancouver, for example, it can be easily seen that a high percentage of people is Chinese, and many different businesses have their propaganda in English and Chinese... I don't think that Canada wants to change its main language to chinese instead of English.

 

[dankboi]

Gotta say man, I enjoy your memes & gifs. Adds some welcome levity to this thread.

 

[dankboi]

Diane Francis: We need immigrants — but not a flood of them
Immigration should target those who can contribute to the economy

Author of the article:
Diane Francis
Publishing date:
May 20, 2021

You have to wonder if the Liberals consulted Statistics Canada before they barreled ahead with their plan to allow 1.2 million more immigrants into the country over the next three years.

Last week, I pointed out that Canada’s unemployment rate is high, at 8.1 per cent, compared to 6.1 per cent in the United States and 5.6 per cent in Australia. Both those countries have prudently cut back on immigration because of the recession and job losses due to the pandemic. But not Canada.

Stephen Poloz on inflation, immigration & commodities

A deeper dive into Canadian statistics yields another reason this proposed policy is unjustified. The rate of unemployment in 2020 among immigrants was dramatically higher than the average, according to Statistics Canada. In 2020, there was 13.5 per cent unemployment among immigrants who landed less than five years before; 11.7 per cent among those who arrived six to 10 years earlier; and 9.5 per cent among those who have been here for more than a decade.

Most importantly, unemployment in Ontario is sky high and given that it’s the principal destination for new immigrants, this must be front and centre when setting migratory targets. Here are the facts: as of April 30, unemployment in the province was at nine per cent, which is down from a pandemic high of 13.5 per cent in May 2020, but still higher than the national average.

And given that Immigration Minister Marco Mendicino intends to allow over 300,000 family class immigrants, along with 198,000 refugee and humanitarian immigrants, to enter the country over the next three years, the issue of housing should be considered.

Housing prices are already sky high throughout most of the country. Bringing in over a million immigrants in such a short time frame will only serve to drive prices even higher, which will price even more Canadians out of the market. This is especially true in large centres like Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal, which already lack affordable housing.

In Ontario, the waiting list to get subsidized housing is between seven and 10 years. In Montreal, 23,000 people are on a waiting list for social housing, but many units sit in disrepair due to government budget constraints. Worse, half of Montreal’s 21,000 social housing units are already sub-standard. An influx of new immigrants will only exacerbate these problems.

And this will add to the problems caused by the rash of refugee and asylum seekers who started illegally crossing the border en masse in 2017. According to figures compiled by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, police intercepted 58,939 so-called irregular border crossers from the beginning of 2017 to the end of 2020.

All were supported by government until their cases were adjudicated to determine whether they were bona fide refugees. So far, 17,709 have been accepted as refugees, 14,017 were rejected and 24,728 cases are pending. Only a few have been withdrawn.

A snapshot of the refugee problem was taken in April 2018 and showed that 60 per cent of people in Toronto’s shelters were immigrants or refugees.

Until these figures are reduced to manageable levels, the government has absolutely no business substantially increasing immigration into Canada. To do so, given the facts, means that more Canadians will lose their homes and their jobs. And the cost of providing social services to the displaced Canadians and new immigrants will place an undue burden on our already heavily indebted treasury.

The minister should show Canadians a detailed cost-benefit analysis. Immigration is needed, but should target those who can contribute to the economy.