Posted in Canada forum
Can anybody please tell me the procedure for migration, If you want I can send you my CV also to check whether my profile is eligible to obtain canada visa or not. As I heard application need to qualify some points or something. If some one can help me would be greatful.
Currently I am in Saudi Arabia.
I am also seeking some one to be my friends, because I love to make new friends and to share my thoughts.
posted by in Canada forum
You have to be in Canada to apply for jobs there.
Unless there is a treaty between your country and Canada.
I would start by making a list of potential employers.
for help with that I would consult job search export and coach:
posted by in Canada forum
Your data proved my point. Isn't obvious?
Okay, so Wikipedia is as you say. Does it effect the outcome?
Canada is transparent with this type of data, and like I said, the immigration system is being reviewed every year, and the defaults you mentioned are/ being dealt with one way or the other.
Plus immigrating to Canada as a skilled worker is not the only option. Immigrants can create their own opportunity.
The formula is: "Immigration is Sacrifice", and "who dares win".
Unrealistic expectation leads to failure.
Canada immigration system has maintained it's integrity, and it is not a scam.
posted by in Canada forum
Hi Diane. It is my pleasure to talk about this issue.
Well, just to begin, in your second paragraph you said:
“Data published on Wikipedia does not mean that we have to accept this data as is and not debate it, Wikipedia is made by users just like you and me.”
I cannot agree with you on this. Despite the fact that Wikipedia has a “free writing” policy, meaning that everyone can contribute with texts, it is not an anarchic encyclopedia. Each text posted there is “quarantined” and they must conform to some rigid standards. Everything is verified by editors who have conquered a reputation of integrity working as volunteers. One of those standards is the quotation of REFERENCES.
I guess you did not notice that the article from which I transcribed some passages in this forum is FULL of references. Those numbers you see between brackets after a sentence indicate the references in the bottom of the text.
For example, in the sentence on the first paragraph “A 2007 Statistics Canada study shows that the income profile of recent immigrants deteriorated by a significant amount from 2000 to 2004.”, if you click on the  you be instantly directed to the following reference on the bottom:
1 - a b c Chronic Low Income and Low-income Dynamics Among Recent Immigrants, Statistics Canada, January 2007, URL accessed 30 January 2007
If you click on the title above (on the site of Wikipedia), you will open the paper to which it refers, in this specific case:
"Analytical Studies Branch Research Paper Series”, Chronic Low Income and Low-income
Dynamics Among Recent Immigrants
”, by Garnett Picot, Feng Hou and Simon Coulombe
. Catalogue no. 11F0019MIE — No. 294
, ISSN: 1205-9153, ISBN: 978-0-662-44993-5
, published by no less than , let's see: “Published by authority of the Minister responsible for STATISTICS CANADA, MINISTER OF INDUSTRY”. (By the way, I strongly recommend that you read this paper in order to understand the phenomenon of persistence in chronic low
income among immigrants.
And if you take your time to go through all the 67!!! references on that text, you will notice that many, or most of them, are information provided by the GOVERNMENT OF CANADA, while others are ACADEMIC RESEARCH PAPERS or ARTICLES BY RESPECTED MEDIA OUTLETS”. In other words, that text is entirely supported by serious references!
Now, going back to what you said: “Data published on Wikipedia does not mean that we have to accept this data as is...” (sic).
Before continuing I have to ask you: After my explanation above, do you accept the data and the references provided by the text? If not, could you tell us why?
posted by in Canada forum
First of all I'd like to debate this, and everyone who reads my posts, they will see that I do not draw a rosy picture or the immigration process to any country not just Canada, because immigration anywhere requires sacrifice.
Data published on Wikipedia does not mean that we have to accept this data as is and not debate it, Wikipedia is made by users just like you and me.
You said that statistics Canada shows that the immigration system is broken, and I wonder why Canada collects this data, isn't to try to fix the things that needs to be fixed in the system, and I have seen these attempts and the amounts of funding for newcomers.
Article says that the more time is spent in Canada, income and employment increase, which makes total sense. This is called integration and cultural awareness from the newcomer to new environment and adaptability.
Out of control immigration system is something of the past, that is why the statistical data collection and amendments to the immigration regulation, and I can confirm it is something of the past. It did exist sometime but not anymore.
Credential issue is also something of the past. I can confirm that there are protocols now in almost every sector host newcomers and help them with this issue. Again this was a result of date collection, which shows Canada is making it's immigration system a priority. Bear in mind, credential evaluation is not a guarantee to a job whether you are a Canadian citizen or an immigrant.
"New workers are also less familiar with the Canadian labour market and will thus not be able to maximize their salaries" and "those who had been in the country five years were more likely than average to be employed" perfectly makes sense and is not because of the immigration system, it is a natural progression in a new environment.
Bottom line, Canada's economy is a knowledge base economy, so you have to work it, which means like all Citizens you will know periods of prosperity in Canada and periods where you will reply on employment insurance and social services to get by. It is like this anywhere in the world.
posted by in Canada forum
Hi, Diana and all other members of this forum. There are many articles and statistical data showing that the Canadian immigration system is totally kaput. Let's begin by an easy and accessible source, the Wikipedia. Bellow are some relevant excerpts from the article "Economic impact of immigration to Canada". Notice that there are references all over the article:
"...over the last 25 years the economic position of newcomers to Canada relative to the native population has steadily declined. A 2007 Statistics Canada study shows that the income profile of recent immigrants deteriorated by a significant amount from 2000 to 2004. Recent immigrants themselves are far more likely than native born Canadians to initially have low incomes, with income and employment rates increasing towards the national average with more time spent in Canada." (Comment: notice that there are no reference to support this last sentence. Strange, eh?).
"In terms of the impact of immigration to economy-wide wage levels, Statistics Canada estimates that for every 10% increase in the population from immigration, wages in Canada are now reduced by 4% on average (with the greatest impact to more skilled workers, such as workers with post-graduate degrees whose wages are reduced by 7%). (Comment: the kernel of the problem: since this negative relation exists, according to no less than Statistics Canada, then an *out of control immigration system* that brings much more people than the economy needs, will naturally cause unemployment, poverty, social problems... as we are already seeing).
"In part because of the credential issue, many immigrants are forced to find work below their education level and at lower wages. However, even for doing work of the same skill level immigrants are much less well compensate than their native born counterparts. Immigration scholar Jeffrey Reitz calculated that in 2001 native Canadians were benefiting from, and immigrants were losing out on, between $2 and 3 billion per year due to this imbalance."
"There are a number of possible explanations for why newcomers earn less than native Canadians in the same jobs with the same skills. Lower hourly wages might be an indication that the labour productivity of immigrants is lower, and employers thus have reason to pay them less. Racism is also a possibility. The wage imbalance is especially true for visible minorities, indicating that racism plays a role. New workers are also less familiar with the Canadian labour market and will thus not be able to maximize their salaries. Employers will also be less familiar with an immigrant's background and thus less willing to offer the same salary as to a native." (Comment: Notice that the term "racism", in this context, doesn't explain the whole phenomenon, since it applies even to immigrant who are not part of the so called "visible minority", If you have the "wrong name" (neither anglo nor french) or just have an accent. So I would say, yes, there is racism, but the most appropriate term would be **Discrimination**).
"In recent years the unemployment rate for newcomers has also increased. In 1981 those who had just arrived had a high rate of unemployment, but those who had been in the country five years were more likely than average to be employed. By 2001 the transition period had expanded, and now it takes ten years before newcomers reach the same employment rate as those born in Canada. In 2006, the unemployment rate of recently arrived immigrants year was 11.5%, considerably above the native Canadian average of 4.9%. For more established immigrants who had been in Canada between 5 and 10 years the rate fell to 7.3%" (Comment: Pay attention people! The so called "transition period" increased to 10 years!!! in 2006. Almost 5 years after and in the middle of the Great-Recession (which is far from over in Canada, as even such organizations as EDC admits) that period could not have decreased and is certainly much longer now. The official unemployment rate is also much higher now. And notice the term "official". It means that many, or most, of those considered "employed" are in truth **underemployed**).
"Higher rates of unemployment and lower wages combine to give newcomers less income than the Canadian average. Analysis of census data as of 2000 shows that immigrant incomes were at 80% of the national average after 10 years of residing in Canada. In previous decades, immigrant income levels did rise to the national average after 10 years, but in recent years the situation has deteriorated. A 2003 study published by Statistics Canada noted that "in 1980 recent immigrants had low-income rates 1.4 times that of Canadian born, by 2000 they were 2.5 times higher, at 35.8%." The study noted that the deterioration was widespread and affected most types of immigrants. The 2003 study explains that the low-income rate among non-immigrants declined in the 1990s, but this was more than offset by the income profile of new immigrants, resulting in a net rise in Canada's total low-income rate. ***An updated January 2007 study by Statistics Canada, explains that the deterioration continued into the next decade, with the low-income rate of recent immigrants reaching rates of 3.5 times that of Canadian born in 2002 and 2003, before edging back to 3.2 times in 2004. ** The 2007 study explains that this deterioration has occurred even though Canada implemented changes in 1993 to encourage more highly educated immigrants, with 45% of new immigrants having university degrees as of 2004. (Comment: Notice the passage I put between stars: according to Statistics Canada evaluation in 2007, the deterioration continued. Imagine how is the situation now. Let's see the results of the next census which will be applied next year...).
"Decline in economic well being
Over the last 25 years the economic position of newcomers to Canada relative to the native population has steadily declined. A number of theories have been advanced to explain these issues.
1. The selection process is flawed;
2. Government and corporate policies deliberately shift immigrants to secondary sector occupations. These are jobs characterized by high instability, hazardous work environments, and low pay. Inherently those involved in these sectors will have lower wages and more periods of unemployment. In several European countries the immigration system is almost fully designed to try and fill these positions. This is less the case in Canada, but significant recruitment programs for sectors such as agriculture and oil and gas recruit many workers to perilous jobs.
3. Newer immigrants from outside of Europe are victims of racial discrimination.
4. Canada's social programs create incentives that conflict with the employment objective; and/or
5. Increased job competition among even native-born Canadians has increased the importance of relying on networking to access the "hidden market," putting immigrants at a disadvantage given their lack of deep and broad networks." (Comments: Actually no need of comments, but pay attention to the key word "networking" or "hidden market" => This system is not meritocratic my friends!!!).
Well, I stop here, because it is already too long. But I would be more than happy to provide further information about the REAL STORY of the Canadian immigration system. And I don't charge any money for that...
You all can reach your own conclusions. If you think the word SCAM is too strong an statement... well, think of other words. But the point is that there is something rotten is this whole immigration system.
posted by in Canada forum
I am willing to help you build an immigration case after hearing your story.
Finding a job to support you to have a Canadian permanent residence while you are outside Canada is impossible for people who earn below 100k annually in countries without a treaty with Canada.
So, contact me and I'll see what I can do for you in terms of independent immigration.