Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Don Cayo, a writer with the Vancouver Sun expresses his opinion on the issue of immigration to the public. In particular, the author seeks to enlighten the unsuspecting general population of a group of people rallying against the entry of immigrants into Canada. This newspaper article, which appears in The Ottawa Citizen, is skillfully written to draw the attention of readers of all age groups. However, it is hard to tell whether this interest that the article evokes in readers can be translated into actual support of its content.
In addition, the fact that the article appears in a popular e-paper and other popular news blogs on the Internet implies that a reasonable size of the Canadian population will get a chance to look at its content. Moreover, the article has been prepared by a reputable and experienced journalist with high standards of integrity. Therefore, it will be a little hard for anti-immigration crusaders to rate his opinion as mere propaganda. Conversely, assumptions are that the factual information provided in the article has been well researched and therefore, it is valid.
In his opening remarks, the author draws the attention of the readers to the news on the arrival of a vessel carrying 492 Tamils who are seeking asylum in Canada (Cayo, 2010, par. 1). The author further attributes this event to a sudden change of attitude in a section of the Canadian population towards the newcomers. Therefore, Don Cayo seeks to express his opinion on immigration by describing the benefits of foreigners to Canada. Despite the article failing to provide any references to prior studies on the benefits of immigrants to Canada, the author manages to provide several reasonable and justifiable facts about the importance of accepting more immigrants into Canada.
Hence, the author notes that the sturdy influx of immigrants into Canada is the main source of the highest proportion of the staff members in health care facilities in most Canadian cities. In addition, the author notes that the foreigners provide a labor force in many industries in the country including hotels and fast food joints. Therefore, the author suggests that there is the need to reconsider the recommendations presented by anti-immigration groups such as the Center for Immigration Policy Reform, which is a group that draws its membership from a section of Canadians who are of the opinion that the immigration rules in Canada are flawed (Cayo, 2010).
On the other hand, the author shows that many successful business enterprises in Canada were founded or co-founded by a group of well-educated and philanthropic immigrants living in Canada. However, the author fails to provide any comparable data to support this claim. Therefore, the author makes clear of his claim by making reference to the United States, which according to Cayo (2010, Par. 9), has a relatively low percentage of immigrants compared to other developed nations. Here, Cayo notes that in the United States, many newly opened business enterprises are founded by foreigners living in the country. It then follows that the author is suggesting that immigration is the source of foreign entrepreneurs who can start new businesses in Canada and in the process improve the economic status of the country.
Would Don Cayos suggestions be feasible? The author opens his remarks to justify his opinion by suggesting that acceptance of the 492 Tamils into Canada may bring with it a lot of benefits than the perceived problems. Here, Don Cayo claims that Canada is in need of people to ease the demographic problems such as the decreasing number of the workforce and the rapidly increasing proportion of the elderly population. However, the author is not keen to provide any comparable data or studies that show the significance of foreigners in the host country. In addition, unlike Cayos sentiments, the opponents of immigration in Canada are of the opinion that the foreigners will hinder the efforts made by the native Canadians in controlling global warming and ecological degradation.
Therefore, many readers and the Canadian population in general may become skeptical or confused because both the pro-immigration and anti-immigration factions present tenable reasons for or against immigration. Furthermore, the author of this article is not objective in providing his ideas and facts to support immigration. Thus, readers may think that the author is trying to arouse their emotion to support his course. Conversely, the author notes that the demographic challenges facing Canada cannot be solved by the small population of Canadians who are productive and a larger proportion of elderly people. Thus, the author believes that the only solution to the demographic problems in Canada is immigration. However, in as much as his claim is tenable, it all looks like a wishful guess because of the obvious reasons that the author does not consider the positive and negative sides of his proposal.
To finish, it is worth noting that the author has a limited number of columns in the newspaper whereby he is expected to argue his case and win the interest and support of the larger Canadian population. Therefore, the author managed to use the limited resources to bring out such a strong case. In his future writings, he should consider looking at the topic from a wider perspective to present a stronger argument and gain public support.
Reference
Cayo, D. (2010). We should all be pro-immigration. The Ottawa Citizen. Web.
The Original Article
We should all be pro-immigration
By Don Cayo, Vancouver Sun 2010
A lot of the xenophobia and bigotry that reverberated in the wake of the arrival this summer of a ship bearing 492 Tamils ostensibly focused on those few refugees.
But you didnt have to read much between the lines of Internet and talk-show chatter to notice that much of the vitriol continues to target a broader swath of immigrants in some cases those who dont fit someones definition of being sufficiently like us, and, in some cases, the whole damn lot.
Which got me thinking about where Canada would be without its steady influx of newcomers, whether skilled or not.
In my own city of Vancouver, if you were to take away visible minorities and those who speak with un-Canadian accents, all our hospitals would be left with frighteningly small staffs.
Ditto the food court where I buy lunch, the store where I buy electronics, the barber shop I need to visit soon.
Without newcomers, wed never see the contributions of thousands and thousands of highly skilled technical workers, nor entrepreneurs ranging from the fruit-seller down the road, to business and philanthropic giants like the founders of Future Shop (Iranian Hassan Khosrowshahi) or Roots (Americans Michael Budman and Don Green).
I havent seen comparable Canadian data, but in the U.S. with its proportionately much smaller immigrant population 25 per cent of new startups are undertaken by foreign-born entrepreneurs.
As for the future, take away immigrants and their children regardless of whether they came here rich or poor and youd be able to open a bowling alley in our halls of academe.
Of course, no one knows what, if any, success stories will unfold if or when any of these 492 Tamils clear the hoops to stay legally in Canada. As with any population including native-born Canadians odds are some will turn out to be bright and productive, and others not so much.
But, on balance, Canada needs people with many different skill levels to cope with looming demographic realities.
I dont know any thoughtful analyst who thinks immigration can totally solve the problems of a rapidly aging population, a workforce shrinking in relation to the jobs that need doing, and an ever-larger requirement for public spending, especially on health care for old people, with an ever-smaller group of productive workers to pay for it. But absence of immigration will worsen these problems.
Which is why I think the system urgently needs fixing.
First, it takes too long, and our bureaucrats too often lose track of those who dont qualify to get in. Thats a frequent complaint of those who argue against immigration, and its valid. But it seems to me its our problem, not the immigrants, and its up to us to fix it.
Second, while its true that immigrants may get some help (those who need an assist from welfare to get started draw particular fury), its also true that, increasingly, there are impediments to how quickly they advance. Some of this stems from government inaction in dealing with protectionist professional groups, who often go to great lengths to make it difficult for newcomers to practice. But, whatever the reason, it takes a steadily lengthening period of time for new arrivals, on average, to start earning as much as native-born Canadians.
Its worth noting, however, that, even though immigrants incomes trail by as much as 20 per cent, this neither increases their welfare usage nor lessens their savings. Recent arrivals are more likely than other Canadians to live in over crowded homes, but the tables soon turn. Established immigrants are more likely than the rest of us to own a home with a manageable mortgage.
Theres also a question of how new immigrants distribute themselves across the land. With the tendency for newcomers to settle in order of preference Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal, the rate of growth can strain services such as schools and English-as-a-second-language training in some communities, while others could really use new blood.
So I dont argue we should take all comers willy-nilly. But for good reasons related to our self interest we have, and need to have, clear rules on who should be let in. This includes refugees who clear the bar weve set for them.
Don Cayo writes for the Vancouver Sun.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.