Toronto Star sells immigration based on unemployment

Another hack job by the Toronto Star, finding nothing at all wrong with mass immigration. The argument is that immigrants find jobs, and they lower the unemployment rate.

Here’s some even better news: immigrants — recent and long-settled both — are a central part of the labour-market strength in Canada, a trend that points to receptive employers, adaptable skill sets among workers and smooth integration.

What is a 'central part'? That's a vague phrase. Also, the fact that immigrants have jobs does not show anything about 'adaptable skill sets' or integration. It says only that immigrants have jobs, but the quality or duration of these jobs are unknown.

And we’re making more money. Average hourly wages rose 2.8 per cent from a year earlier.

And inflation was what? The economic illiteracy is staggering.

Immigrants are finding jobs just as easily as the rest of us and are increasingly responsible for fuelling growth in the job market

Great, so we don't have 'privilege' then. Also, if you flood Canada with 400,000 people a year, those people will require gas, food, clothing, services, etc. Of course economic activity will pick up.

New immigrants who have been in Canada less than five years have a somewhat harder time. Their unemployment rate is 9.1 per cent. 

Ah, so it isn't all roses then. So 10 percent are on welfare.

By the time they’ve been here more than 10 years, their unemployment rate is actually lower than for the population as a whole: 5.3 per cent.

What types of jobs are these? Part-time, full-time? No answers are given.

StatsCan says 83.2 per cent of all workers aged 25 to 54 have a job. For landed immigrants who have been here for more than 10 years, it’s almost exactly the same. “Core-age” newcomers, however, are employed at a lower rate, 69.8 per cent. That’s still healthy by historical standards. 

What was that? What are 'historical standards'? Back in the 19th century, immigrants worked or they starved to death. 30% were NOT on welfare.

Statistics Canada shows that immigrants claimed nearly 60 per cent of the new jobs that went to the “core age” portion of the job market. 

Again: (1) what are those jobs? Full-time, part-time, seasonal, retail? (2) this means that Canadians are getting hosed on these jobs. Why no concern for them?

The federal government is tracking the progress of the 60,000 Syrian refugees who recently came to Canada, and sees them finding work fairly steadily. In soon-to-be-released data, the Immigration Department found that 57 per cent of Syrian refugees have jobs.

There is no way I believe that 57% of all Syrians have jobs. One person in the family? Most Syrian women don't work, preferring to stay home to raise 6+ broodlings.  Even if we take this at face value, 43% of all Syrians are still on welfare.

Breaking the numbers down further, about 43 per cent of government-assisted refugees now have jobs, compared to just 10 per cent in 2016.

So 57% are on welfare, living as parasites.

At the New York Federal Reserve, researchers recently looked at how Germany had integrated two massive waves of immigrants and refugees — 1.4 million newcomers from 2011 to 2014, and 2.1 million from 2015 to 2017. They found that Germany’s workforce was younger as a result. Unemployment dropped and incomes rose. 

I don't buy this either, as half of the gastarbeiters in Germany are on welfare. There are many studies showing the 'refugees' are largely illiterate and suitable only for menial labour.

And if Germany can benefit from a larger intake of newcomers, couldn’t Canada? The economics say we should, but the politicians say we shouldn’t.

Germany has not benefited, it has suffered. Also, immigration is not just about labour and unemployment. The constant stream of attacks on women in Europe is a much bigger issue than a few part-time kebab restaurant workers.

The labour market, it seems, is more accommodating of newness than public opinion.

The labour market knows nothing of the other costs of immigration, including public safety, disease, violence, etc.

All in all, a trite shallow article that cherry picks data and presents a one-sided story. Typical of the Toronto Star.