加拿大华人论坛 加拿大生活信息[评论]哈珀在加拿大放任反华情绪 移民政策说好

在加拿大

新闻:《哈珀在加拿大放任反华情绪 移民政策说好话不做事》的相关评论贾斯廷抨击哈珀政府与中国关系「失败」，令反中国情绪在加拿大日益膨胀。（王冬桦摄） 加拿大联邦自由党党领候选人、前总理杜鲁多之子贾斯廷杜鲁多(Justin Trudeau)昨日在列治文举行华裔社点击展开...如果他减税，我就选他。否则见鬼去吧。

评论
回复: [评论]哈珀在加拿大放任反华情绪 移民政策说好话不做事什么叫反华？他就不反香港嘛。

评论
Eat well, don't smoke, and a fuck was equal to a five-mile walk-----Elizabeth Jane Howard新闻:《哈珀在加拿大放任反华情绪 移民政策说好话不做事》的相关评论如果他减税，我就选他。否则见鬼去吧。点击展开...如果挣4万，那你没有交税，相反你是在享受别人交税带来的福利。如果挣4-8万，那你没有为别人的福利交税，你交的税基本上都用在你自己的福利上了。如过你挣超过10万，你也许可以考虑支持减税。

评论
回复: [评论]哈珀在加拿大放任反华情绪 移民政策说好话不做事现在反华形势这么恶劣，在学校都感觉很明显，还在想加不加税，有你哭的那天。

评论
回复: [评论]哈珀在加拿大放任反华情绪 移民政策说好话不做事This article appeared as an editorial in Postmedia Network publications. I opened my campaign last month with the argument that, if the Liberal Party is to become a positive force for change in Canada, we need to give voice to the aspirations of our middle class. Personal income for middle class Canadians has stagnated for more than a generation. This deeply troubling development is masked by a rise in family income, due to the entry of a new generation of well-educated, hard-working women into the workforce. While overwhelmingly positive, we must be clear-eyed in understanding that this is a one-time benefit. So, we’re left with the vexing question: where will the next wave of growth for the middle class come from? Public and private investment in science, and the innovation and productivity growth it spurs will unquestionably play a major role. A renewed national commitment to build the world’s most educated citizenry is essential, as is a more strategic approach to our natural resources. We also need to keep costs competitive and make smart infrastructure investments. But all of these, while necessary, will be insufficient to provide the opportunities we want for the middle class unless we get one big thing right. Canada’s economic prospects have always been tied to trade. We are a small market that must export and attract investment to create jobs and growth, and import to keep costs down and provide choice for middle class families. For much of our history, the only trading relationship that mattered was with the US. From Laurier to Mulroney, it defined our politics in watershed elections that bookended the last century, and inflamed passionate debates about national identity throughout. As we grew more confident, Canadians arrived at the conclusion, supported by the evidence, that openness to trade is good for us. It expands our horizons, as well as our national wealth. That was the 20th century. The 21st century is different. Trade remains a paramount objective, but we can no longer rely on the US alone to drive our growth. I am not one of those who believes the US is in serious decline. Our relationship with our southern neighbour remains our most important, but we cannot afford to miss vital opportunities elsewhere. By 2030, two-thirds of the planet’s middle class will be in Asia. How we define and manage our relationship with Asian economies to play a Canadian role in fueling that growth will matter as much to the Canadian middle class in this century as our relationship with the US did in the last. So how are we doing? Canada benefitted from being the first western country to recognize the People’s Republic of China, but we have lost ground recently. The Conservatives kicked off their stewardship of the relationship with unhelpful saber-rattling, followed by a stubborn silence. Recently, they have made attempts at courtship, but China’s leadership has a long memory. Influence and trust is built through consistent, constructive engagement. Further, the Conservatives have developed their approach to Asia, such as it is, behind closed doors. This is a mistake. Where is the leadership to explain to Canadians why this relationship is so important, to engage Canadians in the conversation, to make us aware of the opportunities? Because we have failed to make the case for trade, Canadians are understandably anxious. Because we failed to ensure that the middle class participates in the growth created by trade, support for it has recently broken down. The twin issues of the Asian investment in the oil sands and the Northern Gateway Pipeline must be seen in this light. In the absence of a clear, public strategy, with long-term goals and positive outcomes fully aired, debated and understood, Canadians see these issues as one-offs. The government has failed to provide the context, to make the positive case for Asia. It is therefore as difficult to reject bad ideas like the Northern Gateway as it is to approve good opportunities like the CNOOC and Petronas deals. Why is the CNOOC-Nexen deal good for Canada? Because Chinese and other foreign investors will create middle class Canadian jobs. Foreign investment raises productivity, and hence the living standards of Canadian families. More fundamentally, it is in Canada’s interest to broaden and deepen our relationship with the world’s second largest economy. Of course there should be conditions attached. All foreign investors must obey the letter and the spirit of Canadian labour, environment, corporate governance and immigration laws. In certain sectors national security concerns will be real. However, in the CNOOC case, Chinese ownership of 3% of oil sands leases hardly constitutes a national security issue. Most important, the big picture isn’t about CNOOC or Petronas, but the many opportunities like them that will follow in their footsteps. China is scanning the world for acquisitions like a shopper in a grocery store. Just a decade ago, China’s outward foreign direct investment was negligible; today it approaches $100 billion. Canada has perhaps more potential to capitalize on this context than any other country. From minerals to energy, from education expertise to construction, we have a lot of what China needs. We should be creative when thinking about what a trade deal with China could look like. For example, according to McKinsey, China will have 221 cities of more than a million people by 2025 (up from 160 today). Asia will invest trillions in infrastructure over that time. That growth requires exactly the kind of expertise we have in Canada. What if our goal was to become Asia’s designers and builders of livable cities? What if we got our world class financial institutions and pension funds together with our world class engineering and construction industries to secure a leadership role for Canada in Asia’s growth. This is one idea. There are many more. There is a leadership opportunity in Asia that could create thousands of jobs here at home, and a generation of Canadian wealth. In order to take it, we need courage and vision. We deceive ourselves by thinking that trade with Asia can be squeezed into the 20th century mold. China, for one, sets its own rules and will continue to do so because it can. China has a game plan. There is nothing inherently sinister about that. They have needs and the world has resources to meet those needs. We Canadians have more of those resources — and therefore more leverage — than any nation on Earth. The Conservatives are missing the boat. Their erratic approach and secretive behaviour inspires the opposite of confidence, among potential investors and Canadians alike. In the end, this is more about our core values than the pure economic value of rising middle class income. If we really believe in a Canada built on equality of opportunity, upward mobility, and expanded individual freedom and choice, then we must get this right. Real leadership means fighting for, not pandering to, middle class Canadians. This can only happen if we are direct with Canadians, and ready to trust them. If we expect our citizens to be open to the world, the least their government can do is be open with them.点击展开...上面是小杜鲁多的博客原文这个明报作者从何处得来一个反华的概念？除了天朝，从未见过美加的政客用“反华”这个词语描述自己或对手的。添枝加叶的，不妥吧

评论
_________________________來生還做自干五_____________________________時政觀察_________________________上面是小杜鲁多的博客原文这个明报作者从何处得来一个反华的概念？除了天朝，从未见过美加的政客用“反华”这个词语描述自己或对手的。添枝加叶的，不妥吧点击展开...

评论
上善若水，有容乃大上面是小杜鲁多的博客原文这个明报作者从何处得来一个反华的概念？除了天朝，从未见过美加的政客用“反华”这个词语描述自己或对手的。添枝加叶的，不妥吧点击展开...同意！谢谢分享！通篇读完，没有感到要担心反华情绪，反而还觉得有点振奋。加拿大，或者至少小杜鲁多，开始意识到增强与中国贸易关系的重要性。Good!

评论
我曾经来过。2011短登记录 - 2012短登记录 - 中登进行时回复: [评论]哈珀在加拿大放任反华情绪 移民政策说好话不做事M

评论
回复: [评论]哈珀在加拿大放任反华情绪 移民政策说好话不做事上面是小杜鲁多的博客原文这个明报作者从何处得来一个反华的概念？除了天朝，从未见过美加的政客用“反华”这个词语描述自己或对手的。添枝加叶的，不妥吧点击展开...通篇读完，虽然没有那些字句可以直接翻译成“反华”，但是意思在里面。看到不少新闻点评，有关CSIS大头目的中国间谍论，Nexen并购计划，中国矿工签证问题，还有最近爆出的保守党对亚洲的外交策略问题。也大致看了一下CBC网站上读者的留言，两个感受：第一，反中国的声音很多，很大一部分的反对不是基于政治立场，不是基于利益，仅仅是长久以来根深蒂固对中国人的偏见。第二，保守党在中国问题上自我矛盾。从意识形态上，保守党一直把中国放在对立面。之前作为反对党，保守党可以很轻易的反对自由党在中国问题上重商。现在作为执政党，保守党想在中国问题上重商，但是无法和自己的意识形态和历史决裂。在这个问题上，至少保守党内部是意见不统一的。就是因为这些不和谐的声音，所以才会有CBC爆料保守党对亚洲外交策略，这样的事件发生。ANYWAY，保守党的这些尴尬，都不是秘密了。Trudeau在这个问题上的表态，比没有牙齿立场不清的NDP好多了。我看好Trudeau。

  ·中文新闻 贸易部长唐·法雷尔（Don Farrell）正在等待与美国商务部长就澳大
·中文新闻 工党因向议会提交“草率起草”的立法而受到猛烈抨击