[refurb]

I'm not sure you fully appreciate the uproar that it caused during the last war in Lebanon.

It's a relatively straightforward process to get Canadian citizenship. Many Canadian started to question the process that allowed someone raised in another country to come to Canada, gain citizenship in 4 to 5 years, then go back to their home country with no intention of ever returning or contributing to Canadian society again, except under the situation where their current country is residence becomes uninhabitable.

[ktizo]

Sounds to me like thoroughly sensible and responsible behaviour. If I lived in a country that was on the brink of war I would also cover all bases. If I had kids, I would almost definitely try and arrange something like this.

And besides, what skin does it take off your back if someone does this? When those people are in the country, they will generally be working and paying taxes. When they are not in the country they are working and paying taxes somewhere else. And what difference does it make if they come back to go snowboarding, or come back because their country has just gone boom? Patriotism is not a required trait to be a good person.

[refurb]

Oh, I don't disagree at all that it's a smart move. If I lived in an unstable country, I'd likely do the same.

However, the question is is Canada getting the short end of the stick? If you are a Canadian citizen, you get full health care coverage if you live in Canada, you get fully subsidized post-secondary education and your offspring get Canadian citizenship.

I guess the thought is, with Canada providing all of those benefits, maybe the hurdle for Canadian citizenship should be a little higher?

I guess my thought is that Canadians need to decide what type of immigrant they want. One that views Canada as their new home or just a residence of last resort?

[ktizo]

You also need to factor the benefits to Canada of improved trade relations, as well as the saving in bureaucracy that you get from having a liberal immigration policy, rather than merely focusing on the direct cost or benefit of a given individual. Gut instincts of strict fairness when trying to judge people who are taking out but haven't put in yet don't always apply, especially if the cost of enforcement is higher than the cost of being more laissez-faire. And people under 25-30 pretty much can't be judged at all on that basis, for fairly obvious reasons.

[bosch]

Wow you really have no clue... that really amazes me.

The difference is for instance the cost of airlifting those citizens out of war zones will by far dwarf any taxes they may pay back while working in the country for 1-2 years before going back to the other one once the war is over. That's also IF they work and don't go on social assistance programs.

Canada is now experiencing this issue with a lot of Chinese who come here to get a passport as well. To most people, citizenship is the one thing you go all in on. By not doing so it hurts most countries and costs them a lot of money.

I'm not going to reply to you again, it's people with beliefs like yours who damage society as a whole.

[dalke]

"To most people, citizenship is the one thing you go all in on."

I've not seen that. I know English people who became US citizens in part because they were moving back to the UK, and if they decided to move back to the US then it would be much easier as US citizens.

I know a South African who views his Irish ancestry mostly as a way to get a Irish passport, which makes it much easier to visit Europe.

I know an Australian whose didn't visit the US until an adult, but who is a US citizen because of her mother's citizenship. She's lived in the UK for the last 10+ years.

I know a Romanian who got Swedish citizenship because it was easier to stay in Sweden that way. He didn't want to be forced to move back to Romania. He's then got US citizenship a few years later. (He actually got Swedish citizenship while waiting for the US paperwork to go through.)

Yes, my father got US citizenship as a teenager, and doesn't consider himself Canadian. So I know there are many who "go all in." But to say that most do that goes against my observations.

[ktizo]

Canada has a lot of economic emigrants living in the middle east, mostly working for the oil fields. They follow the same pattern of moving to and from the middle east as the people you have a problem with, only they were born in Canada.

And I personally see no problem with stuff like dual-nationality, economic migration, or hedging bets in a dangerous world. For one thing, it encourages trade, and for another, many people do not feel that they owe allegiance to one particular area of land when compared to another.

Also, Canada is built on and encourages immigration. These people have not tried to smuggle themselves in, rather they were encouraged and invited. It is you that really has no clue on this and your suspicion of migrants and denigration of their general motivations does a lot more to damage society than taking the view that it is better to be a bit more relaxed about the desire of many people to wander.

[edit] It also reminds me of the story I read of this guy who was born in South Africa and moved to Canada when he was 17 to avoid getting drafted, without family support and with little money, only stays a few years and also goes to college there, then leaves to go to the US as soon as he can get a scholarship. He is called Elon Musk, you may have heard of him.