How do i explain to the normie/lib-faggottnigger that the solution to a low birth rate is NOT to import a bunch of...

how do i explain to the normie/lib-faggottnigger that the solution to a low birth rate is NOT to import a bunch of backward half-wit nigger shitstains from halfway across the world??

bump

You can't. If they beleive that all people are the same then why would it matter where the replacement population comes from?

YEAH BUT WE'RE NOT THE SAMEEEEEE11!11!! FFFUUUUUUU

nothing makes me more happy than to see a liberal get raped/mugged by a dindu

You have to prove that people are not the same before you can say that immigration is bad.

Best way is to relate it to things they care about. The second you bring out an IQ bell curve or talk about how homogeneous societies have higher levels of trust and lower crime rates they will pop a vein. Stick to things like how bringing in an excess of low skilled immigrants drives down low skilled worker wages. Show how unemployment is incredibly high in western countries and that these people make the situation harder (works even better if you bring up how there is an even higher unemployment rate in black communities). This faggots are able to run with virtue signalling as their fuel so make your arguments appeal to that side of them.

had this argument on /r/canada today

millions of canadians out of work and these retards think we need more immigrants

why can't i just say that niggers are bad for society and that we shouldn't bring any of them in?

why the fuck are you on plebbit? the mods are niggers and the users are college nigshits

Well you'd be right but sometimes a subtle approach is the most effective one.

Well, infants are not know for their toughness on the assembly lines, or coming to the world knowing at least one programming language.

but they shit in pools... IQ 60 people... when will these libnogs get the point...?

Like you just did. If they don't see how that's a disastrously bad idea on its face alone they're not ready for adult discussion

by importing a bunch of immigrants, you are not sustaining your country's staying power only, you are fundamentally altering how that country is governed, how it's money is spent, and it's national identity and culture.

By importing millions of immigrants so save a declining population, you are doing little more than saving the country in no way but name, and sacrificing everything to that end.

A country is not a name at all, it is the people who live within it.

There is no better way to kill a country, than to accept the foreign hordes.

when you convince them that IQ is genetic (you wont)

Step 1
Lock them into a position on low wages.
"Do you think people struggling to make ends meet are just lazy?"

Step 2
Establish the law of supply and demand.
"Remember when that flood in Thailand sent hard-drive prices up? Remember when petrol went cheap because OPEC started pumping out more oil?"

Step 3
Make them realise their stance on immigration and low pay are in conflict.
"Bringing in low-skill workers decreases the value of low-skill work and therefor lowers pay for low-skilled workers, especially immigrants that are already here."

Ask them how they feel about climate change and automation. Under the fallacy that an exponentially increasing population is necessary, climate change is inevitable. Due to upcoming concerns about automation, a growing population would only cause the transition into a post-scarcity economy to be a more difficult task.

Import 30,000 profs, 50,000 lawyers, 100,000 environmental activists used to making $0.003 a week and see if they still think "well ur obviously shit if someone who'll take 50% of what you'll take takes ur job"

right but most of these nignogs are jobless college vaggots

Be lurking in 4-5 hours. I'll dump graphs and pics from my PC.

this thread ain't gonna be alive in 4-5 hours..

>what is a new thread

just dump a few now you nig nog

Just wait ya fookin' leaf, I'm phone posting from work. Be patient.

>We are importing more people than we need to maintain the population

>This is increasing housing prices, causing more homelessness, which is having a negative effect on the economy limiting Canadas ability to do good. Point out foreigners being imported is choking housing supply, causing a bubble that is hurting everyday Canadians and strangling the rest of the economy. A bubble politicians fear popping, as housing growth means more taxes and that the economy is "Growing", when in reality wages are stagnent and real estate trading properties around for higher and higher prices is a pretty unsustainable economic model.

>Point out Aboriginals are underemployed

>Point out that how many places that employ foreign workers because "Muh Canadians won't do the job" pay minimum wage or close to it, in the case of farms they often pay BELOW minimum wage, and the problem isn't really we don't have enough labor. It's that if we don't import workers, Labor will have an advantage over employers, and be able to demand higher wages. This ruins the business models of companies like Brazilian owned Tim Hortons and American owned Mcdonalds, who import TFWs en-masse.

>Point out birth rate would be higher if people were able to make a good wage.

>Show them the documentry "Migrant Dreams" which exposes practices like people being deported after having medical issues.

>Look up the SFU "Fiscal effects of immigrants" PDF.

>Come to the general conclusion that what Canada needs is high skilled foreigners being treated equally to Canadians, we need to stop importing foreigners to fill non-essential jobs like running donut shops, and the TFW scheme is really basically a way to import second-class citizens you can abuse to depress the wages of the natives for the profits of cooperations that aren't even Canadian owned.

>Say if Canada scaled immigration back to birthrate, it would help workers wages, the economy, and prevent abuses. Argue pro-immigration is morally wrong.

Immigration levels at this point in Canada are so retarded you don't even have to talk about racism to make an argument against them.

If you want to redpill though, point out AEI says 13% of Syrian refugees are ISIS sympathizers, and emphasize that you are risking Canadians being killed in an effort to help Syrians. Point out, when you take refugees in from terrorist filled countries, you're inherently taking in refugees from areas where there are a bunch of terrorists. You can even attempt taking the opposite approach here and say it's OK if a few Canadians die if we help a lot of people, because it's such a rediculous notion, but it is really part of the calculated risk of taking in refugees.

Possibly work in how Justin Trudeau screened out single men because Trudeau himself believes that single arab refugees immigrating to Canada are a security risk. Possibly point out the current refugees are ill-adapted to Canada, and argue we should focus on helping the refugees we already have, the homeless, and aboriginals, instead of spreading our efforts out and half-assing our efforts to help every group of people.

Say something about how charity needs to be smart, because if you hurt yourself trying to do good, you can't do good anymore.

Point out Trudeau has pledged to take in as many as 50k refugees, and with 13% being ISIS sympathizers, that's 6,500 ISIS sympathizers we imported to Canada already.

Say that while you're glad you helped those people, you worry about taking in much more than 6,500 ISIS sympathizers. That you don't think it's fair that some people that have to live near people that approve of ISIS, just because some people feel they want to be morally righteous.

Explain to them it creates a pyramid scheme of immigration which has no end. For example if you import people to pay pensions for the aging population, you will have to bring a larger number of immigrants to pay for the pensions of the first generation of immigrants.