The following nuggets extracted from a singular academic essay may help to further inform persistent Brocker campaignist tendencies toward LTA (lobbying the authorities) and DTM (doing the media).
Americans in Canada are not loved by their vassal state, and never will be. When the empire claims its own, the emotional juices of schadenfreude have to overwhelm narrow rational self-interest.
Just watch those Americans get what they deserve. What a delightful spectacle. The increase in my Canadian banking fees due to FATCA is less than I spend on watching hockey goons smash each other up, and the show is way more fun.
Sauve qui peut.
Streambed where nuggets were found:
Kim Matthews and Vic Satzewich. “The Invisible Transnationals? Americans in Canada,” p. 164-179 in: Transnational Identities and Practices in Canada. Vancouver : UBC Press, 2006.
US-based scholars seem to have been generally disinterested in why Americans might want to leave their country of origin. … For many Americans who believe that there are endless numbers of people clamouring to get into their country, it is truly surprising that native-born Americans might want to leave the country at all. (164-165)
In one of the few studies that systematically examines emigration from the United States, American emigration to Canada is portrayed as little more than a form of internal migration to the fifty-first state. (165)
This large, socially significant, yet relatively invisible component of Canada’s immigrant population. (165)
Data suggest that American immigrants to Canada are relatively well off compared to other immigrant groups and to the Canadian population more generally. (167)
As of 1991, only 55% of all immigrants from the United States who were eligible to apply for Canadian citizenship had become Canadian citizens. (168)
Americans with dual citizenship who circumstantially assert their Canadian identity and underplay their American origins and citizenship do so in situational contexts where they believe that this will be beneficial. (169)
All of the individuals with whom we spoke affirmed that they felt anti-American sentiment in Canada. (169)
Americans in Canada, who enjoy the status gains of being from an economically dominant country, have the added security of knowing that Canadians are generally assimilated into their culture and that Canadian political deference to the United States is both common and necessary. (170)
Capital flows both ways, and there is a transnational capitalist and professional class that moves between the two countries to help manage these investments. (178)
USX, I actually got what you wrote for a change!
The attitude you describe is particularly annoying for Canadians such as myself who don’t even remember living in the USA, and are not ‘American’ in any true sense of the word.
Like Usxcanada, I suspect, I am appalled at the figure of 45% of US immigrants to Canada who had (as of 1991) been here long enough to take out Canadian citizenship had not done so, yet continue to reside here and benefit from that, for many of the reasons expressed or implied in the sentences taken from the book chapter. And I share the criticism and resentment implied or expressed about those particular individuals in the quotes from the book, as do I suspect many Canadians of a wide range of political views. But those individuals are a small part of the so-called US persons affected by FATCA in Canada, and extending those resentments to the rest of that population would be very unfair, as WhiteKat notes.
USX has however implied an opinion with which I completely agree (whether he shares it or not; I think he does) that it is too late in Canada to be focusing on “lobbying the authorities.” The horses have all bolted from that corral, and we’re not getting them back. “Doing the media” at this stage is not going to make any difference unless it leads directly or indirectly (through awareness-raising, if that’s still an issue at this stage; perhaps it is) to more donations to the Charter challenge fund.
The ONLY thing that is going to make the slightest difference in the struggle with FATCA and the IGA, in Canada, in my opinion, is that court challenge. Energy and effort and money need to focus on that fund, which still needs (last time I looked) another $6500 to meet the February 1 legal bill. And will need a lot more money until this gets settled in court, and probably the Supreme Court of Canada.
As a Canadian sovereigntist and nationalist, who is proud of our Charter as currently worded, I don’t care about and have no faith at all in anything that will or won’t happen in Washington over these issues. I don’t trust any US politician no matter what their political stripe. I have no interest in going cap-in-hand to the f*****g Americans asking for mercy for my fellow Canadians who are afflicted by FATCA. I care what my country and its legal system think about the IGA under the Charter and what they are going to do about it.
The issues raised under Section 15 can set a precedent for all naturalized Canadians of no matter what national origin, a precedent that I would find totally unacceptable in the Canada I love and am part of. Perhaps DTM, targeting other groups of naturalized Canadians besides US-originated ones, would be a good idea, picking up on that thought. Though even the NDP hasn’t picked up on that thread, and God knows it isn’t from any lack of my telling them they should. The Tories don’t care, and the Liberals seem incapable of understanding the point. (I think Elizabeth May gets it, but sadly no one seems to listen to her though they should on a lot of issues.) So would the media listen any more than the NDP did on that spin? I’m skeptical, but perhaps it’s still worth pursuing.
The Charter case is what matters. Everything else is a distraction IMO, and beyond that I have to express sympathy and agreement with “sauve qui peut” if USX and I understand that phrase the same way.
Whatever your citizenship or CLN status: if you’re reading this, you probably are concerned about the issues raised in this website. Please donate to the Charter challenge, if you haven’t. If you have, donate some more, as and when you can, until that battle is over, hopefully with a victory for the plaintiffs.
@Schubert… Thanks and I agree completely with you.I will be wearing my “second class Canadian” t-Shirt to every election event that I can attend in the upcoming federal election. This ADCS challenge is being watched closely by millions around the world and make no mistake, this WILL set the stage for the truth about Obama and Fatca to come out and it won’t be pretty!
If so, I’m truly out of my element. I became a Canadian citizen in 1975 and was *warned* that I would, by doing so, lose my US citizenship. Young, naive, yes, but I believed and accepted what I was informed, the reason my OMG moment was such a huge shock to me. I have lived in Calgary and area since 1969. Other than listing my work references on a resume did it ever occur to me to talk about or to hide where I was from. Only in hindsight do I realize that is because I fit in by dominant language and, I guess the colour of my skin. I have met more from the US since my OMG moment than I ever met in the total of all my years prior because I (and I presume others like me) just did not have the need to talk about it — AT ALL. I assimilated into my Canadian life without effort, without fanfare, only with gratitude for where I was and the opportunities I had here (after the job losses in the city and industry I came from — Seattle / Boeing, the cancellation of a supersonic transport plane that put many in breadlines). Honestly, I have experienced very little anti-American sentiment in my life here — is that because no one knew I was from the US as it never occurred to me that was an important fact about who I was and I just didn’t much talk about myself period?
In hindsight, I learned that move was among the most fortunate in my life. Canada has been good to me and my Canadian-born children — that is until we learned the Conservative government considers us only ‘US citizens who happen to reside in Canada’, without regard to my naturalization (choosing to be a Canadian!) and my children being born here. I am not a very sophisticated person nor a person of higher education. This bizarre last several years has made me question so much and to lose that simple trust what I thought were my values and beliefs and trust of those I deal with — except those who somehow *understand me* here.
I’m not likely saying much in this comment that is relevant; just that even the finding of this study puzzles me. ( I may not be Charlie in that strange phenomenon, but ) I do know I am Canadian and so are my children.
Some of us have managed to integrate quite well. It’s not necessarily a black-and-white issue. Most of us are married to “aliens” and have “semi-alien” kids. There are many in government with Americans as part of the family and folks in the press who originate or have lived in the US. So what?
“have the added security of knowing that Canadians are generally assimilated into their culture and that Canadian political deference to the United States is both common and necessary.” Repulsive. If that’s what you believe, speak for yourself.
You are saying we should just roll over because a few here and there in the government won’t listen because there are Americans involved? You could probably make the same assertion for ANY of the immigrants to this country. I doubt they would accept this treatment/attitude either. What an excuse for wallowing in self-pity and a refusal to get off one’s bum and do something about it.
How about STB’s? You figure it out.
Trish, Should I be angry? I read USX’s post again, and tried to be, but couldn’t get there.
What is ‘STB’? – I can’t figure that out either. 🙂
Sue The B*****ds
Everyone’s different. It reads to me exactly how I’ve responded. If I am misunderstanding it, I will apologize. It reads to me as if the author thinks doing anything is pointless and is a jab at those who are.
@Trish, I should qualify, with ‘don’t shoot the messenger’.
I think what USX is saying is that, Canadians as a rule, have an inbred dislike/jealousy/distrust of our/their (for those of us who are dually confused) southern ‘best friends.’ Ever watch ‘Mean Girls’?
And people being people, like to see those they don’t like much, getting it up the butt. USX is just pointing this reality out for those of us who haven’t noticed.
“As of 1991, only 55% of all immigrants from the United States who were eligible to apply for Canadian citizenship had become Canadian citizens.”
From 2014 and beyond, thanks to FATCA, my guess is that 55% number will be drastically reduced. Those who do become new Canadians will take advantage of the opportunity to relinquish their US citizenship at the same time, causing the percentage of duals to also shrink over time.
“All of the individuals with whom we spoke affirmed that they felt anti-American sentiment in Canada.”
I have never once felt that directed at me personally. The anti-American sentiment I have seen was directed at America itself and for very good reasons. I agreed with them.
The US treats it’s closest neighbor and staunchest ally like s–t.
I got my CAN citz in 2001 way before the blowover of 2009. Back then I just felt like I was part of Canada, being in Canada for 15 years since 1985. Also I lived near Canada, in Seattle, and we would have these cool trips to Victoria and Vancouver. I bought a Mao red book, and beer even though I must have looked 13 (back then they did not require ID). Plus staying with a middle class family in Burnaby for a soccer exchange. That was a total training of the Canadian identity. **** those Ams.
That is the only format I’ve witnessed as well — never toward any person who came from the US and was now either a Canadian or a permanent resident here. Was I blind? I, of course, agreed in any debate on policy of the government of the US — our disagreement was certainly one (but not the only or main) reason we made a decision to move to Canada.
Having read this post again (confession: I am a speed reader which means I miss a lot), I must say I am thoroughly confused as to its point which maybe is the point.
USXCanada, I challenge you to actually EXPLAIN your point – in English please. 🙂
Borders between friends are not needed and between enemies cannot be enforced.
The current D.C. Pukes will try anything to gather the wealth of the world so they can redistribute it to those who will keep them in office.
Actually when I was a post-doc at UBC Vancouver (where I met my wife, who fortunately is 100 percent CAN), moving from Calif., there was lots of animosity of Canadians to Americans. This was in 1983. I do not know the source of that animosity, but has has gone away. I think it was a distancing from the Vietnam war.
I hope the ADCS court challenge goes ahead and succeeds, and I have made a couple of substantial contributions toward it, but meanwhile the FATCA train wreck will continue. I’ve given up on hoping the broader Canadian public and media will learn and care about the issue or that enough US persons living in Canada will realize what is going to happen to them before it is too late. Unless the court challenge succeeds, the FATCA IGA will become a real issue only when people here start getting hounded by the IRS for capital gains on their houses and when the Canadian government realizes that it and our financial institution are spending lots of money on compliance with no reciprocity. What will they do then?
I’m happily ex-US but with a bitter aftertaste from what they’ve put us through the past few years over obtaining CLNs and worrying about the IRS. But I’ve put the worry behind me and will carry on with my life while continuing to watch the train wreck with fascination.
“..Like Usxcanada, I suspect, I am appalled at the figure of 45% of US immigrants to Canada who had (as of 1991) been here long enough to take out Canadian citizenship had not done so, yet continue to reside here and benefit from that, for many of the reasons expressed or implied in the sentences taken from the book chapter. And I share the criticism and resentment implied or expressed about those particular individuals in the quotes from the book, as do I suspect many Canadians of a wide range of political views. …”
Has nothing been learned about the wide variation and range of views and experiences in conceptualizing citizenship and its rights and responsibilities, and the many complications of duality, and of the historical ways in which both Canada and the US have treated it – which also has changed over time? Have we learned nothing from discussions of the historical intertwining of the two countries and the flow of people in both directions – resulting in family and marriage ties on either side of the border? There are many reasons why people chose the path they chose, or which chose them by reason of random fate, random birthplace, random parentage, and the vagaries of the histories of both the US and Canada. For a long time, both Canada and the US shaped people’s choices by refusing to recognize duality – even when people were born dual. We wouldn’t even be having this discussion if the US wasn’t arrogantly refusing to recognize that people who have chosen, or found themselves living outside of its borders are permanently or temporarily “home” somewhere else.
And as for; “….yet continue to reside here and benefit from that..”I doubt that people’s choices had to do with direct tangible ‘benefit’s of a kind which deserve the depth of disapproval which is expressed by being “appalled”, resented or criticized. Permanent residents pay taxes and obey the laws of the country just as citizens do. Many participate just as fully in their communities as citizens do – and some more so. Many natural born citizens in Canada do not ever bother to vote. Both countries might be “home” in one sense or another. But people stayed planted in one place or the other, and chose to make a life where they were, to the best of their ability, or returned if necessary. And what of Canadian citizens who move ‘abroad’? Do all of them exchange their Canadian citizenship for that of whatever country they have been living in? Is it mandatory, or a sin if they do not? I don’t tell other people what they should or shouldn’t have done regarding their choice of citizenship/s and where they call home. It is so much easier and straightforward if one is born in one place, has parents and family all conveniently located there nearby, and one’s complete life is and it all stays neat and congruent. Some people are never forced to make difficult or complex choices. But life is often not so very tidy. I don’t consider the ability to join or rejoin one’s family, when they or we need help and support to be a ‘benefit’ that should be criticized or judged.
Family formation, unification and preservation is one of the most compelling motivators for humans. I do not consider the ability to join or rejoin or access family to be a “benefit” deserving of criticism.
For example, according to “The Face of Overseas Americans by Amanda Klekowski von Koppenfels, PhD;
“….. Research I have carried out with overseas Americans suggests, however, that the reality is far more complex….” ……..”…..Some overseas Americans are naturalized Americans who have returned to their country of origin or moved elsewhere, either in search of employment or a sense of connection, or both. Some were born in the United States and have returned to their parents’ country of origin, while other overseas Americans were themselves born overseas and have never lived in the United States….”..”The question that is often asked of overseas Americans is “Why did you leave?” The answer is, on the one hand, fairly straightforward – nearly one-quarter left to be with a partner. The role of love in migration has often been underestimated, with migration theorists focusing on economic and structural factors, but in many cases, marriage or partnership is a key factor in migration. Americans are no exception: marriage or partnership is the most-often mentioned reason at 23.4 percent for leaving the United States……….”…
And where there are marriages and partnerships, there are children and relatives by marriage, and friendships. When people get old or ill, it is no comfort to say well, though I’d like to be near them, at least I made sure to give up one citizenship so as to stay in the good graces of the portion of the Canadian or US population who disapprove of dual status or of being a long term PR.
And I have never bought that dual citizenship – however acquired, automatically means divided loyalties. I think I was more true to the best interests of Canada even when I was only a PR than Harper has proven himself to be as a citizen by birth. I was more deeply critical of the US when warranted (frequently) than many Canadian born citizens were and are.
WhiteKat – Powerful hermeneutical heuristic: stick with your first reading unless you get gobsmacked by overwhelming evidence that you missed something big.
Calgary411 – “Calgary” explains a lot …
AnonAnon – “Watch the train wreck with fascination.” Yup. And if you’re aboard that train … it’s SQP all the way!
Next, grok this wowzer:
Canadian citizenship and acquisition itself has many historic twists and turns, some of which are described below:
How many natural born Canadians now call other countries “home” for now or for good? How many are PRs in other countries? How many will not ever become citizens of those other countries? How many think they might possibly return to Canada and so become duals, but don’t renounce Canadian citizenship?
Is there a special standard to judge those of US origin, or those who move to Canada from elsewhere, but not for Canadians who move ‘abroad’?
What about this?
“..It is time Canada viewed its expatriate population of 2.8 million as a strategic asset – and not as a liability. Not, in other words, as a brain drain at all.
Ottawa should appoint a parliamentary secretary to oversee an office dedicated to engaging with these Canadian citizens, who live in Hong Kong, the United States, the United Kingdom and elsewhere….”…
“……..Canada has always thought of itself as a nation of immigrants. But new research suggests that among wealthy immigrant-receiving nations, Canada is one of the likeliest to see its own citizens move abroad.
Nearly 2.8 million Canadians (9 per cent of the population) live in other countries, according to a study by the Asia Pacific Foundation, proportionally about five times higher than the United States and roughly the same as Britain..”..
“……..One survey shows 69 per cent of Canadians living overseas plan to return home eventually. You can be a good Canadian and live abroad….”
” Ranking Canadians: Percentage of those living abroad”
The Globe and Mail
Published Sunday, Jun. 26 2011, 8:47 PM EDT
Last updated Monday, Jun. 27 2011, 9:19 AM EDT
” The percentage of Canadians living abroad is proportionally about five times higher than that of Americans and almost equal to that of Britons
The percentage of Canadians living abroad is proportionally about five times higher than that of Americans and almost equal to that of Britons”
USX: Your “nuggets” are pyrite (Fool’s gold).
the book was published in 2006, but used data from 1991, three years residency was required for citizenship.
The sample measured naturalization rates for arrivals prior to 1988 which was shortly after the US changed policy on acquiring dual citizenship.
all of the eligible residents would have entered Canada before any free trade agreements, many employment contracts were of sufficient duration to make temporary employees eligible for citizenship although they were planning to return to the US
given that to the countries share a common language(save Quebec), frontier expansion and immigration experience it is not surprising that immigrants from the US would see comforting similarities. Shared cultures are strongest north/south, moving to Regina would more of a “shock” if one were from New York than if from North Dakota.
Still the naturalization rate of US immigrants to Canada is higher than the naturalization rates for all immigrants to the US
I guess I agree with the explanation to this woman’s rant in the comment of at least one to the salon.com article that you’d might like us all to think portrays *the American experience in Canada*. And, gee, thanks for letting me know your view of Americans in Calgary. Does my residing in Calgary differentiate me and my family from other *US citizens who happen to reside in Canada*?
To me, my view only, this woman’s divisive words may come from some chip on her shoulder and her choice would be not to be living in Canada. I can see some of what she experiences as invited by her *perhaps exceptional from ‘those Nova Scotian’s’ attitude*. I don’t understand her view any more than I understand the Conservative government signing an IGA with the US — their belief that I and my family are *US citizens who (only happen to) reside in Canada. From another commenter, it may be part of childhood’s boast, “my dad can beat up your dad”.
To be honest, I have a real problem with Americans in Canada, Americans in the UK, Americans in Ireland, Americans in Norway………
If you emigrate to a country, reside there as a permanent resident for the requisite number of years and do not naturalise then something is wrong…..
My partner quickly naturalised as quickly as eligible which was the right thing to do.
This idea of I am going to live the rest of my life in Italy and not become Italian is absurd and arrogant if you are keeping the blue book solely.
Thats probably why I do not have the most FATCA pity on long term expat Americans who are getting burned by THEIR Government.
Others have mentioned and I am growing in seeing merit is that other countries need to start banning long term migration from the USA. Migrants from the US are a threat and hazard to other countries.
I only wish I could shake my US accent.
@Calgary, the woman in that article is NOT happy where she is living. My guess is she wants to move back to New York.
Re-reading the comments this morning I see that I managed to garble my comment at 9:21 Jan. 22. What I intended to say is that if only slightly more than half (55%) of American immigrants were naturalizing as Canadians when they became eligible in 1991, I’m betting the percentage will rise to near 100% starting in 2014.
Why? Because FATCA is making it virtually impossible to be a US citizen who lives permanently anywhere in the world outside of the US. The US life control of it’s citizens via CBT is making it very difficult for them to work, marry, bank, or save for retirement.
These new Canadians will discover they can use this occasion to simultaneously relinquish their US citizenship, thereby saving themselves US$2350. One stop shopping, so to speak. The only exceptions will be tourists or those who are working here on a strictly temporary basis.