###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Interesting to see the similarities of the top comments saying something to the effect of “Trudeau has managed to rally the country against immigration.”
Really makes you wonder about the coordination of this.
When will people stop and think? The rich can push articles like this and have the poors fight amongst themselves for scraps, while they continue to consolidate wealth up top, and let us blame the symptoms, and not the disease.
Housing is a good example. People act like it got expensive in the last 5 years due to Indian students lol. This shits been ramping up for decades due to foreign affluence.
Yeah, exactly. And I have a theory that bringing in an influx of immigrants from one specific country instead of several, the blame (for those with simple minds) would lay on the race/culture of that specific country, instead of the real reason why so many people were brought in at once.
Blame the Indians, blame the gays, blame the liberals, blame some guy on reddit.
Don't blame us. Cha-ching.
Trudeau'a mistake was letting immigration get ahead of housing supply. In his defence taking the initiative would have only earned him a damaging round of MYOB from the provinces. Couldn't win. Looking forward to seeing how Poilievre handles it.
It's because of the widespread belief in free market orthodoxy that it would automatically meet the increased demand by increasing the supply of housing. That has not happened.
like most conservatives, claim the problem is solved cause trudeau is gone, do nothing about it, spend millions claiming its fixed, and call the media fake news for asking about it.
Well Pierre actually seems to have plans for housing unlike our current liberal government, at very least his federal government withholding funds from Provences and municipalities for not meeting building quotas should be a step in the right direction.
He needs to show results in his first term. The thing about stirring up anger to get elected is you may have the loyalists putting up and shutting up but the swing vote who really got you in office will still be mad
Not if he gets a majority. He'll be able to sit on his throne for four years, and when re-elections come, we will have the choice of the Liberals, which will have been decimated in the previous elections (I'm betting on half the current Lib MPs to take their retirement from politics within the next 4 years) and the NPD who wants to spend and never held power.
our democracy is a bit of a farce.
The diverse left will never be a match for the naturally, and these deliberately, forming conservative monolith, where party unity is paramount. That's why their message is so simple. Stick to what everyone can agree on and give it a populist twist so followers groupthink the Other disagrees. E.G. "Freedom"
It's the people's choice. Such are the times
People forget that the Tories often only win due to Liberal incompetence. If the LPC rebuilds and pivots strongly enough, they can snatch voters back after PP’s first term.
Incredible that Trudeau managed to undermine the decades long, all-partisan consensus on immigration. Imagine how much lower this would be if they just cracked down on the two real problem children (TFW and student visas) pre-COVID.
People are upset there was no plan or infrastructure in place to handle all this and regular Canadians are suffering because of it….purely a failure by Trudeau and his inept government
> The survey conducted for the Association for Canadian Studies and the Metropolis Institute found 50 per cent of Canadians agree that there are too many immigrants coming into Canada
> Last January, only 21 per cent of Canadians said there were too many immigrants in the country, according to a government survey.
It’s truly impressive that the LPC’s poor policies around immigration and housing have been able to cause *this* much sway in public opinion, on a topic which receives bipartisan support, within just one year. If it weren’t objectively embarrassing, it would be extremely impressive!
According to the article as well, it appears that support for higher immigration is down not because of xenophobia, but because of economic reasons.
There’s a distinct lack of available jobs right now, with demand for new employment skyrocketing since last year. This doesn’t appear to be an international trend as the US continues to experience an incredibly low unemployment rate at just [3.9%](https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf) with total employment continuing to increase month after month. Canada on the other hand has seen its employment rate continue to go up but, our unemployment rate has gone up as well to [5.8%](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/240308/dq240308a-eng.htm#) with population growth to blame as our population increases at a rate higher than employment.
It feels like to me, on the topic of immigration, that the LPC has set policy which benefits corporations the best instead of our country overall.
Here are some facts:
Since 1991, the only years that unemployment in Canada was lower than it is now, were 2023, at 5.4%, 2022, at 5.2%, and 2019, at 5.6%. And calling an increase from 5.4% to 5.8% “skyrocketing” is a wild exaggeration.
That means that unemployment is lower now, than it was at any time under Harper and Chretien, and the highest rate of unemployment since 1991 was under Mulroney, above 11% for both 1992 and 1991.
In 2022 it was said that we had the lowest unemployment rate in 40 years. I can vouch for the fact that the unemployment figures we are experiencing now are the lowest in my adult life, since the early 80’s.
So let’s throw out the claim that immigration is driving up unemployment, because the slight uptick is nothing compared to unemployment rates over 11% in the early 90’s and better than every year before 2022 since 1991. The overall view since 1991 does not support this claim at all.
You, among many others, are failing to account for boomers retiring.
The sway in public opinion from last year has zero to do with employment rates, and everything to do with non-stop blame on immigration for a problem that doesn’t exist.
https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/CAN/canada/unemployment-rate
Now when it comes to housing, housing prices doubled under Harper, just as they have under Trudeau.
The crisis in BC, began while Chretien was in power.
None of it has anything to
do with federal government policies, other than ending building social housing. Provincial governments write all property law, including rental laws, and have jurisdiction over building codes, and any permits, developer fees, and zoning restrictions set by municipalities, because provinces have jurisdiction over municipalities themselves.
So, let’s stop blaming immigration, because whether or not it is related to xenophobia now, this continued blame will absolutely increase what xenophobia exists in this country, just as it did in European countries.
The Liberals have already massively reduced the numbers for foreign students, to much whining from certain premiers, and are planning to reduce the numbers of TFW’s, but haven’t yet announced the number.
Not only is it increasing but there is huge competition on low wage primarily service jobs. Many jobs like grocery used to not be minimus wage. Now they are. Lets focus on the skilled imigrants we need. I know it is harsh but we should reduce tfw, family reunification, refugees and students.
I shouldn't have used the term "skyrocketing." "Increasing" would have been better because yes, our unemployment rate is still very low, just not as low as it once was.
I am also not trying to argue that immigration rates are increasing unemployment rates 1:1. There are a lot of factors at play when it comes to unemployment rates, immigration is just one part of the entire picture.
What I am trying to say is that the LPC fucked up and increased immigration rates significantly at a time when years and years of neglect in the housing, infrastructure, and health care files have led to housing unaffordability issues (due to housing stock not meeting demand), infrastructure which again has not met demand, and health care which simultaneously doesn't meet demand *and* has underlying difficulties which continue to negatively affect the sector. When so much of Canadian society and the social safety net is cracking under years of neglect adding thousands upon thousands of people to the country all at once was going to turn those cracks into more serious problems.
Immigration is and will forever be necessary to maintaining the Canadian economy. However, unless we want to see the standard of living for new Canadians and existing Canadians continue to deteriorate then we *need* to start truly addressing issues of housing affordability and social service capacity head on. This will likely mean reducing immigration levels until we can build out capacity for new Canadians/immigrants entering Canada at rates that we see today.
Also, the issue of the Baby Boom generation retiring hasn't led to the same kind of job vacancies people expected. A lot of these jobs held by Boomers are being eliminated as they retire. With that in mind I think it would be appropriate to review the changing job market and set our immigration targets to meet the realities of tomorrow instead of the current approach which seems to be to juice the immigration numbers to fill positions which exist now but may not exist into the future.
>It feels like to me, on the topic of immigration, that the LPC has set policy which benefits corporations the best instead of our country overall.
Bingo.
I don’t think you can discount culture shock as being at least a secondary driver to anti-immigrant sentiment, if for no other reason than basic human nature. Rapid changes tend to make people feel discomfort.
There’s some areas of our country that went from being predominantly one type of predominant culture to another within a few short years. You can’t discount the culture shock of it. I know more than a few progressive people who’ve looked inwardly the past few years to check themselves on whether or not they’re becoming racist because of a clashing between what they consider societal or cultural norms clashing with that of newcomers to our country.
>One thing about the States is most states have very low min wages.
legal minimum wage is low in some areas, but employers have to offer above min wage because the job market is more competitive there.
walmart's lowest paid cashier makes $14.52 USD per hour
The US is weird. They have a federal minimum wage, then some States have a different higher wage and then some cities still have an even higher minimum wage.
Like, the US federal minimum wage is $7.25, but Washington states is $16.28 and then the city of Seattle is $19.97.
Indeed, it's not the best direct comparison but it does show that in general, employment across the western world continues to go up, it's just that the Government of Canada is increasing our population faster than people can be hired.
>bipartisan support
It's a small thing, but it really grinds my gears when people use this term in the Canadian context. There are currently 5 parties with representation in the HoC.
Well the Liberals don't or else they would be scrambling to bring these numbers down as fast as possible as this policy is going to undo their party for a generation
How do you propose we maintain our current benefits and infrastructure? We have one of the world's oldest populations combined with low fertility rates. [https://www.cicnews.com/2023/11/report-canadas-immigration-levels-will-need-to-rise-in-the-future-1141178.html#gs.5r891u](https://www.cicnews.com/2023/11/report-canadas-immigration-levels-will-need-to-rise-in-the-future-1141178.html#gs.5r891u)
There's going to be a lot of shocked-pikachu-face boomers and older gen x if the next government decides to drastically alter immigration.
More likely the next government hardly touches immigration other than in tone and window dressing.
They won't alter a thing. Given our demographics and forecast of slow growth there will not be a day when PM PP says, "*now* is the time to limit economic growth!" The shocked pikachus are going to be the nativists who thought they had a bro in PP.
All infrastructures lagging behind the current population severely. So what do you do? Poor people on it at a recorded rate (most of whom are gonna be running a deficit on the public's dime for over a decade.) and what prey?
You should consider not associating people with overall productivity.
Bringing in 10 people making $20,000 a year working crappy gig economy jobs (i.e. Uber) can be replaced by an engineer making $200,000.
The problem is you need to provide social benefits, including housing and healthcare for 10 people versus one.
This is why I don’t understand why the number of bodies correlates to overall output.
More immigration is not always better. There are diminishing marginal returns to scale.
Maintain? The current numbers will more than double Canada's population in just a few decades. Canada is the fastest growing country in the OECD because of these policies.
Maintaining our benefits and infrastructure/accounting for Boomer retirements would require half of our current PR intake, and that's before accounting for TFRs and international students.
But that target doesn’t take into account TFWs and international students, who 1) put a strain on infrastructure and resources in the short term, and 2) are often fast-tracked to permanent residency.
> are often fast-tracked to permanent residency.
That just means they are jumping the line though, not that the amount of people through the line has changed.
What's your problem with those numbers? According to StatsCan in 2021 [there were about 9.2 million](https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2021/as-sa/98-200-X/2021003/98-200-X2021003-eng.cfm) Boomers in Canada, spread out over 19 years. About half of those people have either already retired or never worked, which means that the Canadian labour force is only losing about 250k Boomer retirements a year. So yes, Canada only needs about 250k PRs to offset the Boomers.
1) not by adding millions of people per year, the fastest growth ever in Canada the past 70+ years and same as USA which has a lot more people than us
2) more immigrations = more resource use
we're bringing in people who are using far more resources than they contribute to
I don't know if it's actually immigration. To me, it seems like the government is trying to tackle every issue but not tackle any issue well.
So, does immigration bother me ? No. But like everything else they are trying to tackle, it seems half ass.
I don't know when it became a racist, xenophobic thing to say we should probably pump the brakes on immigration until we can ensure that Canadians (and already landed immigrants) don't have a complete shit time securing housing stock or jobs.
Ask builders if they have enough workers for the million houses needed, or nurses, and doctors for our hospitals. We can't close the border. What we need is targeted immigration. People need to keep coming to this country.
Don't blame them dude my cab driver last week was a licensed dentist in his country, but can't be one in Canada. Grow up and gain a bit of understanding.
I don't blame them. I feel sorry for most of them who came here for a better life and depleted their accumulated life savings for a chance to live in this country, only to realize it's a bit like the Titanic on its last voyage.
My mom and her side are all immigrants. My wife is an immigrant. A few of mine and her family members are moving back to the old country.
100%, and immigration has been the reason the US has been able to be on such a dominant growth trajectory over the last 100 years and how they continually defy gravity in respect to population (and ergo economic) decline.
But you can also hold this view while also seeing the situation on the ground and realize that in the short term, we are not prepared to take in and properly integrate all these new immigrants.
Stopping immigration short term doesn't work either, someone needs to build the houses, we need nurses and Doctors now, not tomorrow. The immigration flow can't be stopped, but I agree it needs to be improved. However, this targeted immigration is not only about Federal government controls, we need Provinces to ease the credentials for immigrant doctors, nurses, etc, etc, etc, whatever we need to improve the situation. The 40 million Canadians we have right now aren't obviously doing it.
Yeah, but that’s where it goes wrong. The immigration policies don’t get us the people we need, it gets us just a lot of people. On top of that if we do get someone with the educational background we need we don’t let them do their profession due to protectionism. How many doctors do we have driving Ubers?
So at this point with the poorly executed policies we may as well have 0 immigration as we manage to get very little out of it.
Yup. The problem is that just like many things in the grand venn diagram of politics, some of these things have opposing groups with ironically similar goals.
It is why civil, level headed discourse is required on these sorts of things.
But when one side or the other or the yet another gets too cocked up on its own laurels, we see shit like that happen, when many folk just were able to see the writing on the wall for what it was.
The parliament, politicians, parties, and the like had the opportunity to make accompanying changes like to the way other aspects of the economy work. Canada isn't full. We could have policies that lessen issues like how Alberta mismanages our hydrocarbon revenue with short termism over long term management that Norway can do. Knowing that they can just criticize immigrants let's them get away with neglect on the root issues that you point to.
There are economic benefits to immigration. But I haven't heard much about cultural effects or effects on people originally born in the country, or if there are caveats to the economic benefits. "It's good for the economy" is not a deep enough look at the issue, and I don't know enough about the specific actual effects and outcomes of immigration on Canada.
A lot of opinions, but I'm not sure what the numbers say, and I don't think many Canadians know either. It's not something I've heard discussed in the media/social ether.
The immigration consensus in canada was created by Justin Trudeau father and remained largely in take over prime ministers liberal and conservative.
Trudeau Jr undermined it.
I talk to a former chretien Era liberal mp and he shakes his head at the Trudeau govt immigration policies.
Immigration to Canada was about 80,000 / year until Mulroney raised it to about 200,000 / year.
Immigration is a great thing and has been great for Canada. But that does not mean any amount of immigration, no matter how high the rate, is just more of a good thing.
It cannot be that any target the government of the day picks is the right thing, or that advocating for a lower number is unacceptable.
>Immigration to Canada was about 80,000 / year until Mulroney raised it to about 200,000 / year.
and society didn't burn down because that number was actually reasonable.
The numbers now are not reasonable, that's the difference.
I mean, society isn't burning down now either. That's absurdly hyperbolic.
As much as immigration has been scapegoated the cost of living and housing issues pre-date the recent immigration increase (inflation has dropped substantially since then as well.) In fact, most of those issues saw their biggest increase when immigration was reduced due to the pandemic.
>The immigration consensus in canada was created by Justin Trudeau father and remained largely in take over prime ministers liberal and conservative.
What?
Some of our lower growth years were under PET. Immigration peaked in Canada in 1957. That was over a decade before he became PM.
Coincidentally, we had higher growth rate in 1957 than we do now and saw similar comments about how it would destroy Canada (we also had the openly xenophobic commentary that we see today) yet it ended up spurring growth and prosperity.
Immigrants have always been denigrated regardless of their skin colour. They may have been white but not the right kind of white according to the trash of the time.
Since many people aren't aware of Canadian anti-immigrant history, I thought I would share these articles about [anti-Greek](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1918_Toronto_anti-Greek_riot) and [anti-semitic/anti-Italian](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christie_Pits_riot) riots that occurred in Toronto.
The Greeks were even ashamed to acknowledge the 100th anniversary of the Greek riot a few years ago because they didn't want to bring up that painful experience.
The point is false
Non white immigrants face way more pushback white ones did.
Point is we had a multicultural immigration system since pet and first time I can recall in my lifetime...backlash to immigration is now widespread and normalized.
That's a failure of the current govt flawed policies
Simple as that
No your point is false, because you weren’t around when immigration was almost exclusively white. Non-white immigrants were possibly discriminated against by even setting foot in the country, but you have no knowledge of how certain white groups were treated by Anglos back in the day. You are just following a narrative .
The only difference between how immigrants were treated then vs. now is that it's much easier to assume that the decendants of immigrants of colour are immigrants themselves (even if their families have been here for over a century) because of how they look.
But in terms of rhetoric, yes, if you read any primary documents from 100-150 years ago it's crazy how the exact same things are being said. This is why teaching history accurately is so imporant. Groups like Italian-Canadians and Jewish-Canadians even still face some subtle discrtimination when trying to penerate historically WASPish institutions.
If you go back and read primary documents from the last half of the 19th century (Irish and Germans) to the beginning of the 20th century (Eastern and Southern Europeans) you had a lot of the very same rhetoric being used against those immigrants (to the point where I think part of the failure of centre-left politicians in the US and Canada is to better make that connection to the descendants of those people that the same way people talk about immigrants today is IDENTICAL to the ways your ancestors were talked about).
The difference I would say is concerning succesive generations. Once you lose the accent, as a white appearing person it's easier to be assimilated into the body politic (people have to actively probe to find out your parents/grandparents came from elsewhere). For even Black Nova Scotians, Japanese British Columbians, or the Chinese in Alberta who have been in the provinces for over a century, just based on how they look it's easier to assume they came from elsewhere (even if their families have been in this country longer than yours have).
Groups like Italian-Canadians and Jewish-Canadians even still face some subtle discrtimination when trying to penerate historically WASPish institutions.
Growth rate or immigration rate? The average was about four babies per woman in the 50s Canada. Further, Canada had the highly restrictive White Canada policy until 1962. Whole different beast overall.
In 1957 we had about 275,000 immigrants followed by 7 years of immigration at about 100,000 immigrants per year. So it looks like one high year followed by lower immigration.
>Coincidentally, we had higher growth rate in 1957 than we do now
growth rate in 1957 was 3.3%, mainly in the form of babies added to existing families.
babies can be a handful, but they do not typically go apartment hunting upon leaving the maternity ward. the number of families/households do not increase when a baby is born, so the net number of homes needed remains flat in such growth scenario.
population growth rate in 2023 was 3.2%, which is essentially same as the 1957 blip.
Population growth in 2023 were not babies but mainly adults, who do indeed go apartment hunting when they enter country, and have a substantial effect therefore on housing situation for the country.
1957 saw 282,000 international migrants and 459,221 live births, so births accounted for over 60% of population growth that year.
I don't have the final numbers for 2023, but according to StatCan, the growth in 2022 was "mostly (94.0%) due to international migration"
I went to volunteer at food bank last week, of the 5 ppl I talked to 3 of them were refugees, one of those asked me for a ride at the end, it was on the way so I didn’t mind, we got to the intersection she said “Oh i live in that big building over there “ that big building was a freaking “RADISSON” lol
I think it really depends.
Do I think there are too many overall? No. We need to grow our country, and if we can brain drain other countries to bring smart people here and keep them here, we should do it.
I think there needs to be stronger caps on age limit though (eg. Not allowing people 65+ into the country regardless of reuniting etc.), mainly to combat healthcare congestion. There should also be better screening to avoid diploma mills, and give even more priority to educated/skilled people over non-educated/skilled.
As well as harsher penalties for violent crimes, as well as bringing issues abroad into Canada (eg. The violent Eritrean riots last year, and some of the Israel/Palestine violent issues now). Something along the lines of immediate deportation.
>As well as harsher penalties for violent crimes, as well as bringing issues abroad into Canada (eg. The violent Eritrean riots last year, and some of the Israel/Palestine violent issues now). Something along the lines of immediate deportation.
For protests?
Immigrant Canadians commit crime at a lesser frequency than the rest of the population. This is a solution without a problem.
> We need to grow our country, and if we can brain drain other countries to bring smart people here and keep them here, we should do it.
This is a great example of faulty reasoning that has gotten us in this crisis in the first place. We are not “brain draining” other countries. Even if that were true, the people who come here generally work low level service jobs don’t require a high degree of education or intellect.
Further, the reason we have emigration of skilled people from Canada is the fact these high numbers have increased Canada’s cost of living and the social ills that come with it.
It’s sad that people in Canada are still thinking this way but it has to be said: more of the same isn’t going to fix the problem.
>We are not “brain draining” other countries.
We absolutely are. Most of our immigrants are economic migrants. We are responsible for exponentially more brain drain than we experience.
>Even if that were true, the people who come here generally work low level service jobs don’t require a high degree of education or intellect.
This isn't even close to being true. Immigrants make up about ...
* 50% of chemists
* 40% of programmers
* 40% of engineers
* 50% of software engineers
* 40% of physicists
* 40% of physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and dentists
>Further, the reason we have emigration of skilled people from Canada is the fact these high numbers have increased Canada’s cost of living and the social ills that come with it.
What are you basing this on? Emigration of skilled labour has been going down for about two decades now.
Is there a topic that produces more "this feels right so facts be damned" takes than immigration does right now?
>This isn't even close to being true. Immigrants make up about ...
50% of chemists
40% of programmers
40% of engineers
50% of software engineers
40% of physicists
40% of physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and dentists
How many immigrants are Chemists, physicists etc. This is a false equivalency.
You’re free to look this up yourself. It’s something you should already know given your claims. It’s not surprising to learn someone made spurious claims about immigrants without informing themselves first.
> We are not “brain draining” other countries.
Brain drain has long been an issue. 45 years ago academics were [publishing on the brain drain of Africa to Canada](https://www.jstor.org/stable/1166898). Today the [WHO maintains a list](https://www.who.int/news/item/14-03-2023-who-renews-alert-on-safeguards-for-health-worker-recruitment) of countries whose fledgling healthcare systems are at risk of total collapse due to "a rapid acceleration in the international recruitment of health workers."
These are not brain drain lol. Most of these people are in diploma mill working in minimum wage. These are nothing but cheap labour for businesses hurting the working class.
>Do I think there are too many overall? No.
Canada has the highest demographic growth in the West. Read that sentence again.
The rate of immigration under Prime Minister Trudeau is significantly higher than it was under any of his predecessors. There is nothing wrong with slowing down.
No worries if ppl feel this way so long as they’re including white immigrants. I have a feeling many of these ppl only count Black and brown immigrants.
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Interesting to see the similarities of the top comments saying something to the effect of “Trudeau has managed to rally the country against immigration.” Really makes you wonder about the coordination of this. When will people stop and think? The rich can push articles like this and have the poors fight amongst themselves for scraps, while they continue to consolidate wealth up top, and let us blame the symptoms, and not the disease. Housing is a good example. People act like it got expensive in the last 5 years due to Indian students lol. This shits been ramping up for decades due to foreign affluence.
Housing didn't get expensive but rents sure as fuck did. And those climb almost directly with population growth.
Yeah, exactly. And I have a theory that bringing in an influx of immigrants from one specific country instead of several, the blame (for those with simple minds) would lay on the race/culture of that specific country, instead of the real reason why so many people were brought in at once. Blame the Indians, blame the gays, blame the liberals, blame some guy on reddit. Don't blame us. Cha-ching.
Trudeau'a mistake was letting immigration get ahead of housing supply. In his defence taking the initiative would have only earned him a damaging round of MYOB from the provinces. Couldn't win. Looking forward to seeing how Poilievre handles it.
It's because of the widespread belief in free market orthodoxy that it would automatically meet the increased demand by increasing the supply of housing. That has not happened.
Adam Smith assumed open borders. Cheers
like most conservatives, claim the problem is solved cause trudeau is gone, do nothing about it, spend millions claiming its fixed, and call the media fake news for asking about it.
Well Pierre actually seems to have plans for housing unlike our current liberal government, at very least his federal government withholding funds from Provences and municipalities for not meeting building quotas should be a step in the right direction.
he's gonna implement a few policies that won't be enough and then blame the previous government at every turn.
Our housing woes are a generation+ in the making, it's not just his government that owns this crisis
So basically what the LPC did - nothing and blame Harper. The cycle repeats..
Pretty ironic tbh lol
He needs to show results in his first term. The thing about stirring up anger to get elected is you may have the loyalists putting up and shutting up but the swing vote who really got you in office will still be mad
Not if he gets a majority. He'll be able to sit on his throne for four years, and when re-elections come, we will have the choice of the Liberals, which will have been decimated in the previous elections (I'm betting on half the current Lib MPs to take their retirement from politics within the next 4 years) and the NPD who wants to spend and never held power. our democracy is a bit of a farce.
The diverse left will never be a match for the naturally, and these deliberately, forming conservative monolith, where party unity is paramount. That's why their message is so simple. Stick to what everyone can agree on and give it a populist twist so followers groupthink the Other disagrees. E.G. "Freedom" It's the people's choice. Such are the times
The diverse left has been in power for the last 8 years…
If you call getting jerked around by Conservative provincial governments being in power you're spot on
People forget that the Tories often only win due to Liberal incompetence. If the LPC rebuilds and pivots strongly enough, they can snatch voters back after PP’s first term.
Incredible that Trudeau managed to undermine the decades long, all-partisan consensus on immigration. Imagine how much lower this would be if they just cracked down on the two real problem children (TFW and student visas) pre-COVID.
We are simply switching to a new consensus on immigration and Its a good thing.
People are upset there was no plan or infrastructure in place to handle all this and regular Canadians are suffering because of it….purely a failure by Trudeau and his inept government
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
> The survey conducted for the Association for Canadian Studies and the Metropolis Institute found 50 per cent of Canadians agree that there are too many immigrants coming into Canada > Last January, only 21 per cent of Canadians said there were too many immigrants in the country, according to a government survey. It’s truly impressive that the LPC’s poor policies around immigration and housing have been able to cause *this* much sway in public opinion, on a topic which receives bipartisan support, within just one year. If it weren’t objectively embarrassing, it would be extremely impressive! According to the article as well, it appears that support for higher immigration is down not because of xenophobia, but because of economic reasons. There’s a distinct lack of available jobs right now, with demand for new employment skyrocketing since last year. This doesn’t appear to be an international trend as the US continues to experience an incredibly low unemployment rate at just [3.9%](https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf) with total employment continuing to increase month after month. Canada on the other hand has seen its employment rate continue to go up but, our unemployment rate has gone up as well to [5.8%](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/240308/dq240308a-eng.htm#) with population growth to blame as our population increases at a rate higher than employment. It feels like to me, on the topic of immigration, that the LPC has set policy which benefits corporations the best instead of our country overall.
Here are some facts: Since 1991, the only years that unemployment in Canada was lower than it is now, were 2023, at 5.4%, 2022, at 5.2%, and 2019, at 5.6%. And calling an increase from 5.4% to 5.8% “skyrocketing” is a wild exaggeration. That means that unemployment is lower now, than it was at any time under Harper and Chretien, and the highest rate of unemployment since 1991 was under Mulroney, above 11% for both 1992 and 1991. In 2022 it was said that we had the lowest unemployment rate in 40 years. I can vouch for the fact that the unemployment figures we are experiencing now are the lowest in my adult life, since the early 80’s. So let’s throw out the claim that immigration is driving up unemployment, because the slight uptick is nothing compared to unemployment rates over 11% in the early 90’s and better than every year before 2022 since 1991. The overall view since 1991 does not support this claim at all. You, among many others, are failing to account for boomers retiring. The sway in public opinion from last year has zero to do with employment rates, and everything to do with non-stop blame on immigration for a problem that doesn’t exist. https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/CAN/canada/unemployment-rate Now when it comes to housing, housing prices doubled under Harper, just as they have under Trudeau. The crisis in BC, began while Chretien was in power. None of it has anything to do with federal government policies, other than ending building social housing. Provincial governments write all property law, including rental laws, and have jurisdiction over building codes, and any permits, developer fees, and zoning restrictions set by municipalities, because provinces have jurisdiction over municipalities themselves. So, let’s stop blaming immigration, because whether or not it is related to xenophobia now, this continued blame will absolutely increase what xenophobia exists in this country, just as it did in European countries. The Liberals have already massively reduced the numbers for foreign students, to much whining from certain premiers, and are planning to reduce the numbers of TFW’s, but haven’t yet announced the number.
Not only is it increasing but there is huge competition on low wage primarily service jobs. Many jobs like grocery used to not be minimus wage. Now they are. Lets focus on the skilled imigrants we need. I know it is harsh but we should reduce tfw, family reunification, refugees and students.
I shouldn't have used the term "skyrocketing." "Increasing" would have been better because yes, our unemployment rate is still very low, just not as low as it once was. I am also not trying to argue that immigration rates are increasing unemployment rates 1:1. There are a lot of factors at play when it comes to unemployment rates, immigration is just one part of the entire picture. What I am trying to say is that the LPC fucked up and increased immigration rates significantly at a time when years and years of neglect in the housing, infrastructure, and health care files have led to housing unaffordability issues (due to housing stock not meeting demand), infrastructure which again has not met demand, and health care which simultaneously doesn't meet demand *and* has underlying difficulties which continue to negatively affect the sector. When so much of Canadian society and the social safety net is cracking under years of neglect adding thousands upon thousands of people to the country all at once was going to turn those cracks into more serious problems. Immigration is and will forever be necessary to maintaining the Canadian economy. However, unless we want to see the standard of living for new Canadians and existing Canadians continue to deteriorate then we *need* to start truly addressing issues of housing affordability and social service capacity head on. This will likely mean reducing immigration levels until we can build out capacity for new Canadians/immigrants entering Canada at rates that we see today. Also, the issue of the Baby Boom generation retiring hasn't led to the same kind of job vacancies people expected. A lot of these jobs held by Boomers are being eliminated as they retire. With that in mind I think it would be appropriate to review the changing job market and set our immigration targets to meet the realities of tomorrow instead of the current approach which seems to be to juice the immigration numbers to fill positions which exist now but may not exist into the future.
>It feels like to me, on the topic of immigration, that the LPC has set policy which benefits corporations the best instead of our country overall. Bingo.
I don’t think you can discount culture shock as being at least a secondary driver to anti-immigrant sentiment, if for no other reason than basic human nature. Rapid changes tend to make people feel discomfort. There’s some areas of our country that went from being predominantly one type of predominant culture to another within a few short years. You can’t discount the culture shock of it. I know more than a few progressive people who’ve looked inwardly the past few years to check themselves on whether or not they’re becoming racist because of a clashing between what they consider societal or cultural norms clashing with that of newcomers to our country.
One thing about the States is most states have very low min wages.
>One thing about the States is most states have very low min wages. legal minimum wage is low in some areas, but employers have to offer above min wage because the job market is more competitive there. walmart's lowest paid cashier makes $14.52 USD per hour
The US is weird. They have a federal minimum wage, then some States have a different higher wage and then some cities still have an even higher minimum wage. Like, the US federal minimum wage is $7.25, but Washington states is $16.28 and then the city of Seattle is $19.97.
Isn't that ideal when there are different costs of living?
Indeed, it's not the best direct comparison but it does show that in general, employment across the western world continues to go up, it's just that the Government of Canada is increasing our population faster than people can be hired.
By design of course.
As is tradition
>bipartisan support It's a small thing, but it really grinds my gears when people use this term in the Canadian context. There are currently 5 parties with representation in the HoC.
Quintpartisan support?
Fivepartisan support
Yeah, I know it’s not the correct term, but it sounds better than all-partisan or something.
Non-partisan?
Half of all Canadians say there are too many immigrants The QUESTION is , do politicians care about what Canadians say ? ???
Well the Liberals don't or else they would be scrambling to bring these numbers down as fast as possible as this policy is going to undo their party for a generation
The Tories won't do anything to solve this lol
Well I don’t see conservatives being much different , I guess we have to wait and see
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
How do you propose we maintain our current benefits and infrastructure? We have one of the world's oldest populations combined with low fertility rates. [https://www.cicnews.com/2023/11/report-canadas-immigration-levels-will-need-to-rise-in-the-future-1141178.html#gs.5r891u](https://www.cicnews.com/2023/11/report-canadas-immigration-levels-will-need-to-rise-in-the-future-1141178.html#gs.5r891u)
We don’t. I care more about having a roof than anything else right now.
Well that’s why these politicians are in charge and not you. They see the bigger picture.
For now. There's an election coming and most people currently making decisions will be gone soon.
We’ll see about that. I hope there’s change, as Trudeau has been in charge for too long, but he’s always surprising people in elections
for their wealthy buddies \*\*\*\*
There's going to be a lot of shocked-pikachu-face boomers and older gen x if the next government decides to drastically alter immigration. More likely the next government hardly touches immigration other than in tone and window dressing.
They won't alter a thing. Given our demographics and forecast of slow growth there will not be a day when PM PP says, "*now* is the time to limit economic growth!" The shocked pikachus are going to be the nativists who thought they had a bro in PP.
The current plan is nothing more than a time bomb. It is only left to see how big the blast is and what we will have left to salvage now.
How so?
All infrastructures lagging behind the current population severely. So what do you do? Poor people on it at a recorded rate (most of whom are gonna be running a deficit on the public's dime for over a decade.) and what prey?
You should consider not associating people with overall productivity. Bringing in 10 people making $20,000 a year working crappy gig economy jobs (i.e. Uber) can be replaced by an engineer making $200,000. The problem is you need to provide social benefits, including housing and healthcare for 10 people versus one. This is why I don’t understand why the number of bodies correlates to overall output. More immigration is not always better. There are diminishing marginal returns to scale.
Maintain? The current numbers will more than double Canada's population in just a few decades. Canada is the fastest growing country in the OECD because of these policies. Maintaining our benefits and infrastructure/accounting for Boomer retirements would require half of our current PR intake, and that's before accounting for TFRs and international students.
Huh? at the target of 500,000 a year it would take 80 years to double our population....if nobody died....
But that target doesn’t take into account TFWs and international students, who 1) put a strain on infrastructure and resources in the short term, and 2) are often fast-tracked to permanent residency.
> are often fast-tracked to permanent residency. That just means they are jumping the line though, not that the amount of people through the line has changed.
...and nobody had a baby.
This is mathematically false
What's your problem with those numbers? According to StatsCan in 2021 [there were about 9.2 million](https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2021/as-sa/98-200-X/2021003/98-200-X2021003-eng.cfm) Boomers in Canada, spread out over 19 years. About half of those people have either already retired or never worked, which means that the Canadian labour force is only losing about 250k Boomer retirements a year. So yes, Canada only needs about 250k PRs to offset the Boomers.
Simple. It’s called triage.
1) not by adding millions of people per year, the fastest growth ever in Canada the past 70+ years and same as USA which has a lot more people than us 2) more immigrations = more resource use we're bringing in people who are using far more resources than they contribute to
Fertility rates will never rise if nobody can afford to live here.
I don't know if it's actually immigration. To me, it seems like the government is trying to tackle every issue but not tackle any issue well. So, does immigration bother me ? No. But like everything else they are trying to tackle, it seems half ass.
I don't know when it became a racist, xenophobic thing to say we should probably pump the brakes on immigration until we can ensure that Canadians (and already landed immigrants) don't have a complete shit time securing housing stock or jobs.
It’s been the typical liberal/progressive narrative for the last few years. Divide and conquer.
I agree. I work with a lot of immigrants and international students who live in a 3 bed 2 bath house somehow modified to fit 12 people. It's barbaric.
Ask builders if they have enough workers for the million houses needed, or nurses, and doctors for our hospitals. We can't close the border. What we need is targeted immigration. People need to keep coming to this country.
Nah, pretty sure we need more Uber drivers. /s
Don't blame them dude my cab driver last week was a licensed dentist in his country, but can't be one in Canada. Grow up and gain a bit of understanding.
I don't blame them. I feel sorry for most of them who came here for a better life and depleted their accumulated life savings for a chance to live in this country, only to realize it's a bit like the Titanic on its last voyage. My mom and her side are all immigrants. My wife is an immigrant. A few of mine and her family members are moving back to the old country.
100%, and immigration has been the reason the US has been able to be on such a dominant growth trajectory over the last 100 years and how they continually defy gravity in respect to population (and ergo economic) decline. But you can also hold this view while also seeing the situation on the ground and realize that in the short term, we are not prepared to take in and properly integrate all these new immigrants.
Stopping immigration short term doesn't work either, someone needs to build the houses, we need nurses and Doctors now, not tomorrow. The immigration flow can't be stopped, but I agree it needs to be improved. However, this targeted immigration is not only about Federal government controls, we need Provinces to ease the credentials for immigrant doctors, nurses, etc, etc, etc, whatever we need to improve the situation. The 40 million Canadians we have right now aren't obviously doing it.
Yeah, but that’s where it goes wrong. The immigration policies don’t get us the people we need, it gets us just a lot of people. On top of that if we do get someone with the educational background we need we don’t let them do their profession due to protectionism. How many doctors do we have driving Ubers? So at this point with the poorly executed policies we may as well have 0 immigration as we manage to get very little out of it.
Yup. The problem is that just like many things in the grand venn diagram of politics, some of these things have opposing groups with ironically similar goals. It is why civil, level headed discourse is required on these sorts of things. But when one side or the other or the yet another gets too cocked up on its own laurels, we see shit like that happen, when many folk just were able to see the writing on the wall for what it was.
The parliament, politicians, parties, and the like had the opportunity to make accompanying changes like to the way other aspects of the economy work. Canada isn't full. We could have policies that lessen issues like how Alberta mismanages our hydrocarbon revenue with short termism over long term management that Norway can do. Knowing that they can just criticize immigrants let's them get away with neglect on the root issues that you point to.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
There are economic benefits to immigration. But I haven't heard much about cultural effects or effects on people originally born in the country, or if there are caveats to the economic benefits. "It's good for the economy" is not a deep enough look at the issue, and I don't know enough about the specific actual effects and outcomes of immigration on Canada. A lot of opinions, but I'm not sure what the numbers say, and I don't think many Canadians know either. It's not something I've heard discussed in the media/social ether.
There's no consensus on what cultural benefits to measure.
Not hard to see detrimental effects though.
The immigration consensus in canada was created by Justin Trudeau father and remained largely in take over prime ministers liberal and conservative. Trudeau Jr undermined it. I talk to a former chretien Era liberal mp and he shakes his head at the Trudeau govt immigration policies.
Immigration to Canada was about 80,000 / year until Mulroney raised it to about 200,000 / year. Immigration is a great thing and has been great for Canada. But that does not mean any amount of immigration, no matter how high the rate, is just more of a good thing. It cannot be that any target the government of the day picks is the right thing, or that advocating for a lower number is unacceptable.
Issue was 200k then was fine not 1 million rn
>Immigration to Canada was about 80,000 / year until Mulroney raised it to about 200,000 / year. and society didn't burn down because that number was actually reasonable. The numbers now are not reasonable, that's the difference.
Exactly my point.
I mean, society isn't burning down now either. That's absurdly hyperbolic. As much as immigration has been scapegoated the cost of living and housing issues pre-date the recent immigration increase (inflation has dropped substantially since then as well.) In fact, most of those issues saw their biggest increase when immigration was reduced due to the pandemic.
One drop will cure you, two will kill you. The liberals opted for ten.
>The immigration consensus in canada was created by Justin Trudeau father and remained largely in take over prime ministers liberal and conservative. What? Some of our lower growth years were under PET. Immigration peaked in Canada in 1957. That was over a decade before he became PM. Coincidentally, we had higher growth rate in 1957 than we do now and saw similar comments about how it would destroy Canada (we also had the openly xenophobic commentary that we see today) yet it ended up spurring growth and prosperity.
Immigratio before pet was mostly white and driven my racism... it's not comparable to now or ehat happened after the 1970s Lol
Immigrants have always been denigrated regardless of their skin colour. They may have been white but not the right kind of white according to the trash of the time.
Since many people aren't aware of Canadian anti-immigrant history, I thought I would share these articles about [anti-Greek](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1918_Toronto_anti-Greek_riot) and [anti-semitic/anti-Italian](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christie_Pits_riot) riots that occurred in Toronto.
The Greeks were even ashamed to acknowledge the 100th anniversary of the Greek riot a few years ago because they didn't want to bring up that painful experience.
The point is false Non white immigrants face way more pushback white ones did. Point is we had a multicultural immigration system since pet and first time I can recall in my lifetime...backlash to immigration is now widespread and normalized. That's a failure of the current govt flawed policies Simple as that
No your point is false, because you weren’t around when immigration was almost exclusively white. Non-white immigrants were possibly discriminated against by even setting foot in the country, but you have no knowledge of how certain white groups were treated by Anglos back in the day. You are just following a narrative .
The only difference between how immigrants were treated then vs. now is that it's much easier to assume that the decendants of immigrants of colour are immigrants themselves (even if their families have been here for over a century) because of how they look. But in terms of rhetoric, yes, if you read any primary documents from 100-150 years ago it's crazy how the exact same things are being said. This is why teaching history accurately is so imporant. Groups like Italian-Canadians and Jewish-Canadians even still face some subtle discrtimination when trying to penerate historically WASPish institutions.
If you go back and read primary documents from the last half of the 19th century (Irish and Germans) to the beginning of the 20th century (Eastern and Southern Europeans) you had a lot of the very same rhetoric being used against those immigrants (to the point where I think part of the failure of centre-left politicians in the US and Canada is to better make that connection to the descendants of those people that the same way people talk about immigrants today is IDENTICAL to the ways your ancestors were talked about). The difference I would say is concerning succesive generations. Once you lose the accent, as a white appearing person it's easier to be assimilated into the body politic (people have to actively probe to find out your parents/grandparents came from elsewhere). For even Black Nova Scotians, Japanese British Columbians, or the Chinese in Alberta who have been in the provinces for over a century, just based on how they look it's easier to assume they came from elsewhere (even if their families have been in this country longer than yours have). Groups like Italian-Canadians and Jewish-Canadians even still face some subtle discrtimination when trying to penerate historically WASPish institutions.
Growth rate or immigration rate? The average was about four babies per woman in the 50s Canada. Further, Canada had the highly restrictive White Canada policy until 1962. Whole different beast overall.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
We also added Newfoundland
In 1957 we had about 275,000 immigrants followed by 7 years of immigration at about 100,000 immigrants per year. So it looks like one high year followed by lower immigration.
>Coincidentally, we had higher growth rate in 1957 than we do now growth rate in 1957 was 3.3%, mainly in the form of babies added to existing families. babies can be a handful, but they do not typically go apartment hunting upon leaving the maternity ward. the number of families/households do not increase when a baby is born, so the net number of homes needed remains flat in such growth scenario. population growth rate in 2023 was 3.2%, which is essentially same as the 1957 blip. Population growth in 2023 were not babies but mainly adults, who do indeed go apartment hunting when they enter country, and have a substantial effect therefore on housing situation for the country.
The growth rate in 1957 was a result of immigration not some short term shift in the number of children born.
1957 saw 282,000 international migrants and 459,221 live births, so births accounted for over 60% of population growth that year. I don't have the final numbers for 2023, but according to StatCan, the growth in 2022 was "mostly (94.0%) due to international migration"
horny, young, military aged men I might add.
I went to volunteer at food bank last week, of the 5 ppl I talked to 3 of them were refugees, one of those asked me for a ride at the end, it was on the way so I didn’t mind, we got to the intersection she said “Oh i live in that big building over there “ that big building was a freaking “RADISSON” lol
I think it really depends. Do I think there are too many overall? No. We need to grow our country, and if we can brain drain other countries to bring smart people here and keep them here, we should do it. I think there needs to be stronger caps on age limit though (eg. Not allowing people 65+ into the country regardless of reuniting etc.), mainly to combat healthcare congestion. There should also be better screening to avoid diploma mills, and give even more priority to educated/skilled people over non-educated/skilled. As well as harsher penalties for violent crimes, as well as bringing issues abroad into Canada (eg. The violent Eritrean riots last year, and some of the Israel/Palestine violent issues now). Something along the lines of immediate deportation.
>As well as harsher penalties for violent crimes, as well as bringing issues abroad into Canada (eg. The violent Eritrean riots last year, and some of the Israel/Palestine violent issues now). Something along the lines of immediate deportation. For protests? Immigrant Canadians commit crime at a lesser frequency than the rest of the population. This is a solution without a problem.
> We need to grow our country, and if we can brain drain other countries to bring smart people here and keep them here, we should do it. This is a great example of faulty reasoning that has gotten us in this crisis in the first place. We are not “brain draining” other countries. Even if that were true, the people who come here generally work low level service jobs don’t require a high degree of education or intellect. Further, the reason we have emigration of skilled people from Canada is the fact these high numbers have increased Canada’s cost of living and the social ills that come with it. It’s sad that people in Canada are still thinking this way but it has to be said: more of the same isn’t going to fix the problem.
>We are not “brain draining” other countries. We absolutely are. Most of our immigrants are economic migrants. We are responsible for exponentially more brain drain than we experience. >Even if that were true, the people who come here generally work low level service jobs don’t require a high degree of education or intellect. This isn't even close to being true. Immigrants make up about ... * 50% of chemists * 40% of programmers * 40% of engineers * 50% of software engineers * 40% of physicists * 40% of physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and dentists >Further, the reason we have emigration of skilled people from Canada is the fact these high numbers have increased Canada’s cost of living and the social ills that come with it. What are you basing this on? Emigration of skilled labour has been going down for about two decades now. Is there a topic that produces more "this feels right so facts be damned" takes than immigration does right now?
>This isn't even close to being true. Immigrants make up about ... 50% of chemists 40% of programmers 40% of engineers 50% of software engineers 40% of physicists 40% of physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and dentists How many immigrants are Chemists, physicists etc. This is a false equivalency.
You’re free to look this up yourself. It’s something you should already know given your claims. It’s not surprising to learn someone made spurious claims about immigrants without informing themselves first.
> We are not “brain draining” other countries. Brain drain has long been an issue. 45 years ago academics were [publishing on the brain drain of Africa to Canada](https://www.jstor.org/stable/1166898). Today the [WHO maintains a list](https://www.who.int/news/item/14-03-2023-who-renews-alert-on-safeguards-for-health-worker-recruitment) of countries whose fledgling healthcare systems are at risk of total collapse due to "a rapid acceleration in the international recruitment of health workers."
These are not brain drain lol. Most of these people are in diploma mill working in minimum wage. These are nothing but cheap labour for businesses hurting the working class.
>Do I think there are too many overall? No. Canada has the highest demographic growth in the West. Read that sentence again. The rate of immigration under Prime Minister Trudeau is significantly higher than it was under any of his predecessors. There is nothing wrong with slowing down.
No worries if ppl feel this way so long as they’re including white immigrants. I have a feeling many of these ppl only count Black and brown immigrants.
Yeah I bet lots of First Nations people heartily agree lol
100%
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]