Canada's Q3 2023 Population Growth

[chris08876]

So from 40 million to 50 million in 8 years? Is baby fever a real thing in Canada? Considering the cost of living. I can imagine immigration would help and high reproduction amongst immigrants but a 20 percent increase? In 8 years...

I'd imagine the world economic situation, which likely will take a few years to fully resolve and be restored below 2020 levels will hamper the population in the long run. That's a lot of housing and infrastructure that has to be built and upgraded for 10 million more folks. All things considered with the current housing crisis.

[3rd&Brown]

These numbers are so impressive.

I guess I should buy that beach house in the Maritimes before it's too late?

[Acajack]

It's not really that much of an achievement though. Any first world developed country could open the floodgates and grow as fast or even faster.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by Acajack

It's not really that much of an achievement though. Any first world developed country could open the floodgates and grow as fast or even faster.

The fact that the political will exists to do it though, is an achievement.

Canada should not be adding more people through immigration than the US, and tbh, it feels like it is.

[Crawford]

I'm amazed it isn't a big issue in Canada. And even more amazed it isn't publicly tied to housing affordability.

The numbers are unreal, perhaps unprecedented in modern times.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I'm amazed it isn't a big issue in Canada. And even more amazed it isn't publicly tied to housing affordability.

The numbers are unreal, perhaps unprecedented in modern times.

It's very slowly but surely coming to a boil as a political issue in Canada.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I'm amazed it isn't a big issue in Canada. And even more amazed it isn't publicly tied to housing affordability.

The numbers are unreal, perhaps unprecedented in modern times.

Come visit the Canada subforum. It is front and centre as an issue, among forumers, but even much more so among the Canadian public.

https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...2230&page=1012

[lio45]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

These numbers are so impressive.

I guess I should buy that beach house in the Maritimes before it's too late?

Just buy a tent

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...ough-1.6930495

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I'm amazed it isn't a big issue in Canada. And even more amazed it isn't publicly tied to housing affordability.

The numbers are unreal, perhaps unprecedented in modern times.

It's definitely a big issue.

What's particular is that many people greatly benefit from this (I like to call it the Ponzi Scheme of Great Enrichment), while it's totally screwing others.

The amount of people that the Scheme fucks is greater, but that's made up by the fact that the people who benefit (usually retired Boomers who are close to the point of cashing out) are 10000% more likely to vote on e-day.

[Nouvellecosse]

Technically the majority of Canadian households own their homes so rising home prices don't hurt them. In fact it helps them because their property being worth more after they already bought it increases their net worth and potentially provides them with more rental income for homes they don't occupy. It only hurts people who 1) didn't own before the prices increased, 2) don't have anyone to inherit property from or help them with a down payment. That's a large number of people, but still a minority so it's hard for it to overcome the political sway of those the high prices benefit.

[Fabricio JF]

This outdated UN map counted forced and voluntary immigration between 2017 and 2021.



Already in this period it's possible to see that Australia and Canada stand out as receiving areas and the two countries currently have common demographic goals of increasing population.

Still trying to analyze the map without taking into account the Venezuelan, Syrian, Central African and South Sudanese diasporas, which resulted in a positive balance for some neighboring countries and not taking into account known expatriate destinations, it turns out that probably Sweden and Switzerland also seem to have strategic population goals, seeking to increase some type of political-economic weight and taking into account an enabling environment for voluntary immigration and opportunities. Of these 2 European countries, Sweden would have similar geographic challenges to Canada, as much of the relatively large territory is in the sub-Arctic zone and difficult to settle with current human colonization technologies to deal with the extreme cold.

Countries like Chile, although it's a well-known destination for expatriates and political refugees without such an apparent presence of voluntary and more economic immigration, could be the closest analogy to Australia from a geographical point of view, as it has a robust territory considering the territorial extremes and also has a desert to dealing with human fixation as a challenge. In terms of total population increase, Canada stands out more than all of them, behind only 7 countries in the survey carried out in 2020 by UN DESA.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Technically the majority of Canadian households own their homes so rising home prices don't hurt them.

Eh, maybe not directly, but there are negative externalities. Extreme reliance on housing depresses wages and makes economies less efficient, people are stuck in housing that isn't a lifestyle fit, and their kids/loved ones might be screwed unless Bank of Mom & Dad sacrifices their retirement to help them.

[MolsonExport]

As someone that is very much pro-immigration, I am angry at our government for making such a mess out of things, in terms of spiking immigration rates to double or more than what we can reasonably accommodate without very badly upsetting the housing market (which was already far too frothy) and with the subsequent backlash putting a great deal of wind into the sails of the anti-immigrant/anti-diversity deplorables.

[Crawford]

Why did Canada double immigration? I don't get this, and I'm definitely on the pro-immigration side.

Canada already had very pro-immigration policies, there didn't seem to be much controversy, and the levels seemed to be close to optimal (lots of skilled newcomers as opposed to now hordes of diploma-mill college kids). Canada, not too long ago, was commonly viewed as the first world nation that had the best handle on immigration. It was always favorably compared to the clown car to the south, where controversy and division are a constant.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Why did Canada double immigration? I don't get this, and I'm definitely on the pro-immigration side.

Canada already had very pro-immigration policies, there didn't seem to be much controversy, and the levels seemed to be close to optimal (lots of skilled newcomers as opposed to now hordes of diploma-mill college kids). Canada, not too long ago, was commonly viewed as the first world nation that had the best handle on immigration. It was always favorably compared to the clown car to the south, where controversy and division are a constant.

The productivity of Canada's economy has been lagging for years (since before Trudeau took power BTW) and more and more immigration has been an easy low-effort way to continue to grow the economy by simply increasing the domestic market of consumers. It also helps businesses by keeping salaries low due to preventing labour shortages from getting too serious.

But yes, it's an economic growth strategy that is similar to pouring gasoline directly into the carburetor because your car won't start.

[edale]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Why did Canada double immigration? I don't get this, and I'm definitely on the pro-immigration side.

Canada already had very pro-immigration policies, there didn't seem to be much controversy, and the levels seemed to be close to optimal (lots of skilled newcomers as opposed to now hordes of diploma-mill college kids). Canada, not too long ago, was commonly viewed as the first world nation that had the best handle on immigration. It was always favorably compared to the clown car to the south, where controversy and division are a constant.

Not to say the US isn't a total mess when it comes to immigration policies, but Canada is extraordinarily lucky to not have to deal with what we do at the southern border. Illegal immigration is not really a thing in Canada, whereas the US received 30,000 asylum seekers (and estimates reveal probably only 5-10% will actually qualify for asylum) at one border crossing in Texas in the last 3 days! Canada has the luxury of picking and choosing who they let in-- usually educated and decently wealthy people who can immediately contribute to the economy. The US gets some of those types of immigrants, but also has to contend with the constant flood of South and Central Americans at the southern border. If Canada also had to deal with this, I bet their attitudes toward immigration would change quite a bit.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Eh, maybe not directly, but there are negative externalities. Extreme reliance on housing depresses wages and makes economies less efficient, people are stuck in housing that isn't a lifestyle fit, and their kids/loved ones might be screwed unless Bank of Mom & Dad sacrifices their retirement to help them.

People who own aren't really stuck in unsuitable housing through because with high resale values, they get a windfall when they sell their unsuitable home which covers much or all of the cost of the new place. And the other issues aren't things the average person draws connections between unless they're quite well economically educated.

[Nite]

Originally Posted by edale

Not to say the US isn't a total mess when it comes to immigration policies, but Canada is extraordinarily lucky to not have to deal with what we do at the southern border. Illegal immigration is not really a thing in Canada, whereas the US received 30,000 asylum seekers (and estimates reveal probably only 5-10% will actually qualify for asylum) at one border crossing in Texas in the last 3 days! Canada has the luxury of picking and choosing who they let in-- usually educated and decently wealthy people who can immediately contribute to the economy. The US gets some of those types of immigrants, but also has to contend with the constant flood of South and Central Americans at the southern border. If Canada also had to deal with this, I bet their attitudes toward immigration would change quite a bit.

Canada accepts much more refugees proportionally than the US by the way.

[Nouvellecosse]

I wonder why Iceland is getting so many people.

[P'tit Renard]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

People who own aren't really stuck in unsuitable housing through because with high resale values, they get a windfall when they sell their unsuitable home which covers much or all of the cost of the new place. And the other issues aren't things the average person draws connections between unless they're quite well economically educated.

That's definitely not the case in Toronto and Vancouver. The overpriced condo shoeboxes definitely won't let you trade up, because the price differential for detached and townhouses is even greater. There are a lot of disgruntled homeowners who are stuck in unsuitable housing (e.g. too small to start a family), and has no ability to trade up due to stagnant wages and high interest rates.