Lately it is beginning to appear that among the many problems caused by this alarmingly rapid population growth is that it fuels anti-immigrant sentiment. We'll be paying the price for decades to come.
this post was submitted on 05 Jan 2024
39 points (100.0% liked)
Canada
217 readers
14 users here now
What's going on Canada?
Communities
π Meta
πΊοΈ Provinces / Territories
- Alberta
- British Columbia
- Manitoba
- New Brunswick
- Newfoundland and Labrador
- Northwest Territories
- Nova Scotia
- Nunavut
- Ontario
- Prince Edward Island
- Quebec
- Saskatchewan
- Yukon
ποΈ Cities / Local Communities
- Calgary (AB)
- Edmonton (AB)
- Greater Sudbury (ON)
- Halifax (NS)
- Hamilton (ON)
- Kootenays (BC)
- London (ON)
- Mississauga (ON)
- Montreal (QC)
- Nanaimo (BC)
- Oceanside (BC)
- Ottawa (ON)
- Port Alberni (BC)
- Regina (SK)
- Saskatoon (SK)
- Thunder Bay (ON)
- Toronto (ON)
- Vancouver (BC)
- Vancouver Island (BC)
- Victoria (BC)
- Waterloo (ON)
- Winnipeg (MB)
π Sports
Hockey
- List of All Teams: Post on /c/hockey
- General Community: /c/Hockey
- Calgary Flames
- Edmonton Oilers
- MontrΓ©al Canadiens
- Ottawa Senators
- Toronto Maple Leafs
- Vancouver Canucks
- Winnipeg Jets
Football (NFL)
- List of All Teams:
unknown
Football (CFL)
- List of All Teams:
unknown
Baseball
- List of All Teams:
unknown - Toronto Blue Jays
Basketball
- List of All Teams:
unknown - Toronto Raptors
Soccer
- List of All Teams:
unknown - General Community: /c/CanadaSoccer
- Toronto FC
π» Universities
π΅ Finance / Shopping
- Personal Finance Canada
- BAPCSalesCanada
- Canadian Investor
- Buy Canadian
- Quebec Finance
- Churning Canada
π£οΈ Politics
- Canada Politics
- General:
- By Province:
π Social and Culture
Rules
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
This is a really important point. I've already seen this when talking with people. And it's also really hard to differentiate the "immigration is good in moderation" sentiment from the "immigrants are ruining the country" sentiment.
Because in the proper numbers, immigration keeps our country alive by filling in gaps and growing the economy. But if the numbers are too high, we have more competition for work and housing and all our other economic resources.
I think nowadays the narrative is seems to be "immigration is always good and if you say otherwise you're a bigot". But we should certainly make sure we are intentional about how many people we bring in because we want our country to be the best it can be for everyone in it and everyone entering it.
What drives me crazy is that the population growth we're seeing now isn't even all that crazy.
It's a bit higher right now, but it's not a significant outlier when plotted on a graph going back 50 years.
Yes over the last 20 years immigration has been consuming a larger portion of that fairly consistent pie, but assuming we didn't stop having kids 20 years ago we would be in a similar spot as we are today.
The real problem is that we stopped building housing. The rate of houses being built slowed down a few decades ago, and that was always going to be cause us problems, regardless of if we had stopped immigration, but had we done that, our population stagnating would have caused us other problems.
500'000 to 1 million immigrants per year is not sustainable especially since there is no housing
Maybe it's just me, but you'd think that anyone moving to another country would try to secure housing BEFORE making the move? Heck, I'll double and triple check hotel accommodations when I'm visiting a new place, let alone assume there will magically be tons of housing to choose from.
This situation is bad for everyone.
A big part out our immigration system is post secondary schools. Students will come to get a diploma and fit into apartments with multiple people to a room. After they are done they now have to find a new place and there aren't enough. Our government should be building so much more housing.
Our government should be building so much more housing.
I think the problem is that you can never build enough.
Having a surplus would be bad, but having "enough" today would only mean "not enough" tomorrow because it would increase the demand for housing.
How do you even catch up? Where I live, apparently the fastest growing city in Canada (or Ontario), new developments are everywhere - at alarmingly fast rates, and massive amounts of land are being swallowed up by new housing, apartments, condos, etc. Our infrastructure can't keep up, and our tax rates have gone through the roof.
Building more puts hardships on existing residents, especially with the way the Ford government set things up to accelerate development.
It's a tough problem to solve, and I don't think you can make everyone happy. Maybe we need to start converting old malls and commercial buildings to residential property. Other cities are already doing this.
fastest growing city in Canada (or Ontario)
Hello fellow Londoner.
Oof. London is growing fast, too. Probably faster than Oshawa. π΅
Humanity is not sustainable. Enjoy the ride.
I'm guessing within 100 miles of the US border
Honest question: Is it growing the most by an absolute number, or by percentage?
Looks like absolute number to me. Searching for "canada historical population growth" shows sites like Statista and Macrotrends which show 1% increases pretty much every year. StatsCan seems to only show one year at a time.
That is far less dramatic and would not get enough clicks.
That's kind of what i expected.
As our population growth, we should expect absolute highs ever year, even if the relative numbers may fluctuate.
Capitalists hate affordable housing so muchβ¦
Actually the opposite, according to economics free market regulates demand/supply so the more there's demand the most there's supply(and cheaper prices). I'm not sure what's the problem in this case, but sounds more like there's too much regulations on building housing, maybe? (More houses = Bigger supply = Cheaper)
Edit: Or you can cut immigration, and thus reduce demand, but it sounds like a bad option obviously.
That is not how supply and demand work, even in theory.
Okay, can you point my mistake please? I would be happy to know how it does work then.
Supply and demand, in economics, relationship between the quantity of a commodity that producers wish to sell at various prices and the quantity that consumers wish to buy. It is the main model of price determination used in economic theory. The price of a commodity is determined by the interaction of supply and demand in a market. The resulting price is referred to as the equilibrium price and represents an agreement between producers and consumers of the good. In equilibrium the quantity of a good supplied by producers equals the quantity demanded by consumers.
Other things being equal, an increase in demand leads to an increase in the equilibrium price. Google "demand shock" for more relevant info. To the extent that it is governed by the usual laws of supply and demand (which is to a notably limited extent), housing is a market that is slow to adapt and will take quite some time to adjust to a sudden change in the demand curve.
Yep, I know about demand shock. And I know that housing is slow to adapt usually, however it all adapt, even if it will take time. (That's what happened with housing bubbles for example)
And I agree with you, you're correct, however how does it go against additionally? Even if I've simplified, haven't I made the same point?
The part that struck me as nonsensical was "the more there's demand the most there's supply(and cheaper prices)." It remains unclear what you meant to say, but perhaps you were thinking of some kind of economy of scale effect, where a larger market leads to more efficient production? That seems largely inapplicable here, though.
Anyway, that there's "too much regulations" is one overly simplistic answer given by certain politicians around here, just as "too much immigration" is the overly simplistic cause often given for our housing market problems. There's at least a little bit of truth in each if you look hard enough, but really it's a pretty complicated situation with no easy answers that requires more sophisticated analysis than seems possible to bring anywhere near visibility in contemporary sound-bite- and clickbait-based politics.
Despite that, given all the various longstanding and intractable ways in which our systems of housing, housing investment, and urban development are currently fucked up, rapid population growth certainly does make that problem worse too. It may not be the root cause of the problem, but it's another push in the wrong direction for a situation that's been bad for as long as most of us can remember.
I get that we literally need immigration to support the ponzi scheme of social benefits. But maybe knowing that should have pushed literally anyone to take housing seriously for the last 10+ years?
The writing has been on the wall for over a decade. I'm constantly amazed at how short sighted every level of government was on this. You'd think that at least NOW we would be taking this seriously, but no. Instead we are simply drilling new holes on an already sinking ship.
At least other countries are trying to make things better.
In other news the rate of accumulation for anything compounded tends to increase.
Did we not study geometric progression in school?
Give me percentages or GTFO. The rest is all just "population increases, hyuk."
Related issue: Canada has ridiculous barriers to recognizing the credentials of foreign-trained health professionals. So we are increasing the demand for healthcare without increasing the supply. There is zero reason a more open approach, such as in the UK for instance could not be taken.
Let me answer your question with a question: are we still hoarding greenspace as personal lawns, and have we begun taxing that wasted hoarded space?
If not, then it'll be Yellowknife.
Yellowknife has had a housing crisis for decades. Bad choice.