And we walked into it with our eyes wide open. Thank you, Justin.
Canada needs immigration reform to escape ‘population trap,’ economists say
There is a need to reduce Canada’s immigration levels as the country faces what National Bank of Canada economists are calling a “population trap,” where the country is finding it difficult to absorb the number of new arrivals.
In the report published Monday, economists Stéfane Marion and Alexandra Ducharme say they agree immigration is good for the gross domestic policy (GDP), “but all good things have their limits.” They argue that Canada does not have the infrastructure or “capital stock” to both bring in the amount of people currently planned, while also improving our standard of living.
We’re the only country that’s ever experienced this.
Marion, who is National Bank’s chief economist, addressed these concerns during an Economic Club of Canada forum last week.
“For the first time in Canadian history in 2023, our capital labour ratio declined,” Marion said during the discussion.
"That’s a population trap. Historically, it’s normally associated with emerging markets. We’re the only country that’s ever experienced this. So this is why we have this urgency to deal with this immigration policy, because it is absorption capability that is undermining living standards.”
A “population trap,” according to Oxford Reference, is defined as a situation where no increase in living standards is possible, because the population is growing so fast that all available savings are needed to maintain the existing capital-labour ratio.
In Monday’s report, Marion and Ducharme, said Canada’s annual total population growth should not exceed 300,000 to 500,000 in order to avoid that “trap.”
National Bank notes Canada’s population grew by more than 1.2 million last year, a “staggering” number that would be halved were the government to commit to levels put forward by the bank.
Canada's immigration levels remain unchanged despite criticism
The federal government has been facing constant criticism over its immigration policies as some Canadians continue to find it difficult to break into not only the housing market, but even the rental market.
Last week, internal documents from 2022 were reported by the Canadian Press as showing employees within Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada warned their deputy minister that boosting immigration would affect housing. Though the Liberals still increased the target for the number of permanent residents to half a million in 2025, defending the decision by pointing to a need for more newcomers to help fill a major labour shortage.
The real reason for more newcomers is because they are likely to vote Liberal in the next federal election. Today, the governing Liberal party stands 3rd in polling and it appears they are willing to throw the Canadian economy under a bus in an attempt to improve their standings. This is Trudeau trying to salvage his ego, and it is an indication of the priorities of Liberal cabinet ministers who are helping him.
Canada’s immigrations levels have also been linked to the ongoing housing crisis, with housing experts, including a senior official at Minister Sean Fraser’s own agency, saying the Liberals’ immigration policy has driven up both house prices and rent.
Under current building goals, the Canada Housing and Mortgage Corporation predicts the country will be short 3.5 million homes, in addition to what’s already being built, to restore housing affordability by 2030.
Fraser, in comments Monday, appeared to signal support for an idea put forward by Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre of tying the number of immigrants with the number of homes built. However, he suggested the pledge made by the Opposition leader didn’t focus enough on where the most impactful population growth was coming from: temporary foreign workers and international students, not permanent immigrants.
“We need to recognize that we have to bring other players to the table, not just provincial counterparts but the institutions who are dramatically increasing the number of study permits they request, sometimes at the personal financial gain of some of the people behind some of those private colleges,” he told reporters.
Ottawa has announced various plans to speed up housing supply, including the modernization of a Second World War-era housing plan that saw hundreds of thousands of homes built from thousands of pre-approved plans between he 1940s and the late 1970s.
Despite this, Fraser pointed to temporary immigration programs that are putting pressure on the housing system and needed addressing, Immigration Minister Marc Miller, along with Fraser and Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc, have all signalled in the past the federal government is considering a cap on international students, but want to work with provinces first to try and find solutions.
“Enough is enough,” Miller said in announcing changes to the international student program last year. “If provinces and territories cannot do this, we will do it for them, and they will not like the bluntness of the instruments that we use.”
Miller previously described the idea of a cap on international students as akin to “surgery with a hammer” during an interview with Global News.
Currently, there are very few limits on temporary residents — those who come to temporarily rather than permanently settling here — and while Miller said he plans to recalibrate the number who can do so, there are little details on what could change at this time.
Meanwhile, in their report, National Bank economists stress based on current demand and reduce shelter cost inflation, Canada would need to double its housing construction capacity to about 700,000 starts per year, a goal they call “unattainable.”
========================================================================================
Is Jordan Peterson the only psychologist in Canada smart enough to see through the madness of the far-left's wokeness? Surely, there must be others! If there are, they should be screaming from the rooftops about this atrocity. But they are silent. What a disgrace!
Judges dismiss Jordan Peterson’s request
to challenge order he undergo media training
Ontario’s highest court has rejected an attempt by controversial psychologist Jordan Peterson to challenge a regulatory body’s order that he undergo social media training or potentially lose his licence to practise.
“I can confirm the Court of Appeal did not grant leave to file fresh evidence,” Jason Gennaro said in an email to The Canadian Press on Wednesday.
“The panel does not provide reasons for its decisions.”
Gennaro said Peterson, who is a retired University of Toronto psychology professor, filed his request to appeal the previous court ruling last September and judges made their decision on Tuesday.
Peterson said Wednesday that there are now no legal avenues he can take to challenge the college’s decision to send him “to re-education camp,” adding his “war” with the college has “barely started.”
“I want the entire current crop of minions at the College of Psychologists to publicly apologize and then resign — en masse,” he said on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter.
“They want me to undergo re-education, which they know will take up my time and fail in any case, so they can undermine my reputation and take my licence away anyway.”
Peterson rose to prominence through his polarizing YouTube videos critiquing liberal culture and since at least 2018, the governing body of Ontario’s psychologists — of which Peterson has been a registered member since 1999 despite having stopped seeing patients in 2017 — has received complaints regarding Peterson’s comments.
The college’s complaints committee has said that some of Peterson’s online commentary on a range of issues, from gender transition to climate change, posed a moderate risk of harm to the public and undermined public trust in the profession of psychology.
Justice Paul Schabas wrote in the court’s August decision that the college’s order that Peterson undergo a program on professionalism in public statements balanced its mandate to regulate the profession, “is not disciplinary and does not prevent Dr. Peterson from expressing himself on controversial topics."
Peterson had said his statements were not made in his capacity as a clinical psychologist, but instead were “off-duty opinions” — an argument the court rejected.
The college’s committee previously noted that during an appearance on “The Joe Rogan Experience” podcast, Peterson identified himself as a clinical psychologist before demeaning a former client.
The college’s ethics code requires members to use respectful language and not engage in “unjust discrimination.”
No comments:
Post a Comment