New report makes case for more immigration | Winnipeg Free Press
New report makes case for more immigration | Winnipeg Free Press
OTTAWA – At a time when skeptics are questioning Canada’s plan to ramp up immigration, a new report argues the country needs to welcome a lot more newcomers to counter-balance its aging de...
I've been thinking a lot about the immigration vs. housing debate and more and more it feels like our generations version of the immigration boogieman taking our jobs. We undeniably need reform to our housing market (maybe through an increase in medium density housing?) but I feel as though I've been seeing increasing push-back on the immigration policy, and while it's a very aggressive policy, it's feeling more and more like a smoke and mirrors game to keep us from demanding the changes we need from our government. But if I put on my cynical tinfoil hat, it's much easier to win an election with "immigrants bad" than with well planned housing reform.
It's refreshing to see an article that highlights why this immigration policy might be in place beyond the usual band-aid arguments about the economy I'm used to seeing
It's not a problem with immigration
It's not a problem with housing
It's not a problem of common people
It's a problem of the wealthy having a strangle hold on the economy and wanting all the money, wealth, power and control for themselves
It finds that the working-age population would have to grow by 2.2 per cent per year through 2040 to maintain the same ratio [of pre- vs post-retirees -- to be able to pay for the health care that Canadian seniors are going to need (and, I assume, an equitable retirement stipend from the consolidated fund we've elected them to manage) ].
And if the country wanted to go back to the average old-age dependency ratio it had between 1990 and 2015, that group of Canadians would have to grow by 4.5 per cent annually.
Given inflation, yeah, 4.5% would give us a better cushion and grow the CCP fund better for for equitable benefits and improved volatility resistance down the road as, I don't know CoViD continues to shut down services (my sister's vet hospital, this week) or similar floods/fires/karens impact the fund's stability.
How about we sort out housing, first. We already have immigrants camping out on the streets for lack of shelter.
If that means bringing in experienced builders of houses, 4-plexes, and row-houses instead of tech and fast food workers, so be it. After they build their own housing, they can get started on housing for everyone else.
How about we sort out housing, first.
No time. Need the Tax revenue or we don't climb out of CoViD.
If that means bringing in experienced builders of houses, 4-plexes, and row-houses
No. Towers built in parallel, so we can house 964 people on the space a 4-plex houses 10. We're not gonna solve housing with shitty firetrap sprawl that also sprawls infrastructure and services -- see DETROIT. Density gives us plausible demand for better transit options and 15-minute neighbourhoods, and drops demand for single-occupant car commutes. The age of the land hoarding is over.
What tax revenue? In the absence of housing, someone is going to be on the streets and that adds to the burden, not reduces it.
Yes, in an ideal world, we'd be building towers. But we're not in an ideal world and can bring in a lot more "stick builders" a lot quicker than we can bring in tower builders.
As for taxes to climb out of COVID, try hitting up the corporations and the wealthy.
Whatever. I don't have the answers and whoever does is either keeping quiet or doing nothing.