American seeks Canandian refuge

[Guest American Woman]

I would imagine that this is a factor: A new Statistics Canada study shows that highly skilled migrants in Canada earn significantly lower salaries than migrants in the United States.

From 1980 to 2005, highly skilled Canadian immigrants saw their earnings drop dramatically in comparison to native-born Canadians.

link

Edited August 15, 2011 by American Woman

[dre]

I would imagine that this is a factor: A new Statistics Canada study shows that highly skilled migrants in Canada earn significantly lower salaries than migrants in the United States.

From 1980 to 2005, highly skilled Canadian immigrants saw their earnings drop dramatically in comparison to native-born Canadians.

link

Factor in what though?

Like I said Canada has a HIGHER immigration rate than the US. 23% Higher in fact.

[bush_cheney2004]

Like I said Canada has a HIGHER immigration rate than the US. 23% Higher in fact.

But what is the net immigration if 25,000 Canadians legally emigrate to the USA each year?

[dre]

But what is the net immigration if 25,000 Canadians legally emigrate to the USA each year?

Canada 5.6 migrants / 1,000 population

US 4.3 migrants / 1,000 population

The most glaring impact on the diferences in demographics (besides the obvious ones like Climate and the fact that the US is much much larger in area when you look at arable land) is this... US has a 25.3% higher birth rate. Canadians use more birth control.

Edited August 15, 2011 by dre

[Guest American Woman]

Factor in what though?

Like I said Canada has a HIGHER immigration rate than the US. 23% Higher in fact.

Yes - because Canada has a much lower population, it stands to reason that the number of immigrants per capita would now be higher than the U.S. But since Canada has a much lower population, I'm not sure what point you think you're making in regards to the actual number of immigrants in Canada being so much lower than in the U.S.

[bush_cheney2004]

....The most glaring impact on the diferences in demographics (besides the obvious ones like Climate and the fact that the US is much much larger in area when you look at arable land) is this... US has a 25.3% higher birth rate. Canadians use more birth control.

Not sure how birth control would matter in 1850 or 1900...but OK. The arable land that does/did exist in Canada was not populated as quickly. Apparently some Europeans had stronger preferences.

[Guest American Woman]

Not sure how birth control would matter in 1850 or 1900...but OK. The arable land that does/did exist in Canada was not populated as quickly. Apparently some Europeans had stronger preferences.

This has been my point. The United States has 38,355,000 immigrants. Canada has 6,200,000. Yes, Canada has a higher percentage of immigrants in its population now - because it had a much lower population to begin with. And why is that? Seems to me that's what the issue is.

[dre]

Yes - because Canada has a much lower population, it stands to reason that the number of immigrants per capita would now be higher than the U.S. But since Canada has a much lower population, I'm not sure what point you think you're making in regards to the actual number of immigrants in Canada being so much lower than in the U.S.

The point Im making is that Canada has a higher immigration rate, and a very similar growth rate. The US is ten times the size of Canada NOW but it was also ten times the size of Canada prior to confederation. Which makes sense because it has way way less arable land.

I'm not sure what point you think you're making in regards to the actual number of immigrants in Canada being so much lower than in the U.S.

Well its pretty simple. How many immigrants you can allow in depends on how large your economy is, and how large your population is. Thats why these things are always measured per capita. Absolute numbers are meaningless.

The reality is that both the US and Canada have managed immigration. They control the ammount of people they let in and they can always fill the slots they open up.

The reality is that both countries have grown at the same rate, and the US has 10 times as many people because it had 10 times as many people to start with, and about 10 times as much land with a typically desirable climate.

Absolute numbers are totally meaningless, and thats why population data isnt compared that way. The US has higher absolute numbers (AGAIN 10x as high), because its economy (which is 10x as large) can absorb more.

But both countries set their immigrations rates around slow managable growth. Canads immigration rate is higher simply because its birthrate is lower.

[bush_cheney2004]

This has been my point. The United States has 38,355,000 immigrants. Canada has 6,200,000. Yes, Canada has a higher percentage of immigrants in its population now - because it had a much lower population to begin with. And why is that? Seems to me that's what the issue is.

Agreed...there are some underlying reasons why Canada was not populated as quickly (by all groups). This would lead to the usual explanations of late confederation, transportation networks, communications, climate, ports, language, yada, yada, yada.

I am of the opinion (unsupported by data) that a steady bleed of population and skilled workers to the United States didn't help matters either. This was called the "brain drain" in decades past.

[dre]

This has been my point. The United States has 38,355,000 immigrants. Canada has 6,200,000. Yes, Canada has a higher percentage of immigrants in its population now - because it had a much lower population to begin with. And why is that? Seems to me that's what the issue is.

Because if you look at the type of land that was desired in the argrarian economy that existed then, the US had ten times as much of it.

[bush_cheney2004]

Because if you look at the type of land that was desired in the argrarian economy that existed then, the US had ten times as much of it.

Right, but you reported that Canada still had/has a significant amount of arable land that was/is not developed. There must be a reason for this.

Edited August 15, 2011 by bush_cheney2004

[dre]

Agreed...there are some underlying reasons why Canada was not populated as quickly (by all groups). This would lead to the usual explanations of late confederation, transportation networks, communications, climate, ports, language, yada, yada, yada.

I am of the opinion (unsupported by data) that a steady bleed of population and skilled workers to the United States didn't help matters either. This was called the "brain drain" in decades past.

No. The numbers make perfect sense to me. The part of Canada that people actually live in (the southern strip where climate is the mildest) HAS populated as quickly. Its just 1/10th the size of the US.

This has nothing to do with the ability to attract immigrants. Both countries could increase the ammount of slots 10 fold, and still easily find immigrants to fill them.

Both countries have the population they planned on having based on how they set their rates, and both countries set them roughly the same.

[dre]

Right, but you reported that Canada still had/has a significant amount of arable land that was/is not developed. There must be a reason for this.

Yes. Its not as fun to live on (for most people). Theres plenty of "arable" land in middle and northern Canada but most people find the climate to be undesirable. Its minus 50 in the winter.

If you were getting off the boat from England a few hundred years ago, you were way more likely want your farm in Montana than in northern Alberta.

So even before Canada existed there was already 10 times as many people in the US.

[bush_cheney2004]

No. The numbers make perfect sense to me. The part of Canada that people actually live in (the southern strip where climate is the mildest) HAS populated as quickly. Its just 1/10th the size of the US.

Then discussions about total arable land are moot.

This has nothing to do with the ability to attract immigrants. Both countries could increase the ammount of slots 10 fold, and still easily find immigrants to fill them.

Until recently, Canada has historically limited immigration more than the US.

Both countries have the population they planned on having based on how they set their rates, and both countries set them roughly the same.

The US population was not planned per se, as immigrants are only about 10% of the total. There were windows of influx based on circumstances, including non-immigrant slaves.

[bush_cheney2004]

Yes. Its not as fun to live on (for most people). Theres plenty of "arable" land in middle and northern Canada but most people find the climate to be undesirable. Its minus 50 in the winter.

Big deal....it gets nearly that cold in the upper Midwest USA too. Where I live, -30C is not unusual. We don't farm in the winter!

If you were getting off the boat from England a few hundred years ago, you were way more likely want your farm in Montana than in northern Alberta.

Not sure there was such a choice, but some drift over the border southward anyway.

So even before Canada existed there was already 10 times as many people in the US.

Why? My latitude is farther north than many Canadian's. It's not just climate.

[dre]

Then discussions about total arable land are moot.

Until recently, Canada has historically limited immigration more than the US.

The US population was not planned per se, as immigrants are only about 10% of the total. There were windows of influx based on circumstances, including non-immigrant slaves.

Not totally mute. People CAN live on that land, and the population density might increase up there because of mining, drilling, etc. But yeah... its never going to as dense.

Until recently, Canada has historically limited immigration more than the US.

The US population was not planned per se, as immigrants are only about 10% of the total. There were windows of influx based on circumstances, including non-immigrant slaves.

It most certainly IS planned. You might not have direct quotas but rest assured your government does, and always has made sure that the population doesnt grow faster than the econony can absorb, and that the economy does not stop growing because of a shortage of laborers. If you wanted to you could find 50 million people willing to move to the US right now. They dont let them in because your economy could not absorb them that fast.

Edited August 15, 2011 by dre

[bush_cheney2004]

It most certainly IS planned. You might not have direct quotas but rest assured your government does, and always has made sure that the population doesnt grow faster than the econony can absorb, and that the economy does not stop growing because of a shortage of laborers.

For immigration, perhaps, but not total population. In fact, slaves and other laborers were imported by the millions as property, not landed immigrants.

If you wanted to you could find 50 million people willing to move to the US right now. They dont let them in because your economy could not absorb them that fast.

The US turns the switch on and off based on economic need...I have seen this first hand with the H-1 visa program. Historically, the US has done so with far more vigor than Canada.

[bush_cheney2004]

Until recently, Canada has historically limited immigration more than the US.

I think this is one of the principal reasons why Canada's population has lagged, as the ratio of 10:1 US is not consistent since confederation. Only recently has pop. growth kept pace.

[Wild Bill]

Big deal....it gets nearly that cold in the upper Midwest USA too. Where I live, -30C is not unusual. We don't farm in the winter!

Not sure there was such a choice, but some drift over the border southward anyway.

Why? My latitude is farther north than many Canadian's. It's not just climate.

Don't forget, the farther north you go the more your growing season shortens up and also the number of strong sunlight hours for photosynthesis. This is why different plants grow better in different latitudes.

You don't have to go too far north before you're living on pine cones and cabbages.

[dre]

I think this is one of the principal reasons why Canada's population has lagged, as the ratio of 10:1 US is not consistent since confederation. Only recently has pop. growth kept pace.

Yes it IS pretty damn consistent.

Like I said... in 1850 The US had 23 million people and Canada had about 2.7. Just over 9 times the size.

[bush_cheney2004]

You don't have to go too far north before you're living on pine cones and cabbages.

But what about giant cabbages in Alaska:

[bush_cheney2004]

Yes it IS pretty damn consistent.

Like I said... in 1850 The US had 23 million people and Canada had about 2.7. Just over 9 times the size.

But in 1900 Canada had about 5.6 million and the US has 76 million....it is not a uniform ratio over time.

[Chrissy1979]

Oooh...a debate about comparative population growth! Why don't I visit this site more often?

[dre]

Oooh...a debate about comparative population growth! Why don't I visit this site more often?

[CPCFTW]

Why is anyone bragging about Canadian immigrants to the USA? Have you been living under a rock for the past 4 years? Canadians are buying up discount US property while laid off US bankers and finance professionals are emigrating to Canada. The trend is clearly in the opposite direction nowadays.