31,000 jobs lost in Canada.

[taxme]

Right back at ya!

Oh, nice to see that you agree with me. Thanks.

[WestCoastRunner]

Oh, nice to see that you agree with me. Thanks.

Uh not really.

[dre]

You need to get off and stop living the immigration dream. Logic and common sense is required here, not emotionalism and foolishness thinking.

You need to stop aptly demonstrating why we need basic courses on macro economics and monetary policy in highschool.

In an economy thats based almost 75% on consumer spending, where do you expect new demand to come from if the population is not growing? Santa clause gonna drop it down our chimney? Will the Easter Bunny bring it?

We let in the right ammount of immigrants to keep the population growing by roughly the rate of inflation. This is an important part of how we achieve wage and price stability. In an economy with a stagnant population demand for ALL GOODS AND SERVICES is weak. It doesn't put people to work it puts them OUT of work. It can also cause deflation... if mortgages are being paid back without new ones being taken out, the money supply will shrink and you lose more and more control of price and wage stability. This shrinkage in the money supply is what made the great depression "great".

To illustrate this visit a town with a growing population. See that new strip mall, full of stores and workers and shoppers? See that new subdivision with all those homes going up? Now go to a town with a stagnant population. See the empty houses? See the rock bottom real-estate prices? See the closed businesses?

Nobody with even a passing knowledge of economics will EVER do what your advocating. All modern economies are doing more or less the exact same thing, for the exact reasons Iv explained to you.

Population Growth

Canada 1.04

Israel 1.81

Mexico 1.24

Philipenes 1.72

UK .75

US .75

Without population we would join a small handful of countries in the world with contraction.

Moldova

Micronesia

Lithuania

Serbia

Latvia

Portugal

Romania

Serbia

Greece

Want have them as our economic piers? This whole idea is just a big misguided fantasy.

If we want to have a static population we need to shrink the services sector and get real productive, real fast. Germany does it... only .06 population growth and 4.2% unemployment rate. But they are a different kind of economy. In 2014 they had the highest trade surplus in the world, and were the largest capital exporter, and third largest exporter overall. Vehicles, machineries, chemical goods, electronic products, electrical equipments, pharmaceuticals, transport equipments, basic metals, food products, and rubber and plastics. Exports are 44% of their GDP compared to our 30%. Canada has lower productivity than 13 other western nations.

Edited August 6, 2016 by dre

[Argus]

Its not quite simple. 90% of the immigrants who are actively seeking work find employment. This is misleading (i.e. children and old people are not actively seeking work). Of you want you case, you need the statistics for the number of immigrants who end up with work as a percent of the total which includes the elderly and kids. Then you have to subtract the number of jobs which were taken away from someone already here (it is not 100% but it is greater than 0%). I doubt these numbers would support your case.

And it's not THAT simple, either.

Each of us is either a plus or minus to our governmental budgets. Your municipality, province/territory and nation spend a good deal of money per citizen on things like education, health care, and a variety of other services, even when you are employed and not drawing welfare or pogey. In order to be a plus you have to be paying more in taxes than you are receiving in benefits.

Given one third of income earners actually pay NO income tax (and very little, if anything else), and that half of all income earners only contribute 4%, we need to be very careful about what kind of worker we are importing.

Are we bringing in a bunch of people who will work as store clerks, food servers, taxi drivers, janitors, security guards and the like, jobs with low incomes which do pay little or no taxes, or are we going to be bringing in people who are skilled workers who will be contributing taxpayers? I would suggest to you that too high a percentage of those we bring in are in the former group.

[Argus]

If we want to have a static population we need to shrink the services sector and get real productive, real fast. Germany does it... only .06 population growth and 4.2% unemployment rate. But they are a different kind of economy. In 2014 they had the highest trade surplus in the world, and were the largest capital exporter, and third largest exporter overall. Vehicles, machineries, chemical goods, electronic products, electrical equipments, pharmaceuticals, transport equipments, basic metals, food products, and rubber and plastics. Exports are 44% of their GDP compared to our 30%. Canada has lower productivity than 13 other western nations.

Then maybe we should be doing whatever it takes to foster innovation and productivity growth instead of subsidizing inefficient industries and heavily taxing others.

As for immigration. All I can say is that we bring in a higher number of immigrants, given our population, than virtually anyone else in the world. Other nations manage with very little immigration. I think we could too, but even if not, we should be greatly adjusting the types of people we get in to ensure they are all contributing taxpayers. We don't need more janitors and security guards and room service clerks. We need more tradesmen and engineers.

[TimG]

Without population we would join a small handful of countries in the world with contraction.

World population growth will eventually halt and we will need to rethink how we view economics.

In any case, the number that matters is not total GDP - it is GDP per capita. Countries that rely on population growth to boost the top line number while the GDP per capita shrinks are engaging in a fraud. It is quite possible to boost GDP per capita with a stable population by increasing productivity.

Edited August 6, 2016 by TimG

[dre]

Then maybe we should be doing whatever it takes to foster innovation and productivity growth instead of subsidizing inefficient industries and heavily taxing others.

And maybe we shouldn't capitulate and sign bad trade deals... Like NAFTA that kept tarrifs on our most important export at the time, or the TPP that will strip us of the right to control patent protection.

As for immigration. All I can say is that we bring in a higher number of immigrants, given our population, than virtually anyone else in the world. Other nations manage with very little immigration. I think we could too, but even if not, we should be greatly adjusting the types of people we get in to ensure they are all contributing taxpayers.

Our immigration rate is high because our birth rate is low. And that's because birth control and jerking off on the internet are so popular here. If you look at our population growth which is the basis on which quotas are set, its middle of the pack.

I agree, lets improve the system as much as we can, but its already pretty good compared with our peers at bringing in skilled and educated immigrants.

We don't need more janitors and security guards and room service clerks. We need more tradesmen and engineers.

Is that opinion based on research of the labor market? I don't know if its true or not.

[bush_cheney2004]

Then maybe we should be doing whatever it takes to foster innovation and productivity growth instead of subsidizing inefficient industries and heavily taxing others.

Good idea.....might also help to stop the brain drain and employment emigration to the United States.

[Smoke]

Fourth: employment goes up; goes down. That's normal.

Fifth: why do people think it's all about politicians when it comes to jobs? It is about markets.

When jobs were lost under Harper it was all Harper's fault. Now that jobs are lost under Trudeau....well heck that happens all the time. You know, it's the market's fault. What a joke the left is. What sheer hypocrites.

[Moonlight Graham]

This post is so false and shortsighted. I know of refugees from China (in late 80"s and early 90"s) and Iran (in the 80"s) who were accepted as immigrants and who were university/college students at the time but not feeling safe to return home and hence granted immigration status then and who are now in high ranking positions and long time tax payers like engineers, doctors, teachers/professors,...etc. Painting all refugees with same brush as bathroom cleaners demonstrates clearly lack of wisdom and knowledge to say the least.

You're 100% right. It was a dumb thing to say. Far too generalizing I was.

[herples]

Then maybe we should be doing whatever it takes to foster innovation and productivity growth instead of subsidizing inefficient industries and heavily taxing others.

As for immigration. All I can say is that we bring in a higher number of immigrants, given our population, than virtually anyone else in the world. Other nations manage with very little immigration. I think we could too, but even if not, we should be greatly adjusting the types of people we get in to ensure they are all contributing taxpayers. We don't need more janitors and security guards and room service clerks. We need more tradesmen and engineers.

We don't have a lack of innovation. We have a lack people who can take those innovations and make a business out of it.

[?Impact]

Natural resources doesn't contribute a cent to our economy, they simply are parasites that extract our natural wealth and move most of it offshore.

[Argus]

Natural resources doesn't contribute a cent to our economy, they simply are parasites that extract our natural wealth and move most of it offshore.

I'd be interested in the logic (if any) behind this eyebrow raising statement.

[taxme]

We don't have a lack of innovation. We have a lack people who can take those innovations and make a business out of it.

Maybe there is no lack of innovation at all. Maybe what the real problem is that there are just to many rules and regulations, environmentalists interference in the creation of new jobs, and the taxes and fees involved that will make any person want to think twice of having to deal with it all. The government doesn't appear to encourage growth, they appear to try to stifle it. At least that is that way I see things now. Am I wrong, you tell me?

[taxme]

You need to stop aptly demonstrating why we need basic courses on macro economics and monetary policy in highschool.

In an economy thats based almost 75% on consumer spending, where do you expect new demand to come from if the population is not growing? Santa clause gonna drop it down our chimney? Will the Easter Bunny bring it?

We let in the right ammount of immigrants to keep the population growing by roughly the rate of inflation. This is an important part of how we achieve wage and price stability. In an economy with a stagnant population demand for ALL GOODS AND SERVICES is weak. It doesn't put people to work it puts them OUT of work. It can also cause deflation... if mortgages are being paid back without new ones being taken out, the money supply will shrink and you lose more and more control of price and wage stability. This shrinkage in the money supply is what made the great depression "great".

To illustrate this visit a town with a growing population. See that new strip mall, full of stores and workers and shoppers? See that new subdivision with all those homes going up? Now go to a town with a stagnant population. See the empty houses? See the rock bottom real-estate prices? See the closed businesses?

Nobody with even a passing knowledge of economics will EVER do what your advocating. All modern economies are doing more or less the exact same thing, for the exact reasons Iv explained to you.

Population Growth

Canada 1.04

Israel 1.81

Mexico 1.24

Philipenes 1.72

UK .75

US .75

Without population we would join a small handful of countries in the world with contraction.

Moldova

Micronesia

Lithuania

Serbia

Latvia

Portugal

Romania

Serbia

Greece

Want have them as our economic piers? This whole idea is just a big misguided fantasy.

If we want to have a static population we need to shrink the services sector and get real productive, real fast. Germany does it... only .06 population growth and 4.2% unemployment rate. But they are a different kind of economy. In 2014 they had the highest trade surplus in the world, and were the largest capital exporter, and third largest exporter overall. Vehicles, machineries, chemical goods, electronic products, electrical equipments, pharmaceuticals, transport equipments, basic metals, food products, and rubber and plastics. Exports are 44% of their GDP compared to our 30%. Canada has lower productivity than 13 other western nations.

I remember listening to a retired Canadian Immigration Minister say(I cannot recall his name)many decades ago that there are just as many babies being born in Canada in one year as there are people dying in Canada in one year. Basically, what he was saying was that with every one new baby born, they replace the one person that died. From what I got from that was that Canada could pretty much hold it's own on what was it's present day population back then without any concern for increased immigration like we see happening today which is obscenely ridiculous.

Canada is bringing in far too many immigrants today that we just don't need. We might not grow in population all that much if we cut back but we would be able to pretty much carry on business as usual as a country without any problems. I have no problem with allowing some very little immigration but not in the numbers that we allow in today. We just don't need all of the new immigrants coming here all that much. Many new immigrants and refugees coming here are more of a burden than a bonus, and they are sucking off of our medical and social services, and taking jobs away from unemployed Canadians, and are adding to our debt load. Canada will not fall apart if we slow down on immigration.

So, we don't build a new strip mall. We don't need one if there are enough already to go around with the present day population that we have. The only people who benefit from more population growth are immigration lawyers, special interest groups and lobbies that make money from new and more immigration, and corporations who can have a steady supply of cheap labor. And those are the people that you appear to be listening too. I don't worry too much about what markets say. They are always a bit wishy-washy on most things, and are used by the ones that control the markets for their benefit and making money with. So, like I already said too you. You need to get off of this flood the country with new immigrants.

[taxme]

When jobs were lost under Harper it was all Harper's fault. Now that jobs are lost under Trudeau....well heck that happens all the time. You know, it's the market's fault. What a joke the left is. What sheer hypocrites.

Hypocrites and liars help make the world go round.

[cybercoma]

When jobs were lost under Harper it was all Harper's fault. Now that jobs are lost under Trudeau....well heck that happens all the time. You know, it's the market's fault. What a joke the left is. What sheer hypocrites.

Harper was in office for nine years and some of the problems were directly attributable to Conservative policies. Did you actually want to point out what specific legislation has been passed since the new government took office that had an effect this quickly on employment? I won't hold my breath.

[Boges]

Yeah but our PM has Abs.

[dre]

So you say that when we let 100 new immigrants in 96 find jobs. I would prefer to not let any new immigrants in that are going to take those 96 jobs away from unemployed Canadians.

This is whats known as the "lump of labor" fallacy.

In economics, the lump of labour fallacy (or lump of jobs fallacy, fallacy of labourscarcity, or the zero-sum fallacy, from its ties to zero-sum games) is the contention that the amount of work available to labourers is fixed.

Its easy to see why someone might believe that an immigrant coming here will take a job away from a Canadian but in reality that's not what happens. If a new person comes to Canada first of all he needs shelter, and increases the demand for housing. He will cause a developer to take out a loan for 200 thousand dollars or more and the money supply will grow by that amount minus the reserve ratio. That 200 thousand will enter the economy through payments by the developer to workers and suppliers, and the government will collect some fees.

In addition that new immigrant will increase the demand for other products and services which will cause those providers to need more workers.

[TimG]

Its easy to see why someone might believe that an immigrant coming here will take a job away from a Canadian

You are correct to point out the labour market is not a zero sum game, however, it is wrong to say immigration does not have a negative effect on the job market. Specifically, the wages for jobs which immigrants compete for tends to go down even if there is an increase in the total number of jobs. So you can argue that some percentage of immigrants between 0% and 100% do take jobs away from resident Canadians.

I noticed that the Libs are opening the door wide for Chinese TFW which is invariably used as loop hole to import labour cheap. If we did not keep opening these loop holes wages would have to rise.

[dre]

however, it is wrong to say immigration does not have a negative effect on the job market.

No its not.

Studies in both the US and Canada have shown that when immigration increases the economy improves and more jobs are created.

http://www.readersdigest.ca/features/heart/why-canada-needs-more-immigrants-now/

Studies in both the United States and Canada have shown that job creation increases and the economy improves as the number of immigrants swells. Immigrants are, as a group, better educated than Canadians, and since 1967, when the government introduced its point system, the selection process favours those with marketable skills.

Immigrants are also more likely to create new business than Canadian born citizens.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/immigrant-businesses-study-1.3500813

By the time they'd been in Canada nine years, about 5.3 per cent of immigrants owned a private company, meaning they formed new businesses more quickly than the Canadian-born population, where the rate is 4.8 per cent.

Another 19.6 per cent of immigrants were unincorporated self-employed persons, compared with 16.1 per cent for the Canadian-born group.

.

You're just repeating the same lump of labor fallacy and youre ignoring the part where I explained that immigrants are propping up not only the construction industry but the banks, and realestate industry as well, and encouraging private developers to grow the money supply by taking out loans to hire workers and purchase land and materials.

Immigration CREATES jobs and economic growth. It has a positive effect not a negative one.

[TimG]

Studies in both the US and Canada have shown that when immigration increases the economy improves and more jobs are created.

That is what I said. It is not a zero sum game and some jobs are created. But at the same time the supply of workers for some job categories increases which depresses wages. So it is wrong to say immigrants are entirely beneficial. More jobs at lower wages is good from the POV of an economist with tenure but no so good to someone who makes a living in the trades which see depressed wages as a result. Elites refusing to acknowledge the harms caused by immigration is one of the reasons Trump has found people willing to vote for him.

As with free trade, immigration causes harm to some people. We should be able to talk openly about these harms without being called 'racists'.

Edited August 10, 2016 by TimG

[Argus]

Its easy to see why someone might believe that an immigrant coming here will take a job away from a Canadian but in reality that's not what happens. If a new person comes to Canada first of all he needs shelter, and increases the demand for housing. He will cause a developer to take out a loan for 200 thousand dollars or more and the money supply will grow by that amount minus the reserve ratio.

But there seems little debate that immigration pushes down wages for lower income workers. And what additional economic activity is produced depends on the wealth of the immigrant. A poor immigrant who needs government support because of his or her low wages is not a spur but a drain on the economy.

[eyeball]

But there seems little debate that immigration pushes down wages for lower income workers.

Sure there has, with much of it sounding apologetic and condescending in tone.

[taxme]

This is whats known as the "lump of labor" fallacy.

Its easy to see why someone might believe that an immigrant coming here will take a job away from a Canadian but in reality that's not what happens. If a new person comes to Canada first of all he needs shelter, and increases the demand for housing. He will cause a developer to take out a loan for 200 thousand dollars or more and the money supply will grow by that amount minus the reserve ratio. That 200 thousand will enter the economy through payments by the developer to workers and suppliers, and the government will collect some fees.

In addition that new immigrant will increase the demand for other products and services which will cause those providers to need more workers.

Ya, and the new refugee immigrants will still receive free everything and probably stay unemployed for years in one of those new housing projects while the Canadian taxpayer's pay for it all. While here in Vancouver poor people are in need of housing and have a problem trying to find a place to live. There is no problem building new homes for refugees but poor unemployed Canadians can just stay out in the cold. A win-win for refugees. For the taxpayer's and the unemployed and the poor it is a lose-lose situation for all of them. Why are there so many Canadians out there who continue to show more concern for foreign refugees who have nothing in common with us, and not for their own people? With 50,000 refugees supposedly going to come to Canada, the tax dollars lost will never be recovered by the Canadian taxpayer's. The Canadian taxpayer's will always lose billions in tax dollars when it comes to immigration. I say stop all immigration for a long while and let us all just wait and see if the sky comes tumbling down. I will bet you that it won't. Works for me.

Edited August 10, 2016 by taxme