I am Groot Posted June 5, 2023 Report Share Posted June 5, 2023 (edited) It's really kind of amazing the number of these articles and columns that are coming out these days, taking positions which would never have gotten past the editor five years ago, when daring to oppose immigration was considered blaspheme in the mainstream media. Prominent business economists say they are baffled by the government’s insistence on sticking to supersized immigration quotas at a time of widespread housing shortages. Stéfane Marion, chief economist at National Bank of Canada, and David Rosenberg, president of Rosenberg Research, have urged Ottawa to consider revising its targets to allow housing supply to catch up to demand. .. The authors – Matthew Doyle and Mikal Skuterud of the University of Waterloo, and Christopher Worswick of Carleton University – argue that policy makers are mistaken to conclude “that if some immigration is good for the economy, then more must be better.” ... Research has demonstrated that measures of per capita GDP are closely tied to feelings of well-being and life satisfaction. If immigration offers a surefire way to boost this number, then there is good reason to think it is benefiting the nation as a whole. Unfortunately, for the pro-immigration camp, there is no evidence that it does much of anything to help accelerate growth in GDP per capita. The opposite is often true. When immigration is limited and labour is in short supply, businesses can find it profitable to invest in new capital – tools, computers, factories and other gear – to boost the productivity of scarce workers. This capital investment can help to swell per capita GDP. In contrast, when immigration is surging, the case for capital investment may look less attractive. Businesses can find it cheaper to hire an additional worker to meet new demand instead of investing in new equipment. The result can be a larger work force, but one with lower productivity and lower per capita GDP. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/investing/article-whats-the-right-number-of-immigrants-for-canada/ Edited June 5, 2023 by I am Groot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted June 5, 2023 Report Share Posted June 5, 2023 Some immigration is good, but too much is a problem as well. I don’t know what the right number is but Trudeau’s approach seems to be that it’s just going to…balance itself? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted June 5, 2023 Report Share Posted June 5, 2023 A better question would be 'what's the right model for setting immigration limits in Canada'. I think that's what we need to work out. A formula that gives us a number based on several factors including how many homes are we building? How much infrastructure (Schools, hospitals etc ) are being built? And then factors like what's the job situation. We can't keep bringing in more than we can support with housing and services. If you want more immigration you have to start building more homes BEFORE you bring them in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impartialobserver Posted June 5, 2023 Report Share Posted June 5, 2023 Interesting question. Not sure I know the answer. Could use a statistical modeling software like IMPLAN or REMI but that does not factor in subjectivity and such. Basically, you would decide an outcome and it solves the equation. Deciding that outcome.. the definition of subjective. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted June 5, 2023 Report Share Posted June 5, 2023 1 minute ago, impartialobserver said: Interesting question. Not sure I know the answer. Could use a statistical modeling software like IMPLAN or REMI but that does not factor in subjectivity and such. Basically, you would decide an outcome and it solves the equation. Deciding that outcome.. the definition of subjective. Well some of it is pretty empirical . X number of people will need Y amount of housing and Z amount of infrastructure, and those should be easy numbers. Create a cap using those. The rest you could probably address with advances to our flag system. That would make changes based on needs pretty easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impartialobserver Posted June 5, 2023 Report Share Posted June 5, 2023 3 minutes ago, CdnFox said: Well some of it is pretty empirical . X number of people will need Y amount of housing and Z amount of infrastructure, and those should be easy numbers. Create a cap using those. The rest you could probably address with advances to our flag system. That would make changes based on needs pretty easy. If you use a modeling software package, how you would do this is as follow You have an outcome (y). This could/would be GDP, GDP Growth, Per capital GDP, personal income, or whatever. You would set a value for this and then population/demographics would be independent variables on the right hand side. It would solve for this population number.. to achieve x amount of growth of GDP, you need a population growth of 2.4% (just a random number) and given existing empirical data.. this growth would be comprised of so many immigrants and so on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted June 5, 2023 Report Share Posted June 5, 2023 Just now, impartialobserver said: If you use a modeling software package, how you would do this is as follow You have an outcome (y). This could/would be GDP, GDP Growth, Per capital GDP, personal income, or whatever. You would set a value for this and then population/demographics would be independent variables on the right hand side. It would solve for this population number.. to achieve x amount of growth of GDP, you need a population growth of 2.4% (just a random number) and given existing empirical data.. this growth would be comprised of so many immigrants and so on. sounds reasonable. I'm sure there's a way. but i think that's what we're missing - a model and profiling combo that gives us an 'ideal' range and hard cap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herbie Posted June 5, 2023 Report Share Posted June 5, 2023 The right number is 42, All of them HERE. So they have to build the new subdivision they laid out 10 years ago and at least one will have the brains to open a restaurant that's open at dinner and doesn't serve hamburger and chicken wings or mock Chinese food. And some will be kids with enough foreign work ethic to mow lawns and shovel driveways to earn their own money. I'd even bet at least a dozen would know how to use a hammer and a saw and would be eager to do handyman jobs for $25 hr. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I am Groot Posted June 5, 2023 Author Report Share Posted June 5, 2023 In the first place, we should not be bringing over anyone who does not increase GDP per person. The only possible reason for immigration is to improve the lifestyle of those who are already here. That means, as they suggest above, only bringing in highly skilled people with job skills that are in high demand. We need people who will earn above the national average, not below. We certainly don't need people to do low-skilled work. That the government is allowing TFWs who work in the restaurant industry to count that as 'Canadian work experience' and bringing them in as permanent residents is ludicrous. They are not improving the wealth of Canadians in general, but lowering it. Everyone who comes in who earns less than the national average lowers GDP per person. Anyone coming in who does not earn a reasonably high salary has to be carried by those who do - due to our progressive tax system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impartialobserver Posted June 5, 2023 Report Share Posted June 5, 2023 as long as they immigrate to a nation legally.. I do not care if someone is a software engineer or a janitor. As long as they are law abiding and have/seek employment, the context to me is irrelevant. I come from a poor background and so know that even if you are once poor, you can rise above that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted June 5, 2023 Report Share Posted June 5, 2023 4 hours ago, impartialobserver said: If you use a modeling software package, how you would do this is as follow Economists already model this stuff out regularly. The problem is the competing priorities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impartialobserver Posted June 5, 2023 Report Share Posted June 5, 2023 2 minutes ago, Moonbox said: Economists already model this stuff out regularly. The problem is the competing priorities. How do you think I know how the nuts and bolts of how they do it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I am Groot Posted June 5, 2023 Author Report Share Posted June 5, 2023 (edited) 40 minutes ago, impartialobserver said: as long as they immigrate to a nation legally.. I do not care if someone is a software engineer or a janitor. As long as they are law abiding and have/seek employment, the context to me is irrelevant. I come from a poor background and so know that even if you are once poor, you can rise above that. Well, I care. Almost half the people in this country don't pay taxes, as it is. That means I have to pay for their healthcare, their children's schooling, and everything else they get in the way of government services, from their share of road building and maintenance to their share of the military. We do not need more mouths sucking on the government teat. If we're going to bring in more people they need to be people who will share the load. Edited June 5, 2023 by I am Groot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted June 6, 2023 Report Share Posted June 6, 2023 3 hours ago, impartialobserver said: How do you think I know how the nuts and bolts of how they do it? I don't know, but modeling what we're talking about here would would be of limited usefulness. There are too many variables and (I suspect) too little past data to build something that would be even remotely accurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.