Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Cowboy89]

I cannot track specifically the number of visas that expire in a typical year. But you can pretty safely draw the conclusion that the number is likely a multiple or multiples higher than pre-covid levels

The Non-Permanent Resident Population of Canada moved from the 500-600k (population share of 1-2%) range pre-Trudeau to 3.0 million in Q3 2024 (6-7% share of population). Since January 1, 2022 that number increased from 1.36 million to 3.0 million in Q3 2024. So in 2-3 years Canada has incrementally added the equivalent of the population of Calgary in temporary residents and the equivalent population of Edmonton in permanent residents (475-500k / year).


https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1...pid=1710012101

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.cdhowe.org/sites/default/files/2024-04/IM-Skuterud%20and%20Mahboubi_2024_0417.pdf

[Ozy_Flame]

Wish CP had a Bluesky embed feature (like Twitter).

(Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs) Domenic Leblanc was asked about the interference in the CPC leadership race. He said Poilievre was "offered a highly sensitive security briefing" to Mr. Poilievre, precisely so he can see the nature and scope of the threat of foreign interference in the Con Party." But he declined.

It would be nice for Poilievre to explain this one openly and transparently. I'd even be game for his marketing schitck of "[verb] the [noun]" he loves so much.

[Flacker]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Wish CP had a Bluesky embed feature (like Twitter).

(Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs) Domenic Leblanc was asked about the interference in the CPC leadership race. He said Poilievre was "offered a highly sensitive security briefing" to Mr. Poilievre, precisely so he can see the nature and scope of the threat of foreign interference in the Con Party." But he declined.

It would be nice for Poilievre to explain this one openly and transparently. I'd even be game for his marketing schitck of "[verb] the [noun]" he loves so much.

This is the same crowd that blocked border crossings, and rolled coal on Ottawa, because of a public health mandate that was designed to protect the common good. It is best to keep the sentences as simple as possible.

[belsarius]

I can see the negative effects of the immigration over the last couple of years, but I wonder how many of the positives are being ignored.

For example, wage suppression keeps coming up, but without the TFWs or excess labour, would we not have continued to see high inflation? If those wages in the service industry or more importantly in agriculture had continued to grow, would it not have been harder to get inflation under control. Yes I understand that housing inflation was increased due to the population growth, but how much MORE would food cost without the workforce?

The unemployment rate was at a 50 year low in 2022, with an aging workforce, how else was that supposed to be dealt with? How many people retired during Covid only to have inflation hit so hard they were forced back into the workforce, suddenly increasing the competition?

Immigration, like inflation is hard to manage because it takes time for the effects to be seen. Housing definitely should have been more of a priority as the aging population isn't dying yet, so they are being replaced in the workforce but not in the housing situation.

So the liberals were being pressured from industry that more workers were required, and pressured from the populace to get inflation under control. Both could be solved by increasing immigration.

Even now, 4 years after Covid and an extra 1.5MM work visas, we still don't have a workplace participation rate over 66% (the norm for the past 20 years), and its even gone below 65% now. High levels of immigration tend to increase participation, so if we are looking to evict a significant portion of our workforce, how is that going to affect the economy?

Did the Liberals immigration plan cause issues? Absolutely. But I have a hard time judging the issues without taking into account the baseline of the issues we would have without the increased immigration. I am still not convinced that the current plan is going to work out as there are numerous issues that will come from losing immigrants. And I can't take solace in that "even the Liberals are backtracking on it" because that doesn't mean it isn't the best way forward, it is just unpopular and they are scrambling to keep the voters happy. But happy voters aren't always right on complex issues.

There are a lot of unanswered questions in the public domain, and I have trust that a lot of these issues and ramifications are being discussed by the policy makers and bureaucrats making these plans.

[Azure]

Liberals did what every other party in almost every single Western country did.

Their corporate overlords wanted cheaper labour. It is really simple.

Canadians love paying more for just about everything, so we abide by that as well.

End of the day nobody is arguing against immigration. There are good arguments to make that immigration should have been increased in certain ways. But to the extent where we are at now? Pretty clear it caused a lot of issues.

Which is exactly why the Liberals are back tracking like crazy.

Though coming out and saying 5 million people need to leave in the next year is all kinds of stupid.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I cannot track specifically the number of visas that expire in a typical year. But you can pretty safely draw the conclusion that the number is likely a multiple or multiples higher than pre-covid levels

The Non-Permanent Resident Population of Canada moved from the 500-600k (population share of 1-2%) range pre-Trudeau to 3.0 million in Q3 2024 (6-7% share of population). Since January 1, 2022 that number increased from 1.36 million to 3.0 million in Q3 2024. So in 2-3 years Canada has incrementally added the equivalent of the population of Calgary in temporary residents and the equivalent population of Edmonton in permanent residents (475-500k / year).


https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1...pid=1710012101

https://www.cdhowe.org/sites/default/files/2024-04/IM-Skuterud%20and%20Mahboubi_2024_0417.pdf

Yeah, there has been significant and unsustainable growth in non-permanent residents; I'm not sure anyone questions that. But the 4.9M number people toss around is basically irrelevant because it evidently includes a bunch of tourists.

Based on the 2nd link, there will be a net reduction of about 220K non-permanent residents by the end of 2025. That's a whole lot different than talking about getting 4.9M to leave all at once. Particularly since much of that reduction will be through attrition. Temporary residents who normally leave after their visa expires or who become permanent residents will continue to do so, while fewer new visa holders will be admitted to replace them. Over time, the non-permanent resident population will shrink significantly.

[Azure]

I mean its kind of amusing the timing on this.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1863966431605346656

and not sure if this is true, but sure speaks to how inter-connected our countries are.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1864060771724079108

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by opendoor

I haven't seen a specific number published anywhere for a normal year. But we do know that there are only about 3M non-permanent residents in Canada (inclusive of all work and study permit holders as well as asylum claimants) total. So that 4.9M figure obviously includes millions of people who aren't even residents (i.e. people issued tourist visas at some point in the year).

I wonder if this would include the “work visa” or “tourist visa” or whatever that my boss has to get in order to enter the country for a one week visit. If so, this 4.9M number could be incredibly inflated for the argument for which it is being quoted.

[Sylvanfan]

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/dail...20427a-eng.htm

Based on the 2021 Census 21.8% of the population was aged 55 to 64. The number of people 65 plus was growing 6 times faster than that of people under 14.

So why is immigration occurring at these levels? That's a major reason why. I used to wonder if we needed this much. Now I'm terrified about how crippling taxes will become if we don't keep it at current levels or increase it. I'm of the opinion that the housing issue is easier to address than the pending demographic ones that are pending. 10 years from now there will be a glut of Boomer mini mansions and a shortage of senior friendly housing. That 15 year glut of boomers has been tripping up the government for 75 years now.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Azure

and not sure if this is true, but sure speaks to how inter-connected our countries are.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1864060771724079108

It probably is true. Aluminum is similar. Canada is the 4th largest aluminum producer in the world and supplies about 40% of the aluminum that the US uses. But we have zero bauxite mines in Canada so all the raw materials are imported (primarily from Brazil).

[SebC]

Bringing the conversation here from the American Politics thread...

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Nope. Poilievre has been highly political active since he was 14, and knee deep in Reform Party crap right out of the gates, and was highly active at the U of C as President of the Young Tories club. Ironically he clashed with Patrick Brown during these years.

Policy wonk through and through.

Perhaps he was one then, and has evolved into a dorky populist.

[Doctorfever]

https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...as-purely-poll

Seems the attempt to buy our votes with our own money was unsuccessful. Way to go Canada!

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...as-purely-poll

Seems the attempt to buy our votes with our own money was unsuccessful. Way to go Canada!

Very unlike the "axe the tax" buying of votes that actually will leave a lot of people poorer.

[Ozy_Flame]

Axe the Tax!

Liberals: axed the tax

Milhouse: noooooooo not that tax

Cons need to stop trading in punchlines.

[Doctorfever]

Well, seems we have found part of the 20% who disagree with the majority.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

Well, seems we have found part of the 20% who disagree with the majority.

I'm a dipper. I've never really agreed with the majority.

[Azure]

(Bloomberg) -- Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s plan to fix immigration in Canada depends on the biggest exodus of people since at least the 1940s — one that many economists doubt is feasible.

Slamming the brakes on record-setting population growth requires 2.4 million non-permanent residents to leave or change status over the next two years, according to the government’s forecasts, which also see 1.5 million new temporary arrivals during that time.

That projected net loss of about 900,000 international students, laborers and other non-permanent residents is a little more than 2% of Canada’s current population. It would be roughly the equivalent of removing Indiana from the US.

The new plan — in which the overall population is set to slightly shrink, once all factors are considered — represents a sharp reversal from a population boom that strained housing, the job market and public services. Once a proponent of mass migration, Trudeau is backtracking amid souring public opinion on immigration and weak polling numbers for his Liberal Party.

But for it to work, large numbers of people must leave when their temporary visas expire. Next year alone, the government projects 1.3 million non-permanent residents will lose their spots — more than double that of any previous year. The vast majority will be expected to depart the country, though the government has earmarked about 158,000 permanent-resident places for them, and others may be able to snag another non-permanent resident visa.

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business...eople-leaving/

Okay then, good luck. When are deportations going to start?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Azure

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business...eople-leaving/

Okay then, good luck. When are deportations going to start?

Remember Trudeau's "Soldiers in the Streets" BS?

Now his Government is going to have to round up, detain and deport millions of people?

There may actually have to be Soldiers in the Streets. And ironically he's going to be the one who put them there.

[opendoor]

Doesn't seem that crazy to me. Reading between the lines, it sounds like 500K-600K people have their temporary visas expire every year and we don't have a massive illegal population.

So 1.3M is definitely high, but I don't see why that turns things from business as usual to all of the sudden having to have massive government forces going around and rounding up people to forcibly deport. Why would the 1.3M be more likely to stay as illegal residents than the 500-600K people every other year?

[SebC]

https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/air-...mers-1.7133426

Our transport minister is not happy that Air Canada is trying to make money.