The article is about the USA. At the point I commented, I didn’t see anything to indicate anyone was talking about Canada. Regardless, someone has challenged your assertion further down the thread in the Canadian context.
Okay, then. So why is this a problem? What’s the demographic breakdown of that total? You mentioned Hindus specifically, but what percentage of that total are Hindu? Why are Hindus problematic? Are there other groups that trouble you? Who are they, and why are they a problem? Are the groups that concern you monolithic and homogenous, or is it a subset of those groups that you see as a problem?
To be fair, I think replacement theory is nonsense, but I want to get down to the fundamentals of why you appear to think it’s valid.
Yeah its weird, we are kinda both right. I did some more research, and… its admittedly quite confusing. According to this article 2,198,679 is correct for 2023 as the total number of non-permanent residents in Canada, which is over 1 million more than the year before. But! This 1 million excess isn’t all new people. They revised the way they counted people, which resulted in a higher number than before being counted.
The article goes on to say “The large growth from international migration is due to nearly 470,000 new permanent resident landings, and an increase in the number of non-permanent residents by almost 700,000 people.”
So the number in my previous comment was only accounting for “NEW and permanent” residents, not the non-permanent residents. The number of “NEW non-permanent” residents is not given, but it is implied that most of their increased number come from the new method of counting them.
As a side note, of the 2.2 million non permanent residents in Canada, 1.4 million of them have work permits, and a lot have student visas (the exact number wasn’t shown in the article).
Regardless, it is true that the number of new immigrants is increasing faster than any other G7 country. Is that a bad thing? Find out next time on Dragon Ball Z
I mean, I don’t care about exact numbers. It’s a seriously massive amount, much more than any culture this small can absorb, I don’t care if it one in 40 or one in 30 really. They’ve imported more than the population of some provinces in a year.
The idea is to ensure economic prosperity of the future. Extremely low birth rates + an aging population = a need for more immigration. The US, Japan, and Korea will all need to do this soon too - social security is set to run out in 2035 if we don’t do anything about it. Immigration is the answer.
I was perfectly happy with the declining birthrate. Ffs that was the propagandists goal for 40 years, and when it worked, they decided to import what we coulda been breeding. It ain’t about security anyways. It’s keeping wages low. I own my house. Nobody much 20 today ever will because of this disastrous policy…the market would have corrected left alone.
If I understand you correctly, are you saying that there was some coordinated effort to lower birth rates over the last 40 years? What would the point of this be?
According to most sociologists, the lowering birth rate seems to be an effect of higher incomes and education, and is affecting most first world countries, not just Canada.
I think I agree with you, however, that wages in general should go up at the expense of the super-wealthy elites.
Wait, I don’t get it. Are you implying you believe that the population of the US is only 37.5 million?
Removed by mod
The article is about the USA. At the point I commented, I didn’t see anything to indicate anyone was talking about Canada. Regardless, someone has challenged your assertion further down the thread in the Canadian context.
And they’re full of shit https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/canada-clocks-fastest-population-growth-66-years-2023-2024-03-27/
Okay, then. So why is this a problem? What’s the demographic breakdown of that total? You mentioned Hindus specifically, but what percentage of that total are Hindu? Why are Hindus problematic? Are there other groups that trouble you? Who are they, and why are they a problem? Are the groups that concern you monolithic and homogenous, or is it a subset of those groups that you see as a problem?
To be fair, I think replacement theory is nonsense, but I want to get down to the fundamentals of why you appear to think it’s valid.
Removed by mod
Mod is tard
Ah, the comment you replied was talking about the US. I think that is where the confusion came in.
Edit -
The number of immigrants into canada according to statista:
2022 - 2023: 468,817
2021 - 2022: 493,236
That is a lot, but not 2.5 million
Ok.now try 23 and 24
1.3 million in 2023 https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/canada-clocks-fastest-population-growth-66-years-2023-2024-03-27/
Yeah its weird, we are kinda both right. I did some more research, and… its admittedly quite confusing. According to this article 2,198,679 is correct for 2023 as the total number of non-permanent residents in Canada, which is over 1 million more than the year before. But! This 1 million excess isn’t all new people. They revised the way they counted people, which resulted in a higher number than before being counted.
The article goes on to say “The large growth from international migration is due to nearly 470,000 new permanent resident landings, and an increase in the number of non-permanent residents by almost 700,000 people.”
So the number in my previous comment was only accounting for “NEW and permanent” residents, not the non-permanent residents. The number of “NEW non-permanent” residents is not given, but it is implied that most of their increased number come from the new method of counting them.
As a side note, of the 2.2 million non permanent residents in Canada, 1.4 million of them have work permits, and a lot have student visas (the exact number wasn’t shown in the article).
Regardless, it is true that the number of new immigrants is increasing faster than any other G7 country. Is that a bad thing? Find out next time on Dragon Ball Z
I mean, I don’t care about exact numbers. It’s a seriously massive amount, much more than any culture this small can absorb, I don’t care if it one in 40 or one in 30 really. They’ve imported more than the population of some provinces in a year.
According to this: https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-levels-plans.html
The idea is to ensure economic prosperity of the future. Extremely low birth rates + an aging population = a need for more immigration. The US, Japan, and Korea will all need to do this soon too - social security is set to run out in 2035 if we don’t do anything about it. Immigration is the answer.
I was perfectly happy with the declining birthrate. Ffs that was the propagandists goal for 40 years, and when it worked, they decided to import what we coulda been breeding. It ain’t about security anyways. It’s keeping wages low. I own my house. Nobody much 20 today ever will because of this disastrous policy…the market would have corrected left alone.
If I understand you correctly, are you saying that there was some coordinated effort to lower birth rates over the last 40 years? What would the point of this be?
According to most sociologists, the lowering birth rate seems to be an effect of higher incomes and education, and is affecting most first world countries, not just Canada.
I think I agree with you, however, that wages in general should go up at the expense of the super-wealthy elites.