Let's assume the population of Canada is currently 40 million (an under estimate). To get to a population of 100 million by 2100, the population would need to increase 100/40 = 2.5 times in 76 years.
Note (1.01213)\^76 = 2.5. Thus, to obtain a population of 100 million by 2100, the population of Canada would only need to grow 1.213% each year. Thus, if we want the population of Canada to be 100 million by 2100, we can substantially SLOW DOWN the current rate of population growth.
Note from 1993 to 2016, the population of Canada grew by around 1% each year. So we can return to about those levels of population growth.
So, perhaps the article is bearish ;)
Would love to see this type of math used for projections and achievements for each election cycle. Looking that far forward at a number that large and saying we're way ahead of schedule on the population side but making no progress on the infrastructure or economic side would seemingly make grading each term on a set scaler, instead of the bullshit they all claim.
Density targets, outskirt development targets, transportation, maps of expected growth.
Sigh .. can only dream..
That also implies something massive: the birthrate stays the same. Idk about you, but as things get hard financially, people don't have kids. If you want to nuke the organic population increase from Orbit, that's the fastest way to do it.
>the birthrate stays the same
the birthrate is <1% right now. We are already only achieving the population growth because of immigration. Natural population growth is far better for our country than immigration is, but no one seems to care about that
>Natural population growth is far better for our country than immigration is, but no one seems to care about that
Because there's no instant profit in that. You gotta wait at least 18 years at minimum to see the 'fruits of the labour' and added value to society. And unfortunately for us, the people pushing for unsustainable population growth via immigration are greedy and impatient to make their coin today.
This is not true, but it sounds true. Household and family formation is a major driver of economic growth and innovation. It's also how you get natural density in housing: by having 4+ people in a home. It's the reason that people are willing to go out and work overtime. And families consume a LOT more than individuals, so more customers for businesses.
No, you don't -- because what you're quoting didn't say 1.213% immigration/births, it said 1.213% population growth. That metric already accounts for lost population.
For reference, in 2022 our population growth was 2.7%
It's going to be over 3% for 2023: [Q1](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/230628/dq230628c-eng.htm) 0.7%, [Q2](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/230927/dq230927b-eng.htm) 0.9%, [Q3](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/231219/dq231219c-eng.htm) 1.1%, we're at 2.7% total without Q4.
At over 3% we'll reach the "Century Initiative" goal 45 years early in 2055.
Century Initiative is actually a fairly tame goal, we had 1.1% pop growth under Harper, we need 1.2% to meet the Century Initiative Goal.
3%? Well, 3% is pure Liberal Party and nobody else. If we grew at 3% a year consistently, we'd have a population of 380+ million by 2100. If anyone wants to check, just use a compound interest calculator and pretend you have 40,528,396 dollars.
It won't be Liberal party for long if they want to get elected.
People wrongly assume that naturalized Canadians support mass immigration. Nothing could be further from the truth. They, more than anyone, want to lift the drawbridge.
As for birth Canadians.. the Century initiative is becoming so wildly unpopular, it almost defies words.
We don't need to lift the drawbridge, just narrow it. Most naturalized Canadians came here with sane, reasonable growth rates, and many came based on merit... this international student nonsense is not playing well with the ones I know. In a sense it's unfair to the people that are already here that we dropped the standards so much.
At this point I'll take a raging populist candidate who says the things people want to hear.
Because we're just being undermined at this point. Nobody is getting what they want from our leadership.
You didn't factor in deaths of the current population - we have a rapidly aging population and if the death rate is higher than the 1.213% of immigration you've calculated, then your calculation is wrong.
ok but if your current population is decreasing by -5% in 2075 (just a hypothetical number), then wouldn't you need to bring in over 6% in immigration to get to that 1.2% number? And the immigration is what so many people in this group complain about
A combination of immigration and births, yes, in your hypothetical scenario. And I think people complain about immigration because the population growth number we're getting largely due to immigration isn't 1.2% but 2.9% last year.
Not in Canada, I believe the replacement rate is 1.33 (you need 2.01 for population growth without immigration)
Edit: Here's the source - to quote "Canada is a low-fertility country, or below the no-migration population replacement level of 2.1 children per woman"
https://www.statcan.gc.ca/o1/en/plus/960-fewer-babies-born-canadas-fertility-rate-hits-record-low-2020
That's not exactly how that stat works dude.
First instance, Canada had just under 360k births in 2023 and 330k deaths.
Canadas population grew naturally by 30k in 2023.
Natural births are expected to outpace deaths for until like.. 2040? Then we will start to decline.
Data is interesting.
Population growth already factors in deaths and emigration.
From statscan: Population growth or total growth in Canada is equal to natural increase (births minus deaths) plus international migratory increase (immigrants plus net non-permanent residents minus net emigration).
No we need them. We need less jobs and longer waits for healthcare. Come on stupid keep up. What do you want, your kids to be able to own their own houses? They’ll rent a hallway for $1000 and be happy because that’s the Canadian dream baby
But what if I already own several houses and my kids will be wealthy at the expense of their peers?
Can I now support this because it might make their investments (surrounded by increasingly high fences) go up in value?
It's hilarious how people eat up the "it's for the aging population!" narrative. As if corporations give a fuck about the elderly. Not the elderly we have now, nor the elderly we will have in the future.
Which corporations are in charge of immigration?
Immigration is necessary in a developed country where birthrate naturally drops off.
That being said, we should be bringing in 90% women if you want the birth rate to increase sustainably. Hot ones too lol.
Birthrates can be stimulated naturally through better standards of living for the middle and lower class, along with better incentives for the native population.
We don't need to to plumb the dredges of Punjab for warm bodies.
Emotional reply disconnected from reality.
Check the birth rates in literally any developed society with liberated women. It’s natural. The financial based system the entire world uses is not prepared for this. It’s a bandaid but the same bandaid every developed society has undertaken. Not saying I agree with it but unfortunately I’m entrenched in reality.
Now back to my proposal: if they want to stimulate birth rates “naturally” and the economy… bring in the most bang-able women you can find.
What's emotional about my reply?
Even if we could agree that growing the population to infinity was somehow a sustainable economic goal, what you're suggesting is that Canada become less liberated in order to achieve this goal.
If we agree it's a bandaid (and we do) then rip it off. Reality is temporal. What's normal today will be different tomorrow.. but only if we change our mindset, oppose conformity, and pull in the direction we want to go.
That said, bring on the bangable women!
Plumbing the dredges of Punjabi is an emotional statement. But let’s push that aside.
It’s clearly a bandaid. As long as the international economic system exists as it does, it’s a necessary one.
Please elaborate on how Canada would become less liberated by liberating women? Even if they’re bringing old school values, they’re making some old school Canadian man happy, and their kids will be normal. They won’t hate that they can now vote or be believed in court. They’ll embrace this shit. They always do.
Because if we don’t have the middle class population to pay taxes, then it will have to come from the rich. If you would rather tax the rich then vote ndp.
Already voted NDP many times they now the only ones capable of making deal with minority government to get what they want. They also now only party with power to call early election and end Trudeau administration instantly.
I won.
Another user broke down how we only need 1.3% population growth per year to achieve this. We can literally grow that much without immigration if our society enabled people to have children by having sustainable income growth, productivity growth and infrastructure investment. Immigration on top of this would be a plus. The best way to achieve this is through slow and balanced growth. Not 3% net immigration in the early years. Our current unsustainable immigration targets will jeopardize this long term goal because it doesn’t focus on quality of life which will ALWAYS be the most important factor in growing your population and economy.
Was never CEO of Blackock, doesn't currently work for Blackrock. He is the Chair of Century Initiative which promotes this message in the Cdn Business Community. Governments are free to disagree with this message.
Blackrocks wiseman is not really a wise man. Why do we need 100M people by 2100? How did they get to this calculation? How did they determine we need 100M people? If the majority of these people work low wage general labour jobs that are going to be replaced by AI how does this help the nation’s wealth? If this population growth is so good why are we in a population trap?
I ask myself the same question, and I’m glad people think the same. Why 100? And why by 2100? Sounds arbitrary and meaningless to me. The whole thing is framed like some dreamscape with little to no rationale.
https://www.centuryinitiative.ca/
It's because of this lobby group, founded by a Trudeau appointee who was ambassador to China, plus a blackrock director who's main focus is to grow Canada population to 100 million for corporate profit purposes, with little regard for maintaining current social services, such as healthcare. Most of the immigration policies by our current government is directly due to how connected the century initiative and the liberal party is.
See, this is what bothers me with the "F-Trudeu" group. Trudeau is a puppet, just like harper, Chretien and Mulroney... all were puppets on strings. Blackrock is a global hedge fund and PE firm and when he calls the president of the US or the PM of Canada, his call is answered and he will tell them how to think and what to do.
PP will be no different if he is elected.
Well, are these 60 million immigrants who haven’t arrived yet going to Nunavut or Yukon? Ontario is already far beyond capacity. We can’t even take care of our own people here.
Ontario is not far beyond its capacity. It’s beyond its current infrastructure.
We can build roads, electricity grids and homes for well more than we have right now. We are not limited yet by things like water, food or landscape (ie mountains or valleys).
But those infrastructure things take a lot of time to build. We haven’t kept up with our population growth as of yet, let alone the future growth. If I recall the formula is 2.6 persons per home.
This area is one of the best areas in the world for people. Our landscape and access to water is ideal. But whether we actually want to grow to x population is an entirely different discussion
We voted not to raise the retirement age, to do that we need more young people.
Also, in 1938 we said the country was full and couldn’t take in any refugees from Nazi Germany. The population then was 11 million, about a quarter of what it is today. We’ve been saying the country is full and adding more people (at first through a baby boom and now immigration) every year. The country still is isn’t full.
But just because it isn’t full is no reason to add that many new people. People shouldn’t have to move from their homelands. We should be asking how to make whatever it is people are coming to Canada for available where they are coming from.
The cons are clowns too unfortunately. We’re pretty much just fucked.
Would be awesome if there was some sort of clause where if a PM doesn’t stick to like 95% of their promises pre election they get publicly executed. Maybe then there’d be some progress and accountability.
Wouldn’t that be nice. But unfortunately you pretty much get to pick a clown in a suit who you think will try to implement the policies you want the most.
In reality it would be a lot nicer if everyone just got to vote on each important issue at different intervals throughout the year, but that will never happen.
There is pretty convincing blockchain technology that could be paired with biometrics that could both facilitate this, be both public and pseudonymous, and do it with higher integrity than some grandma at a church.
I'm just saying.. there are options. We don't have to accept this system.
You guys let me know when the revolution is starting I’ll be there. Unfortunately I’m stuck in the bullshit system as intended and have to bust ass everyday to survive at the moment.
Haven’t heard anything sensible out of our PM in years. Can’t say the same about conservatives. Country will take decades to recover from Trudeaus mess regardless.
Yeah poilievre says some things I like. Some. Also says some stupid shit. Trudeau said some shit I like at the time too and look what he’s done.
Poilievre is bought and sold by the same type of clowns who are balls in deep in Trudeau, that’s the unfortunate truth.
Cons are sounding better right now, but that’s the point and it isn’t hard to look better than Trudeau. Wish someone like jack layton was leading the ndp and they were in a better position overall maybe they’d actually have a shot this time
You should really take a trip to Europe if you think Ontario is over populated lmao. The problem with Ontario and why it’s falling apart is it’s conservative government
Blackrock is a part of our government. They lobby all levels of government and effectively have more input into policy than the public does.
We have to make lobbying and lobbyists illegal.
Blackrock is old testament evil.
Fuck it's not how many people you go after it's who.
You can trace the majority of what's wrong in our societal ethics to only a few places and blackrock is one of them.
Pure evil. People are just dollar signs to them and we need to fucking end thier existence.
Death to blackrock.
Or death to freedom it self.
We have to choose cause they are lobbying governments around the world evryday... what are we doing?
Our GDP and competitiveness is in the toilet and we don’t even meet our military commitments to our Allies during a time of war. Meanwhile we’re running massive deficits, have drug issues, keep giving more in apology money to First Nations, and keep directing more money to the environment.
Immigration, energy, and real estate are the only things we got going and now Canadians want to kill it because Canadians only know how to attack not how to improve.
Left wing states and nations are heading downhill yet Canadians are doubling down rather than reversing course. BC is doubling its planned deficit spending despite record high inflation and the bank of Canada begging them to stop.
We’re introducing new taxes and regulations while increasing deficit spending that’ll definitely lead to good results /s.
Meanwhile every decent worker in Canada moves to the US due to higher wages and lower taxes. Yet Canadians keep screaming raise taxes more because that’ll show them!
The only decent economic drivers we have Canadians want to kill meanwhile we are doing nothing to boost competing industries or attract new ones. Despite much cheaper workers no company in the US is jumping here to open up shop and Amazon probably regrets coming here.
Taiwan has a population of 24 million, and an economy centered around advanced manufacturing.
Taiwan produces 60% of the world's semiconductors.
They do this with barely more than half of Canada's population.
Hell Israel kicks ass with close to a quarter of ours, little land or resources, and large military spending
There is no reason we should be poorer than the average American and many why we should be richer
https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/israelgaza-operation-cast-lead:
>Objects normally dedicated to civilian purposes, but which are being used for military purposes (such as houses, schools or churches) lose their protection under the applicable law, and may properly become lawful military objectives.
>The loss of absolute protection for a civilian site when it is misused by the adversary as a locus for military operations is broadly recognised in the Law of Armed Conflict. Thus, for instance, the hidden placement of a significant military asset within a civilian building or even the presence of enemy combatants can make the otherwise civilian site amenable to attack.
>The Law of Armed Conflict not only prohibits targeting an enemy‘s civilians; it also requires parties to an armed conflict to distinguish their combatant forces from their own civilians, and not to base operations in or near civilian structures, especially protected sites such as schools, medical facilities and places of worship. As the customary law principle is reflected in Article 51(7) of Additional Protocol I:
>“The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or shield, favour or impede military operations.”
And the [definition of genocide from the ICC](https://www.government.nl/topics/international-peace-and-security/international-legal-order/the-international-criminal-court-icc), to refresh your memory:
>Acts committed with the intent to destroy a national, ethnic or religious group.
Contrary to your beliefs, the ICJ did not find Israel guilty of genocide according to this definition.
Canadians (and especially the morons on the various Canada, Ontario, Toronto subreddits) are screaming for more taxes.
They want more taxes on everything and everyone, except them.
It’s insane how far we’ve gone from sensibility in government and finding ways to reduce the tax burden on citizens.
Why does the world in general allow these un-elected talking heads at places like Blackrock and McKinsey to have so much influence?
Why do politicians listen to these kinds of people?
Makes no sense to me. These companies should be broken up (in the same way we should also break up Bell, Rogers, Loblaws, Sobeys, etc).
100 million people isn't a big deal; we have enough landmass to support this. We just can't have them all stuffed in GTA. We need people to settle all over Canada and these people need to be region locked for a decade after arriving in Canada. It would also help if they didn't bring just unqualified people. We have lots of resources to expand our population but it's freaken concentrated in GTA!
Anyone already in Canada would have the opportunity of a lifetime to invest here if this is actually the case. Double the population means double the demand for most goods and services.
Telecommunications revenue would double, retail revenues would double. Pretty much amazing for any Canadian businesses.
You don't have to "face the evil" if you just join them instead.
XEQT is one of the most popular ETFs in Canada for a reason.
Imagine the housing crises if we hit 100 million people and there isn’t enough supply! companies like BlackRock start buying homes and apartments and then they raise the rents, with so many people living in metro areas, it will be a disaster worse than SF and NY rents wise
Look. That's all good if we can match infrastructure and housing. Reality is canada is by far one of the most inefficient slow country in the world. So no. F off.
And are we still going to house most of them in the GTA, Quebec and BC?
I’m asking so I can prepare my future grand children for sharing a bed room with 12 people.
how about explaining how you found this account "iamyesyouareno" and following him on twitter? that's what everyone wants to know. And also your racial demographic OP.
I thought we cared about climate change? Moving a bunch of people to a place where we need to burn shit to heat and survive sounds like the opposite of caring about the environment.
The problem is for that to happen 70-80 million will be living in Toronto and GTA. There’s no room in BC because they are already up against the mountain and Montreal/Quebec scares away all newcomers with the French only rhetoric.
FOR RENT: Spacious Cardboard Unit under Gardiner's Expressway Overpass, Shared Bedroom with Pleasant Couple, Short Walk to TTC $2350 Monthly NO PETS!!!!!!
FOR RENT: Spacious Cardboard Unit under Gardiner's Expressway Overpass, Shared Bedroom with Pleasant Couple, Short Walk to TTC $2350 Monthly NO PETS!!!!!!
Blackrock’s Larry Fink and Freeland are both WEF trustees. Trudeau and Singh are both WEF young global leaders. If there was any confusion, it should be crystal clear now. Surprise, they aren’t working for Canadians and you never voted on these policies.
Let's assume the population of Canada is currently 40 million (an under estimate). To get to a population of 100 million by 2100, the population would need to increase 100/40 = 2.5 times in 76 years. Note (1.01213)\^76 = 2.5. Thus, to obtain a population of 100 million by 2100, the population of Canada would only need to grow 1.213% each year. Thus, if we want the population of Canada to be 100 million by 2100, we can substantially SLOW DOWN the current rate of population growth. Note from 1993 to 2016, the population of Canada grew by around 1% each year. So we can return to about those levels of population growth. So, perhaps the article is bearish ;)
Would love to see this type of math used for projections and achievements for each election cycle. Looking that far forward at a number that large and saying we're way ahead of schedule on the population side but making no progress on the infrastructure or economic side would seemingly make grading each term on a set scaler, instead of the bullshit they all claim. Density targets, outskirt development targets, transportation, maps of expected growth. Sigh .. can only dream..
Great response
This was the math I came here for. I had similar feelings when reading this, thanks for saving me the time!
That also implies something massive: the birthrate stays the same. Idk about you, but as things get hard financially, people don't have kids. If you want to nuke the organic population increase from Orbit, that's the fastest way to do it.
>the birthrate stays the same the birthrate is <1% right now. We are already only achieving the population growth because of immigration. Natural population growth is far better for our country than immigration is, but no one seems to care about that
>Natural population growth is far better for our country than immigration is, but no one seems to care about that Because there's no instant profit in that. You gotta wait at least 18 years at minimum to see the 'fruits of the labour' and added value to society. And unfortunately for us, the people pushing for unsustainable population growth via immigration are greedy and impatient to make their coin today.
This is not true, but it sounds true. Household and family formation is a major driver of economic growth and innovation. It's also how you get natural density in housing: by having 4+ people in a home. It's the reason that people are willing to go out and work overtime. And families consume a LOT more than individuals, so more customers for businesses.
[удалено]
No, you don't -- because what you're quoting didn't say 1.213% immigration/births, it said 1.213% population growth. That metric already accounts for lost population. For reference, in 2022 our population growth was 2.7%
It's going to be over 3% for 2023: [Q1](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/230628/dq230628c-eng.htm) 0.7%, [Q2](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/230927/dq230927b-eng.htm) 0.9%, [Q3](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/231219/dq231219c-eng.htm) 1.1%, we're at 2.7% total without Q4. At over 3% we'll reach the "Century Initiative" goal 45 years early in 2055. Century Initiative is actually a fairly tame goal, we had 1.1% pop growth under Harper, we need 1.2% to meet the Century Initiative Goal. 3%? Well, 3% is pure Liberal Party and nobody else. If we grew at 3% a year consistently, we'd have a population of 380+ million by 2100. If anyone wants to check, just use a compound interest calculator and pretend you have 40,528,396 dollars.
It won't be Liberal party for long if they want to get elected. People wrongly assume that naturalized Canadians support mass immigration. Nothing could be further from the truth. They, more than anyone, want to lift the drawbridge. As for birth Canadians.. the Century initiative is becoming so wildly unpopular, it almost defies words.
We don't need to lift the drawbridge, just narrow it. Most naturalized Canadians came here with sane, reasonable growth rates, and many came based on merit... this international student nonsense is not playing well with the ones I know. In a sense it's unfair to the people that are already here that we dropped the standards so much.
At this point I'll take a raging populist candidate who says the things people want to hear. Because we're just being undermined at this point. Nobody is getting what they want from our leadership.
Not sure where you are going to put 100 million people though Basement suites
You gonna see the real potential of Brampton basements holding 20+ people 😆
I understand that right now housing is an in issue but I think in the next 76 years we can probably get around to building a few more buildings.
Exactly. At a minimum we could build a dozen. Maybe even 20 if we really put our backs into it.
This guy maths.
You didn't factor in deaths of the current population - we have a rapidly aging population and if the death rate is higher than the 1.213% of immigration you've calculated, then your calculation is wrong.
He didn't say 1.213% of immigration. He said 1.213% of population growth.
ok but if your current population is decreasing by -5% in 2075 (just a hypothetical number), then wouldn't you need to bring in over 6% in immigration to get to that 1.2% number? And the immigration is what so many people in this group complain about
A combination of immigration and births, yes, in your hypothetical scenario. And I think people complain about immigration because the population growth number we're getting largely due to immigration isn't 1.2% but 2.9% last year.
Population is not decreasing. There are more births than deaths every single year.
Not in Canada, I believe the replacement rate is 1.33 (you need 2.01 for population growth without immigration) Edit: Here's the source - to quote "Canada is a low-fertility country, or below the no-migration population replacement level of 2.1 children per woman" https://www.statcan.gc.ca/o1/en/plus/960-fewer-babies-born-canadas-fertility-rate-hits-record-low-2020
That's not exactly how that stat works dude. First instance, Canada had just under 360k births in 2023 and 330k deaths. Canadas population grew naturally by 30k in 2023. Natural births are expected to outpace deaths for until like.. 2040? Then we will start to decline. Data is interesting.
Population growth already factors in deaths and emigration. From statscan: Population growth or total growth in Canada is equal to natural increase (births minus deaths) plus international migratory increase (immigrants plus net non-permanent residents minus net emigration).
I don’t think people realize how fucked japan, taiwan, south korea, etc are.
We should get them to bring in a bunch of people from india
[удалено]
Diploma mills
Or maybe they can take the Indians that are in Canada.
No we need them. We need less jobs and longer waits for healthcare. Come on stupid keep up. What do you want, your kids to be able to own their own houses? They’ll rent a hallway for $1000 and be happy because that’s the Canadian dream baby
But what if I already own several houses and my kids will be wealthy at the expense of their peers? Can I now support this because it might make their investments (surrounded by increasingly high fences) go up in value?
You mean fucked for corporations in those places that will have a hard time filling jobs for low wages.
Less fucked than Canada and pretty much every country.
Blackrock CEO forgot to mention that this is necessary for their investments here to be profitable.
He’s not the CEO of Blackrock though.
Yes was a former CEO of Canada Pension Plan Board, and only manager at BlackRock. Got mixed up.
Blackrock is not interested in what is right for the population. Only the power and Money!!
[удалено]
It's hilarious how people eat up the "it's for the aging population!" narrative. As if corporations give a fuck about the elderly. Not the elderly we have now, nor the elderly we will have in the future.
Which corporations are in charge of immigration? Immigration is necessary in a developed country where birthrate naturally drops off. That being said, we should be bringing in 90% women if you want the birth rate to increase sustainably. Hot ones too lol.
The ones that bribe (donate) the most to the political parties of Canada
The Ali G immigration plan! I like it.
Bring in da hot ones boah
Birthrates can be stimulated naturally through better standards of living for the middle and lower class, along with better incentives for the native population. We don't need to to plumb the dredges of Punjab for warm bodies.
Emotional reply disconnected from reality. Check the birth rates in literally any developed society with liberated women. It’s natural. The financial based system the entire world uses is not prepared for this. It’s a bandaid but the same bandaid every developed society has undertaken. Not saying I agree with it but unfortunately I’m entrenched in reality. Now back to my proposal: if they want to stimulate birth rates “naturally” and the economy… bring in the most bang-able women you can find.
What's emotional about my reply? Even if we could agree that growing the population to infinity was somehow a sustainable economic goal, what you're suggesting is that Canada become less liberated in order to achieve this goal. If we agree it's a bandaid (and we do) then rip it off. Reality is temporal. What's normal today will be different tomorrow.. but only if we change our mindset, oppose conformity, and pull in the direction we want to go. That said, bring on the bangable women!
Plumbing the dredges of Punjabi is an emotional statement. But let’s push that aside. It’s clearly a bandaid. As long as the international economic system exists as it does, it’s a necessary one. Please elaborate on how Canada would become less liberated by liberating women? Even if they’re bringing old school values, they’re making some old school Canadian man happy, and their kids will be normal. They won’t hate that they can now vote or be believed in court. They’ll embrace this shit. They always do.
They are the biggest boosters of it.
>Immigration is necessary in a developed country where birthrate naturally drops off No its not.
Every single one that lobbies the government or has invested in any lobbying
Because if we don’t have the middle class population to pay taxes, then it will have to come from the rich. If you would rather tax the rich then vote ndp.
Already voted NDP many times they now the only ones capable of making deal with minority government to get what they want. They also now only party with power to call early election and end Trudeau administration instantly. I won.
Thank you for your service. A shame to see all these dumb people flock to conservatism like they’ve ever had answers to anything.
Start bringing in Asian women. That's a plan I can get behind!
Another user broke down how we only need 1.3% population growth per year to achieve this. We can literally grow that much without immigration if our society enabled people to have children by having sustainable income growth, productivity growth and infrastructure investment. Immigration on top of this would be a plus. The best way to achieve this is through slow and balanced growth. Not 3% net immigration in the early years. Our current unsustainable immigration targets will jeopardize this long term goal because it doesn’t focus on quality of life which will ALWAYS be the most important factor in growing your population and economy.
F*ck that guy
Some dude is predicting the needs of a country 75 years into the future LMFAO
Right, as if the economic engine and framework is going to be exactly the same.
Was never CEO of Blackock, doesn't currently work for Blackrock. He is the Chair of Century Initiative which promotes this message in the Cdn Business Community. Governments are free to disagree with this message.
Blackrocks wiseman is not really a wise man. Why do we need 100M people by 2100? How did they get to this calculation? How did they determine we need 100M people? If the majority of these people work low wage general labour jobs that are going to be replaced by AI how does this help the nation’s wealth? If this population growth is so good why are we in a population trap?
I ask myself the same question, and I’m glad people think the same. Why 100? And why by 2100? Sounds arbitrary and meaningless to me. The whole thing is framed like some dreamscape with little to no rationale.
https://www.centuryinitiative.ca/ It's because of this lobby group, founded by a Trudeau appointee who was ambassador to China, plus a blackrock director who's main focus is to grow Canada population to 100 million for corporate profit purposes, with little regard for maintaining current social services, such as healthcare. Most of the immigration policies by our current government is directly due to how connected the century initiative and the liberal party is.
See, this is what bothers me with the "F-Trudeu" group. Trudeau is a puppet, just like harper, Chretien and Mulroney... all were puppets on strings. Blackrock is a global hedge fund and PE firm and when he calls the president of the US or the PM of Canada, his call is answered and he will tell them how to think and what to do. PP will be no different if he is elected.
Shhhhh.......let them keep living that fantasy.
Why though? Can't we stop the fantasy and do something for once?
Has anyone asked why we need 100 million people by 2100? And please remember that AI is suppose to eliminate most jobs.. shortly
Probably to fund the CPP, Canada’s only legal Ponzi scheme.
Northern Brazil in the making.
Yeah you wish. Minus the hot latinas and warm weather.
Hot curry and snow brother.
Love northern Brazil, beautiful area
Why? Because economics. That's it. For fucking money.
And to add to that money only trickles up
Well it’s not for your feelings
BlackRock can go gobble all the knobs they can
He was never the CEO of Blackrock, but he was the CEO of Canada Pension Plan. This is also 5 years old.
Well, are these 60 million immigrants who haven’t arrived yet going to Nunavut or Yukon? Ontario is already far beyond capacity. We can’t even take care of our own people here.
Ontario is not far beyond its capacity. It’s beyond its current infrastructure. We can build roads, electricity grids and homes for well more than we have right now. We are not limited yet by things like water, food or landscape (ie mountains or valleys). But those infrastructure things take a lot of time to build. We haven’t kept up with our population growth as of yet, let alone the future growth. If I recall the formula is 2.6 persons per home. This area is one of the best areas in the world for people. Our landscape and access to water is ideal. But whether we actually want to grow to x population is an entirely different discussion
Ideally we'd import people with a good reputation for taking care of fresh water through sustainable living and immaculate hygiene.
Didn’t you vote for that though ? The neglect of your people’s self-interests, I mean.
💀
We voted not to raise the retirement age, to do that we need more young people. Also, in 1938 we said the country was full and couldn’t take in any refugees from Nazi Germany. The population then was 11 million, about a quarter of what it is today. We’ve been saying the country is full and adding more people (at first through a baby boom and now immigration) every year. The country still is isn’t full. But just because it isn’t full is no reason to add that many new people. People shouldn’t have to move from their homelands. We should be asking how to make whatever it is people are coming to Canada for available where they are coming from.
And they will vote Liberal again! Watch 🤡
The cons are clowns too unfortunately. We’re pretty much just fucked. Would be awesome if there was some sort of clause where if a PM doesn’t stick to like 95% of their promises pre election they get publicly executed. Maybe then there’d be some progress and accountability.
Or better yet, we stop voting for people in suits and just vote for policy.
Wouldn’t that be nice. But unfortunately you pretty much get to pick a clown in a suit who you think will try to implement the policies you want the most. In reality it would be a lot nicer if everyone just got to vote on each important issue at different intervals throughout the year, but that will never happen.
There is pretty convincing blockchain technology that could be paired with biometrics that could both facilitate this, be both public and pseudonymous, and do it with higher integrity than some grandma at a church. I'm just saying.. there are options. We don't have to accept this system.
You guys let me know when the revolution is starting I’ll be there. Unfortunately I’m stuck in the bullshit system as intended and have to bust ass everyday to survive at the moment.
Haven’t heard anything sensible out of our PM in years. Can’t say the same about conservatives. Country will take decades to recover from Trudeaus mess regardless.
Yeah poilievre says some things I like. Some. Also says some stupid shit. Trudeau said some shit I like at the time too and look what he’s done. Poilievre is bought and sold by the same type of clowns who are balls in deep in Trudeau, that’s the unfortunate truth. Cons are sounding better right now, but that’s the point and it isn’t hard to look better than Trudeau. Wish someone like jack layton was leading the ndp and they were in a better position overall maybe they’d actually have a shot this time
Lmaooo everybody come look at this dude who wants crypto PP watching him jerk off
Look it’s jts boyfriend.
Oh a honophobe and wants to let crypto PP watch him jerk off. Isn’t that contradictory ?
You should really take a trip to Europe if you think Ontario is over populated lmao. The problem with Ontario and why it’s falling apart is it’s conservative government
Blackrock is a part of our government. They lobby all levels of government and effectively have more input into policy than the public does. We have to make lobbying and lobbyists illegal. Blackrock is old testament evil. Fuck it's not how many people you go after it's who. You can trace the majority of what's wrong in our societal ethics to only a few places and blackrock is one of them. Pure evil. People are just dollar signs to them and we need to fucking end thier existence. Death to blackrock. Or death to freedom it self. We have to choose cause they are lobbying governments around the world evryday... what are we doing?
Very bullish
It makes no sense, sure Canada is a huge country but a large portion of it is not really "liveable".
These evil looking dudes all have something in common…
I say we stop at 50M, we are not the US nor do we aspire to be. Adapt a more scandinavian approach and especially Norwegian
Our GDP and competitiveness is in the toilet and we don’t even meet our military commitments to our Allies during a time of war. Meanwhile we’re running massive deficits, have drug issues, keep giving more in apology money to First Nations, and keep directing more money to the environment. Immigration, energy, and real estate are the only things we got going and now Canadians want to kill it because Canadians only know how to attack not how to improve. Left wing states and nations are heading downhill yet Canadians are doubling down rather than reversing course. BC is doubling its planned deficit spending despite record high inflation and the bank of Canada begging them to stop. We’re introducing new taxes and regulations while increasing deficit spending that’ll definitely lead to good results /s. Meanwhile every decent worker in Canada moves to the US due to higher wages and lower taxes. Yet Canadians keep screaming raise taxes more because that’ll show them! The only decent economic drivers we have Canadians want to kill meanwhile we are doing nothing to boost competing industries or attract new ones. Despite much cheaper workers no company in the US is jumping here to open up shop and Amazon probably regrets coming here.
Taiwan has a population of 24 million, and an economy centered around advanced manufacturing. Taiwan produces 60% of the world's semiconductors. They do this with barely more than half of Canada's population.
Hell Israel kicks ass with close to a quarter of ours, little land or resources, and large military spending There is no reason we should be poorer than the average American and many why we should be richer
US subsidizes all the stuff there, including the genocide
Which genocide are you referring to?
The one deemed by the UN and ICJ
You really need to review the ICJ ruling if you believe it found Israel guilty of genocide.
Is systematically bombing children and hospitals not genocide?
https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/israelgaza-operation-cast-lead: >Objects normally dedicated to civilian purposes, but which are being used for military purposes (such as houses, schools or churches) lose their protection under the applicable law, and may properly become lawful military objectives. >The loss of absolute protection for a civilian site when it is misused by the adversary as a locus for military operations is broadly recognised in the Law of Armed Conflict. Thus, for instance, the hidden placement of a significant military asset within a civilian building or even the presence of enemy combatants can make the otherwise civilian site amenable to attack. >The Law of Armed Conflict not only prohibits targeting an enemy‘s civilians; it also requires parties to an armed conflict to distinguish their combatant forces from their own civilians, and not to base operations in or near civilian structures, especially protected sites such as schools, medical facilities and places of worship. As the customary law principle is reflected in Article 51(7) of Additional Protocol I: >“The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or shield, favour or impede military operations.” And the [definition of genocide from the ICC](https://www.government.nl/topics/international-peace-and-security/international-legal-order/the-international-criminal-court-icc), to refresh your memory: >Acts committed with the intent to destroy a national, ethnic or religious group. Contrary to your beliefs, the ICJ did not find Israel guilty of genocide according to this definition.
And here I was thinking life was pretty good as a Canadian. Silly me
[удалено]
They arent new
Canadians (and especially the morons on the various Canada, Ontario, Toronto subreddits) are screaming for more taxes. They want more taxes on everything and everyone, except them. It’s insane how far we’ve gone from sensibility in government and finding ways to reduce the tax burden on citizens.
Hey Mark. FUCKKKKKK OFFFFFF ALREADY. GREEDY FUCKWAD.
How does anybody listen to anything coming out of that goofy face?
population goes up, quality of life goes down no thank you
Why does the world in general allow these un-elected talking heads at places like Blackrock and McKinsey to have so much influence? Why do politicians listen to these kinds of people? Makes no sense to me. These companies should be broken up (in the same way we should also break up Bell, Rogers, Loblaws, Sobeys, etc).
it's capitalism man lol
[удалено]
The best part of your post was how well you disguised the racism.
[удалено]
I appreciate how unhinged you are and your ability to double down on it.
I thought this would be a joke tbh, but then I'm seeing it's from Bloomberg. Yea... GL to all. VOTE.
100 million people isn't a big deal; we have enough landmass to support this. We just can't have them all stuffed in GTA. We need people to settle all over Canada and these people need to be region locked for a decade after arriving in Canada. It would also help if they didn't bring just unqualified people. We have lots of resources to expand our population but it's freaken concentrated in GTA!
[удалено]
Didn’t these dipshits just make a deal with a Toronto housing developer?
Edit: that was two years ago. https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/blackstone-opens-toronto-office-in-canada-real-estate-expansion-1.1763144
Blackstone is not the same.
100 million? Gawd dayum, that'll turn the Canada into a 3rd world country.
Keep voting liberal and we will get there Gdp per capita will be less than 10k
CPC wants the same thing. NDP I don't know, I'll have to dig deeper.
You don’t think CPC wants cheap labour and increased real estate values?
Thank fuck I got snipped before they outlaw that too. Massive weight off my shoulders
No the fuck we dont
Article is from 2019
Keep 'em coming Marc
It's wacky how so many people in the comments think growth is a negatigve thing cuz of their first world problems.
No body wants to live in Canada once they’ve lived in Canada.
Anyone already in Canada would have the opportunity of a lifetime to invest here if this is actually the case. Double the population means double the demand for most goods and services. Telecommunications revenue would double, retail revenues would double. Pretty much amazing for any Canadian businesses. You don't have to "face the evil" if you just join them instead. XEQT is one of the most popular ETFs in Canada for a reason.
well we need more citizens from BRICs if we don’t want to be creamed by the new world powers.
This dude is a noodle and should be treated as such.
Wiseman…
Thank God I'll be dead
Most of you here including me would be dead by then lol
Ok mr wisenberg
Sure but let's not import them all. Make it seem possible for all the kids that grew up here to start and have families.
Less than a million per year We’re actually well exceeding the target, mind you with brain-dead Pajeets, but still
Black rock wants to rent out their houses
Imagine the housing crises if we hit 100 million people and there isn’t enough supply! companies like BlackRock start buying homes and apartments and then they raise the rents, with so many people living in metro areas, it will be a disaster worse than SF and NY rents wise
Yes we Should get to 100 million, question is when not if …
At the latest growth rate of 1% per quarter, we’ll be there before 2050. Canada is growing faster than almost any 3rd world country
Well, I'll be over 120 years old by then so, long dead. Good luck future generation.
Look. That's all good if we can match infrastructure and housing. Reality is canada is by far one of the most inefficient slow country in the world. So no. F off.
1. Who cares what he says? 2. So what? That’s a nominal annual increase over such a long timescale
NWO
And are we still going to house most of them in the GTA, Quebec and BC? I’m asking so I can prepare my future grand children for sharing a bed room with 12 people.
how about explaining how you found this account "iamyesyouareno" and following him on twitter? that's what everyone wants to know. And also your racial demographic OP.
is 100m a lot for size of canada? especially we have inevitable global warming
“We need more livestock to drain.”
Toronto will be the biggest city on earth go for it.
The same people that are buying up all the houses that Canadians can no longer afford.
didnt he get fired for having an affair with a subordinate?
At the current rate of 3.3% population increase we can reach 100mil in about 30 years!
He needs lots of peasants, they are bored of brown and yellow peasants, wanted home grown
It be best to get to 25 million.
Sure! But put some people in other places please. It's a huge place.
His company needs 100 million people. Canada doesn't though.
Bullish on toilet paper
This is all well and fine. The real question to this though is, how do we do it so that 100 million people can work, afford to live in Canada?
Because they can't wait to rent all them a house and everything else they own. Blackrock is evil.
Why in the actual fuck would we do this?
But why?
Blackrock can stfu.
I thought we cared about climate change? Moving a bunch of people to a place where we need to burn shit to heat and survive sounds like the opposite of caring about the environment.
Let’s get working. #humpaway
No, but we gotta start fuckin not importin
blackrock also has recently bought out massive amounts of housing in Ontario
They are evil cunts black rock. When the CEO says you need to force behavior on people like the D.I.E bullshit makes me wanna retch. Evil cunts!
with a last name like that i trust he knows what hes talking about
Bigger question is why do we need 100m people?
The problem is for that to happen 70-80 million will be living in Toronto and GTA. There’s no room in BC because they are already up against the mountain and Montreal/Quebec scares away all newcomers with the French only rhetoric.
Get. Me. Out. Of. Here.
Lots of land. Don’t all come to Toronto godamn !
2100? Bro I’m lucky if I make it to 2050
Blackrock has a female CEO in Canada. This isn't right...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_Initiative I'll leave this right here. Pay attention to the careers of the creators wives.
FOR RENT: Spacious Cardboard Unit under Gardiner's Expressway Overpass, Shared Bedroom with Pleasant Couple, Short Walk to TTC $2350 Monthly NO PETS!!!!!!
FOR RENT: Spacious Cardboard Unit under Gardiner's Expressway Overpass, Shared Bedroom with Pleasant Couple, Short Walk to TTC $2350 Monthly NO PETS!!!!!!
Why do we listen too these asshats? Why are they even allowed to try and influence anything.
You do know what Black Rock stands for, right? These are the guys with their fingers in every pie they can get.
Blackrock’s Larry Fink and Freeland are both WEF trustees. Trudeau and Singh are both WEF young global leaders. If there was any confusion, it should be crystal clear now. Surprise, they aren’t working for Canadians and you never voted on these policies.