If you were to tell your friends that you only wanted to have 2 children instead of 10 do you suppose they would accuse you of hating children? Probably not. They would likely acknowledge that you could only afford to raise 2 children and that it made sense given your financial circumstances.
So why is it then that when it’s suggested that Canada cut back on immigration numbers it is almost immediately rebuffed these days as someone “hating immigrants”?
“The Angus Reid Institute found 49 per cent of surveyed Canadians want to see the federal government’s 2018 target of 310,000 immigrants reduced. In 2014, 36 per cent said it should be reduced.”(Source: CBC)
But this is predicated on government being transparent about numbers. In an earlier poll from 2014 “When asked the question, during Citizenship and Immigration Canada’s 2013-14 annual tracking survey, 43 per cent of the Canadian adults polled wouldn’t even hazard a guess (about actual numbers). Fully one third thought the number was less than 100,000 a year… In the 1980s, when Canada was only admitting about 150,000 immigrants and refugees a year, significant proportions of Canadians were in favour of reducing the number.” (Source: Ottawa Citizen)
So what’s been happening?
“One of the key factors is that we’ve always made an economic case for immigration. People really buy into it.” according to a University of Ottawa political scientist Luc Turgeon who was quoted in 2014.
Do Canadians really know what they’re “buying into”?
According to a Statistics Canada Population Projections report from 2015 “For most of the 20th century, natural increase was the main driver of population growth in Canada. However, in the middle of the 1990s, a shift occurred when immigration increased while fertility remained relatively unchanged. As a result, migratory increase (the balance of immigration minus emigration) has been the main source of population growth in Canada for the last two decades. In 2012/2013, migratory increase accounted for just over two‑thirds of population growth (67.7%) while natural increase accounted for the remaining 32.3% of growth.” (https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/91-520-x/2014001/section02-eng.htm)
What happened to the “declining fertility rate” that we’ve been assailed with for the past number of years? It says “fertility remained relatively unchanged.” Immigration rates have certainly been growing, but the correlation to any notion that this is “necessary” to offset some decline in fertility is a myth.
Another interesting fact that one can glean from this population projection report is that the population of Canada was expected to hit 40 million in 2063. Canada’s current population, thanks to record high mass immigration in the past few years has already pushed it to nearly 38 million!
The statistics in this table (which draws on UN and World Bank input!) are completely out of sync with the present reality when it appears that Canada is presently experiencing a population explosion.
I think we need to ask some very hard questions about why the United Nations and World Bank are so focussed on our country’s demographics and the role of the UN in massively boosting our immigration rates without having any responsibility for the consequences in terms of of the cost to taxpayers (currently in excess of $40 billion per year) or the societal impact.
In 1967, Canada’s Centennial Year, the population was around 20 million. It took another 43 years (2010) to add another 10 million. Canada’s population has grown by another 8 million in only 9 years!
According to the Conference Board of Canada, job growth in the 1970’s-80’s averaged 3.4% a year. In 2000 it dropped to 1.6%. (https://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/Details/Economy/employment-growth.aspx?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1)
“In the 1970s and 1980s, Canada earned an “A” for employment growth, yet simultaneously received a “D” and a “C” for unemployment. The paradox of high employment growth and poor unemployment performance can be explained by the rapid increase in Canada’s labour force participation rate in those decades. This was driven by a shift in the demographic as baby boomers entered the labour force, increased participation by women, and higher levels of immigration.”
How intelligent is it, when unemployment levels are high due to known local factors, to bring in even more people seeking employment?
If you take the time to actually read through the Conference Board article it praises high immigration as contributing positively to the economy (!) because GDP increased — corporate Canada was having a field day. Canadians not so much….
Another thing we need to take into perspective is something called “per capita income”. “Income per capita is the most frequently used statistic for comparing economic well-being across countries. It is calculated as gross domestic product (GDP) per capita—it is not a measure of personal income.”
So let’s look at personal incomes in Canada, because it’s becoming increasingly apparent that GDP and per capita income are not going to tell us anything that is relevant to the people who actually live and work in Canada — they’re measures of how the Globalist corporate elites are doing milking the national labour cow.
“Nearly three-fifths of low-income neighbourhoods are in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver. But some smaller cities are also seeing high levels of poverty – Sherbrooke has the highest portion of its low-income population living in poor neighbourhoods, followed by Windsor and Trois-Rivières.
Single people, visible minorities, recent immigrants and single parents account for higher shares of the population inside poorer neighbourhoods. For instance, four in 10 people in low-income areas are visible minorities while in other neighbourhoods their share is 24.2 per cent.” (Source: Globe & Mail) The median individual income in Canada was $29,878 in 2010, the survey showed – which means half the population had an income above that level and half below. The median family income in Canada is $76,000.”
However the statisticians never substantiate how that “median family income” is arrived at or the fact that the majority of Canadians aren’t living in families.
The last Stats Can report showed that less than 30% of Canadians are living in family settings. That means that around 70% of Canadians are earning under $30,000 a year which should be declared the new poverty level. Strangely there is never any mention of single Canadians struggling to make ends meet, the entire media narrative is always about “families”.
In the meantime the Canadian government continues to not only lie about the benefits of mass immigration to Native Canadians, it also lies to potential new immigrants about the benefits of moving to Canada. Everybody is losing in the UN gambit except for multinational Globalist corporations.