Why Canada doesn't need a "flood" of immigrants

[Troodon]

I'm surprised that this story hasn't appeared as a post on RFD. The Globe and Mail has recently featured an article (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/time-to-lead/why-canada-needs-a-flood-of-immigrants/article2423585/) arguring for having more immigrants in Canada. I have to provide a disclaimer though, I'm a Canadian who had immigrated to Vancouver more than a decade ago.


Between now and 2021, a million jobs are expected to go unfilled across Canada. Ottawa is making reforms to the immigration system but isn't going far enough. We need to radically boost immigration numbers. With the right people, Canada can be an innovative world power. Without them, we'll drain away our potential.

The article begins with the argument that more immigration is going to allow Canada to reach its "full potential". I don't really know what it means to reach any country's "full potential" but I'm assuming that it's GDP growth. Increased immigration is going to obviously increase GDP because its per capita output times the population. If the population increases through immigration, then you'll likely seen more consumption and production.

But, I'm worried that it may not increase GDP per capita. Though I'm not an economist, but I do know that more labour means that labour will become cheaper. I'm not just talking about labour as in manual labour, but all forms of personal work including skilled and technical labour.

Throughout the article, there's a fear of "labour shortages" as a crisis that'll face Canada and immigration as a solution.


The shortage of skilled labour in the Alberta oil sands and Saskatchewan potash mines has become a national issue. But a similar lack of people power is plaguing the ambitious but underdeveloped secondary cities of Ontario, and in Atlantic Canada a third of the population will be over 65 in less than two decades. The Conference Board of Canada estimates that over the next 10 years, there will be a million jobs going wanting across the country. This shortage is a drag on Canada's potential to innovate and compete into the future.

However, I really don't see that as a problem. As a college student, I've seen how difficult it is for some of my older peers to get jobs. I was at a job fair a year ago and a recruiter told me how, like in the article, a lot of professionals are going to retire over the next few decades. But isn't a panacea for the student loan and unemployment crisis? Also, how can we reconcile the impending labour shortage with the current unemployment and underemployment of labour across all skill levels?

A lot of corporations have problem finding skilled labour because they often don't want to train Canadians (i.e. they only want people with X years of experience). I think it's lazy for them to ask the government to provide them with immigrants already possessing such experience rather than training young Canadians themselves.

*** I think a misclick added the US flag symbol to the left of my thread... I apologize for the confusion.

[spike1128]

Haven't read the whole post, but you can never really maximize the country's potential.

Generally, Canadian culture is not a workaholic culture, so we can never reach full potential.

If they are saying trying to get immigrants to their full potentials. It's them who is not trying their all to get to full potential. Staying in their own ethnic enclaves certainly didn't help them at all. How is it the government want to justify to give help to immigrants first, but not their own (locally born Canadians).

I say we don't need anymore immigrants, especially from 3rd world countries. Wish the immigration minister will just put in a policy that there is a line for first world country immigrants and 3rd world country immigrants. Take a few more from the Euro zone if we need more population. Easier to integrate them into Canada.

[ever1221]

are you american?

[Drew87]

Yes
they could live in
Kitchener-Waterloo (German town)
Little Italy, Woodbridge
Little Portugal
Greek town
Lawrence Park, Forest Hill, High Park (British)
North York, Thornhill, Rosedale, Forest Hill, Lawrence Park (Jewish)
Roncesvalles (Polish)
Quebec (French)

-


You can take "greek town" off the list - as a Greek I can tell you that Greek town has been over run with people that aren't Greek and is way more diverse now - Sure the Danforth has a couple of Greek restaurants but the main population isn't Greek anymore...

As a Greek I can tell you that as a whole we're generally spread out over the GTA now - we don't move to where other Greeks live, if anything we try to live close to our own families.

For example:

My cousins grew up in Scarborough once my cousins got married their parents (my aunts and uncles) sold their house to buy a house closer to their kids....

My cousins bought their houses in Markham...

[BornRuff]

I'm surprised that this story hasn't appeared as a post on RFD. The Globe and Mail has recently featured an article (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/time-to-lead/why-canada-needs-a-flood-of-immigrants/article2423585/) arguring for having more immigrants in Canada. I have to provide a disclaimer though, I'm a Canadian who had immigrated to Vancouver more than a decade ago.



The article begins with the argument that more immigration is going to allow Canada to reach its "full potential". I don't really know what it means to reach any country's "full potential" but I'm assuming that it's GDP growth. Increased immigration is going to obviously increase GDP because its per capita output times the population. If the population increases through immigration, then you'll likely seen more consumption and production.

But, I'm worried that it may not increase GDP per capita. Though I'm not an economist, but I do know that more labour means that labour will become cheaper. I'm not just talking about labour as in manual labour, but all forms of personal work including skilled and technical labour.

Throughout the article, there's a fear of "labour shortages" as a crisis that'll face Canada and immigration as a solution.



However, I really don't see that as a problem. As a college student, I've seen how difficult it is for some of my older peers to get jobs. I was at a job fair a year ago and a recruiter told me how, like in the article, a lot of professionals are going to retire over the next few decades. But isn't a panacea for the student loan and unemployment crisis? Also, how can we reconcile the impending labour shortage with the current unemployment and underemployment of labour across all skill levels?

A lot of corporations have problem finding skilled labour because they often don't want to train Canadians (i.e. they only want people with X years of experience). I think it's lazy for them to ask the government to provide them with immigrants already possessing such experience rather than training young Canadians themselves.

*** I think a misclick added the US flag symbol to the left of my thread... I apologize for the confusion.

This post is full of way too much one dimensional thinking about multi dimensional issues.

More workers doesn't necessarily mean lower wages if the number of available jobs is also increasing.

Unemployment now does not eliminate the possibility of us not having enough workers in the future. Things change over time.

Also, GDP is the value of all good and services produced within a county. Your version of what GDP is just describes multiplying GDP per capita by the number of people in a country. Technically it would give you the GDP, but it would be like saying that miles per hour is your miles per minute multiplied by 60, which doesn't really explain what the measurement actually means.

[Troodon]

This post is full of way too much one dimensional thinking about three dimensional issues.

More workers doesn't necessarily mean lower wages if the number of available jobs is also increasing.

Unemployment now does not eliminate the possibility of us not having enough workers in the future. Things change over time.

Also, GDP is the value of all good and services produced within a county. Your version of what GDP is just describes multiplying GDP per capita by the number of people in a country. Technically it would give you the GDP, but it would be like saying that miles per hour is your miles per minute multiplied by 60, which doesn't really explain what the measurement actually means.

1. Yes, but where's the evidence to support that more workers will mean more job creation?

2. Well, perhaps we should take care of the present crisis before worrying about the future one. Since the future one is at best uncertain well the present one is hurting Canadians today. Also, again, how is a labour shortage a problem?

[BornRuff]

1. Yes, but where's the evidence to support that more workers will mean more job creation?

I have not read the article, but I cannot imagine that that is their theory.

From what you summarized, they are saying that there will be more jobs, so we need more workers, not that if we get more workers we will create more jobs. Make sense?


2. Well, perhaps we should take care of the present crisis before worrying about the future one. Since the future one is at best uncertain well the present one is hurting Canadians today. Also, again, how is a labour shortage a problem?

Again, this is one dimensional thinking. We always need to consider the present and the future.

Labour shortages are bad because it lowers our productivity, and by extension our competitiveness. If businesses can't find the workers that they need, that significantly reduces their ability to succeed.

A certain level of unemployment will always exist, and it is not a bad thing. Unemployment is the liquidity in the labour market and a certain level is necessary so that when businesses want to hire more people, there are people out there to hire.

[Aznsilvrboy]

Canada should take less immigrants from the Eurozone, except Germany. Europeans don't have hardworking culture as they like to take a lot of vacations and want to get paid high salary. They will not be productive in Canada. They will end up bankrupting us like they bankrupted their own countries. There is no direct cause and effect relationship between importing people and depressing wages. There are plenty of countries that don't have that many immigrants and have stagnating/decreased wages while Canadians wages have increased for the past few decades while taking in floods of immigrants until recently.

[Abel4Life]

ONLY allow new immigrants in if they:

Are Employed/

Otherwise, No.

Also we need to raise the requirements (length condition for example) for elibility for taking advantage of OHIP, EI, OAS etc.

[coolspot]

However, I really don't see that as a problem. As a college student, I've seen how difficult it is for some of my older peers to get jobs. I was at a job fair a year ago and a recruiter told me how, like in the article, a lot of professionals are going to retire over the next few decades.

A lot of immigrants have Masters and PhD degrees, only a small portion of the Canadian / American population have these types of degrees.

As for your friends having a difficult time finding a job, what degree did they graduate with?

[hightech]

The truth of the matter is that we DO need more immigration into the country. Consider the thousands that are brought into this country each year bringing their skills and wealth to the country. These people buy homes, relie on goods and services and boost our economic sector. By shutting doors, we reduce demands for goods and services which in turn leads to negative growth and eventually job losses. I am all in favour of hard working families coming to this country and agree we need to have rules in place that makes sure that people coming in have skills we need and can help boost our economy. We don't need deadbeats who contribute 0 and sucks off the system. Those are the types we should kick out. Canada does not need to become the #1 charity case.

[flashy_mcflash]

http://i.imgur.com/fQUf0.jpg

[Xpwmata]

Canada should take less immigrants from the Eurozone, except Germany. Europeans don't have hardworking culture as they like to take a lot of vacations and want to get paid high salary. They will not be productive in Canada. They will end up bankrupting us like they bankrupted their own countries. There is no direct cause and effect relationship between importing people and depressing wages. There are plenty of countries that don't have that many immigrants and have stagnating/decreased wages while Canadians wages have increased for the past few decades while taking in floods of immigrants until recently.

:lol:You are quite simple.

[Abel4Life]

The truth of the matter is that we DO need more immigration into the country. Consider the thousands that are brought into this country each year bringing their skills and wealth to the country. These people buy homes, relie on goods and services and boost our economic sector. By shutting doors, we reduce demands for goods and services which in turn leads to negative growth and eventually job losses. I am all in favour of hard working families coming to this country and agree we need to have rules in place that makes sure that people coming in have skills we need and can help boost our economy. We don't need deadbeats who contribute 0 and sucks off the system. Those are the types we should kick out. Canada does not need to become the #1 charity case.

+1 to specialized skills and those able to get qualified jobs and bring investment.

Those that cannot contribute though we DO NOT want you to come over.

[zonetbh]

Yes
they could live in
Kitchener-Waterloo (German town)
Little Italy, Woodbridge
Little Portugal
Greek town
Lawrence Park, Forest Hill, High Park (British)
North York, Thornhill, Rosedale, Forest Hill, Lawrence Park (Jewish)
Roncesvalles (Polish)
Quebec (French)

-

Hahahahaha the only one you listed there that is anything like Markham or Brampton is Quebec, but at least in Quebec they are using an official language of the country.

[siriuskao]

IMHO
- More entrepreneurs and investors but with more oversight to reduce fraud.
- Less family class immigration, particularly seniors where they contribute very little to our tax system yet consume the most benefits. I think the new super visa with private/traveler's health insurance is a good idea.
- Higher family sponsorship requirements. Right now it's 22K for 1 person up to 60K for 7 people. I think it should be doubled.
- As for race (somebody brought up euro zone vs rest of the world), we probably don't get a lot of application from developed western European countries anyway. With Eastern European countries, you'll probably have similar "3rd world" issues. IMHO if you qualify, you qualify, regardless of your origin.
- As for only allow immigrants with firm job offer, it's nice in theory, but hard in practice. I mean it's hard for Canadians to find a job in a different city, never mind a different country.

[elmst200]

do you mean Taiwanese have "hardworking culture"? If so, why so many Taiwanese oppose to the openess to foreign workers? Why so many Taiwanese companies have to go to China to find "hardworking" workers to work in their sweatshops? Why Chinese people in Beijing are so lazy than their countrymen from the countrysides? etc etc


Canada should take less immigrants from the Eurozone, except Germany. Europeans don't have hardworking culture as they like to take a lot of vacations and want to get paid high salary. They will not be productive in Canada. They will end up bankrupting us like they bankrupted their own countries. There is no direct cause and effect relationship between importing people and depressing wages. There are plenty of countries that don't have that many immigrants and have stagnating/decreased wages while Canadians wages have increased for the past few decades while taking in floods of immigrants until recently.

[Aznsilvrboy]

do you mean Taiwanese have "hardworking culture"? If so, why so many Taiwanese oppose to the openess to foreign workers? Why so many Taiwanese companies have to go to China to find "hardworking" workers to work in their sweatshops? Why Chinese people in Beijing are so lazy than their countrymen from the countrysides? etc etc

I did not infer anything about Taiwan, so I don't know why you start to ramble about Taiwan randomly. Second, your question makes no sense. How does hardworking culture relate to openess to foreign workers? There are little to no Chinese people working in Taiwan. So I don't know where you're getting "so many" Taiwanese companies go to China to find anybody.

[alanbrenton]

IMHO
- More entrepreneurs and investors but with more oversight to reduce fraud.
+1
- Less family class immigration, particularly seniors where they contribute very little to our tax system yet consume the most benefits. I think the new super visa with private/traveler's health insurance is a good idea.
+1
- Higher family sponsorship requirements. Right now it's 22K for 1 person up to 60K for 7 people. I think it should be doubled.
If they are highly educated, these immigrants will be up on their own two feet sooner than later. Better to restrict any form of social subsidy for new immigrants for a few years since this may be prone to abuse. When they immigrated, they had presented "show money" anyway even for skilled worker class so why should the taxpayers subsidize them when they can apply to lower paying jobs in the mean time to cover their living expenses?
- As for race (somebody brought up euro zone vs rest of the world), we probably don't get a lot of application from developed western European countries anyway. With Eastern European countries, you'll probably have similar "3rd world" issues. IMHO if you qualify, you qualify, regardless of your origin.
+1
- As for only allow immigrants with firm job offer, it's nice in theory, but hard in practice. I mean it's hard for Canadians to find a job in a different city, never mind a different country.
One advantage for the new immigrants is they don't have a feeling of entitlement the way many people who were born here do
http://business.financialpost.com/2012/05/02/sense-of-entitlement-is-sapping-canadas-productivity/


From a thread on what is to like about immigration, I suggested the following advantages:

If immigrants are chosen wisely (deport the criminals, tax cheats and human rights abusers),


It will make Canada be able to compete better against other developed or 2nd world countries (with no educated immigrants coming to this country, there will be no incentive for many locals to brush up on their skills, well I'm talking besides these soft skills so many are proud of when actually they should be aptly called manipulation or being two-faced rather than genuine care for colleagues and peers and humanity.)

Some of the immigrant values like filial piety to forebears and respect for elders/authority (these values though present in previous North American generations, is very much on a decline) can make Canada a better place.

Products and services pricing don't go through the roof since many businesses run by immigrants try to profit on volume and quick inventory turnover to make up for the lower profit margins. $70/hr (2nd or 3rd gen Canadian) vs $40/hr (new immigrant with proper training) to finish a basement? It sounds like a no-brainer to me who many on RFD will choose if given the same skill sets and quality of work.

Canadians will get a better sense that if we remain complacent as a country, we will be leaped frog in two or three generations by BRIC and other countries where the labor force is inexpensive but getting a lot more educated through technology/web.

I get to understand how businesses operate in other countries. Many of the articles published by the media don't tell all and it takes someone from the actual country to be able to relate real experiences instead of anecdotal evidences gathered by the news reporters.

We will all have some Canadian pension after retirement since the country's population is aging and we need a younger workforce to support the generous benefit payments. I know some will espouse giving the locals a baby bonus just like they do in Singapore for the second child but then again who in the right mind would agree to getting some tax write-offs or a lumpsum of $10,000 when it takes so much more money to raise a child and provide with a good higher education, if need be?


Canada should overhaul its education system and maybe we will not need as many immigrants with technical skills and better work ethics (slightly longer hours without having to demand overtime pay, get more work done without all the prolonged water cooler talks, etc.)

All the soft skills (I'm talking about the pretentious and selfish type to get ahead and step on peers' and not genuine concern for others) in the world will not make this country a better place to live in. Think Wall Street bankers so despised by Main Street America, these will have all the fake soft skills in the world but we know they weren't genuinely concerned for the people around them.

[Troodon]

From a thread on what is to like about immigration, I suggested the following advantages:

If immigrants are chosen wisely (deport the criminals, tax cheats and human rights abusers),

[LIST=1]
It will make Canada be able to compete better against other developed or 2nd world countries (with no educated immigrants coming to this country, there will be no incentive for many locals to brush up on their skills, well I'm talking besides these soft skills so many are proud of when actually they should be aptly called manipulation or being two-faced rather than genuine care for colleagues and peers and humanity.)

Products and services pricing don't go through the roof since many businesses run by immigrants try to profit on volume and quick inventory turnover to make up for the lower profit margins. $70/hr (2nd or 3rd gen Canadian) vs $40/hr (new immigrant with proper training) to finish a basement? It sounds like a no-brainer to me who many on RFD will choose if given the same skill sets and quality of work.


1. We can't really increase our skills with relevant work experiences that may be taken by immigrants. Also, I think Canadian universities are doing a decent job training young people.

2. Possibly every job in Canada can be replaced by a more experienced person from a developing country costing half the salary. Do you want Canada to emulate the living standards of BRIC countries?

The average GDP per capita in BRIC countries is still depressingly low. That's not evidence of their higher productivity. We should be proud that college graduates aren't being paid $5 per hour building smart phones. Of course, that means that we won't be a manufacturing powerhouse but I see that as a good trade.

[gomyone]

I'm surprised that this story hasn't appeared as a post on RFD. The Globe and Mail has recently featured an article (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/time-to-lead/why-canada-needs-a-flood-of-immigrants/article2423585/) arguring for having more immigrants in Canada. I have to provide a disclaimer though, I'm a Canadian who had immigrated to Vancouver more than a decade ago.



The article begins with the argument that more immigration is going to allow Canada to reach its "full potential". I don't really know what it means to reach any country's "full potential" but I'm assuming that it's GDP growth. Increased immigration is going to obviously increase GDP because its per capita output times the population. If the population increases through immigration, then you'll likely seen more consumption and production.

But, I'm worried that it may not increase GDP per capita. Though I'm not an economist, but I do know that more labour means that labour will become cheaper. I'm not just talking about labour as in manual labour, but all forms of personal work including skilled and technical labour.

Throughout the article, there's a fear of "labour shortages" as a crisis that'll face Canada and immigration as a solution.



However, I really don't see that as a problem. As a college student, I've seen how difficult it is for some of my older peers to get jobs. I was at a job fair a year ago and a recruiter told me how, like in the article, a lot of professionals are going to retire over the next few decades. But isn't a panacea for the student loan and unemployment crisis? Also, how can we reconcile the impending labour shortage with the current unemployment and underemployment of labour across all skill levels?

A lot of corporations have problem finding skilled labour because they often don't want to train Canadians (i.e. they only want people with X years of experience). I think it's lazy for them to ask the government to provide them with immigrants already possessing such experience rather than training young Canadians themselves.

*** I think a misclick added the US flag symbol to the left of my thread... I apologize for the confusion.

...from an economic standpoint, potential GDP growth = growth in the labour force + productivity growth. The reason why Canada is seeking immigration is that without it, the natural rate of population growth would eventually start declining and along with an agingr population, this would cause labour force participation rates to also decline. ALL ELSE EQUAL, declining labour force participation would cause potential economic growth to stagnate. I say all else equal because weaker labour force growth can be partially offset by stronger productivity growth - this is exactly what Japan has done (even though economic growth in that country has still been relatively slow). Unfortunately for Canada, our productivity record has been dismal and we can't really rely on it to support our economic well-being.

[alanbrenton]

1. We can't really increase our skills with relevant work experiences that may be taken by immigrants. Also, I think Canadian universities are doing a decent job training young people.

2. Possibly every job in Canada can be replaced by a more experienced person from a developing country costing half the salary. Do you want Canada to emulate the living standards of BRIC countries?

The average GDP per capita in BRIC countries is still depressingly low. That's not evidence of their higher productivity. We should be proud that college graduates aren't being paid $5 per hour building smart phones. Of course, that means that we won't be a manufacturing powerhouse but I see that as a good trade.

There's been calls in the media to revamp education. I started a thread about free education on the web. Some of them are from prestigious institutions like Harvard or Princeton. There's got to be a better way of teaching the Canadian workforce.

When I was studying sciences at SFU (Burnaby, BC), the internet was nascent then and we had to use to log into UNIX to check our emails, etc. Back then, the school model was:

#1
1) read textbook prior to class

2) professor spends most of the class regurgitating what many of the students already know (of course, only for those who read the textbook material). So much time was wasted writing on the transparencies and redrawing things that technology now can automate. I was surprised most people didn't even bother showing up in many of the classes when they had already paid for the course (maybe they had to finance their schooling and had to work during class hours).

3) Instead of learning in class, all I got was regurgitation of what I had already learned by myself. This is not even liberal arts I'm talking about. These are chemistry, biology, chemistry, calculus and physics classes. The classes should be used more for open forum to address interesting questions and tidbits. Best not to give participation too high a percentage of the overall grade as there will be a lot of silly students raising their hands and blurting out anything just to show they are participating. Let the interested students drive the discussions. The Professor will be the facilitator of these discussions.

The TA's should be there for the slower learners so they don't hold the entire class hostage with the simpleton questions.

4) Write exams

How does this add value save for the fact we get a degree to back the time we spent in school? Has it changed over the years? I'm sure University classes are very much like this still.

I think we are overstating the importance of soft skills over technical skills. There will never be an economy where we all can just be smooth talkers. Some people will just have to walk the talk.

#2
I agree Canada should be more selective with applications. You mentioned you were an immigrant yourself so what makes it different this time, is it because you are already in Canada that you want others to not have the same opportunity? School should be teaching students practical skills that employers want in employees. I understand it can't be possible all the time. Exactly the same thoughts of home purchasers who are pro-rezoning (industrial to residential) only to become anti-rezoning once they have settled in the area and want more green space. No where did any promulgation say that there will never ever be another re-zoning in that area. That is human nature I'm afraid: to want the best for oneself but not for one's neighbors.

China used to be a non-capitalist economy so its GDP is kind of low but it is increasing significantly. If you have been to Shanghai, which I haven't, it will put many major cities to shame. India, Russia and Brazil's economies were shattered by high inflation, which is why their money is worth a lot less. When American, British, Dutch colonies were left to their own discretion and ruling, the initial value of the native currencies would have been pegged to the colonizer's currency. Because of graft and corruption, people saw their savings shrunk because of inflation and currency depreciation, thanks to government officials' mismanagement. Not all people want to be in public service to steal from the citizens, though it can be very lucrative.

They have a massive uneducated population which is why their per capita income is so low and factor in the inflation/hyperinflation for some of these countries which make their labor costs so much cheaper. With graft and corruption, many will stay poor as funds for education are siphoned onto public servants' pockets.

I don't think it's fair to not let educated immigrants in if they will be increasing our country's competitiveness. I know it puts a risk on my job security but then this isn't Japan where there is lifetime employment anyway.

It's becoming quite obvious that there is a disparage in terms of the costs for jobs requiring physical presence (construction, car repair, home theater set ups, TTC collector booth jobs) and those than can be done overseas (financial analysis, accounting, etc.). That is not fair too since we are becoming a knowledge based economy and these supposedly higher paying jobs are the ones that can be moved overseas. Either we keep upgrading the skills of the workforce or eventually, we will have to outsource many of these higher paying jobs overseas.

I too fear for my daughter's future which is why I supplement her education with other things that I think will be useful like typing, learning another language and a few other things. Though it hurts me to think I am too authoritarian, I just want her to be prepared in the future. She can always come back to me for financial assistance if the need arises. It's not like I want her to gain independence so that I don't have to spend any more money on her after her tertiary education, whatever that will be in the future.

Complacency breeds mediocrity and without immigrants, many of us will become very complacent, just as many who hold public office have become.