Trudeau advisory council recommends Canada increases population to 100 million by 2100

[rugatika]

35 million not enough? How about 100 million people in Canada? Super brainy people working for our super brainy prime minister think 100 million people should be about right.


http://ipolitics.ca/2016/10/27/a-can...e-they-insane/

There are some ideas so daft that it takes a very smart person to think of them. Or, in the case of a new proposal to triple Canada’s population to 100 million by the end of the century, it takes an entire committee of smart people.

The authors of this particular idea are the fourteen members of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Advisory Council on Economic Growth, who issued their first report last week. To most Canadians, the idea is so preposterous as not to bear analyzing. Crumple it up and start again. But, as these are supposed to be serious thinkers — selected, according to a government press release, “because they are recognized, forward-thinking individuals in their respective fields” — it’s worth taking their proposal at face value.

Dominic Barton, the global managing partner of management consulting giant McKinsey & Co and the committee’s chief advocate of “a Canada of 100 million,” worries that without significant population growth, Canada’s international “relevance” will suffer. This is an odd thing to say, and an even odder thing to care about. How many Canadians, waking in the dark this morning, bundling their children into winter jackets and out the door to school, give two pucks for Canada’s “relevance”?


Luckily I will be dead in 84 years.

Enjoy the decline. Suckers.

[3blade]

Republic of Western Canada

Autonomous region of Western Canada

Take yer pick, and sign up to build a better fence on the eastern edge of Saskatchewan. Don't even want to think about the destruction this liberal craptastic nonsense is going cause

[JamesB]

Effects on global warming?

[woodsman205]

WHAT A MORON!

But what can you expect from a White Water Rafting Guide? That may just of cost him the next election! Fingers Crossed!

[lmtada]

All to Kaybek

[play.soccer]

Well I'll be gone by then so I won't lose sleep over this lol

[elkdump]

Originally Posted by woodsman205

WHAT A MORON!

But what can you expect from a White Water Rafting Guide? That may just of cost him the next election! Fingers Crossed!

I read all the posts on this thread, nothing can be added to this ,


WHAT A MORON

[NKP]

When various jurisdictions in the country are pushing a reduced greenhouse gas agenda, it's irresponsible to call for population growth that high. Besides people just living, there's no way that many people would sustain themselves solely through a service economy. This increase would necessitate some growth in primary industries. So much for saving mother Earth.... Also, compare to the 'Big Australia' idea. Pretty sure it failed or was abandoned.

Edit: on the other hand, look at how Mexico demographic boom since the 1970s has led to increased clout.

[Okotokian]

Personally, I'm of two minds. If we want to stop being a lapdog of other powers economically ad politically, take care of our own defense, be taken seriously by the US, etc. etc. we need to get a lot bigger. And we could. We've got the space. On the other hand I see no reason to eat up more of our wilderness, rub shoulders with more people, etc.

[Redfrog]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Personally, I'm of two minds. If we want to stop being a lapdog of other powers economically ad politically, take care of our own defense, be taken seriously by the US, etc. etc. we need to get a lot bigger. And we could. We've got the space. On the other hand I see no reason to eat up more of our wilderness, rub shoulders with more people, etc.

Really? Who da thunk it?

I'm with you Okie. Things are crowded enough now.

If half the existing population is dumber than the average dummy, do we really need a lot more of them just to get a handful of above average dummies? Raise the bar.

[schmedlap]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Personally, I'm of two minds. If we want to stop being a lapdog of other powers economically ad politically, take care of our own defense, be taken seriously by the US, etc. etc. we need to get a lot bigger. And we could. We've got the space. On the other hand I see no reason to eat up more of our wilderness, rub shoulders with more people, etc.

I prefer your second choice.

Anyway, I've been saying, and telling politicians when I get the chance, for 30 years, that the stupidest course we can possibly take is to repeat the mistake of much of the rest of the world and become much more highly populated. It is really our biggest advantage in terms of comparative quality of life in this country to have a relatively "low" population. Technological advances make it pretty obvious that we do not benefit anyone from having universally poor huddled masses of urbanites.

I won't be around to see my children have to cope with even more serious over competition for resources, locally or globally, due to the race's stupidity on this item, which is already quite evident in the most over-populated parts of the planet (?). But it is just so obvious that almost any major global environmental or political issue is fundamentally related, already to "too many people", and that there is an enormous reluctance amongst most to face up to this truth (?).

On a purely political level, this is so typical of the Liberano approach to ensuring we have their benevolent nanny state corruption in perpetuity - what's good for them is obviously best for all us ignorant peons (????). We all need to move into state-owned low income multi-unit urban housing and stop resisting - the Borg have spoken.

If the Borg are successful on this aspect of their agenda, I feel so sorry for my kids, and, I guess, so lucky to have lived before the Borg ascendancy.

[Troutslayer444]

Originally Posted by 3blade

Republic of Western Canada



Autonomous region of Western Canada



Take yer pick, and sign up to build a better fence on the eastern edge of Saskatchewan. Don't even want to think about the destruction this liberal craptastic nonsense is going cause

Where do I sign up? If there was a group, I'm in for sure. Sick of the bs going on. They can be poor (do to no oil money from us) and over populated in the east. The whole reason I love living in Canada, is because it's low key.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[densa44]

What got us to this cycle of depopulation were the immigration policies of the last 2 centuries, while the Americans had an open immigration policy so that they could move from a 3 rd world status to the colossus that it has become. While this was going on our leaders were only allowing in Church of England of the best type. This may have worked if they hadn't killed of a whole generation in France and Belgium. Did you know that the USA and Canada had about the same amount of casualties in WW1 and our population was only 8 million people.

How many American would come here after this election if we made it easier?

Would we get 5 or 10 million people? This could help a lot, they speak English, are educated and are entrepreneurs.

Don't just close your mind to new ideas, Canada has always needed immigrants but we are confusing immigration with helping refugees..

[ETOWNCANUCK]

It's all about the taxes boys and girls.

More people to tax, means more in the government coffers.

[Bitumen Bullet]

Originally Posted by densa44

What got us to this cycle of depopulation were the immigration policies of the last 2 centuries, while the Americans had an open immigration policy so that they could move from a 3 rd world status to the colossus that it has become. .

Canada and the US had similar immigration policies in the past, which is why the mix of immigrants were so similar at least until the late 20th century, so that can't be the reason they thrived while Canada and it's prospects withered. I would suggest the U.S. advanced beyond a 1st stage resource based economy by having a very different view towards the lands they conquered and acquired.

This is clearly seen in Western Canada where the new lands, taken by force as did the USA were seen as colonies of Canada, not part of Canada. This is why Canada had, and still has, many different laws and practices that apply to Western Canada and not "Central" Canada in the East.

It can also been seen in how Canada treated their colonists businesses and how Canada controlled growth in their newly acquired colonies. Some areas had thriving businesses.

For example today's Manitoba had their own colony, complete with many of European descent, including Riel whose parents were white catholic farmers. These people had many businesses and supplied much of the food for Hudson Bay and their many outposts.

Before Canada took control they had 18 or more Windmills grinding wheat into flour and more than a half dozen waterwheels and multiple steam powered mills with their advanced technology. I mentioned Riel because his family also had a mill. There was an established industry to grow but that growth ground (pun) to a halt with the arrival of Canada which I think can best be seen in how Canada controlled funding to businesses in Western Canada.

Canada's financial institutions were few, basically just the Family Compact, Chateau Clique and the Maritime Establishment and their offshoots of which we can still see today. They did not see their role as that of Nation building. Their investments were for their profit, safety and security, to ensure they remained dominate.

And the Canadian government adopted their attitudes, listened to and still does listen to them when it comes to economic policies and as a result saw their new colonies as little more than cash cows to advance their already established interests. For them it was easier to strip off the countries natural resources and export them raw.

The U.S. on the other hand developed a diversified economy that poured available capital back into that development.

By 1910 the U.S. had 25,000 different banks headquarters and ownership spread across the country. They collected capital and then used that capital to support regional growth in their own area. One bank for every 3600 Americans, banks that reinvested locally.

By 1910 Canada had only 11 banks, one for every 63,000 Canadians, all headquartered in Eastern Canada, with the rest of the country serviced by branches that had little discretion when it came to loans and no mandate to service or advance local interests. Canadian savings, which were high at the time, were funneled back to the Eastern based banks who used them to advance their own local interests.

Worst yet the lack of funding for Canadian businesses, even in Eastern Canada, created a vacuum into which Americans stepped with American funding. Funding that ensured investment advanced American and not Canadian interests.

Even today Canadian interests, our industries, answer to foreign masters and Western Canada is still treated by Canada, the real Canada, Central Canada in the east, as a colony that should be quiet and send cash.

[CMichaud]

Originally Posted by densa44

Did you know that the USA and Canada had about the same amount of casualties in WW1 and our population was only 8 million people.

NB: According to Wiki:

US KIA was 117,465
US WIA was 204,002

Canada KIA was 58,639 to 66,996
Canada WIA was 149,732

Also bear in mind that the US joined the war in 1917 whereas Canada declared war in 1914.

[Grizzly Adams]

Originally Posted by CMichaud

NB: According to Wiki:

US KIA was 117,465
US WIA was 204,002

Canada KIA was 58,639 to 66,996
Canada WIA was 149,732

Also bear in mind that the US joined the war in 1917 whereas Canada declared war in 1914.

US missed all the meatgrinder battles as well. By the time they showed up, the Hun was about finished.

Grizz