3 ms·
The impression I've always had of Canada is there simply isn't enough country to sustain their level of socialism. Conservatism can be important esp. when tryin
by smaudet 3y ago
The impression I've always had of Canada is there simply isn't enough country to sustain their level of socialism. Conservatism can be important esp. when trying to conserve resources.
Specifically, despite having higher population per square mile than the US (1 person per 10 miles compared to 1 person per 80 miles), they have about the 6th of the population, and fewer major city centers (about 10 > 500k in Canada versus about 30 > 500k in the US).
Fewer large city centers translates to fewer tech companies, more competition for housing hence home and rent increases, less reliable health care, and of the fewer tech companies that do exist they have a smaller market, hence lower pay.
Climate/terrain is also a huge issue, large portions of their provinces are either frozen tundra or "back-woods-y", which is great if you want to live on a farm or go long-distance skiing or sledding, but pretty poor for building population centers. I wouldn't want to be living there right now with the recent outbreaks of fires and smoke/smog, either (not all their fault, but).
This is not a set of problem unique to Canada, either - depending on where you live in the US the health care system can be equally or worse broken, thanks to localized over-population or under-population - e.g. Maine/Alaska have a lot of problems with being both poor and barren states with mostly tourism for industry, and simultaneously absurdly expensive to live in due to their tourism, states like NYC and SoCal suffer extreme over-population that necessitates small fortunes to even maintain a meager lifestyle and drive out lower-class workers, and on the flip side overly conservative states like Texas suffer from rampant corruption and as a result healthcare and utilities are generally some mix of unsafe, unaffordable, in-accessible, outside of the large city centers (and now in some cases illegal thanks to recent political events in the US).
- joshlemer 3y ago> Specifically, despite having higher population per square mile than the US (1 person per 10 miles compared to 1 person per 80 miles), they have about the 6th of the population, and fewer major city centers (about 10 > 500k in Canada versus about 30 > 500k in the US). I think you have this way backwards. Canada has a larger land mass than the US, but about 10% of the population.
- smaudet 3y agoThe numbers are as follows. 3,855,103 sq m 36,991,981 people in Canada is 36,991,981 / 3,855,103 ~= 10 people per square mile. 3,794,100.43 sq m ~300 000 000 people in US is 300 000 000 / 3,794,100.43 ~= 80 people per square mile. So yes, US is more populated (which is what I incidentally thought initially, I figured it was map skew not a units flip so I didn't question it), but my point remains - Canada has fewer population centers than the US.
- midoridensha 3y agoIt has more land mass, but the vast majority of it is uninhabitable. The US has a lot of habitable area; only large parts of the western states are uninhabitable because it's a desert, and some parts of the far northern states (ND, MN, etc. plus most of Alaska) because it's too cold.