4 ms·

Raising kids is like manufacturing: 'richer' countries outsourced that and then 'import' grown adults. See current Canada immigration rates. https://www.cicnew

• toomuchtodo 2y ago
  Too costly for domestic production.
• morkalork 2y ago
  There's a Netflix show, 3%, that very much resonates with that idea in the first season.
• firecall 2y ago
  Australia went hard on immigration for a hot minute there when the new Labour governent got into power post Covid. And they've now realised we dont have any housing for them! Note: I'm pro Labour and pro Immigration :-) > https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/mar/21/migration-numbers-australia-2023-rise https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/mar/21/migra...
  • Rinzler89 2y ago
    It's funny how we(rich countries) just "forgot" how to build houses.
    • imtringued 2y ago
      When people say they are using their house as a retirement account what they are really saying is that they want to make the next generations wait.
      • Rinzler89 2y ago
        Not wait, just monetize. It doesn't matter to them if a local couple or some offshore millionaire or investment fund buys their home, as long as they get to maximize their profit.
    • klyrs 2y ago
      The answer was always "with immigrant labor" wasn't it?
• princeb 2y ago
  This is what Singapore does. Although the government provides substantial aid to new citizen families, the unspoken preference is for the immigration authority to shape national demographics by filtering the educational, racial and cultural intake. and by far the most prioritized group for immigration are malaysians of chinese descent with tertiary education. despite the sheer number of applicants from this group, the wait for citizenship is extremely short, some say as low as 3 months after application. the straits chinese have the lowest fertility rate among all the major racial groups in singapore, and yet mysteriously the proportion has not changed in the last 10 years.
• jseliger 2y ago
  I for one am shocked—shocked!—that spending decades raising the cost of housing (a fundamental input to children) has reduced the number of children had: https://www.amazon.com/Rent-Too-Damn-High-Matters-ebook/dp/B0078XGJXO https://www.amazon.com/Rent-Too-Damn-High-Matters-ebook/dp/B....
• whatever1 2y ago
  It works as long as you import them young, healthy and somewhat trained in something that is not crime. On a serious note, this is another prime example on why borders are stupid. Eventually you will perish within your own borders. Embrace the bordersless future!
  • JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > another prime example on why borders are stupid Might want to start with the free movement of people before you go abolishing borders of all kinds.
    • whatever1 2y ago
      What is the point of keeping borders for doing things in a specific way (nation-style), if you do not train people in this but instead you import people who were raised in different ways? What is the point for saying that within this border we are a religion-A nation when we make no new kids who will be trained to follow that religion and we import adults of religion-B? Same goes for every institutional value that a nation upholds and makes it different to the rest.
      • Rinzler89 2y ago
        Keeping borders today is for defense, legal and tax reasons, not to define what culture lives inside of it.
        • whatever1 2y ago
          Enforcement of law is impossible if the vast majority of the citizens are not aligned with its core values. What are you gonna do? Assign a policeman and a jail for each person within your border? The one thing that borders indeed do well is concentration of scarce resources. But again if you lose the majority of bodies who would die for this, then the border is worthless.
          • 2y ago
• Nasrudith 2y ago
  This raises an incredibly rude "question" that I don't expect there to be an answer for: just how much "better" are the results for paying more for people over their early lifetime? I don't think there is a good answer for it, from any perspective. Other than perhaps the honest "I don't know."
• rayiner 2y ago
  Good analogy. In both cases, it guts the richer country’s ability to be self-sustaining.
  • Rinzler89 2y ago
    Because rich countries are run like a business: everything needs to be turned into a profit making scheme, including your procreation endeavors and output. Also rich countries are full of well educated people and academics, and those reproduce the least. Meanwhile poor countries with low education reproduce the most.
    • rayiner 2y ago
      More specifically, rich countries are run like short-sighted financialized businesses like Boeing. You cut costs and corners, and end up destroying the domestic know-how and culture that allowed the country to thrive in the first place.
• me_me_me 2y ago
  this is a failing strategy given that sources of that workforce has already a sub-replacement birth rates. You are essentially draining other countries of its population to temporary plug in your hole. Also a rapid migration from clashing culture backgrounds will introduce permanent cultural frictions and clashes into host country, all for a temporary increase of workforce. The sub-replacement birth-rates is the biggest problem the majority of developed countries are facing now