6 ms·

Canada needs houses, not people.

Hammershaft 2y ago
We need both, without a healthier population density Canada will forever be a bunch of exploitative oligopolies in a trenchcoat hopelessly dependent on a benevolent USA.
- bombcar 2y ago
  If Canada doesn’t manage its population well it _will_ end up the 51st state in practicality if not reality.
mmooss 2y ago
The number of houses isn't fixed, nor are almost any other resource. The way economics works, each average person produces significantly more than they consume. Someone living alone in a cabin is (economically) poor. Someone in a small town may have customers, but not many, and it's going to be hard to expand. What you need is more people - more people buying, more people to work for you.
- slothtrop 2y ago
  Housing supply is inelastic, in part because of zoning (but it's not the only reason). Know what doesn't change very quickly? Policy and law at the municipal level. Know what changes quickly because it's done at the very top level? Immigration rate.
  - bombcar 2y ago
    The speed is the problem. Nobody is willing to go “long” on housing when the government can go “short” on supply at any time. So you have to normalize that somehow, and since the government controls immigration levels, it should subsidize housing construction to match, somehow.
    - slothtrop 2y ago
      There are so many things wrong with that.
    - mmooss 2y ago
      > government controls immigration levels In what sense is the government controlling immigration levels? If they could, it would be much different. > Nobody is willing to go “long” on housing when the government can go “short” on supply at any time. How does the government go short on supply?
  - mmooss 2y ago
    > Know what doesn't change very quickly? Policy and law at the municipal level. Know what changes quickly because it's done at the very top level? Immigration rate. In my experience, local policy and law changes much faster than federal, especially with GOP opposing everything on the federal level. The GOP shot down the immigration deal they negotiated last summer. Locally is where I see solutions happen (and then state GOP parties, where they have power, will sometimes undermine that). > Know what changes quickly because it's done at the very top level? Immigration rate. How is immigration rate "done" at the federal level? With federal inaction, it's mostly an organic outcome of economics and politics in other countries.
    - int_19h 2y ago
      We're talking about Canada, not US. But also, for all practical purposes, the migration rate to all rich Western countries is limited only by their respective laws and regulations governing immigration. For all of them, there are more people who want to get in than the quota allows (whether explicit or implicit via point systems etc). Any country that would fully open its borders would see millions coming in from Asia and Africa. People generally want to move where the life is better when they can.
      - mmooss 2y ago
        > the migration rate to all rich Western countries is limited only by their respective laws and regulations governing immigration. If those laws and regulations were that powerful, the US and Europe wouldn't have so many illegal migration problems. > People generally want to move where the life is better when they can. I wouldn't say 'generally'. The vast majority of people want to stay where they are.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - dragonwriter 2y ago
    > Housing supply is inelastic, in part because of zoning (but it’s not the only reason). Know what doesn’t change very quickly? Policy and law at the municipal level. Assuming policy and law at higher levels are more responsive, if there is a broader problem due to common and inflexible municipal policy, this can be resolved by changing the policy at the higher level to change the scope of municipal options and/or the applicable process so as to either steer it in the desired direction or make it more responsive.
threeseed 2y ago
Canada needs people and fast. Otherwise good luck affording a social net in future decades. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_fertility_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_fer...
- ThrowawayTestr 2y ago
  Better keep importing people from one specific province in India by the boatload
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- slothtrop 2y ago
  What will boomers, the richest generation, ever do? This is overstated. The alarm was sounded on this 2 decades ago for several east Asian countries, but they're not on fire. They're fine. Old people die. If the fertility rate mattered that much, they'd have scrambled to make any number of policy changes including better work-life balance (see: Japan, SK, China), or plain ol' immigration, but they don't because it simply does not matter. All the efforts have been completely half-assed (like tax benefits, cash).
  - threeseed 2y ago
    > but they don't Japan enacted new immigration policies last year to allow more migrants as well as improved parental leave. South Korea has been in political turmoil for last year but lots of work is being done on immigration.
    - slothtrop 2y ago
      The current net migration rate for Japan in 2024 is 0.489 per 1000 population, a 5.23% decline from 2023. I foresee a marginal increase.
  - bombcar 2y ago
    If people really cared about the fertility rate they’d ask those with two kids what it would take for them to have a third. The answers could be used to modify policy, but it’s more important to give tax credits for EVs, apparently.

We need both, without a healthier population density Canada will forever be a bunch of exploitative oligopolies in a trenchcoat hopelessly dependent on a benevolent USA.

bombcar 2y ago
If Canada doesn’t manage its population well it _will_ end up the 51st state in practicality if not reality.

mmooss 2y ago

The number of houses isn't fixed, nor are almost any other resource. The way economics works, each average person produces significantly more than they consume. Someone living alone in a cabin is (economically) poor. Someone in a small town may have customers, but not many, and it's going to be hard to expand. What you need is more people - more people buying, more people to work for you.

slothtrop 2y ago
Housing supply is inelastic, in part because of zoning (but it's not the only reason). Know what doesn't change very quickly? Policy and law at the municipal level. Know what changes quickly because it's done at the very top level? Immigration rate.
- bombcar 2y ago
  The speed is the problem. Nobody is willing to go “long” on housing when the government can go “short” on supply at any time. So you have to normalize that somehow, and since the government controls immigration levels, it should subsidize housing construction to match, somehow.
  - slothtrop 2y ago
    There are so many things wrong with that.
  - mmooss 2y ago
    > government controls immigration levels In what sense is the government controlling immigration levels? If they could, it would be much different. > Nobody is willing to go “long” on housing when the government can go “short” on supply at any time. How does the government go short on supply?
- mmooss 2y ago
  > Know what doesn't change very quickly? Policy and law at the municipal level. Know what changes quickly because it's done at the very top level? Immigration rate. In my experience, local policy and law changes much faster than federal, especially with GOP opposing everything on the federal level. The GOP shot down the immigration deal they negotiated last summer. Locally is where I see solutions happen (and then state GOP parties, where they have power, will sometimes undermine that). > Know what changes quickly because it's done at the very top level? Immigration rate. How is immigration rate "done" at the federal level? With federal inaction, it's mostly an organic outcome of economics and politics in other countries.
  - int_19h 2y ago
    We're talking about Canada, not US. But also, for all practical purposes, the migration rate to all rich Western countries is limited only by their respective laws and regulations governing immigration. For all of them, there are more people who want to get in than the quota allows (whether explicit or implicit via point systems etc). Any country that would fully open its borders would see millions coming in from Asia and Africa. People generally want to move where the life is better when they can.
    - mmooss 2y ago
      > the migration rate to all rich Western countries is limited only by their respective laws and regulations governing immigration. If those laws and regulations were that powerful, the US and Europe wouldn't have so many illegal migration problems. > People generally want to move where the life is better when they can. I wouldn't say 'generally'. The vast majority of people want to stay where they are.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- dragonwriter 2y ago
  > Housing supply is inelastic, in part because of zoning (but it’s not the only reason). Know what doesn’t change very quickly? Policy and law at the municipal level. Assuming policy and law at higher levels are more responsive, if there is a broader problem due to common and inflexible municipal policy, this can be resolved by changing the policy at the higher level to change the scope of municipal options and/or the applicable process so as to either steer it in the desired direction or make it more responsive.

threeseed 2y ago

Canada needs people and fast. Otherwise good luck affording a social net in future decades. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_fertility_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_fer...

ThrowawayTestr 2y ago
Better keep importing people from one specific province in India by the boatload
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
slothtrop 2y ago
What will boomers, the richest generation, ever do? This is overstated. The alarm was sounded on this 2 decades ago for several east Asian countries, but they're not on fire. They're fine. Old people die. If the fertility rate mattered that much, they'd have scrambled to make any number of policy changes including better work-life balance (see: Japan, SK, China), or plain ol' immigration, but they don't because it simply does not matter. All the efforts have been completely half-assed (like tax benefits, cash).
- threeseed 2y ago
  > but they don't Japan enacted new immigration policies last year to allow more migrants as well as improved parental leave. South Korea has been in political turmoil for last year but lots of work is being done on immigration.
  - slothtrop 2y ago
    The current net migration rate for Japan in 2024 is 0.489 per 1000 population, a 5.23% decline from 2023. I foresee a marginal increase.
- bombcar 2y ago
  If people really cared about the fertility rate they’d ask those with two kids what it would take for them to have a third. The answers could be used to modify policy, but it’s more important to give tax credits for EVs, apparently.