40
Posthaste: Canada could face two more decades of stagnant growth, report warns
(ca.finance.yahoo.com)
What's going on Canada?
๐ Meta
๐บ๏ธ Provinces / Territories
๐๏ธ Cities / Local Communities
๐ Sports
Hockey
Football (NFL)
unknown
Football (CFL)
unknown
Baseball
unknown
Basketball
unknown
Soccer
unknown
๐ป Universities
๐ต Finance / Shopping
๐ฃ๏ธ Politics
๐ Social and Culture
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:
That feels a bit different to me because Japan refuses basically all immigration and their population is declining, while Canada is accepting record numbers of immigrants and is by far the fastest growing population in the G7.
Japan's population skyrocketted, and land prices got extremely high, it took another two decades before population started to decline.
Doesn't matter if it was births or immigration. We're seeing the population increase and land going up.
Soon we'll see immigration cut off as people get mad, and the population will take a decade or two before it starts declining.
Look at the demographics. Understand WHY Canada is hoovering up young professionals like it's Coke at MaraLago:
so.
Immigrants, excluding refugees
Okay, too much information to be hit with all at once, but those are the predicates. So it follows:
The problem isn't immigration, despite what the russian bots and conservatives will tell you: it's that we have an ageing population not working - as mentioned - who needs more care to stay alive and whom we want to stay alive; and all the indolent hillbillies high on russian-anti-vax hate and rejecting basic social responsibility made the experienced doctors fucking quit by being dickheads. But it's the imm'grints' fault? Housing is an issue because rental barons are raking it in and voting for the guys who promise no services, no taxes, because hoarding greenspace and greenbacks is the American way; and imm'grints are the issue?
Look. We can't kill Nana, and she's done with work anyway, so we can't send her back to work as the only job she'll score at her age is stocking shelves at the loblaws and I know that for a familial fact. We can't claw back a bunch of years of retirement and hope Uncle Bob will reopen his bait shop happily and pay more taxes. And we have to keep them alive because we don't have that loophole where the poors and retirees and soldiers die from being poor like in America because we don't do that (and we like them because she makes good cookies and he tells us all the dumb things Dad did as a kid).
We need:
Sadly, we're gonna have to raise retirement. But let's do it slowly, like a half-a-year each year or so, so Uncle Bob can stay retired and a few people to near the age can fulfill that wish and the rest who are almost as close can still accomplish it sooner just not right away, etc, etc, just stay in the job they have a little longer and use their experience. We're all living longer, and that's awesome. Let's still be Canadian and try to care for one another if we still can.
(If you own a dodge ram and no cowboy hats, this is probably not about you, but your downvote will be lost among the people who don't know better, so a flash of spite on the mouse-click is all good)
Hang on, your solution is to raise the retirement age at a time when wages are actively being suppressed across multiple sectors because there are too many people competing for the same jobs?
Let's revisit that when applicants for near-minimum wage unskilled labour jobs aren't lining up around the block (virtually and sometimes physically) for a single opening.