Canada’s Population at 38 Million and Adding 4 Million Immigrants from Now to 2030

Canada’s population is passing 38 million and new immigration plans will push annual immigration over 400,000 per year.

Canada’s immigration plan targeted a level of 361,000 immigrants in 2022 but the high range would allow 390,000 immigrants in 2022.

Canada will release a 2021-2023 immigration plan in October, 2020. Canada has been increasing annual immigration by 10,000-20,000 per year. 2020 saw reduced and delayed immigration because of COVID.

It is likely that there will be a 20,000 immigration level increase in 2023 with a high range of 410,000. Canada will likely continue to edge up annual immigration to 500,000 by 2030.

Canada 2030 The Defining F… by Toronto Star

SOURCES- Toronto Star, Stats Canada
Written by Brian Wang, Nextbigfuture.com

123 thoughts on “Canada’s Population at 38 Million and Adding 4 Million Immigrants from Now to 2030”

  1. Based on the fact that 50% of Indians and Chinese women marry white men I would say they will be mostly half caste, an old English term for mixed people. I guess most of them will have that slight yellow tinge like most Quebecans.

    Reply
  2. Someone has to baby sit the kids and care for the household since both mother and father immigrant works.

    It is not a debunked argument. Immigration built America and immigration will keep America strong.

    There are people working on ways to infuse the body with new cells to extend life because being cripple and senile suck. The same applies to nations.

    Reply
  3. More immigration leads to even lower birth rates. 
    More immigration = Less wages, Higher housing costs = Less births

    Plus, last time i checked, immigrants also grow old too. So it will be a never ending system of mass immigration? Also why do we allow them to bring their grandparents here? You think saying "Fertility rate is low therefore we need mass immigration" is some kind of trump card argument, it is NOT, it is an old and debunked argument.

    Reply
  4. Brampton has a higher rate of rape now than Chicago does, and its because of all the Indian/Bangladeshi migrants. It's not because of white people.

    Reply
  5. Have a large, rural, technologically sparing, Amish, rural population with a high birth rate.
    Some proportion of each generation choose to move to the "big, corrupt cities" and so keep the cities populated too.

    The cities (and near city exurbs and citified rural areas) leak out enough medical tech, spending, infrastructure projects, and national defense to keep the rural population base content(ish) and safe.

    That's how the rural/urban populations worked for thousands of years.

    Actually, as I write this out it strikes me that this is probably the way that the world will end up within this century. With the word "Amish" substituted for whatever happens to culturally fit the required niche in various parts of the world.

    Reply
  6. Your suggestions for less BS jobs should be highly desirable under any circumstance, regardless of what the population numbers are doing.

    So I think the first step is to work out why such steps haven't already been taken.

    Reply
  7. Because permanent demographics decline is called extinction. Populations only replace another when the other population is nice enough to become extinct. What happens is that both population merge both biologically and culturally. A large percentage of Native Americans have African and European blood. A large percentage of white Americans have Native American blood and African blood. In the real world, no human population actually replaces another. They merge. So they can choose disappearing forever or being transformed.

    Being a mutt ain't bad. In the real world, it is the mutt that survives while the pure bred dies.

    Immigration is the easiest and most effective way of adding strength to a nation. I look around and I see that the countries that allowed immigration are stronger and more prosperous than the countries that didn't.

    Reply
  8. Because xenophobes aren't known for their intelligence or reading abilities. In this case, visual acuity seems to be questionable too because that is a Canadian Mounty pictured in that meme. Poster is clearly flying their knee-jerk hatred on autopilot.

    Reply
  9. Who cares about the demographic decline? Why this is relevant? Just think about it logically. If you take people from one country and put them into other to make up for difference of births then YOU REPLACE ONE POPULATION WITH OTHER. You do not maintain your country, you destroy it. Culture is irrelevant. I can learn perfect Japanese and be more culturally Japanese than the Japanese, and 100% loyal at that. But neither I nor my children are of Japanese origin, and therefore my cultural belonging is irrelvant. My tribe has replaced their tribe. So the fact that this happened gradually, peacefully, and that culture was maintained is ireelevant, because as reuslt Japanese have been erased.
    You cannot have mass migration when your native population has too low fertility rates! you cannot form then enough dyads to manitain culture transmission to newcomers and to yourself. And demographic decline is overrated problem. With decrease of people in country you would be forced to innovate-socially, technologically-to do more with less. Major breakthroughs in human history were result of fighting this problem. Europe after black death-beginnings of capitalism and science for instance. Immigration is in interest of oligarchy, because it allows to sell more-of products, debt (banks) while keeping wages low. Boost your fertility rates and stop whining. Suicide is not a solution.

    Reply
  10. I do mind. As a policy on this site (Im old commenter but did not bother to make new account when comment system changed) I decided not to disclose my country of origin. I neither confirm or reject when somebody correctly guesses.

    Reply
  11. If you want succesfull immigration, you need environment for it. Culture that is attractive and therefore pushing out old one is certainly one of those, but on more concrete level you need to have population dynamics capable of assimilating newcomers.In simple terms you need to have enough people to form potential dyads with newcomers, and you need to have fertility rate that allows to create more dyads for natives so that the type of interaction within native part of population will always maintain dominance in general body of human-to-human interactions.It simply means that culture of natives will be transmitted to more natives in addition to transmition to newcomers. Its like connecting cells. Cells need to divide fast enough to create pairs with new-comer cells, so that the new cells will be buidling already existing organism.In practical terms this means that you need to make sure that amount of newcomers never exceeds 0-9% of population, and that the amount that you take in yearly will be significantly lower than the amount of births of native population. The exact numbers cannot be given because they depend on insitutions, culture, economcis etc. factors and can vary with time. But rule of thumb is have no more than 5% of newcomers in a given generation as total of population,and accept yearly at most half of imigrants in relation to native births (if you have 100k native births, then you can accept 50k newcomers in that year maximum).Too fast and tribalism happens.

    Reply
  12. To be fair, looking at how things turned out for the Native Americans does not make immigration look attractive for the current locals.

    Reply
  13. "The data we do have…"

    To be clear, if you have a better way of imputing the percent of Canadian citizens preferring the policy of continually increasing immigration rates for the last half century, let me know.

    Reply
  14. According to the data, Iran was exporting as much as 600,000 bpd, using ship-to-ship transfers with transponders turned off to avoid detection, skirting U.S. sanctions

    Yep, doing it out in the open …. not trying to hide like cockroaches. I guess that is the best they can do until Trump and his Keystone Feds (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwUUUqgfu-E) find a way to make their lives even more unpleasant.

    Reply
  15. Yes, the Amish, well known for their technological capabilities and research. Great choice if you want to be an Christian agrarian country and get invaded occasionally.

    Reply
  16. This is the same Canada that almost split up a few years ago because of the whole French versus English thing?

    A country is just lines on a map.
     
    A nation is a country where a single culture predominates, which is another way of saying a single set of core cultural values predominate (such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). In practice, you will probably never really achieve this if the members cannot all talk to each other in the same language.
     
    As a rule, nations are far more stable and powerful than countries with equivalent resources and both are far more stable than empires.
     
    Empires are just collections of countries and can easily be stronger even than nations, but this is solely due to massive resources. They are also at least an order of magnitude more unstable than countries and tend to be rather short-lived because of this.
     
    The U.S. owes a goodly part of its superpower status to the fact that it can be thought of as being all three, a country, a nation (for the time being), and an empire. If its states were considered to be countries (that all happen to share the same cultural values, no less) and ranked by GNP, there would be 240 countries on Earth, and 45 U.S. states would be pretty evenly distributed across the top 50% . . . and even the bottom most, Vermont. squeezes in to the top 150.

    Reply
  17. Agreed, sort of bothers me. How can a people build anything with such divisiveness in their hearts? And how many in the U.S. descended from immigrants? There cannot be that many Native American commenters on NBF, even then, such are by and large a most gracious people.

    Reply
  18. Depends; I mean 50-100 years ago both Canada and US had eyetalian neighborhoods, polish neighborhoods etc. Now we have Chinese neighborhoods in Vancouver for example; even if Kurt above there thinks them #1 corporate slave type of choice, the ChiCom money pushed up real estate in BC so much they have tons of opiate overdoses since the local population cant compete..

    Overall unlike USA and several EU countries; immigrants here assimilate well however; and anti-immigrant party here polls in the 2-3% range.

    That should tell you how much the population thinks of the current policies.

    Overall I think plenty of western countries could learn from Canada; US was considered the 'melting pot' but that obviously stopped working several decades ago (likely Neo-liberalism fuckup as usual)

    Reply
  19. …but this scenario involves most children being singles…

    I'm sorry, but I think that's a misreading. In this scenario women would have less than two children on average, but in the two-mommy household, that would still mean that kids end up in homes of ~3 children. And today women already have less than 2 children on average anyway so….

    I think there is a downside to this proposal, but it's more that it would make it even easier for men to flake out. There are upsides too though. Like, if excess men causes a higher crime rate, does excess women cause the opposite? Probably.

    Reply
  20. Japan is dying. Their quaint mountain villages are dying one by one. So sad to see them go. European Muslim will become less and less religious just like other Europeans. Europe will absorb them like it has always done. The majority of Europeans will be non-religious just like it is now.

    Reply
  21. Same is true of Indian Hinduism under Modi, Myanmar Buddhism under Suu Kyi/Army.

    Actually, not that different from Communism, Nazism etc.

    Reply
  22. The one thing often claimed is that if a population has too few children, their work force shrinks, creating a higher ratio of elders to workers, meaning they won't be able to provide as much support for the elderly.

    But in most advanced economies, a substantial percent of the workers are doing BS jobs, and those people could be shifted over to useful jobs, if the economics can be made to work. Less advertising, fewer middle managers, fewer engineering projects to reinvent the wheel slightly differently instead of paying patent licensing fees.

    Let people save more of their money instead of constantly inflating away its value, so they have more money to spend when they get old, allowing economics to direct workers from BS jobs to whatever goods and services the elders need. Make more durable products instead of designing for fast obsolescence, so less manufacturing is needed to cover everyone's needs. So many things that could be done.

    Reply
  23. So how do you think that turn out? I remember that after the War the GI Bill made it affordable for many to go to college. It was followed by the greatest expansion of any economy in the history of the world.

    Reply
  24. From a reproduction standpoint, there probably are excess men around, but this scenario involves most children being singles, which seems to have undesirable results in terms of social development.

    The current sex ratio would be fine if pay rates were a bit higher, allowing more women who wanted to, to be stay home moms.

    Ironically, it's exactly the immigrants being brought in to make up the birth shortfall who are driving down those wages.

    Reply
  25. The difference is that right now, not every man can do that because the gender ratio is off. Too many men per woman. With a greater number of women, more men could form sequential families. Or the same men could form more sequential families, I guess.

    Reply
  26. You could accomplish the same thing with immigration, but faster.

    Just get a points based immigration system, and because women are underrepresented on all sorts of things, they automatically get more points. Then end family reunification and voila!

    Traditional sources of tension with immigrants, like crime/terrorism, or ethnic enclaves and assimilation issues, would obviously also be avoided.

    Reply
  27. That's an amusing notion, which would probably run into problems in a democracy, where the women might disagree with it, AND be a 2/3 majority of the voting population.

    Reply
  28. That strikes me as the key point: If you're importing small numbers from all over, and the numbers are such that the imports will always find themselves locally outnumbered by a large margin, they'll assimilate.

    If you import sufficient numbers of one group that they can form enclaves, where they are locally the majority, they won't.

    Reply
  29. Reading some of these posts, it appears an increasing number of NBF readers would be comfortable on 4chan or whatever alt right or racist website is in vogue these days.

    Reply
  30. Well, in that case one can only congratulate Canadians. But just because you could assimilate, say, italians, in the past it does not mean that you will be able to assimilate somalians today. This is particularly true if you import a sufficient number of somalians so that they can form their own permanent sub-group.

    Reply
  31. Google this:
    ”IAEA: Iran continues to expand stockpile of enriched uranium”
    and this:
    " Iran Significantly Boosts Oil Exports Despite Sanctions"

    Iranian economy is back on track and oil exports are growing.
    "Maximum pressure" by the US has yielded "Maximum defeat"

    Go Iran!

    Lhuke

    Reply
  32. OFFTOPIC!
    Google this:
    ”IAEA: Iran continues to expand stockpile of enriched uranium”
    and this:
    " Iran Significantly Boosts Oil Exports Despite Sanctions"

    Iranian economy is back on track and oil exports are growing.
    "Maximum pressure" by the US has yielded "Maximum defeat"

    Go Iran!

    Da luke

    Reply
  33. OFFTOPIC!
    Google this:
    ”IAEA: Iran continues to expand stockpile of enriched uranium”
    and this:
    " Iran Significantly Boosts Oil Exports Despite Sanctions"

    Iranian economy is back on track and oil exports are growing.
    "Maximum pressure" by the US has yielded "Maximum defeat"

    Go Iran!

    Da luke

    Reply
  34. It's possible that the chinese, indian, jamaican, russian and french immigrants in Canada are just fine, on the whole.

    ..Or…

    Perhaps your friend cicle is not really representative of how immigrants are in general?

    …or…

    The early immigrants are OK because they were selected on a merrit system, but later waves of immigrants are not and thus an unmitigated disaster?

    (By the way, nobody is claiming that average-Joe immigrant from China, India and France are not OK. They are. Average Joe's from all of Africa and all muslim countries are problematic in western societies).

    Reply
  35. I provided data from official reports and keywords you can search to confirm what I said. Economic disparities are present in every country (according to US Census figures for example, more than 20 million people, or 6% of the population, live in trailer parks) , but as I stated the level of integration in Sweden is much higher than other countries. I am sure that Tucker Carlson and Hannity will say something different, but the data indicate otherwise.

    Reply
  36. I provided data from official reports and keywords you can search to confirm what I said. Economic disparities are present in every country (according to US Census figures for example, more than 20 million people, or 6% of the population, live in trailer parks) , but as I stated the level of integration in Sweden is much higher than other countries. I am sure that Tucker Carlson and Hannity will say something different, but the data indicate otherwise.

    Reply
  37. Hahaha! So every male would have a mini harem? I like the way you are thinking..

    But seriously though, what makes you think that the fertility rate would be constant under this new social contract? And in a way, this is allready happening. Some men make families several times, others not at all. It's your plan but implemented sequentually instead of in parallell.

    Reply
  38. Well, it depends on what levels that actually were (what is "high levels"?), what the cultural composition was and what education those immigrants had compared to todays immigrants.

    As for the Irish, the "cultural distance" from lutherans brits to irish was not that great compared to the distance from todays somalians to canadians. So it really depends on the composition of the immigrants if it will be a success story or not…

    Reply
  39. Greater Chicago area is still a bit more populous than Greater Toronto, but Toronto is definitely overtaking Chicago in the near future as it is the fastest growing city in North America.

    Reply
  40. People tend to choose to increase the consumption rather than have a spouse stay at home. And there is something to be said for self-actualization. In Japan women don't marry because they are expected to leave the labour market.

    Reply
  41. Canada has always had high levels of immigration. I think it would be much more problematic if it stopped! At one point the Irish were considered 'ethnic'.

    Reply
  42. Maybe the difference is that a Syrian can never really be a 'Swede' or feel comfortable in Swedish identity, whereas the idea of what is a Canadian is much less defined and inclusive.

    I can't pretend to know why European countries seem to struggle with integrating immigrants more than new world countries. My best guess is that they have much longer-standing, ethnically defined identities. There will always be 'ethnic' Swedes vs people who are just 'cultural Swedes'. No such thing as an 'ethnic Canadian', really.

    Reply
  43. Just about all Canadians are people from other countries, or close descendants thereof. Toronto is over half foreign-born and doing just fine.

    Reply
  44. Despite the 'multiculturalism' ideology, there is definitely a homogenizing and Canadianization that happens with immigrants. 2nd or 3rd generation are pretty well Canadians from a base attitudes/values perspective, but might keep a veneer of traditions and customs from the old country. There is a lot of mixing in most communities. You get the odd Italian grandma who lived in Canada for 60 years but still barely speaks English, but that is the exception. The kids born here integrate pretty readily.

    Reply
  45. There are different classes of immigration. Canada does have a points-based merit based stream, but we also have a family reunification stream (parents/inlaws, etc.) and investor class, as well as refugees.

    So not all of them are going to look like software engineers.

    Reply
  46. The extended Toronto area (GGH) alone is projected to grow by 3.8M in the 15 years between 2016 and 2031.

    Canada shows no signs of slowing down when it comes to welcoming immigration. Toronto was the fastest growing city in US/Canada last year, beating Dallas by a healthy margin.

    Reply
  47. I've got a plan…

    Develop reliable gender selection technology. Mandate use of a randomizer for universal gender selection that skews to 2 female for every 1 male. As the population shifts, women pair off (to insure compatibility), then jointly choose a single male mate to complete a married unit.

    As a result, the national fertility rate can be just over 1.5 to maintain the population, versus >2.0 under the current, out-moded "pairing" scheme. Only 1 of 3 parents in a family unit would need to stay home taking care of young kids, instead of 1 of 2 – doubling family income during that critical developmental period for the children, while family unit size (for a stable population size) increases only 50%.

    Reply
  48. The main factor that has caused a birth dearth in essentially every developed nation, IMO, are old age pensions. Children were the original old age pension: Unless you were the rare wealthy person, your comfort in old age was a function of how many productive children you had.

    Old age pensions create the illusion that your comfort in old age isn't dependent on having children; It is, but the children are turned into a commons, your specific comfort isn't a function of how many children YOU have. The tragedy of the commons sets in, and people rationally under produce children to live well during their childbearing years, in the expectation of being supported by children other people bore the expense and trouble of.

    The straightforward solution is to recognize that public pensions aren't actually paying out the money people paid in, but instead are financed by the next generation. Make your old age pension a direct function of the number and productivity of your own children. A need based poverty level pension for those without children, and for those who did have children, a non-need based pension that is based on the aggregate income of your children.

    You'd be surprised how many people would rationally chose to have children, and devote themselves to raising them to be productive citizens, under such a system. Incentives matter.

    Reply
  49. Well you are right about that the immigration may be the death knell – in the long term – to Canada. And you are wrong about Sweden being on the verge of civil war. Not happening.

    Reply
  50. Dude, right now, the average immigrant earns at least 40% less than the corresponding "born i Sweden citizen". And mind you, those "born in Sweden" is a technical term that contains a lot of immigrants (that earn less than Swedes).

    It's a freaking disaster.

    Reply
  51. Hungary has many of the measures that you propose and a few additional ones. My favorite is that a woman that has given birth to at least three children is exempt from income tax for the rest of her life. I wish that could be implemented in Sweden where I live…

    Reply
  52. Well, it seems to work for Hungary. They have increased their fertility levels by about 5.8% in only four years [1]. This is nothing to sneeze at.

    This is probably cheaper per individual than importing immigrants from the third world. The latter kind of import is – as far as I know – always a fiscal loss for a western country. Plus, Hungary has a sporting chance of still being Hungary in a hundred years….

    (1)
    https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/HUN/hungary/fertility-rate

    Reply
  53. If you wait a while, a fertile sub-group fills the gap. In the USA, the amish would eventually be a really great source of people with their excelent fertility rates.

    Reply
  54. Immigration is usually not "necessary" from an economic point of view; it 's just a fiscal net loss. Canada may or may not be an exeption to this rule as their immigration may or may not be merit based.

    Reply
  55. Why? So if a piece of land that could support people is .. empty.. what happens? The trees die, the grass wilts..? Or is 38 million inhabitants not sufficient to create a sustainable society..? Please explain.

    Reply
  56. I'm glad that the information I have is false and the Syrian immigrants in Sweden are all integrated without issue, contrary to the news I have been getting from there and from Germany. It seems like we have nothing to worry about, then. Since there are no Middle Eastern ghettos and the refugees are mixed throughout the population, there is indeed nothing to worry about. Thank God!

    Reply
  57. If immigrants want this cesspool of socialism and corruption they can have it as far as I’m concerned. Their descendants will be leaving here for some place richer in a few decades.

    Reply
  58. The data we do have on immigration policy preference over time is from Gallup's polling of US citizens. That data shows that opposition to the policy of increasing immigration has been beyond any definition of "supermajority". This has been consistent for the last half century and for most of those decades opposition exceeded 90%.

    During that time immigration has steadily increased.

    What do people think is going to happen?

    Reply
  59. I'm fine with the Chinese in Vancouver, for example.

    Let me restate my point. Why should a nation's immigration policy be any different than a comporation's talent acquisition policy? After all, any human organization is only as good as the human capital that comprises it. Anyone care to challenge this assertion?

    Reply
  60. We have seen low fertility rates in nations. It eventually corrects when the place bottoms out. That is different when they are replaced by someone else.

    Reply
  61. You know if the locals would study hard, work hard and have kids I don't suppose that immigration would be economically necessary (apart from bringing lots of good food).

    I can probably boil it all down to immigrants are far more likely to wake up early and work at their business and the locals are far more likely to wake up late and smash the business in the name of "resisting fascism".

    Reply
  62. "I think that a lot of Canadian immigrants see Canada as a step to the US."

    A fair number of Canadian citizens see Canada as a step to the US.

    Reply
  63. China is mulling taxing people for not having children. I suppose that merits discussion.

    As for Gov. making affordable child care, I am quite sure it will turn out like Gov. subsidized affordable college.

    Reply
  64. As I have been called a liar please see:
    1) Regarding free Swedish classes for immigrants (they are paid by municipalities) please search: "Svenska för invandrare"
    2) Regarding teaching of the mother tongue of kids that do not speak Swedish as first language please search "modersmålundervisning" and "hemspråk" initiatives.
    3) Regarding the biker gangs search "Great Nordic Biker War" for the historic perspective (the fights in the 80s and 2000s). Searching for "mc-gängen" and "svt.se" will give an article (in Swedish but can be google translated) that clearly states that:
    — criminal motorcycle gangs constitute the largest criminal groups in Sweden.
    — The Mc gangs mainly are an internal threat and the members are Swedish-born with Swedish parents.
    —Bikers gang activity is generally underreported.
    The "violent extremism and organized crime report" "Ny rapport om organiserad brottslighet och våldsbejakande extremism" (2018 version, I think they just published the 2019 one) stated that: "Biker gangs were the biggest criminal groupings, with 5,693 registered individuals, while 5,094 people were associated with criminal networks in socially deprived areas. Some 835 people were considered to have direct links with football firms (hooligans) and 785 people with Islamist groups"

    Regards

    Reply
  65. They could try and create the condition where one income could be enough to provide for a family so that women could have the option of giving birth.

    Just a few ideas: More affordable child care, longer maternity leave, higher tax deductions for children, Tax deduction and credit for nannies.

    Reply
  66. If you depend on whites alone every Western country would be like Japan in that they would be undergoing a strong demographic decline. Immigrants are the means to have some population growth. And most second generation immigrants are Western in language and lifestyle. Yes, there will be a few exceptions.

    Reply
  67. Toronto passed Chicago in size 10 years ago and the difference just keeps increasing. I live closer to Toronto than either Chicago or NYC. Now all that happens is we both have to get Covid under control so I can go up there to check out their building boom.

    Reply
  68. Yeah…no.

    1. The biggest factor in predicting creation of dyads are values. See comments below.
    2. The biggest factor in predicting long-term stability of a group is its cohesion
    3. Cohesion is multi-level. Values, culture, beliefs, identity-all are relevant. However dyads can change, culture evolves, circumstances change as well. Therefore if you dont have over-arching similarity then society collapses, because there is no direction towards assimilation into one, homogenic group
    4. "Multi-cultural" societies are short-lived. They either produce homogenity of some kind, or they fragment and go their own ways
    5. Look at history. Its littered with great societies that were "tolerant" "open" and "multi-X". Turn couple of pages int extobok and lookie, they are at each other throats.
    6. The absurd plans of Canadian government are not taking into account capability of a given core identity group to assimilate new people, creating new dyads
    7. Situation where one identity group is being replaced en-masse by others creates situation where identity feels besieged – assimilation stops. It does not matter that some people mix with others-they eliminate themselves from the textoboks of history. The people who remain are those who resist. And they provide a bloodbath on next page or vanish. And new country is born.
    8. My country for centuries was multi-ethnic, multi-culti with all major faiths on its territory. One of the first to be tolerant. It didnt end up well. It never does. Mix, separate or perish.
    Reply
  69. Clearly you dont live in Toronto… 😀 my Caucasian brother is married to a Chinese wife, Indian friend married to a Jamaican, Russian to a French, Polish to a Cuban, Philipino to a white Canadian, Turk to a Ukrainian-English mut.

    Those are just close friends and relatives; whatever you're smoking just stop.

    Reply
  70. I live in Sweden and this is total bull…t I have lived in Italy, Switzerland, US (NYC) and Sweden and I have not seen anywhere else a comparable level of integration of the immigrants: here in Sweden immigrants do not cover only the most humble jobs. They are not only collecting garbage and cleaning toilets, they teach in daycare and schools, they work in municipality administration, in hospitals and so on. Immigrants learn the language because the society values their integration and promotes free language courses, furthermore the school promotes the teaching of your primary language as well (my daughter could choose between English or Italian, some of her friends learn Arabic, German or Chinese) so nobody feels left behind or devalued.
    It is worth to underline that the major source of violence in Sweden are not immigrants but the biker gangs that control guns/drugs/prostitution trafficking. These gangs are usually linked to far-right/neonazi violent groups and are particularly big threat as they have access to high yield explosives from Russia. In their war against each-other in 2019 they placed a bomb in the city where I live that damaged 200 apartments. Since it was not muslim terrorism and by pure chance there were no deaths it did not hit the global news.
    If you want some information (in English) about Sweden check thelocal(dot)se
    I see a lot of lies about Sweden mainly from certain propaganda associated to US rightwing media.

    Reply
  71. The problem is that Islam is not merely a religion, but political ideology first and foremost, that breeds automatically political subversion and terrorism. And it has been designed specifically to combat judaism and christianity, and then to manage conquered peoples of this faiths. This is history of Islam and that is what its most trusted sources say. You are applying experiences of Western Civilization with itself and its denominations and variants and try to apply it to different civilizations. This does not work. Too radical differences. Look at Indian subcontinent-this is civilization. It is very diverse within its borders. And people there can integrate and assimilate to each others cultures. Look at China. China went trought the same process. Look at Arab world. The same story. There you have capacity for ignoring subvariants of belief system, they are similar. Look at Europe-Europe is the same story. But to apply those experiences across-civilizations? NOPE. You can, to be frank, have some of this type of migration between civilzations but not at the same scale and not with the same type of venting criteria. The biggest forecasting factor when it comes to forming dyades are values. Not race, ethnicity, religions etc but values. However, cultural factors-like religion-have tendency to breed value systems. If your values are different, then there is not enough room for creating dyad, and therefore society cannot function-because dyads are friendships and marriages.

    Reply
  72. Why not? If you cannot or dont want to control for merit you can for stability. In environment where ethhnical identities are less relevant than racial ones baisng your immigration system on racial criteria is a smart thing to do. Maybe you will not get best people, but you have chances in the long run to have stable nation. Your comment is absurd-it is as if people had responsibility to make sure that they will be sorrunded by people as much distant from them in all possible aspects as possible. Would you advice this to somebody from Gambia, Nepal, Urugay? Why is it so difficult to understand, that countries are build by certian demographics and hence-its their country? Do you know what happens when you have mixed people of no common origin living next to each other? the same thing as always. Humanity did not evolved to live like that. You need to have some homogenity basis, something that connects people. And ethnicty and race are two most stable factors. Cultural factors are more potent, but they also are more maliable and change fast, so society based on cultural homogenity is not that stable in the long run. If you combine both types of homogenity you get very robust society, provided your institutions are free, open. But for some bizarre reason many people think that doing everything backwards will give them positive results. NOPE. Just look at the United States and riots.

    Reply
  73. Oh, great. another country that will be taken over by somebody else. Splendid! I dunno what is wrong with guys in he West and immigration, its like a drug to you? because it has the same consequences-yo dead.
    Unless you can vent for people who want to become a CANADIAN, that is to become part of your nation, identity group, they want to SACRIFICE themselves to the greater whole, they want to share the same FATE – then you are just replacing yourself with somebody else and we have a name for this process: colonization. Ethnocentricsm is the thing, you know? why is it so diffcult to understand?

    Reply
  74. I have lots of friends living in Sweden. The country has got some disagreements with regards to immigration, but seriously, they are not even close to civil war.

    Reply
  75. You arrive as a tourist and overstay your visitors visa (if you need one at all) and vanish. You get yourself employed with the papers of a legal compatriot, become the 32nd spouse of a legal resident etc. etc.
    I think that a lot of Canadian immigrants see Canada as a step to the US.

    Reply
  76. I have heard that Canada has a "merit-based" immigration system. Yet, when I have visited there on business, I see many immigrants who do not appear to be the kind of people who got there on the basis of merit. A paradox to many I'm sure.

    Reply
  77. I have heard that Canada has a "merit-based" immigration system. Yet, when I have visited there on business, I see many immigrants who do not appear to be the kind of people who got there on the basis of merit. A paradox to many I'm sure.

    Reply
  78. I have friends who emigrated to Canada. The main thing about the Latin Americans who want to emigrate to the US or Canada is that they would like absolutely nothing else than integrate into the culture and become indistinguishable from Colonial-stock Canadians. One in particular has been there for 20 or so years and already speaks Portuguese with a bad accent. Sweden is having problems because a significant proportion of the immigrants it has been taking in aren't interested in becoming culturally Swedes; this is what the Swedish far right has been correctly complaining about.

    Note that I do not mean that the Syrian refugees must convert to Lutheranism or even to Secularism; but they must want to learn the language and become Muslim Swedes who are grateful for the institutions which have accepted them and allow their children to mix with the children of natives, to learn to speak Swedish and possibly forget the tongue of their ancestors, if that is the way the cookie crumbles.

    Reply
  79. Canada gets 50k-100k in illegal immigration per year which doesnt seem like much but its a pretty high number considering the population is only 38 million

    Reply
  80. If you replace canadians with people from other countries its not canada its an expat zone for the rest of the world. A country is made up of its people not the ground they live on.

    Sweden is on the verge of civil war with only 1 million migrants since 2015.

    Goodbye Canada.

    Reply
  81. Illegal immigration is not a huge problem in Canada, it's not the easiest nation to immigrate to illegally due to natural barriers and having to cross the US border then the Canadian one. What is the illegal immigrant population of Canada? maybe 50-100k. Hardly a big problem.

    Reply
  82. Canada needs more people. Lost of water and it's only getting warmer. 38 million in the second largest (by land mass) nation on earth is not much.

    Reply
  83. Well done Canada, an immigration target compliments growth. The U.S. has been right around 1 million immigrants per year for a while now. Should we pump ours up?

    Reply

Leave a Comment