Canada’s Population Tracking to 40 Million This Year and 50 Million in 2040

Canada is tracking to pass 40 million people late in 2023 and is following the Statscan high population growth scenario to pass 50 million people by 2040. Canada should have 44 million people by 2030.

The US has about 334 million people now. Canada has 11.7% of the US population today.

US population projections:
2023   335 million
2030   351 million
2040   375 million
2050   389 million
2058   400 million
2100   434 million
Canada population projections:
2023   40 million
2030   44 million
2040   50 million
2050   58 million
2058   64 million
2068   74 million
2100  107 million
Canada percentage of US population:
2023   12%
2030   12.5%
2040   13.3%
2050   14.9%
2058   16%
2100   25%

If this happens then Canada in the 2040s and 2050s would be passing the population of Italy (52-55 million declining from 58 million today) and France’s population in the late 2050s.

Canada is adding a lot of immigrants and temporary residents. They are planning to add over 500,000 immigrants a year. There are business and political leaders in Canada pushing for plans and policies to reach a population of 100 million by 2100.

Ontario has over 15 million people and should have over 20 million people by 2040. Quebec should reach 10 million people by 2040 and BC and Alberta will each be around 7 million.

There are only four states with more population than Ontario. (California, Florida, Texas and New York). This would still be the case in 2040 but Ontario would get close to passing the population of New York. In 2040, Quebec would have more population than the tenth most populous state.

18 thoughts on “Canada’s Population Tracking to 40 Million This Year and 50 Million in 2040”

  1. There is a problem with “enormous” immigration. We think of immigration as creating a great melting pot and perhaps even providing some hybrid vigor. But many immigrants these days are problematical in that their religion prevents them from accepting a separation of church and state, or else they are unable or unwilling to learn and use the common language of the place they are migrating to.

    My ancestors came from a smallish Northern European country. I’ve visited there, and I like it there. The locals seem pretty happy with it, too. If I went back and found it predominantly occupied by people of another culture, I would be less than happy. I expect the current locals would be less than happy, too. They would surely prefer to see it a bit less densely populated rather than become a minority in their ancestral homeland.

    Then too, there is the question of tolerance. Almost any other culture replacing their own would be one less tolerant than they currently are. To be tolerant of a less tolerant culture supplanting their own would require them to be tolerant of intolerance, a logical absurdity in theory, and cultural suicide in practice. If you value and embrace tolerance, then you cannot be tolerant of intolerance

    I don’t believe in practicing discrimination on the basis of skin color, race, ethnicity, gender, and so on. I do believe that everyone on this planet discriminates on the basis of culture and they are not wrong to do so. Are you going to tell me that a culture that embraces female circumcision is better than your own? How about cannibalism? How about not permitting female suffrage? If you are from a culture that is fine with these things then you can’t. A culture that embraces toleration is a very good thing, paradoxically, what it cannot tolerate is intolerance.

    A country is just lines on a map (and an empire, a far more fragile beast, is just a collection of countries). A nation is a country that shares the same culture. Culture is not defined by preserved native dances or handicrafts, or even by geographic origin. Culture is defined by shared cultural values. The US cultural values of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are open-ended enough to give it tremendous strength and resilience as a nation (despite often being incompletely embraced). But an immigrant that can’t get behind these values is not an immigrant that strengthens the nation. Instead, that is an immigrant that will help bring the nation closer to being a country, and that’s a step in the wrong direction; countries are inherently less stable than nations.

  2. Could you kindly provide the reference for the 2040 U.S. state population projections?

    I don’t know if you’re aware of it or not but this indicates that in seventeen short years, a quarter of the states will hold 63% of America’s population – but only control a quarter of the Senate seats, putting the relatively depopulated states right at the three-quarters’ margin for approving constitutional amendments. Should the urban/rural sorting in American political parties continue – and that’s iffy – it may not matter how much partisan gerrymandering occurs because the House will pass a point of no return in the mathematics. That would put the House and the Presidency solidly in the hands of one urban party while leaving the new segregationists in charge of the Senate and, by default of constitutional quirks, a veto over court appointments and all laws, taxation and expenditures through the unconstitutional imposition of the filibuster. This would be explosive given that these populous states will be the wealthiest and most economically dynamic, making them the major contributors to the federal budget and the greatest consumers of federal investment. I really don’t see the richest, most populated states sitting still for smaller states telling them, “Shut up. Pay your taxes and no, you can’t have judges or representation in the Senate.” This could be a powder keg.

    • Thanks for this very enlightening USA democracy forecast. I wonder if RCV (Ranked Choice Voting) and other reforms can prevent this dangerous situation?

      #1 Get dark money out of political campaigns and replace it with FCC enforced equal free air time, and openly traceable small donations only.

      Ranked-choice POTUS voting would fix the primary rigging which results in unpopular duopoly candidates. So many other reforms are also very necessary to restore the USA to be an exemplary democracy instead of ranked 28th on the world democracy index. Other forums include online voting just as secure as online banking, lower the voting age, younger candidates, more political parties, voter information apps which help voters focus on policies and candidates which agree with voter policy preferences, national voting holiday, very high voter participation with financially incentivised voting as the next best thing to mandatory voting, …

      (source billkingblog dot com what our founding fathers said about political parties)
      “[Political parties] serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels, and modified by mutual interests. . . .Let me now . . . warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party ..

      . . . . It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeebles the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption . . . A fire not to quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into flame . . .”

      “ There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.”
      John Adams in letter to Johnathan Jackson, 1780.

      “I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a political party, I would decline to go.”
      Thomas Jefferson letter to Francis Hopkinson, 1789

      “Party knows no impulse but spirit, no prize but victory. It is blind to truth, and hardened against conviction. It seeks to justify error by perseverance, and denies to its own mind the operation of its own judgment. A man under the tyranny of party spirit is the greatest slave upon the earth, for none but himself can deprive him of the freedom of thought.”
      Thomas Paine, The Opposers of the Bank, 1787.

      As brilliant as our founding fathers were, we still need to improve some things in our democracy.

      This is why we need universal RCV (Ranked Choice Voting) elections to restore our democracy from “Flawed democracy” ranked 26th, behind almost all of european countries:
      (source wikipedia org Democracy Index)
      1 Norway
       2 New Zealand
       3 Finland
       4 Sweden
       5 Iceland
       6 Denmark
       7 Ireland
       8 Taiwan
       9 Switzerland
       9 Australia
       11 Netherlands
       12 Canada
       13 Uruguay
       14 Luxembourg
       15 Germany
       16 South Korea
       17 Japan
       18 United Kingdom
       19 Mauritius
       20 Austria
       20 Costa Rica
       22 France
       23 Israel
       24 Spain
       25 Chile
       26 United States

      H.R. 3863, and support

      At large congressional districts with Rank Choice Voting would solve all the gerrymandering mess and make 99% of constituents happy.

      Other changes are needed:

      Simultaneous Nationwide Ranked Choice Voting for POTUS(or PM), senators, and representatives. 

      Free and fair access to media and advertising.

      Get rid of corrupt primaries and the voting industrial complex!!! 

      Also here are some great ideas:
      These should be mandatory:
      1. Vote Online or at least absentee mail in
      2. Compulsory Voting For First-Time Voters
      3. [_] None of the Above – can trigger new election if winner
      4. Access to Information – VAA’s (Voter Advice Application)
      5. Young Candidates

      • Ranked-choice voting is a gimmick designed to yield the blandest, least objectionable candidate possible. Progress makes enemies of incumbents and the status quo. Almost all the major, durable reforms in American political history came from often narrow or rare victories of radical, determined coalitions during moments of weakness in the opposition – the land grant colleges and railroads post Civil War, Social Security and the SEC in the New Deal and so forth. The American system is already set up to be incredibly conservative and resistant to change, with multiple veto points for determined minorities to block change, disproportionately empowering the wealthy and large chunks of empty geography. Ranked-choice voting would just add another veto to evolution – plus, it encourages collusion among candidates, which is a felony (not that it’s easy to prove). Present day problems stem from redefining bribery as “protected free speech” and calling corporations people, not to mention allowing corporations to overcharge their customers and spend that money on campaign donations and lobbying expenses. Privatizing the government for personal gain of donors and officeholders is the problem; neither party will truly respond to the will of their voters until the corruption is dealt with. It doesn’t matter if corporations leave disinformed, propagandized voters with twenty candidates or two.

        I won’t even get into the Condorcet Paradox or Arrow’s Theorem. Needless to say, there is no “best” voting system that reflects a population’s preferences. Take it from someone who passed the Formal Theory comprehensive exams. You’re suggesting a new skirt for Lady Liberty when she’s bleeding to death from a hit ‘n’ run.

  3. So by 2100 the population of the US + Canada would probably exceed the population of China, given current demographics and trends?

  4. It’s the cheap, modern, rich, infrastructure-laden/ready space.
    It’s like the California gold rush with the freeways, roads, jobs, and infrastructure already there for you in the bottom 300 miles from the US border and up both coasts.
    You can have a 50 acre property with a 3,000 sq.ft house and not be very far from amenities, good roads, and some kind of western-style civilization anywhere (in the noted 300mi band) for a fraction of the price of a 500 sq.ft condo in a mid-size US town.
    It’s 1,500,000 sq.miles of land (less than 20% of total) that is mostly arable and temperate, with 4-season splendor that rarely goes below 10F and often goes above 70F – a true ‘glad to be alive’ living experience with every political, lifestyle, and landscaping flavor from anarchist to BH-Liberal to gun-slinging RN to downtown snowflake in every kind of ultra-urban to suburban to ex-urban to mountainous to deep woods to small town you can imagine. It’s choice and challenge.
    And though I don’t support bulk pro-immigration policies as I believe that the majority of the world’s population does not adequately subscribe to the needed high-work ethic, individualistic, pro-career, and ambitious attitude needed to make Canada great – I do hope that more land opens up to embrace those with an entrepreneurial live-life-to-the-fullest mind-set.

  5. Why do people move to that frozen wasteland?

    The standard for high quality of life is removing 10 cubic meters of snow from your driveway every single day, it seems

    • Which is actually why every winter, I take the targa off my vintage Italian sports car, go for a drive along OCH on a nice 75 degree day and send the video to all family and friends who live near the arctic circle*

      *anywhere that gets snow and requires hours if shoveling.

    • They take up residence there but live elsewhere. Now that Canada restricts foreign real estate ownership, that will probably dry up.

      These people don’t work in Canada, so Canada’s demographic problems are not being fixed.

  6. If you imagine a map of canada, draw a horizontal line across it, squish it to the bottom, then squish it some more, 90% of the population will still be living below that line. The plan is mostly about expanding the Vancouver and Toronto areas rather than the whole country.

  7. Canada is a large country with many resources and small population, therefore rich. What is the motive to increase it’s population so quickly.???

    • Yeah. I agree. They should aim for increasing population by not rapidly increasing. Of course Real Estate sellers always want more population pressure.

    • The usual: Drive down labor costs while increasing market size, and diluting the votes of current inhabitants who might object.

      That latter is probably pretty important, given Canada’s recent turn in a police state direction. Current Canadians might not be as happy about that turn as immigrants from already less free countries.

      It’s become routine that the people running a country have interests distinct, and often opposed, to the people already living there, and see importing a more cooperative population as a solution to that problem.

Comments are closed.