Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,037,872 times
Reputation: 11862
No, it would not be good. I've heard some say that 50 million would already be high for Australia - a nation slightly smaller than the US. Water, for instance, is becoming a precious commodity. We don't exactly need a lot more people.
Open your doors to immigration from Western Europe and a little from Eastern Asia. Only lightly for Africa and the Middle East, taking only the best educated.
lol white people only? hmm.. I agree about the educated thing but I don't think they should discriminate people based on their country of origin.
Take a look at Asia for example: Japan, N. Korea and Singapore are developed countries. In the middle east you can find Israel and Lebanon. In Africa it's mostly South Africa but I think Egypt and Morocco are fine too.
Open your doors to immigration from Western Europe and a little from Eastern Asia. Only lightly for Africa and the Middle East, taking only the best educated.
How can you do that? When you open the door, you open the door. It is impossible to open the door "a little" and "lightly" for some people and widely for others as you have to apply the same criteria, unless you impose a skin-color restriction to achieve that, which is impossible.
education and language requirement is a must, that I agree, but that gives west EU little advantage, does it? Only the British speak English as first language.
In the past years, much fewer Europeans came to Canada because they didn't want to (not many applied) as life is already good there, not because the policy disallow them.
No, it would not be good. I've heard some say that 50 million would already be high for Australia - a nation slightly smaller than the US. Water, for instance, is becoming a precious commodity. We don't exactly need a lot more people.
Austria does lack water. But Canada doesn't. We have the largest amount of water per capita in the world.
lol white people only? hmm.. I agree about the educated thing but I don't think they should discriminate people based on their country of origin.
Take a look at Asia for example: Japan, N. Korea and Singapore are developed countries. In the middle east you can find Israel and Lebanon. In Africa it's mostly South Africa but I think Egypt and Morocco are fine too.
the problem the more developed a country is, the less their people want to immigrate. How many Japanese do you see applying for Canadian immigration? Any immigrating policy will inevitably lead to more influx of developing country population.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,037,872 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by botticelli
Austria does lack water. But Canada doesn't. We have the largest amount of water per capita in the world.
With global warming one might see a mass-migration to Canada, I suppose. The boreal forests might become like the mixed/decidious forests currently found in places like Kentucky.
the problem the more developed a country is, the less their people want to immigrate. How many Japanese do you see applying for Canadian immigration? Any immigrating policy will inevitably lead to more influx of developing country population.
Wait until effects of recent history are known quantities. Radiation in Japan for instance, may DRIVE them out of their reverie with more willing to escape the "irrepairable" damage done.
My fear is politicians "wanting" us to be a major player for all the wrong reasons such as hinted at by a few posts on here. The strength of your country should not be solely measured by modernity or wealth, but rather by the integrity and moral underpinnings of your society.
Do we really need to be at the top of the list of countries viewed as having the most lavish or comfortable lifestyle through economic means?
We as a nation are faced with others squandering their resources and needing more so they come to our market looking to buy. All well and good as long as they're willing to pay a fair price but what happens when we go a step too far and inherit the disjointed and sometimes destructive cultures of too many other countries and lose our sense of purpose and resolve to the ever present vote courting of the ego driven politician?
What will happen if we turn into that multicultural melting pot that has no core value but merely seeks to exist along the lines of being the public bazaar with all things for sale at any price with no moral back bone other than the dying generation before us? Picture the guy at the podium at a Sotheby's auction house; do we want Canada run like that?
I am chagrined at recent announcements by our leaders that we will continue to pour money into a failed experiment called "Democracy in Afghanistan". I am sorry but; my instinct tells me we would do better to inform Karzai and his corrupt regime "we've already invested far too many of our young and far too much of our proportionate wealth with no visible return in stability and freedoms within your country; we're done here".
The money sent there would be better spent in upgrading our educational infrastructure here.
The future of this country relies on what is built from within; not what's imported from without.
Yes we are talking about Canada, but that doesn't mean Canada's present density is just perfect, or the majority of our people don't prefer larger population and more economic activities. It is like Toronto is warm in winter by "Canadian standards", that doesn't mean Toronto at -20C in January isn't uncomfortably cold, or most people don't prefer it to be 30C warmer in January.
I agree with you though about the suburban sprawl. If Canada has 100M people, let more cities prosper, instead of creating new Bramptons and Scarboroughs.
As to Southern Ontario, I don't consider it crowded. GTA itself is so sparsely population and can easy hold twice as many people, not to mention London, Hamilton, Windsor, Kitchener etc probably should be 4-5 times bigger.
I never once said our present population density is just perfect. I would like to know where you get the idea from that the majority of Canadians would be in favour of a more highly populated Canada. I can't find any links that support that claim.
As to the idea of just how many people Canada can or should support, here is an article that raises a few questions about that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan
Wait until effects of recent history are known quantities. Radiation in Japan for instance, may DRIVE them out of their reverie with more willing to escape the "irrepairable" damage done.
My fear is politicians "wanting" us to be a major player for all the wrong reasons such as hinted at by a few posts on here. The strength of your country should not be solely measured by modernity or wealth, but rather by the integrity and moral underpinnings of your society.
Do we really need to be at the top of the list of countries viewed as having the most lavish or comfortable lifestyle through economic means?
We as a nation are faced with others squandering their resources and needing more so they come to our market looking to buy. All well and good as long as they're willing to pay a fair price but what happens when we go a step too far and inherit the disjointed and sometimes destructive cultures of too many other countries and lose our sense of purpose and resolve to the ever present vote courting of the ego driven politician?
What will happen if we turn into that multicultural melting pot that has no core value but merely seeks to exist along the lines of being the public bazaar with all things for sale at any price with no moral back bone other than the dying generation before us? Picture the guy at the podium at a Sotheby's auction house; do we want Canada run like that?
I am chagrined at recent announcements by our leaders that we will continue to pour money into a failed experiment called "Democracy in Afghanistan". I am sorry but; my instinct tells me we would do better to inform Karzai and his corrupt regime "we've already invested far too many of our young and far too much of our proportionate wealth with no visible return in stability and freedoms within your country; we're done here".
The money sent there would be better spent in upgrading our educational infrastructure here.
The future of this country relies on what is built from within; not what's imported from without.
I completely agree with what I've bolded above. I don't understand this notion of firstly, equating population size to player status, and secondly, why one would want to be a world player in the sense implied by some posts.
I expect the population will increase over time but let it be a natural increase not a superficial one based on flawed ideas.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
