• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

So... Canada is destroying itself by letting millions into the country.

The only way for millions of people to enter a country is over a land border.

Han Island is uninhabited.

Therefore, Canada has a problem with its land neighbour having a lack of border control.


www.cp24.com

Trump says Canada is ‘destroying itself,’ Carney to speak at event with European leader. Live updates here.

U.S. President Donald Trump says, 'Canada is destroying itself by allowing millions and millions of people into the Country.' Follow for live updates.
www.cp24.com www.cp24.com
 
dapaterson said:
So... Canada is destroying itself by letting millions into the country.

The only way for millions of people to enter a country is over a land border.

Han Island is uninhabited.

Therefore, Canada has a problem with its land neighbour having a lack of border control.


www.cp24.com

Trump says Canada is ‘destroying itself,’ Carney to speak at event with European leader. Live updates here.

U.S. President Donald Trump says, 'Canada is destroying itself by allowing millions and millions of people into the Country.' Follow for live updates.
www.cp24.com www.cp24.com
Click to expand...

You're reaching. You know as well as I do most fly into the country.

I agree with closed immigration, with exceptions made for specific occupations; and deportations.
 
dapaterson said:
So... Canada is destroying itself by letting millions into the country.

The only way for millions of people to enter a country is over a land border.

Han Island is uninhabited.

Therefore, Canada has a problem with its land neighbour having a lack of border control.


www.cp24.com

Trump says Canada is ‘destroying itself,’ Carney to speak at event with European leader. Live updates here.

U.S. President Donald Trump says, 'Canada is destroying itself by allowing millions and millions of people into the Country.' Follow for live updates.
www.cp24.com www.cp24.com
Click to expand...

And, of course, the stats indicate otherwise:

Canada's population growth continues to slow​

The population of Canada reached an estimated 41,798,407 people on July 1, 2026, an increase of 189,425 people (+0.5%) from July 1, 2025. This is the lowest annual July-to-July (or June to June before 1946) growth in the total size of the population since 1944/1945 (+126,000; +1.0%) and the lowest growth in percentage since 1915/1916 (+20,000; +0.3%). The July-to-July growth in 2025/2026 is lower than the annual growth from July 1, 2020, to July 1, 2021 (+211,226; +0.6%), which included border restrictions in place to slow the spread of COVID-19.

From April 1, 2026, to July 1, 2026, the population of Canada increased by 80,343 people (+0.2%). This was the lowest growth in a second quarter since the second quarter of 2020 (+21,697; +0.1%), right at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The rapid changes in the population growth rate since 2020 are almost entirely attributable to changes in international migration.

Changing international migration trends have also resulted in the median and average ages in Canada increasing over the past two years. An aging population had been the typical pattern in the past, but very high international migration levels from 2021/2022 to 2024/2025 resulted in either decreases or stabilization of the average and median ages. Canada's population is aging once again—the median age was 40.9 years on July 1, 2026, and the average age was 42.1 years.

The Daily — Canada's population estimates: Age and gender, 2026

The population of Canada reached an estimated 41,798,407 people on July 1, 2026, an increase of 189,425 people (+0.5%) from July 1, 2025. This is the lowest annual July-to-July (or June to June before 1946) growth in the total size of the population since 1944/1945 (+126,000; +1.0%) and the...
www150.statcan.gc.ca www150.statcan.gc.ca
 
Low population growth for a brief time so we can catch up on policy and infrastructure is good and necessary, but we’re gonna need to get back to more robust population growth sooner rather than later for all the normal economic reasons. There needs to be a solid, multi-layered plan for that, fed led with as much provincial buy-in as can reasonably be achieved.
 
brihard said:
Low population growth for a brief time so we can catch up on policy and infrastructure is good and necessary, but we’re gonna need to get back to more robust population growth sooner rather than later for all the normal economic reasons. There needs to be a solid, multi-layered plan for that, fed led with as much provincial buy-in as can reasonably be achieved.
Click to expand...

I agree.

Give major financial breaks for having kids. Multiply those breaks for every kid.

Target your immigration on professional sectors we need. Target it only to working aged people, with no health complications.
 
Figure out why so many successful people around the world want to go to the US. Emulate that to the best of our ability. This is radical, I know, because it would mean rethinking our economic policies.
 
Halifax Tar said:
I agree.

Give major financial breaks for having kids. Multiply those breaks for every kid.

Target your immigration on professional sectors we need. Target it only to working aged people, with no health complications.
Click to expand...
You need to tie this policy to some form of contributing to society though, not just encouraging more single parent baby factories.

Pay more to individuals who are working and raising a family. Make incentives to those who own family businesses where the children are part of the business (be it farming, fishing, small business owners, etc). I was going to say make it means based, but logically, you want to incentivize all families to increase the birth rate, not just the poor.

Maybe also make it attractive to have one stay at home parent or caregiver (such as a grandparent).
 
captloadie said:
You need to tie this policy to some form of contributing to society though, not just encouraging more single parent baby factories.

Pay more to individuals who are working and raising a family. Make incentives to those who own family businesses where the children are part of the business (be it farming, fishing, small business owners, etc). I was going to say make it means based, but logically, you want to incentivize all families to increase the birth rate, not just the poor.

Maybe also make it attractive to have one stay at home parent or caregiver (such as a grandparent).
Click to expand...

Solid points. I don't have a perfect answer, just an opinion on the direction I'd like to see us go. I agree, If we're going to use public policy to encourage larger families, it should reward both raising children and contributing to society through work, business ownership, or caregiving. I'd rather see incentives that strengthen stable family formation, make it easier to raise children, and recognize the value of parents or grandparents who provide care. The goal shouldn't be simply more births, but more families that have the support and stability needed to succeed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top