Toronto Is The Fastest-Growing City In U.S. And Canada, And That’s Not Good

[Doady]

Toronto is a city of 6 million people who wish they could live in Detroit or Buffalo instead. But they aren't allowed to. Because unlike Canada, the USA has standards.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by Obadno

I fully expect for the USA to hit 500 million in coming decades. There is a ton of space in the USA still.

If China and India can have 1 billion + the USA could easily fit far more.

It's not simply about having the space to physically accommodate these people, but rather the space to sustain these people. Ever take a cross country flight across the USA, there isn't much land that isn't used for human consumption. The Chinese and Indians historically have been poor developing societies and the Chinese went to great lengths to lift themselves out of poverty and still aren't quite there yet and the Chinese have far less arable land then the US.

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by JManc

It's not simply about having the space to physically accommodate these people, but rather the space to sustain these people. Ever take a cross country flight across the USA, there isn't much land that isn't used for human consumption. The Chinese and Indians historically have been poor developing societies and the Chinese went to great lengths to lift themselves out of poverty and still aren't quite there yet and the Chinese have far less arable land then the US.

There is plenty of land that is not used or extremely underused.
Pick a city. Muscatine, Iowa can easily become a 10 million people city without disturbing any nature. All those farms nearby would just become multifamily housing. US produces plenty of food as is, way more than 330 million people can consume. We just don't have enough people in this country, so most land, even the one that is developed by humans, either lies fallow, or has low productivity uses such as farming.
If we fit 500 million people just in Midwest alone, I think it would still be less dense than Germany...
Adding 55 million people just to Michigan alone would make it the same density as the current UK.
And I am not even talking about our areas such as Pacific Northwest that barely even have any cities, despite having relatively mild climate.

[Nite]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

This all sounds reasonable, but the recent bump in Canadian immigration is purely driven by the current U.S. presidential administration's anti-immigrant mood. Many large U.S. companies have stopped sponsoring new H1b visas because of the uncertainty in the process now.

For example, over the last couple of years, the Trump administration has been challenging the credentials of the holders of many of the H1b visas that it awarded. Last year the administration challenged over 60% of the visas it awarded, up from 20% pre-Trump. It is extremely disruptive when the government does this because the workers are usually already in their jobs and have to go on leave during the process. Many companies are just declining to hire people who need to apply for H1bs.

it has nothing to do with the US and everything to do with the Canadian government deciding to increase immigration to 1% of the population.

do you think if someone fails to get into the US they automatically get to come to Canada?

the Canadian government controls 100% the number of immigrants who come to Canada.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Nite

it has nothing to do with the US and everything to do with the Canadian government deciding to increase immigration to 1% of the population.

do you think if someone fails to get into the US they automatically get to come to Canada?

the Canadian government controls 100% the number of immigrants who come to Canada.

I personally know people who have migrated to Toronto because they could not obtain a visa to work in the U.S.

[Nite]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

I agree. I’d happily take a good share of those Canadian immigrants. It doesn’t sound like Canadians are taking issue with immigration for the most part. It’ll be interesting to see how well they assimilate. For whatever reason I feel immigrants are slower to assimilate in the US these days.

Canada has been taking in a large number of immigrants for over 100 years, this is nothing new for the country as the percent foreign-born in Canada will attest (30% Foreign born in Canada, 13% in the US).

Canad has an official policy of multiculturalism which means assimilation is not the goal for government

[Nite]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I personally know people who have migrated to Toronto because they could not obtain a visa to work in the U.S.

ok, but I am sure you don't know the other 350,000.
but regardless of the number of people Canada takes in every year is set by the federal government. it has nothing to do with US policy.
A change in the government here late this year could see immigration cut in half if the new government wants that

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by Obadno

I fully expect for the USA to hit 500 million in coming decades. There is a ton of space in the USA still.

If China and India can have 1 billion + the USA could easily fit far more.

I agree, but not if we continue to build the way we do.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Nite

ok, but I am sure you don't know the other 350,000.
but regardless of the number of people Canada takes in every year is set by the federal government. it has nothing to do with US policy.
A change in the government here late this year could see immigration cut in half if the new government wants that

Which would certainly affect Toronto next year, but this still doesn't negate the fact that Toronto/Canada's current uptick in immigration is directly related to the U.S. becoming more strict. If U.S. becomes stricter, Canada remains more liberal, and many would-be immigrants to the U.S. view Canada as an alternative, what exactly would be the logical outcome? If Canada tightens its own standards then obviously that number would go down. Next year. But only one country in North America has significantly changed its immigration posture in the past two years, and it isn't Canada.

[Nite]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Which would certainly affect Toronto next year, but this still doesn't negate the fact that Toronto/Canada's current uptick in immigration is directly related to the U.S. becoming more strict. If U.S. becomes stricter, Canada remains more liberal, and many would-be immigrants to the U.S. view Canada as an alternative, what exactly would be the logical outcome? If Canada tightens its own standards then obviously that number would go down. Next year. But only one country in North America has significantly changed its immigration posture in the past two years, and it isn't Canada.

Again, the amount of people Canada lets in has nothing to do with anything the US does. Canada would still be letting in 350,000 a year right now if Hillary had won the election.
Canada's immigration policy and targets have nothing to do with anything that happens in the US.
I don't know why you keep insisting that the two countries immigration systems are tied. If the US doubles or bans all immigration, Canada will still be taking in 350,000 people

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Nite

Again, the amount of people Canada lets in has nothing to do with anything the US does. Canada would still be letting in 350,000 a year right now if Hillary had won the election.
Canada's immigration policy and targets have nothing to do with anything that happens in the US.
I don't know why you keep insisting that the two countries immigration systems are tied. If the US doubles or bans all immigration, Canada will still be taking in 350,000 people

How many people does Canada turn away?

[Northern Light]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

How many people does Canada turn away?

That's a difficult question to answer.

Canada has a number of different streams for immigration.

Broadly, there are Economic immigrants, Family-Class immigrants and Refugees.

But there are in fact many sub categories of each.

Canada caps the number of applications in each category each year.

So there isn't a giant rejection list, so much as people who never got to apply in the first place because there was no spot in the stream to which they wish to apply. (there are rejections of course, for a host of reasons)

But you can get a hint of demand vs supply by looking at those family-reunification applications.

The government made 20,000 spots available during the last application window, this year on January 28.

They opened applications at Noon, and closed them at 12:09pm, 9 minutes later.

All the spots were gone.

In that time, 100,000 people tried to access the system (in 9 minutes).

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/imm...ment-1.5154407

As to how the system of applying from overseas works, I found this:

Each fall the federal government indicates how many immigrants it plans to admit in the coming year by category of immigration in the Immigration Levels Plan. Visa officers abroad and in Canada review and approve enough applications to meet the targets established in the plan. The Immigration Levels Plan is an important policy statement containing the government’s vision for the total number of immigrants, as well as the proportion of family class verses other categories.

From here: https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentVi...port-8/page-99

In the economic category its not much different judging by this story from Ireland which indicated that up to 2016 the number of opportunities for a work VISA to Canada were all snapped up in mere minutes.

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-...ship-1.1971606

A further indication of demand might be found here:

https://vancouversun.com/news/staff-...rate-to-canada

Which suggests total demand in the range of 45 million people (clearly most of these never get the chance to apply)

[CherryCreek]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

I don’t think he’s necessarily wrong. If you were given the ability to pick a passport of any country on earth, what would you pick? The US would be up there. The size of the country and much better climate are very attractive.. as are the job opportunities generally speaking.

Reality is that The US is much more difficult to enter though, so Canada it is for many. I’m sure many would pick Canada over the US, but I’m also sure for many it’s a second choice.

There's actual data points on this question, we don't need to guess:

They say home is where the heart is. But for a large proportion of the world’s population, home is where the work is. Or the food is. Or safety.

14% of the world’s adults – nearly 710 million people – said they want to permanently migrate to another country, according to analytics company Gallup.

Conflict, famine and disaster are driving large numbers of people from countries such as Syria, South Sudan and Congo, while chronic high unemployment is at the root of people’s desire to leave Albania.

And where do they want to go? The US primarily: one in five potential migrants named the country as their preferred destination. Meanwhile, Germany, Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Australia and Saudi Arabia appeal to at least 25 million adults each. Roughly 20 countries attract more than two-thirds of all potential migrants worldwide.




https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/...nt-to-move-to/

[badrunner]

Originally Posted by Nite

Canad has an official policy of multiculturalism which means assimilation is not the goal for government

That's because Canadians, both native and foreign born are assimilated into American culture.

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by Nite

Again, the amount of people Canada lets in has nothing to do with anything the US does. Canada would still be letting in 350,000 a year right now if Hillary had won the election.
Canada's immigration policy and targets have nothing to do with anything that happens in the US.
I don't know why you keep insisting that the two countries immigration systems are tied. If the US doubles or bans all immigration, Canada will still be taking in 350,000 people

You have to excuse American forumers, they think of immigration largely in illegal-immigration terms where the migrants themselves pick the country, regardless of the laws of that country. So with that framework, it would make sense that since the US is looking less attractive, these people would just flood into Canada illegally.

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by CherryCreek

There's actual data points on this question, we don't need to guess:

They say home is where the heart is. But for a large proportion of the world’s population, home is where the work is. Or the food is. Or safety.

14% of the world’s adults – nearly 710 million people – said they want to permanently migrate to another country, according to analytics company Gallup.

Conflict, famine and disaster are driving large numbers of people from countries such as Syria, South Sudan and Congo, while chronic high unemployment is at the root of people’s desire to leave Albania.

And where do they want to go? The US primarily: one in five potential migrants named the country as their preferred destination. Meanwhile, Germany, Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Australia and Saudi Arabia appeal to at least 25 million adults each. Roughly 20 countries attract more than two-thirds of all potential migrants worldwide.




https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/...nt-to-move-to/

But I keep being told how evil and racist the West is, why do all these black and brown people want to be treated so bad by moving to the West?

I am joking, of course. But that narrative does fall apart when actual people are involved.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by JManc

It's not simply about having the space to physically accommodate these people, but rather the space to sustain these people. Ever take a cross country flight across the USA, there isn't much land that isn't used for human consumption. The Chinese and Indians historically have been poor developing societies and the Chinese went to great lengths to lift themselves out of poverty and still aren't quite there yet and the Chinese have far less arable land then the US.

Yes China and India are examples exactly of how many more people we can fit.

Zoom in on the north China Plain, Northern India or Pakistan along the Indus, even western Europe in Rural France, look at the density of villages and cities and towns in these areas.

Now zoom into Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, hell even Mississippi or Virginia the USA has some of the largest stretches of arable land in the world, vastly more than China or India with only 330 million people.

And thats just considering the temperate areas that are easiest to develop. With Modern technology areas that were not very habitable before can now house millions. And without considering how we could change farming tech to be more efficient and smaller footprint. Right now we dont have too.

If China and India can have over a billion people the USA most certainly can easily.

Now, if that will or should happen is an entirely different discussion but the USA can easily fit hundreds upon hundreds of millions more with today's technology.

This is also true for the prairie states of central/west Canada and the massive sparsely populated temperate and moderate parts of Australia.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by jtown,man

I agree, but not if we continue to build the way we do.

I believe people are eminently capable of ripping up suburbia if it needs to be done.

We are far less permanent than we seem to think. The fact is there is simply no need and much less desire to end suburbia any time soon. Maybe some day but not now and not for the foreseeable future. What density is occurring is a surprising shift of peoples personal choice to live densely. If anything given modern technology and as cheap as oil and cars are relatively we have every incentive to spread out as much as possible, but we arent seeing that.

[dc_denizen]

Anyhow this discussion seems to assume that the us gets few immigrants

Whereas in reality, 1 million people emigrate to the USA each year.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...-s-immigrants/

[chris08876]

Toronto will continue growing until prices greatly exceed what folks are earning. Than you'll have people move somewhere else when they are pushed out.