Support NeoGAF

[Silexx]

So we now know that five of the Cabinet posts are Ministries of State meant to assist other Ministers.

Ministry of La Francophonie will assist Foreign Affairs

Ministry for Status of Women will assist Canadian Heritage

Ministry of Sport and Persons with Disabilities will assist Canadian Heritage and Employment and Social Development

Ministry of Small Business and Tourism will assist Industry

Ministry of Science will assist Industry

http://www.pco-bcp.gc.ca/oic-ddc.asp?lang=eng&txtToDate=&txtPrecis=&Page=secretariats&txtOICID=&txtAct=&txtBillNo=&txtFromDate=2015-11-04&txtDepartment=&txtChapterNo=&txtChapterYear=&rdoComingIntoForce=&DoSearch=Search+/+List&pg=7

 

[Lexxism]

Forbes listed Trudeau as 69th powerful people in the world. How did Harper fair with this listing?

 

[Stumpokapow]

Canada's Newspapers Need to Stop Humiliating Themselves

the newspapers perhaps did us a favour in the last week of the campaign with their inane endorsement of the Harper autocracy for yet another four-year term. Postmedia and the Globe and Mail actually managed to write editorials justifying the re-election of a man turfed from office by a tsunami of voter revulsion...

The Globe and the National Post editorials both declared their support because of Harper’s economic record — but ignored all the actual evidence...

Those who run the country’s daily newspapers show themselves to be concerned only about “the economy” in the narrowest sense, using it as a code word for the corporate elite, the one per cent — not the economy of ordinary wage-earners...

The op-ed here is good, but it doesn't go far enough: the same newspapers that endorsed solid Conservative policy are now turning around and fellating the mere thought of the Liberals in part because of how bad the status quo is and how Canada has declined over the last decade. There's two possibilities: either individual members of editorial boards are disingenuous and should be held to account; or owners have overrode editorial boards in endorsements and don't during regular coverage... in which case, why should we ever trust an editorial?

 

[CitizenVectron]

Canada's Newspapers Need to Stop Humiliating Themselves



The op-ed here is good, but it doesn't go far enough: the same newspapers that endorsed solid Conservative policy are now turning around and fellating the mere thought of the Liberals in part because of how bad the status quo is and how Canada has declined over the last decade. There's two possibilities: either individual members of editorial boards are disingenuous and should be held to account; or owners have overrode editorial boards in endorsements and don't during regular coverage... in which case, why should we ever trust an editorial?

Editors and staff from Postmedia and G&M made it pretty obvious that they had no control over the endorsements, they were entirely made by the owners. Andrew Coyne at the NP even stepped down as head of their editorial department over the handling of it.

 

[Sean C]

Not surprised to see Goodale at the top. Poor Bardish Chagger, lol.

That list is purely in the order they were sworn into the Privy Council, hence, Goodale and MacAulay in first and second positions, as they're the only remaining members of Jean Chretien's original 1993 cabinet, followed by Dion, who joined in 1996 midway through the first term.

Though Goodale's position is a pretty decent match with his actual ability.

Chagger is already plotting her Richard III-style ascent.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Rona Ambrose is the new Conservative interim leader. Just before the announcement, I was just saying to a coworker, "You know, I think Rona Ambrose may be a dark horse. She's pretty staunchly Conservative, and some people find her attractive. They may like that combination."

When that doesn't happen, you end up with the American system, where the alternative to the Democrats is a band of sociopathic morons. Just watch a single GOP debate and be utterly terrified at the prospect of any of them with the nuclear launch codes.

Since the cabinet prediction game is over, I'm going to guess that Rob Nicholson is elected as interim leader.

My initial post actually said something about this, then I took it out! I was going to say the same thing: as fun as it is to watch the GOP fall off successively higher cliffs, you should root for them to pick a smart, sane leader because at some point, they're going to beat the Democrats, and you don't want someone horrifying in charge when that happens.

 

[Silexx]

Canada's Newspapers Need to Stop Humiliating Themselves



The op-ed here is good, but it doesn't go far enough: the same newspapers that endorsed solid Conservative policy are now turning around and fellating the mere thought of the Liberals in part because of how bad the status quo is and how Canada has declined over the last decade. There's two possibilities: either individual members of editorial boards are disingenuous and should be held to account; or owners have overrode editorial boards in endorsements and don't during regular coverage... in which case, why should we ever trust an editorial?

Yeah, I'm going to dissent and claim this op-ed is just weak.

First, it's perpetuates the 'governments run the economy' myth. The only reason to address the performance of the economy under Harper is to counter the notion that Harper kept the country stable during the downturns, but if you turn and try to make the case that Harper somehow was a cause for the poor performance, then you commit the same fallacy.

Second, while I agree that the editorial endorsements were a fiasco, it was still the owners of Postmedia's prerogative to endorse the Conservatives. But whether it was the tone-deaf Globe and Mail editorial or the censoring of Coyne's dissenting column at the National Post, all this tells us is that Postmedia needs to get its house in order or maybe just come to the realization that editorial endorsements are an antiquated notion that, at best, fail to have any real sway in public opinion and, at worst, can cause a backlash that comprises the credibility of your papers.

 

[gutter_trash]

looks like the Cons want to keep their power base in Alberta by selecting Ambrose.

 

[PumpkinSpice]

looks like the Cons want to keep their power base in Alberta by selecting Ambrose.

Hopefully they pick someone outside Alberta in the real leadership contest. They can't just be "The Alberta Party" forever.

 

[gutter_trash]

Hopefully they pick someone outside Alberta in the real leadership contest. They can't just be "The Alberta Party" forever.

They will forever be the Reform Party

 

[Sean C]

looks like the Cons want to keep their power base in Alberta by selecting Ambrose.

Eh, I think that's reading too much into it. The future of the party will not be decided by the interim leader, and in any event, who amongst the people running would have offered anything notably different from what Ambrose likely will?

 

[maharg]

Canada's Newspapers Need to Stop Humiliating Themselves



The op-ed here is good, but it doesn't go far enough: the same newspapers that endorsed solid Conservative policy are now turning around and fellating the mere thought of the Liberals in part because of how bad the status quo is and how Canada has declined over the last decade. There's two possibilities: either individual members of editorial boards are disingenuous and should be held to account; or owners have overrode editorial boards in endorsements and don't during regular coverage... in which case, why should we ever trust an editorial?

Worse, I think it's part of the sickness of endorsing stability through a lack of change in government. There's a perception that a change in government rocks the boat too hard, so it's better to make small changes to the status quo. That's what the CPC minus Harper endorsements were really about, business leaders trying to prevent a sweeping change to the business environment.

Now they'll do the same for Trudeau, whether he wants it or not. I expect fawning endorsements in 4 years from the same bunch.

But maybe this is just me seeing Alberta's last 40 years everywhere. Still, I think the CPC did well at exporting anti-democratic ideals to the rest of the country. And the Liberals are particularly prone to believing such things themselves.

 

[Zombie James]

looks like the Cons want to keep their power base in Alberta by selecting Ambrose.

Unbelievable. I guess they're really buying the "it was all about Harper" narrative. Hopefully they'll realize where their problems actually lie and elect a permanent leader that isn't constantly on the wrong side of reality.

On a happier note: http://actionplan.gc.ca/

 

[Tabris]

This is one of the things that makes me really confident about Trudeau:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7ZCd-qmd84

 

[maharg]

Interim leader was decided by caucus, right? Makes sense it'd be someone from Alberta just based on that, since that's their strongest base still. For the actual leadership contest I think they're supposed to use a national one member one vote system, so something quite different could happen out of that.

 

[CreeperBlocks]

On a happier note: http://actionplan.gc.ca/

Thank God.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Forbes listed Trudeau as 69th powerful people in the world. How did Harper fair with this listing?

*snicker*

Interim leader was decided by caucus, right? Makes sense it'd be someone from Alberta just based on that, since that's their strongest base still. For the actual leadership contest I think they're supposed to use a national one member one vote system, so something quite different could happen out of that.

Caucus including senators, I believe.

And I don't think it was just an Alberta thing. That probably didn't hurt her chances, to be sure, but I'd bet money that a significant number of Conservatives looked at the press coverage the Liberals got for having a gender equal cabinet, and figured that this was an easy way to win some favourable coverage. Ambrose will be competent in the job, she's relatively telegenic, she's shown she has message discipline -- as horrible as her beliefs may be, I can see why they would pick her.

I imagine once you get the base voting, things could turn out very differently. I'd forgotten about that backbench semi-revolt a few years ago, so it'll be interesting to see if that bloc of social conservatives are as big a part of the party as they like to pretend they are.

 

[Sean C]

Interim leader was decided by caucus, right? Makes sense it'd be someone from Alberta just based on that, since that's their strongest base still. For the actual leadership contest I think they're supposed to use a national one member one vote system, so something quite different could happen out of that.

Yeah, it's OMOV. Now, granted, the Tories' strongest base of support, by far, is in the west, so the votes are likely to very disproportionately come from there.

But we're talking about a leadership contest that probably won't get seriously underway for over a year, anyway.

I imagine once you get the base voting, things could turn out very differently. I'd forgotten about that backbench semi-revolt a few years ago, so it'll be interesting to see if that bloc of social conservatives are as big a part of the party as they like to pretend they are.

Paging Doug Ford...

 

[DrEvil]

Peter Mansbridge: Behind-the-scenes of Justin Trudeau's first day as Prime Minister

Fantastic video, I'm halfway through and it's very genuine.

Yup, I love this. First time our Country's leader (at least in my lifetime) has felt real.

Chretien was close, but I was too young to really understand it all back then.

 

[Pedrito]

Ambrose calls herself a libertarian and is a fan of Ayn Rand novels such as Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead.

Well ain't that wonderful.

Peter Mansbridge: Behind-the-scenes of Justin Trudeau's first day as Prime Minister

Fantastic video, I'm halfway through and it's very genuine.

For a moment I thought the "It's 2015" line was actually spontaneous. Oh well, thanks Gerald Butts :/

 

[Slime]

Well ain't that wonderful.

The (continued?) rise of Canada's very own Tea Party

 

[gutter_trash]

Well ain't that wonderful.



For a moment I thought the "It's 2015" line was actually spontaneous. Oh well, thanks Gerald Butts :/

god, one of those.

I was listening to an editorial about the resonning behind the Conservatives scrapping the Longform Census was to appease their Far-Right Libertarian base, nothing more.

I am so glad that Harper is gone. Everything he did was electoralist and he was in constant campaign mode pandering for votes in key groups.

So bad so that he his Foreign Policy was entirely based on pandering certain demographics for votes.....

 

[Silexx]

For a moment I thought the "It's 2015" line was actually spontaneous. Oh well, thanks Gerald Butts :/

Hate to break it to you, but Gerald Butts and Katie Telford have got our PM coached down to a science.

 

[Pedrito]

Hate to break it to you, but Gerald Butts and Katie Telford have got our PM coached down to a science.

That will teach me for believing he went off script for a brief second...
How could I be so naive?!?

 

[maharg]

That will teach me for believing he went off script for a brief second...
How could I be so naive?!?

You can tell when Trudeau goes off script. He gets a bit rambly and sentimental. He's not really a one-liner kind of guy.

As long as he believes the sentiment, though, who cares.

 

[Mysterious]

It was during his time in that role that he became acquainted with Pierre and Margaret Trudeau, as the Johnston children played with the Trudeau children

Johnston, then President of the University of Waterloo, introducing Justin Trudeau as a speaker at the university, March 2006

Damn so it seems they have a history. This should be a good thing right?

 

[Slime]

Damn so it seems they have a history. This should be a good thing right?

Constitutional crisis averted

 

[Kraftwerk]

wow, I just saw Justin Trudeau delivering his fathers eulogy. First time seeing this old vid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5p4NUJMPAjQ

You can already see he was born to lead. What a guy, much respect.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Yeah, it's OMOV. Now, granted, the Tories' strongest base of support, by far, is in the west, so the votes are likely to very disproportionately come from there.

But we're talking about a leadership contest that probably won't get seriously underway for over a year, anyway.

I think the timing of the leadership contest is going to tell us a lot about Jason Kenney's chances. If it's within a year, then it would suggest Kenney's supporters are running the party and trying to set a timetable that benefits him the most, since he seems to be the only candidate who's done any kind of organizing so far. The less time there is to organize and sign up new members, the more of an advantage he (presumably) has.

If it's a longer period -- say 18-24 months -- that bodes less well for him, since that would give challengers more time to organize, and it would suggest he doesn't have quite the campaign organization or party control most people seem to think he has.

It'll also tell us how the CPC itself views the loss. If it's a quick leadership contest, they may feel there's not much need for reflection and self-examination, and that all that's needed is a new coat of paint. A longer period means they feel the need to go for some party renewal. It took the Liberals two big losses (2008 and 2011) to get to the point where they had widespread recognition that renewal was necessary (some people were saying it in 2006, I remember, but I don't think it was a widely-shared opinion), so I'm curious to see how the Conservatives view it.

You can tell when Trudeau goes off script. He gets a bit rambly and sentimental. He's not really a one-liner kind of guy.

He's a bit rambly and sentimental even when he's on-message, too.

Totally off-topic, but your thoughts (or anyone else's thoughts) on Amarjeet Sohi? I just read a few stories about him...pretty crazy life he's led, and it's neat to have people like him in cabinet.

 

[Simon Belmont]

Damn so it seems they have a history. This should be a good thing right?

Not especially beyond the fact that it's nice to have friends.

 

[Pancake Mix]

This is really important and urgent.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2015/11/05/why-trudeau-must-save-medicare-in-quebec.html

I doubt anything is done about this but I can't believe this isn't a more well-known issue.

The underfunding and erosion of our single-payer system is a joke and it was never that great compared to some of Canada's peers. We don't even have a universal perscription drugs plan.

 

[Tabris]

First, the Provinces have too much power in our Universal Healthcare.

The fact that MSP exists in British Columbia is gross. That should just be a part of Income Tax and that should come from an increase in Federal Income Tax.

Second, yes, we should have a universal prescription drugs plan. Again, provincial domain is useless here.

In what way is healthcare unique to provinces where it should be a provincial domain? The only difference between BC, Alberta, and Ontario citizens on receiving healthcare is just the cost of providing the healthcare via cost of living / salary requirements by doctors, nurses, and establishments. So the federal government just needs to base funds provided based on those costs, but the citizen care doesn't change.

I should have the same medical experience and service going from BC to Alberta to Ontario to Quebec.

 

[PumpkinSpice]

I really don't understand why healthcare isn't handled federally in this country.

My wife losing coverage when we moved from Nova Scotia was beyond ridiculous (thanks Mike Harris apparently for that one).

 

[mdubs]

First, the Provinces have too much power in our Universal Healthcare.

The fact that MSP exists in British Columbia is gross. That should just be a part of Income Tax and that should come from an increase in Federal Income Tax.

Second, yes, we should have a universal prescription drugs plan. Again, provincial domain is useless here.

In what way is healthcare unique to provinces where it should be a provincial domain? The only difference between BC, Alberta, and Ontario citizens on receiving healthcare is just the cost of providing the healthcare via cost of living / salary requirements by doctors, nurses, and establishments. So the federal government just needs to base funds provided based on those costs, but the citizen care doesn't change.

I should have the same medical experience and service going from BC to Alberta to Ontario to Quebec.

I really don't understand why healthcare isn't handled federally in this country.

My wife losing coverage when we moved from Nova Scotia was beyond ridiculous (thanks Mike Harris apparently for that one).

s.92 of the Constitution Act, 1867. Health care was not a big concern in 1867, so they felt that giving provinces exclusive jurisdiction made sense because it would allow the to tailor regulation to local needs. Expect a mountain of federalism challenges if the feds ever try to introduce a federal drug plan without getting all the provinces signing on (which will never happen)

 

[diaspora]

Reading about Sajjan's time in the military is ridiculous. It's like he's the fucking Director of SHIELD.

 

[Pedrito]

http://www.cbc.ca/player/play/2678426856

The end LOL.

"Are you guys crazy? That's not change, we have more questions!"
"Rona! Rona! Rona!"

 

[Tabris]

I posted this in another thread, it's 2011 data (we'll get up to date with long form census soon) but it gives you an idea:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada#Visible_minority_population

It's really worrying that only BC, Alberta, and Ontario are that diverse. BC and Ontario being the most diverse with a ~25% minority demographic. Provinces like Saskatchewan are at ~6%.

 

[Pancake Mix]

I posted this in another thread, it's 2011 data (we'll get up to date with long form census soon) but it gives you an idea:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canada#Visible_minority_population

It's really worrying that only BC, Alberta, and Ontario are that diverse. BC and Ontario being the most diverse with a ~25% minority demographic. Provinces like Saskatchewan are at ~6%.

Why is that worrying at all? Immigration is good and will continue to compensate for the birth rate but come on now, it may surprise some but Canada is not as ethnically diverse as the US. That's not a positive or a negative imo.

 

[excelsiorlef]

wow, I just saw Justin Trudeau delivering his fathers eulogy. First time seeing this old vid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5p4NUJMPAjQ

You can already see he was born to lead. What a guy, much respect.

I was 14 or 15 at that time. I watched that and turned to my Mom and said he'll be prime minister someday

 

[Tabris]

Why is that worrying at all? Immigration is good and will continue to compensate for the birth rate but come on now, it may surprise some but Canada is not as ethnically diverse as the US. That's not a positive or a negative imo.

That's definitely a negative. We need to balance our provincial demographics or at least increase the diversity into the prairies and maritimes. Doing programs to encourage immigration there, like fast tracking asylum if you're willing to reside in those provinces.

And I disagree on the statement Canada is not as ethnically diverse as the US. Infact, if you just look to BC and Ontario, I think we are more ethnically diverse. In my opinion, there is a difference between ethnic diversity and racial diversity, and while the US is more racially diverse then Canada, ethnic diversity is quite different.

The US is at 28% non-"European American". 13% of that category is "African American" which one would argue is less an ethnicity and more a racial profile, because the ethnicity part is the American, and the racial part is the African ancestry. Some of that category includes immigration in which they shouldn't be put into the same ethnic category, but a majority of it is from the horrors of slavery trade in the US. But that's a whole other debate, on the concept of ethnicity vs race.

BC is at 27% Visible Minority, Ontario is at 25% (these numbers are most likely higher and probably exceed the US' demographics now. We'll find out soon from the long form census). We just need to increase immigration to the rest of Canada, so it's higher then the national average of 19%.

 

[Silexx]

Why is that worrying at all? Immigration is good and will continue to compensate for the birth rate but come on now, it may surprise some but Canada is not as ethnically diverse as the US. That's not a positive or a negative imo.

No it won't

 

[Tabris]

No it won't

Please defend your point with statistics.

Because the issue with Canada, much like most modern nations right now from Japan (who was the first to struggle with this causing economic stagnation because unlike the rest of the list, they have a fairly anti-immigration policy) to Scandinavia to Germany to Australia is the population age demographic wave.

The more people you immigrate helps offset the lower birthrate that modern nations have to ensure we can afford to pay for the population wave to finish and be re-balanced to our current birthrates and death rates.

 

[diaspora]

Please defend your point with statistics.

Because the issue with Canada, much like most modern nations right now from Japan to Scandinavia to Germany to Australia is the population age demographic wave.

The more people you immigrate helps offset the lower birthrate that modern nations have to ensure we can afford to pay for the population wave to finish and be re-balanced to our current birthrates.

I think the point they're trying to make is that it might not be enough.

 

[killer rin]

s.92 of the Constitution Act, 1867. Health care was not a big concern in 1867, so they felt that giving provinces exclusive jurisdiction made sense because it would allow the to tailor regulation to local needs. Expect a mountain of federalism challenges if the feds ever try to introduce a federal drug plan without getting all the provinces signing on (which will never happen)

In a perfect world, the Federal Government would throw down the towel, say they were operating the services with zero exception, and any province which says otherwise will have to find some way to fund their system themselves.

What will they do, Succeed? I'd like to see them try considering the people would never go for it, especially if you were enhancing their services.

 

[Pancake Mix]

That's definitely a negative. We need to balance our provincial demographics or at least increase the diversity into the prairies and maritimes. Doing programs to encourage immigration there, like fast tracking asylum if you're willing to reside in those provinces.

And I disagree on the statement Canada is not as ethnically diverse as the US. Infact, if you just look to BC and Ontario, I think we are more ethnically diverse. In my opinion, there is a difference between ethnic diversity and racial diversity, and while the US is more racially diverse then Canada, ethnic diversity is quite different.

The US is at 28% non-"European American". 13% of that category is "African American" which one would argue is less an ethnicity and more a racial profile, because the ethnicity part is the American, and the racial part is the African ancestry. Some of that category includes immigration in which they shouldn't be put into the same ethnic category, but a majority of it is from the horrors of slavery trade in the US. But that's a whole other debate, on the concept of ethnicity vs race.

BC is at 27% Visible Minority, Ontario is at 25% (these numbers are most likely higher and probably exceed the US' demographics now. We'll find out soon from the long form census). We just need to increase immigration to the rest of Canada, so it's higher then the national average of 19%.

I know Ontario and BC are, I was referring to the country as a whole. Anyways, I disagree, rest of the country is fine, and frankly nobody wants to immigrate to those areas. We accept more immigrants per capita than any other country on the face of the Earth and almost all of them aren't interested in Saskatchewan so no...let's not. Predominantly European and Aboriginal Canadian areas are absolutely fine too.

No it won't

Yes it has and will continue to compensate to some extent. We already accept more per capita than the rest of the globe and mostly young so we should be in better shape than the rest of the developed world regardless. That's not even taking into account the mechanization of labour, etc.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-630-x/11-630-x2014001-eng.htm

Look at Japan for an example of a country with an only slightly lower birthrate but which doesn't allow much immigration.

 

[Tabris]

I think the point they're trying to make is that it might not be enough.

It can be enough, all depends how it's handled.

This is a modern problem that no nation has really solved because they have just started experiencing it. Outside really Japan, most modern nations haven't hit the "wave crest".

You want immigration. The issue with most immigration, especially on the lower socio-economic side of the spectrum, such as the Syrian migrants, is that there is an on boarding cost to society.

So you have to either balance the population you need with the on boarding cost, or experience the economic and social strain during that on boarding period. It's a large initial investment for a longer term payout. Which is why most immigration isn't looked at fondly by existing citizens. Short sighted views.

 

[Silexx]

I think the point they're trying to make is that it might not be enough.

Indeed. The issue we are facing is an aging population. In order to keep a stable population, we need a fertility rate of 2.1 in order to maintain a sustainable worker-to-retiree ratio. Canada is around 1.5. Immigration, unfortunately does not sufficiently change the age distribution of the country.

http://dangardner.ca/why-immigration-wont-save-us/

 

[Tabris]

I know Ontario and BC are, I was referring to the country as a whole. Anyways, I disagree, rest of the country is fine, and frankly nobody wants to immigrate to those areas. We accept more immigrants per capita than any other country on the face of the Earth and almost all of them aren't interested in Saskatchewan so no...let's not. Predominantly European and Aboriginal Canadian areas are absolutely fine too.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree.

The issue with a cultural homogenized society that you see in the other provinces, is their values and experiences, will conflict with the majority of Canadians living in BC and Ontario who experience a diversified society.

Canada is strong because it's diversified. We need to ensure that all provinces can experience that. So like how you attract business to your province to increase economic growth via things like tax breaks and incentives, we need to attract immigrants to fill out these other provinces via the same kind of concepts.

I don't see anything wrong with creating a program that fast tracks asylum or some kind of benefit if you are willing to reside in these select provinces unless you have a family member in another province, to encourage diversification and long term economic growth in these provinces.

 

[Silexx]

Yes it has and will continue to compensate to some extent. We already accept more per capita than the rest of the globe and mostly young so we should be in better shape than the rest of the developed world regardless. That's not even taking into account the mechanization of labour, etc.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-630-x/11-630-x2014001-eng.htm

Look at Japan for an example of a country with an only slightly lower birthrate but which doesn't allow much immigration.

Quoting from the article I posted:

So what matters here is not the absolute numbers of people in the population. It’s the ratio of workers to retirees. And many studies have shown that, for a host of reasons, feasible levels of immigration can do little to change the worker-to-retiree ratio.

It’s a counter-intuitive result but the numbers don’t lie. One C.D. Howe study imagined a huge increase in immigration and projected Canada’s future population. Result: a big increase in the total population but little change in the age distribution. Then the analysts imagined draconian policy changes that favoured younger immigrants. Result: little change.

So the analysts asked what would it take to maintain the ratio of workers to retirees? Answer: Immigration would have to more than triple almost immediately and rise rapidly to almost seven times current levels. That would mean 2.6 million immigrants arriving each year. And Canada’s population would explode to 57 million within 15 years.

Needless to say, that’s impossible. Not to mention absurd — because there’s no way we could boost numbers that high.

 

[Tabris]

Indeed. The issue we are facing is an aging population. In order to keep a stable population, we need a fertility rate of 2.1 in order to maintain a sustainable worker-to-retiree ratio. Canada is around 1.5. Immigration, unfortunately does not sufficiently change the age distribution of the country.

http://dangardner.ca/why-immigration-wont-save-us/

Well first, this is a modern issue and no one has a complete solution yet. So to say with certain either way is foolish, I can provide just as many links that talk about it being the solution. Here's a UN report (a bit more credible then Dan Gardner ) on replacement migration concept:

http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/migration/migration.htm

Second, it's about "weathering the storm" until those older generations die off to re-balance the population demographics. So even if it's not a total solution, it helps offset the effects of the problem. You change the dynamics of the wave via immigration which reduces the storm (but elongates it) that you need to weather.

So either way, it's foolish to discount immigration. Even if it's not the complete solution, it's part of a solution.