We’ve had borders, passports, visas etc. in some form since the dawn of civilization.
Borders have not always been so precisely defined, and the strict, universal passport system we have today mostly came out of WW1
You can’t just let random people wander into your country undocumented… If you did, it wouldn’t be a country.
What is this xenophobic nonsense? As if physical geography, population, culture, and language have no inertia. But more importantly, why are you concerned with demographic purity as your defining characteristic for a “country”? Why is maintaining this segregation important to you anyway?
Fair, I should have stated instead that “the free movement of populations has been controlled” since the dawn of civilization. Usually by guys with spears rather than by means of documents, true. But we live in a time with more freedom of movement than ever before, and the era of WW1 also happened to coincide with large-scale mechanized transport giving more people the option to travel than ever before.
As for the second part of your comment, rather than rise to the standard bait offered on Lemmy (“muh xenophobia!”) I refer you to my nearby comment, surely visible when you typed this one, that details several ways in which uncontrolled population growth has damaged my country.
None of which have anything to do with segregation or demographic purity.
I’m sorry that your government has failed to fund social services and regulate the housing market. I am unconvinced that this is the fault of migration
The problem is not even the numbers but the rapid rate increase, which is why I advocate against completely open borders. With open borders, you can’t make plans, maybe millions will come next year, maybe nobody?
Those regulations and funds have to be in place before we can welcome a large number of people.
For many years Canada had a low population and low growth rate. Most Canadians had been taught the same thing, “the world is overpopulated, Canada is not, be responsible and don’t have too many kids” and so we were a replacement rate society. Infrastructure was maintained, not built. A trickle of immigration helped keep our population growing at a sustainable rate.
Then we see a sudden shift in federal policy to taking 1 million immigrants per year on a population of 30 million. That’s a 3% growth rate which is the highest in the G8.
Now we have cities and provinces screaming “don’t send immigrants here we are full” because nothing else has grown at 3%. Our GDP per citizen is dropping as we haven’t created jobs at the same rate, so the tax base hasn’t grown, and infrastructure takes decades to plan and implement due to excess red tape.
Also you have to consider unforseen issues like 1 working age immigrant then bringing their entire extended family who are not working age. Our population was already aging, but we are importing more retirees than we are workers, resulting in a net loss when it comes to social service funding. Healthcare was already strained and is now near the breaking point in many regions.
Borders have not always been so precisely defined, and the strict, universal passport system we have today mostly came out of WW1
What is this xenophobic nonsense? As if physical geography, population, culture, and language have no inertia. But more importantly, why are you concerned with demographic purity as your defining characteristic for a “country”? Why is maintaining this segregation important to you anyway?
Fair, I should have stated instead that “the free movement of populations has been controlled” since the dawn of civilization. Usually by guys with spears rather than by means of documents, true. But we live in a time with more freedom of movement than ever before, and the era of WW1 also happened to coincide with large-scale mechanized transport giving more people the option to travel than ever before.
As for the second part of your comment, rather than rise to the standard bait offered on Lemmy (“muh xenophobia!”) I refer you to my nearby comment, surely visible when you typed this one, that details several ways in which uncontrolled population growth has damaged my country.
None of which have anything to do with segregation or demographic purity.
I’m sorry that your government has failed to fund social services and regulate the housing market. I am unconvinced that this is the fault of migration
The problem is not even the numbers but the rapid rate increase, which is why I advocate against completely open borders. With open borders, you can’t make plans, maybe millions will come next year, maybe nobody?
Those regulations and funds have to be in place before we can welcome a large number of people.
For many years Canada had a low population and low growth rate. Most Canadians had been taught the same thing, “the world is overpopulated, Canada is not, be responsible and don’t have too many kids” and so we were a replacement rate society. Infrastructure was maintained, not built. A trickle of immigration helped keep our population growing at a sustainable rate.
Then we see a sudden shift in federal policy to taking 1 million immigrants per year on a population of 30 million. That’s a 3% growth rate which is the highest in the G8.
Now we have cities and provinces screaming “don’t send immigrants here we are full” because nothing else has grown at 3%. Our GDP per citizen is dropping as we haven’t created jobs at the same rate, so the tax base hasn’t grown, and infrastructure takes decades to plan and implement due to excess red tape.
Also you have to consider unforseen issues like 1 working age immigrant then bringing their entire extended family who are not working age. Our population was already aging, but we are importing more retirees than we are workers, resulting in a net loss when it comes to social service funding. Healthcare was already strained and is now near the breaking point in many regions.