False, this is globalist economist propaganda that is not based on reality. A stable population or a slowly reducing population count would be the best case for most countries, as it would make the focus on efficiency gains and effectiveness. "Growing the economy" by adding more people does not do anything, it literally does not grow anything except an useless number somewhere. What is better a country with 1000 people with $1000 per capita, or one with 100 people and $1M per capita?  Furthermore, if you design systems that rely on infinite growth then of course they will start failing when this assumption is not met. This does not mean that such growth is needed, that is complete bullshit. If the focus was on creating a healthy population with extreme levels of well being, combined with technological deflation and automation we could be heading to an utopian. Instead, Canada like many places is heading to a 3rd world shithole. They don't. Massive immigration has a net negative and creates an even heavier burden on the real work force. This is why paying taxes for filthy and unskilled 3rd world persons is a scam. They should receive zero benefits. If the design of system is faulty and riddled with terrible assumptions to begin with, of course such a system is unstable and fragile. The pension structure should be abolished in favor of free market solutions and personal responsibility. Instead we are creating a monster nanny state that creates more harm than good.
False, this is globalist economist propaganda that is not based on reality. A stable population or a slowly reducing population count would be the best case for most countries, as it would make the focus on efficiency gains and effectiveness. "Growing the economy" by adding more people does not do anything, it literally does not grow anything except an useless number somewhere. What is better a country with 1000 people with $1000 per capita, or one with 100 people and $1M per capita?  Furthermore, if you design systems that rely on infinite growth then of course they will start failing when this assumption is not met. This does not mean that such growth is needed, that is complete bullshit. If the focus was on creating a healthy population with extreme levels of well being, combined with technological deflation and automation we could be heading to an utopian. Instead, Canada like many places is heading to a 3rd world shithole. They don't. Massive immigration has a net negative and creates an even heavier burden on the real work force. This is why paying taxes for filthy and unskilled 3rd world persons is a scam. They should receive zero benefits. If the design of system is faulty and riddled with terrible assumptions to begin with, of course such a system is unstable and fragile. The pension structure should be abolished in favor of free market solutions and personal responsibility. Instead we are creating a monster nanny state that creates more harm than good.

False, this is globalist economist propaganda that is not based on reality. A stable population or a slowly reducing population count would be the best case for most countries, as it would make the focus on efficiency gains and effectiveness. "Growing the economy" by adding more people does not do anything, it literally does not grow anything except an useless number somewhere. What is better a country with 1000 people with $1000 per capita, or one with 100 people and $1M per capita?  Furthermore, if you design systems that rely on infinite growth then of course they will start failing when this assumption is not met. This does not mean that such growth is needed, that is complete bullshit. If the focus was on creating a healthy population with extreme levels of well being, combined with technological deflation and automation we could be heading to an utopian. Instead, Canada like many places is heading to a 3rd world shithole. They don't. Massive immigration has a net negative and creates an even heavier burden on the real work force. This is why paying taxes for filthy and unskilled 3rd world persons is a scam. They should receive zero benefits. If the design of system is faulty and riddled with terrible assumptions to begin with, of course such a system is unstable and fragile. The pension structure should be abolished in favor of free market solutions and personal responsibility. Instead we are creating a monster nanny state that creates more harm than good.

False, this is globalist economist propaganda that is not based on reality. A stable population or a slowly reducing population count would be the best case for most countries, as it would make the focus on efficiency gains and effectiveness. "Growing the economy" by adding more people does not do anything, it literally does not grow anything except an useless number somewhere. What is better a country with 1000 people with $1000 per capita, or one with 100 people and $1M per capita?  Furthermore, if you design systems that rely on infinite growth then of course they will start failing when this assumption is not met. This does not mean that such growth is needed, that is complete bullshit. If the focus was on creating a healthy population with extreme levels of well being, combined with technological deflation and automation we could be heading to an utopian. Instead, Canada like many places is heading to a 3rd world shithole. They don't. Massive immigration has a net negative and creates an even heavier burden on the real work force. This is why paying taxes for filthy and unskilled 3rd world persons is a scam. They should receive zero benefits. If the design of system is faulty and riddled with terrible assumptions to begin with, of course such a system is unstable and fragile. The pension structure should be abolished in favor of free market solutions and personal responsibility. Instead we are creating a monster nanny state that creates more harm than good.