The government’s new targets for reducing the size of Canada’s non-permanent resident (NPR) population are ambitious with multiple margins of adjustment to choose between. It’s important they get it right. Here are our recommendations. 👇
cdhowe.org/intelligence-m…

Economics prof Mikal Skuterud was recently a featured expert at the Public Policy Forum’s Canada Growth Summit 2024 where he discussed what needs to change in immigration policy to address Canada’s productivity challenges.

Read his 3 key takeaways: bit.ly/49I1QMP

CLEF research by Mikal Skuterud, Christopher Worswick, and Matt Doyle gets a mention on Freakonomics Radio.
freakonomics.com/podcast/why-is…

Gosh, in a country where the vast majority of low-wage workers have no right to walk a picket line, organized labour might want to reconsider their litmus test.

Sometimes I feel like focusing on policies that only affect growth rates by a few tenths of a percentage point feels small.

But then I remind myself that the difference between the United States and Argentina over the last 120 years was 0.5 percentage point.

Someone pointed me to a longer time series on Canada's non-permanent series (👉www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/cv.…).

Would love to know the thinking behind discontinuing the earlier series in 2017.

ICYMI: Adam Lavecchia, Philip Oreopoulos, and Noah Spencer: Too good to be true? How an education program is transforming the lives of at-risk youth

thehub.ca/2024-04-12/ada…

Dumb economic policy. Full stop.

New fascinating research from @cleforum. No gates. Get on it. 👇

Virtue signaling to Quebec voters disguised as economic-class immigration.

Amazing to watch LPC gang throw up their hands and claim productivity problem is an impossible nut to crack while they continue with this bad policy.

Ottawa focuses on French-speaking economic immigrants – and often bypasses stronger candidates /via The Globe and Mail theglobeandmail.com/business/artic… Good comments by Mikal Skuterud on yet another distortion of Express Entry #cdnimm

Conservatives like to criticize Liberals when the primary objective of their policies is to virtue signal but fail to see when they’re doing the same.

Kelden Formosa There’s no shortage of people in the world who would be more than happy to receive Canadian citizenship and be part of our national community if offered. That’s a dumb policy objective.

Just read it again, journo. Quite clear the proposal is to focus policy “on the ultimate goal of citizenship.” What’s the problem they’re trying to solve here? I can guess and it has little or nothing to do with the economy.

I'm sensing confusion about the distinction between 'permanent residency status' and 'citizenship.' Citizenship, as a policy objective, is not well aligned with national productivity objectives. Why not just sell citizenship on the international market if that's the objective?

Citizenship? Why? Is there a citizenship emergency that I’m unaware of? How about national productivity instead?

Another week done and gone. Time for a beer and a record. See you on the flip side. Cheers, all. 🍻 🎶

Politicians of all stripes have historically been reluctant to criticize these kinds populist, but harmful demand-side proposals. Bravo to Sabrina Maddeaux for actually prioritizing good policy and the wellbeing of non-homeowners.

When it comes to Canadian wage growth, the one outlier gets all the attention!

Heard Housing Minister yesterday tell Public Policy Forum audience that prioritizing construction workers for immigration (over computer scientists at our top universities) is a solution to our productivity problems.

This is complete economic nonsense. Maybe someone can let him know?