[OJFord]

I think it depends on the country - substitute society, area, whatever as you prefer, an organisational unit - some would be advanced by more people; others would likely have an easier time advancing with fewer.

I think this is one root of colonialism: more people and land with which to expand our already developed ideas, processes, et al. - and also perhaps (though often/typically problematically, controversially, etc.) benefit them in doing so, bring our developed ideas, processes, et al. to them, saving them the development, a jump forward for them.

The most obvious example I can think of for this (the general idea, not colonialism) in the modern world is Canada: lots of land, well developed, few people; promoting net immigration.

(The UK has roughly double the population while Canada has about 40x the land area. I don't see many ads but something I've occasionally seen all my life is 'move to Canada' - like the colonial example they're helping us too, eh?)

[monkeywork]

In Canada however that positive net migration (I believe second highest in western world) and high immigrant percentage of population (forth highest I believe) comes at a massive cost when you realize Canada has not been matching population growth to housing and infrastructure.

Prior to pandemic we were building fewer than 0.4 new houses per person nationwide (down from 0.7 back in 2010), our healthcare system is very stressed with lowered population provinces (example Maritimes) having massive waits to get family doctors causing ppl to use ER for simple things adding major stress and delays there.

Most of the talk about Canada's RE market gets pushed to secondary causes or really reactions and symptoms of the core issues. Foriegn money, private investment, greedy landlords etc are all results of a basic supply and demand problem that the government could fix via zoning reform and immigration reform but seem to deflect away from instead giving ppl boogiemen to hate on instead.

Net migration into Canada is great and we benefit greatly by those who choose to come here however if it's not balanced by the government spending to support it Canada is heading for disaster in the next decade.

[OJFord]

Absolutely, I didn't mean to suggest that everything is being done right for that plan, just that it is 'a plan', a deliberate action for the benefit of the nation, not just an arbitrary choice some countries (or parties) like immigration and others don't.

Aside from housing, it's healthcare that really surprises me - I've seen second-hand (I'm not a doctor) the lengths citizens have to go to, and how competitive it is, to get a residency spot at home; even more so apparently if they studied abroad (even if somewhere similar, e.g. US/UK/EU).

[pcthrowaway]

> I've seen second-hand (I'm not a doctor) the lengths citizens have to go to, and how competitive it is, to get a residency spot at home; even more so apparently if they studied abroad (even if somewhere similar, e.g. US/UK/EU).

This sounds similar to the crisis facing intern-level and entry-level software workers, where everyone is too shortstaffed to hire on inexperienced people they'll need to train/supervise. Though perhaps with medicine there's less of a concern of the trainee jumping ship immediately once they're "up-to-standards" (or through residency).. I don't know much about the medical industry

[OJFord]

I think that is a concern too - especially in more rural areas (more people, even disproportionately, want to work in major hubs, in the GTA, etc.) since in the Canadian system you rank hospitals/programmes and they rank candidates, and then you 'match' somewhere (or don't). So possibly, likely even, you don't end up in the area you actually want to be (e.g. where you're from/family lives) so you apply to transfer mid-residency to, or simply for a job afterwards, where you actually want to be.