[nostrebored]

Really untrue. You’re treating the pools of each as if they’re infinite.

Everyone in a declining population country will implement this strategy to keep asset prices afloat. The pool of people you want to immigrate to your country is not large enough to support that strategy.

Soon the government will have to provide huge incentives have children or immigrate. Then the cost to maintain that asset price is larger and more direct.

[questinthrow]

"The pool of people you want to immigrate to your country is not large enough to support that strategy."

Is this true though? In Vancouver apartment prices have increased by 600% between 2000 and 2024. And Canada is still taking in between 500k to 1 million immigrants yearly. https://topqualitycanada.ca/2023/05/15/shift-of-two-decades-...

[nostrebored]

This is because asset pricing in Canada is entirely dependent on increasing populations. Immigration requirements have been relaxing and will continue to relax. Which means that you should expect a higher “miss” rate on immigrants over time.

The problem with immigration this way is that there’s a careful balance of cost vs production. The question is already becoming “is this net positive” and will soon become “what deficit are we okay with running to prop up the asset market”