Unlikely with Canadian exploding diploma mill immigration patterns post covid i.e. the 100k increase in Indians. That's not some, i.e. a few 1000 refugee/asylum charity to make feel good headlines. That's structurally unsustainable. Hence new cap reduction and strict field of study rules. Reality is Canada was importing fuckload of low skill hoping to juice economy short term with international tuition injections, but having students fill service and gig jobs driving up rent / suppressing wages / straining infra / services is bad short term politics and bad long term ROI. These generally aren't turnkey high skilled immigrants that boost economy long term. These aren't even wealthy economic immigrants dump $$$ into economy, these are bluntly marginal immigrants from poor households that goes into debt/leverage and have to take low end jobs with high remittance culture to payback - the give/take ratio is not great. They are no where nearly as "worth it" as a rich PRC international students dropping $$$ into economy and trying to capital flight $$$ into Canadian economy. And removing them is easy... a few signatures to cap study permits, change crs and pgwp requirements, already down ~70% from peak, much easier to building. Of course building is great for everybody, but Canada ain't building.

The right solution is move back to sustainable high-value immigration patterns. 60k to 160k Indians is unprecedented. Like 2nd/3rd largest cohort is PRC and PH at ~40k. 160k per year from any country is stupid policy, only justifiable if the plan is basically to steal their tuition and kick them out of the country after making PR/citizenship harder, i.e. Canada bait-switch (scammed) a bunch of Indian villagers pooling their limited resources together, and it's looking likely that's how this saga will end. Again, it's not Indian immigrants fault, but they don't vote so they're the one's whose going to get screwed because bad policy screwed Canadians who vote.

The broader context is Canada is on paper a small pop country with sufficiently alright governance to get per capita rich selling shit from ground. The more people you have have, the less that model works, and frankly Canada at 25m in the 00s already passed that point (vs 6m Norway). It doesn't help that... foreign influence have stagnated Canadian fossil/extractive industries development. Trudeau thought it was good idea to aim for 100m Canadians by 2100 (century initiative)... which on paper makes sense - only way for Canada to compete/influence vs US is heft, but of course that means a lot of brown and eventually black people fighting for housing and opportunities in the interregnum.

Unsurprisingly, broken housing market = no one likes that interregnum.

>Gelonghui, February 11th | Zhejiang Orient Financial Holdings Group (600120.SH) announced the following explanation regarding the recently market-focused "DeepSeek Concept": DeepSeek is a large model under Hangzhou DeepSeek AI Basic Technology Research Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "DeepSeek"). In response to matters of concern in the Capital Markets, the company verified that as of the date of this announcement, the names of companies invested by the fund Sector managed by the company, such as Peking Deep Search Technology Co., Ltd. and Peking Jiuzhang Yunjike Technology Co., Ltd., are quite similar to those of DeepSeek and its affiliated enterprises, but there is no equity investment relationship. The company and the relevant private equity funds managed by the fund Sector have not directly or indirectly invested in DeepSeek.

ttps://news.futunn.com/en/post/53041547/zhejiang-orient-financial-holdings-group-600120-sh-and-its-managed?level=1&data_ticket=1780940972364876

India (who also tried family planning) utterly fucked in this regard, i.e. trending towards 1.8B people, ignoring all the things PRC did that India didn't. PRC 1.4b trending towards 400m old/poor vs 1000m young/rich. Indian trending towards 1400m old/young poor, 400m young/rich. Can't craw out of per capital poverty with that composition, not within this century, and also very different configuration of constituents to govern, i.e. volatility is going to go way up when more than half of country is young and poor... worse if young educated and poor.

As for why. Democracy sucks at development.

Not a single >10m country has gone from developing to reasonably developed on democratic system. The few <10m countries basically have some resource or geopolitical favourable position where narrow specialization or limited sponsorship from hegemon = enough $$$ to uplift per capita. Political economy is as soft as and inexact as science can be, but democracy being the worst form of gov for developing countries (not except all others) is overwhelmingly clear.

If you're a poor country, hope you have competent authoritarian leadership, bandwagon with hegemons (or rather do not trigger ire of hegemons) or do not get on bad side of hegemon, do some land reforms, sort out your problematic minorities, break eggs before they become problems. It will be bloody but it may pay off, alternative is generations trapped in poverty that accumulates more averted deaths than if you just slapped country into shape in the first place. Don't fall for democratic promotion = aka political elite capture, that will also happen under incompetent autocrats but will 100% happen in democratic system.

Or accept (mass) immigration, which LBH only black and brown countries have excess bodies. Countries will have to decide whether they hate slow decline more than they hate getting darker or hate their women's rights. Or maybe on long timeline, some scifi shenanigans like test tube babies, shifting sex ratio, i.e. 2:1 female to male ratio brings replacement TFR to 1.5 and all the family structure changes that entails (more single moms, institutional polygamy, functional state orphanages etc), i.e. state will have to be much more active in demographic management.

Ultimately, it seems cannot carrot to replacement TFR, maybe able to stick, but no politician in any system really wants to touch that stick.

Underperforming with a standardized test floor, i.e. for tier1 PRC universities this is lowering bar for minority to 99th percentile instead of 99.9 percentile. They filter before tertiary with programs that find all the high performing minorities in poor/disadvantaged regions and throwing them into subsidized boarding schools in wealthy provinces with better academic pipelines, i.e. ensuring they still enter university fully prepared instead of lowering floor to 80th percentile SAT math scores that on paper is good enough but in reality is borderline remedial stupid for university math. Hence PRC STEM has negligible drop rate vs west.

As for athletics, I think it's sensible for US who tightly coupled university economics with (some) sports that it makes sense for some athletes, but that's an... unusual arrangement.

Or you know, preference. Nice steady predictable AI slop delivered at mono qualities can be very comfy. It's like sleep tube, people reading wiki or random articles, comment threads but with varying energy to time pass. It's good enough, better than most human creator content.