It's a political problem, but it's not clear that it's an actual economic problem. Immigrants are easy to demonize, so absent anything else political provocateurs tend to default back to complaining about immigration. Real life studies show that immigration is a net positive for the economy.

Or maybe it’s you doing the demonizing of “political provocateurs”?

Notice the phrasing, if you are against immigration, you are demonizing IMMIGRANTS. Not for instance the politicians who set immigration policy, it’s not them being demonized, it’s the immigrants being demonized!

Immigration being a net benefit to the economy is also a given. It is still a consensus to have immigration. Even far right parties want immigration. The question is more that if you take in more and more immigrants do you have unending economic benefits for the average member of the population and is more immigrants simply always better regardless of who they are or what they do?

We got to the point where immigration levels in Canada in 2022 were such that the population expanded by 2.7% year over year, which is enough to double the population in 26 years, despite the population having well under sub replacement fertility. Is that too slow to reap the real economic benefits of immigration? Should we ignore the provocateurs and believe studies and try to double the population every 13 years?

Housing affordability had been an issue in Canada even before recent changes to immigration. Cities have been hesitant to upzone and no premier wants to upset voters in suburban homeowner ridings.