What do you think of this project?

  • I dislike it

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I dislike it a lot

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    35
Let's be realistic. Rent in Edmonton has not increased because of international student enrollment at dozens of strip mall colleges. That kind of rhetoric isn't only silly and unwelcome, it's dangerous. The reality is, scale is needed for buildings like MacEwan's business building to be constructed. In other words, you're not constructing that building for a couple hundred students. You need lots of students for that building to make economic sense.

Read the article just posted by johnnyboy. Academic institutions are having difficulty filling the hole in their operating budgets left by the decline in international student enrollments. It's not hard to assume that the higher tuition fees paid by international students acted as a subsidy to Canadian students and now the revenue shortfall being experienced by some institutions will need to be picked up by Canadian students or their parents. Taxpayers could possibly end up making up for the shortfall. One thing that is clear, lay-offs and scaling down programs is not conducive to construction of new building.
Again, larger, reputable institutions are not suffering from the effects of these cut-backs nearly enough for this argument to make sense. These institutions' main sources of funding are endowment funds or provincial government transfers, not tuition.

Additionally, as me, and others here have pointed out, Edmonton is an outlier in the sense that it didn't feel the impacts of the poorly thought escalation of temporary resident numbers, but I'm cities like Vancouver and Toronto (and others in southern Ontario and the Lower Mainland) this has a substantial impact, and the government cannot create specific immigration and visa approval rules for different cities.

No one here is saying that we shouldn't have those international students, but the growth was too fast and infrastructure, not just housing, didn't keep up with it. It needs to be brought down to a point in which we can sustain the growth while maintaining affordability, job creation and quality infrastructure for everyone, including those coming here.
 
Again, larger, reputable institutions are not suffering from the effects of these cut-backs nearly enough for this argument to make sense. These institutions' main sources of funding are endowment funds or provincial government transfers, not tuition.

Additionally, as me, and others here have pointed out, Edmonton is an outlier in the sense that it didn't feel the impacts of the poorly thought escalation of temporary resident numbers, but I'm cities like Vancouver and Toronto (and others in southern Ontario and the Lower Mainland) this has a substantial impact, and the government cannot create specific immigration and visa approval rules for different cities.

No one here is saying that we shouldn't have those international students, but the growth was too fast and infrastructure, not just housing, didn't keep up with it. It needs to be brought down to a point in which we can sustain the growth while maintaining affordability, job creation and quality infrastructure for everyone, including those coming here.
Don't take my word for it. Read the testimonials made by the administrators of academic institutions in the article posted by johnnyboy. They say they have revenue shortfalls because of smaller enrollments by international students. As "inclusion" pointed out earlier, universities have enrollment quotas for many programs and a student from Victoria studying at UBC is no different than a student from Hong Kong studying at UBC. They're both going to have residency in Vancouver and drive up the price of rent in Vancouver according to your theory. The Hong Kong student is a more valuable student to UBC though because he's paying a bigger tuition fee than the guy from Victoria. So if the student from Victoria doesn't have marks that are good enough to gain entrance into a program, he's going to be the first one to complain about international students, and it's something you hear from red necks all the time.
 
Don't take my word for it. Read the testimonials made by the administrators of academic institutions in the article posted by johnnyboy. They say they have revenue shortfalls because of smaller enrollments by international students. As "inclusion" pointed out earlier, universities have enrollment quotas for many programs and a student from Victoria studying at UBC is no different than a student from Hong Kong studying at UBC. They're both going to have residency in Vancouver and drive up the price of rent in Vancouver according to your theory. The Hong Kong student is a more valuable student to UBC though because he's paying a bigger tuition fee than the guy from Victoria. So if the student from Victoria doesn't have marks that are good enough to gain entrance into a program, he's going to be the first one to complain about international students, and it's something you hear from red necks all the time.
You are missing the point entirely, but at this point, trying to have a productive conversation with you is like talking to a brick wall.

Institutions like UBC, U of A, etc did not ramp up the number of students they admit to their programs (like the countless no-name colleges all over the country did), and students accepted to these kinds of institutions will not be impacted by the curtailing of student visas (mind you, visas are only issued after acceptance by the university...).
The absolutely crazy numbers of temporary residents coming through strip mall colleges, and bringing their families alongside, these are the ones who were mostly gaming the system and putting a strain on housing, the job market and the country's infrastructure.
 
students accepted to these kinds of institutions will not be impacted by the curtailing of student visas (mind you, visas are only issued after acceptance by the university...)
I don't think this is true. There's a definite increase in the administrative load that comes with the clampdown, and greater uncertainty about whether a visa will be issued at all, even for highly competitive graduate programs.
 
I don't think this is true. There's a definite increase in the administrative load that comes with the clampdown, and greater uncertainty about whether a visa will be issued at all, even for highly competitive graduate programs.
There might be the odd one that's trickier here and there, but considering how part of the recent overall targets for this administration also involve "brain drain", especially focusing on competition with the US, I do not see major institutions being heavily affected.
 
There might be the odd one that's trickier here and there, but considering how part of the recent overall targets for this administration also involve "brain drain", especially focusing on competition with the US, I do not see major institutions being heavily affected.
They are being affected. Whatever verbal commitments the administration makes, the burden and scrutiny on international MSc and PhD students and their advisors has gotten worse. I'm saying this as someone at U of A having conversations with my colleagues about these exact issues.
 
Screenshot 2025-12-09 at 11.07.20 AM.png
 

Back
Top