[shreddog]

Stats Can just released their latest batch of population estimates (http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/111220/dq111220c-eng.htm), running up to Q3 2011.

Overall no real surprises: Ontario leads in absolute numbers, Alberta in percentages, but there are some interesting trends and tibits.

I only played with the numbers for the big 4, but here are some views

Population Estimates for Oct 2011
Canada: 34,605,346
ON: 13.422,912
QC: 8,002,098
BC: 4,592,034
AB: 3,798,791

Growth, 2011 YTD, total / %
Canada: 311,828 / .91%
ON: 123,671 / .93%
QC: 61,880 / .78%
BC: 40,292 / .89%
AB: 56,598 / 1.51%

Natural Increase (births -deaths)
Canada; 104,979
ON: 37,903
QC: 22,300
BC: 10,071
AB: 23,866

Inter-Provincial Migration
ON: -2027
QC: -2703
BC: -1567
AB: 13131

International Migration
Canada: 206,869
ON: 87,794 (42.4%)
QC: 42,283 (20.4%)
BC: 31,788 (15.4%)
AB: 19,601 (9.5%)

Some observations:

Based on the current growth trends, Canada’s population may be over 35M by Feb 2012, Alberta may be over 4M by early 2013, Ontario may also hit 14M by early 2013 and BC may hit 5M in late 2014. Of course these estimates are wild ass at best, but it will be interesting to see when these milestones are hit.

The big 4 take in 87.7% of all international immigrants and make up 86.2% of the population ... meaning the immigrant to population link is almost as it should be ... no real surprise.

Alberta totally owns interprovincial migration, BC saw negative interprovincal migration in all three quarters and both Ontario and Quebec had a mix of positive and negative (but mainly negative).

In natural growth (births less deaths) Alberta has higher absolute growth than Quebec with less than half the population! Yes it is true that the median age in Alberta is much lower than Quebec’s, but it is still shocking to see this much of a difference!

And if you’re interested on how things looked a year ago … http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=190164

[thurmas]

Manitoba has the 2nd highest growth rate in Canada after Alberta we grew by 15,700 people or 1.37% The West is just leaving Quebec and the Maritimes in the dust.

[vanatox]

There was an error in the table regarding total growth for Quebec. I have changed the numbers.

Stats Can just released their latest batch of population estimates (http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/91:002:x/2011003/tablesectlist:listetableauxsect:eng.htm), running up to Q3 2011.

Overall no real surprises: Ontario leads in absolute numbers, Alberta in percentages, but there are some interesting trends and tibits.

I only played with the numbers for the big 4, but here are some views

Population Estimates for Oct 2011
Canada: 34,605,346
ON: 13.422,912
QC: 8,002,098
BC: 4,592,034
AB: 3,798,791

Growth, 2011 YTD, total / %
Canada: 311,828 / .91%
ON: 123,671 / .93%
QC: 61,880 / .78%
BC: 40,292 / .89%
AB: 56,598 / 1.51%

Natural Increase (births -deaths)
Canada; 104,979
ON: 37,903
QC: 22,300
BC: 10,071
AB: 23,866

Inter-Provincial Migration
ON: -2027
QC: -2703
BC: -1567
AB: 13131

International Migration
Canada: 206,869
ON: 87,794 (42.4%)
QC: 42,283 (20.4%)
BC: 31,788 (15.4%)
AB: 19,601 (9.5%)

Some observations:

Based on the current growth trends, Canada’s population may be over 35M by Feb 2012, Alberta may be over 4M by early 2013, Ontario may also hit 14M by early 2013 and BC may hit 5M in late 2014. Of course these estimates are wild ass at best, but it will be interesting to see when these milestones are hit.

The big 4 take in 87% of all international immigrants.

Alberta totally owns interprovincial migration, BC saw negative interprovincal migration in all three quarters and both Ontario and Quebec had a mix of positive and negative (but mainly negative).

In natural growth (births less deaths) Alberta has higher absolute growth than Quebec with less than half the population! Yes it is true that the median age in Alberta is much lower than Quebec’s, but it is still shocking to see this much of a difference!

And if you’re interested on how things looked a year ago … http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=190164

[vanatox]

In natural growth (births less deaths) Alberta has higher absolute growth than Quebec with less than half the population! Yes it is true that the median age in Alberta is much lower than Quebec’s, but it is still shocking to see this much of a difference![/url]

Alberta really has a baby boom, especially if you compare with BC. More than double absolute natural growth even if the province has a lower population. There has been a mini baby boom in Quebec but the province also has an aging population so the effect is less apparent.

[Dougler306]

I think maintoba was 3rd in population growth. Well sask was ranked 2nd in growth

[thurmas]

Sask was 1052000 last year this year 1063000 Man was 1243000 last year this year 1258000 growth rates are tied.

[thurmas]

By the stats can population clock Manitoba grows 5 minutes per person faster than Sask. I can't let Rider people win!


http://www.statcan.gc.ca/ig-gi/pop-sk-eng.htm

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/ig-gi/pop-mb-eng.htm

[Nathan]

Sask was 1052000 last year this year 1063000 Man was 1243000 last year this year 1258000 growth rates are tied.

Saskatchewan grew by 5,651 in Q3 (apparently the highest rate in Canada) and 5,444 in Q2. This alone is at the 11k number your numbers give, and Saskatchewan has had a growth in population in every quarter since April 2006, so something is off here...

article (http://www.canada.com/Saskatchewan+population+posts+record+growth/5890023/story.html)

[taal]

Are there predictions for specific cites as well ?

[MolsonExport]

Manitoba has the 2nd highest growth rate in Canada after Alberta we grew by 15,700 people or 1.37% The West is just leaving Quebec and the Maritimes in the dust.

15,700 is certainly leaving Quebec in the dust. Let's put things into perspective:

ON: 123,671
QC: 61,880

[Vertigo3000]

Annual growth right?
Because that can't be the amount of growth since 2006! Too little for five years.

[Darkoshvilli]

15,700 is certainly leaving Quebec in the dust. Let's put things into perspective:

ON: 123,671
QC: 61,880

Don't be so cocky man. At this rate Manitoba will surpass Quebec's population in 200,000 years.

[Nicko999]

Don't be so cocky man. At this rate Manitoba will surpass Quebec's population in 200,000 years.

And let's not forget the Territories... they are leaving the West in the dust.

[armorand93]

And let's not forget the Territories... they are leaving the West in the dust.

Particularly Iqualit, look at that capital grow! Heard they might get BUS RESOLDFROMWINNIPEG TRANSIT! :jester:

[caltrane74]

By 2020 Ontario might be able to hit 17 million, on track for 21 million by 2030.

[thurmas]

I meant all of Western Canada but if I live long enough in 200,000 years it will be Manitoba time!

[Acajack]

This obsession that some people here have with overtaking other areas of the country in population is really bizarre...

[Biff]

This obsession that some people here have with overtaking other areas of the country in population is really bizarre...

I can't wait until my part of the country overtakes your part of the country in population....we will reign supreme........bwwhha ha ha ha......cough, cough

[ErickMontreal]

I can't wait until my part of the country to separate from your part of the country ....we will reign supreme........bwwhha ha ha ha......cough, cough

:haha:

[shreddog]

This obsession that some people here have with overtaking other areas of the country in population is really bizarre...Same same for those "overtaken" (there was a fair bit of angst a few years ago when the Calgary metro exceeded Ottawa's) however I do agree that this obsession is puzzling at best. It's almost like some view it as a zero sum game where the benefit of one comes at the expense of another.

BTW, before anyone gets too hung up on these numbers - first they are estimates (albeit very good ones) and these growth numbers will change dramatically over time. Simply go to the SC website and look at the historical numbers.

Anyway, enjoy the numbers, explore the analysis, and remember as always my {insert city name here} is always better than your {insert city name here}. ;)

[Waterlooson]

Alberta has long been a place that drew inter-provincial migration, but now it is also starting to attract immigration due to the opportunities for employment.

[Waterlooson]

This obsession that some people here have with overtaking other areas of the country in population is really bizarre...

In the context of bill C-20, the "obsession" becomes a little less bizarre.... and so do any Federal payments... which are based on population.

[MolsonExport]

Will equalization payments start to pollute this thread as well?

Christ all fuggin mighty, it is so damned tiresome.

[freeweed]

Will equalization payments start to pollute this thread as well?

Christ all fuggin mighty, it is so damned tiresome.

It's almost as if it's an important issue to a lot of people or something.

Although it's pretty off-topic, doesn't economics play a far greater role than population in the formula?

[big T]

Anyway, enjoy the numbers, explore the analysis, and remember as always my {insert city name here} is always better than your {insert city name here}. ;)

My Saint-Pierre-de-Véronne-à-Pike-River is always better than your Saint-Pierre-de-Véronne-à-Pike-River?

[D-dog]

When are city pop est coming out??

[Waterlooson]

Will equalization payments start to pollute this thread as well?

Christ all fuggin mighty, it is so damned tiresome.

Not unless you insist on talking about it.... I made no reference to that (only you have) - either directly or indirectly since the fastest growing provinces don't qualify for equalization.... social transfers are separate from equalization payments.

[D-dog]

Fine I'll go first....

Toronto 5,841,500
Montreal 3,898,500
Vancouver 2,449,500
Calgary 1,268,000
Ottawa 1,253,500
Edmonton 1,196,500
Winnipeg 766,500
Quebec city 765,500
Hamilton 747,500
Kitchener-Cambridge-Waterloo 498,500
London 496,500
Halifax 410,000
St. Catharines-Niagara 405,500
Oshawa 368,500
Victoria 363,500
Windsor 329,500
Saskatoon 274,000
Regina 221,000
Sherbrooke 200,000
St John's 195,000
Barrie 192,000
Kelowna 181,000
Abbotsford-Mission 177,500
Kingston 165,000
Greater Sudbury 165,000
Saguenay 153,000
Trois-Rivières 148,000
Brantford 140,500
Guelph 140,000
Moncton 139,500
Saint John 129,000
Thunder Bay 127,000
Peterborough 121,500

[Waterlooson]

^^ link please?

[D-dog]

No link I am taking a guess

[Dougler306]

This was on the saskatoon construction page 2

The city estimates that its at 234,000

http://www.saskatoon.ca/DEPARTMENTS/Community%20Services/PlanningDevelopment/FutureGrowth/DemographicAndHousingData/Pages/PopulationEstimateProjection.aspx


Still waiting on regina

[Nathan]

This was on the saskatoon construction page 2

The city estimates that its at 234,000

http://www.saskatoon.ca/DEPARTMENTS/Community%20Services/PlanningDevelopment/FutureGrowth/DemographicAndHousingData/Pages/PopulationEstimateProjection.aspx


Still waiting on regina

The CMA is definitely higher though. I think it's actually really close to the number D-dog gave.

Regina is around D-dog's figure as well (for the CMA), city is probably about 200,000 now.

[Vaillant]

Fine I'll go first....

Toronto 5,841,500
Montreal 3,898,500
Vancouver 2,449,500
Calgary 1,268,000
Ottawa 1,253,500
Edmonton 1,196,500
Winnipeg 766,500
Quebec city 765,500
Hamilton 747,500
Kitchener-Cambridge-Waterloo 498,500
London 496,500
Halifax 410,000
St. Catharines-Niagara 405,500
Oshawa 368,500
Victoria 363,500
Windsor 329,500
Saskatoon 274,000
Regina 221,000
Sherbrooke 200,000
St John's 195,000
Barrie 192,000
Kelowna 181,000
Abbotsford-Mission 177,500
Kingston 165,000
Greater Sudbury 165,000
Saguenay 153,000
Trois-Rivières 148,000
Brantford 140,500
Guelph 140,000
Moncton 139,500
Saint John 129,000
Thunder Bay 127,000
Peterborough 121,500


Montréal is already more than 3 900 000

[someone123]

.... and so do any Federal payments... which are based on population.

The main reason why payments are based on population is that the need for money increases as the population grows. On balance it's certainly not a given that service levels, or the quality of infrastructure improve as the population increases.

In many cases service levels seem to be worse in rapidly-growing areas because infrastructure doesn't keep up. I'm not sure Ontario is going to be such a great place if it really does hit 20 million or 30 million inhabitants. Toronto already has very long commutes for example. A place like Alberta that lives off of natural resources might not be better off with a large population since the revenues from natural resources are largely fixed and determined by the larger world economy.

I think this sentiment about how wonderful it is to have a rapidly-growing population dates back to past decades when Canada was an underpopulated backwater country. In the future, rapid population growth might not be very desirable. It is already undesirable in most parts of the world.

[Melroy]

This obsession that some people here have with overtaking other areas of the country in population is really bizarre...

It's not really bizarre, just typical human nature. Any time you can measure and compare something, it automatically brings out a competitive streak.

[Waterlooson]

What is perhaps a little bizarre is what happens in the US when cities are unhappy with the Census Bureau population stats... they sue the Bureau, because they want the federal funds they would get with a higher figure!

[caltrane74]

I wonder how close the GTA is to 7 million, usually runs 1 Million ahead of CMA.

CMA 5.8 mil
GTA 6.8 mil ? Perhaps?

[D-dog]

Montréal is already more than 3 900 000

Like I said it's a guess until the official ones come out it's as good a guess as yours!:cheers:

[Rico Rommheim]

Montréal is already more than 3 900 000

I thought we had (unofficially) reached 4,000 000?

[Vaillant]

I thought we had (unofficially) reached 4,000 000?

yes something between 3 960 000 and 4 050 000, it's still unofficially but febuary 3rd we will know more about it

Montreal is still bigger than the whole Alberta and that is official! :D

[lake of the nations]

Montreal is still bigger than the whole Alberta and that is official! :D

Too bad it doesn't have the same GDP. Can you imagine how rich it would be!!!

[Doug]

yes something between 3 960 000 and 4 050 000, it's still unofficially but febuary 3rd we will know more about it

Montreal is still bigger than the whole Alberta and that is official! :D

For another couple of years, maybe

[Rico Rommheim]

Montreal at 4 million is a milestone.its almost a miracle, when you take history into the equation. We reached 3 million in the mid-eighties, so 25 years to ad a million. Let's hope we can get to 5 million in 15 years!!!

[thurmas]

If Quebec didn't have the seperation flare ups since 1976 Montreal would probably have 500,000 more people and some major corporations still headquartered in Montreal.

[Vertigo3000]

If Quebec didn't have the seperation flare ups since 1976 Montreal would probably have 500,000 more people and some major corporations still headquartered in Montreal.

Toronto wouldn't be what it is today, Montreal and Toronto would pretty much swap places with corporations and people

[Razor]

Wow..Calgary and Ottawa literally neck to neck! Can Ottawa cheat and count all the lil old valley and sea way towns surrounding it's CMA? Joking of course.The official count isn't even in yet, but I think the numbers will be similiar to what was shown..Good on Alberta for all the economic success it's enjoying right now.

[ACT7]

Toronto wouldn't be what it is today, Montreal and Toronto would pretty much swap places with corporations and people
Toronto started to slowly overtake Montreal long before separatism began. That being said, the gap likely wouldn't be so big as it is today and Montreal probably wouldn't have lost as many head offices.

[rbt]

Toronto started to slowly overtake Montreal long before separatism began. That being said, the gap likely wouldn't be so big as it is today and Montreal probably wouldn't have lost as many head offices.

Maybe, maybe not. There is a fair amount of regulation in place which requires certain companies (like Air Canada and CN Rail) to have their head-office in Montreal.

That regulation may not be as strong today if Quebec was more passive.

Air Canada, for example, is one of Montreal's top 10 private employers. There are only 3 (Air Canada, BCE, and Bombardier) out of the top 10 that are not tied specifically to Quebec. Other top employers are McGill, hostpital networks, quebec lotto, french bank (Desjardins), and similar.

Both Air Canada and CN Rail have expressed strong interest in having that regulatory restriction removed.


Bombardier at this point is better described as being a European company. 2/3rds of their workforce is in Europe and their Berlin offices are both larger and handle more sales (revenue) than the Montreal headquarters.

Bell Canada seems to be in Montreal by choice. I don't see anything in the Bell Canada Act. that requires them to be located there.

[ssiguy]

I really would like to know what formula StatsCan uses for it's CMA definition.
A great example is Calgary. The district {Foothills} bordering the southern part of the city is not even considered in it's CMA yet it has about 19,000 and is total commuter population. Nearby Okotoks has 25,000 is is also a bedroom community. This is in great contrast to Ottawa or Edmonton which take in massive territory.

[Mister F]

In many cases service levels seem to be worse in rapidly-growing areas because infrastructure doesn't keep up. I'm not sure Ontario is going to be such a great place if it really does hit 20 million or 30 million inhabitants. Toronto already has very long commutes for example.
There are many parts of the developed world that are as heavily populated and manage just fine. There's no reason to think we can't do the same. The most populated parts of the country have to grow more efficiently, and that's slowly but surely happening.

I think this sentiment about how wonderful it is to have a rapidly-growing population dates back to past decades when Canada was an underpopulated backwater country. In the future, rapid population growth might not be very desirable. It is already undesirable in most parts of the world.
It's undesirable mostly in developing countries with unchecked growth. Developed countries are growing mostly by choice. The "we're populated enough" idea is very Canadian in that we still look at urban growth with suspicion. But in reality Canada could easily double its population.

[roccerfeller]

I really would like to know what formula StatsCan uses for it's CMA definition.
A great example is Calgary. The district {Foothills} bordering the southern part of the city is not even considered in it's CMA yet it has about 19,000 and is total commuter population. Nearby Okotoks has 25,000 is is also a bedroom community. This is in great contrast to Ottawa or Edmonton which take in massive territory.

Gatineau? Makes up a huge chunk of Ottawa's CMA population (812k in 06 vs 1.13million CMA)

And Compare Edmonton city proper to its CMA (730k in 06 vs 1.03 million CMA)...I always thought Edmonton's got a lot of surrounding neighbourhoods; there's a big difference between 730k and 1 million.

vs Calgary (988k in 06 vs 1.079 million CMA)

larger differences for Ottawa & Edmonton so I always assumed Ottawa & Edmonton had more CMA territory than Calgary.

though this information doesn't really address your point :haha:

In fact, I wonder too what parameters are used.

For example, take a look at Winnipeg & Quebec City's city proper's vs CMA (633k / 694k Peg; 491k / 715k QC), which shows a stark contrast in the CMA population vs the city

I think the CMA is generally the serviceable population or surrounding communities that are dependent on the city financially (i.e. people work in the city proper or are tied to the city proper) but I don't exactly know which communities that would be. For instance, in Winnipeg, I had many friends live outside Winnipeg (i.e. Lockport, Stonewall, Selkirk, etc...) but they would go to classes at the University of Winnipeg every day, or work within the city.

These links might be helpful:

http://geodepot.statcan.ca/diss/reference/cogg/LongDescription_e.cfm?GEO_LEVEL=5&REFCODE=1&LANG=E

http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/ref/dict/geo009a-eng.cfm

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/bsolc/olc-cel/olc-cel?lang=eng&catno=92F0138M2003001

The first two might help to answer these thoughts

[dennis1]

It's undesirable mostly in developing countries with unchecked growth. Developed countries are growing mostly by choice. The "we're populated enough" idea is very Canadian in that we still look at urban growth with suspicion. But in reality Canada could easily double its population.

If Canada did that it would be the 20th largest country on earth. Are you prepared for that?

[rbt]

If Canada did that it would be the 20th largest country on earth. Are you prepared for that?

Everybody over 35 had better hope we continue to increase the population of Canada for the next 50 years; or we may find that there are very few people working in hospitals, banks, etc. when we go to retire. The age gap is an issue that will outlast the boomers in Canada due to low birth rates.

Watch Japan closely to see just how difficult it can be to have half the population retired.

[Doug]

Everybody over 35 had better hope we continue to increase the population of Canada for the next 50 years; or we may find that there are very few people working in hospitals, banks, etc. when we go to retire. The age gap is an issue that will outlast the boomers in Canada due to low birth rates.

Watch Japan closely to see just how difficult it can be to have half the population retired.

Retirement? That is an obsolete Baby Boomer concept. I'm on the Freedom 85 plan.

[caltrane74]

Import as many people as it takes so that I can be waited on "hand and foot" till the day I die. Also make sure I get my CPP Checks/Bank deposits on time as well.

[rbt]

Retirement? That is an obsolete Baby Boomer concept. I'm on the Freedom 85 plan.

That's my point.

Retirement isn't being pushed back in countries where the top-heavy work force problem doesn't exist.

If Canada had twice as many people between 10 and 30, boomers would be able to retire much easier both because their investments would be stable* but also because health care costs would likely decrease somewhat (more competition for jobs) and social security payments could be higher.

* TSX is going to have a difficult time providing significant returns when boomers start to withdraw from their pension funds and personal investments in significant quantity.

Canadians pulling 50 Billion per year out of the market (5 million Canadians, $10,000 per year from RRSP/pension/other plans) is going to be difficult to replace by today's 30 year-olds.

My Freedom35 plan is shorts of pension heavy stocks in a ~2015 recession.

[dennis1]

Everybody over 35 had better hope we continue to increase the population of Canada for the next 50 years; or we may find that there are very few people working in hospitals, banks, etc. when we go to retire. The age gap is an issue that will outlast the boomers in Canada due to low birth rates.

Watch Japan closely to see just how difficult it can be to have half the population retired.

I agree 100% Look at how many recessions japan has had.

[Doug]

That's my point.

Retirement isn't being pushed back in countries where the top-heavy work force problem doesn't exist.

If Canada had twice as many people between 10 and 30, boomers would be able to retire much easier both because their investments would be stable* but also because health care costs would likely decrease somewhat (more competition for jobs) and social security payments could be higher.

* TSX is going to have a difficult time providing significant returns when boomers start to withdraw from their pension funds and personal investments in significant quantity.

Canadians pulling 50 Billion per year out of the market (5 million Canadians, $10,000 per year from RRSP/pension/other plans) is going to be difficult to replace by today's 30 year-olds.

My Freedom35 plan is shorts of pension heavy stocks in a ~2015 recession.

More young people would just delay the inevitable. As life spans increase, the population must age. I'd rather see the CPP/OAS and public sector pension eligibility ages pushed way, way, way out to reflect longer lifespans.

[Mister F]

If Canada did that it would be the 20th largest country on earth. Are you prepared for that?
Prepared for what exactly?

[dennis1]

Prepared for what exactly?

With a bigger population comes a bigger government and more services to be provided. Don't tell me you don't know this.

[Canadian Mind]

With a bigger population comes a bigger government and more services to be provided. Don't tell me you don't know this.

And more people to pay for it.

Economics of scale. For example; 90% of the inter-city/inter-provincial highway infrastructure in this country could sustain 2-3 times the current population. That's infrastructure that gets 33-50% of its potential used, with that many people paying 100% maintenance costs. So with a larger population, you'd have more people paying the same maintenance costs, making it cheaper on a per-capita basis. In parts of the country where the highway infrastructure wouldn't be adequate, with a higher population we may be able to finally afford upgrades, Northern Ontario and BC for example. HSR would also become more Palatable both in the Windsor-QC corridor and the Prairies when you are serving 30 Million people and 8 million respectively.

[Rusty van Reddick]

Alberta has long been a place that drew inter-provincial migration, but now it is also starting to attract immigration due to the opportunities for employment.

"Starting to"? Calgary punches WAY above its weight with respect to current immigration levels as well as the percentage of foreign-born here. Calgary is as of the 2006 census almost exactly where Toronto was in 1991- and that was years (I have the old Nat Geos from the mid 80s to prove it) promoting itself as the most multicultural city on earth. In 2009 Calgary had the second highest rate of international immigration in North America- only Vancouver was higher, and yes we beat Toronto (and every American city). But this isn't a new thing- we've always had high rates of internal in-migration and natural increase, but Calgary has always been a major magnet for international immigration. Always.

And so has Edmonton and so have Alberta's smaller centres, especially Fort Mac.

[Cowtown_Tim]

Just curious what the percentage of immigrants in Calgary is? Shame on me for living in Calgary and not knowing this.

"Starting to"? Calgary punches WAY above its weight with respect to current immigration levels as well as the percentage of foreign-born here. Calgary is as of the 2006 census almost exactly where Toronto was in 1991- and that was years (I have the old Nat Geos from the mid 80s to prove it) promoting itself as the most multicultural city on earth. In 2009 Calgary had the second highest rate of international immigration in North America- only Vancouver was higher, and yes we beat Toronto (and every American city). But this isn't a new thing- we've always had high rates of internal in-migration and natural increase, but Calgary has always been a major magnet for international immigration. Always.

And so has Edmonton and so have Alberta's smaller centres, especially Fort Mac.

[Cowtown_Tim]

yes something between 3 960 000 and 4 050 000, it's still unofficially but febuary 3rd we will know more about it

Montreal is still bigger than the whole Alberta and that is official! :D

For now :D

[Rusty van Reddick]

Just curious what the percentage of immigrants in Calgary is? Shame on me for living in Calgary and not knowing this.

All available at statcan.gc.ca... around 24% in the 2006 census.

[sync]

All available at statcan.gc.ca... around 24% in the 2006 census.

my friends from vancouver reminded me several times over the holidays (they were visiting alberta) that calgary is the, and i quote, "whitest city in canada".

i don't even know what to say to them when i hear that stuff.

[Surrealplaces]

Statscan site has a reasonable explanation of the formula they use and I believe Wikipedia does also.

In a nutshell, Foothills MD doesn't have as much commuter traffic into Calgary as many would think. A surprising number of people in Okotoks work within the MD itself (statscan doesn't say where they work, but likely High River)
If you go through the community profiles you can actually do the math as they have number for the amount of people that commute to other CMAs etc..
Foothills is pretty close to being added to Calgary. I don't think it made it in the 2011 census, but it's close.

I really would like to know what formula StatsCan uses for it's CMA definition.
A great example is Calgary. The district {Foothills} bordering the southern part of the city is not even considered in it's CMA yet it has about 19,000 and is total commuter population. Nearby Okotoks has 25,000 is is also a bedroom community. This is in great contrast to Ottawa or Edmonton which take in massive territory.

[Metro-One]

:previous:I have also never figured out why that is a negative thing... It would be like negatively viewing cities in Japan because they are mostly Japanese.

[Acajack]

my friends from vancouver reminded me several times over the holidays (they were visiting alberta) that calgary is the, and i quote, "whitest city in canada".

i don't even know what to say to them when i hear that stuff.

They are full of it. Every single large city in the country except for Toronto and Vancouver has a lower percentage of visible minorities than Calgary.

[Surrealplaces]

You'll have to ask them 'which Calgary' they visited :haha: All someone would have to do is walk around downtown Calgary for about 10 minutes and they'd realize that's not the case....or better yet if they took the c-train to the northeast they would probably be declaring Calgary, the most diverse city in Canada..

my friends from vancouver reminded me several times over the holidays (they were visiting alberta) that calgary is the, and i quote, "whitest city in canada".

i don't even know what to say to them when i hear that stuff.

[Waterlooson]

"Starting to"? Calgary punches WAY above its weight with respect to current immigration levels as well as the percentage of foreign-born here. Calgary is as of the 2006 census almost exactly where Toronto was in 1991- and that was years (I have the old Nat Geos from the mid 80s to prove it) promoting itself as the most multicultural city on earth. In 2009 Calgary had the second highest rate of international immigration in North America- only Vancouver was higher, and yes we beat Toronto (and every American city). But this isn't a new thing- we've always had high rates of internal in-migration and natural increase, but Calgary has always been a major magnet for international immigration. Always.

And so has Edmonton and so have Alberta's smaller centres, especially Fort Mac.

Yes, "starting to"! As I was referring to Alberta as a whole and not specifically Calgary which you have chosen to cherry pick; even so:

"The foreign-born population made up almost one-quarter (23.6%) of Calgary's population in 2006, up from 20.9% in 2001. The proportion of foreign-born was the fifth-highest in Canada, after Toronto, Vancouver, Hamilton and Abbottsford."

http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/as-sa/97-557/p28-eng.cfm

You say Calgary has "always been" a major magnet for immigration? I don't think so, since as late as 2001 only 21% was foreign born.... a figure not that much higher than the average for Canada taken as a whole (currently about 22%), so as to include very low centres of immigration like the Maritimes and rural Canada.... I would say, that it's really only over about the last 10 or so years, that immigration to Calgary has really picked up.... making this a more recent phenomena than for the other cities mentioned. And I didn't single out Calgary in the first place, I was referring to Alberta as a whole... which has a much lower average of foreign-born than Calgary - obviously.

As of 2006, Calgary was ranked 5th in the proportion of foriegn-born, and it was the 5th largest metro.... so I don't see how that qualifies it as punching "WAY above" its weight in this regard... at least not until recently.... and that's just what I said.

[jigglysquishy]

What you seem to forget is that North America and Europe account for 10% of the world's population yet take in 95% of the world's immigration.

Calgary would be within the top 5% for global diversity.

[Waterlooson]

What you seem to forget is that North America and Europe account for 10% of the world's population yet take in 95% of the world's immigration.

Calgary would be within the top 5% for global diversity.

Last time I checked Canada made up about .4%, the US 3-4% and Mexico just over 1% of the world's pop. for a total of around 5% of the world's pop. and other country's have taken in huge numbers of refugees that may not get counted as "immigrants"... so I think your figures are way off... no way does NA take in 95% of the world's immigration.

[Metro-One]

:previous:You missed Europe their, not to mention Australia / New Zealand.

[jigglysquishy]

Canada needs to further establish itself as an immigration capital.

I'm adamenty against all immigration to Europe. Canada and the US are the only true homes of immigrants

[Waterlooson]

:previous:You missed Europe their, not to mention Australia / New Zealand.


Just take Australia... foreign-born stand at about 24% of population. That's higher than Canada at about 22% and the US at only about 12%.

[jigglysquishy]

Let's get real here. When I said North America and Europe I included Australia and New Zealand as well. It saves on typing

[Metro-One]

:previous:It was in response to Waterlooson's comment, not yours :)

[Andrewjm3D]

What you seem to forget is that North America and Europe account for 10% of the world's population yet take in 95% of the world's immigration.

Calgary would be within the top 5% for global diversity.


Whoa, where are you getting your facts from? These sound like Fox news or Sun media facts and figures. :shrug:

[MonkeyRonin]

Based on his posting history as well, jigglysquishy definitely has some...odd views regarding immigration.

[isaidso]

For now :D

True. I wouldn't be surprised to see the population of Alberta pass that of Montreal by the 2016 Census. Alberta's GDP is already bigger than BC's and might pass that of Quebec by then too. Alberta punches way above its weight. As far as I'm concerned, the bigger and richer Alberta gets, the better off Canada will be.

Hopefully, Alberta can get to 7 million within 25 years.

[roccerfeller]

True. I wouldn't be surprised to see the population of Alberta pass that of Montreal by the 2016 Census. Alberta's GDP is already bigger than BC's and might pass that of Quebec by then too. Alberta punches way above its weight. As far as I'm concerned, the bigger and richer Alberta gets, the better off Canada will be.

Hopefully, Alberta can get to 7 million within 25 years.

A lot can happen in 25 years.

I see Saskatchewan and Manitoba, and even Atlantic Canada, getting due recognition during that timespan.

Though I do hope the entire country grows, not just certain provinces while others lag behind.

[new age]

my friends from vancouver reminded me several times over the holidays (they were visiting alberta) that calgary is the, and i quote, "whitest city in canada".

i don't even know what to say to them when i hear that stuff.

Thats funny when I first went to Vancouver from Ontario I always said, "It was nice in Vancouver, never snowed, to bad it is white all the time." How times have changed, and it is happening in Alberta too.

The foreign-born population, and it's visible minorities of Calgary are not the same thing. You can be black, and not an immigrant, or you can be an immigrant without being a visible minority.

[MolsonExport]

What you seem to forget is that North America and Europe account for 10% of the world's population yet take in 95% of the world's immigration.

Calgary would be within the top 5% for global diversity.

what complete balderdash.

[isaidso]

A lot can happen in 25 years.

I see Saskatchewan and Manitoba, and even Atlantic Canada, getting due recognition during that timespan.

Though I do hope the entire country grows, not just certain provinces while others lag behind.

I see good things ahead for Saskatchewan and Manitoba also. Maybe they can both get to 2 million over the same time span. I'm not that optimistic about Atlantic Canada, although that monster $25 billion ship contract should help Nova Scotia a great deal. It's a wonderful part of the country, but gets bypassed due to few opportunities and little in the way of big city delights. Halifax really needs to get to about Winnipeg's size to reach that critical mass.

[freeweed]

my friends from vancouver reminded me several times over the holidays (they were visiting alberta) that calgary is the, and i quote, "whitest city in canada".

i don't even know what to say to them when i hear that stuff.

Tell them you're looking into finding more educated friends.

[Vertigo3000]

I thought Toronto and Miami had the largest foreign born populations? Calgary, really? I love the city so don't tell me I'm bashing the city, but that city is white as f**k compared to Toronto! Anyone who lives in or near Toronto or have even been there would know that Toronto is full of immigrants whether visible minorities or Europeans

[freeweed]

I thought Toronto and Miami had the largest foreign born populations? Calgary, really? I love the city so don't tell me I'm bashing the city, but that city is white as f**k compared to Toronto! Anyone who lives in or near Toronto or have even been there would know that Toronto is full of immigrants whether visible minorities or Europeans

Over a quarter of Calgary is decidedly non-white. I suppose if you grew up in Calcutta that might appear to be "white as fuck" but for North America it's pretty damned diverse. 2006 Statscan details. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calgary#Demographics)

I also think it's time to take issue with the whole "white as fuck" comment in general. It's more than a bit offensive, to be honest. If I described Miami as "Hispanic as fuck" or Detroit as "black as fuck", people would be offended, and rightly so.

Also, I don't see a single person here claiming Calgary has a larger foreign-born population than Toronto, although maybe I didn't read close enough. :shrug:

[Vertigo3000]

Over a quarter of Calgary is decidedly non-white. I suppose if you grew up in Calcutta that might appear to be "white as fuck" but for North America it's pretty damned diverse. 2006 Statscan details. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calgary#Demographics)

I also think it's time to take issue with the whole "white as fuck" comment in general. It's more than a bit offensive, to be honest. If I described Miami as "Hispanic as fuck" or Detroit as "black as fuck", people would be offended, and rightly so.

Also, I don't see a single person here claiming Calgary has a larger foreign-born population than Toronto, although maybe I didn't read close enough. :shrug:

If we are offended by being profiled, why are we talking about racial diversity? If you're offended by someone on the internet it's time to grow up and act like a man. anyways, I am far from racist buddy ;) so don't be offended

[LeftCoaster]

Tell them you're looking into finding more educated friends.

I don't think it's that they're uneducated, it's just that to them Calgary probably does seem quite monocultural.

It's all relative.

[Blader]

I don't think it's that they're uneducated, it's just that to them Calgary probably does seem quite monocultural.

It's all relative.

But then there is perspective - by 2017 statscanada predicts 'visible minorities' to be in the majority in metro Toronto and Vancouver. ie: one out of two - in Calgary they predict it to be one out of three. Is this monoculture? To me monoculture is rural Canada. The top 5 urban areas are very diverse.

[Surrealplaces]

I thought Toronto and Miami had the largest foreign born populations? Calgary, really? I love the city so don't tell me I'm bashing the city, but that city is white as f**k compared to Toronto! Anyone who lives in or near Toronto or have even been there would know that Toronto is full of immigrants whether visible minorities or Europeans

I don't think anyone is saying Calgary is less White than Toronto. Everyone knows that Toronto and Vancouver are in a whole different level when it comes to ethnic diversity. Calgary has a diverse population com pared to most other NA cities though.

[240glt]

I find Edmonton more culturally diverse, but both cities pale in comparison to Vancouver

[Waterlooson]

I find Edmonton more culturally diverse, but both cities pale in comparison to Vancouver

But if you were to exclude only two groups - the Chinese and the east Indians - Vancouver wouldn't be very "diverse".

[240glt]

^ true enough.... I'd ammend my post to say that Vancouver is extremely ethnic, however Edmonton feels more diverse

[jmt18325]

Winnipeg and Edmonton have very similar demographic numbers in terms of the ratio of whites to non whites, with just over 71% being white in Edmonton, and just over 73% in Winnipeg.

[Bassic Lab]

Statscan site has a reasonable explanation of the formula they use and I believe Wikipedia does also.

In a nutshell, Foothills MD doesn't have as much commuter traffic into Calgary as many would think. A surprising number of people in Okotoks work within the MD itself (statscan doesn't say where they work, but likely High River)
If you go through the community profiles you can actually do the math as they have number for the amount of people that commute to other CMAs etc..
Foothills is pretty close to being added to Calgary. I don't think it made it in the 2011 census, but it's close.

You're right in pointing out High River as a major reason why Foothills is still excluded. The town really doesn't function as a suburb of Calgary; it has its own employment centres and functions more like a rural town servicing the local area. Another issue is the lack of sprawl within the MD itself. Compared to Rockyveiw County, it just doesn't have as much exurban development like Springbank, Bearspaw, and such. This is beginning to change with developments like Heritage Pointe and subdivision into acreages around Dewinton.

Really, northern Foothills is part of metro Calgary but southern Foothills is not. Statscan requires an all or nothing approach to inclusion so unless the MD is split it could still be a little while until it is added to the CMA. The 2011 numbers should give us a good idea of how far along the process is. For the time being it is kind of stupid to have Heritage Pointe excluded but once the whole MD is included it will be kind of stupid to have farms just north of Nanton as part of the CMA.

[jigglysquishy]

Call my views of immigration weird if you want.

Immigration outside of the New World is a very dangerous and threatening idea. England will not culturally or economically survive unless the country is filled with white Anglo-Saxons. Japan will not survive culturally or economically unless the country is filled with the ethnic Japanese. I won't go through the 190+ nations that need to remain monoethnic or have the different ethnicities separated inside the country.

America, Canada, New Zealand and Australia (among a few others) can endure immigration. They are based on immigration. The very identity of the country is immigration.

There's no reason why we need to lose the culture, heritage and identity of dozens of nations when Canada, the US, Australia and New Zealand can absorb the immigration.

[MolsonExport]

^weird is not the word I would use. The vast majority of countries worldwide are multiethnic. It happens to be my research area.

[LeftCoaster]

But then there is perspective - by 2017 statscanada predicts 'visible minorities' to be in the majority in metro Toronto and Vancouver. ie: one out of two - in Calgary they predict it to be one out of three. Is this monoculture? To me monoculture is rural Canada. The top 5 urban areas are very diverse.

You're getting me all wrong, I'm not saying Calgary is monocultural, I'm just saying that to someone used to 50% visable minorities, going to 25% is a significant drop and could seem very white.

But if you were to exclude only two groups - the Chinese and the east Indians - Vancouver wouldn't be very "diverse".

I think that could apply to the entire globe. Ethnic Chinese and Indians comprise about half the worlds population.