[roccerfeller]

Originally Posted by Spocket

The estimates are , in fact , closer to the truth in all probability .
There are a number of factors involved but you can get a better idea of the population by looking at job creation , average household size , trends , etc. than a simple count . The problem with a simple head count is that some people move , some people don't realize their participation is mandatory , kids are born , and a million other factors .
Census counts give you a better idea of how population centers stack up against each other , what kinds of trends areas are experiencing , and so on . They're just a snapshot . What will happen (in Winnipeg's case at least) is that the numbers will be adjusted upwards significantly although by how much is anybody's guess . Don't forget too that other centers will see their numbers pushed higher so don't hold your breath in expectation of change in the city's national ranking .

Stats-Can openly acknowledges that census figures aren't accurate due to so many fluid factors and more precise numbers don't become available until the adjustments are made .

This is a good point, and a good post

Originally Posted by Bdog

Quebec City's CMA boundary grew by about 75 sq. km's between 2006 and 2011. I wonder how much population was added by default by the boundary adjustment...

True but regardless if its added in the census then Stats Can believes at least half of whatever regions were included in the CMA boundary ultimately service Quebec City in work force

Originally Posted by chrisallard5454

See the most interesting thing is the opting out in general. I lived with my parents during the census so I didn't have to fill it out, but I distinctly remember months of radio broadcasting we had to fill the census out by law. If it is a legal matter than should there be no discrepancies? Besides homeless and transient population of course.

It is legal, yes. But as Spocket pointed out, discrepancies occur.

Originally Posted by Winnipegger@Heart

Ha ha ha...Edmonton grew by 12.1% and Saskatoon by 11.4%...poor broken down, delapidated Winnipeg by 5.1%. Soon, Saskatoon will overtake Winnipeg; how embarrassing.

Right. Lets ignore how from 2006-2011, Winnipeg growth almost double from 2001-2006. Within which there was a full decade of negative growth from 1991-2001. For a "have-not" city. That has a rough reputation across the country. That people choose not to live in (including those who are only citizens by heart ). The growth rates were expected (a little on the low side though), and its nothing but a positive sign if you ask me.

And you're entirely correct about the Saskatoon comparison. It will only take about 60 years of continuous 11.4% growth rates every 5 years for Saskatoon to get 713k people. If Winnipeg stops growing right now.

Friggin hell man, I can understand certain criticisms you might bring and some good points you might make for discussions sake, but this consistent dumping on Winnipeg is getting old. Winnipeg isn't oil country or potash country. Deal with it.

And I'm happy for Edmonton & Saskatoon....they deserve their fortunes as far as I'm concerned, especially Saskatoon which has taken a lot of crap and had its share of rough economic times.

Originally Posted by hexrae

Good lord,

I understand that recent banning's were due to personal attacks, but how behaviour like this is tolerated is beyond me.

he's allowed to have his opinion, even if it is ridiculously negative. we'll just send him to the mosquito pit next time he's in Winnipeg.

Originally Posted by Bdog

I guess my smiley didn't make the tongue in cheek nature of my comment apparent enough. But you're right, Saskatoon will likely pass Winnipeg in a few short years!

No man, I heard its happening this weekend.

Originally Posted by Jammon

This happened in 2006 as well. They released the numbers and everyone was upset about how little we had grown. Then, they released the undercount numbers a couple of years later and the numbers ballooned. A census is a point in time statistic. It is barely reflective of the complexities associated with municipal and provinical growth and in-migration and out-migration. I guarantee those numbers will be inflated hugely after they account for the undercoverage. I know of many people in Winnipeg who didn't even complete a census, so it really is reflective of the little interest involved with the process.

This post, brings sense and logic.

The undercount will bring it up closer to estimations. Its completely irrelevant to me that we're not in 7th, but there's a fair discrepancy with these numbers, and not just for Winnipeg. This seems to point to the adjustments, or lack-thereof.