Statistics Canada Reports II

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by harls

None of them settled in Sherbrooke area, for sure.

some of my ancestors did. To my knowledge, none were criminals.

[ssiguy]

If Canada's population growth plunges over the next year, some provinces will be in a very grave position.

Alberta not only has the highest population growth but also the healthiest. Obviously, it gets a lot of international migration but also strong interprovincial migration, and a healthy natural increase rate. BC, on the other hand is in a far worse position. It is completely dependent upon immigrants and it's population would be shrinking by a sizeable amount due to negative migration and negative natural increase. Quebec would be in a similar situation. Ontario has a positive natural increase but a significant negative interprovincial rate.

Except for Alberta, our 4 largest provinces would be in population decline without immigration which is very unhealthy demographically and economically. That may however, be a good thing as BC & Ontario are the 2 provinces with the greatest housing affordability issues. Perhaps what we need is a MASSIVE intake decline nationally to bring some affordability in our housing market which is killing our productivity, sending household debt levels into the stratosphere, and plunging our standard of living.

Except in the construction and healthcare sectors, maybe a drop from 1.3 million in growth to 100k is exactly what Canadians and our economy needs until we can house and feed our people and begin to steer our economy away from it's highly unproductive real estate dependence.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by KnoxfordGuy

Stats Can released the Quarterly population figures for Jan 1st.

Canada 40,769,890 + 0.6%
Increase of 1,271,872 from Jan 1, 2023.
97.6% immigration
2.4% natural Increase

The Trudeau Trainwreck.

[dennis]

Originally Posted by whatnext

The Trudeau Trainwreck.

It’s easy to bring people here. It’s hard to have them come into a better economy with lower cost of living with subsequent higher wages.

[kwoldtimer]

Ain't dead yet - Statistics Canada says .6% GDP growth in January, and likely .4% growth in February.

[Innsertnamehere]

vs. 4% population growth.

0.4% GDP growth is basically -3.5% real growth.

Pumping a million suckers into the country in 9 months is certainly one way of preventing a "recession"..

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

vs. 4% population growth.

0.4% GDP growth is basically -3.5% real growth.

Pumping a million suckers into the country in 9 months is certainly one way of preventing a "recession"..

Apples, meet oranges.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Many (most? all?) of us are direct and indirect descendants of 'Fresh New Suckers' from 400, 300, 200, 100, 50, 25, etc. years ago.

Those Irish getting off the boat for quarantine at Grosse Ile din't have a pot to piss in, or a window to through it out of.

Weren't a modest number of European colonists those with...criminal records...back in the early days?

True and this is one of the main arguments of open borders types who see the flow of people across international boundaries as something that should be unhindered and limitless.

Still, I am not sure this is a good plan for better lives in the future for us - or for a lot of the newcomers either. (Keeping in mind also that many of the Canadians of today are yesterday's newcomers from not that long ago.)

Another thing is that as a professor (of economics?) you should be aware that the backroom pressures to keep the intake extremely high are not entirely or even primarily altruistic.

They're actually blind to personal and societal outcomes, and almost entirely mercantile.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

vs. 4% population growth.

0.4% GDP growth is basically -3.5% real growth.

Pumping a million suckers into the country in 9 months is certainly one way of preventing a "recession"..

Yes but getting us over the recession hump might have been brilliant. We will never know of course but a housing crash led made in Canada recession combined with inflation could have spiraled down out of control. In hindsight it seems the strong US growth would have kept it to a mild recession here and avoided a lot of problems we have now but that's far from certain.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Yes but getting us over the recession hump might have been brilliant. We will never know of course but a housing crash led made in Canada recession combined with inflation could have spiraled down out of control. In hindsight it seems the strong US growth would have kept it to a mild recession here and avoided a lot of problems we have now but that's far from certain.

At best it is delaying the recession. The factors poisoning the economy are still poisoning the economy.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Yes but getting us over the recession hump might have been brilliant. We will never know of course but a housing crash led made in Canada recession combined with inflation could have spiraled down out of control. In hindsight it seems the strong US growth would have kept it to a mild recession here and avoided a lot of problems we have now but that's far from certain.

I mean it's getting us "over the hump" on paper only, basically. The median Canadian is seeing economic declines still as gdp per capita is still in massive decline. The decline likely would have happened with or without the population crunch, but would have hit a "recession" definition which would have been a political black mark for the Liberals.

The only thing it fixes is government revenue - but they also face increased costs still as a result of the increased population.

There isn't a "free ride" out of this, and ultimately the Canadian economy is paying for the ridiculous money printing through COVID that Trudeau handed down. The COVID money printing ultimately sent Canada's economy into banana-republic territory and was generally insane for a western nation. We are paying for that now as high interest rates have to pull that fake money back out of the economy.

There isn't such thing as a free lunch.

[Acajack]

The recession, slowdown or whatever may also be more painful when it does hit, as a result of it being delayed.

[P'tit Renard]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Yes but getting us over the recession hump might have been brilliant. We will never know of course but a housing crash led made in Canada recession combined with inflation could have spiraled down out of control. In hindsight it seems the strong US growth would have kept it to a mild recession here and avoided a lot of problems we have now but that's far from certain.

By kicking the can down the road an delaying the inevitable, the ultimate crash will be even worse. Stress in the housing market has built up significantly and intensified since COVID. The delay is terrible timing, as it's likely the US economy won't be performing as well when we have nothing left to cushion the fall.

At this point it's quite obvious Trudeau just doesn't want to get blamed for any housing crash, and will delay it at all costs to protect his political hide.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by P'tit Renard

At this point it's quite obvious Trudeau just doesn't want to get blamed for any housing crash, and will delay it at all costs to protect his political hide.

JT doesn't have any hide left to protect. Public opinion has already skinned him alive!!!

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Acajack

True and this is one of the main arguments of open borders types who see the flow of people across international boundaries as something that should be unhindered and limitless.

Still, I am not sure this is a good plan for better lives in the future for us - or for a lot of the newcomers either. (Keeping in mind also that many of the Canadians of today are yesterday's newcomers from not that long ago.)

Another thing is that as a professor (of economics?) you should be aware that the backroom pressures to keep the intake extremely high are not entirely or even primarily altruistic.

They're actually blind to personal and societal outcomes, and almost entirely mercantile.

to be clear, I am definitely not advocating for unimpeded population flows across borders, which evidently is not tenable. Just saying that we should remember that most of our ancestors (probably 90% or higher) also had humble beginnings in this country, with modest (at best) resources. The primary difference today being where these immigrants are coming from.

for the record, I think our population intake should immediately be halved, if not reduced to a third of what it currently is, as our economy is seemingly incapable of absorbing the current intake.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by Acajack

The recession, slowdown or whatever may also be more painful when it does hit, as a result of it being delayed.

Indeed.

The various pumping 'line must go up' schemes generally result in more downside overall when the final accounting is done.

I often read news articles that include a sidebar of an interview of a homeowner as an example of the negative effect of the Bank of Canada's interest rate hikes.

While not unsympathetic to the owner's plight, the thought nearly invariably comes to mind: This person should not have been able to purchase that home at that price. But they did, because a fluke low interest rate allowed them to technically qualify. It pumped up the economy, albeit briefly. They're going to lose their home eventually and the savings they plowed into it.

The problem with the current 'pump up scheme' is that is distorts the necessary process for correction. People losing their homes is not the end of the world if they can land in a cheaper rental and rebuild their lives. By closing off this avenue by way of high population growth, one has essentially removed a pressure release valve. Pressurized tanks will go bang if they got hot enough. It just is much uglier and exciting if they don't have a release valve.

Using a time machine and going back to 2015, perhaps crimping the ability of Canadians to take on debt would have been better. It would have been painful at the time, but it would have prevented this whole run-up from happening. Had CHMC required 10% downpayments on any amount up to $400,000 (average price of 2015) and simply not insured mortgages beyond that point (banks would require 20% for each additional dollar of mortgage obtained), a strong disincentive to high leverage would be in place.

We pumped up the scheme instead.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by thewave46

We pumped up the scheme instead.

Hans and Fritz at it again!

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

to be clear, I am definitely not advocating for unimpeded population flows across borders, which evidently is not tenable. Just saying that we should remember that most of our ancestors (probably 90% or higher) also had humble beginnings in this country, with modest (at best) resources. The primary difference today being where these immigrants are coming from.

We also aren’t giving away 160 acres of free land willing to settle on it.

[shreddog]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Hans and FranzFritz at it again!

[lio45]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Many (most? all?) of us are direct and indirect descendants of 'Fresh New Suckers' from 400, 300, 200, 100, 50, 25, etc. years ago.

Those Irish getting off the boat for quarantine at Grosse Ile din't have a pot to piss in, or a window to throw it out of.

Actually it's totally the other way around: back then the Suckers were the ones who had no initiative, stayed behind, and starved from lack of potatoes. The ones who dared seize the opportunity offered and cross the Atlantic did pretty well on average.

If you accept a deal that sucks for you (staying put in Ireland during a famine because it's the inertia option, coming to Canada in 2024 as an Indentured Servant and living 20 to a house while waiting in a 100-person lineup for a job at Tim Hortons, etc.) when you could pretty easily have done better, then it can be said you're a Sucker, no?