HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1821  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2016, 7:52 PM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 6,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy View Post
That's very true but generally they are growing at a much slower rate if at all.
No, not really.

Calgary, Edmonton, Quebec City, Winnipeg, Hamilton, Halifax, KCWG, Saskatoon, Regina and a lot of other smaller cities that I'm not thinking of are all growing well (or have been until recently). Even Montreal is now growing well.

Yes, rural areas are emptying out, but that's not such a bad thing really.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1822  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2016, 8:14 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 19,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmt18325 View Post
It's also worth noting that other cities are growing. In fact, almost all of the CMAs are growing, some of them above 1%.
Yep. For all the talk of how much the biggest cities are growing, urban population growth today seems to be more evenly-distributed around the country than it was back around 2000 or so. Immigration is the largest source of growth in many places and is more evenly-distributed now as well, probably mostly due to provincial nomination programs.

I think growth will continue to slow in Toronto and Vancouver compared to other cities unless something dramatic changes with respect to housing costs and transportation infrastructure. Newcomers with average incomes in those cities can no longer afford good housing within a decent commuting time of their work. I wouldn't recommend unattached people try to set down roots in either of those cities now unless they had millions of dollars or were certain they'd be happy living in a small apartment for an indefinite period of time. Most new migrants to cities probably fall outside of those two camps.
__________________
flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1823  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2016, 8:17 PM
north 42's Avatar
north 42 north 42 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Windsor, Ontario
Posts: 4,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmt18325 View Post
No, not really.

Calgary, Edmonton, Quebec City, Winnipeg, Hamilton, Halifax, KCWG, Saskatoon, Regina and a lot of other smaller cities that I'm not thinking of are all growing well (or have been until recently). Even Montreal is now growing well.

Yes, rural areas are emptying out, but that's not such a bad thing really.
London and Windsor are also growing at about 1% lately.
__________________
Windsor Ontario, Canada's southern most city!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1824  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2016, 8:18 PM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 8,613
Ssiguy, I wouldn't think driving one hour to uni is that big a deal. It's basically like a student driving from South Surrey to UBC (though there us the horrendous ON winter weather to consider.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1825  
Old Posted Oct 30, 2016, 8:26 PM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 6,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by north 42 View Post
London and Windsor are also growing at about 1% lately.
Yes, that's right, as have a lot of other cities across southern Ontario. Yeah, Toronto is growing massively, but to say it's just Toronto is completely ignorant.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1826  
Old Posted Oct 31, 2016, 12:24 AM
ssiguy ssiguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,707
I don't consider London or Windsor "small cities". When I say small I mean about 100k or less.

All of Eastern ontario is shrinking save Kingston, Ottawa, and Peterborough..........the only cities with a university. Same for the SW as, London and Windsor, all areas outside commuting distance have stagnant or falling populations. Last year in Alberta oil dependent Red Deer shrank but Lethbridge didn't, Lethbridge the one with the university.

Every area of Atlantic Canada is shrinking save Hal/St.J/SJ/Char/Fred/Monc..........again where the universities are located. Universities and the cities they are in offer not only educational opportunities but more economic stability.

A generation or more ago going to the city was more optional than it is now. You didn't need a degree or more to get a decent job. Manufacturers, agriculture, and mills didn't need a BA but those jobs have left so unless you want a low paying service job a degree is a must. Certainly smaller community colleges offer some alternatives to smaller areas but only a limited amount and with fewer educational options.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1827  
Old Posted Oct 31, 2016, 3:08 AM
Drybrain Drybrain is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 3,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy View Post

Canada will continue to urbanize but not to just smaller cities but nearly exclusively to the much larger regional ones. We've moved from long-term urbanization to long-term big city urbanization.
That's not really what's happening.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1828  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2016, 6:35 PM
eternallyme eternallyme is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,243
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy View Post
That's very true but generally they are growing at a much slower rate if at all.

Another long term issue is that this decline will accelerate. As the young today leave that leaves the city/town/rural area they left significantly older and pass their reproductive years. Not only does that make those areas less appealing to the younger generation but also the declining public school enrollment also declines making the case for a university more difficult. Why spend a fortune opening a university in a place with fewer potential students when the bigger cities need larger schools to keep up with enrollment demands?

This becomes a catch-22. Sort of similar to transit...........an era of fewer riders means less government support and higher fares to make up for it which in turn results in even lower ridership and the circle continues building on itself.

The young have always been drawed to the cities for school, to see the big lights, to get away from their sleepy towns. or just to break free from their parents. The difference now is that post-secondary is a requirement for even the most basic of jobs and now that applies to both genders. They now are practically forced to leave to secure any future but also to stay away longer as a simple BA just doesn't do what it use to and the longer they are away the more likely they have lost contact with their high school peer group making the draw to their hometown even less appealing.

Canada will continue to urbanize but not to just smaller cities but nearly exclusively to the much larger regional ones. We've moved from long-term urbanization to long-term big city urbanization.
But if people can't afford to live in those big cities, what are they supposed to do? We've likely hit that point now...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1829  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2016, 6:39 AM
ssiguy ssiguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,707
While "logic" dictates that a person who is offered the same job for the same money but one in a major city and one in a small town about 100km from the next largest city, then the person should choose the small town job due to no commuting and much cheaper housing. The problem is that people seldom think logically. The reality is that most younger people want the bright lights of the city and are willing to make significant financial sacrafices to get it.

This has certainly always been the case.....the young leaving for school, jobs, to see the big city, and/or get away from their parents. This is nothing new but a generation or more ago such a move was optional while today it is not. Post-secondary is a neccessitie for all but the most basic of jobs and that requires moving away to go to school and due to their high school friends also having moved away, more educational options, more and better paying jobs, meeting new friends and maybe a partner, the notion of moving back to an ever aging small town is not attractive. Many young people today also are not as drawn to the car culture of a generation ago so they need, and demand, a very good transit system to suit their 24 hour non-suburban lifestlye.

Another thing that is new is older people moving from rural areas to nearby, if not large at least a decent size, cities for medical care. People are living nearly a decade longer than they were 50 years ago and that means more time in retirement and more time needing good medical care and options which smaller areas don't offer so a move to at least a decent sized city is also becoming more important for retirees. This is added by the fact that as people age they either loose their ability to drive or nolonger want to which means moving to a city with a decent transit system which negates most under 100k.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1830  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2016, 6:45 AM
ssiguy ssiguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,707
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
Ssiguy, I wouldn't think driving one hour to uni is that big a deal. It's basically like a student driving from South Surrey to UBC (though there us the horrendous ON winter weather to consider.
You are right that some have a car and the money for gas/parking to drive to school but anything further than 20km each way starts to really hurt the pocket book in gas/parking/insurance/car payments. This at a time when post-secondary is MUCH more expensive than it use to be when accounting for inflation and students need to go to school longer as a Masters of today is what a Bachelors was 30 years ago.

Also, South Surrey to UBC or SFU is not a valid comparison because you can get to both by public transit. Someone in St.Thomas with 40k which borders the city of London with 400k have no options except a taxi.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1831  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 4:22 AM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 9,296
My parents build their careers in two separate cities: my dad in Ottawa, and my mom in Cornwall. The two are about 100km apart. They compromised by choosing a small town in between the two and deciding to live there.

We don't tend to see this sort of thing happening as much anymore. I feel like a millennial couple in the same situation would just choose to live in Ottawa.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1832  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 5:08 AM
ssiguy ssiguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,707
Millennials are not only far more likely to go to post-secondary school now but also for longer periods of time. This backed up with far higher tuition when accounting for wages/inflation, has left students with a crushing debt. This debt in combination with the younger people shunning both the car and their suburban parent's lifestyle has resulted in far more taking and depending upon transit. A decent transit system for people who are dependent upon it usually requires a city of at least 300k.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1833  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 12:03 PM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 25,562
The ongoing attempts to establish a union for fish harvesters separate from everyone else in the FFAW isn't going so well. FISH-NL, the new union, is getting a lot of bad press - for obvious reasons.

__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1834  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 6:03 PM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 8,613
Yet another tragic example why BC should receive either funding from the rest of Canada to deal with their flotsam that ends up in BC, or have border controls:

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/ca...ne-in-hospital
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1835  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 6:26 PM
Vorkuta's Avatar
Vorkuta Vorkuta is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Moncton, NB
Posts: 1,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
Yet another tragic example why BC should receive either funding from the rest of Canada to deal with their flotsam that ends up in BC, or have border controls: http://news.nationalpost.com/news/ca...ne-in-hospital
To be fair, there are crazy, violent people everywhere, nowadays. (Mayerthorpe, Moncton, etc.)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1836  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 7:17 PM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 8,613
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vorkuta View Post
To be fair, there are crazy, violent people everywhere, nowadays. (Mayerthorpe, Moncton, etc.)
Yeah but a lot of Canada's problem individuals wash up here because of climate etc, many ending up in the DTES.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1837  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 7:27 PM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 25,562
This is getting disarmingly ridiculous. I don't even know what country I'm in anymore. Even over the explicit opposition of Quebec, the federal government has granted us an increase to our federal loan guarantee for the Muskrat Falls project.



It's the latest in a lengthy list of huge (such as the Supreme Court appointment, or postponing significant debt repayments owed to them by us) and comparatively minor (such as re-opening the St. John's SAR Sub-Centre, or giving several of our MPs prominent positions within government) wants/needs the federal government has agreed to provide.

I can't believe this is happening for us. It's a very unusual feeling to see the federal government is working for us, and our needs aren't just being addressed to the extent it has no impact on more important provinces, if at all.

I'm paranoid now. Surely there has to be some catch to all this?

Quote:
"We will guarantee up to an additional $2.9 billion in debt," Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr told the House of Commons.

Carr was responding to a question from the Liberal member of Parliament for St. John's South-Mount Pearl, Seamus O'Regan.

"Costs on the Lower Churchill project were mismanaged by former Conservative governments, putting Newfoundland and Labrador at financial risk," said Carr.

" I am pleased to inform the House that we will guarantee up to an additional $2.9 billion in debt, using commercial terms of a guaranteed fee of a half basis point above the federal rate. Today's decision means we will contribute to our climate change goals, and Atlantic Canada's future energy needs."

​The province asked Ottawa to extend the 2013 loan guarantee granted by the Conservatives under Stephen Harper, a guarantee capped at $5 billion for the Nalcor-led portion of the project.

Quebec opposed any increase, in a move Newfoundland and Labrador Minister of Finance, Cathy Bennett, called "unneighbourly" and "disappointing."
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfou...alls-1.3835135
__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1838  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 9:04 PM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is offline
ARTchitecture
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cala Ghearraidh
Posts: 18,545
Great news for Newfoundland!
__________________
Strong & free

'My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world.' — Jack Layton
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1839  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 9:13 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 14,016
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1840  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2016, 9:20 PM
SignalHillHiker's Avatar
SignalHillHiker SignalHillHiker is offline
I ♣ Baby Seals
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: See post below...
Posts: 25,562
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
Yeah.

The article has since been updated with some more information. There's a little more to it than just the loan guarantee:

Quote:
"The Government of Canada will also work with the province to provide immediate relief for its escrow account obligations as well as an extension to the timeline for debt repayment," Carr said in a news release issued after Question Period.
And they elaborated on the mess we're in:

Quote:
The new guarantee will ensure that borrowing costs remain lower than what the province could qualify for on its own.

In July, international credit rating agency Moody's downgraded the Newfoundland and Labrador rating from Aa2 to Aa3, saying the province will spend 12 per cent of its total revenue to finance its debt by 2020.
__________________
Note to self: "The plural of anecdote is not evidence."
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:23 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.