HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted May 6, 2014, 10:28 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
Shāh Māt
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,293
The Economics of Development and Business in Winnipeg and Manitoba

A thread where posters can discuss the pros and cons of Economic development in Winnipeg and Manitoba.The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.

Real Estate, Business, Construction Projects, Government or Private sector, Projections, Forecasts, Trends...etc. Both the feasibility and/or problems with regards to development in Winnipeg and the Province.The Positive and the Negative Economics of the development Industry and the City going into the future and looking at the past with an emphasis on the Present.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 4:18 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
Shāh Māt
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,293
Manitoba economy looking strong: RBC economist
By: Geoff Kirbyson
Posted: Nov/7/2013

A strong housing sector, possible record automobile sales and growing exports to the U.S. have Manitoba positioned as one of the strongest economies in Canada through to the end of 2014, says Canada's biggest bank.

Robert Hogue, Toronto-based senior economist at RBC, predicts the Manitoba economy will churn out 2.5 per cent GDP growth this year, compared with 1.7 per cent for all of Canada, with only a slight slowing for 2014.

"The housing sector in Manitoba has been very robust over the last few years and this year it continues to be a major generator of economic activity. It's not just construction, there are other spinoffs, too. Think of retail with furniture. (Housing) is a big component of a relatively good economy that's growing at a cruising speed of 2.5 per cent," he said.

The continuing recovery of the U.S. housing sector also bodes well for Manitoba, as it will spur exports of lumber and other goods, he said.

Sales of new automobiles have been strong in North America of late and Hogue thinks after narrowly missing a record for new sales last year, a new high will be set this year.

Many people put off buying a new car or truck in the wake of the 2008 recession and now with the average age of vehicles nearing an all-time high, they're preparing for a major purchase.

"There's a lot of pent-up demand there," he said.

Manitoba's unemployment rate will continue to be well below the national average, too. Hogue said the bank's prediction for the province is 5.5 per cent this year, compared with 6.8 per cent nationally, with a slide to 5.1 per cent in 2014.

The health of the economy and the number of jobs available in the province continues to have a positive effect on immigration, both internationally and inter-provincially, he said.

"The natural flows are from areas where unemployment is higher, such as Ontario and the Atlantic provinces. The bigger part is international immigration, with more people coming to Manitoba from the Philippines and Eastern Europe," he said.

Video from Economist Robert Hogue RBC on freep site.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/bus...230947141.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 4:27 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
Shāh Māt
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,293
For those interested....

Economics Basics: Supply and Demand
By Reem Heakal

http://www.investopedia.com/universi...economics3.asp
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 4:42 PM
Simplicity Simplicity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyro View Post
Manitoba economy looking strong: RBC economist
By: Geoff Kirbyson
Posted: Nov/7/2013

A strong housing sector, possible record automobile sales and growing exports to the U.S. have Manitoba positioned as one of the strongest economies in Canada through to the end of 2014, says Canada's biggest bank.

Robert Hogue, Toronto-based senior economist at RBC, predicts the Manitoba economy will churn out 2.5 per cent GDP growth this year, compared with 1.7 per cent for all of Canada, with only a slight slowing for 2014.

"The housing sector in Manitoba has been very robust over the last few years and this year it continues to be a major generator of economic activity. It's not just construction, there are other spinoffs, too. Think of retail with furniture. (Housing) is a big component of a relatively good economy that's growing at a cruising speed of 2.5 per cent," he said.

The continuing recovery of the U.S. housing sector also bodes well for Manitoba, as it will spur exports of lumber and other goods, he said.

Sales of new automobiles have been strong in North America of late and Hogue thinks after narrowly missing a record for new sales last year, a new high will be set this year.

Many people put off buying a new car or truck in the wake of the 2008 recession and now with the average age of vehicles nearing an all-time high, they're preparing for a major purchase.

"There's a lot of pent-up demand there," he said.

Manitoba's unemployment rate will continue to be well below the national average, too. Hogue said the bank's prediction for the province is 5.5 per cent this year, compared with 6.8 per cent nationally, with a slide to 5.1 per cent in 2014.

The health of the economy and the number of jobs available in the province continues to have a positive effect on immigration, both internationally and inter-provincially, he said.

"The natural flows are from areas where unemployment is higher, such as Ontario and the Atlantic provinces. The bigger part is international immigration, with more people coming to Manitoba from the Philippines and Eastern Europe," he said.

Video from Economist Robert Hogue RBC on freep site.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/bus...230947141.html
This article is from November of last year. Those GDP numbers were never met and unemployment came in higher than expected.

Posting this article is just an attempt to mislead people...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 4:54 PM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,905
It was very close to target, and may have been on depending which GDP measurement method you use. Keep looking for clouds in every silver lining though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 5:04 PM
Simplicity Simplicity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,355
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmt18325 View Post
It was very close to target, and may have been on depending which GDP measurement method you use. Keep looking for clouds in every silver lining though.
2.2% is not close to 2.5% when it comes to GDP.

And there's no alternative measurement. Stats Can released the figures on the 30th of April. 2.2% GDP growth. Unemployment has been known for awhile already. Generally, if there's any revision at all - which, historically there will be - it's downwards, not up.

What kind of service to yourself or anybody else are you being by intentionally ignoring the facts and then telling me I'm a downer. If you don't like reality, whose problem is that?

Projections from 7 months ago that have now been proven wrong aren't silver linings anymore. They're irrelevant speculation...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 5:26 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,497
So let's keep all the economics to this thread please. When I go into the CentrePoint thread or 300 Assiniboine thread, I want to see how construction is progressing, etc. Not a novel on how it shouldn't be built because of government handouts. If you are just so darn pissed about it, maybe a run for mayor or premier is on order. Thank you.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 7:31 PM
Simplicity Simplicity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,355
Quote:
Originally Posted by bomberjet View Post
So let's keep all the economics to this thread please. When I go into the CentrePoint thread or 300 Assiniboine thread, I want to see how construction is progressing, etc. Not a novel on how it shouldn't be built because of government handouts. If you are just so darn pissed about it, maybe a run for mayor or premier is on order. Thank you.
Thanks for weighing in, big shooter. Enlightening, contributory, and intellectually defiant as always.

And the word is 'saw'. You 'saw' it. Nobody 'seen' anything.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 7:38 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
Shāh Māt
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplicity View Post
This article is from November of last year. Those GDP numbers were never met and unemployment came in higher than expected.

Posting this article is just an attempt to mislead people...
I insured the date was present, even changing the 11th Month to November in the heading to make it "very clear" for readers of the articles published date? Once again thank you for clarifying what I provided in my post.

The article was published 5.5 months ago, you mentioned 7 in a later post.
Projections and forecasts are not easy to make and are far from an exact science.

The Evaluation
of Economic Forecasts
http://www.nber.org/chapters/c1214.pdf

On a side note. Please do not make statements about what you perceive are my intentions on this forum or with a post I've made.(see your bolded comment)

Let posters make up their own minds on the validity of any information provided and not try direct them to a conclusion you would like to endorse.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 8:00 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
Shāh Māt
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplicity View Post
Thanks for weighing in, big shooter. Enlightening, contributory, and intellectually defiant as always.

And the word is 'saw'. You 'saw' it. Nobody 'seen' anything.
From past experience on this forum I find that posters who start to correct individuals on their spelling mistakes is usually a a very bad sign, somewhat like a comment in a media section, where moderation is eventually going to be needed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 8:02 PM
Simplicity Simplicity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyro View Post
I insured the date was present, even changing the 11th Month to November in the heading to make it "very clear" for readers of the articles published date? Once again thank you for clarifying what I provided in my post.

The article was published 5.5 months ago, you mentioned 7 in a later post.
Projections and forecasts are not easy to make and are far from an exact science.

The Evaluation
of Economic Forecasts
http://www.nber.org/chapters/c1214.pdf

On a side note. Please do not make statements about what you perceive are my intentions on this forum or with a post I've made.(see your bolded comment)

Let posters make up their own minds on the validity of any information provided and not try direct them to a conclusion you would like to endorse.
The data isn't present. It isn't even data. It's months old speculation.

If your intent was to inform, why wouldn't you have just posted the actual numbers from last week?

Or the newest projections from 2014 which say GDP growth of 2.0% that also came out last week? Was it easier to find something coming from an RBC Economist from November of last year that was speculative rather than actual numbers published by Stats Can?

I'm having a difficult time grasping this one if you're suggesting there's nothing to this...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 8:43 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
Shāh Māt
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplicity View Post
The data isn't present. It isn't even data. It's months old speculation.

If your intent was to inform, why wouldn't you have just posted the actual numbers from last week?

Or the newest projections from 2014 which say GDP growth of 2.0% that also came out last week? Was it easier to find something coming from an RBC Economist from November of last year that was speculative rather than actual numbers published by Stats Can?

I'm having a difficult time grasping this one if you're suggesting there's nothing to this...
You've posted the Stats Can data in the forum already, or others have. Do a search on posts you've made or other data posters have made and bring them here. If not, a simple internet search will clarify the exact numbers for others to go over and formulate their own opinions.

Speculation from a 5.5 month article is just that. But it does further the the discussion into "Economics" and the reason for this thread. I see the recent numbers and go, it could have been worse but all in all relatively stable and moving forward. You'll have to explain what you see and provide the data.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 8:49 PM
Simplicity Simplicity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyro View Post
You've posted the Stats Can data in the forum already, or others have. Do a search on posts you've made or other data posters have made and bring them here. If not, a simple internet search will clarify the exact numbers for others to go over and formulate their own opinions.

Speculation from a 5.5 month article is just that. But it does further the the discussion into "Economics" and the reason for this thread. I see the recent numbers and go, it could have been worse but all in all relatively stable and moving forward. You'll have to explain what you see and provide the data.
This is total nonsense.

It doesn't further anything. It obfuscates, it's intellectually dishonest, and most of all it's already been proven false. Why'd you stop at November? You could've gone all the way back to April where they were predicting 2.7% GDP growth.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 9:13 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
Shāh Māt
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,293
You seem some what vexed with the topic of discussion and perplexed at my line of posting.

Better give it a break, think of it as an intermission to relax and calm ones self.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 9:15 PM
Simplicity Simplicity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyro View Post
You seem some what vexed with the topic of discussion and perplexed at my line of posting.

Better give it a break, think of it as an intermission to relax and calm ones self.
Well, I'm just wondering. If you started a thread about astronomy, would you kick it off with an article from the 1500s that said the earth was flat?

You acknowledged you had seen the data. Why you would disregard it is the question.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 9:22 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,497
Big shooter yourself, Simplicity. You don't have to fire back on every post, belittling everyone. Being a huge dick. Somebody doesn't quite agree with you and they're stupid. Their ideas are nonsense. Nobody knows more than Simplicity.

Sounds like you know what you're talking about. Just don't have to repeat it 100 times. We all know your stance. Most of us agree, including myself. Private industry shouldn't be at the teet of the taxpayer. We get it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted May 7, 2014, 9:43 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
Shāh Māt
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplicity View Post
Well, I'm just wondering. If you started a thread about astronomy, would you kick it off with an article from the 1500s that said the earth was flat?
Irrelevant to an Economics thread even though an analogy.
Suggestion: Start Astrology Thread.
Keep to topic of thread. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted May 8, 2014, 2:31 AM
Winnipegger Winnipegger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 313
Lightbulb

Alright let's stop arguing over whether or not a dated economic report is relevant or not and discuss some real economics. I have a few suggestions about some good topics we could discuss.

Do you think the condo bubble in Toronto and Vancouver is eventually going to make it's way over to Winnipeg? With D-Condos, Glasshouse, and potentially SkyCity, along with all the development in the exchange and waterfront, there seems to be a flood of new units available, or soon going to be available. What's driving this demand? Speculative investors or local household demand? If it's speculative investors, what sorts of implications may that have for the city and province? How about the housing market?

Do you think the Province should continue to make regular increments in the minimum wage? Why or why not? Is inflation a problem in Manitoba or are our price levels relatively stable? Are increasing housing prices squeezing the middle and lower class out of home ownership and forcing want-to-be suburban households into bedroom communities like La-Salle, St. Adolph, and Niverville, reducing Winnipeg's tax base and increasing strain on it's infrastructure?

See, these are some real issues you should be discussing, not whether or not a report is still relevant. Get to it!
__________________
Progress can be made
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted May 8, 2014, 3:11 AM
Riverman's Avatar
Riverman Riverman is offline
Fossil fuel & rubber
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Winnipeg/Toronto
Posts: 2,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winnipegger View Post
Do you think the condo bubble in Toronto and Vancouver is eventually going to make it's way over to Winnipeg?
No bubble in Toronto that I can see.

http://www.urbantoronto.ca/news/2014...ining-strength
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted May 8, 2014, 4:55 AM
trueviking's Avatar
trueviking trueviking is offline
surely you agree with me
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: winnipeg
Posts: 9,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplicity View Post
This article is from November of last year. Those GDP numbers were never met and unemployment came in higher than expected.

Posting this article is just an attempt to mislead people...
umm.....actually, the article's unemployment predictions were almost bang on....it was even lower in fact....I'm sure you will enlighten us all on how in economics 5.4 is actually much higher than 5.5.
http://www.gov.mb.ca/finance/pdf/highlights.pdf

who's misleading whom?

I also agree that 2.2% from 2.5% is hardly a discrepancy worth deriding someone over....that isn't a big difference in the context of a discussion on relative economic performance....GDP is an estimate and has an inherent margin of error.....you are wrong.


ok......go....freak out with a nine paragraph diatribe!!!!!

Last edited by trueviking; May 8, 2014 at 6:08 AM.
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 > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:20 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.