Sunday, 13 January 2008

Possible recession in the forecast, a downturn in the economy. Lower immigration targets? Don't count on it.

Here are a couple business news reports concerning the Canadian economy. Both are from The Toronto Star.

The first one can be read in its entirety here.

Recession fears grow in Ontario

Pessimistic forecasts about slowing U.S. economy mean Ontario is at risk as well in the coming year

Jan 10, 2008 04:30 AM
Madhavi Acharya-Tom Yew
Les Whittington
staff reporters


There is growing concern among economists that Ontario is teetering on the brink of a recession.

Several analysts yesterday issued pessimistic predictions about the U.S. economy, and the impact it will have on the province this year.

"Ontario is already struggling with the high Canadian dollar and the problems in the auto industry. A U.S. recession would be a triple whammy for the Ontario economy," said Sal Guatieri, senior economist at BMO Capital Markets in Toronto. "(Ontario) might avoid recession because interest rates are low in Canada, but it would be touch and go."


The second one can be read in full here.

18,700 Canadian jobs lost in December

Manufacturing buckles under weight of dollar, but jobless rate holds steady at 5.9 per cent
Jan 12, 2008 04:30 AM

OTTAWA–Canada shed 18,700 jobs in December after seven months of rising employment, but economists doubt the pullback means the economy is about to take a sharp turn for the worse.

The jobs data released yesterday by Statistics Canada were a surprise, reversing economists' consensus forecast for a gain of 15,000 jobs. The private sector cut 51,000 jobs last month while the public sector kept hiring and self-employment continued increasing.

The month's net loss of 18,700 jobs was the worst in 3 1/2 years, but the overall unemployment rate held steady at 5.9 per cent, leading many economists to speculate that the retraction was a blip.

For starters, economists are useless when it comes to making forecasts. They just make educated guesses. That's why they have to boast about their track record to convince people to believe them on anything. If you have ever taken an economics course you'd realize that economics has no practical application outside of a university class room. Once you get an economics related job in the real world you should throw everything you ever learned out the window. Economic history, psychology, and that good ol' fashioned "gut feeling" are more practical in economics than supply and demand graphs. The only thing economists are good for is trying to make sense of what the hell just happened. That being said, notice how the loss of 18,700 jobs took them by surprise. They were in fact predicting a gain of 15,000 jobs. When it comes to economists and their analysis its buyer beware. But I am digressing here.

Given the hint of a possible slow down in the Ontario economy - the province that receives the bulk of Canada's immigrants and the so-called "economic engine of Canada" - and that Canada has shed 18,700 jobs should we still be bringing in 250,000 immigrants a year, possibly more? No we shouldn't never mind the fact that no real justification ever existed for introducing 250,000 immigrants into Canada in the first place.

When job growth is mentioned, absent from such reports are what kinds of jobs Canada is producing. This is where you have to keep an eye and ear out for further details. In one interview I caught on a business news channel the one being interviewed mentioned as a passing comment that most of the jobs being produced in Alberta's job-boom that are going unfilled are service sector jobs like Tim Horton's counter help. I think that is the case for most of Canada actually. Part time help is considered job growth. Temp help is considered job growth and 1/3 of all jobs - in Ontario at least - are temp jobs. The second news article mentions an increase in self employment. Part time help, temp help, and self employment are unstable, do not pay as well in most cases, and do not have benefits. If this is the crux of Canada's job growth then this is not good news. Also, a significant portion of full time employment is service sector related such as counter help, wait staff, custodial, bus drivers, security guards, etc.

Canada has suffered a terrible blow to its manufacturing sector. These jobs provided a middle class income for those with just a high school education. News reports come out on occasion concerning the shedding of more manufacturing jobs to be relocated over seas. Recently a moratorium on the hiring of new teachers was called for. There is an apparent glut of teachers in the Canadian labour market. The Toronto Star published an article reporting that new teaching graduates can expect to look years for that full time teaching position. The number of engineers seeking work each year is doubled because of immigration making it more difficult for some to find steady work.

To continue to introduce 250,000 - 300,000 if illegal immigration is included - into the Canadian economy given these economic conditions is insane! This does not benefit Canadians at all and it is an assault on their standard of living.

There was a time when immigration numbers fluctuated based on economic need but no more. Canada's immigration system has nothing to do with benefiting Canada and Canadians. It benefits Canada's political parties who abuse it to pander to ethnic voters in urban ridings. It also benefits those who make a living in what has been called, correctly so, Canada immigration industry. These include chiefly immigration lawyers and immigration consultants as well as social workers, banks to sell services to new clients, housing developers who need immigrants to sell houses to, and ethnic communities who want the steady importation of their people to colonize Canada and swell their numbers so as to command a greater share of economic and political power within Canada.

Canada's immigration are targets are too high and will make the effects of a recession worse if immigration numbers remain at its current level. Immigration should compliment the standard of living of Canadians, not attack it.

4 comments:

Banana said...

"It benefits Canada's political parties who abuse it to pander to ethnic voters in urban ridings."

Why do politicians worry about the ethnic vote? Do Montreal/Toronto/Vancouver/Winnipeg ridings outnumber other ridings? I tried counting up the federal ridings and found that the immigrant-abundant ridings are still fewer than other ridings. Unless I just don't know enough about suburbs of these areas outside of GTA. Do you have any resources that may shed more light on this?

PaxCanadiana said...

Thanks for the comment.

To answer your question let's look at the Sri Lankan Tamil colony in Toronto as an example. They were essentially a non-existent people in Canada until a civil war broke out in Sri Lanka and the Tamils realized that the Canadian refugee system was ripe for abuse and easy to game.

After twenty years of fraud and abuse there are approximately 200,000, maybe more, Tamils living in Toronto alone and 300,000 in total across the country. Because of settlement patterns Tamils can swing the vote in at least six federal ridings. This is according to former Liberal MP Bill Graham who stated as such in the National Post. I've tried to find this quote but I couldn't however it has come up for discussion on the Michael Coren show. According to the posted site Tamils can swing the vote in ten to twelve federal ridings.

http://www.uthayam.net/articles/mar28_2006_tamil_ca_html.htm

This is why the Liberals refused to list the LTTE (the Tamil guerrilla army in Sri Lanka) as a terrorist organization while the rest of the civilized world did. It took the Conservative government to do it.

Because of Canada's first past the post electoral system all a candidate needs is at least thirty percent of the vote. Immigrant groups do not have to constitute the majority but if they form thirty per cent of a riding they can essentially deliver a candidate to Ottawa guaranteed. Most ridings are not that high but they are significant enough to deliver swing votes which means they can tip the balance. Here is a link to a Muslim site that lists Muslim population percentages in some federal ridings. You'll have to scroll down to page 30.

http://www.canadianislamiccongress.com/election2004/Election2004.pdf

StatCan considers an ethnic enclave as an area where thirty per cent of the population is of one particular ethnic group. Because of immigration there are approximately 230 so called ethnic enclaves in the GTA.

Half of Toronto's residents were not born in the country and soon half of Toronto's residents will be of non-European ancestry. Almost half of Mississauga's residents were not born in the country, the same with Scarborough. Thirty per cent of Markham is Chinese. Immigrants are now moving into the areas outside of Toronto into what is called the 905 area. That's a lot of federal ridings. Almost a quarter of Vancouver residents are Asian. English is now a minority language in that city.

When immigrants and minorities vote they do so overwhelmingly for the Liberal party. Should it be of any wonder why the Conservative government was shut out of Canada's three major cities? This is why the current minority Conservative government is towing the line when it comes to immigration. This is why immigration is now in a league of its own being totally removed from the real economic necessities of Canada. This is why, even in a depression, I am lead to believe that Canada's federal parties will be weary of touching immigration. We, as Canadians, have literally lost control of it and our borders.

I hope this clears it up. This comment section isn't very apt for such responses.

desmond jones said...

Visible minorities, according to exit poll studies, favour the Liberal Party 70% of the time. Let's use Vancouver-Quadra as an example. Of a total population, 2001 Census, of 112,985, 40,820 (37%) are immigrant. Vismins, largely Chinese, are 33,305.

Stephen Owen, Liberal MP, won ~49% of the vote. National turnout was ~65%. Of 112,985 total pop, ~73440 voted. Of the 33,305 vismins ~21,648(65%) voted. If 70% vote Libs it's ~15,154 for Owen. Of the 73,440 who voted Owen got ~36,000(49%) votes. He's got 15,000 vismin votes and gets another 21,000 elsewhere, which is only 40% of the non-vismin vote. By getting only 40% of the white vote he wins big-time even though the vismin population amounts to only 29%.

Anonymous said...

caucus ping ethnographic traceability listservs analliance rica stevenson amunicipal adshel finds
lolikneri havaqatsu