Winnipeg CMA Population in 5 Years: Predictions - Page 3

harls · #41 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 1:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DowntownWpg

I'm no Ottawa expert, so am not that sure as to if I would consider, personally, Kanata and Nepean in the Ottawa CMA.

They most certainly are. Especially Nepean.

DowntownWpg · #42 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 3:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by harls

They most certainly are. Especially Nepean.

Oh yes. Just spent some time with Google maps of Ottawa. Looks quite clear to me that both Kanata and Nepean should be in the Ottawa CMA. They both appear to be built-up and touching Ottawa 'proper.' As you said, especially Nepean, which to me, looks like it is a part of Ottawa. There is that Stony Swamp Conservation Area between Nepean/Qualicum and Kanata, but that just looks like a big park inside the metro area, certainly not some vast rural expanse.

Do some Google mapping of Winnipeg (if you're not from here), and it is clear where rural starts, and where urban ends. As an example, including all of East St. Paul RM seems to be too lofty a 'grab' for Winnipeg's CMA... more reasonable would be just after the Birds Hill area.

dennis · #43 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 4:31 PM**

CMA is not a very good tool for determining the market size for Winnipeg, If what everybody says is true regarding what statscan determines what a CMA is. If say an NHL team came here, people Steinbach (13000) and Hannover RM (11,000) which are only a 1/2 hour drive away, Selkirk (~10,000). Then There is carmen, altona, morden and winkler and gimli, all about an hour away, all fast growing. How do these people help out our weekend shopping market. Are they potential Ikea customers. All these communities not in the Winnipeg CMA, all of which (except Selkirk city itself) are some of the fastest growing and most wealthy communities in Manitoba. I think its better to do a market study than to base our market on our CMA's population.

DowntownWpg · #44 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 5:05 PM**

I have no problem with the Capital Region being used as a unit of analysis in the economic realm. However, when one is using a population-based approach to consider a city's size, CMA is an extremely more realistic stat by which to gage 'size.'

Driving to West Hawk Lake a few weeks back, I pulled off the highway and onto a dirt farm access road just before the St. Anne's & Steinbach turn-off. I took a piss. While I had many thoughts racing through my head at that moment, on that dirt road not once did I think that I was in a metropolitan area.

SmileyBoy · #45 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 9:50 PM**

All I know is that there's roughly 1 million people living within 35 miles of the Red River between Selkirk and the US border. That's usually the model I use when I think of Winnipeg's surrounding area.

(Same surface area in US Red River Valley between Wahpeton and Grand Forks has about 400,000 people)

Only The Lonely.. · #46 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 11:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dennis

CMA is not a very good tool for determining the market size for Winnipeg, If what everybody says is true regarding what statscan determines what a CMA is. If say an NHL team came here, people Steinbach (13000) and Hannover RM (11,000) which are only a 1/2 hour drive away, Selkirk (~10,000). Then There is carmen, altona, morden and winkler and gimli, all about an hour away, all fast growing. How do these people help out our weekend shopping market. Are they potential Ikea customers. All these communities not in the Winnipeg CMA, all of which (except Selkirk city itself) are some of the fastest growing and most wealthy communities in Manitoba. I think its better to do a market study than to base our market on our CMA's population.

I agree..

In this particular case I think of St.Andrews. While it is certainly far removed from Winnipeg's city limits, most of its growth and current population can only be attributed to its relative closeness to Winnipeg.

St.Andrews in and of itself is almost entirely a bedroom community, with no private industry of its own.

So yes, there is a fair expanse of country seperating it from Winnipeg. But, it would be a MUCH different community in terms of its development if it were an hour or two further away.

Thus, I think it is fair to consider St.Andrews as a community that is heavily influenced by Winnipeg's metropolitan region, if not capital region.

newflyer · #47 Posted **Jun 20, 2009, 2:19 AM**

I also agree that the Winnipeg market area is far beyond the CMA and the Winnipeg Capital Region, but as a means to measure Winnipeg's true economic impact including its population it is far more accurate to use the CMA and the Capital Region than the area within the city limits. They may all have different civic goverence, they are really all the same city IMO. The capital region is a means to coordinate Winnipeg proper with its surrounding municipalities, and to find efficincies and to effective plan of the region, as it grows. At the end of the day, the city limits are little more than lines on the map, when it comes to measuring the impact of the city.

Thats not to suggest that Winnipeg proper does not hold the overwelming majority of people and industry in the region, but it is far too simplictic to ignore the other rapidly growing areas of the capital region and to how in it impacts the overall economic base of this growing "city".

wayward_prince · #48 Posted **Jun 23, 2009, 10:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drew

^ and what exactly do you base YOUR claim on?

I've worked in immigration. Manitoba primarily gets educated immigrants via the provincial nominee program. Manitoba doesn't need engineers, architects and such. most of the university graduates need to leave to get a job never mind newcomers.

wayward_prince · #49 Posted **Jun 23, 2009, 10:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trueviking

err...where you been?...winnipeg has grown by that amount for the last 5 years and has averaged 5000 for the last 10....your hypothesis that immigrants leave in 6 months is completely false....look at the statistics and compare immigration to population growth numbers and you will see that you are formulating your opinion on myth and not fact.

the immigrant sponsorship programme pretty much guarantees that we will continue to grow at at least that pace....moe likely it will be at a greater pace.

immigrants leave because there are few professional jobs here. Manitoba's growth is based on aboriginal people having lots of kids and aboriginals following the white man to the city and taxpayers paying for it all. that's it!

1ajs · #50 Posted **Jun 23, 2009, 11:20 PM**

yes and no

Jets4Life · #51 Posted **Jun 24, 2009, 4:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wayward_prince

immigrants leave because there are few professional jobs here. Manitoba's growth is based on aboriginal people having lots of kids and aboriginals following the white man to the city and taxpayers paying for it all. that's it!

How does that explain how Winnipeg only gained 19,000 people in the 90's, and has already more than tripled that number this decade?

wayward_prince · #52 Posted **Jun 24, 2009, 12:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

How does that explain how Winnipeg only gained 19,000 people in the 90's, and has already more than tripled that number this decade?

NDP govt brings them in...they advocate for it. remember they wanted to build a reserve in Tuxedo..they create a holiday for Louis Riel...they think integration in winnipeg is a great idea. So to answer your question it changed when the NDP got elected.

wayward_prince · #53 Posted **Jun 24, 2009, 12:29 PM**

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/st...ba-census.html

people on here have the numbers all wrong..totally exaggerated..and ignore the Immigration ministers baloney at the end of this article.

Spocket · #54 Posted **Jun 24, 2009, 12:30 PM**

^Huh ?
-Provincial nominee program.
-Diversified economy that is outperforming much of Canada and has been doing so for some time now.
-Is there a reserve somewhere in this city the government as well as the rest of us aren't aware of ?

And yeah , actually , what's wrong with integration ? Maybe I'm misreading you here but you make it sound like it's a bad thing.

wayward_prince · #55 Posted **Jun 24, 2009, 12:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trueviking

the answer is 772 500.

8000 per year on average.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/st...ba-census.html

When the census was taken in May 2006 the population of Winnipeg was 633,451 compared with 619,544 in 2001. That's less than 3,000 per year. So where is the 8,000 per year??
get ur facts straight, so much of what you post on here is based of delusional myths.

drew · #56 Posted **Jun 24, 2009, 1:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wayward_prince

When the census was taken in May 2006 the population of Winnipeg was 633,451 compared with 619,544 in 2001. That's less than 3,000 per year. So where is the 8,000 per year??

So what you are saying is that the growth in Winnipeg is fixed to the average experienced between 2001 and 2006, and it can't increase?

How do you explain the latest population figures? Let me guess, NDP lies and baloney.

#57 Posted **Jun 24, 2009, 1:35 PM**

Out of curiosity, WWP, is there anything positive about the population growth in Winnipeg, or is it just all doom and gloom for ya?

DowntownWpg · #58 Posted **Jun 24, 2009, 2:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drew

So what you are saying is that the growth in Winnipeg is fixed to the average experienced between 2001 and 2006, and it can't increase?

That is somewhat correct. StatsCan only obtains population 'counts' data during the censuses. They do not do studies to actually count the population numbers except for during the censuses. Everything between is just an estimate.

That said, estimates are not just based on the average increase between the previous two censuses. Their complex models for interim projections notably factor in birth and mortality rates (the aging population/'local' population pyramids), immigration and migration trends. This is why it is not based merely on an average yearly increase as calculated between 2001 to 2006.

In short, this is why such between census estimates are not official population statistics, but rather a tool used for public policy planning, the media, and guys who have an inferiority complex related to their city and are desperately wanting to impress those who do not live here (sorry, but I felt compelled to end this post on a negative note

)

wayward_prince · #59 Posted **Jun 24, 2009, 4:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by drew

So what you are saying is that the growth in Winnipeg is fixed to the average experienced between 2001 and 2006, and it can't increase?

How do you explain the latest population figures? Let me guess, NDP lies and baloney.

there is no data to support a sudden growth spurt. but who cares-does it matter how much it grows. why are people so fixated on this. all i am pointing out is the projection numbers of some are wrong.

wayward_prince · #60 Posted **Jun 24, 2009, 4:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel

Out of curiosity, WWP, is there anything positive about the population growth in Winnipeg, or is it just all doom and gloom for ya?

it's not all doom and gloom but when half of university graduates are leaving a city to find work this notion of growth is rather transparent and disingenuous. Toronto and Ontario doubled it's population in the past 35 years and all it got out of it was becoming a have not province. Invite people if there are good 'new' jobs. otherwise be happy with the present size.