Statistics Canada Reports II

[harls]

Originally Posted by kora

Largest population increase by metro area, 2024-2025 (US and Canada)

Houston: 126,720
Dallas: 123,557
Atlanta: 61,953
Phoenix: 59,065
Charlotte: 54,122
Austin: 53,796
Calgary: 52,351
Edmonton: 50,717
Washington: 50,206
Seattle: 43,068

“Slow Growth Impacts Nation’s Largest Counties Hardest”, US Census Bureau (see Table 10)
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2026/2025-popest-metro-micro-counties.html#table-10

Population estimates, July 1, by census metropolitan area and census agglomeration, Stats Canada
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710014801

I sure wouldn't want to live in Houston with that about of growth. No offense to JManc.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by harls

I sure wouldn't want to live in Houston with that about of growth. No offense to JManc.

Houston has a population of just under 8m, so it's not dramatic growth - only 1.6%.

That's the same percentage growth as the CMAs of Halifax and Fredericton, and less than Brampton, St. Catharines - Niagara, Red Deer, Lethbridge, Regina, Barrie, Ottawa - Gatineau, Saskatoon, Chilliwack, Calgary, Moncton and Edmonton (which had 3.1% growth 2004-2005).

It's partly that our metro areas are all smaller, and also because our large cities saw almost no growth because of our recent policies on overseas students and temporary foreign workers.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Wow, just wow.

Everyone has equal opportunity for entry level jobs in Canada. That was true in 1980, true in 2000, and true today. FACTS: Canadian born are far less willing to flip burgers or dish out Timbits.

MAGA has given license for people to openly express their underlying bigotry. The overt racism in the Canada Section on SSP has been one of the biggest shocks the last 5 years. The only bigger shock is how comments like this are allowed to go unchallenged. Your dismissive condescending descriptor 'foreigner' is nauseating. They are LEGAL immigrants like your ancestors who are contributing to this country, paying taxes, and on their way to citizenship. And why do I get the sense that people making anti-immigration comments would be fine with it if these immigrants were from England?

Shame on you.

Shame on me?.....Why because I want our young people to be able to get their first jobs? What's the problem with saying "foreigners"? If someone is in the country who is not a landed immigrant or a citizen, then yes, they are foreigners. They are in the country temporarily because Ottawa has allowed them to enter not because they have some sort of "right" to come here because they don't just as I have no "right" to go to Japan or Spain.

Also, where did I bring up race? I don't care what someone's race is and it has nothing to do with what I stated. You are assuming that all these temp workers are of a non-Caucasian race so who is it that is using stereotypes here because it's not me?As for Trudeau letting everyone who could fog a mirror into the country, that's exactly what he did. From those going to post-secondary to non-skilled labour, he let over a million people a year into Canada with absolutely no thought to where these people were suppose to live and how they will be taking non-skilled jobs from Canadians, especially younger ones.

Who are you to say young people aren't willing to do McJobs? What they maybe unwilling to do is the jobs that the employers are willing to pay them. When I was a kid and got my first McJob, if the employer couldn't find workers at the wage they were willing to pay them then they had to increase the pay to entice new applicants. Now, if an employer doesn't want to do that, they just import cheap labour who they know will work at the lowest possible wage and won't say boo to their boss because they know the boss could threaten to revoke their labour contract and hence have to leave the country, This is why youth unemployment in Canada is over 14% and vastly higher for Indigenous and disable youth.

Shame on you for willing to endorse immigration policies that put our young people's needs on the back burner just so employers can line their own pockets.

[Nite]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

I disagree. Even though kids from wealthy parents may not need the money, it is still a big deal.

Your first McJob is more than just about money. It gives a kid a sense of independence not having to rely on M & D in the first place. It's a place where they start to understand the workings and expectations of a day's work and teaches responsibility and interpersonal skills that they don't get with just hanging around their friends. These McJobs allows a kid to understand the world outside their academic and social bubble. It forces the kids to interact with kids of different socio-economic backgrounds which is essential for these rich kids in particular as many urban ones live in their wealthy neighbourhoods and go to school and socialize only with their wealthy friends.

A first job is a real social milestone for our young people and just giving them away to foreigners ala Trudeau, does them and society in general, a great disservice.

Plenty of jobs available in small towns across the country, why aren't young Canadians jumping at them.

• Video Link

[ssiguy]

^^^^ Thanks for the video but it misses one VERY important piece of information............how much are they paying these workers?

Unless one is in a VERY remote location {Estevan SK doesn't qualify} then there is no shortage of labour while youth unemployment is over 5%. What there is is a lack of workers willing to work at the wages you are offering. How many aboriginal youth or youth with disabilities do these businesses employ? Unemployment for these groups are very high and there are lots of gov't programs that subsidize their labour costs/apprenticeships but they probably consider that too much of a bother.

Also, where are these foreign workers suppose to live? Every foreigner worker coming into the country, last time I checked, requires a place to live. Every apt they take is one less available for a Canadian. If these employers are as desperate as they claim, then the can provide the housing for these workers.

I love how so many of these small businesses and their associations are always screaming about gov't red tap and high taxes but when they need workers they expect that same gov't to bail them out by bringing in cheap foreign labour.

[jonny24]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Wow, just wow.

Everyone has equal opportunity for entry level jobs in Canada. That was true in 1980, true in 2000, and true today. FACTS: Canadian born are far less willing to flip burgers or dish out Timbits.

MAGA has given license for people to openly express their underlying bigotry. The overt racism in the Canada Section on SSP has been one of the biggest shocks the last 5 years. The only bigger shock is how comments like this are allowed to go unchallenged. Your dismissive condescending descriptor 'foreigner' is nauseating. They are LEGAL immigrants like your ancestors who are contributing to this country, paying taxes, and on their way to citizenship. And why do I get the sense that people making anti-immigration comments would be fine with it if these immigrants were from England?


Shame on you.

"Foreigner" isn't anything bad. It's a pretty neutral descriptor - people that come from a foreign country. We have a Foreign Affairs ministry, after all. A huge amount aren't legal immigrants, they are Temporary Foreign Workers.

You're the one who's gone and made it about race.

As they say in England, wind your neck in.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Nite

Plenty of jobs available in small towns across the country, why aren't young Canadians jumping at them.

I'm simplifying, but young people (18-35) generally desire the following things:

- the ability to find a partner;
- the ability to find like-minded peers that they can become friends with;
- the ability to grow their career and/or earnings potential, which nowadays involves hopping around between employers and industries

Some may also seek out niche lifestyles, exposure to interesting subcultures, etc., although this isn't quite as universal as the first 3.

Young people, being single and lower in income, are generally much more willing to sacrifice things like living space.

Rural areas and small towns are inherently disadvantaged at providing the first 3 things compared to bigger cities. What they offer is cheaper living, but this is what younger people are much more willing to trade off. It's unclear if a rural area even offers cheaper living when you factor in that you need to own a car. This is especially true for the story in the video above where the lady who owns the cleaning business is finding it difficult to hire cleaners who will travel from house to house around a vast rural territory. I'm almost certain she's not going to provide a car and a credit card to fill gas to cleaners who make minimum wage.

[ericmacm]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

I'm simplifying, but young people (18-35) generally desire the following things:

- the ability to find a partner;
- the ability to find like-minded peers that they can become friends with;
- the ability to grow their career and/or earnings potential, which nowadays involves hopping around between employers and industries

Some may also seek out niche lifestyles, exposure to interesting subcultures, etc., although this isn't quite as universal as the first 3.

Young people, being single and lower in income, are generally much more willing to sacrifice things like living space.

Rural areas and small towns are inherently disadvantaged at providing the first 3 things compared to bigger cities. What they offer is cheaper living, but this is what younger people are much more willing to trade off. It's unclear if a rural area even offers cheaper living when you factor in that you need to own a car. This is especially true for the story in the video above where the lady who owns the cleaning business is finding it difficult to hire cleaners who will travel from house to house around a vast rural territory. I'm almost certain she's not going to provide a car and a credit card to fill gas to cleaners who make minimum wage.

I am within that age bracket and my wife and I lived a rural-ish life, renting a place in Chatham, ON for 1 year back in 2021. It’s not that remote or small as far as rural living goes, but I will be honest - it sucked. We did this because I worked in London while my wife was finishing her nursing degree in Windsor. We were both partially remote with work and studies so it made sense to live in the middle, an hour away from each city. It wasn’t even that cheap to live in either, rent was more expensive for a similar type of dwelling that we rented in Windsor, in a significantly worse location. Detached housing prices were also about the same as Windsor for similar quality.

We didn’t have to worry about the first point you make, but we had no friends there (the pool of similar local working professionals was very shallow), and the potential career opportunities for a long-term life there were very limited. There were only a couple of engineering firms located there which would have limited my career options, and there was only the one small hospital that my wife could have theoretically worked at. When we would go out for a drink and a bite downtown, we would go to restaurants and all the people in our age group would stare at us because they had no idea who we were, and were probably trying to figure out if we went to high school with them.

We also really like nature, and enjoy having stuff like trails and naturalized parks close by within walking distance. Windsor has the massive Detroit River trail and we lived a 2min walk from the trailhead on the west side of the city. Chatham didn’t really have any of that, many of the “parks” were just overgrown vacant land and were pretty limited. We hated living there so much that we left for London 3 months before our lease was up, paid double rent, and my wife finished her degree driving from London to Windsor when she had to, fortunately it was still mostly remote at the time though. I was even planning to leave my job in London so we could move back to Windsor if it came down to it, but our long-term goal was moving to London anyway. It ultimately ended up working out well for us over in London.

Rural places unfortunately have very little to offer. Many have been experiencing brain drain and industrial decline (especially those within the “large rural town” category) and just aren’t great places to live, but also don’t always offer a proportional value proposition to cities that have more amenities.

[niwell]

Agreed with above posts - a lot of rural places aren't actually *that* cheap once you factor everything in. If you have a stable career and want to put down roots home ownership is certainly a lot easier. However if you're young, positions tend not to compensate nearly as much as urban areas, and the rent/ownership cost curve is far more stacked against the former. This is certainly dependent on area but in the part of Eastern Ontario I know well rentals aren't exponentially cheaper than what you can find in larger centres, and they can be quite difficult to come by. If you find something you'll get more space but that's not really as big of a sell for younger people starting out.

For example a quick search of available rentals in Napanee, ON (where I'm typing this from at the moment and will be for a couple weeks while our dog recovers from surgery) shows a a couple dozen 1 bedrooms from $1,500 to $2,800. For context our mortgage is near the lower-end of that for a much bigger place. We happen to have a cleaning/property management service for our place here so I have a decent idea what someone in the above example would get paid, and it's not much. Once you factor in a car and food prices that are honestly a bit more than Toronto that's VERY difficult to make ends meet. A couple could do it but a single person will struggle. Similarly those grandfathered in to cheap rent would be fine, but

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by niwell

We happen to have a cleaning/property management service for our place here so I have a decent idea what someone in the above example would get paid, and it's not much. Once you factor in a car and food prices that are honestly a bit more than Toronto that's VERY difficult to make ends meet. A couple could do it but a single person will struggle.

I think a cleaning service, or any kind of menial job where you have to travel from site to site, is a very bad deal in a rural community.

Cleaning is probably especially bad because:

- the houses are bigger than in a city, all else being equal, so they take more time to clean;
- what a cleaner can charge is less, since local salaries are lower;
- you need to own your own car, and you're paying for the gas/wear/tear on it
- traveling long distances between jobs is time you're not paid for

Even if you're not super educated, if you're reasonably capable at working you'd soon realize that a remote cleaning job is not a good deal, and that there are many other kinds of jobs at your skill level that are much less precarious and exploitive.

Not to stereotype, but if I were the owner of a cleaning business, I'd be worried that whoever I hire would be flaky or unprofessional or on drugs.

I'm not saying that people who work in cleaning jobs in a big city are empowered, but they're usually immigrant women who work under the table for themselves. They also usually make a deal that the client provides all the equipment, like the vacuum cleaner and the cleaning supplies. That way all they have to do is take transit to the house they're cleaning and get paid in cash.

[svlt]

The poster a couple of posts above nailed it. Unless it's life changing amount of money - and I mean seriously life changing, going from being destitute and unable to retire to being reasonably wealthy and early retirement - there's very little incentive.

Unless your entire life revolves around going from work and home, there's just so little to offer for quality of life in a rural area compared to a major city. Friends, family, just stuff to do to live your life enjoyable for yourself, your partner and your children.

Maybe being on a skyscraper forum skews that viewpoint but for all the bellyaching about how expensive and difficult living in cities are, people still for the most part choose to live in cities, year in and year out.

[harls]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

I think a cleaning service, or any kind of menial job where you have to travel from site to site, is a very bad deal in a rural community.

Cleaning is probably especially bad because:

- the houses are bigger than in a city, all else being equal, so they take more time to clean;
- what a cleaner can charge is less, since local salaries are lower;
- you need to own your own car, and you're paying for the gas/wear/tear on it
- traveling long distances between jobs is time you're not paid for

Even if you're not super educated, if you're reasonably capable at working you'd soon realize that a remote cleaning job is not a good deal, and that there are many other kinds of jobs at your skill level that are much less precarious and exploitive.

Not to stereotype, but if I were the owner of a cleaning business, I'd be worried that whoever I hire would be flaky or unprofessional or on drugs.

I'm not saying that people who work in cleaning jobs in a big city are empowered, but they're usually immigrant women who work under the table for themselves. They also usually make a deal that the client provides all the equipment, like the vacuum cleaner and the cleaning supplies. That way all they have to do is take transit to the house they're cleaning and get paid in cash.

A cleaner in a small town doesn't really have to travel that far. Probably far less than someone in a mid-sized city. Wear and tear on a car is probably a big nothingburger.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

I'm simplifying, but young people (18-35) generally desire the following things:

- the ability to find a partner;
- the ability to find like-minded peers that they can become friends with;
- the ability to grow their career and/or earnings potential, which nowadays involves hopping around between employers and industries

Some may also seek out niche lifestyles, exposure to interesting subcultures, etc., although this isn't quite as universal as the first 3.

Young people, being single and lower in income, are generally much more willing to sacrifice things like living space.

Rural areas and small towns are inherently disadvantaged at providing the first 3 things compared to bigger cities. What they offer is cheaper living, but this is what younger people are much more willing to trade off. It's unclear if a rural area even offers cheaper living when you factor in that you need to own a car. This is especially true for the story in the video above where the lady who owns the cleaning business is finding it difficult to hire cleaners who will travel from house to house around a vast rural territory. I'm almost certain she's not going to provide a car and a credit card to fill gas to cleaners who make minimum wage.

Cars don't have to be particularly expensive to own and operate, especially somewhere like a rural area where parking costs are non-existent and insurance is generally significantly less than urban areas. Older, beater cars can be run for not much more than a bus pass in an urban area in that context. you can get insurance for $100 a month, gas for a reasonable amount of driving for $100, and depreciation / maintenance for another $100 or so for an older, fully depreciated economy car. $300-$400/month for transportation isn't that far off what many in Toronto pay once you consider the odd uber / cab / commuter rail ride on top of a $160 monthly transit pass.

That said, driving around on your own dime for minimum wage is definitely not advisable even in that context. Your operating costs will rapidly eat into an already paltry income.

Regarding real estate, the floor of housing isn't that much cheaper in rural areas as apartments cost about the same in Napanee to build as they do in Toronto. The "cheaper" thing is land, which makes detached houses much more affordable, but doesn't impact apartments as much as land costs are a very small component of the cost of a unit even in Toronto. That cheaper land does mean however that while an apartment is $2,000 to rent in Napanee just like Toronto, you can buy a detached house for $400,000 while that same property in Toronto would be more like $1,000,000.

The rural / urban divide has a lot more to do with access to employment than lifestyles. People here are acting like rural areas force people into isolation without social groups (not true), have no amenities whatsoever (definitely not true), and are these terrible, isolating places. Many people live happy, connected lives in rural spaces, especially if they have family in the area, and have long lists of hobbies. The hobby list is different, usually with a larger focus on outdoor activities, but there nonetheless.

For most people, the move to the city is employment related. The number and extent of employment opportunities in a city is simply way, way larger than in rural areas. If you can eke out a good income in a rural area the lifestyle can be excellent, but that's hard to do for most people. Cities, more than anything, provide a wide diversity of career options and high paying jobs that allow people better access to income to create a good quality of life for themselves. And for that they will give up things like space. There is a reason retired people move out of the city in large numbers to rural areas - they move for lower cost of living, larger spaces, and recreational amenities not available in the city, and are not tied to the city by employment any longer.


I do think many people value the amenities that come with a city at around 100,000 people or so - most would miss amenities which you lose in communities smaller than that. But for most people, they would be just as happy in a community of 100,000 as they would be in a city of 10,000,000 (if not more so!) provided they were gainfully employed and had a good social network. Many people would probably be happiest on a rural property just outside of a community of that size, to be honest.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by svlt

Maybe being on a skyscraper forum skews that viewpoint but for all the bellyaching about how expensive and difficult living in cities are, people still for the most part choose to live in cities, year in and year out.

But people in this thread have explained why the alternatives are so bad. For example, many small towns also suffer from housing unavailability while offering much lower incomes. And moving away from Canada or between regions in Canada is hard since this country is so geographically sparse and offers somewhat limited labour mobility (interprovincially or outward; it's much easier for people to come here and depress wages).

Canada's remarkable for shifting goalposts and failing to broadly grasp fundamental, obvious problems like stagnant productivity or deteriorating housing affordability. We are not yet really on the same page about those problems as a society. I tend to think we'll continue to settle into less than what we recently would have thought of as first world living standards particularly for younger Canadians, and most Canadians who are doing well personally will fail to achieve enlightenment about the plight of their compatriots. The guy born in the 50s who flunked out of high school but still ended up with a pension and a million-plus in untaxed property wealth will believe that his own achievements separate him from average younger professionals living with roommates into their 30s.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

For most people, the move to the city is employment related.

Earning money is probably the first thing on people's minds when they settle somewhere, but I wouldn't dismiss finding friends or a long-term partner, either. Speaking as a heterosexual man, who you choose to spend your life with is probably the most important decision you'll ever make. Married men live significantly longer than single men, and economically there are very few career promotions in life that will net you a better economic outcome than sharing the costs and enjoying the benefits of a dual income household. And having a good set of friends is up there in importance, too. Looking back from middle age, I can honestly say that between a spouse, good friends and a career, I'd put career 3rd in importance. Even if you're very career-focused, I would say that a lot of your success finding the best jobs comes down to friends in your network.

Cities are better suited for young people to meet people and form friendships and partners with. It's not just the numbers. Cities skew younger than rural areas, and since many young people to a city are newcomers from other places, they are more willing to reach out and meet new people. Those who live in rural areas overwhelmingly grew up there and tend to have a friend base that they don't stray from (this is what ericmacm was talking about).

[someone123]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

And having a good set of friends is up there in importance, too. Looking back from middle age, I can honestly say that between a spouse, good friends and a career, I'd put career 3rd in importance.

I think friends and family are really underrated in discussions that sometimes feel like they borrow a lot from a "MoneySense 2026 Best City to Live" perspective. Adventurous younger people who move somewhere totally new will want to quickly build up a new network of social connections, and for every other case existing connections tend to matter. If weather is worth 1 point, interpersonal connections might be worth 20 points.

If you are gay and dating you are really looking at 1% or less of the population to begin with and basic requirements (they are single, they are roughly your age or stage of life) drops that more to 0.1% or 0.01%. Sometimes you see survey data saying 7% of people are 2SLGBTQQIAAWTFBBQ++ but that doesn't reflect real same-sex (or trans) partnerships which can feel like they take place in a small village even in a big city.

This is a tangent but I think awful relationships (multiplied by pathological interactions with the family law system that awful people tend to create) are probably the #1 life ruiner there is, with major health problems potentially being worse but rarer. It's one of those areas of life that I think day-to-day culture largely doesn't address and people don't want to hear about.

[Changing City]

To drag the thread back to Statistics Canada, they have helpfully recently published the results of the Housing Survey, including Why do people move within Canada?. Housing is the most frequently cited reason, and family-related reasons were also cited, although not as frequently. Employment was the most frequently cited reason among households that moved across provinces.

"The vast majority (94.4%) of moves occurred within the same province, with many occurring within the same municipality. At the same time, 5.6% of households that moved went to another province. These interprovincial households that moved often cited different reasons for moving than those that moved within the same province.

Among households that moved interprovincially, 42.5% cited a new job or job transfer as one of their reasons for moving. Wanting to be closer to family (27.6%) was also often cited. Notably, 4.5% of interprovincial movers identified upgrading to a larger dwelling or better-quality dwelling as a reason, compared with 26.6% of households that moved within a province."

Lots more in the article about the different motivations of different generations for moving.

[someone123]

You tend to start closer to friends and family though so they are often more of a reason not to move. They might also influence to you move locally instead of interprovincially, for example. Interprovincial mobility in Canada is relatively low as the statistics indicate; 1.9% of households in the past 5 years, or around 99.6% odds of staying in the same province from one year to the next.

[The mayor]

McLeod also pointed to “major, major growth right here in Regina, with 7,800 jobs added.”

https://www.sasktoday.ca/provincial-news/mcleod-enthused-about-jobs-numbers-for-march-12127355
McLeod enthused as province adds 15,000 jobs, unemployment hits low
Saskatchewan added 15,000 full-time jobs in March, with the province reporting the lowest unemployment rate among provinces.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by jonny24

"Foreigner" isn't anything bad. It's a pretty neutral descriptor - people that come from a foreign country. We have a Foreign Affairs ministry, after all. A huge amount aren't legal immigrants, they are Temporary Foreign Workers.

You're the one who's gone and made it about race.

As they say in England, wind your neck in.

"Global Affairs" for a number of years now.