This City has no planning department, at least not one that is able to make a mayor and Council understand what is happening and how to re-adjust if they, themselves, understand it or are allowed the time to understand it.

Hopefully the new mayor and Council will understand that fundamental flaw in this City and do something about it. No one else seems to.

I suspect the only reason we saw many houses bieng built here in the 90's is the fact that when people like myself left home after graduation and decided to stick around P.G. and were able to afford to buy a home while in our 20's...most of my friends were directly or inderectly employed by the forest industry and were also able to buy homes in there early 20's...those days are probably gone.
I would prefer to see slow population growth versus what is happening in the Smokanagan or Kamloops.

I agree Gus, but Ben raises issues that are bigger than PG IMO. We are a corporate society now, and not one oriented towards families... and that is the real issue.

Todays families need two people working to make it work for the nice home and trips and a somewhat comparable lifestyle to what people see on TV. Even the best jobs these days are not enough to buy a home and raise a family, and even if they were... those jobs may not be there in 5-years in most cases.

The greater architects of society are the bankster money power planners and not the local municipal planners as we would think.

The bankster society is the commoner society where family units do not exist (common children and women)... this so that the fabric of humanity can be shaped through a selection process similar to a dog breeder, but more sophisticated where people don't realize they are all pawns in a game to define society. The banksters are the ones that bank role the ism's and the anti-life campaigns to further their agenda of no family units through a controlled moral agenda that they sell to the people.

The ism crowds are the confused and morally mixed up vanguard of this 'change' genuinely believing their personal life choices are their right, which is a very hard thing to argue against... and so can only be addressed with proper education to the moral hazards people can fall victim to IMO. We haven't even begun to do that yet as a society through fear of the backlash.

The banksters print their own money and manufacture it through financial trickery in a fixed casino market that allows them the money power of kings to manipulate society to serve their ideology and greed. The corporations I believe are the enablers of the bankster agenda through the bankster control of corporate finance and investment capital... and then the corporations lobby and financing efforts with politics, as well as control of real information (ie the banksters and their agenda) through enabled like minded corporate media ownership.

The bought and paid for political parties then make their representatives that are in office sell out our society through unrestricted free trade to enable the bankster corporations to undercut our labor, environment, and in effect to undermine our lifestyle. Bailouts for the banksters if they run into trouble playing their game. These are the same people that support signing a softwood lumber agreements that is a sell out, and also say letting the big three auto makers go bankrupt is markets in action.

PG's situation is no different than anywhere else, other than in other places the short fall isn't noticed as much, because it is made up for with immigration that is mostly made up from rich immigrants, rather then the old school ones that worked their way up from the bottom. People make money on their equity appreciation from their newly rich neighbors and they remain ignorant of the under the radar problems from misguided corpocracy controlling the social and economic agenda.

I think that (society engineering by the banksters through their control of finance and finance information)is the root of the problems/changes today ... and the things we are seeing in the financial world today are only symptoms of this underlying fact. The demographic shift is everywhere and not just a PG phenomenon. I would argue Vancouver has it worse and they will likely lose a generation if the housing market crashes 30% down there and still the next generation will not be able to afford much more than a closet in a highrise....

I think the solution is to own our government by and for citizens (through BCSTV IMO) so that we can focus government on quality of life issues for citizens and families, taxation shifts away from families, public infrastructure that promote free enterprise, break up of media ownership conglomerates, tight regulation and enforcement of the financial sector, and 'fair trade'... rather than 'free trade'.

Time Will Tell

When you take the decrease in school enrollments, and tie it in with the lower number of graduates in the Central Interior, this over time will have a huge effect on enrollments at CNC and UNBC.

Factor in the number of people who have lost their jobs this past year, and those who will probably lose theirs next year, and you have a serious problem.

There doesnt appear to be any big ticket items on the Corporate agendas that are to be built to attract people to Prince George.

Well spoken eagle one, thought provoking too.
metalman.

The Mayor was going to appeal the Census numbers for Prince George with Stats Canada, because he didnt beleive them.

Havent heard anymore about the appeal.

Eagleman, those are good words.

Thanks guys. A bit long winded once I got going though lol....

Uh say what? How did the declining population in PG suddenly become an advertisement for the BCSTV system? Like that is going to have any effect whatsoever.

The bottom line is that wages have not kept up with the cost of living in this generation. It takes two people working to make ends meet. Kids are expensive and many families are choosing to have two maximum or in many cases, one, as Ben noted.

The BCSTV system is not the answer.

I think the solution is to own our government by and for citizens (through BCSTV)

Well eagleone that was a long story too tell us that the way we vote would solve all our problems. But you missed the fact that the topis is population growth in PG not the monatary system we have. You just love to rant on and on. As I have said before I think the centerline is getting to you. Try driving your truck in your lane.

cheers

Many years ago now, my wife and I decided we wanted children and that one of us had to stay home and be there for them. Well, that is not easy. We are constantly punished for that decision. Total family income is decreased and tax benefits do not match costs. Contributions to medical and dental are increased. Even in retirement it is tough to make it on only one pension.

Lets give a parent that stays home a real incentive. And, while we are at it, take the pill away and lets fill the schools again!

"Todays families need two people working to make it work"

It's not so much that they NEED to work, it's likely that they both WANT to work. Off the top of my head, I can't think of a single person in my peer group of friends where both people in the relationship don't have their own career. That's just the culture of more recent generations.

"So where are we now . . . if we really want to change the trend we will need to get back to replenishing the population and there seems to be no burning desire to do that"

I agree and therein lies the rub. Times have changed and what people want from life is also changing. In reality, PG is completely doomed if it thinks that in 2008 (let alone 2015) it can attract people here by advertising some 60K a year job at a local mill all the while just telling people that the "smell of money" is the price you have to pay for having such a "great" life. Most people entering the workforce now (these are the folks we need to attract for long-term sustainibility) won't put up with an "old school" PG. They'll go make their 60K elsewhere. Do some of you "long timers" here ever wonder why more and more of our local kids (your kids perhaps) leave PG the first chance they get? Maybe they are trying to tell us something. Maybe we should listen for a change . . .

Increase family size to fill schools? Wow!!!! Now there is a reason that I really never thought of.

Human beans seem to be getting smarter the longer they are on this earth.

How about converting a school or two for residences for the homeless?

Can you quote your sources there Ben on the average number ofkids per household now compared to the past that you refer to? Or are you just making this stuff up as you go along?

"Can you quote your sources there Ben on the average number ofkids per household now compared to the past that you refer to? Or are you just making this stuff up as you go along?"

Uh, the StatsCan website has a ton of information, just look it up.

----

"It's not so much that they NEED to work, it's likely that they both WANT to work. Off the top of my head, I can't think of a single person in my peer group of friends where both people in the relationship don't have their own career. That's just the culture of more recent generations."

That's partially true but doesn't tell the whole story. Life is more expensive. I'm not talking about a second car in the garage or a cabin on a lake, I'm talking about basic living expenses like food and shelter. Quite often, two people need to work in order to make enough to live. You make it sound like everyone has a choice, and that is not necessarily always the case.

----

"Do some of you "long timers" here ever wonder why more and more of our local kids (your kids perhaps) leave PG the first chance they get? Maybe they are trying to tell us something. Maybe we should listen for a change . . "

Probably because there are not enough of those 60K jobs advertised in the paper that you referred to earlier. PG is a boom or bust kind of town. When forestry is going well, so does PG... when the inevitable downturn hits, look out. This one might last a while.

"That's partially true but doesn't tell the whole story. Life is more expensive. I'm not talking about a second car in the garage or a cabin on a lake, I'm talking about basic living expenses like food and shelter. Quite often, two people need to work in order to make enough to live. You make it sound like everyone has a choice, and that is not necessarily always the case"

In some cases I agree. In MANY cases, however, life is more expensive because of the choices people make. When I was growing up we had one car. We had one tv that lasted at least 10 years. We went on a family vacation once every 3 or 4 years and it was a drive to Edmonton for a few days of holiday time or a weekend camping with my grand parents. We lived in a small home. A dinner at a restaurant was a treat. Contrast that to today where family vacations in Mexico are the norm, multiple vehicles are a "necessity", every person in the house has a cell phone, people have 528 channels of TV and having the fiscal means to take the skidoo's out in the winter has been all but enshrined in the Charter of Rights. The number of people living beyond their means as a result of choices they have made is insane. Look no further than our current financial crisis for proof. Heck, just look to the people living on your block. If you can't find them it's likely that your eyes aren't open.

----

"Probably because there are not enough of those 60K jobs advertised in the paper that you referred to earlier"

Actually there are lots of good paying jobs advertised pretty much every weekend in the Citizen. Two issues though:

1) They generally require higher education or specific skillsets, they are not your classic "union labour" jobs

2) We're competing against other cities to attract the same people to their communities to fill those jobs. Unfortunately for us, we often lose that battle because most of those other cities have things we can't compete with. Lame things like clean air, nice downtowns, performing arts centers, higher quality of life, etc. I'm not sure if they have potholes or not. That's one thing I've noticed when talking with people from other areas, they never seem to mention the condition of their roads as a primary selling point as to why their city is great. Strange stuff, LOL :)

"The number of people living beyond their means as a result of choices they have made is insane. Look no further than our current financial crisis for proof."

---

"Actually there are lots of good paying jobs advertised pretty much every weekend in the Citizen. Two issues though:

1) They generally require higher education or specific skillsets, they are not your classic "union labour" jobs

2) We're competing against other cities to attract the same people to their communities to fill those jobs."

---

I agree with you on both counts 100%.

There's no excuse for people who max out their credit cards to keep up with the Joneses. I do believe that basic costs (food/shelter) are taking a larger percentage of an average person's take home pay than it used to be, and I don't see that trend reversing any time soon.

Declining enrollments reflect fewer children entering the public school system, it does not necessarily mean they are not still in PG. Also the stats only reflect those numbers from residents who actually submitted their census forms. There are lots of people in PG who did not send those forms in.
The graduates may very well have remained in PG to attend CNC or UNBC. Or perhaps they took a gap year. Or are in the labour market. Hard to say.
One would have to compare various stats to get a clearer picture of our true population count. Looking at the local employment rates, school enrollments and the census is only a guide. The only way to get a clearer picture is to also include family size info from Revenue Canada with the child tax benefit. Of course, there are many who do not file for this credit so again there will be gaps.
Based on the numbers there is a population decrease of 7,000. 400 x 5 = 2000 and 450x5= 2250, so by looking solely at the enrollment figures one could surmise 2000-2250 people have left. Now if each of those grads left with their parents that adds another 4000-4500. Did 2000-2250 families really leave in the past 5 yrs? Based on the real estate market I am not sure. I would guess that is not the case because there would be a dramatic employment shift if the parents left with the kids.
So I come to the conclusion that the numbers are not all that accurate to begin with because of the lack of participation by residents to fill out and submit their census forms.

If the school population was 26,000 at its high and it has now shrunk to 15,000, that’s 11,000 that went somewhere.
Let's see if they have closed 13 schools since 2000, if the stats were wrong then kids should have been showing up for school.
Finally did 6,000 people fail to fill in their information for stats Canada, given that a warm body called on them to do so in all but a few cases, I don't think so?
We don't seem to want to face the facts.
Stats Can. and the provincial government hand out grants based on the population, we have never won and appeal, rather strange isn't it. Maybe we just don't want to face facts.
By the way what is wrong with our population as it sits anyway? Do you want to be Surrey, Richmond or Kelowna?
Also strange that the majority of cities in Canada agree with Stats Can. figures