You have got to be kidding!

"The largest number – 6,871 – came from Alberta"

Sort of traditional over the past 2 or 3 decades, isn't it ....

mobile people ... nomads ... blue eyed sheiks ..

Interesting figures.

Immigration: 10,058
Interprovincial migration: 13,513
Actual population growth: 14,383

Therefore, the number who left the province to find work elsewhere must be about: 9,188

(10058+13513)-14383

"Therefore, the number who left the province to find work elsewhere must be about: 9,188"

Not true .... you actually do not know how many left the province to find work elsewhere. All you know is that they left the province.

They could have gone back to South Africa because they did not like it here, left because they completed their undergraduate degree and moved back home and are taking their fiance who was born here with him/her; moved back home to be closer to elderly parents to take care of them, moved back to the Maritimes because they made their money here and can now buy a one boat fishing charter on the $700,000 they sold their house for and have $500,000 left over after they buy a simlar house there.

Not everything is about "work" for everyone. There are more than 4 million stories in this province.

Oh .. and of course the reverse is also not true, that those who came to this province all came here because they found work.

You are correct, Owl, so how many of those 9,000 would you estimate left due to your anecdotal story, and how many left to gain an economic advantage? I presume births and deaths could likely cancel each other out.

Perhaps it would be more accurate to express it as, "that means about 9,000 people left the province. In view of the catastrophic state of the lumber industry it would not be unreasonable to presume that a substantial number of those left to find work in other places."

By the way, anecdotally, it is my observation that many Canadians come to BC to retire in a more agreeable climate. This is particularly so on Vancouver Island, and the population here is growing pretty well continuously, despite a devastated lumber industry.

The fact is that it is not much better here in that regard than it is around Prince George - 10,00 logging truckloads of raw logs exported in January and February combined, while mills close.

Retirees tend to have a stable income which is not affected by the ups and downs of industry. Many pensions are good enough to allow a fair disposable income and large numbers of retirees can soften the effect on a community's economy from downturns.

Perhaps Mackenzie could look into the possibility of becoming such a community. It would require some facilities oriented towards elderly people, both indoor and outdoor. Not all retired people dislike the cold and snow. Some like it a lot, and Mackenzie could well be a suitable community for those.

So its true that 70% of BC's population growth comes from immigration from other countries.

Typically one would think immigration would be used to stabilize an economy not to dilute its existing population. All of this immigration growth goes to Vancouver-Victoria so we can assume the rest of the province is diluted politically by that factor do to these policies.

I would also argue that when 70% of the population growth (higher in Vancouver) comes from immigration that the immigrants are driving the housing market that is pricing Canadians out of their homes.

Further to that I would add that when a country is relying on 70% of population growth coming from immigration that it has already utterly abandoned the concept of Canadian families providing the growth required for our economy. It becomes an economy that leaves no margin for Canadian incomes to support Canadian born families.

i am unable to accept the statement that our low birth rate is due to state of the economy. Honestly, people have WAY more disposable income now than they did in my parents day. Think back , all of you to the days when travel overseas was a dream for most people. WHen only the rich had 2 newish cars. When people drove the cheapest, most practical vehicle and saved their whole lives to pay the mortgage on a modest home (the likes of which are no longer even built). Those people had kids and raised them too, with far less resouces and security than we have.
While our birth rate is increasing, it is still low. I am sure we can all think of some reasons for this. I doubt the economy (which is robust is one of them). If you want to do something about the 'dilution' of our population, then have some kids (but be sure to raise them right). Or perhaps, we ought to remember that canada is a country of immigrants (apart from the natives). Had former canadian citizens banned foreign immigration many of us would not be here....

Good Lord eagleone ... why don't we go get every single WHITE Canadian family to make sure they have at least four kids so that we can stay CANADIAN and make our footprint on this earth even bigger that it already is.......

You don't get it, do you????

This is a land of immigrants. Not only that, but virtually every country these days is a land of immigrants ... Britain, France, Germany, Spain ... on the European side .... Australia .. South America .... maybe Africa and Asia are the last holdouts, but not much longer ....

An intersting tidbit when it comes to retiring .... most popular place for brits who want to leave their home country and retire someplace else? ... not Spain, but Canada ...... of course, they are no longer fertile .. so maybe we need to get them to take a fertility pill or two sos that we can keep that good olde british ancestry alive ......

You are unbelievable, eagleone ...... !!!!!

"i am unable to accept the statement that our low birth rate is due to state of the economy"

Look at it in a different way, and it actually may be, but in the reverse sense.

The "natural" reason for having children has mainly been to provide support for the family unit and to allow the family unit to survive from generation to generation.

Thus the poor countries typically have larger families since there are more hands to work to feed the mouths. When those who can no longer work can no loger feed themselves, so to speak, the younger members of the family will do so.

That is the way nature operates until the riches are accumulated to such a degree that children are no longer needed for sustenance but only for continuance of the lineage and the community.

One can argue, and it can be seen when one looks at some of the countries which have low fertility rates but are still relatively poor, that if the state takes the place of the children, then fertility rates will also drop.

Thus, Cuba and Canada have a similar fertility rate of 1.60 and 1.61 respectively for what I would say rflects those two reasons.

I'll let you figure out which is the richer country.

;-)

Countries with the highest fertility rate?

Mali 7.38
Niger 7.37
Uganda 6.84
Somalia 6.68
Afghainstan 6.64 ...

Partly follows the notion that when your children are killed, you make more of them.

:-(

http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?v=31

I love the fact that we have such strong immigration into BC. It helps the overall population grow, it brings money into the Province (along with additional tax revenues), it keeps us politically "relevant" within Canada and it makes us a more desireable place within the globe. In short, what's good for the LML is good for BC and what's good for BC is good for PG.

NMG,I sorry to hear that you feel using immigration to boost population is a great way to attain political and monetary capital. There's the Canadian spirit... not. Also how is growing the 'LML' beyond its natural capacity good for BC? Aren't there better ways of being relevant then selling the future for the present?

------------

Owl, I don't get you when you advocate we all become infertile so that we have room to share our land with others who are breeding like rabbits because of their condition of poverty in their own countries. I guess you want the Darwin award for reverse darwinism? I'm sure it can be arranged.

--------------

Carinmacil, I agree the economy is great for a two income family. Although it used to be one income could pay the bills and the other parent could raise the kids. Nowdays its both parents working to pay the bills, while the child raising is outsources to the lowest bidder, or in some cases government themselves. When the family flies to Disneyland that might be the only time the kids see their parents. Probably an apples and oranges argument though. Maybe its not economics, but merely a result of the decades of abortion or other social ills.

Just a different philosophy eagleone ...

we are all human beings living on the same spaceship earth .....

people have migrated and "intermarried" since time immemorial

formal borders denoting countries and having relatively long duration is a fairly modern notion.

despite that, people continue to migrate and intermingle.

If you think I am off the mark, think Mexicans and USA, think guest workers, think genocide ..... many ways to accomodate fellow humans or accommodate ME!!! as in the ME generation.

You want to prove that Canucks are superior to everyone else by entering into the baby factory business? Blue eyes or brown? And you will be cream of the crop. better hide the water, the oil, the land and build an army to defend it to the death. Nice plan you have for my grandchildren. My parents had a planner like that too running their country. He believed in Darwin's theory too. Also had the same thoughts about the Rothchilds that you have.

;-(

"Although it used to be one income could pay the bills and the other parent could raise the kids."

There was one TV in the house. There was one car to the family. The house was 1000 sf. There was a single telephone land line to the house. There was no Starbucks, food was cooked at home and eaten there except once a month or birthdays, etc. There was one golf course in a city of 350,000; flying???? who flew???

We overeat; we cannot exercise unless we do it on some contraption and pay to do it; we enjoy ourselves on motorized vehicles flitting over land and water and carry them on th back of our oversized vehicles because it is macho ......

we import food from all over the world so that we can get grapes year around, apples year around, bananas, peaches .....

We are hooked on consumerism and have become anti family. We move at a moment's notice to earn another $100 bucks per week, leaving friends who are really no longer friends in the truest sense.

Yeah ... I can see we can't survive on one salary anymore. In fact, soon we will be as I described above, we will smarten up and realize getting a kid will allow us to get an income from them when they turn 14 or so. We will need three working people in the family to be able to stay out of the poor house.

Darwin at his best.

And to think that just 30 years ago we were wonderng what to do with all the free time we were about to get with 30 hour work weeks .....

No one counted on the fact that it takes as special kind of human to figure out what to do with free time tht di not cost too much.

And people think that gambling is addictive!!!! LOL ... they can't see the obvious things they are actually addicted to.

Thats interesting... so in Owls world I'm hilter all over again because I am pro domestic growth and the Canadian family (I don't agree that we should all be made infertile as Owl does), rather than importing our population growth. Its seems quite the leap of logic to me. Our country has no hope if thats the politically correct thing of the day.

I don't think me and hitler share much in common either... even when it comes to our views on the Rothschilds who funded hitler. I'm all for Canadians of all nationalities and varieties and people can interbred all they want (my family is probably well ahead of most all others), so I have no idea how Owl always turns my opinion into some kind of race warfare thing.

I guess I'm just more loyal to my country and the well being of my fellow citizens, rather than making excuses and using fear politics to further an agenda that has no loyalty to our country and is willing to use hitler to make a bankrupt argument for unlimited immigration?

Shame on Owl IMO.

Oh boy oh boy... some folks will never figure out that population growth is behind nearly every problem on this planet and Canadians use more resources per capita than almost any other population. If everyone on Earth used resources the way Canadians do this Earth of ours would be a clear cut, mined out charred rock in no time at all. Earth's population needs to DECREASE! This is why capitalism is akin to cancer: it demands constant growth to remain alive or it will perish... just like cancer.

eagleone: "Our country has no hope if thats the politically correct thing of the day." That was referring to domestic baby factories versus inmigration .....

and .." ..... others who are breeding like rabbits because of their condition of poverty in their own countries"

All for keeping the "race" pure it seems .... of coruse that is not like Hitler, and many others who thought and still think that way, whatsoever .... stupid me. How could I ever have thought that? It's just the Darwin thingy .... after all, Darwin is PC, Hitler and other racists are not PC.

No Owl that refers to abortions of Canada's future population. You seem to be arguing Canadians need to be made infertile to save the planet.

I guess Owl and his ilk win though, because our country saw fit today to award the Order of Canada to a man that has killed a whole generation of Canadians murdering over a million Canadians before they were even able to take their first breath outside the womb.

Maybe you can apply for an Order of Canada Owl and join the illustrious club of people that rub shoulders with the likes of hitler wanna be's.

Happy Canada Day :-(

Eagleone ..... I am stating a fact based on statistical data ...

When people are not assured of being able to survive by themselves they gather people around them to assist. Families can create assistants, called children by some. So, generally speaking, the poorer the community and the less the community is able to help out individuals, the more likely it is that families have more than 2 children ....

As security of survivability increases through either personal wealth or support of the community for individuals in need, the birthrate (or group fertility as it is called, and maybe this is where you get off on your "right ot life" stuff) drops.

It has nothing to do with abortions, Morgentaler, sterilizing people or whatever. It has to do with choice. The choice to have children is a choice less frequently made whether by right to life couples or by couples who are pro-choice.

You are blinded to reading the content by your beliefs.

You have not the faintest clue what my thoughts on right to life and pro-choice are. That is not even under discussion.

In case you do notr understand the use of fertility rate in my writings.

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/P/Populations.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate

Owl, sorry, but I don't have time for your links this morning... but as for your position on choice....

Your position looks to be choice, but what nobody likes to talk about is 'when' that choice is made? That IMO is the moral debate that should be settled. Is it appropriate to leave the right to choice until a time when an unborn baby has to be... you know? I bet the one million unborn Canadians would have liked to have had their day in court on that question (how many of them would have been order of Canada recipients?).

Thats 25 years worth of BC immigration to put the number in perspective.

IMO people make 'economic decisions' because they are not yet mature enough to understand that society hasn't yet set out the proper moral lines of responsibility (or they've been circumvented for convenience). Future generations will look at this 'victimless' method of population control and equate it morally with the Spartans who submitted their children to state decisions of whether or not their children were fit to live.

IMO it comes down to the 'when' of 'choice' that is appropriate. Time will tell.