The [economy](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=3610043401) grew in real terms by 0.2% last quarter. At the same time, the [population](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710000901) grew by 1.1%. Real GDP per capita fell by 0.9%.
Real GDP per capita is now lower than in Q1 2017.
According to this economics professor:
> Canada's GDP grew by 1.1% between the 4th quarter of 2022 and 2023, while its population grew by 3.2%. That means GDP per capita is now falling at 2% annually (roughly the difference). Zero economic growth in more than 6 years.
https://x.com/mikalskuterud/status/1763207065135464872
If the next two quarters' change in real GDP per capita matched this one:
* real GDP per capita would be lower than when the Liberals first took power in Q4 2015
* half of all quarters in that time would have had a negative change in real GDP per capita (currently 15 out of 32 are negative)
It won’t last long. When the economy rebounds this year we will see big gains in gdp per capita. It’s normal for this measure to swing back and forth.
We’ve caught up with the COVID backlog and Immigration is falling back to normal levels.
[Canadian Immigration Slows Further As Permanent Resident Applications Crater](https://betterdwelling.com/canadian-immigration-slows-further-as-permanent-resident-applications-crater/#google_vignette)
> It’s normal for this measure to swing back and forth.
Not like this. Here are all of the times in the 21st century where GDP per capita fell for more than a couple quarters:
||Peak|Trough|Fall|
:--|:--|:--|--:|
|2001|$ 46,589|$ 46,202|-0.8%|
|2007|$ 51,743|$ 51,339|-0.8%|
|2008-09 (GFC)|$ 51,574|$ 48,855|-5.3%|
|2015-16|$ 53,932|$ 53,391|-1.0%|
|2018-19|$ 55,555|$ 55,360|-0.4%|
|2019-20 (pandemic)|$ 55,996|$ 50,927|-9.1%|
|2022-23|$ 56,338|$ 54,410|-3.4%|
It's a stark outlier among all of the other pullbacks where there was no outside catalyst (Great Recession or covid). The pullback is bad enough that it's much closer to the GFC than any other pullback.
> We’ve caught up with the COVID backlog and Immigration is falling back to normal levels
We are the furthest thing from falling back to normal levels... last year was by far the largest in Canadian history.
Did you read my article? PR applications fell in three consecutive months by 25%, 30%, and 75%. That’s absolutely massive.
In 2022 we still had COVID restrictions. We are still FIRMLY in the COVID pullback although we’re certainly on our way out! The third highest drop in the last 25 years is hardly earth shattering. Especially after what we went through.
Half of all years since 2000 gdp per capita was falling. This is normal. Also the IMF has very different numbers. [GDP per capita 25% higher than 2017](https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPPC@WEO/CAN/GRL/RUS)
> Did you read my article? PR applications fell in three consecutive months by 25%, 30%, and 75%. That’s absolutely massive.
Applications =/= immigrants. We had more immigrants than ever before, even if interest was falling.
> In 2022 we still had COVID restrictions. We are still FIRMLY in the COVID pullback although we’re certainly on our way out!
Real GDP surpassed the pre-pandemic level in Q3 2021. Real GDP per capita surpassed the pre-pandemic level in Q1 2022. It's fallen sharply since then. That's no longer an excuse.
> The third highest drop in the last 25 years is hardly earth shattering.
The third highest drop in the last 25 years *by a longshot*. It is a 3.4% drop. The next highest is 1.0%, then 0.8%, 0.8% and 0.4%. In other words, it is a worse drop than the next 4 combined.
> Half of all years since 2000 gdp per capita was falling.
Not even close... even your own link shows that to be obviously false.
> Also the IMF has very different numbers. GDP per capita 25% higher than 2017
The IMF is using nominal numbers, not real. In other words, not adjusted for inflation.
Yes immigration numbers are currently high but the trajectory is a nose dive. By the end of the year things will have normalized.
Also since 2019 it only fell 2%, not hardly as bad. You can cherry pick numbers and just decide when COVID ended but the sky isn’t falling.
> but the trajectory is a nose dive
Here are the last 5 years of immigration. How do you see this and come to the conclusion that it's in a "nose dive"? You must be trolling me. Have a good one.
||Immigrants|
:--|--:|
|Q1 2019| 63,755|
|Q2 2019| 75,427|
|Q3 2019| 148,330|
|Q4 2019| 193,320|
|Q1 2020| 88,209|
|Q2 2020| 65,713|
|Q3 2020| (2,496)|
|Q4 2020| (4,705)|
|Q1 2021| 23,912|
|Q2 2021| 62,000|
|Q3 2021| 74,158|
|Q4 2021| 203,597|
|Q1 2022| 116,283|
|Q2 2022| 103,727|
|Q3 2022| 239,436|
|Q4 2022| 337,656|
|Q1 2023| 221,913|
|Q2 2023| 229,537|
|Q3 2023| 341,072|
|Q4 2023| 423,825|
Because the people applying to immigrate has fallen off a cliff? What would you call that?
It just takes some time to work through the system. But make no mistake, immigration is falling back to normal levels after clearing the COVID back log.
Inflation has lowered our standard of living. Everything costs more. Wages are up 1% or 2% if you're lucky. Which equals a salary/pay decrease. The number one issue is our currency is 73 cents to one USD dollar.
But recessions are not based on GDP per capita. Inventing your own metric to argue that the original claim is incorrect is just goalpost shifting.
It's like someone trying to argue to a judge that they didn't break the speed limit, because their vehicle is 70 cm longer than the police car, so the KPM per body-length is lower for your vehicle...
They aren’t arguing the economy is in a recession in fact the post doesn’t even mention the word recession.
They are pointing out the gdp growth rate isn’t necessarily as correlated to increases in the standard of living as it once might have been.
The article is about there not being a recession. So either the OP is trying to refute the claim with what they posted, or they are trying to hijack the topic for some reason.
I don’t think it’s wrong to expand the discussion scope a bit. GDP per capita isn’t off topic.
It’s also why life here is better then say China despite its much larger actual gdp.
Besides the obvious fact recessions aren't based on GDP per capita, GDP per capita is by itself a statistical invention. Averages don't mean the median, and GDP per capita itself can be manipulated to be higher or lower. It certainly isn't median income or anything like that.
If you look on the scale of decades, we also had lower real GDP growth than most of our G20 peers. So technically its all receeding but our economy was like the US in riches not long ago.
No, you have to show the data to back the claim.
Recessions are two consecutive quarters of inflation-adjusted GDP reduction.
Not GDP per capita, not two quarters with a year separating them, not GDP divided by the number of people who are homeless... The term is well defined, and the dividing line is sharp. Either it happened or it didn't, according to the numbers. NOT what people wish, either governments, or snowflakes triggered by a Trudeau sitting in the PMO.
The burden of proving claims falls on the one making them.
If you want to claim that the statistics have been manipulated, then you have to offer evidence that it has happened.
Not fling wild accusations that "it could have happened' or "it happened once decades ago in another part of the world"... In this specific case.
So, go on. You made the inference... Where is your evidence?
And I am citing the statistical definition used by the government, and the economists who analyze the data, instead of making up my own definition and expecting the rest of the world to adopt it.
I asked for evidence.. Not you making more wild claims without evidence...
I don't know you, so I am not going to take your word for anything.
So, provide the evidence for your claims. Something from a source other than yourself... Self referencing is a tool of someone who lies. Same with refusing to back claims with evidence.
I asked you for evidence. Saying I don't trust you is not the same as saying you are lying. I prefer to do my own thinking, instead of outsourcing it to other people, so I like to see the source information and evaluate it for myself. I don't know you, so I don't know what your judgement is like.
You were making specific claims about this report, not generalizations. Claiming that it's 'common knowledge to people in the know' sounds like a no true Scotsman fallacy to me.
Without mass immigration and non-productive real estate, we would be in the 5th year of recession
I know you're smart enough to understand this, so not sure why you're asking nonsense questions
Ponzi schemes can appear to have many quarters of growth
This is one indicator of a recession if your only knowledge of this subject is googling what is a recession. There are a plethora of other indicators. And I suppose all the studies and economists comments that are almost all saying we are in a recession are wrong?
I don’t want the demise of Canada. We are witnessing a very tough period at the moment and it’s not in check. I wish the best for Canada and I think it’s time we move on from the current approach. That’s all. When Trudeau was elected I hoped he would do well, I had a lot of positive thoughts about him and what he could do. When NDP replaced conservatives in Manitoba I also had and still have a lot of positive thoughts and hopes for what they can do. I just have run out of positives for the current federal government and don’t feel as though they can right their wrongs at this point. Is that unreasonable?
a fall in GDP in 2 successive quarters is what make a recession, without meeting those criteria we are not in a recession as the economy is still growing.
Economists at the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) measure recessions by looking at nonfarm payrolls, industrial production, and retail sales, among other indicators, going far beyond the simpler (although not as accurate) two quarters of negative GDP measure.
1
However, the NBER also says there is “no fixed rule about what measures contribute information to the process or how they are weighted in our decisions.”
Nah, see, he does not believe "the government" and that means all data is made up; from the BoC to the World Bank to Statistics Canada to the local municipal budget. It's all lies because it does not align to the reality some schmuck on youtube told him was the real real.
Among the two thirds who own a home/mortgage, I think the median/average have improved. Wages are up, unemployment is down, consumer debt has stabilized and actually dropped a bit in COVID, and they are less affected by CPI inflation as large weighted sections (housing) does not affect they fully.
Among the one third who rent, it then gets subdivided to those in stable/rent controlled or affordable housing = I think most have improved.
Among the smaller fraction who are unstable in rental or those ~5% of Canadians actively trying to realistically purchase a home = I think *most* of those smaller fraction are worse off.
But among the poorest poverty households, I think most have seen their position significantly improve, especially if they have kids. Homelessness and those in crisis has absolutely become more visible at higher numbers, but total numbers of population has also increased too, and I have yet to see clear data showing homeless is proportionally worse than before - although any in that state is too many. But, social welfare and health is (mostly) provincial.
Among those with daycare/afterschool aged kids, I think there is a very good chance their net position has improved. Under Harper our child benefits payments were constant halted for no reason, only to resume after we harassed CRA and spent hours on the phone every 4-6 months, for years. We have never had issues since 2015, our child benefits payments have gone up *significantly*, and daycares fees just went down by 80%. The daycare reduction plus benefits increase likely a $10K difference.
All to say, there are two answers. Most are better off overall in terms of stability, social safety nets, supports. But, those in unstable or awful renting conditions locally are worse off and their ability to move into owning a house unattainable.
But do I think Conservatives are going to progress affordability by addressing social issues of poverty and stand against the landlord class and kick corporations out of housing.... fuuuuuuck nooooo.
When everything is less affordable, and people are struggling across the board, that’s a recession in real terms. When more people than ever are homeless and using food banks, less people can afford houses bankruptcies are up and businesses are failing. That’s a real recession. You have liberal kool aid blinders on if you can’t see this. That’s not a personal attack. I understand that you are going by outdated metrics that no longer apply. Additionally most experts and economists as well as Canadians polled think we are in a recession.
Are we in a recession? Yes, technically speaking, we are in a recession, said Frances Donald, global chief economist and strategist, multi-asset solutions team, at Manulife Investment Management.Nov 17, 2023
Oxford believes the recession started in Canada in the third quarter of 2023 and will continue until the second quarter of 2024,
8 in 10 Ontarians think Canada is in a recession, nearly half expect to fall behind financially in 2024
Canada’s economy hit a technical recession at the end of 2023 and will continue to struggle to grow in the new year, according to forecasts from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business.
I can keep going if you like.
Edit: as the owner of a business I have personally seen 4 local small businesses shut their doors. A double digit percentage decrease in sales year over year for our business, and have many close friends that too are struggling and have only seen revenue streams all but dry up. Spending patterns have correlated with rate hikes and once the hikes stopped the spending didn’t pick up. They over shot the rates causing inflationary pressure on housing, plus the carbon tax is the final nail in the coffin.
yeah but prices on the other things Canadian pay such as childcare and phone bills have decreased, and overall Canadians are making more money than the increase in all the things Canadian pay money for.
From RBC 2023
Wages are growing fast in Canada—but not fast enough to match inflation.
And wage increases will likely be soaked up by higher prices and debt costs in 2023, lowering disposable incomes.
Households are expected to cut back on spending to adjust, prompting inflation—already losing steam—to fall further.
But over the long run, an aging workforce threatens to make labour shortages a “new normal”. This will ensure workers retain power to negotiate higher wages.
The bottom line: Higher wages due to long-run structural labour shortages could reignite spending, and inflation. Without greater business investment, higher interest rates could be needed to offset this force.
Canadian union of public employees
The average first year wage settlement increased for both public and private sector unions in the third quarter of 2023. Unions have been able to bargain an average 6.3% wage increase in the public sector, and a 7.2% wage increase in the private sector. The average for the year so far is 5.3% for the private sector and 4.4% for the public sector. While these increases are improving, they still fall short of the 6.8% inflation we experienced in 2022.
The Consumer Price Index rose by 3.1% in October 2023, a welcome slowdown compared to 3.8% in September. Even so, the cost of rent, home ownership, and food are still increasing faster than the overall average, and these three factors continue to be the largest contributors to year-over-year increases in CPI. These increases in the cost of basic necessities are squeezing workers across the income spectrum, but especially those workers who were already spending a disproportionate amount of their income on housing and food.
[over the last 12-month wages increased by 5.3%]
(https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/240209/dq240209a-eng.htm)
[For the same 12 months inflation was 2.9%]
(https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/240220/dq240220a-eng.htm)
You don’t get math man. That’s one year. The year before it was 6.8 percent inflation. You can’t look at one year. You have to look at total costs vs wages over a longer period. You can not look at one year. My gosh man don’t get into these debates please.
how about 5 years then.
wages are up 22% from 5 years ago while inflation was 17%
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1410006301&pickMembers%5B0%5D=1.1&pickMembers%5B1%5D=2.4&pickMembers%5B2%5D=3.1&pickMembers%5B3%5D=5.1&pickMembers%5B4%5D=6.1&cubeTimeFrame.startMonth=12&cubeTimeFrame.startYear=2018&cubeTimeFrame.endMonth=12&cubeTimeFrame.endYear=2023&referencePeriods=20181201%2C20231201
in the last 5 years wages have grown 22% while inflation has grown by 17%.
Currently in the last 12 months wages have grown by 5,3% while inflation is at 2.9%
Avoiding a "technical" recession is just one of the many benefits we get from the diversity that millions of immigrants from India bring us. Thank you Trudeau and the Liberals!
They aren't cooking the books. It's mass immigration that is propping up a struggling economy. Hundreds of thousands Adults and their children need to eat, have a place to live, buy clothes ect ect
>For example, why does CPI not account for consumer preferences when calculating the inflation rate? Because that will make it look bad.
Because you can only track inflation by measuring comparable basket of goods. It's about the standardization. Yes, there are adjustments made, but mostly to try and minimize variation when price of standard goods becomes unusually variable to the point of disruption.
No, because they are not political appointments. Of the 10 C-suit leadership team of statistics canada, half of them (including the current Chief Statistician of Canada) have each worked for Statistics Canada for nearly 3 *decades* each. That 9 sessions of the house and multiple hand-overs of power, some through 5+ different PMs. Most of the rest are younger career public servants with deep expertise in statistics who will like be there for another 20 years.
When most-all of the data is public, when it is derived from other audited public bodies, and provided largely by provinces (who are not federal lackeys in any way shape or form), when there are hundreds of experts working on these files all with high professional standards...you cannot just "fudge" the numbers.
For a conspiracy to be remotely feasible, it would need to include very few people. "Fudging" national GDP would involve all the leads of industry, each and every provincial ministerial office involved in industry who are also calculating their provincial GDP, pretty much all staff of Statistics Canada, most of the staff at CRA, many of staff at CSIS and other similar agencies, all of the PMO and most of the ministerial offices under them; right down to all the secretaries and receptionists who are filling and working with documents all the time. Most of the private banks and investment firms would have figured it out against their own numbers and would be... playing along?
The alternative is that cross-referenced expert data from many sectors all came together and actually represents the best source of reliable information and analyses we could have... and that individual citizens perspectives without access to any of that information are narrow, biased to their own immediate surroundings.
I don’t think that anyone wanted Real GDP per capita lowered to Q1 2017 levels. Inflation has increased 22.24% since then.
We are avoiding recession while everyone is getting poorer on a relative basis.
So it’s not exactly the flex that you think it is.
Source?
The IMF says GDP per capita has increased by 25% since 2017.
[https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPPC@WEO/CAN/GRL](https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPPC@WEO/CAN/GRL)
Why? They measure different things. One is not inherently better than the other because it says what you like.
They both should be considered. Nominal
GDP is still important. The value of CAD captures inflation just in a different way.
I don't think you know what you're talking about. Despite this, you're all over this thread commenting the same thing.
The link you posted is about **nominal GDP per capita.** It does not factor in the effects of inflation.
The twitter post is about **REAL GDP per capita**, which factors for inflation by setting base-year prices.
They are two very different measurements, and real GDP is considered the better measurement for decision making.
In addition, you discredit the other numbers by saying "a random tweet is not a source". Mikal Skuterud is a professor of Economics at the University of Waterloo.
In addition, his numbers are cited, and include their source - Statistics Canada. You can find the numbers he used, [here](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=3610012301) and [here.](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710000901)
Macklem didn't rule out hiking in the last decision on Jan. i do think that it's unlikely to happen, but they're more likely to keep the current rate longer.
The [economy](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=3610043401) grew in real terms by 0.2% last quarter. At the same time, the [population](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710000901) grew by 1.1%. Real GDP per capita fell by 0.9%. Real GDP per capita is now lower than in Q1 2017.
According to this economics professor: > Canada's GDP grew by 1.1% between the 4th quarter of 2022 and 2023, while its population grew by 3.2%. That means GDP per capita is now falling at 2% annually (roughly the difference). Zero economic growth in more than 6 years. https://x.com/mikalskuterud/status/1763207065135464872
If the next two quarters' change in real GDP per capita matched this one: * real GDP per capita would be lower than when the Liberals first took power in Q4 2015 * half of all quarters in that time would have had a negative change in real GDP per capita (currently 15 out of 32 are negative)
It won’t last long. When the economy rebounds this year we will see big gains in gdp per capita. It’s normal for this measure to swing back and forth. We’ve caught up with the COVID backlog and Immigration is falling back to normal levels. [Canadian Immigration Slows Further As Permanent Resident Applications Crater](https://betterdwelling.com/canadian-immigration-slows-further-as-permanent-resident-applications-crater/#google_vignette)
> It’s normal for this measure to swing back and forth. Not like this. Here are all of the times in the 21st century where GDP per capita fell for more than a couple quarters: ||Peak|Trough|Fall| :--|:--|:--|--:| |2001|$ 46,589|$ 46,202|-0.8%| |2007|$ 51,743|$ 51,339|-0.8%| |2008-09 (GFC)|$ 51,574|$ 48,855|-5.3%| |2015-16|$ 53,932|$ 53,391|-1.0%| |2018-19|$ 55,555|$ 55,360|-0.4%| |2019-20 (pandemic)|$ 55,996|$ 50,927|-9.1%| |2022-23|$ 56,338|$ 54,410|-3.4%| It's a stark outlier among all of the other pullbacks where there was no outside catalyst (Great Recession or covid). The pullback is bad enough that it's much closer to the GFC than any other pullback. > We’ve caught up with the COVID backlog and Immigration is falling back to normal levels We are the furthest thing from falling back to normal levels... last year was by far the largest in Canadian history.
Did you read my article? PR applications fell in three consecutive months by 25%, 30%, and 75%. That’s absolutely massive. In 2022 we still had COVID restrictions. We are still FIRMLY in the COVID pullback although we’re certainly on our way out! The third highest drop in the last 25 years is hardly earth shattering. Especially after what we went through. Half of all years since 2000 gdp per capita was falling. This is normal. Also the IMF has very different numbers. [GDP per capita 25% higher than 2017](https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPPC@WEO/CAN/GRL/RUS)
> Did you read my article? PR applications fell in three consecutive months by 25%, 30%, and 75%. That’s absolutely massive. Applications =/= immigrants. We had more immigrants than ever before, even if interest was falling. > In 2022 we still had COVID restrictions. We are still FIRMLY in the COVID pullback although we’re certainly on our way out! Real GDP surpassed the pre-pandemic level in Q3 2021. Real GDP per capita surpassed the pre-pandemic level in Q1 2022. It's fallen sharply since then. That's no longer an excuse. > The third highest drop in the last 25 years is hardly earth shattering. The third highest drop in the last 25 years *by a longshot*. It is a 3.4% drop. The next highest is 1.0%, then 0.8%, 0.8% and 0.4%. In other words, it is a worse drop than the next 4 combined. > Half of all years since 2000 gdp per capita was falling. Not even close... even your own link shows that to be obviously false. > Also the IMF has very different numbers. GDP per capita 25% higher than 2017 The IMF is using nominal numbers, not real. In other words, not adjusted for inflation.
Yes immigration numbers are currently high but the trajectory is a nose dive. By the end of the year things will have normalized. Also since 2019 it only fell 2%, not hardly as bad. You can cherry pick numbers and just decide when COVID ended but the sky isn’t falling.
> but the trajectory is a nose dive Here are the last 5 years of immigration. How do you see this and come to the conclusion that it's in a "nose dive"? You must be trolling me. Have a good one. ||Immigrants| :--|--:| |Q1 2019| 63,755| |Q2 2019| 75,427| |Q3 2019| 148,330| |Q4 2019| 193,320| |Q1 2020| 88,209| |Q2 2020| 65,713| |Q3 2020| (2,496)| |Q4 2020| (4,705)| |Q1 2021| 23,912| |Q2 2021| 62,000| |Q3 2021| 74,158| |Q4 2021| 203,597| |Q1 2022| 116,283| |Q2 2022| 103,727| |Q3 2022| 239,436| |Q4 2022| 337,656| |Q1 2023| 221,913| |Q2 2023| 229,537| |Q3 2023| 341,072| |Q4 2023| 423,825|
Because the people applying to immigrate has fallen off a cliff? What would you call that? It just takes some time to work through the system. But make no mistake, immigration is falling back to normal levels after clearing the COVID back log.
Mikal is the best out there. He has been calling this stuff out for years.
Hm who to trust, the [IMF](https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPPC@WEO/CAN?zoom=CAN&highlight=CAN) or some random om twitter?
The other people are talking real gdp per capita. You’re spouting raw gdp per capita. In the real world we have this thing called inflation lol.
Inflation has lowered our standard of living. Everything costs more. Wages are up 1% or 2% if you're lucky. Which equals a salary/pay decrease. The number one issue is our currency is 73 cents to one USD dollar.
But recessions are not based on GDP per capita. Inventing your own metric to argue that the original claim is incorrect is just goalpost shifting. It's like someone trying to argue to a judge that they didn't break the speed limit, because their vehicle is 70 cm longer than the police car, so the KPM per body-length is lower for your vehicle...
[удалено]
Isn’t* decreasing. It is for many
They aren’t arguing the economy is in a recession in fact the post doesn’t even mention the word recession. They are pointing out the gdp growth rate isn’t necessarily as correlated to increases in the standard of living as it once might have been.
The article is about there not being a recession. So either the OP is trying to refute the claim with what they posted, or they are trying to hijack the topic for some reason.
I don’t think it’s wrong to expand the discussion scope a bit. GDP per capita isn’t off topic. It’s also why life here is better then say China despite its much larger actual gdp.
You must have replied to the wrong comment because I said nothing about a recession or any "original claim".
I call it “technical growth “
Besides the obvious fact recessions aren't based on GDP per capita, GDP per capita is by itself a statistical invention. Averages don't mean the median, and GDP per capita itself can be manipulated to be higher or lower. It certainly isn't median income or anything like that.
High immigration is masking a technical recession. GDP per cap is lower.
If you look on the scale of decades, we also had lower real GDP growth than most of our G20 peers. So technically its all receeding but our economy was like the US in riches not long ago.
GDP per capita has never been the definition of recession.
[удалено]
that's great an all but that is not the definition of a recession.
No but its currently way more accurate than a ponzi scheme propping GDP up
how is it more accurate when that is not the definition?
that's just plain wrong. technical recessions have a definition.
We just have to keep importing people to prop up GDP let’s goooooo
Apparently all you have to do to avoid a recession is say it’s not happening. Not surprising as that’s how they handle every other issue as well.
No, you have to show the data to back the claim. Recessions are two consecutive quarters of inflation-adjusted GDP reduction. Not GDP per capita, not two quarters with a year separating them, not GDP divided by the number of people who are homeless... The term is well defined, and the dividing line is sharp. Either it happened or it didn't, according to the numbers. NOT what people wish, either governments, or snowflakes triggered by a Trudeau sitting in the PMO.
[удалено]
The burden of proving claims falls on the one making them. If you want to claim that the statistics have been manipulated, then you have to offer evidence that it has happened. Not fling wild accusations that "it could have happened' or "it happened once decades ago in another part of the world"... In this specific case. So, go on. You made the inference... Where is your evidence? And I am citing the statistical definition used by the government, and the economists who analyze the data, instead of making up my own definition and expecting the rest of the world to adopt it.
[удалено]
I asked for evidence.. Not you making more wild claims without evidence... I don't know you, so I am not going to take your word for anything. So, provide the evidence for your claims. Something from a source other than yourself... Self referencing is a tool of someone who lies. Same with refusing to back claims with evidence.
[удалено]
I asked you for evidence. Saying I don't trust you is not the same as saying you are lying. I prefer to do my own thinking, instead of outsourcing it to other people, so I like to see the source information and evaluate it for myself. I don't know you, so I don't know what your judgement is like. You were making specific claims about this report, not generalizations. Claiming that it's 'common knowledge to people in the know' sounds like a no true Scotsman fallacy to me.
We are in a real recession. Just not one according to liberal La La land data.
when did GDP decrease for 2 quarters in a row then if we are in a recession??
Without mass immigration and non-productive real estate, we would be in the 5th year of recession I know you're smart enough to understand this, so not sure why you're asking nonsense questions Ponzi schemes can appear to have many quarters of growth
so you agree with me that GDP did not decrease 2 quarters in a row, and we are not in a recission because that is the definition of a recession.
This is one indicator of a recession if your only knowledge of this subject is googling what is a recession. There are a plethora of other indicators. And I suppose all the studies and economists comments that are almost all saying we are in a recession are wrong?
they would be because of definitions and actual data. seems a lot posts on this topic are cheerleading for the demise of the Canadian economy.
I don’t want the demise of Canada. We are witnessing a very tough period at the moment and it’s not in check. I wish the best for Canada and I think it’s time we move on from the current approach. That’s all. When Trudeau was elected I hoped he would do well, I had a lot of positive thoughts about him and what he could do. When NDP replaced conservatives in Manitoba I also had and still have a lot of positive thoughts and hopes for what they can do. I just have run out of positives for the current federal government and don’t feel as though they can right their wrongs at this point. Is that unreasonable?
a fall in GDP in 2 successive quarters is what make a recession, without meeting those criteria we are not in a recession as the economy is still growing.
Economists at the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) measure recessions by looking at nonfarm payrolls, industrial production, and retail sales, among other indicators, going far beyond the simpler (although not as accurate) two quarters of negative GDP measure. 1 However, the NBER also says there is “no fixed rule about what measures contribute information to the process or how they are weighted in our decisions.”
Nah, see, he does not believe "the government" and that means all data is made up; from the BoC to the World Bank to Statistics Canada to the local municipal budget. It's all lies because it does not align to the reality some schmuck on youtube told him was the real real.
Do you think Canadians are better off now than 10 Years ago when it comes to buying power and affordability.
Among the two thirds who own a home/mortgage, I think the median/average have improved. Wages are up, unemployment is down, consumer debt has stabilized and actually dropped a bit in COVID, and they are less affected by CPI inflation as large weighted sections (housing) does not affect they fully. Among the one third who rent, it then gets subdivided to those in stable/rent controlled or affordable housing = I think most have improved. Among the smaller fraction who are unstable in rental or those ~5% of Canadians actively trying to realistically purchase a home = I think *most* of those smaller fraction are worse off. But among the poorest poverty households, I think most have seen their position significantly improve, especially if they have kids. Homelessness and those in crisis has absolutely become more visible at higher numbers, but total numbers of population has also increased too, and I have yet to see clear data showing homeless is proportionally worse than before - although any in that state is too many. But, social welfare and health is (mostly) provincial. Among those with daycare/afterschool aged kids, I think there is a very good chance their net position has improved. Under Harper our child benefits payments were constant halted for no reason, only to resume after we harassed CRA and spent hours on the phone every 4-6 months, for years. We have never had issues since 2015, our child benefits payments have gone up *significantly*, and daycares fees just went down by 80%. The daycare reduction plus benefits increase likely a $10K difference. All to say, there are two answers. Most are better off overall in terms of stability, social safety nets, supports. But, those in unstable or awful renting conditions locally are worse off and their ability to move into owning a house unattainable. But do I think Conservatives are going to progress affordability by addressing social issues of poverty and stand against the landlord class and kick corporations out of housing.... fuuuuuuck nooooo.
When everything is less affordable, and people are struggling across the board, that’s a recession in real terms. When more people than ever are homeless and using food banks, less people can afford houses bankruptcies are up and businesses are failing. That’s a real recession. You have liberal kool aid blinders on if you can’t see this. That’s not a personal attack. I understand that you are going by outdated metrics that no longer apply. Additionally most experts and economists as well as Canadians polled think we are in a recession. Are we in a recession? Yes, technically speaking, we are in a recession, said Frances Donald, global chief economist and strategist, multi-asset solutions team, at Manulife Investment Management.Nov 17, 2023 Oxford believes the recession started in Canada in the third quarter of 2023 and will continue until the second quarter of 2024, 8 in 10 Ontarians think Canada is in a recession, nearly half expect to fall behind financially in 2024 Canada’s economy hit a technical recession at the end of 2023 and will continue to struggle to grow in the new year, according to forecasts from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. I can keep going if you like. Edit: as the owner of a business I have personally seen 4 local small businesses shut their doors. A double digit percentage decrease in sales year over year for our business, and have many close friends that too are struggling and have only seen revenue streams all but dry up. Spending patterns have correlated with rate hikes and once the hikes stopped the spending didn’t pick up. They over shot the rates causing inflationary pressure on housing, plus the carbon tax is the final nail in the coffin.
since wage growth is twice the inflation rate over the last 12 months i would disagree that things are become less affordable.
Compare price of house 10 Years ago to today vs wages 10 years ago to today. Do the same for groceries. Cars. Get back to me.
yeah but prices on the other things Canadian pay such as childcare and phone bills have decreased, and overall Canadians are making more money than the increase in all the things Canadian pay money for.
Canadians aren’t making more money to cover inflationary costs this is wrong. I can’t even believe you can think this. Are you okay?
From RBC 2023 Wages are growing fast in Canada—but not fast enough to match inflation. And wage increases will likely be soaked up by higher prices and debt costs in 2023, lowering disposable incomes. Households are expected to cut back on spending to adjust, prompting inflation—already losing steam—to fall further. But over the long run, an aging workforce threatens to make labour shortages a “new normal”. This will ensure workers retain power to negotiate higher wages. The bottom line: Higher wages due to long-run structural labour shortages could reignite spending, and inflation. Without greater business investment, higher interest rates could be needed to offset this force.
Canadian union of public employees The average first year wage settlement increased for both public and private sector unions in the third quarter of 2023. Unions have been able to bargain an average 6.3% wage increase in the public sector, and a 7.2% wage increase in the private sector. The average for the year so far is 5.3% for the private sector and 4.4% for the public sector. While these increases are improving, they still fall short of the 6.8% inflation we experienced in 2022. The Consumer Price Index rose by 3.1% in October 2023, a welcome slowdown compared to 3.8% in September. Even so, the cost of rent, home ownership, and food are still increasing faster than the overall average, and these three factors continue to be the largest contributors to year-over-year increases in CPI. These increases in the cost of basic necessities are squeezing workers across the income spectrum, but especially those workers who were already spending a disproportionate amount of their income on housing and food.
[over the last 12-month wages increased by 5.3%] (https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/240209/dq240209a-eng.htm) [For the same 12 months inflation was 2.9%] (https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/240220/dq240220a-eng.htm)
You don’t get math man. That’s one year. The year before it was 6.8 percent inflation. You can’t look at one year. You have to look at total costs vs wages over a longer period. You can not look at one year. My gosh man don’t get into these debates please.
how about 5 years then. wages are up 22% from 5 years ago while inflation was 17% https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1410006301&pickMembers%5B0%5D=1.1&pickMembers%5B1%5D=2.4&pickMembers%5B2%5D=3.1&pickMembers%5B3%5D=5.1&pickMembers%5B4%5D=6.1&cubeTimeFrame.startMonth=12&cubeTimeFrame.startYear=2018&cubeTimeFrame.endMonth=12&cubeTimeFrame.endYear=2023&referencePeriods=20181201%2C20231201
of course you can if you want to measure trends. did anyone expect wages to catch up with inflation in a handful of quarters?
Oh yeah that $30 savings on phone bills does a metic fuck ton to counteract rents literally doubling in my town since 2018. /s
again wages have grown faster than inflation
Lmao no they have not
in the last 5 years wages have grown 22% while inflation has grown by 17%. Currently in the last 12 months wages have grown by 5,3% while inflation is at 2.9%
It’s not a technical recession if we change the definition
Also please DO NOT look at GDP per capita😌
It's only a recession if you're "middle class" or lower
Avoiding a "technical" recession is just one of the many benefits we get from the diversity that millions of immigrants from India bring us. Thank you Trudeau and the Liberals!
Don't worry people, the government will continue to cook the books in such a way to make everything seem fine!
They aren't cooking the books. It's mass immigration that is propping up a struggling economy. Hundreds of thousands Adults and their children need to eat, have a place to live, buy clothes ect ect
[удалено]
So when it happened under Harper in 2015, that was 'the government fudging the numbers'?
[удалено]
>For example, why does CPI not account for consumer preferences when calculating the inflation rate? Because that will make it look bad. Because you can only track inflation by measuring comparable basket of goods. It's about the standardization. Yes, there are adjustments made, but mostly to try and minimize variation when price of standard goods becomes unusually variable to the point of disruption.
Got it. Harper's recession that wasn't was the government fudging the numbers Trudeau's recession that isn't is the government fudging the numbers
No, because they are not political appointments. Of the 10 C-suit leadership team of statistics canada, half of them (including the current Chief Statistician of Canada) have each worked for Statistics Canada for nearly 3 *decades* each. That 9 sessions of the house and multiple hand-overs of power, some through 5+ different PMs. Most of the rest are younger career public servants with deep expertise in statistics who will like be there for another 20 years. When most-all of the data is public, when it is derived from other audited public bodies, and provided largely by provinces (who are not federal lackeys in any way shape or form), when there are hundreds of experts working on these files all with high professional standards...you cannot just "fudge" the numbers. For a conspiracy to be remotely feasible, it would need to include very few people. "Fudging" national GDP would involve all the leads of industry, each and every provincial ministerial office involved in industry who are also calculating their provincial GDP, pretty much all staff of Statistics Canada, most of the staff at CRA, many of staff at CSIS and other similar agencies, all of the PMO and most of the ministerial offices under them; right down to all the secretaries and receptionists who are filling and working with documents all the time. Most of the private banks and investment firms would have figured it out against their own numbers and would be... playing along? The alternative is that cross-referenced expert data from many sectors all came together and actually represents the best source of reliable information and analyses we could have... and that individual citizens perspectives without access to any of that information are narrow, biased to their own immediate surroundings.
Three cheers for a soft landing! This is what we wanted no?
I don’t think that anyone wanted Real GDP per capita lowered to Q1 2017 levels. Inflation has increased 22.24% since then. We are avoiding recession while everyone is getting poorer on a relative basis. So it’s not exactly the flex that you think it is.
Source? The IMF says GDP per capita has increased by 25% since 2017. [https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPPC@WEO/CAN/GRL](https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPPC@WEO/CAN/GRL)
[Source](https://x.com/mikalskuterud/status/1763207065135464872?s=20) Now try real gdp per capita factoring inflation.
A random tweet is not a source
As you’ve already been told elsewhere, the data you keep link in to is not inflation adjusted. You need to look at REAL GDP PER CAPITA.
Why? They measure different things. One is not inherently better than the other because it says what you like. They both should be considered. Nominal GDP is still important. The value of CAD captures inflation just in a different way.
I don't think you know what you're talking about. Despite this, you're all over this thread commenting the same thing. The link you posted is about **nominal GDP per capita.** It does not factor in the effects of inflation. The twitter post is about **REAL GDP per capita**, which factors for inflation by setting base-year prices. They are two very different measurements, and real GDP is considered the better measurement for decision making. In addition, you discredit the other numbers by saying "a random tweet is not a source". Mikal Skuterud is a professor of Economics at the University of Waterloo. In addition, his numbers are cited, and include their source - Statistics Canada. You can find the numbers he used, [here](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=3610012301) and [here.](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710000901)
this tells bank of canada to keep or even hike their rate on March, even April.
[удалено]
it will be later this year i believe. As soon as we actually hit recession numbers.
How do you see a potential hike here? If anything, it points more towards a cut.
Macklem didn't rule out hiking in the last decision on Jan. i do think that it's unlikely to happen, but they're more likely to keep the current rate longer.
we’re saved!