The Official Saint John, NB Project Thread

[nwalbert]

Originally Posted by ErickMontreal

Whatever happens, something needs to happen!

According to this, SJ dropped 2,100 jobs while Moncton was gaining 3,400.

Saint John saw a 3% drop in employment in 2011 alone.

David Campbell's work is some of the weaker stuff in the Telegraph Journal so that gives you an idea on the quality. This table is misleading. They are comparing Dec 2010 to Dec 2011. In 2010 Saint John had record low unemployment rates. Saint John continues to lead the province in unemployment and has for quite some time. Although losing jobs is bad, the Dec 2010 rate was unsustainable.

The alarming part for both cities is that high paying jobs are being replaced with lower paying. Call center after call center in some regions.

[nwalbert]

Originally Posted by cdnguys

If you re read my post it's says office staff not refinery. Number is accurate

Sorry to hear that your friend was laid off, but I still don't buy it. Just don't see how 100 tradespeople were laid off and no one reported it and yet others are reporting that the unions expect a second refinery. I also don't buy that 78 people make up 20% of the office staff. Like I said, too bad about your friend though.

[cdnguys]

Originally Posted by nwalbert

Sorry to hear that your friend was laid off, but I still don't buy it. Just don't see how 100 tradespeople were laid off and no one reported it and yet others are reporting that the unions expect a second refinery. I also don't buy that 78 people make up 20% of the office staff. Like I said, too bad about your friend though.

Call the carpenters union at 450-4024 and ask how many of that trade alone let go at refinery. Research before suggesting I'm wrong please.

[nwalbert]

Originally Posted by cdnguys

Call the carpenters union at 450-4024 and ask how many of that trade alone let go at refinery. Research before suggesting I'm wrong please.

Lets just agree to disagree on this one.

[nwalbert]

Went by the Rocca condo's for the first time in a while this morning and they are looking very good, almost complete from the exterior.

Is there a final move-in date?

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by ErickMontreal

Whatever happens, something needs to happen!

According to this, SJ dropped 2,100 jobs while Moncton was gaining 3,400.

Saint John saw a 3% drop in employment in 2011 alone.

I am generally unhappy with the unemployment stats that are released on a monthly basis. They seem to bounce around like a yo-yo, which leads me to suspect there's lots of rounding off going on as well as inaccuracies related to sample size.

Moncton has done OK in the last year, but I think if things were this bad in SJ, that the effects on the local economy in the city would be obvious. Have you guys noticed anything? To an outsider such as myself, the economy in SJ should be reasonably healthy given the amount of construction going on....

[nwalbert]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

I am generally unhappy with the unemployment stats that are released on a monthly basis. They seem to bounce around like a yo-yo, which leads me to suspect there's lots of rounding off going on as well as inaccuracies related to sample size.

Moncton has done OK in the last year, but I think if things were this bad in SJ, that the effects on the local economy in the city would be obvious. Have you guys noticed anything? To an outsider such as myself, the economy in SJ should be reasonably healthy given the amount of construction going on....

These numbers really need to be taken into perspective. Saint John still has a better unemployment rate than Moncton does.

This time last year SJ was extremely low and Moncton was at a peak approaching 10%. As you suggest, the numbers bounce and this is simply a case of catching a trend. The numbers are not meaningful. Stats are a dangerous business, they can be manipulated to show almost anything when in the wrong hands.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by nwalbert

The numbers are not meaningful. Stats are a dangerous business, they can be manipulated to show almost anything when in the wrong hands.

True enough - there are lies, damn lies and statistics!!

One of the reasons why Moncton has recently had a higher unemployment rate than SJ is because of continued immigration into the city. Although the labour force has grown, it just hasn't grown as fast as the population increase, hence the "rate" has gone up.

In any event, I am confident for the future of SJ, especially with this "mystery" announcement that the mayor hopes to make later in the spring......

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by nwalbert

Went by the Rocca condo's for the first time in a while this morning and they are looking very good, almost complete from the exterior.

Is there a final move-in date?

Not until they resolve their major screw-up that has led to the people who had bought condos living in a hotel until they can move in because of, um, structural problems.

[kwajo]

^ Regarding the new condo tower, I can tell you that they began to allow occupancy of units as of last week. This is a verifiable fact based on the knowledge that I'm living there right now

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by kwajo

^ Regarding the new condo tower, I can tell you that they began to allow occupancy of units as of last week. This is a verifiable fact based on the knowledge that I'm living there right now

Excellent.

Can you verify that they constructed it improperly and didn't take into consideration the width of the walls in the plans? I heard hallways were too small, rooms weren't exact sizes, etc. etc.

[nwalbert]

Originally Posted by kwajo

^ Regarding the new condo tower, I can tell you that they began to allow occupancy of units as of last week. This is a verifiable fact based on the knowledge that I'm living there right now

Cool!! Hope you are enjoying it!

[kwajo]

Originally Posted by GregHickman

Excellent.

Can you verify that they constructed it improperly and didn't take into consideration the width of the walls in the plans? I heard hallways were too small, rooms weren't exact sizes, etc. etc.

I don't know about that, comparing the floorplan I was given at the time of purchase and the as-built dimensions, it looks like everything measures up (pun intended).

Just to be clear though, the building is definitely unfinished still. The common areas and amenities are not complete and a number of units remain under construction, but there are about 8-10 units that are occupied right now, with the number steadily increasing as more are completed. Everything seems fine, I'm not sure why you're so negative on the building. Yes, if I had purchased 2 years ago I'd be upset the completion took so long, but from a community standpoint it's great having more condo options Uptown because the previous inventory was terrible and left people like me at a loss to find the urban living environment we sought after.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by kwajo

I don't know about that, comparing the floorplan I was given at the time of purchase and the as-built dimensions, it looks like everything measures up (pun intended).

Just to be clear though, the building is definitely unfinished still. The common areas and amenities are not complete and a number of units remain under construction, but there are about 8-10 units that are occupied right now, with the number steadily increasing as more are completed. Everything seems fine, I'm not sure why you're so negative on the building. Yes, if I had purchased 2 years ago I'd be upset the completion took so long, but from a community standpoint it's great having more condo options Uptown because the previous inventory was terrible and left people like me at a loss to find the urban living environment we sought after.

How am I being negative? I'm just relaying information that i've heard, and that information was that it was built improperly which is why [your] wait-time to move in was lengthened. Perhaps the units that are still under construction are undergoing re-construction. I'm glad that you were able to move in and that there are more options for living in the Uptown.

[nwalbert]

Originally Posted by kwajo

I don't know about that, comparing the floorplan I was given at the time of purchase and the as-built dimensions, it looks like everything measures up (pun intended).

Just to be clear though, the building is definitely unfinished still. The common areas and amenities are not complete and a number of units remain under construction, but there are about 8-10 units that are occupied right now, with the number steadily increasing as more are completed. Everything seems fine, I'm not sure why you're so negative on the building. Yes, if I had purchased 2 years ago I'd be upset the completion took so long, but from a community standpoint it's great having more condo options Uptown because the previous inventory was terrible and left people like me at a loss to find the urban living environment we sought after.

On a similar note I was by Abbey St. Andrew for the first time recently and what a fantastic addition that is to the uptown as well. There absolutely is investment going into the core at the moment.

[kwajo]

Originally Posted by GregHickman

How am I being negative? I'm just relaying information that i've heard, and that information was that it was built improperly which is why [your] wait-time to move in was lengthened. Perhaps the units that are still under construction are undergoing re-construction. I'm glad that you were able to move in and that there are more options for living in the Uptown.

My apologies, it must have just been the tone that came across in your post, I misread it as negative. Where did you hear that there was improper construction?

As for the increase in investment Uptown, I think it is immediately obvious everywhere you look, from the new housing developments like the Abbey & the Harbourfront, to the renovations of upper floors on Prince William & King Street amongst others, to the growth in boutique stores and new restaurants, I'd say there is a new life and energy in the core that hasn't been seen in a long time. I think that these are signs of stability in Saint John that bode extremely well for the next decade as the city moves to regain a lot of the momentum lost in the 80s & 90s.

[mmmatt]

Originally Posted by nwalbert

David Campbell's work is some of the weaker stuff in the Telegraph Journal so that gives you an idea on the quality. This table is misleading. They are comparing Dec 2010 to Dec 2011. In 2010 Saint John had record low unemployment rates. Saint John continues to lead the province in unemployment and has for quite some time. Although losing jobs is bad, the Dec 2010 rate was unsustainable.

The alarming part for both cities is that high paying jobs are being replaced with lower paying. Call center after call center in some regions.

Just wanted to clarify with the StatsCan data:

Employment 2002-2011 (62.5 = 62,500)



Here is a leveled off version:

Originally Posted by nwalbert

Saint John continues to lead the province in unemployment and has for quite some time.

While this is true, I will offer a bit of info behind the unemployment rate. There is another stat called "participation rate". This is the percentage of the population that is actively looking for work or working. In Saint John for example that rate is 63.4% whereas in Moncton the rate is 68.9%. An example to show you the power of the participation rate: if the participation rate in Saint John was 68.9, the unemployment rate would jump from 7.4% to 14.7%.

Another example would be of a fictional city that has an unemployment rate of 5%. Sounds great however the population is 100,000 and only 50,000 are in the workforce. Thus the "participation rate" would only be 50%. But because 47,500 of those 50,000 are working, it looks great. But the unemployment rate doesn't show the 15,000 people in that city who are on EI and Social Assistance etc. because they have given up looking for work.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by mmmatt

Another example would be of a fictional city that has an unemployment rate of 5%. Sounds great however the population is 100,000 and only 50,000 are in the workforce. Thus the "participation rate" would only be 50%. But because 47,500 of those 50,000 are working, it looks great. But the unemployment rate doesn't show the 15,000 people in that city who are on EI and Social Assistance etc. because they have given up looking for work.

So, using the tables you listed, Saint John's unemployment rate would be somewhere around ~30%? I'm vaguely sure the unemployment rate (IE Welfare, Social Assistance, etc.) is about 80% in the Old North End. Not entirely sure.

[mmmatt]

Originally Posted by GregHickman

So, using the tables you listed, Saint John's unemployment rate would be somewhere around ~30%? I'm vaguely sure the unemployment rate (IE Welfare, Social Assistance, etc.) is about 80% in the Old North End. Not entirely sure.

Sorry, the tables I made were of "actual" employment...not employment rate. In other words the current number of 62.5 means there are 62,500 people working in the Saint John CMA.

[nwalbert]

Originally Posted by mmmatt

Just wanted to clarify with the StatsCan data:

I think it is probably a safe assumption that most folks on these boards understand the basic statistics behind unemployment rates. The participation rate could be lower here for a number of reasons. The two primary being that we have more folks on welfare and more folks who are wealthy and don't need to work.

At the end of the day, unemployment measures the number of jobs available for the workforce and having a low unemployment rate is good thing.

It is definitely a positive for SJ that they lead the province in unemployment and it is good for the whole region that the entire southern region is at or below the national average. The north is a different story.