Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123
One of the big biases on SSP is that people talk about data they like and ignore data they don't. They also look at a brief period of time, so the long-term trends tend to be obscured. Economic activity for example tends to oscillate back and forth, but we tend to hear about only the "peaks" from certain places and often they're compared to the "valleys" of others. The best relative economic performance of the past few years was 2008-2009 in NS for example. Nobody likes to post numbers from that year on SSP because most provinces experienced significant economic contraction at that time. The population growth numbers for most places were much lower back then too. That was one extreme end of the spectrum and now we're seeing another.
|
If you would like a longer time frame
someone, try this on for size. This is a comparison of CMA sizes from 2006 and 2013 (a span of seven years) for the Atlantic Canadian CMA's.
CMA________________
2006 pop___________
2013 pop____________
Growth____________
Percent Change
Halifax 384,585 408,702 24,117 6.27%
St. John's 183,777 208,372 24,595 13.38%
Moncton 129,707 144,941 15,234 11.74%
Saint John 124,951 127,883 2,932 2.34%
I could make a comparison back to 1991 too if you want, but Moncton wasn't considered a CMA back then.
The population of Halifax in 1991 was 320,501 (current 408,702 change 88,201 percent change 27.52%)
The population of St. John's in 1991 was 171,848 (current 208,372 change 36,524 percent change 21.25%)
The population of Saint John in 1991 was 125,838 (current 127,883 change 2,045 percent change 1.62%)
I wonder if there wasn't some change in the CMA boundaries between 1991 and 2006? Halifax seemed to experience significant population growth during that time (64,000 people), but only 24,000 people in the seven years since 2006.
In any event, since 2006, St.John's has outpaced Halifax in
both relative and absolute population growth, and therefore appears to be the current east coast growth champion. How much longer this goes on for is a matter of conjecture, but it is a very interesting observation……….