Economic Action Dud: Canada loses 46,000 jobs, unemployment rate climbs to 7.2%


mentalfloss
No Party Affiliation
#1
Canada loses 46,000 jobs, unemployment rate climbs to 7.2%

The Canadian economy unexpectedly shed 45,900 jobs last month as employers cut full-time positions.

The country’s jobless rate rose to 7.2 per cent in December from 6.9 per cent as more people looked for work, Statistics Canada said Friday.

Canada’s job growth slowed by year’s end as a string of companies, from Sears Canada to Potash Corp. and BlackBerry, announced job cuts late last year while a wave of manufacturers, particularly in Central Canada, said they plan to close plants. Through 2013, job gains in Canada averaged 8,500 a month, a sharp drop from the average of 25,900 new positions per month in 2012.

December’s weak reading, which sent the Canadian dollar to a new four-year low, was far below expectations. Economists had forecast about 14,000 new jobs and an unchanged rate.

Private-sector firms trimmed 26,300 positions while the public sector added 18,200 jobs and the number of self-employed shrank by 37,900.

Youth unemployment rose, with their jobless rate climbing to 14 per cent from 13.4 per cent.

Canada loses 46,000 jobs, unemployment rate climbs to 7.2% - The Globe and Mail


Canadian dollar sinks on ugly jobs report: ‘Needed this like another hole in the head’

Jobs report drives loonie down
Ugh, and ugh.

This morning's employment report from Statistics Canada is downright ugly, with 46,000 jobs lost in December and the unemployment rate climbing by 0.3 of a percentage point to 7.2 per cent as more people went hunting for work.

In the United States, growth in the labour market slowed last month to just 74,000 positions, though the jobless rate eased markedly to 6.7 per cent.

The two reports combined added more pressure to the Canadian dollar, which tumbled fast to about 91.60 cents U.S. within minutes of the reports.

"The Canadian dollar needed this like another hole in the head," said chief economist Douglas Porter of BMO Nesbitt Burns.

"The dismal jobs data will simply pour on the pressure for the sagging Canadian dollar, which was only spared more pain by a disappointing U.S. jobs gain in December," he added.

The loonie, as Canada’s dollar coin is known, plunged as the job losses signalled that Bank of Canada Governor Stephen Poloz will likely be “dovish for longer,” said chief currency strategist Camilla Sutton of Bank of Nova Scotia.

Coupled with that is the fact that Canada’s weak report – economists had projected gains of about 13,000 jobs – plays into a string of several soft economic readings of late.

As The Globe and Mail’s Tavia Grant reports, the Canadian reading is all the more troubling because the job losses were driven by an erosion of full-time work.

That brought growth in the labour market over the course of 2013 to 102,000, Statistics Canada said, or 0.6 per cent. The monthly average was 8,500 jobs, well down from 2012’s average of almost 26,000.

“December’s labour force survey was awful across the board with an ugly headline number and even worse details,” said senior economist Krishen Rangasamy of National Bank Financial, noting that the overall showing for last year was the “worst net jobs tally” since 2009.

In the United States, our Washington correspondent Kevin Carmichael writes, the U.S. economy sent a mixed signal, given the slow jobs growth but declining unemployment rate. Economists had expected the report to show job creation of 197,000, though a jobless rate still at 7 per cent.

The reading is expected to see the Federal Reserve move cautiously on its stimulus pullback.

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/report-...service=mobile
Last edited by mentalfloss; Jan 10th, 2014 at 09:29 AM..
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
+4
#2  Top Rated Post
How many thousands of those job losses are the fault of the NIMBYs and NOPEs that are forcing delays/cancelation of major projects? Since their goal is to destroy our economy and life as we know it one would think they would be like you and bragging about their success.
 
mentalfloss
No Party Affiliation
#3
I have no idea what you're talking about.
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
+3
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

I have no idea what you're talking about.

No surprise there.
 
relic
Free Thinker
#5
Sounds like tory gibberish to me too, What's the old saying? "If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bull****."
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by relicView Post

Sounds like tory gibberish to me too, What's the old saying? "If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bull****."

Pay attention to what is going on in the country. There are at least 2 pipelines and 2 mines that should be underway long before now if our governments would put a stop to the NIMBY/NOPE protests. That is a lot of real jobs and money.
More importantly it sends a message to investors that Canada is not a good place to invest.
 
petros
+1
#7
The report only counts if you live east of MB.

Other than "those people" we're doing just fine.
 
BornRuff
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

How many thousands of those job losses are the fault of the NIMBYs and NOPEs that are forcing delays/cancelation of major projects? Since their goal is to destroy our economy and life as we know it one would think they would be like you and bragging about their success.

The actual effect on jobs of a project like the pipelines is kind of dubious. Yes there will be jobs created in the short term to build the thing, but the whole point of the pipelines once they are up and running is to move more oil with less manpower.
 
petros
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by BornRuffView Post

The actual effect on jobs of a project like the pipelines is kind of dubious. Yes there will be jobs created in the short term to build the thing, but the whole point of the pipelines once they are up and running is to move more oil with less manpower.

It's the first of many.
 
BornRuff
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

The report only counts if you live east of MB.

Other than "those people" we're doing just fine.

So in other words, other than ~70% of the country, we are fine.
 
petros
+1
#11
with 30% paying the bills too.
 
BornRuff
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

It's the first of many.

Which will kill more and more jobs in the transportation industry.

There are no free lunches.
 
petros
#13
Why would it kill jobs in transport?
 
BornRuff
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Why would it kill jobs in transport?

How do you think we are moving oil now?
 
petros
#15
We aren't other than keystone
 
BornRuff
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

We aren't other than keystone

You honestly think that in the absence of a pipeline, the oil companies are just sitting on their hands waiting?
 
petros
#17
Rail has increased but it's still a 3 man crew no matter how many lococs, drones and push units when trains get longer because nothing is moving by truck.

Oh hey.

What is your opinion of a potash pipeline"?
 
BornRuff
+1
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Rail has increased but it's still a 3 man crew no matter how many lococs, drones and push units when trains get longer because nothing is moving by truck.

Oh hey.

What is your opinion of a potash pipeline"?

The manpower required to move oil by rail is still many times higher than by pipeline, and trucks are most certainly being used to move oil as well.
 
petros
#19
Far less jobs than a pipeline. oil isn't being moved by truck to port or refineries.
 
BornRuff
#20
As far as a "potash pipeline", I have no idea. I don't know anything about that.

When it comes to the current pipelines being proposed, I don't even care that much if they are built or not. All I am arguing here is that it isn't necessarily a boon for jobs.
 
petros
#21
Why would you know less? There is no difference between a solution line and an oil line.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by BornRuffView Post

As far as a "potash pipeline", I have no idea. I don't know anything about that.

When it comes to the current pipelines being proposed, I don't even care that much if they are built or not. All I am arguing here is that it isn't necessarily a boon for jobs.

You need to look at both direct and indirect employment.

2 pipelines, one East and one West will cost in the billions, and a huge chunk of that money goes to paying the employee base required to get this done
 
BornRuff
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

No it's not. Far less jobs than a pipeline.

You are going to have to start responding with much more detail if you want this discussion to get anywhere.

How do you figure that it requires more jobs to operate a pipeline than is does to move the same amount of oil by rail? Once a pipeline is up and running, the amount of manpower required is pretty minimal(relatively, of course).
 
petros
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by BornRuffView Post

You are going to have to start responding with much more detail if you want this discussion to get anywhere.

How do you figure that it requires more jobs to operate a pipeline than is does to move the same amount of oil by rail? Once a pipeline is up and running, the amount of manpower required is pretty minimal(relatively, of course).

No oil is moved to port or refineries by truck.

Rail oil filling stations aren't fed by truck and are mainly automated with one man doing what 10 used to.
 
BornRuff
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

You need to look at both direct and indirect employment.

2 pipelines, one East and one West will cost in the billions, and a huge chunk of that money goes to paying the employee base required to get this done

I am not arguing that the construction won't create jobs during the construction of the pipeline. I am saying that long term, the entire point of the pipeline is to cut down on the amount of manpower required to move oil around. A lot of people are currently employed moving oil by rail and trucks.

Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

No oil is moved to port or refineries by truck.

You realize that is exactly the point of the pipelines too, right?

Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Rail oil filling stations aren't fed by truck and are mainly automated with one man doing what 10 used to.

We are not making comparisons to yesteryear, we are looking at what takes more manpower today. Pipelines, or rail/trucks?
 
petros
#26
Pipes because there are no jobs in trucks and rail is automated.

Pipes have more jobs spread all along the line. You see it's not just a pipeline. It's an "energy corridor".
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by BornRuffView Post

I am not arguing that the construction won't create jobs during the construction of the pipeline. I am saying that long term, the entire point of the pipeline is to cut down on the amount of manpower required to move oil around. A lot of people are currently employed moving oil by rail and trucks.


Rail is relatively recent and the trucking component is still in play to get crude from the batteries to the terminals/refineries.

You are missing the big picture economics here in that getting Western crude to Asia and Europe opens new markets and fetches a better commodity price. This in turn spurs the industry, investment and indirect employment, not to mention that the iBanks in TO, steel mfgrs in Ont and a myriad of professional services like engineering companies now are hiring to take on these multi year contracts.
 
petros
#28
Quote:

Rail is relatively recent and the trucking component is still in play to get crude from the batteries to the terminals/refineries.

And hundreds of thousands of km of 4" and 6" latticing AB and SK collecting oil.
 
Blackleaf
#29
I've mentioned elsewhere that Canada's unemployment rate is forecast to overtake Britain's this year.

Canada's unemployment rate is rising. It has now climbed to 7.2%. Britain's is predicted to fall from 7.4% to 7% in 2014.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#30
AB and Sask are still shy of around 50,000 jobs.

Much of Canada's unemployment is a sheer matter of those that won't go to where the work is.

It is to the point that the gvt is providing tax relief to those companies that need to find temporary foreign workers
 
no new posts