Population of Toronto (Including Census Counts)

[Northern Light]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1178650861049958401

1.4% population growth, is a very large number, largest in the G7.

Also of note, is that while just over 82% of said growth came from immigration, that means roughly 18% did not.

This suggests that current replacement rate birth is enough to actually grow the population on its own.

To be clear, those observations are not in any way opposing immigration; but I do feel that governments/parties need to be honest in having the conversation about the 'why' and what we are actually trying to achieve.

My observation would be that the demographic reasons asserted for immigration are substantially less than advertised at this point.

The more probable reasons would be to lower the cost of labour; and to increase the size of the Canadian economy on an aggregate basis.

Those aren't necessarily bad reasons; but where one fails to discuss objectives in a frank manner, I think there is a greater risk of backlash.

I also think its important to properly measure things so we have constructive answers on what we are achieving or not.

Real (inflation adjusted) GDP per capita is the economic statistic of interest here to start.

But I would also be interested to look at the listed occupations of immigrants and refugees, and then look at the average wage trends in those professions.

Once again, I'd say, even if the impact in a given profession is linked to lower wage growth, that isn't automatically a bad thing. But its one thing to suppress the growth in wages of a six-figure IT specialist or a $500,000 medical specialist; its another to suppress wages of farm workers, office cleaners and security guards.

****

One further note of interest. If you take that level of growth and compound it over 30 years; Canada will have a population of just over 59 million in 2049 and 92.6 Million in 2079

 

[WislaHD]

A nuanced conversation about immigration is impossible these days, @Northern Light

I am by no means an advocate for sprawl, but Canada still has a lot of room for growth (ideally smart growth). Another subset of this conversation is that immigration is overwhelmingly directed towards the biggest markets and population centres, while we as a whole country could really benefit from it being spread a little more consistently throughout the country. Western Canada is far from reaching its carrying capacity, while small-town Ontario is largely stagnant and Northern Ontario is in serious population decline.

 

[Northern Light]

A nuanced conversation about immigration is impossible these days, @Northern Light

I am by no means an advocate for sprawl, but Canada still has a lot of room for growth (ideally smart growth). Another subset of this conversation is that immigration is overwhelmingly directed towards the biggest markets and population centres, while we as a whole country could really benefit from it being spread a little more consistently throughout the country. Western Canada is far from reaching its carrying capacity, while small-town Ontario is largely stagnant and Northern Ontario is in serious population decline.

There's no question there is value in immigration, at least to Canada, if well managed.

We could easily discuss doctor shortages in rural areas as an obvious point of interest.

But, is the way that we are managing immigration actually addressing that issue?

Of course, its not merely a matter of how we manage the immigration system; for instance, we have steered a large number of South Asian students to Lakehead in Thunder Bay for their education (I mean foreign students here for the record)

But, when they graduate, often staying in Canada, and entering a pathway to citizenship; they usually leave Thunder Bay.

A piece in the Globe and Mail examining that subject looked at the availability of the right jobs; but also considered racism; and the simple issue of the absence of even one high quality cricket pitch.

If we choose to attract (or try to) some of the world's best and brightest, we need to have a proper plan for their benefit and ours, that includes looking at ascension to desired professions, retention in Canada and/or the community where they have initially immigrated to and where they are most needed.

There's also an ongoing need to address wage stagnation in lower-income jobs. I happen to favour increasing minimum levels of paid vacation to do this, by raising Ontario/Canada to the EU/OECD norm of 4 weeks minimum from year 1 for new hires.

I would also examine having overtime kick-in at 40 hours per week, instead of 44.

 

[Northern Light]

As a side note, I just took the latest growth numbers for the City of Toronto (2.6% annualized population growth) and ran it through the same compound growth calculation as I did for Canada.

The City of Toronto proper would grow to 6.42 milliion by 2049; and over 14 million by 2079.

Needless to say, I don't see that happening; but it does the case clear for thoughtfully planning out growth.

 

[WislaHD]

As a side note, I just took the latest growth numbers for the City of Toronto (2.6% annualized population growth) and ran it through the same compound growth calculation as I did for Canada.

The City of Toronto proper would grow to 6.42 milliion by 2049; and over 14 million by 2079.

Needless to say, I don't see that happening; but it does the case clear for thoughtfully planning out growth.

That yellowbelt can't be sustained long-term. We will need a radical rethink of Toronto's planning regime.

It also points to me the obviousness that certain nearby cities in the GTHA are going to need to shoulder a lot of the growth, namely: Kitchener-Waterloo, Burlington, Hamilton, Mississauga, and the Niagara Region (St. Catharines to Port Colborne corridor). These cities can't just be bedroom communities for Toronto, but self-sufficient economic centres in their own right.

 

[Northern Light]

That yellowbelt can't be sustained long-term. We will need a radical rethink of Toronto's planning regime.

It also points to me the obviousness that certain nearby cities in the GTHA are going to need to shoulder a lot of the growth, namely: Kitchener-Waterloo, Burlington, Hamilton, Mississauga, and the Niagara Region (St. Catharines to Port Colborne corridor). These cities can't just be bedroom communities for Toronto, but self-sufficient economic centres in their own right.

K-W and Guelph have finite water supplies based on aquifers and the Grand River.

I don't see growth in the former getting that much past the 1M mark before hitting a sustainability wall.

Most of the rest of the GTA, where water supply is via Lake Ontario, or Lake Simcoe could manage, subject to further work on water quality, storm water management etc.

 

[WislaHD]

Even the Tri-City area doubling in population alone would be enough to shoulder their fair share of the growth expected in the greater region. In theory, can't water be pumped from the Great Lakes? The Grand River is in the Great Lakes watershed so we are not violating any treaties with the USA.

Honestly, in terms of large population growth, the city that my eyes keep darting to is Hamilton. International airport is there already, and that downtown streetgrid if developed from parking lots to density would result in a brilliant urban fabric.

 

[rbt]

K-W and Guelph have finite water supplies based on aquifers and the Grand River.

That's more of a technical limitation. A few relatively small improvements on the process Alberta uses for sewage treatment would allow for immediate re-use.

 

[TrickyRicky]

Northern Light, if I read your post correctly you mention immigration and the impact on demographic numbers. I suspect the impact of immigration on population is greater not less than acknowledged. Immigrants are younger than Canadians in general and often come here with a partner or with the intent to find a partner to settle down and have kids. I suspect they have an outsized impact on the domestic birth rate. Neither I nor my wife was born in Canada. We have two kids born in Canada.

 

[Northern Light]

Northern Light, if I read your post correctly you mention immigration and the impact on demographic numbers. I suspect the impact of immigration on population is greater not less than acknowledged. Immigrants are younger than Canadians in general and often come here with a partner or with the intent to find a partner to settle down and have kids. I suspect they have an outsized impact on the domestic birth rate. Neither I nor my wife was born in Canada. We have two kids born in Canada.

An interesting hypothesis. I would love to see the numbers on this.

We could also have a thoughtful debate about who counts as what, when and where.

For instance, a family that has 2 young children at the time of immigration, those children count in the total already of immigrants.

If they have 2 more once here, they count towards domestic birthrate.

The children, once adults, have children, they count as 'domestic' birth rate.

That's all fair.

As to average age; I'm not sure; one has to blend the economic immigrants, the refugees and the family reunification immigrants (often parents/grandparents).

I'm not sure how all that weighs out, some of it, doubtless, is known, and I shall have to have a look at the data if no one else gets there first.

But I'm not sure whether the data on immigrant births is separated out.

Definitely merits examination.

 

[TrickyRicky]

Northern light, I think this link if it works has a lot of relevant data on immigration and demographics. It is very central to the topic of Toronto’s population as just shy of 50% of the region’s population is foreign born.

I believe it says as of 2011 the median age of recent immigrants is 31.7 years compared to 37.3 for Canada as a whole. Surprisingly for those who concern themselves with the idea of supporting elderly immigrants milking the system only 3.3% of recent immigrants were 65+

Immigration and Ethnocultural Diversity in Canada

The National Household Survey. Immigration and Ethnocultural Diversity in Canada

www12.statcan.gc.ca

 

[TheTigerMaster]

From the City's Ontario Line report: http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2019.EX9.1

For context, over the next twenty years, the City's population is projected to grow by about 960,000 people. By 2041, the City's population will be more than 3,900,000, exceeding the Provincial Growth Plan forecasts by more than 500,000[1]

So, yea, we weren't crazy to suggest Toronto will reach a population of 4 Million in the next decade or two. I wonder what the city will look like then. Toronto of 2019 already hardly resembles Toronto of 20 years prior.

Torontonians are going to have to start making some really uncomfortable decisions soon. Congestion charges and private auto bans on certain city streets are going to be on the table. People are going to have to let go of the dream of owning houses. The days of Toronto the Good are long dead; the city is going to have to quickly let go of its small town mentality.

If we were smart, municipal and provincial officials would be sitting down to create and implement a vision for Toronto to handle this growth. Encapsulating everything housing, to transport, to employment and urban design. Queen’s Park is going to have to quickly reform municipal governance and introduce greater autonomy, as the City of Toronto Act will be wholly ineffective at governing 4 Million people. We absolutely cannot spend the next 20 years continuing to dick around. But I don't think Toronto is ready for that conversation. This city is going to be dragged kicking and screaming into a future where its bigger and greater than it ever wanted to be.

 

[Towered]

From the City's Ontario Line report: http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2019.EX9.1



So, yea, we weren't crazy to suggest Toronto will reach a population of 4 Million in the next decade or two. I wonder what the city will look like then. Toronto of 2019 already hardly resembles Toronto of 20 years prior.

Torontonians are going to have to start making some really uncomfortable decisions soon. Congestion charges and private auto bans on certain city streets are going to be on the table. People are going to have to let go of the dream of owning houses. The days of Toronto the Good are long dead; the city is going to have to quickly let go of its small town mentality.

If we were smart, municipal and provincial officials would be sitting down to create and implement a vision for Toronto to handle this growth. Encapsulating everything housing, to transport, to employment and urban design. Queen’s Park is going to have to quickly reform municipal governance and introduce greater autonomy, as the City of Toronto Act will be wholly ineffective at governing 4 Million people. We absolutely cannot spend the next 20 years continuing to dick around. But I don't think Toronto is ready for that conversation. This city is going to be dragged kicking and screaming into a future where its bigger and greater than it ever wanted to be.

If Toronto is going to add another million people within the 416 alone in just 20 years, I don't see how any city council is going to be able to justify preserving the "stable neighbourhoods" of detached single family homes that wastefully occupy roughly 70% of its area.

Then again, dicking around politically is what this city has done since the 70's, so why would that culture change?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Then again, dicking around politically is what this city has done since the 70's, so why would that culture change?

It’s easy to be a pessimist, but I do think there’s been a notable shift in the political culture in this city, at least since Ford was deposed. A decade ago all hell broke loose when the St Clair ROW was proposed. Today, the King Street transit priority project passed with little controversy (save for the middle finger guy with the failing restaurant). That’s some solid progress.

Likewise, Council voted near-unanimously to review our yellowbelt policies. Not a chance that would’ve happened a decade ago. Obviously things are still far from perfect, but it is better.

The bigger problem, imo, is at the provincial level. Queen’s Park still seems totally oblivious to what the hell is going on in Toronto. They’re still treating transit building as a purely political exercise, rather than an urgent necessity, and the response to the housing crisis has been virtually non-existent. Queen’s Park is going to have to wake the hell up soon, as they hold all the revenue tools to make meaningful changes. And if they can’t, they really should devolve those powers to a government that can.

I’m not expecting anything to happen with the PCPO government, but I’m looking for a palpable shift with the next NDP or Liberal government. I expect to be disappointed.

 

[WislaHD]

For context, over the next twenty years, the City's population is projected to grow by about 960,000 people. By 2041, the City's population will be more than 3,900,000, exceeding the Provincial Growth Plan forecasts by more than 500,000[1]

Basically, the city is supposed to house 1 million more people, that's great, but the question I have is WHERE lol