Jobs, Canada down, U.S. Up

Commodity Marketing

Tools

Jobs, Canada down, U.S. Up

Dec 6, 2019 | 09:08 1 Looking at the headlines today I see Canada lost 71000 jobs in November, after losing only 1800 in October, pushing the unemployment rate fron 5.5% to 5.9% compared to the U.S. which added 266000 thousand jobs with an unemployment rate of 3.5%. Now I don't get too excited about month to month variations but after reading various articles on yesterday's throne speach it could be the start of a trend imo. Trudeau's main concern is climate change, it would appear that he believes his path back to a majority is through policies related to climate change. I can certainly appreciate that he believes there is little room for him to add seats in the west and he is probably right but this month's job report showed the biggest job losses in Quebec, in his favoured backyard, should give him something else to think about. Enjoy your day. Reply With Quote
Dec 6, 2019 | 09:34 2 Let's all encourage trudeau to continue down the path of destruction he is on. It only adds fuel to the separatism fire. At this rate, even Chuck will be a hard core separatist soon. Reply With Quote
SASKFARMER's Avatar Dec 6, 2019 | 09:50 3 Even chuck will eventually want to separate.

I’ll say it again the Trudeau has no idea how to run a country

But ruin a country they are well on

[ATTACH]5325[/ATTACH

]there way to doing that.
Attached Images Attached Images  
Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Dec 6, 2019 | 09:53 4 I have a question.....I have been cutting ice for a month ....its 8 inches thick on the dugout....

    So if we have ice that thick wouldn't it be building in the arctic now or are temperatures still above zero up there?

    And didn't AL gore say we would be using the northern ports regularly by now?...

    Last boat out of churchill was November 7.... Reply With Quote
    Dec 6, 2019 | 09:57 5
    Quote Originally Posted by bucket View Post
    I have a question.....I have been cutting ice for a month ....its 8 inches thick on the dugout....

    So if we have ice that thick wouldn't it be building in the arctic now or are temperatures still above zero up there?

    And didn't AL gore say we would be using the northern ports regularly by now?...

    Last boat out of churchill was November 7....
    Don't ask inconvenient questions... Just remember that everything can now be blamed on global warming, and it will all make sense. Reply With Quote
    Dec 6, 2019 | 10:08 6 Not a problem, everything will be solved with an increasing Carbon Tax, don’t worry. Good for the economy Trudeau and McKenna tell us. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Dec 8, 2019 | 10:43 7 Astonishing U.S. job creation of 266,000 jobs in November well above average trader estimates going into Friday’s report was apparently aided by 41,000 GM workers returning to work. These are not fresh, new manufacturing jobs. Recent U.S. manufacturing data has shown a slowdown stateside.

    Also, interesting data showing U.S. labour force participation rate actually declined to 62.4%.

    But as soon as robust (on-the-surface) data was released, algorithms took over . . . triggering a powerful buying wave. We may be in for some heavy volatility straight ahead, as human logic gradually kicks in. Reply With Quote
    Blaithin's Avatar Dec 8, 2019 | 10:49 8
    Quote Originally Posted by Hamloc View Post
    Looking at the headlines today I see Canada lost 71000 jobs in November, after losing only 1800 in October, pushing the unemployment rate fron 5.5% to 5.9% compared to the U.S. which added 266000 thousand jobs with an unemployment rate of 3.5%. Now I don't get too excited about month to month variations but after reading various articles on yesterday's throne speach it could be the start of a trend imo. Trudeau's main concern is climate change, it would appear that he believes his path back to a majority is through policies related to climate change. I can certainly appreciate that he believes there is little room for him to add seats in the west and he is probably right but this month's job report showed the biggest job losses in Quebec, in his favoured backyard, should give him something else to think about. Enjoy your day.
    Did the article say how many were in Alberta? Kenney seems to be rather chop happy. Reply With Quote
    Dec 8, 2019 | 11:09 9 Errol . . . . as human logic gradually kicks in, it can be an excruciating slow process for some. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • SASKFARMER's Avatar Dec 8, 2019 | 16:37 10 So Errol, if the 40000 GM workers were included the number, is still a new 226000 and skippy lost 70000 please explain Reply With Quote
    Dec 8, 2019 | 20:05 11
    Quote Originally Posted by Blaithin View Post
    Did the article say how many were in Alberta? Kenney seems to be rather chop happy.
    18,000 (25% of Nov losses) were lost in Alberta in November on Kenney's watch.
    Last edited by dmlfarmer; Dec 8, 2019 at 22:19.
    Reply With Quote
    Dec 8, 2019 | 22:37 12
    Quote Originally Posted by dmlfarmer View Post
    18,000 (25% of Nov losses) were lost in Alberta in November on Kenney's watch.
    My personal opinion Dml is that many companies hoped that the Conservatives would win the election. When that didn't happen I think companies abruptly changed course. I believe that it really doesn't matter what Kenney does the energy jobs aren't coming back. Oil is produced with more automation, less employees today. The immediate future for Alberta isn't that bright imo. Reply With Quote
    Dec 8, 2019 | 23:28 13
    Quote Originally Posted by Hamloc View Post
    My personal opinion Dml is that many companies hoped that the Conservatives would win the election. When that didn't happen I think companies abruptly changed course. I believe that it really doesn't matter what Kenney does the energy jobs aren't coming back. Oil is produced with more automation, less employees today. The immediate future for Alberta isn't that bright imo.
    Those are some very good points. The energy industry has made quantum leaps in efficiency. Oil and gas production are still nearly at record levels, while employment continues to drop.

    Name:  oil.jpg
Views: 172
Size:  13.8 KB

    Those jobs aren't coming back, no matter the price of oil. Technology and progress have deemed them obsolete. The low price of oil just makes that process of becoming more efficient go that much faster. All of those celebrating the end of the oil industry because of low prices, fail to notice that it isn't demand that dropped off, it was a victim of its own success.

    There were a number of projects on hold waiting for the outcome of the election, which were then postponed indefinitely, or scrapped altogether, along with the staff. Who would invest in an industry that is unapologetically under attack by the government?

    Edit: Link to the oil production chart since it is hard to read.
    https://economicdashboard.alberta.ca/OilProduction
    Last edited by AlbertaFarmer5; Dec 8, 2019 at 23:32.
    Reply With Quote
    Dec 9, 2019 | 00:20 14
    Quote Originally Posted by dmlfarmer View Post
    18,000 (25% of Nov losses) were lost in Alberta in November on Kenney's watch.
    Job losses are unfortunate but more so the ones lost to unrealized projects to expand our production.

    But much like the ag sector which once had a lot more people, the commodity is more important than the number of people involved in its production. Reply With Quote
    Dec 9, 2019 | 08:09 15 Matching supply to the markets ability to move it to the customer is a good business decision. Over production is not. Uncontrolled booms lead to inflation with higher production costs and over supply that come back to bite. Peter Lougheed would have supported slower growth and better planning. And putting away a significant amount of revenue for the eventual bust. Reply With Quote
    Dec 9, 2019 | 08:31 16
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckChuck View Post
    Matching supply to the markets ability to move it to the customer is a good business decision. Over production is not. Uncontrolled booms lead to inflation with higher production costs and over supply that come back to bite. Peter Lougheed would have supported slower growth and better planning. And putting away a significant amount of revenue for the eventual bust.
    It always amazes me how those on the left worship Peter Lougheed. Myself I certainly thought he was a good leader but with all the rural hospitals he built and his love of crown corporations, what he built was unsustainable. He retired at just the right time and let Don Getty deal with the large deficits that were created by what Peter Lougheed had built. As for putting away more energy royalties for future generations I certainly agree. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like