Aller au contenu

Quebec losing young people to interprovincial migration, report shows


Faitlemou

Messages recommendés

Il y a 1 heure, mark_ac a dit :

What does it say when we have trouble retaining a significant portion of the Quebec youth that we educate, despite the tremendous generosity of the QUebec taxpayer? 

Well, people love taxpayers generosity when they are on the receiving end of that generosity, like university students.  But they don't feel the same way when it is their turn to be generous.  That is why we need to make a deal with students: we will pay your tuitition (or at least a big part of it) in exchange you will work in Québec a certain number of years.  If you chose to leave tha's ok, but you will need to reimburse what we gave you.  Basically, make tuition a loan repayable by staying some time in Qubec instead of a gift.

  • Like 2
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

Il y a 1 heure, mark_ac a dit :

Again I love your utopic vision of the world, but did we need to have hundred's of thousands of our best and brightest to leave the province in order to accomplish above? Did we need to lose all of the companies and the associated wealth  that could have gone to our hospitals, schools, and infrastructure to Toronto to accomplish above?  There was no other way to re-write history to achieve the social goals above? It sounds like you're defending the status quo of average.  

Did the Americans needed to fight a war to get their freedom from the British Empire?  Would less freedom but no war be better?  In all revolutions, there are casualties.  The American Revolution was bloody and brutal but once it was over, thngs started to improved (well, until their last election...).  It is ths same thing with our Quiet Revolution, but there was much less blood.  We lost a lot, true, but it still would have happened if we asked less.  Most of the poeple and institutions leaving didn't left because of the magnitude of the changed we made happen, but just because there were changes.  Their vision of Montréal did not include a thriving French speaking population.  We were supposed to keep quiet and be obedient until we see the light and become loyal anglophones.  If that happened, Montréal wouldn't be Montréal.  Our media and cultire would be dictated from Toronto, and the core of our financial institutions and other economic agents would still haved moved to Toronto (maybe a little more slowly, thought) because that is the Torontocentric vision of what Canada wants to be.  The emancipatiuon of Québécois didn't made it happen, at most it only accelerated it.  At least, it stopped the bleeding.  We didn't lose our cultural institutions (quite the contrary) and it gave us a generation of Québecois entrepreneurs and now we have another generations of new innovationg entrepreuneurs that can thrive in Montréal and don't have to expatriate themselves to Toronto (even if some will prefer to go there because they feel more Canadian then Québécois, which is fine).

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

J'aimerais ajouté que la montée de Toronto débuta dans les années 40 pour votre info. Toronto est decenu ce qu'elle est beaucoup plus à cause des investissements américains et la baisse d'influence de l'Empire Britannique qu'à cause de méchants francophones qui n'aimaient les anglais.

  • Like 3
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

Sans compter que la voie maritime du Saint-Laurent, inaugurée en 1959, a porté un énorme coût à l'économie montréalaise en enlevant à notre ville son statut de double terminal maritime et ferroviaire, et déportant la grande industrie et les capitaux vers Toronto et Hamilton en Ontario.

  • Like 1
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

Il y a 2 heures, mark_ac a dit :

Again I love your utopic vision of the world, but did we need to have hundred's of thousands of our best and brightest to leave the province in order to accomplish above? Did we need to lose all of the companies and the associated wealth  that could have gone to our hospitals, schools, and infrastructure to Toronto to accomplish above?  There was no other way to re-write history to achieve the social goals above? It sounds like you're defending the status quo of average.  

What is the vision for Montreal? What do we want the city to become? The greatest aspect of Montreal, is its multiculturalism, its diversity, outlook and inclusiveness.  Francophone/Anglophone/Jewish/Arabic/Latino/Italian and Lebanese, Montreal can truly be one of the greatest cities of the world. This aspect has been in despite the desires of people outside the city to suppress the bilingual, multi-cultural and international flavor of the city for fear of cultural assimilation and ethnic insecurity etc. This isn't any different from our dear neighbor to the South, but Montreal can't flourish globally in the Quebecois context as we know it today.  Let the next provincial election show why above is true.

What does it say about us when our city has trouble attracting people due to poor attractiveness, despite having one of the best qualities of life on the planet? What does it say when we have trouble retaining a significant portion of the Quebec youth that we educate, despite the tremendous generosity of the QUebec taxpayer? 

All niceties aside, the facts clearly show that your vision of Montreal, the "good news metropolis of the Americas" is not shared at large. If/When i'm wrong, i'll eat crow and drink the kool-aid. In the meantime, the demographic concerns that face this province and our city will further amplify.

We fly under the radar, we hide our successes because we prefer to look at our failures (and English Canadian media love to look at Québec's failures, real or made up).  We need to show what we do good.  We need to publicize our quality of life.  Our crime rate is almost negligeable compared to the rest of North America.  And recently even Toronto looks bad (but we have to be honest, they still do way better then other North Aerican cities).  We have an well educated often trilingual work force.  Of course, there are still room for improvment, we still have a pretty high number on analphabecy (often from older people that didn't have a good education system to rely on, but still).  People here have access to public healthcare, low cost higher education, innexpensive day care (do you know how much that cost in Toronto?), decent public transit, low priced housing, low cost clean electricity, , a healthy democracy, a very active social and cultural life and we have access to almost all the amenities of a big North-American city in sports, culture, entertainement, shopping and so on. 

And now our economy is booming, and not just because or real estate or natural ressources but thanks to modern industries like multimedia, AI, aerospace, health...  And a non negligeable bonus:  our infrasctrutures are being redone and we are getting new public transport built.  That added to the fact that we already had a economic renewal with "soft" sectors like low end clothing virtually disseapearing (and the jobs long gone too), the sectors and companies we have left are stronger.  And let's not forget tourism is booming too... 

Things are looking good.  That does't mean we should sleep on our laurels, but rather built on it.  But to do that, we need to aknowledge that things are going good and are improving.  Can you do that?

il y a 12 minutes, Faitlemou a dit :

J'aimerais ajouté que la montée de Toronto débuta dans les années 40 pour votre info. Toronto est decenu ce qu'elle est beaucoup plus à cause des investissements américains et la baisse d'influence de l'Empire Britannique qu'à cause de méchants francophones qui n'aimaient les anglais.

C'est vrai.  C'est entre autres pour ça que je dis que le centre du pouvoir se serait déplacer vers Toronto de toutes façons.  Au pire, la Révolution tranquille n'aura qu'accélérer ce mouvement.

  • Like 2
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

Il y a 5 heures, mark_ac a dit :

 

2.) Reduce personal income taxes to be lower than Ontario, to provide a fiscal incentive to come to Quebec vs. Ontario. If you know Ontario has an advantage over you, why further exacerbate it by having higher income taxes for the working class?

Yes - $7 day care, Yes- cheaper tuition, Yes- cheaper cost of living - but at the end of the day global talent is looking at the bottom line before evaluating the options of where to pursue a career.

 

What exactly would you cut (and how much of it) to pay fot those tax cuts?

  • Like 1
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

22 hours ago, mark_ac said:

my opinion

1,) modernize bill 101 for the changing global context. Make sure that "operating exclusively in french" doesn't scare people from University of Toronto, Stanford, or Oxford to consider Montreal for a global career.  Let's speak only as friends, the perception whether true/false reduces our attractiveness. Provide a grace period to learn/adopt french. Encourage businesses to comply with the french language charter through tax advantages and benefits. This proposal is not meant to scrap Bill 101 or ignore the cultural realities of Quebec. This is not all or nothing type of approach

2.) Reduce personal income taxes to be lower than Ontario, to provide a fiscal incentive to come to Quebec vs. Ontario. If you know Ontario has an advantage over you, why further exacerbate it by having higher income taxes for the working class?

Yes - $7 day care, Yes- cheaper tuition, Yes- cheaper cost of living - but at the end of the day global talent is looking at the bottom line before evaluating the options of where to pursue a career.

3.) Provide fiscal incentives for university students (international/domestic) to opt for a career in Quebec instead of looking elsewhere

4.) Increase, not reduce immigration. 

22 hours ago, mark_ac said:

I agree with much of this.

1) Personally, I believe that a side affect of Bill 101 was to save the Canadian federation and that the French fact of Quebec is increasingly a sure thing. However, many Quebecers remain fearful and sceptical. and I understand that. We certainly cannot rely on the federal government or other provincial governments to protect the French language; just look at the prairies and Ontario. So, any modification, especially if it is the lessening of the rigour of 101, should wait until there is further proof that the French language in Quebec is totally secured and growing. 

2) I think that this is more ideological than practical. I am happy to pay taxes as long as they are not abused; either because of a bloated bureaucracy or outright corruption. The curent use of our taxes increases our overall quality of life; it decreases the tendency we see elsewhere towards unacceptable and highly dangerous financial disparity, and it allows our remaining dollars to go much further than in other provinces.  

3) Good thinking and a good priority. There is a wealth of talent at our universities and most of the foreign students here would be happy to live their lives here.. I would add that , during their student days, when appropriate, they should receive intensive French language training. In passing, I would also open up government sponsored language training to unilingual anglo-Canadians who want to move here and stay here,. Alcan used to have (perhaps still does in Saguenay) a programme where outside employees were given free French language instruction. If they couldn't function in French within 3 years , they were then transferred out of the province.

4). Yes, increase immigration and do it within the spirit of Bill 101. In other words, do not bring in immigrants who cannot or will not integrate into the francophone community., 

 

 

 

Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

On 2018-07-26 at 7:19 PM, vivreenrégion said:

 California losing residents via domestic migration.

Yes, 

California and New York have lost millions of people over the last ten years to more affordable places with less tax like Texas, Florida, Georgia, and the Carolinas. They mainly attract the wealthiest who can afford living there.

  • Like 1
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

On 2018-07-26 at 3:05 PM, Chris1989 said:

Because it's the Gazette and if you aren't reminding your readers that Quebec sucks with your own biased numbers, you aren't doing your job.

Keep scaring people away English-media in Quebec, soon there won't be anyone to read your trash anymore.

Most of the people I know refuse to watch CTV or listen to CJAD or read the Gazette nowadays. It's just too depressing and fake.

I agree with mark_ac. I wouldn't call it Fake News, but I do think that English Quebec media tends to skew stories , as all media do. For example, if an undercover reporter in the English media visited 100 stores in Montreal, and managed to get service in French in 90 stores, their story would be French is Being Use in 9 of 10 Montreal Stores. But if an undercover reporter in the French media did the same experiment, their story would be Le Francais Est Seulement Utilisé dans 9 de 10 magasins Montréalais? That's the nature of the media where we live. Some places in this world it is left-right, protestant-catholic,  sunny-shia, muslim-hindu and other combinations. In our corner of the world it is English-French. C'est la vie.

But I don't worry about people leaving Quebec, because cost of living alone will have those people coming back to Quebec in several years time after they "make a go" in another province. And the way the stats get skewed, the people who leave and come back get counted as New when they are not really New. 

And everyone is "leaving" somewhere. How many "Millennials are leaving Vancouver" type articles have been published for the past few years? At least a half dozen. And anecdotally, I know quite a few Vancourites that are moving here. Whether they are native to Van City or former Montrealers, I don't know. So I take these "people are leaving [fill in the blank city]" articles with a grain of salt.

And stats can be skewed and they make things simplistic. It is not as simple as saying people are leaving a city because of problem A, B, C, and D and people are moving to a city because of D, E, F, and G. You get a better idea of why people leave or move to a city by talking to them about their everyday practical experience, not some intangible stat. I have a friend who lives in Syracuse, New York who is African American. He had many friends who lived in New York City, who were also African American, who decided to move down south (African Americans leaving NYC in the tens of thousands for the Carolinas, Georgia, and Florida has been a thing for about a decade or more). It is said that they left NYC because it is too expensive even in the suburbs, houses are cheaper down south, less taxes, and less traffic/congestion. What my friend told me was that he thought of moving too, but things don't always turn out as well as they would hope. Sure, there is more house for your buck in Atlanta than Brooklyn, but jobs are harder to get down south if you are not from down south. People there like to hire other southerners like them, even if they happen to be the same race. Now these people don't necessarily move back to NYC, but it serves as an example to remind people that the grass may be greener on the other side, but how much greener is it really? If the grass is greener with a smaller yard, can you live with that? If the greener grass is bordered by concrete walls, whereas at home you had great views, can you live with that? People often overlook the practical day-to-day experience of moving to a city. The streets of Los Angeles are full of people who thought they knew the city they moved to and the promise it would offer them, but things don't always pan out. Don't let stats or people's public image on social media fool you: things don't always pan out.

As far as our situation here in Montreal, things can always be better, as is the case in any city. But I left Montreal a decade ago for Toronto and lived there for a few years. I loved Toronto, wanted to stay there, not because I hated Montreal, but it was fun getting to know the ins and outs of Toronto. Learn its strengths, its weakness, its people, etc. But the way things worked out, several years ago I had to come back to Montreal. As much as I love Toronto, I can tell you the practical negatives of living in that city as good as I can tell you Montreal's. That's why when I visit Toronto, I'm ironically happy that I moved back to Montreal. For example, many condo towers in Toronto are built on Yonge. If you fly into Billy Bishop and look out the window as the plane lands, there is a canyon of condos stretching from the Lake Ontario to Steeles Avenue. A top selling point for condos on Yonge is that they are on the Yonge-University subway line (they gave them numbers now to be like New York: a typical Toronto gesture. When they don't copy NYC, they copy Montreal) for people's convenience. There is one big problem: during the morning rush hour it is not convenient. If you live at Yonge and Bloor and you work at King and Bay, the subway is already packed by the time it gets to Yonge and Bloor, by people who thought the same thing - that living on the subway line will be convenient to get to work/school, etc... And when I say packed, I mean can't step on packed. Let 2 or 3 trains pass before I get on packed. And that was 10 years ago with less condos on Yonge, so today it must be even worse (I guess people take Uber and get stuck in traffic on Bayview or the DVP now). Sure, Tory says he will build a Downtown Relief Line, but Toronto needs 6 Downtown Relief Lines. One flaw Toronto has is public transit: they have New York City geographic scale, but a subway system slightly bigger than Montreal's. What Toronto needs is a New York scale of a subway system, but Ontario is broke now, and that will never happen. That's why the day the REM opens cue the stories in the Star, Sun, and Globe and Mail of "How come Montreal built the REM and we can't even...."  And if Plante somehow manages to get her Pink Line built, I would hate to be a Toronto mayor explaining to his or her constituents ( Jennifer Keesmaat maybe)why the second largest city in the country can manage to build two substantial subway (type) lines, but all we can get from Ford is money to built one Downtown Relief Line? Lack of scale of Toronto's subway system, and how that can influence how you get to work or a meeting, is a practical negative that I wouldn't expect a Montrealer or Vancouverite who wants to move to Toronto to understand, until they live there. That's what I try to tell my Toronto friends who visit Montreal and want to live here because they love the vibe: You want to move to Montreal? Well, take the bus or metro, speak to the STM worker in English, and after he tells you off, tell me if you still like Montreal. Oh, and just try driving around from point A to point B without being Detoured, Rue Barréd, or throwing up because your car hit a million potholes, and then tell me if you like Montreal....Some of them say they still like it. I say: You guys are crazy man! Congratulations, you are now genuine Montrealers! lol

 

 

 

  • Like 3
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Invité
Répondre à ce sujet…

×   Vous avez collé du contenu avec mise en forme.   Supprimer la mise en forme

  Seulement 75 émoticônes maximum sont autorisées.

×   Votre lien a été automatiquement intégré.   Afficher plutôt comme un lien

×   Votre contenu précédent a été rétabli.   Vider l’éditeur

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Créer...