The definition of relativity

The Globe is reporting on the strong increase in EI beneficiaries in the past month.  The report intones that the growth in the number of employment insurance beneficiaries was “especially strong in Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario, all of which recorded month-over-month increases that were above the national average.”

You’d think the sky was falling in the have provinces.  So for a little perspective, this is the rate of current EI recipients per 1,000 population across Canada.

Newfoundland and Labrador                71.3
Prince Edward Island                56.6
New Brunswick                40.7
Nova Scotia                31.0
Quebec                23.3
Canada                17.5
Ontario                14.6
British Columbia                13.5
Manitoba                  9.9
Saskatchewan                  9.1
Alberta                  7.2

Obviously, for Alberta’s standards having 83% less persons on EI is admittedly high for them but then again everything is relative, no?

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to The definition of relativity

  1. Anonymous says:

    If stats canada shows Quebec with 327,000 unemployed, would that not be more like 46 out of 1000 ? About the same for New Brunswick or do I need a head shake? Same for Ontario ,is it not closer to 50 per thousand?

  2. david says:

    That would mean Ontario would have 50k EI recipients per million or over 500k in the province.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Unemployment 570.1 626.7 56.6 190.0 9.9 43.5

    So isn’t it saying 626.7 thousand?

  4. david says:

    The number of people receiving regular Employment Insurance benefits across Canada rose to 560,400 in January, up 4.4% or 23,700 from December.

  5. Anonymous says:

    I see, so of the about 1.5 million of unemployed eligible workers only 560,000 receive benefits?
    I remember now! Doug Young changed the structure so that part time workers couldn’t be eligible by raising the number of hours needed. And cutting back the number of weeks you could draw, so as to really cut out the less educated or honest. Doug Young, who was never elected again, did alright though? In fact, as shown by the NB governments sneaking through their gold pension supplements, and their workers, never have to worry the rest of their life.
    Yes, that only seems fair.

  6. Yes, that is where we are out of alignment. You are talking about the unemployment, I was talking about the number of persons collecting EI in January.

  7. Anonymous says:

    Yes, I guess I’m a bit shocked to see that only a portion of the unemployed are getting benefits, and now that Quebec and Ontario are being affected, the MP’s of the party that caused the problem are now demanding the system be improved! Meanwhile billions are being paid as bonuses to failures, and pension plans of government workers are being topped up from the taxes! Besides 20% of children in poverty. What a system.

  8. mikel says:

    There was no one party that caused this, the changes to EI were actually begun by Mulroney, continued by Chretien, and continued again by Harper. The changes have continued under Harper, who just announced ‘big’ changes, which actually aren’t that big, and which are set to expire in 2010 (so its obvious how much they care about this). That’s what you get when you don’t vote NDP:)

    For David, you might want to check out “the current” at CBC. I’m not sure if they have podcasts, but they have been focusing on economic matters for some weeks now. I’ve got a friend who got a job as an account manager, who was told that in the first week the job was posted, the employer got over 1000 job applications.

    It’s bad enough that normally compliant canadians showed up at a protest in toronto to demand changes in EI. The number of canadians that are unemployed is already half of what the feds said would become unemployed when the recession was worst.

Comments are closed.