4 ms·

One thing I’ll highlight is that public sector growth has outpaced private sector during that whole time, and entrepreneurs indirectly have to pay to prop up pu

One thing I’ll highlight is that public sector growth has outpaced private sector during that whole time, and entrepreneurs indirectly have to pay to prop up public services only to get from a business perspective to get a worse business ecosystem than America in pretty much every way except not having to pay for employee health insurance and lower labour costs. If the idea is that the public sector’s wonderful services are supposed to help the private sector flourish, well, that whole idea doesn’t seem to be working. The other is rents have increased that whole time, who can afford to be an entrepreneur when your lease will eat you alive before you ever get off the ground. If the argument is “aha - but Canadians could start an innovative company that relies on remote work and thus avoid such expensive leases” what is the appeal of starting such a business in Canada compared to starting one in the United States where success is far more likely due to a larger market and more pro-business environment? Finally inequality and monopolization is just much worse than 20 years ago internationally. Why be David fighting Goliath when the deck is stacked against you? I’d be kind of surprised if the trend in the article isn’t happening internationally. The articles suggestion that Canadians just don’t have good enough soft skills to be entrepreneurs is just insulting blaming of non-existent individual deficits that ignores systemic issues.

geepytee 3y ago
>public sector growth has outpaced private sector during that whole time Interesting, do you have a source for this? Would love to read more about it
- motohagiography 3y ago
  This example is for the prior decade, but the difference is so stark over 2003-2013 (22% public sector growth vs. 10% private) that even if the comment was conjecture, it would be a pretty good one. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/times-have-changed-public-sector-employment-on-the-rise-in-canada-especially-in-ontario https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/times-have-changed-p... I'd suggest a more constructive comment might be to find an example source and ask whether it is consistent with the reasoning. These "source?" comments are low effort and degrade the quality of conversation.
  - II2II 3y ago
    It is also worth noting that the Fraiser Institute is a conservative think tank and the article does not explain their methodology. In some ways the article is contradicting itself, by making assertions that imply causation near the top of the article then admiting that correlation does not imply causation near the end of the article. Understanding whether we are looking at causation or correlation is important here. Canada is neighbours with the largest economy in the world, with the Canadian economy being heavily influenced by the American economy. Quite often public programs are introduced simply to be competitive because the private sector is not stepping up. (At least that is the perception. That perception is important polticially.)
    - faeriechangling 3y ago
      I found that Fraser Institute article first and went through the effort of finding the actual Statscan data because I'm well aware that a significant slice of Canadians will disregard anything coming from the Fraser Institute. I've been hearing about they're an evil organisation funded by American Corporations since I was a wee lad hearing my socialist family complain about the latest Fraser Institute study published in our local Postmedia paper. They implored me never to trust them! In any case, their claims seem to line up with the Statscan data to me, and I don't see where else they would have gotten this data from.
      - fooster 3y ago
        They may have just made it up to fit their narrative.
    - motohagiography 3y ago
      It's an example that is better than a comment that says, "source?" Pretty sure public sector growth outpaces private sector growth in Canada. However, what is "stepping up," in the private sector, as if it involves putting down our cigars and caviar and having our butlers open the jobs lever a bit, I'd suggest there is a broken ontology at play.
- faeriechangling 3y ago
  https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1410028802 https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=141002... Sept 2023 - Public sector employees: 4,291.7; Private sector employees: 13,293.4; Self-employed: 2,685.1 Sept 2003 - Public sector employees: 2,945.8; Private sector employees: 10,298.9; Self-employed: 2,430.0 Difference - Public sector employees: 1,345.9; Private sector employees: 2994.5; Self-employed: 255.1 % growth - Public sector employees: 45.7%; Private sector employees: 29.1%; Self-employed: 10.5%
  - Scoundreller 3y ago
    Population change over the same time period is +23%. 31.6m to 38.8m Where did all the jobs come from? Are people not retiring? Spending less time in schooling? It's wasn't a massive decrease in unemployment that could explain that. https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/CAN/canada/population https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/CAN/canada/population
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - abdullahkhalids 3y ago
      A large part of the population growth is from adult working-age immigrants. So the employable proportion of the population has gone up.
    - BeefWellington 3y ago
      That would make 23% roughly the floor then for public sector growth, assuming that the increase in population requires a corresponding increase in jobs like teachers, police, firefighters, healthcare, and all the other civil servants. The remaining 26% is the real question - who did huge hiring over the past 20 years?
- tormeh 3y ago
  An easy way to explain this is increased health care and old-age care costs due to an ageing population. I haven't verified it for Canada in particular, but I'd be surprised if this wasn't the cause.
rospaya 3y ago
> If the idea is that the public sector’s wonderful services are supposed to help the private sector flourish, well, that whole idea doesn’t seem to be working. Are you implying that social programs are here to help to private sector?
- hartator 3y ago
  It’s what people say when you complain about a very heavy social bureaucracy.
- umvi 3y ago
  "once you have universal health care and every possible social safety net, then people will be able to take risks without fear of failing and innovate like crazy" ...so the logic goes
  - HWR_14 3y ago
    And there's no evidence that logic doesn't hold. It's not like Canada introduced universal health care 20 years ago so we can see the effects of just that.
  - zdragnar 3y ago
    That's a pretty decent paraphrasing of arguments for UBI that I've seen just on this site, actually.
throwawaysleep 3y ago
> If the idea is that the public sector’s wonderful services are supposed to help the private sector flourish That isn't the idea. The services are for the people, not to help you line your pockets.
orwin 3y ago
The reason seems to be the same than France. I think in the OECD only the US managed to avoid it yet (probably a mix of net immigration, retirement age being really weird, and life expectancy 10year lower than the average ), but most of the increase is in Healthcare, specifically elderly care, and in the administration, also caused by the population being older: the overall population grow, but the number of 'active' do not, or do it slower. Education, research and policing growth slower than all other ministry (although police funding seems to be catching up). There is also administrative bloat, mostly due to more rules, but it seems quite contained here to ecology and urbanism (except in the education ministry, which employ now more administrators than teachers)
4death4 3y ago
What evidence do you have that there is a causal inverse relationship between public sector growth and private sector growth? Isn’t it entirely possible that private sector growth has lagged because some third process has produced fewer entrepreneurs and fewer entrepreneurs results in less private sector growth? It’s possible that the relative difference in public and private sector growth is caused by fewer entrepreneurs, not the other way around. Basically, your argument is a classic case of assuming causality from a correlation.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- personjerry 3y ago
  > It’s possible that the relative difference in public and private sector growth is caused by fewer entrepreneurs You're saying the government saw there are no entrepreneurs so they increased government jobs???
  - faeriechangling 3y ago
    A lack of private sector jobs can be caused by a lack of entrepreneur's. A lack of private sector jobs can cause a lot of people to be eligible for welfare. The government can then be incentivised to react to this by increasing public sector jobs, which at least makes people somewhat productive in theory while also giving them the means to provide for themselves. I'll point out that none of the beliefs expressed so far actually contradict each-other. Less entrepreneurs could mean more public sector jobs. More public sector jobs could mean less entrepreneurs. Third order effects could mean less entrepreneurs as well.

geepytee 3y ago

>public sector growth has outpaced private sector during that whole time Interesting, do you have a source for this? Would love to read more about it

motohagiography 3y ago
This example is for the prior decade, but the difference is so stark over 2003-2013 (22% public sector growth vs. 10% private) that even if the comment was conjecture, it would be a pretty good one. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/times-have-changed-public-sector-employment-on-the-rise-in-canada-especially-in-ontario https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/times-have-changed-p... I'd suggest a more constructive comment might be to find an example source and ask whether it is consistent with the reasoning. These "source?" comments are low effort and degrade the quality of conversation.
- II2II 3y ago
  It is also worth noting that the Fraiser Institute is a conservative think tank and the article does not explain their methodology. In some ways the article is contradicting itself, by making assertions that imply causation near the top of the article then admiting that correlation does not imply causation near the end of the article. Understanding whether we are looking at causation or correlation is important here. Canada is neighbours with the largest economy in the world, with the Canadian economy being heavily influenced by the American economy. Quite often public programs are introduced simply to be competitive because the private sector is not stepping up. (At least that is the perception. That perception is important polticially.)
  - faeriechangling 3y ago
    I found that Fraser Institute article first and went through the effort of finding the actual Statscan data because I'm well aware that a significant slice of Canadians will disregard anything coming from the Fraser Institute. I've been hearing about they're an evil organisation funded by American Corporations since I was a wee lad hearing my socialist family complain about the latest Fraser Institute study published in our local Postmedia paper. They implored me never to trust them! In any case, their claims seem to line up with the Statscan data to me, and I don't see where else they would have gotten this data from.
    - fooster 3y ago
      They may have just made it up to fit their narrative.
  - motohagiography 3y ago
    It's an example that is better than a comment that says, "source?" Pretty sure public sector growth outpaces private sector growth in Canada. However, what is "stepping up," in the private sector, as if it involves putting down our cigars and caviar and having our butlers open the jobs lever a bit, I'd suggest there is a broken ontology at play.
faeriechangling 3y ago
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1410028802 https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=141002... Sept 2023 - Public sector employees: 4,291.7; Private sector employees: 13,293.4; Self-employed: 2,685.1 Sept 2003 - Public sector employees: 2,945.8; Private sector employees: 10,298.9; Self-employed: 2,430.0 Difference - Public sector employees: 1,345.9; Private sector employees: 2994.5; Self-employed: 255.1 % growth - Public sector employees: 45.7%; Private sector employees: 29.1%; Self-employed: 10.5%
- Scoundreller 3y ago
  Population change over the same time period is +23%. 31.6m to 38.8m Where did all the jobs come from? Are people not retiring? Spending less time in schooling? It's wasn't a massive decrease in unemployment that could explain that. https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/CAN/canada/population https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/CAN/canada/population
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - abdullahkhalids 3y ago
    A large part of the population growth is from adult working-age immigrants. So the employable proportion of the population has gone up.
  - BeefWellington 3y ago
    That would make 23% roughly the floor then for public sector growth, assuming that the increase in population requires a corresponding increase in jobs like teachers, police, firefighters, healthcare, and all the other civil servants. The remaining 26% is the real question - who did huge hiring over the past 20 years?
tormeh 3y ago
An easy way to explain this is increased health care and old-age care costs due to an ageing population. I haven't verified it for Canada in particular, but I'd be surprised if this wasn't the cause.

rospaya 3y ago

> If the idea is that the public sector’s wonderful services are supposed to help the private sector flourish, well, that whole idea doesn’t seem to be working. Are you implying that social programs are here to help to private sector?

hartator 3y ago
It’s what people say when you complain about a very heavy social bureaucracy.
umvi 3y ago
"once you have universal health care and every possible social safety net, then people will be able to take risks without fear of failing and innovate like crazy" ...so the logic goes
- HWR_14 3y ago
  And there's no evidence that logic doesn't hold. It's not like Canada introduced universal health care 20 years ago so we can see the effects of just that.
- zdragnar 3y ago
  That's a pretty decent paraphrasing of arguments for UBI that I've seen just on this site, actually.

throwawaysleep 3y ago

> If the idea is that the public sector’s wonderful services are supposed to help the private sector flourish That isn't the idea. The services are for the people, not to help you line your pockets.

orwin 3y ago

The reason seems to be the same than France. I think in the OECD only the US managed to avoid it yet (probably a mix of net immigration, retirement age being really weird, and life expectancy 10year lower than the average ), but most of the increase is in Healthcare, specifically elderly care, and in the administration, also caused by the population being older: the overall population grow, but the number of 'active' do not, or do it slower. Education, research and policing growth slower than all other ministry (although police funding seems to be catching up). There is also administrative bloat, mostly due to more rules, but it seems quite contained here to ecology and urbanism (except in the education ministry, which employ now more administrators than teachers)

4death4 3y ago

What evidence do you have that there is a causal inverse relationship between public sector growth and private sector growth? Isn’t it entirely possible that private sector growth has lagged because some third process has produced fewer entrepreneurs and fewer entrepreneurs results in less private sector growth? It’s possible that the relative difference in public and private sector growth is caused by fewer entrepreneurs, not the other way around. Basically, your argument is a classic case of assuming causality from a correlation.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
personjerry 3y ago
> It’s possible that the relative difference in public and private sector growth is caused by fewer entrepreneurs You're saying the government saw there are no entrepreneurs so they increased government jobs???
- faeriechangling 3y ago
  A lack of private sector jobs can be caused by a lack of entrepreneur's. A lack of private sector jobs can cause a lot of people to be eligible for welfare. The government can then be incentivised to react to this by increasing public sector jobs, which at least makes people somewhat productive in theory while also giving them the means to provide for themselves. I'll point out that none of the beliefs expressed so far actually contradict each-other. Less entrepreneurs could mean more public sector jobs. More public sector jobs could mean less entrepreneurs. Third order effects could mean less entrepreneurs as well.