Record Population Growth for Manitoba!

Given that line of thought, would Winnipeg be better off without Boeing's $350-400 million annual economic contribution? It is mind boggling to think that what started as a minor operation with less than 100 employees because of an agreement to buy a few aircraft has turned into one of the premier composites centres in the world. Without the intital government involvement none of it would exist, here or elsewhere in Canada.

LennyJessop wrote:

grumpyrom wrote:

Government involvment is not necessarily bad when it's good for "us".

Like the CF-18 contract in 1985...

My point exactly, had it been taking from Quebec and given to Manitoba no one would be complaining. Because it went the other way, we're still sore about it. I don't agree with it one bit, but none of us complain when it falls our way....as the example I illustrated with Boeing Winnipeg for instance.

on an interesting and related note
whites will no longer make up the majority of people in the US by 2050. They will still be the group with the highest percentage.. but it wont be above 50%.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091216/ap_on_go_ot/us_white_minority

The CF18 contract SHOULD have gone to Winnipeg if I recall the circumstances correctly. It was those circumstances that offended so many. To this day still it rankles many.

That said if Boeing came to Winnipeg under similar circumstances (ie it SHOULD of gone to Quebec) then I agree with Grumpyrom. However, if Winnipeg won fair and square... Then it is an apples and oranges discussion.

LennyJessop wrote:

grumpyrom wrote:

Government involvment is not necessarily bad when it's good for "us".

Like the CF-18 contract in 1985...

Unfortunately, you are following the oft-referenced theory that the CF-18 contract to Quebec was a bad deal.

The CF-18 contract was for maintenance of CANADA's CF-18 fleet. What Manitoba got was the maintenance contract for Canada's CF-5s. The economic spin offs from that contract were actually greater than the CF-18 contract. Why? Because few countries were flying the CF-18s at the time, at those that did fly the CF-18s did their own internal maintenance. The CF-5 was still widely used throughout the world. Most countries that flew them did not have established aerospace industries and therefore had to send their planes to places like Canada for maintenance. So, the economic benefits overall and from outside canada were greater from the CF-5 than the CF-18, even though the CF-18 was higher visibility and higher tech.

Nevertheless, we are talking about maintenance agreements, not hi-tech aerospace development and manufacturing. Had we received the CF-18 contracts, it's highly unlikely that we would be designing or even building aircraft at more than a component level which is what Boeing already does.

Me and the gf were two people who moved to manitoba from another province this year, however that will be offset once school is completed and we leave in early 2011

casualchris wrote:Me and the gf were two people who moved to manitoba from another province this year, however that will be offset once school is completed and we leave in early 2011

You can add me to the "new" Manitobans, even though I only left province for 4 years.

St Norberter wrote:

LennyJessop wrote:

grumpyrom wrote:

Government involvment is not necessarily bad when it's good for "us".

Like the CF-18 contract in 1985...

Unfortunately, you are following the oft-referenced theory that the CF-18 contract to Quebec was a bad deal.

The CF-18 contract was for maintenance of CANADA's CF-18 fleet. What Manitoba got was the maintenance contract for Canada's CF-5s. The economic spin offs from that contract were actually greater than the CF-18 contract. Why? Because few countries were flying the CF-18s at the time, at those that did fly the CF-18s did their own internal maintenance. The CF-5 was still widely used throughout the world. Most countries that flew them did not have established aerospace industries and therefore had to send their planes to places like Canada for maintenance. So, the economic benefits overall and from outside canada were greater from the CF-5 than the CF-18, even though the CF-18 was higher visibility and higher tech.

Nevertheless, we are talking about maintenance agreements, not hi-tech aerospace development and manufacturing. Had we received the CF-18 contracts, it's highly unlikely that we would be designing or even building aircraft at more than a component level which is what Boeing already does.

Please tell me you're joking. Or at least try talking to someone who has been employed in the Aerospace industry in Winnipeg for the last 15 years.

good white english peeps I hope.

Found on another site... Winnipeg CMA population in 2009 reached 742k...

http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/demo05a-eng.htm