Exodus of young people suggests Ontario is an increasingly less-desirable place to live

Over the four years from 2020/21 to 2023/24, Ontario saw 104,426 people (on net) leave the province and migrate to somewhere else in Canada. This concerning trend of out-migration, particularly among working age individuals, suggests the province is an increasingly less-desirable place to live and work—and policymakers should take notice.

Using data from Statistics Canada, we can see that over the four year period from 2020/21 to 2023/24 (the latest year of available data), 277,299 people migrated to Ontario from other provinces or territories while 381,725 left Ontario to move to a different province or territory. Put differently, Ontario saw a net loss of 104,426 people to the rest of Canada.

We can further break down this data by age. Looking at working age individuals (15-64 years old), Ontario had a net loss of 80,323 people from 2020/21 to 2023/24. If we zero in further, roughly 39 per cent (40,608 individuals) of the total net loss during those four years were young individuals aged 20-34 years old.

These are concerning trends. Not only have more individuals been leaving Ontario than are coming from other provinces in recent years, but a significant share of those who are leaving are young adults—those who may be finishing school, starting a career or a family, and who have the potential to contribute greatly to the overall standard of living in Ontario over the course of their lifetime.

So, why might Ontario be increasingly viewed as a less-desirable place to live?

First and foremost, Ontario’s economy is broken and provincial living standards have been falling behind the rest of Canada for decades. In 2000, per-person GDP—a broad measure of individual living standards—was $63,146 (inflation-adjusted), nearly 5 per cent higher than the rest of Canada. Yet growth in Ontario’s per-person GDP (inflation-adjusted) has slowed since then and provincial living standards in 2023 were 3.2 per cent lower than the rest of Canada. In other words, over the last two decades Ontarians went from enjoying a higher standard of living than the rest of the country, to now suffering lower living standards.

Ontarians are further saddled with some of highest tax rates in North America. For example, an Ontarian earning C$150,000 per year faces the third highest combined (federal/provincial) marginal personal income tax rate of anywhere in Canada and the United States.

And the Ford government’s continual debt accumulation—including massive projected deficits of $14.6 billion this year and $7.8 billion next year—suggests taxes in Ontario could rise further in the years to come.

High tax rates take away more of your hard-earned money and discourage skilled workers (including doctors, engineers and entrepreneurs) from living and working in the province—meaning future tax hikes will only further weaken Ontario’s already-struggling economy.

Finally, Ontarians (particularly younger individuals) may be leaving the province in search of more affordable housing. Ontario is ground zero for Canada’s housing affordability crisis and there are few signs this will change anytime soon. Home prices and rents are through the roof due to a lack of housing supply, and recent efforts by the Ford government to try and spur more homebuilding will do little to help (despite their considerable cost).

Migration numbers suggest that Ontario is increasingly becoming a less desirable place to live and work compared to the rest of Canada. If the Ford government is to stop the exodus, it must balance the budget, lower taxes, and meaningfully address housing affordability.

Related Topics:#CanadaPopulation #FraserInstitute #GradyMunro #JakeFuss OntarioEconomy OntarioPopulation

Up Next

Privatizing Canada Post Is The Only Solution Left

Don't Miss

Alberta sets pace on new housing construction—rest of Canada should catch up

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Federal climate plan could trigger Alberta recession

Economy / 13 hours ago

Conservatives finally enter the climate fight armed with science

International / 1 day ago

Chinese Couple Renting American Women’s Wombs Exposes Dark Side Of Surrogacy Industry

Business

Privatizing Canada Post Is The Only Solution Left

Published on August 3, 2025

Todayville

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Conrad Eder

Endless bailouts won’t fix Canada Post’s broken business model

Canada Post is bleeding taxpayers dry. In 2024 alone, it lost nearly $1.3 billion and saw revenues fall by $800 million—a staggering 12.2 per cent year-over-year decline. These grim figures forced a $1 billion taxpayer bailout in January.

And the crisis is far from over. Beginning in 2026, Canada Post itself projects it will need another $1 billion every year simply to survive.

This is not a temporary slump. It is a structural failure. Since 2018, Canada Post has accumulated losses of more than $3.8 billion. The message is clear: Canadians aren’t getting mail—they’re getting fleeced.

Yet despite overwhelming evidence of collapse, proposals to privatize the service continue to face resistance from those nostalgic for a bygone era. That nostalgia is costly. Every billion-dollar bailout is a billion dollars not spent on hospitals, schools and infrastructure. Imagine what $1 billion a year could mean for health care wait times, long-term care beds, or repairing crumbling bridges. Instead, Canadians are spending it to keep an outdated postal service on life support.

Critics of privatization argue that only a public entity can guarantee affordable, universal service. They warn that private operators would reduce access, raise prices and abandon rural Canada.

But the European experience tells a different story. Germany’s Deutsche Post, privatized in 1995, expanded its services globally while maintaining affordable domestic delivery. The Netherlands’ PostNL streamlined operations and introduced innovative parcel services to meet the demands of online shopping. Austria Post invested heavily in automation and developed flexible delivery options. In all three cases, universal service requirements were preserved, prices remained affordable, and customers benefited from enhanced, innovative services.

By contrast, Canada Post’s outdated monopoly model is a straitjacket. It must deliver to every address, no matter the cost, while being forced to seek government approval for even modest changes. This bureaucracy means political considerations routinely trump business logic. While private competitors can adjust pricing, delivery models and technology overnight, Canada Post waits months—sometimes years—for permission to act.

As if structural flaws weren’t enough, labour instability has become another costly burden. A recent 32-day strike cost Canada Post more than $200 million.

While the Canadian Union of Postal Workers has every right to defend its members, it has consistently resisted reforms like flexible staffing and automated systems. These are precisely the changes needed to bring the service into the modern era. With taxpayer bailouts guaranteeing survival, CUPW faces little pressure to change course. Canada Post has become less of a postal service than a taxpayer-funded job protection scheme.

Former CEO Moya Greene understood this reality. After leaving Canada Post, she led the UK’s Royal Mail through successful privatization. Her experience showed that public postal services can modernize without abandoning universal service. The lesson is simple: performance improves when failure is possible.

Critics warn about the dangers of the profit motive. But Canada Post already raises postage rates while continuing to post massive losses. Canadians are paying more and getting less. Profit, unlike politics, demands accountability. Companies that fail to deliver value lose customers. Crown corporations, shielded by bailouts, lose nothing.

Fixing Canada Post will take more than tinkering. Incremental reforms cannot solve a billion-dollar-a-year problem. Canada must end its monopoly, open the market and privatize the service. A privatized model can be designed to ensure continued universal delivery, just as in Europe, while giving operators the flexibility to innovate and compete.

Privatization is neither reckless nor radical. It is a proven solution to a financial and operational crisis. Canadians deserve more than excuses and nostalgia. They deserve a postal service that delivers goods to Canadians, not one that delivers bills to taxpayers.

Conrad Eder is a policy analyst at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Business

Trump’s long-promised “reciprocal tariff” regime is no longer a threat — it’s the new world order.

Published on August 1, 2025

Todayville

MxM News

Quick Hit:

The world woke up Friday to Trump’s tariff world order — with a rate-modifying executive order enforcing the terms of Liberation Day, imposing tariffs up to 41% on countries that failed to cut a deal with the United States.

Key Details:

The executive order builds on Trump’s April Liberation Day proclamation, which declared chronic U.S. trade deficits a national emergency and imposed ad valorem tariffs on nearly 70 countries.
Thursday’s follow-up order modifies tariff levels, effective seven days after signing, with full penalties up to 41% now locked in for countries that failed to reach meaningful trade or security agreements with the U.S.
Transshipped goods — products routed through third countries to evade tariffs — will be hit with a flat 40% duty and no possibility for leniency. A blacklist of violators will be published every six months.

🚨 AUGUST 1ST.

President Donald J. Trump signs an Executive Order modifying reciprocal tariff rates, resetting decades of failed trade policies. America First 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/hsgQzlY1Uy

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) August 1, 2025

Diving Deeper:

President Donald Trump formalized a new phase of his Liberation Day trade strategy on Thursday, signing an executive order that rewrites tariff rates and tightens enforcement across the global economy. With this action, Trump’s long-promised “reciprocal tariff” regime is no longer a threat — it’s the new world order.

The executive order, issued from the White House Thursday, amends the original April declaration that framed persistent U.S. trade deficits as a national emergency. That earlier order imposed broad-based duties on nearly 70 countries. Thursday’s update locks in or adjusts those penalties depending on each country’s progress — or lack thereof — in negotiations with the United States.

For countries that reached or are nearing “meaningful trade and security commitments” with the United States, temporary rates will remain in place as agreements are finalized. For the rest, full penalties apply — with tariffs ranging from 10% to 41%, as outlined in Annex I of the order.

The European Union receives a tailored formula: if a product’s current U.S. tariff is under 15%, the new combined rate will be pushed to that floor. Goods already above 15% will not face additional penalties.

But the most aggressive provision of the order targets a growing tactic of tariff evasion — transshipping. Under Section 3, goods that are determined by Customs and Border Protection to have been rerouted through third countries to avoid tariffs will face an automatic 40% penalty. Mitigation or reduction of that duty is explicitly barred under the order.

Trump’s team will also release a biannual blacklist of known violators — naming countries and facilities involved in circumvention schemes. This list will inform public procurement, national security reviews, and corporate due diligence.

The order empowers the Departments of Commerce, Homeland Security, Treasury, and the U.S. Trade Representative to implement the policy, issue regulations, and take “all necessary actions” to enforce it.

Countries that failed to reach a deal by the deadline now face the consequences. Those still negotiating have little time left. And for businesses and governments around the world, the message is clear: American leverage is back — and it comes with a price tag.