Six Basic Human (Emotional) Needs

Have you wondered why it is seems so difficult to change our habitual behaviours? The reason is because our decisions and behaviours are driven by our emotions more than by our logic. Logically, we want to stop smoking or stop overeating, and yet, we still find ourselves repeating the pattern of behaviours. Why do we do this? It is because smoking and over eating meets our emotional needs.
At the same time, we all logically want to have a great relationship with our spouse or friends. And yet, we sometimes find ourselves getting into the same patterns of arguments and conflicts. Again, this is all caused by a mismatch of emotional needs between well-intentioned parties.
To change any kind of behaviour, you must first understand that as human beings, our decisions and actions are almost ALWAYS driven by the need to meet six human (emotional) needs. This is why we sometimes do things that don’t make any sense at all. We do it simply to meet these 6 human needs (by the way, this was developed by Anthony Robbins). So, what are these 6 human needs?
Human Need 1: Certainty
The first human need is the need for CERTAINTY. We all need to feel a sense of security that things will be okay. Certainty gives us peace of mind and assurance.
Although we all have the need for CERTAINTY, we use different behavioural strategies to meet this need. For example, when you feel stressed, worried, unsure and uncertain, how do you meet your need for certainty?
Some people use destructive strategies like over-eating, smoking or drinking alcohol. Don’t some people do these things to relieve the stress of uncertainty and get into certainty? Others get certainty by controlling other people (becoming a control freak) or by losing their temper. In one episode of Oprah, she interviewed a woman who handled her stress of being sexually abused by creating a multiple personality disorder.
At the same time, there are useful strategies to get certainty. Some people pray/use religion to get that sense of certainty. Some people, adopt empowering beliefs like, ‘ I know I will get through this’ or ‘everything happens for a reason’ or they simply have faith in themselves. Others get certainty through exercise, meditation or confiding in a friend.
So, think about this? How DO you meet your need for certainty? Is it constructive or destructive to you?

Human Need 2: Uncertainty
Now, here is the big paradox! As human beings, we have a second emotional need that is in direct conflict with our first need. We all have a need for UNCERTAINTY!
Think about it. If you had absolute 100% certainty in your life where you knew exactly what was going to happen, when it was going to happen, how it happens, before it happens every single day, how will you feel? You will feel BORED TO DEATH. This is why there are multi millionaires who have all the money and all the possessions in the world, but are depressed! Their life is so certain that they have no more challenges or surprises. No more uncertainty!
This is also why a woman/man in a perfect marriage where everything is routine and predictable will eventually get so bored, that they will unconsciously start picking a fight, having an affair or leave the marriage. There is no more excitement and stimulation that we all need emotionally.
So, how do people meet the emotional need of uncertainty (i.e. challenge/surprise/variety) in their lives? Again, some people do destructive things like having an affair, starting arguments, picking up one-night stands, taking drugs, smoking when bored and drinking to get high (yup, smoking and drinking offer both certainty AND uncertainty).
Some of us do neutral stuff like watching a movie, playing sports, changing jobs, making new friends or partying. This gives us the stimulation and variety we all need.
Some constructive strategies would include taking on new challenges (e.g. going mountain climbing, traveling, starting a business, writing a book). So think about it, how do you meet your need for uncertainty?

Human Need 3: Significance
The third human emotional need is the need to feel significant/special/unique/important/needed. We all hunger for this need and again pursue it in different ways.
Some people feel significant by attaining qualifications (e.g. MBAs, PhDs etc..), achieving success, buying lots of toys (e.g. bigger house, bigger car, country club, Rolex watch etc…) or pursuing status symbols.
Others get significance by putting other people down, dressing in a unique way or tattooing every conceivable part of their body. Again, others feel significance by having children (and making sure they excel and do them proud) or flaunting their wealth. Some people get significance by being proud of certain identities they adopt like being a Christian, a Muslim, an Army Officer, a Vegetarian etc…
Many people have asked me why I continue to work so hard to write so many books, spend hours writing posts on my BLOG and speak at so many seminars when I clearly don’t really need the money anymore. The answer is that I am driven to all these things because it makes me feel significant (useful, special, needed) and provides me the uncertainty (challenge & variety) that I crave. It also, gives me the 4th human need, connection and love and the 6th human need, contribution.
Again, think about how YOU meet the need to feel significance?

Human Need 4: Love and Connection
The 4th human need is in direct conflict with the 3rd human need of SIGNIFICANCE. Think about this. If you felt TOTALLY significant where you were so unique, so special and so different from all the people around you. Would you be happy? No! You would feel disconnected from the people around you.
One of our strongest needs as humans in the need to be accepted, to be loved and connected to the people around us. Once we become so special and unique, we will start to find ourselves losing that connection to our peers. I can tell you that I feel that way sometimes myself. At times I find it difficult to really be myself, connect with people I meet because people keep expecting me to be this perfect guru, with all the answers.
Have you ever wondered why a superstar like Britney Spears with all the fame, money and talent in the world could end up screwing up her life by engaging in destructive behaviours like drink driving, drug taking that would lead to 2 divorces, losing custody of her children and ending up in a mental institution? My guess is that although she felt total significance, she felt unloved and disconnected from everyone around her.
She probably could not be herself, always having to put up a front and feeling that all the people around her were just using her. Her need for connection and love probably drove her to mix around with the wrong company (i.e. Paris Hilton) and engaging in destructive behaviours that would get her the love/connection and sympathy she was lacking.
We all need to feel love and connection and again get it through different means. Some people get connection by getting into a relationship, getting married, making love, joining clubs, playing with their children, having pets, prayer (connection to God) or hanging out with friends.
Sometimes, people even ‘try’ to get love and connection by self-abuse and falling sick (studies show 90% of all illnesses are psychosomatic). This gives them the sudden outpour of sympathy and love that they yearn for. How do you get love and connection in your life?

If Your Relationship is Not Happy, Here’s Why…
I have found after working with many couples that whenever a marriage breaks down, it is always because partners are not meeting each others emotional needs.
A man (or woman) often wants to leave the marriage either because he/she no longer feels significant, loved, certainty or uncertainty by his/her partner. What is a very very common scenario is that after a couple has a child, the man no longer feels the same level of significance anymore. It seems that his wife spends all the time with the kids, that he is no longer important. So what happens? He rather spend his time in the office where he feels more significant or find a girlfriend who makes him feel special again!
So, here is a point of reflection. How well are you meeting your partner’s emotional needs?

If Your Staff Are Leaving Your Company, Here’s Why…
As a boss of my own company and a person who trains other companies in bringing put the best in their employees, I have found that your staff will only be happy and motivated to give their best when they feel significant (they are praised often and recognized), certainty (sense of security of their future in the company), uncertainty (their jobs gives them variety and challenge) as well as connection (they love the people they work with and have a sense of belonging).
Similarly, people leave a company not only for monetary reasons. They leave when they feel a lack of security (certainty), lack of challenge (uncertainty), lack of connection (they hate the people) or a lack of significance (unappreciated).
Reflection: if you are a boss/team leader, are you meeting your staff’s/colleagues emotional needs to bring out the best in them?

If You Have An Addiction that You Cannot Change, Here’s Why…
Finally, I have found that if you have a negative behaviour that you find hard to change, it is only because it is being used to meet two or more of your emotional needs. For example, if you find yourself constantly losing your temper, it is because it gives you a sense of significance and certainty.
If you find it difficult to stop smoking, it is probably it meets your needs for certainty (relaxes and de-stresses you), uncertainty (smoke when you feel bored), connection (especially if you smoke with friends to ‘fit in’) and significance (makes you look ‘cool’). Often, when a behaviour meets more than 2 needs, it becomes an ADDICTION.
In my patterns of excellence programs, I show people how to break limiting patterns of behaviours by first finding an alternative way to meet their needs. If you do not find a new useful alternative behaviour to replace it, you will find yourself going back to the old habit/addiction.

The Last Two Human Needs: Growth and Contribution
You are probably wondering what the last two human emotional needs are. Understand that the first four needs MUST be met by us constantly. It is what drives our daily behaviours.
However, to be truly fulfilled and happy, we need to meet the last two needs of ‘growth’ and ‘contribution’. We need to constantly grow by learning more and challenging ourselves to become better. The moment we stop growing, we start dying emotionally.
Finally, we all need to contribute beyond ourselves, This is why people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett make all the money in the world only to give most of it away to charity. contribution is what gives us ultimate purpose and fulfillment in life.

Bond Yields & Interest Rates

Expect to see 12-18 months of yo-yo markets (the TSX, Dow, and subsequently, the Bond Market) in which we will see surges and retreats (as we have seen over the past month)

· The US will take longer to recover than initial estimates

· The economies to watch as the fastest growing nations are from BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, and China)

· Rates will stay relatively low as bonds continue to rise

· “Quantitative Easing” or the printing of Government Bonds and T-bills (aka money) will be watched very closely to monitor the effects of this practice on inflation

· The other main factors affecting the economy (and in turn rates) are:

o Oil prices

o Bond prices/yields

o Large market influences (such as GM going bankrupt)

o And the jobless numbers, the actual number of Canadians out of work

Pre-Approvals: A Dying Breed?

Pre-approvals are something many lenders could do without. The problem (from a lender’s perspective) is that people get pre-approved and then frequently don’t close.

One bank that recently did away with pre-approvals in the broker channel was rumoured to be losing $20 million a year on them.

Pre-approvals are pretty expensive, and the return for lenders is debateable. In most cases, less than one-third of pre-approvals actually close. Meanwhile, the lender is tying up human resources to process the applications, as well as capital to hedge the rates (if rates move adversely, the lender is on the hook, so lenders pay to lock-in the interest rates using derivatives).

In recent weeks, some very big-name lenders have halted pre-approvals--either altogether, or in the broker channel. Two of the most prominent have been FirstLine (a division of CIBC) and TD.

There are still some good lenders doing pre-approvals but their numbers are dwindling. Among the best is ING. ING has solid rates, great perks, and they do a full rate look-back (meaning: if rates fall and then rise again, you automatically get the lowest rate during the pre-approval period).

It’ll be interesting to see what the future holds for pre-approvals. If we had to guess, more lenders may eventually either:

A) Eliminate them; or,

B) Start charging rate premiums (some lenders, for example, already charge 0.10% more for pre-approvals).

We’d love to hear your thoughts and predictions!

Don't handcuff your mortgage

Gary Marr, Financial Post Published: Saturday, June 13, 2009

Would you like to pay an extra $300 per month on your mortgage? Not likely.

That hasn't stopped a number of Canadians, with the deal of a lifetime on a variable-rate mortgage, from switching over to a more expensive fixed-rate product and paying the extra freight.

A fear of rising rates is driving the rash decision. But if you've finally managed to pin your banker to the ground, why on Earth would you let him off the mat?

More than 28% of Canadians have a variable-rate product tied to prime, according to the Canadian Association of Accredited Mortgage Professionals (CAAMP). If you negotiated a deal before October of last year, chances are you are now borrowing money for as little as 1.35%. That's based on deals that at one point saw the banks giving 90 basis points off prime. Prime is now 2.25%.

The average sale price of a home last month in Canada was $306,366. Based on a 25% downpayment and a 25-year amortization, your monthly payment would be $962.61 at 1.35%. Convert that to a five-year fixed-rate term and you're probably going to have to consider a 4% mortgage rate and a monthly payment of $1,289.04.

Rates are rising fast. Most major banks upped their five-year rate by 40 basis points this week, although discounters were still offering 4% this past week.

"It's not a mass rush yet, but we are starting to see ... people locking in. But variable rates are still so good," says Joan Dal Bianco, vice-president of real estate-secured lending, TD Canada Trust. She stops short of questioning why a consumer would pull out of these "deals" that are no longer available on the market.

Try to get a variable-rate mortgage today and the best you can probably hope to get is 60 basis points above prime, or 2.85%.

The landscape changed dramatically in October during the credit crunch. As the Bank of Canada lowered rates, the major banks reluctantly lowered prime because of the massive amount of customers with variable-rate products negotiated under the old, higher terms.

"Bonds yields are going up rapidly and people are starting to realize the rates are going to go up," Ms. Dal Bianco says. Throw in the fact the Bank of Canada used the weasel word "conditional"(on inflation rates)when it promised not to raise rates until June, and you can understand why some people think today's record-low prime rate might not hold.

But if you're someplace between 60 to 90 basis points below prime, the rate is going to have to go up pretty fast to justify locking in today at 4%, even though that is just slightly above the all-time low hit last month for a five-year term.

"I don't understand why you would lock in," says Jim Murphy, chief executive of CAAMP. "Sure, if they start to rise, but [Bank of Canada governor Mark] Carney says they won't rise, so you've got another year at that prime-minus rate."

Don Lawby, chief executive of Century 21 Canada, says even when rates do start to increase, they are not going to jump significantly right away. You are not going to get 4% on a fixed rate again, but double-digit rates seem unlikely. "The only logic two locking in would be for someone very sensitive to any rate change and they just want to be secure," Mr. Lawby says.

But at what price? If you're using the "feeling secure" logic, why not go for the 10-year fixed-rate product? Rates on that product can be locked at 5.25%, ridiculously low by historical standards. Yet fewer than 10% of Canadians consider a 10-year product.

There are some compromises you can make. For starters, there is nothing to prevent consumers from having a blended mortgage at most Canadian banks. Some banks will let you take half your outstanding debt and lock it in. Diversity is preached for stock portfolios, but few people seem to adhere to the same philosophy when managing their debt.

Consumers might want to take their cue from business. Few companies would want all of their debt coming due at the same time -- it presents too much risk. The other option is knocking down principal: Make payments based on a 4% rate and have that extra $300 go straight to your principal every month.

The bottom line is if you've got a deal on your mortgage, why would you give it back?

Dusty wallet Double check your credit card statements. DW is in a bit of a skirmish with Visa over a taxi cab bill. Of course, DW is too cheap to use cabs, but does succumb to them to get to and from airports on vacation. Last trip, the family took an airport limousine and paid the $56 charge. Guess what? The same amount was billed a month later. So far, the taxi cab company has yet to produce a second receipt. In the interim, DW had to pay the second $56 charge.

gmarr@national-post. Com

Fed not likely to raise rates

Peter Hodson, Financial Post

Recently, there has been some loud talk about inflation and how the U. S. Federal Reserve is going to have to start raising interest rates soon in order to nip inflation in the bud.

When first confronted with this news, you may have said, "Hogwash! No way in this economic backdrop could the Fed raise rates, slow down growth and risk sending us into a steep 'double-dip' recession."

That certainly would be my view. It's unclear at this point even if we are coming out of recession, so it really would be premature to slow things down at this point before any growth traction has been achieved.

However, let's not just make assumptions. Let's delve into history to see what the Fed has done in prior cycles.

The last U. S. recession was from March, 2001, to November, 2001, a period of eight months. The Fed funds rate was 6.5% from June, 2000, to January, 2001. In January of that year, the Fed lowered the rate to 6%, then went on a 12-month lowering frenzy during the recession and in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. By year-end 2001 the Fed funds rate was 1.75%, with the Fed still maintaining an easing bias.

Despite the official ending of the recession in November, 2001, the Fed maintained very low interest rates for almost three more years. In fact, it kept lowering rates, down to 1% from June, 2003 to May, 2004. This strategy of keeping rates low despite no recession is now widely blamed as the reason for the creation of the housing bubble that popped in 2007. The Fed finally raised rates in June, 2004, a full 30 months after the recession had ended.

In the recession of July, 1990 to March, 1991 (eight months) the Fed had been easing or maintained a neutral bias since February, 1989. At the start of that recession, the Fed funds rate was 8.25%. By the end of the recession, it was down to 6%. Again, despite the recession being over, the Fed kept jamming rates lower, all the way down to 3% in December, 1993. The Fed didn't raise rates again until February, 1994. In that recession, again the Fed kept lowering rates for 30 months after the end of the recession.

Going back further into history, in the recession of July, 1981 to November, 1982 (16 months) the Fed acted a little more quickly. In May, 1981 the Fed rate was 20.0%. By December of that year, the Fed had moved rates down to 12%. In the spring of 1982, though, rates were back to 15%. But, showing signs of confusion, by the end of the summer 1982, rates were much lower, at 9.5%. The Fed was tightening rates again by September, 1982, and for a period of time investors had no idea what to expect, as the Fed moved rates up or down seemingly at random for a period of 18 months.

In the energy crisis of the early 1970s, the recession lasted from November, 1973, to March, 1975 (16 months). In November, at the start of the recession the Fed funds rate was 9.00% but by May, 1974, because of inflation fears the Fed had already raised the rate to 13%. Recession fears, however, ultimately ruled the day, and by year-end 1975 the Fed rate had been cut in half, to 4.75%. The tightening began anew, however, in April, 1976, 13 months after the official end of the recession.

What can we conclude? One, it seems sometimes that the Fed is just winging it, moving rates at random in response to short-term events. But it does seem the Fed is unwilling to raise rates too quickly after any recession.

Based on the severity of this economic downturn, you would have to conclude the Fed is unlikely to risk a double-dip recession, and will keep the Fed funds rate very low (now 0% to 0.25%) for a long time.

This may, of course, cause inflation, but for the time being, that is still better than a giant de-leveraging economic death-spiral.

peter@sprott.com--- - Peter Hodson is a senior portfolio manager at Sprott Asset Management.

Have a great day!

RIDING THE ... REAL ESTATE ROLLER COASTER

Garry Marr, Financial Post

Heather Harding and her husband, film editor Graham Withers, have been on the real estate sidelines looking for a home for the past 18 months. The Toronto couple, renters, started their search when the market was at the top and every home they looked at was "just too expensive."

But now that prices are finally falling and affordability is increasing, there is another major stumbling block in their search: Job security.

"There just seems to be so much uncertainty. Prices in the range we have been looking at haven't changed all that much, either," said Mr. Withers.

"We keep waiting for the big housing crash," said Ms. Harding.

They look to the situation in the United States and see prices dropping by as much as a third in many markets, but that hasn't happened here. The Canadian Real Estate Association said prices across the country in the first four months of 2009 were down 6.7% compared with a year ago.

"We are looking for more of a deal. And more stability. I work on contracts and my wife just changed jobs," said Mr. Withers. "Unless we are going to get a deal, why would we introduce more uncertainty into our lives?"

That's the real-estate rub: Sales have stalled as vendors refuse to lower prices while buyers sit on the sidelines waiting for a deal after more than a decade of rising prices.

To be sure, the deals have finally begun to materialize, although not from plummeting prices. Rather, record-low interest rates, whether consumers are borrowing long-term or short, are a key factor in the new real-estate affordability.

Consider a $300,000 mortgage. At the 3.75% rate some mortgage brokers claim they can get for a five-year closed mortgage, the monthly payment is $1,537.67, based on a 25-year amortization. A couple of years ago, when the rate was closer to 5.75%, the same mortgage would cost 22% more, or $1,875.07 a month.

Cheap money has created a classic economic battle. In one corner stands the real estate industry, trying to lure buyers with rates so low it is now cheaper to own than to rent. In the other is the skittish consumer who is too focused on job concerns to care about interest rates.

For the first time this decade, the Royal Bank of Canada's Affordability Index, which measures the percentage of household income needed to carry a home, is declining.

"We've seen affordability improve across the board, but especially in some centres where it had deteriorated over the past few years," said Robert Hogue, senior economist with RBC.

Vancouver is one example. At the market peak, almost 80% of pre-tax household income (based on the median household income in the city) was needed to carry a standard two-storey home. The index is based on a 25% down payment, a 25-year amortization and includes the costs of principal and interest, property taxes and utilities.

Vancouver's affordability rating has improved to the 70% range, but so has job uncertainty, according to RBC. The decision to jump into Canada's most expensive city for housing has not gotten easier.

Nationwide, 43.7% of household income is needed to carry a detached bungalow, a decline from 46.6% in the fourth quarter of 2007. When RBC releases its first quarter results later this month, that figure is expected to fall again. The all-time peak in Canada was 52.6% in 1990.

"Consumers still are not jumping into the market en masse because of concerns over job uncertainty," says Mr. Hogue. "The job market continues to show losses. We are talking about a battle between confidence and affordability. This is likely to see-saw for some months ahead."

The real estate industry is busy pumping out the statistics to back up the affordability argument. CREA and others in the industry point to three straight months of improving sales activity, adjusted for seasonality. April sales were 32% above the decade's low point reached in January.

But the numbers still show very slow sales for 2009. April sales were off 9.2% from a year ago, while sales for the first four months of 2009 were down 20.7% from a year earlier.

In Windsor-Essex, ground zero for the Canadian auto industry, housing sales for the year were down 21% from a year ago, while the $152,856 average price of a home has sunk to the fourth lowest among the 25 urban centres CREA tracks.

"There are tons of homes up for sale," said Rick LaPorte president of Canadian Auto Workers local 444 in Windsor. "My house has probably dropped $20,000, maybe $30,000, in the last three years. It's a buyer's market -- as long as you have a job. ... If you have no way of paying for a mortgage, houses can be as cheap as you want." said Mr. LaPorte.

From the real estate industry's perspective, first-time buyers have been the cement that has held this market together. A survey by Royal LePage last month found 86% of potential first-time buyers indicated that low interest rates were a key motivator for buying. Lower prices was the second-biggest reason to purchase, with 81% of potential buyers citing that factor. But 76% of respondents also listed job security as a major factor affecting whether to buy.

The results back up LePage president Phil Soper's assertion that affordability trumps job security in this high-stakes game. "While these consumers appreciate government incentives such as tax credits, greater RSP deduction limits and rebates on home renovations, it is markedly improved affordability that is proving to be the powerful drawing card," he said.

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce senior economist Benjamin Tal has his own set of statistics. He say outstanding mortgage debt is rising 8.5% on a year-over-year basis, but the pace of borrowing continues to slow.

"That's the real test of affordability. If affordability was the only measure, you would see mortgage activity accelerating," said Mr. Tal. "Look at the U. S. market, it's extremely affordable. But is anyone buying? If you have no confidence, you are not buying a house, even if interest rates are zero because you cannot afford the risk."

Countrywide mortgage execs charged with fraud

Marcy Gordon and Greg Risling

The Associated Press WASHINGTON

Federal regulators yesterday charged Angelo Mozilo, the former chief executive of mortgage lender Countrywide Financial Corp., and two other company executives with civil fraud.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's civil lawsuit, filed in federal district court in Los Angeles, also accuses Mozilo of illegal insider trading.

Countrywide was a major player in the subprime mortgage market, the collapse of which in 2007 touched off the financial crisis that has gripped the U.S. and global economies.

Mozilo, 70, is the most high-profile individual to face formal charges from the federal government in the aftermath of the crisis. Mozilo has denied any wrongdoing.

Civil fraud charges also were filed against Countrywide's former chief operating officer David Sambol, 49, and ex-chief financial officer Eric Sieracki, 52.

The trio "deliberately misled'' Countrywide shareholders, SEC enforcement director Robert Khuzami said at a news conference. While they painted a picture of robust performance, the real Countrywide was "buckling under the weight" of soured mortgage loans, he added.

Khuzami said Mozilo reaped nearly $140 million US in illicit profits from his stock sales.

It was the first major case led by Khuzami, who joined the agency in March.

SEC Chair Mary Schapiro brought him in at a time when the agency was being assailed by lawmakers over its failure to detect the massive pyramid scheme run by fallen money manager Bernard Madoff despite red flags raised to its staff by outsiders over the course of a decade.

Sambol's lawyer Walter Brown said his client will fight the charges.

"The SEC wrongly asserts that Countrywide's disclosures to its investors regarding its lending criteria should have been more extensive, and that Mr. Sambol is somehow responsible for insufficient disclosure," said Brown. "Making groundless allegations and losing in court will not help the SEC restore its reputation. I am confident that Mr. Sambol will be vindicated completely"

The SEC and federal prosecutors have undertaken wide-ranging investigations of companies across the financial services industry, touching on mortgage lenders, the Wall Street investment banks that bundled home mortgages into securities sold to investors, and other market players.

The SEC's scrutiny of Mozilo's stock sales began in the fall of 2007 with an informal inquiry.

The filing of the agency's lawsuit is a striking turn for Mozilo, the man who 40 years ago co-founded what grew into the nation's largest mortgage lender. He moved the company in 1969 from New York to the housing hotbed of suburban Los Angeles, guiding Countrywide through numerous boom-and-bust housing cycles.

After the mortgage crisis hit, Calabasas, Calif.-based Countrywide was forced to cut thousands of jobs and saw its shares plummet. Its downward spiral ended with its sale to titan Bank of America in July 2008 for about $2.5 billion. Countrywide itself is the target of multiple lawsuits related to the mortgage meltdown.

Economic confidence is rising

Julian Beltrame
The Canadian Press OTTAWA

There is mounting evidence that Canada's economy is springing back to life, bringing with it the spirits of ordinary Canadians -- except, it seems, when it comes to the question of whether or not they'll have a job to go to next month.

As the recession relaxes its steely grip on the country, employment remains among the last of the country's economic wounds to heal, usually because leery firms are biding their time lest the signs of improvement prove a false harbinger of better times ahead.

That's why the consensus is predicting Statistics Canada, which releases its latest employment figures tomorrow, will reveal the country dropped another 36,000 jobs in May, and that jobs will keep disappearing for most of the year and possibly well into 2010.

The expected losses would completely wipe out April's surprising 36,000 pickup, which many economists believe overly flattered Canada's ugly labour market.

"I don't believe the StatsCan report for April reflected material improvement for job markets,'' said Derek Holt, vice president of economics with Scotia Capital. "I think it was just a big head-fake on people declaring themselves self-employed for involuntary reasons.''

After five months of vanishing jobs, April's data shocked most observers -- until it became clear the gains were based entirely on 37,000 new jobs in the self-employment category.

In a recession, that is most likely an indication that the newly jobless were trying to create their own work because regular work couldn't be found, they say.

Not that there aren't signs of life -- the so-called "green shoots'' cited by economists as they scour for hope amid the blackened economic landscape -- appearing in increasing regularity in Canada, as well as in the U.S., Europe and Asia.

Yesterday's correction notwithstanding, North American markets are up close to 40 per cent since the lows of early March. Oil prices have also been moving upwards on the expectation of demand in China.

Canadians have started to notice the brightening sky.

Consumer confidence hit a 15-month high last month, according to a Harris-Decima poll that found only 29 per cent of Canadians surveyed expecting economic times to worsen in the next year, compared to a pessimistic 59-per-cent reading in February.

With the sharp downturn seen at the end of 2008 and beginning of 2009 apparently slowing -- but the economy still in recession -- most economists expect the Bank of Canada to sit on its hands today and keep the trend-setting interest rate at the historical low of 0.25 per cent.

But they also see little chance of central bank governor Mark Carney priming the pump with additional stimulus, such as resorting to increasing the money supply through so-called quantitative easing -- a tactic that essentially amounts to printing more cash.

"The significant rise in the Canadian dollar has increased the chances they may move to ease policy further, but at this point we don't think they are willing to do that yet,'' said economist Benjamin Reitzes of BMO Capital Markets.

"If the dollar keeps rising, however, it may provide a significant enough downside shock to the economy for them to feel that further easing is warranted.''

A strong dollar is particularly damaging to Canadian manufacturers, already on their knees from the recession, by making their products less competitive on world markets.

But even the dollar movement yesterday pointed to the central bank taking a time out. After a torrid climb from the 77-cent US levels, the loonie experienced the first significant pullback in weeks, diving 2.29 cents to close at 90.22 cents US.

Harper: 'The worst is behind us'

Prime minister encouraged by new data that suggests economy is in recovery mode

Julian Beltrame
The Canadian Press OTTAWA

Canadians have reason to breathe a little easier -- the economy fell sharply at the start of the year but talk about another depression appears to have been just talk.

Having been given the best economic news in months, Prime Minister Stephen Harper was quick to take advantage yesterday, saying the Liberals have no reason to push for a federal election.

"I think the worst is behind us, we will have better quarters going forward,'' Harper said in an interview with a Toronto radio station.

"I think that's one of the reasons (Liberal Leader Michael) Ignatieff seems to be pushing so hard with ideas to get the other parties to bring the government down. He would love the opportunity to get in there for a recovery. The country needs an election like a hole in the head,'' Harper added.

The output numbers for the first quarter of 2009 were nothing to boast about. The economy contracted by a massive 5.4 per cent at an annualized rate, the worst in 18 years when there was a 5.9 per cent decline in 1991.

But with the Bank of Canada having projected a 7.3 per cent collapse and some economists saying the decline could be as much as nine per cent, the Statistics Canada data has the feel of a death row reprieve.

And the improving data for the last two months of the quarter -- February and March -- suggests that as Harper noted, the worst is likely over and it happened during the November-January period.

"It is the worst recession since the Great Depression globally, but this is where some of Canada's positives have come back to save us a bit from something nastier,'' said Douglas Porter, deputy chief economist with BMO Capital Markets.

"Make no mistake, it's a very severe downturn. But we've been through these kinds of severe downturns before in the early '80s and early '90s.''

Combined with the revised 3.7 per cent drop in the fourth quarter of 2008, Liberal finance critic John McCallum said the slump still qualifies as among the worst since quarterly data began being kept in 1961.

But he too expressed relief that "there is less panic than there was a while ago . . . and more sense that, 'Yeah, we are going to get out of this."'

McCallum said his party will still press for improvements to unemployment insurance to ensure that more laid-off Canadians qualify for benefits, saying the economy will likely continue to shed jobs for months to come.