Peter F

Yes, that is true. Macro-Economically speaking I understand why they did so. But I have to wonder, what risks do these lending institutions take? The whole underlying concept of capitalism is risk, yet, it seems, that is the last thing we want them to do...unless its only in small amounts. But 25 billion isnt chump change and so the Canadian government assumes the entire risk that the mortgage co's undertook in the first place. The government issues the bonds to buy the MBA's, and if they fail, the government sucks it up. What do the mortgage companies suck up? $25 billion dollars. What do they do with it? Well, whatever they want: Hoard it, buy Canada Bonds, invest in Google, issue loans; and collect all the profits from those actions. And the risk they undertake? Still no risk. If things go south they will be looking for 25 billion more that us taxpayers can risk for them. On the other hand, if things go south fiarly quickly, they will hoard that money anyways to limit thier supposed 'risk' of Other Peoples Money, and be looking for government to buy more billions of stuff from them in order to reduce thier liquidity risk. This isnt capitalism - this is feudalism.

If any school teacher/principal had used such weaponry on my children I'd have sued them three ways from Sunday. Time-outs work just fine for the little people.

You misunderstand. These are not mortgages being transferred to CMHC. These are mortgage derivatives - not the mortgages themselves. I have a mortgage with TD bank which the TD bank could well have bundled up with a bunch of other mortages of similar term and interest rate to create a derivative called a Mortgage Backed Security. The mortgages involved are still in the hands of TD bank. However, it is the income flow from these MBS's (the mortage payments I and others are making to TD) that are being bought up by CMHC. It is the income flow that makes the MBS attractive to investors. TD bank will be paying out the mortgage payments that I and others make to TD to the MBS buyers (CMHC in this case). The attraction to TD bank to issue these things is they get the money they lent me for my mortgage now and don't have to wait 20 years for me to pay the mortgage off....and they would be waiting that long thats for sure. So bundled up in the MBS is all kinds of mortgages, first second or third - it really doesn't matter because its not the mortage that is changing hands but the promised mortgage payments. The strength of MBS in Canada is that they are required by law to be derived from mortgages that are guaranteed by CMHC. So if I should fail my mortgage requirements to TD Bank, CMHC will pay out whats owing on my mortgage to TD Bank. That has the same effect of guaranteeing the MBS that my mortgage is part of, and no default on the MBS by TD bank will occur. Its safe as houses. In Canada anyways...

I would let him blow me to smithereens. But thats just me.

Moonbox is right. The government is not buying a dime of the banks. The CMHC will buy a bunch of mortgage derivatives from the Sellers (who are not necessarily the banks) to the tune of 25 billion dollars. Today they bought up the first installment of 5 billion Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation reverse auction The Canadian government issued/will issue 25 billion in bonds to finance these purchases by CMHC. I have no idea what the interest rate on Canada Bonds are but the CMHC auction rules are that offers must have a return of 1% above the Canada Bond rate. Thus Flaherty's statement that the exchange will be at no cost to the taxpayer and probably result in a modest return.

Well, it's their money now. They get to do whatever they want with it,

Things are so bad the healthiest banking system in the world was pulling back on the lending business and needed 25 billion dollars to encourage them to please please please keep lending money.

No, Oleg, she's dead because two guys with kalishnikovs gunned her down. On the other hand, perhaps they were feminist nuts or, maybe, hired by feminist nuts.

and how would that course of action be 'not responsible'?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/ CON..... 143 closest = Vancouver King (142) furthest = betsey (185) LIB....... 76 closest = Whitedoors (76) furthest = Jerry J Fortin (130) BQ....... 50 closest = Motoro (50) furthest = betsy (20) NDP......37 closest = Motoro (37) furthest = Guyser (12) IND...... 2 GRN..... 0 OTH..... 0 final scores: Vancouver King............. - 12 WhiteDoors (2nd guess).. - 22 nothinarian (2nd guess).. - 24 Motoro...........................- 28 normanchateau.............. - 38 visionseeker...................- 44 jdobbin...........................- 47 cybercoma..................... - 47 capricorn.........................- 48 Rue................................ - 48 Geoffrey......................... - 56 WhiteDoors (1st guess)..... - 58 nothinarian (1st guess) ..... - 60 M.Dancer (2nd guess)........ - 64 Moonbox.......................... - 66 M.Dancer (1st guess)........ - 68 Guyser............................. - 76 kengs333......................... - 78 betsey..............................- 84 Riverwind........................ - 95 Jerry J Fortin.................. -108 Peter F.......................... -308

so Harper made no policy decisions based upon the recent short term 'fluctations' of the market?

Is there a point to this thread? Stockmarket goes up; 'Its good for Harper!" Stockmarket goes down: "Its good for Harper!". If stockmarket went sideways that'd be good for Harper too. Is there any stockmarket condition thats not good for Harper?

Smoke the moderates so they will become allies and deal with the radicals...Ya. I have a sneaking leftard suspicion that things wouldn't quite work out that way.

Banks don't need help, Harper says Ruling out bailout ideas, PM cites report lauding the Canadian system (Oct 10, 2008 04:30 AM ) The Toronto Star Feds buy $25B in mortgages Oct 10, 2008 09:55 AM The Toronto Star Flaherty Flaherty reassures Canada about its economic growth after White House meeting Sat Oct 11, 2:17 PM Yahoo News Flaherty:

So lets nuke everyone in Mecca and/or Tehran...and the difference between you and them again is what?

Banks don't need help, Harper says Ruling out bailout ideas, PM cites report lauding the Canadian system (Oct 10, 2008 04:30 AM ) The Star Feds buy $25B in mortgages Oct 10, 2008 09:55 AM The Star Flaherty ...so the Canadian government is borrowing $25 billion dollars to buy up mortgages held by the banks...and the government is doing so because the Canadian banks are the most solid banks in the world! Why not just lend the banks 25 billion dollars at cost? They are certainly good for it arn't they? Whats the need for the transaction of mortgages for money?

...and recent events have shown that corporate bureaucrats arn't all that shit-hot at picking winners either.

Osama would be dancing with joy!

Just radical Muslim terrorists or any ol' terrorist?

I dunno. Who?

I suspect that the government is perfectly happy letting the Americans deal with him because his most serious alleged crime was specifically directed against Americans (illegally killed, allegedly, a US soldier). None of his alleged crimes - entirely brought by the USofA - were directed specifically against Canada. In the clause he would be charged treason under, the wording implies that he had to be fighting in the armed forces and/or aiding the armed forces of a country that Canada is officially or unofficially at war with. Would the Taliban apply as the armed forces of a country? If so which country? I am also sure those legal questions are not insurmountable ... but then some lawyers can make pretty good arguments making such legal questions insurmountable. So, if the Americans have him, and his alleged crimes were committed almost entirely against Americans, why not avoid the legal conundrums by letting the Americans deal with him? Thats what I think the Canadian government thinks. They prefer, as ususal, that somebody else deal with it. As for the Khadr's using the Canadian health system: Why shouldn't they? they're Canadians too. The Canadian healthcare system serves all Canadians no matter what thier politics are and no matter what their moral values are. It really cannot be any other way.

well, someone would need to point out how the Bloc's actions fit the crime of Treason....under Canadian Law specifically.

Sure he could be if he was in Canadian custody. But as yet Canada has not sought his custody. Perhaps they will when the Americans are done with him - then again, perhaps not. As yet the Canadian government has expressed zero interest in gaining that custody. If they did, I suppose Treason (if nothing else) would be something they could charge him with. But, even if found guilty of such, he would not hang or be shot but confined instead. I suspect the court would take into account his age at the time of his treasonable acts, the circumstances that led up to his treasonable acts, the effect of his treasonable acts and last but not least his pretrial confinement and treatment. I suspect, that even if found guilty of treason he would serve one or two more years at most.

I think it refers to this part of the code (additional to what ArmyGuy posted above): Criminal Code PART II: OFFENCES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER Treason and other Offences against the Queen’s Authority and Person Canadian citizen 3) Notwithstanding subsection (1) or (2), a Canadian citizen or a person who owes allegiance to Her Majesty in right of Canada, a) commits high treason if, while in or out of Canada, he does anything mentioned in subsection (1); or commits treason if, while in or out of Canada, he does anything mentioned in subsection (2). Overt act 4) Where it is treason to conspire with any person, the act of conspiring is an overt act of treason. Legal Information Institute

and as a NATO country we could have limited ourselves to something we could have effectively supported...much like many other NATO countries have done. But we did and the Liberals are to blame for that. There is no requirement that Canada continue in a role that it has not the wherewithall to complete. We have and that is the responsiblity of the Cons and Libs. I will admit that the Fat Lady has yet to sing, and things may work out despite the fact the CAF is underequiped and undermanned for the role in wich they have been assigned. The conservative party are not the innocent babes they like to make themselves out to be. They were the official opposition at the time Martin committed the CAF to its role. They gladly and happily supported that decision . They were not shocked to discover what that mission was when they took over the government. All the while knowing full well that the CAF was not properly equipped for the job. Both the libs and cons are as guilty as sin. Harper, knowing full well how underequiped the CAF was, plagerized a speach encouraging the government of the day in 2003 to commit those same underequiped AF to combat operations in Iraq....I know, that wasnt his fault, that was the fault of the Liberal Party.