Jump to content


Senior Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Moonbox

  1. I'm not really angry about this. I couldn't care less really. You can't deny that the Green Party is probably done after this though. At least the NDP has an independent platform and takes shots at everyone. It truly is a real political party. The Green Party under May, however, has so completely aligned herself with another party that it can hardly even be looked upon as such anymore. By basically agreeing with everything the Liberals have said, May has reversed ANY accomplishments she made by getting in the Leadership debate and put the party enormously backwards on top of this. I doubt it will even continue to exist.
  2. The Toronto Star is and always had been my very least newspaper in all of Canada. It's so unobjective about virtually EVERYTHING I hold it in utter contempt. At least there are anti-Harper stories in the Globe and the Sun etc. The Toronto Star is pro liberals on EVERYTHING and always has been. It's a pandering newspaper and it's a complete joke.
  3. I wrote a post explaining the 25 billion dollar deal. You don't have a clue how it works and I don't expect you to, but don't go around pulling your hair out at something you don't even begin to understand. It's not a bailout in any way, shape or form. I cannot even stress how much it is not a bailout.
  4. No this is a bald-faced lie. There is not an economist in Canada or the world who is supporting this. This is 100% total and complete bullshit. The Green Shift IS going to tax companies' on carbon emissions. That's right. They WILL get tax reductions on profit. That's right as well. The plan is revenue neutral in terms of money going to the GOVERNMENT. What the Liberals fail to tell you is that a VASTLY unfair amount of the tax dollars collected from carbon taxes will be going to the poor. Economists generally agree that business and anything but the very poorest households will only get 66% of every dollar extra they pay from the plan back in income tax cuts. The remaining 33% is income redistribution towards the poor. I think Harper has been pretty clear in that he's not making the environment a priority over the economy. Dion can't even speak without a teleprompter in front of him. His economic 'plan' is that he will start the 30-50 plan. That's the plan that the Liberals have for the economy, that's for 30 days. The 30-50 plan is for the economy, because it's 30-50.....Wait can I start again?
  5. No what I said was right. CMHC doesn't finance mortgages at all. The banks do that. Selling mortgages is part of my job but I won't begrudge you that. You're sort of right in that CMHC provides default insurance for people who don't have enough downpayment for a conventional mortgage. Conventional nowadays is also 80% or below now. It used to be 75%. Anyways over 80% financing is considered a risky mortgage and the banks are basically required by law banks to purchase default insurance on any mortgage financing over 80%. The client pays a default insurance premium for every % point they finance over 80% and if the mortgage goes bad CMHC pays the money back to the bank. There are private companies that do the same thing but most high-ratio mortgages in Canada are insured by CMHC This part is a little fuzzy for me. What I understood from the deal was that Flaherty is selling bonds and the proceeds of the bonds will purchase the mortgage deals. The proceeds from the mortgage deals will pay off the bond amounts owing so unless all of these mortgages go bad then the government will make good money from this. CMHC has cash on hand to pay off any of these bad mortgages anyways as that's it's purpose in the first place.
  6. Elizabeth May has effectively killed the Green Party. Her party members are furious with her and Green supporters will never feel it's worth it again to throw their vote away at a party that's just going to give up and encourage voters to vote for another party. What the heck was the point? We all knew Green's wouldn't win the election.
  7. From what I've read 90% or more of you have no idea what they're talking about with the $25B CMHC deal that just took place and you somehow think that it's a bailout akin to what happened in the US. Somehow a lot of you think that the deal proves that this proves the IMF etc are full of crap when they said Canada's banks are the strongest in then world. Let me briefly explain how this deal works to you. CMHC, first, is a crown corporation that provides the vast majority of mortgage default insurance to Canadian banks for people with high-ratio (over 80% financed) mortgages. If a high-ratio mortgage defaults, CMHC pays the amount owing. CMHC has purchased $25 Billion worth of the lowest risk, best performing mortgages in Canada, in order to free up cash for the banks so they can continue to lend cheaply without having to jack interest rates way up and make loans harder to get. Why did they have to do that? Because there is not enough liquidity in worldwide financial markets for the banks to finance their lending operations as cheaply as they have previously been able to. Without this plan, banks would have to get stingey with their lending and make mortgages, loans and lines of credit harder and more expensive to get. This would have caused the economy to slow. This was an infusion of cash that will ultimately cost the tax payers nothing and will likely end up making the government money. The banks were willing to take the deal because they'll be able to make more profit on the new money they will be lending out than they would have with the mortgages they sold with low interest rate spreads. The banks have all raised their rates recently despite the central bank lowering interest rates. You can't get a below-prime mortgage ANYWHERE in Canada anymore and new secured lines of credit will cost people a full 1% more in interest than they did a week ago. If CMHC hadn't purchased the mortgages, the rates would be even higher. The difference between this deal and the 'bailout' in the US is that first it was not a straight out purchase or 'nationalization' of our banking industry. Rather than basically take over the banks, CMHC bought out some of the banks' well-performing investments. Not only that, this deal was meant to be an infusion of cash to help nudge the economy forward and soften a slowdown. In the US it was a full-on bailout to prevent the collapse of the banking industry at large, which isn't even conceivable right now in Canada
  8. CMHC bought the mortgage deals. It's a lot different than a government bailout. This will not cost tax payers anything. I won't expect or ask you to understand how it works, but feel free to form an opinion without doing so.
  9. I just want to add Jdobbin that I'm not arguing that the markets don't blow themselves up once or twice a decade, but some of your points sometimes are just way out there.
  10. Jdobbin you argue like a child. You contradict yourself so much it's not even funny. You complain and complain about the financial crisis and you whine about how Harper is somehow magically the cause of it, yet Canadian federal monetary policy has PROVEN itself the best in the world. Given that the natural caution of the Canadian Banks has almost entirely sheltered us from a collapse of banking systems seen almost EVERYWHERE else in the world, I find it hilarious that now you're trying to argue against their tightening up of lending guidelines. You're so completely and totally ignorant of both how the economy works and how foolish you make yourself look with arguments that contradict each other, I don't even know what to say to you anymore. There are some really blind posters out there but at least you can understand how and why they feel the way they do. I understand a low wage union member voting NDP because it's in their best interest to. I understand Greenthumb's hate for the Tories given his position on legalizing drugs. You on the other hand, I can't even begin to understand. You criticize Harper on spending yet the Martin Liberals spent 95% as much AND the Dion Liberals are proposing to increase spending by a GREAT DEAL MORE. You criticize Harper for the financial crisis yet you cannot come up with a SINGLE specific criticism of what he's done to make it worse and you ignore the fact that we're better off right now than everyone else. You then go ahead and criticize the banks for exhibiting the natural caution that has SAVED them from a banking collapse! Plugging your ears, closing your eyes and humming loudly does NOT make you right! Try for a change to allow what some of us are writing to actually sink in!
  11. I know exactly what you're talking about. I'm a Canadian conservative, but an American conservative would make me look like Jack Layton. In fact, I've tried to argue a few generally accepted Canadian idealogies on American forums and been met with basically frothing americans telling me I'm a dirty evil communist.
  12. Jdobbin just to throw your own tactics right back in your face, please cite specifically where the National Post says this is all Dion's fault. I have an inkling that you're distorting what they wrote but if you can prove it to me then I'll agree they're full of BS. You just deconstructed my post where I specifically said it was NOT all Dion's fault. I said he was making it worse by being an alarmist. Once again, way to ignore everything I said and take the argument in a completely different and ill-conceived direction. I know that there is a TON of mom and pop's selling off. My father liquidated his equity in September for over $200,000. He's not a particularly wealthy guy. He's just been saving a long time. Yes, I know that's testimonial and you can take that for what you want but if even if a TINY fraction of the population is doing this the sell offs amount to the tens of billions. 10,000 people in a population of 30 something million selling off the same amount as my father accounts for about 2 billion dollars. 0.0003% of the population can cause a 2 billion dollar drop in invested equity. Most people don't have that kind of equity but what if 0.003% sell off 20,000? Same result. We're probably look at something out of decimals for the percentage of small investors selling off so you do the math. The money out there is HUGE.
  13. Well that mistake rests squarely on my poor understanding of the American political system. Either way it was poor regulation, I just don't know which squabbly group of old Americans to blame.
  14. The banks have all been losing money on variable rate mortgages for at least a year now. This is because credit has been getting tight. It's not made up stuff, but we're in a way better position than the rest of the world.
  15. What you agree or disagree with Jdobbin is based entirely on your partisan view and your almost deliberate effort to remain ignorant about how the markets actually work. I work in a bank advising clients about investments on an every day basis. Yes, the institutional investors have sold a lot, but the advantage they had was that they were paying attention to what was going on and they'd already sold a lot of what they had. They contributed to the market plummeting but now the 'mom and pop' type people are jumping on the bandwagon and panicking which is pushing the sell off even further. I know this because I've been dealing with it on a daily basis for about 2.5 months. I have to constantly reassure clients that the Canadian Banks are not going to go belly up and I have to constantly reassure them that their actual deposit balances are insured. I wouldn't go as far as saying this is Dion's fault, but he and Jack Layton are being alarmists and it is definetly making things worse. They're trying to get people scared because it's politically advantageous for them to do so.
  16. I've read arguments very similar to this but usually from American political forums. I believe in free markets and capitalism but a 100% free market like you're suggesting is as bad as a central communist economy. There are a few simple reasons for this. First, smarter, wealthier and more educated people will by their very nature end up taking over the entire system and control all factors of production. A very small number of people, through guile and ruthlessness, would end up owning EVERYTHING. Rockefeller proved this without a shred of doubt. Second, monetary policy is absolutely necessary to help shelter the economy from short term shocks and fluctuations. A volatile economy is harmful to the vast majority of people as heavy cyclical fluctuations are more likely to cause job loss and displacement. Raising and lowering interest rates helps to smoothe these out. The current crisis in the US is not due to too much regulation. It's due to POOR regulation. This is not entirely Bush's fault but a large amount of blame can be laid on his administration as well as Clinton's. George W had AMPLE opportunity to fix the system before this happened. Canada is in good shape because of a heavily regulated and protected banking system. 3 of the top 10 biggest banks in North America are now Canadian banks. There is substantial talk about RBC and others acquiring banks that used to dwarf them. Relatively speaking, Canada has come away laughing.
  17. Yeah really I think asking for proof he has a hearing problem is a pretty silly thing to do. I'll believe it because I have no real reason not to. This interview however was never a question of hearing. They were both wearing mics and Dion didn't say he couldn't hear anyone. He made an attempt at answering the question, bunged it all up, and then after that decided that he didn't understand the time period they were talking about after the anchor said specifically: "What would you have ALREADY done if you were Prime Minister?" There could have been no clearer language and rest assured Dion understood the question. He just didn't understand how he would answer it.
  18. No the revenue taxes are lower. That's it. It's the very specific tax on investment that is specifically working to discourage job growth. I'm focusing 100% on this tax because it is the most important one determining whether or not it's worthwhile to invest in new facilities and equipment. These are the things that create new jobs to replace ones being lost and they also encourage companies to modernize and innovate so they're not closing down later. It also discourages companies from LEAVING because if they have a lot of money invested they're less likely to leave it all behind. Because it's a zero-sum game. Alberta and Ontario have ALWAYS had a huge fiscal imbalance in equalization payments. To give more money to one province means giving less to another province. The whole system is imbedded in the Consitution now thanks to Trudeau's retarded Canada Act which made it Atlantic Canada's and Quebec's 'right' to receive the bulk of equalization payments because of their have not status. Thank Trudeau for that, not Harper. Around the same time, the Trudeau government 'agreed' that Ontario would be excluded from receiving equalization payments altogether. How are you even trying to blame this on Harper? It's a Liberal policy which has been in place for 30 years which was also supported and maintained from 1993-2006. While I don't know enough for sure, amending the formula at this point would probably be a mess of federal and constitutional law.
  19. I'm focusing on the area that encourages companies to START NEW BUSINESS. Ontario is penalizing companies for doing so relative to pretty much everywhere in the ENTIRE WORLD. That's what I'm focusing on. I'm focusing on the simple, mathematical and indisputable fact that Ontario has by far one of the highest tax rates in te world for the actual act of investing money to create new jobs. What this does is it makes the start-up of new businesses more expensive and it actively discourages existing businesses to invest in new equipment in facilities. It makes it riskier to do business in Ontario because it means that it will taker longer to recover capital spent and more capital is being risked in the first place. Jobs are being lost. Why are we discouraging INVESTMENT in the province??? I'm asking for like the fifth time now! No argument. We have a skilled, plentiful and educated work force. We are close to the US. These are all good. The problem is that similar conditions exist across the border, in Europe and in many parts of Asia. Those high capital taxes can and DO turn investors away from Ontario. No I don't deny it! This imbalance has existed for a long time and was developed during the days of the Chretien Liberals!!!!! It was a policy of pandering to Quebec and Atlantic Canada for votes. People in Ontario were stupid enough to support the Liberals despite this! You're so unbelievably difficult to argue with because you pull the wool over your own eyes. You just brought up the fiscal imbalance of all things! Harper has been increasing transfer payments to ALL provinces and trying to make sure they ALL get a fairer share. I'll admit he's thrown some extra money at Quebec but the end result has been that ALL the provinces have more money in their pockets due to his policies. What I find hilarious Jdobbin is you try to score points by arguing completely different views on very related topics. On one hand you've always complained about Tory spending but now you're complaining because there's a fiscal imbalance and the Tories aren't sending enough money to Ontario? Make up your mind!
  20. I think it was a really really unbelievably simple question to understand. It was asked more than 3 times in the CLEAREST possible language. His english isn't good, but it is plenty good enough to debate in English. He heard the question. He began answering it. He bumbled with some stupid 30-50 plan crap and then realized he sounded like a tard so he asked to restart. Then, even AFTER his aide explained the question, he still couldn't answer. It's not like there was any complicated english. From my perspective, you can take this two ways. Either Dion really has no idea what he's going to do with the economy and got called out on it, or he's a total moron who can't understand a question phrased in the simplest of language. If Dion wasn't just avoiding a question he had no answer for then for some strange reason the simple concept of imagining what he would have done in Stephen Harper's place was completely beyond him.
  21. Manwithnoname your post was way to long to quote but it's so full of balogna I don't even know where to start.
  22. Jdobbin those taxes don't matter! The business income taxes are irrelevant when the businesses are losing money and closing up shop! We need businesses to START UP in Ontario. There are industries closing up in Ontario that are NEVER coming back because we will NEVER be able to compete with Chinese labour. We have a skilled workforce and the rest of the world knows this so again, WHY ARE WE TAXING PEOPLE MORE THAN EVERYONE ELSE FOR INVESTING IN ONTARIO??????? I CANNOT ask the question any clearer but feel clearly to skirt around the question and ignore like you usually do.
  23. There are advantage in corporate revenue taxes relative to the rest of North America yes. That advantage erodes very quickly when companies are not making money...kind of like now. A high capital tax rate discourages companies from starting NEW BUSINESS because it's more expensive to do so here. When entire industries have been shifting away from Ontario for 20 years now why are we discouraging new ones from starting?????
  24. Historically volatile?? What? What's your starting point for history? It's ALWAYS been volatile and anyone buying equity knows this. There will be huge buying opportunities moving on. The market will go back to it's historic high over the next few years and the people buying at the low point (myself included hopefully having secured lending facilities and savings for this specific market correction). The average person invests the most retarded way possible. They get excited when the market is flying high and jump on the bandwagon only to realize they bought over valued stock and then when the correction happens they jump on the panicwagon and sell when it's low. If people would keep a level head they will realize they've lost nothing until they liquidate and selling off everything right now after a 30% dip is probably not a great idea.
  25. You cited the CTF in another thread where they compared Harper's spending increases to Martin's. The difference was less than 1% higher for Harper. Go back to your CTF reference and see what they say about Dion's Liberal plan. The CTF offers scathing criticism for Dion's Green Shift and confirms what we all know. It will increase taxes for the average Canadian. I already said I like income tax cuts better. The Liberals aren't offering that. They're offering a net INCREASE in taxes.
  • Create New...