Job Numbers Are Out

[blueblood]

Oh, the do as I say not what I legislate argument.

That's a good one for them to get prepped up.

Except they've been bitching about the avg Canadians indebtedness for more than a year. They slashed rates to try and stimulate production and unfortunately people decided to get drunk on cheap money.

I wonder how those homeowners are going to feel about the Canada bank act when interest rates rise and their house values drop like a rock as your predicting... And you know some of the "goodies" in there pertaining to being over leveraged, can't make payments, and other things pertaining to property value decreasing.

[msj]

Except they've been bitching about the avg Canadians indebtedness for more than a year. They slashed rates to try and stimulate production and unfortunately people decided to get drunk on cheap money.

I wonder how those homeowners are going to feel about the Canada bank act when interest rates rise and their house values drop like a rock as your predicting... And you know some of the "goodies" in there pertaining to being over leveraged, can't make payments, and other things pertaining to property value decreasing.

You are mixing up what the government has control over.

The BoC sets interest rates.

The government of Canada can change the rules so that 10% or more is required for a down payment.

They can also crack down and prevent banks from offering effective 0% down mortgages.

In fact, if you have been paying attention to Mark Carney for the past year he has essentially been asking them to do this since this is their job.

[BubberMiley]

Meanwhile, the employment figures in socialist NDP Manitoba continue to improve, despite the wet blanket the Tories have been for the rest of Canada.

[msj]

Meanwhile, the employment figures in socialist NDP Manitoba continue to improve, despite the wet blanket the Tories have been for the rest of Canada.

What can we say, those socialists just know how to create jobs!

[blueblood]

What can we say, those socialists just know how to create jobs!

Ho hum conservative Saskatchewan leads the nation in unemployment

My link

And the sask party is polling at about 60%

My link

Ho hum bubber's Tory wet blanket claim has been shot full of holes

Ho hum

Edited November 6, 2011 by blueblood

[blueblood]

You are mixing up what the government has control over.

The BoC sets interest rates.

The government of Canada can change the rules so that 10% or more is required for a down payment.

They can also crack down and prevent banks from offering effective 0% down mortgages.

In fact, if you have been paying attention to Mark Carney for the past year he has essentially been asking them to do this since this is their job.

Ah but the minister of finance can trump the governor if he so desires. (hasn't happened yet). If the minister of finance wants interest rates to be higher, they shall be higher.

My link

The problem of cheap money and the Cmhc guaranteeing everything is a far bigger moral hazard than mortgage regulations.

Mccleans

And like I've said, when the crap hits the fan, those Canada bank Act regulations are going to really sting the borrowers.

Don't know if you posted this link, but it cites low interest rates as a big culprit. So we've had ridiculous housing growth over the last decade under Tory and liberal govts, fueled by low interest and the Cmhc backing those mortgages. Sounds a lot like our friends down south. But you make a fair point, if we are going to have gov't interfere with a central bank arbitrarily setting interest rates and guAranteeing the mortgages, then there has to be regulations the other way dictating how this cheap, guaranteed money is doled out.

Economic analyst

[punked]

Stimulus isn't supposed to have lasting effects, other than improved infrastructure. Stimulus is simply a stop gap to help the economy coast through difficult times. Canada should really be out of difficult times now, but because of outside factors, we're not doing as well as we otherwise would be.

FDR had to "stimulate" his economy for 5-8 years, and the one year he pulled back because people kept repeating what you are saying they went back to depression. Stimulus should be pulled back slowly not all at once you end up in a negative feed back cycle.

[Smallc]

Because of what I'm saying? What are you talking about? And no, as long as the economy is growing, stimulus isn't required.

[Topaz]

Good point, PIK! The usual suspects were jumping all over themselves to dump on Harper, totally ignoring any role of Ontario's provincial government. Those figures released show that the big problem is in Ontario. Harper gets no credit for anything good in the rest of the country and is expected to take all the blame for Ontario, while Dalton gets off scot-free.

Can those "suspects" spell "partisan"?

If Harper takes credit when a province does increase employment than he can take the blame when a provinces loses them! Premier's also are blamed its just that the Federal government, Harper, is always in our faces.

[Topaz]

Ah but the minister of finance can trump the governor if he so desires. (hasn't happened yet). If the minister of finance wants interest rates to be higher, they shall be higher.

My link

The problem of cheap money and the Cmhc guaranteeing everything is a far bigger moral hazard than mortgage regulations.

Mccleans

And like I've said, when the crap hits the fan, those Canada bank Act regulations are going to really sting the borrowers.

Don't know if you posted this link, but it cites low interest rates as a big culprit. So we've had ridiculous housing growth over the last decade under Tory and liberal govts, fueled by low interest and the Cmhc backing those mortgages. Sounds a lot like our friends down south. But you make a fair point, if we are going to have gov't interfere with a central bank arbitrarily setting interest rates and guAranteeing the mortgages, then there has to be regulations the other way dictating how this cheap, guaranteed money is doled out.

Economic analyst

I listened to the Governor in committee, and he said right now they can't rise interest rates because of the household debt, they could put alot of Canadians in deep financial trouble with their mortgages and credit lines and bring the Canadian economy into more problems. Both, the US and Canada have said it will be at least 2013 before it would rise them unless, the economy turned around.

[msj]

Ah but the minister of finance can trump the governor if he so desires. (hasn't happened yet). If the minister of finance wants interest rates to be higher, they shall be higher.

My link

And why would he do that when raising down payment limits and disallowing banks from giving "rebates" would be more effective?

In fact, by your own admission, the government now has to wear the implications of the "emergency low interest rates" Canada has been under for so long too.

[Smallc]

I still don't think there's all that much to worry about. Economists don't seem all that concerned with the state of things at this point. The US weakness is somewhat of a concern, but it's most likely manageable.

[blueblood]

FDR had to "stimulate" his economy for 5-8 years, and the one year he pulled back because people kept repeating what you are saying they went back to depression. Stimulus should be pulled back slowly not all at once you end up in a negative feed back cycle.

Giggle.

Hoover and FDR caused the recession by trying to prop up prices/wages instead of letting the market correct itself like it did in 1920-21. They should have let interest rates rise and encouraged people to save their money and let people enjoy lower prices for the goods they buy. It's funny for someone who sticks up for the little guy, you should be happy that prices should fall because high prices benefit mainly the 1% your talking about. We had cheap money and everyone and their dog was plowing it into the stock market, and companies who normally wouldn't have had a high stock price based on performance got to enjoy a high stock price, unfortunately that created a bubble and when people couldn't make the cheap money payments and the inflow of cash was gone, stock prices dropped and wiped out all that money. Much like the dot com bubble. And to make things worse we have FDR trying to prop prices up by stimulating the economy and "creating" jobs that were not productive - just work for the sake of work. If you think FDR had the right way of getting out of the depression, perhaps you'll like Krugman's idea of getting out of this mess better:

And for the sake of sanity we have an opposing view:

And if your thinking war is the best stimulus, why haven't all the nations of the world put all their navies in the pacific ocean, evacuated the crews and proceeded to blow up all the ships? Just think of all the jobs that would be created to build all those ships again!

[blueblood]

And why would he do that when raising down payment limits and disallowing banks from giving "rebates" would be more effective?

In fact, by your own admission, the government now has to wear the implications of the "emergency low interest rates" Canada has been under for so long too.

Because raising interest rates would be far more effective in getting people to quit this maddening borrowing, plus it benefits the bondholders and those with interest paying savings accounts.

No, they're both at fault, the boc for wanting low interest rates and the gov't for rubber-stamping it. Much like a pregnancy, both parties are to blame.

[Smallc]

Interest rates have to remain low because of the weakness in global markets. There's nothing that can be done at the moment.

[msj]

Because raising interest rates would be far more effective in getting people to quit this maddening borrowing, plus it benefits the bondholders and those with interest paying savings accounts.

No, they're both at fault, the boc for wanting low interest rates and the gov't for rubber-stamping it. Much like a pregnancy, both parties are to blame.

Both parties may be to blame but given that one party has ultimate control that one party also gets ultimate responsibility (and ultimate blame).

[msj]

Interest rates have to remain low because of the weakness in global markets. There's nothing that can be done at the moment.

Oh, I agree.

However, the government should never have allowed 0/40 or even the current 5/30 mortgages to rear their ugly heads and encourage Canadians to binge on debt like our American cousins.

In fact, if the government really want to have Canadians put a down payment on their home then they should not allow "cash back" mortgages at all.

Yet they do allow them.

[blueblood]

Interest rates have to remain low because of the weakness in global markets. There's nothing that can be done at the moment.

Yes there is, let them rise and let's take our medicine. it's like a hangover, it sucks for a while, but once the booze is purged from the system, the person feels better.

The problem that I see is that people in general don't like how long it takes the market to correct and allocate resources. As a result they elect people who will try and manipulate the market so it benefits them in the short term, but is in fact unsustainable. Msj's Canadian housing bubble is a good example of this.

As far as I'm concerned "winter's coming"' now it can be a short winter or a long winter. All this stimulus spending is going to make it a long winter. Had interest rates been allowed to rise, how many Canadians would be buying 400,000+ houses on 50,000 income with obscene interest payments right off the bat and no teaser rates.

[punked]

Because of what I'm saying? What are you talking about? And no, as long as the economy is growing, stimulus isn't required.

But if you take the Stimulus dollars out the Economy is shrinking.

[jacee]

Canada's unemployment rate rose to 7.3 per cent in October as the country lost a total of 54,000 jobs, Statistics Canada said Friday. The economy shed 71,700 full- time jobs, while part-time employment grew by 17,700.

The October job losses were a surprise, as the consensus forecast of economists had been for employment to rise by 15,000.

Last month's decline in employment also wiped out the bulk of the gain of 61,000 jobs in September. It was the largest jobs decline in almost three years, dating all the way back to March 2009, during the depths of the recession.

"While job losses in any given month are by no means rare, losses of this magnitude are extremely rare, aside from recessionary periods—the last such hefty job drop outside of recession was in September 1996," said BMO Capital Markets deputy chief economist Douglas Porter in a commentary. Most of the decline last month occurred in manufacturing — which lost 48,000 jobs in the month.

I thought it might be good to look at the actual numbers of families affected ... 71,700 fulltime wage earners out of work.

If they all end up on welfare, that's well over $70m PER MONTH and at least $1b PER YEAR.

And the G20 1%'rs want the Canadian government wants to implement an 'austerity' agenda to cut back on social services?!

It's f'ng ridiculous ... that's too kind ... it's disgusting. :angry:

And if this is "a surprise", then I guess we really can't trust what the economists and government say, can we?

Edited November 6, 2011 by jacee

[blueblood]

Canada's unemployment rate rose to 7.3 per cent in October as the country lost a total of 54,000 jobs, Statistics Canada said Friday. The economy shed 71,700 full- time jobs, while part-time employment grew by 17,700.

The October job losses were a surprise, as the consensus forecast of economists had been for employment to rise by 15,000.

Last month's decline in employment also wiped out the bulk of the gain of 61,000 jobs in September. It was the largest jobs decline in almost three years, dating all the way back to March 2009, during the depths of the recession.

"While job losses in any given month are by no means rare, losses of this magnitude are extremely rare, aside from recessionary periods—the last such hefty job drop outside of recession was in September 1996," said BMO Capital Markets deputy chief economist Douglas Porter in a commentary. Most of the decline last month occurred in manufacturing — which lost 48,000 jobs in the month.

I thought it might be good to look at the actual numbers of families affected ... 71,700 fulltime wage earners out of work.

If they all end up on welfare, that's well over $70m PER MONTH and at least $1b PER YEAR.

And the G20 1%'rs want the Canadian government wants to implement an 'austerity' agenda to cut back on social services?!

It's f'ng ridiculous ... that's too kind ... it's disgusting. :angry:

And if this is "a surprise", then I guess we really can't trust what the economists and government say, can we?

Jobs out west, why don't they want them?

[Michael Hardner]

And the G20 1%'rs want the Canadian government wants to implement an 'austerity' agenda to cut back on social services?!

It's f'ng ridiculous ... that's too kind ... it's disgusting. :angry:

And if this is "a surprise", then I guess we really can't trust what the economists and government say, can we?

We are to blame. We let specialists play the game on our behalf. The public now wants more accountability and more knowledge. This is a good thing, but the players don't want to let us play with them.

[cybercoma]

What's funny to me is that jobs numbers come out and we blame world economies, the end of stimulus, and myriad external factors for the lack of jobs. However, when ready, willing, and able-bodied workers can't find jobs, they're lazy and unmotivated and it's their fault. Methinks some people's views on labour are a touch hypocritical.

[bush_cheney2004]

We are to blame. We let specialists play the game on our behalf. The public now wants more accountability and more knowledge. This is a good thing, but the players don't want to let us play with them.

That's because they don't want to keep score, and accept winning and losing.

[blueblood]

What's funny to me is that jobs numbers come out and we blame world economies, the end of stimulus, and myriad external factors for the lack of jobs. However, when ready, willing, and able-bodied workers can't find jobs, they're lazy and unmotivated and it's their fault. Methinks some people's views on labour are a touch hypocritical.

It's that they won't go to where the jobs are and won't adjust their compensation to economic reality. As a result we have u employment.