Mulcair can't pay off his mortgage

[Argus]

Now I agree there can be any number of reasons why you would remortgage your house. But 11 times? This is a couple who have always had a comfortable family income, yet in thirty years he has made no progress in paying off his mortgage. In fact, his original mortgage of $58,000 is now $300,000. He has no equity in his house after thirty years of living in it? That doesn't suggest to me that this is a man who has any ability to manage his finances. It also suggest to me this guy doesn't think or care much about how much debt he's in, or worry about what happens if interest rates rise or his income falls. So why would we think he would handle Canada's finances any better than his own?

NDP leader remortgages house 11 times

[punked]

Let the personal attacks begin. I remember quite a few Conservative members around here were pretty angry when old Vic's public divorce papers were tweeted by a Liberals. Heck our government even went so far as to spend our tax payer dollars to try and track down who did it.

I look forward to hearing about all MP's finances. Something tells me we wont hear about anyone else's though.

As for him paying off his mortgage I'll wait for an official response. I'll tell there are plenty of things in life which would make me take out a higher mortgage on my home. As well many people as their housing value increases take the money out now and use it now before they grow to old to use it.

Edited May 27, 2012 by punked

[Keepitsimple]

It's clearly odd given the continous income of the family but there may very well be valid reasons for it - and if Mulcair was a backbencher, he should expect that it could be kept private. But the man has now willingly stepped into the spotlight. He aspires to be Prome Minister and lead the country. If he doesn't answer the questions now, someone will eventually do it for him. He is now a target - just like Harper was when he was in opposition - and he's still a target. Look at poor Rob Ford with the college repoprters at the Star lurking around every corner. It's a tough job Tom, and you'll have to answer questions.

[socialist]

It's clearly odd given the continous income of the family but there may very well be valid reasons for it - and if Mulcair was a backbencher, he should expect that it could be kept private. But the man has now willingly stepped into the spotlight. He aspires to be Prome Minister and lead the country. If he doesn't answer the questions now, someone will eventually do it for him. He is now a target - just like Harper was when he was in opposition - and he's still a target. Look at poor Rob Ford with the college repoprters at the Star lurking around every corner. It's a tough job Tom, and you'll have to answer questions.

look at the despereate cons trying to dig up dirt on Mr. Mulcair. mulcair will have a bi job ahead of him in 2015 when he is pm and has to clean up the mess of 10 years of cons.

[Wild Bill]

look at the despereate cons trying to dig up dirt on Mr. Mulcair. mulcair will have a bi job ahead of him in 2015 when he is pm and has to clean up the mess of 10 years of cons.

Well, I'll bet you 2 beer that he will never be PM! I just don't think the federal NDP could attract enough votes from Ontario westward to make that possible. Particularly here in Ontario. Maybe if Bob Rae got hit by a bus! There are just too many older voters that remember his NDP provincial government. You can try to defend it all you want but the plain truth is that it would be easier to get Mulroney re-elected than to get Ontario voters to give the NDP another chance, either federally or provincially.

In 20 years or so enough of them will have died off and it will be a new ball game but for right now, I just can't see it! It is an emotionally based sentiment. You can't try to use reason to change people's minds when their hearts were stung so badly. Overall one could argue it's not even a fair sentiment but again, that doesn't matter.

It IS a bit of an ad hominem attack, very similar to those on Rob Ford as Mayor of Toronto made every day by the Left! Still, there is a grain of truth to it. Mulcair has repeatedly made suggested financial policy statements. 11 times for his mortage??!! It is perfectly logical to question his ability to understand and handle financial problems. Keep in mind that the NDP has ALWAYS been vulnerable to attacks on how they would manage financesl! They always have great plans for how to spend money but they get very vague on how to produce it. Usually they just blow those questions off with talk of more taxes on the rich, taking it for granted that somehow the rich are genetically programmed to keep producing wealth no matter how much you tax them and they will NEVER quit or leave the country! It is useless to point out that there have been some NDP provincial governments that did quite well with finances. As always, they have to fight perceptions based on years of rhetoric from NDP opposition parties and of course, Bob Rae's Ontario term.

Again it is not entirely fair, since Mulcair would PM and not finance minister. One would expect he would choose someone else who would be good at the job.

Yet once again, that doesn't matter. In politics, perception is reality.

Edited May 27, 2012 by Wild Bill

[punked]

Well, I'll bet you 2 beer that he will never be PM! I just don't think the federal NDP could attract enough votes from Ontario westward to make that possible. Particularly here in Ontario. Maybe if Bob Rae got hit by a bus! There are just too many older voters that remember his NDP provincial government. You can try to defend it all you want but the plain truth is that it would be easier to get Mulroney re-elected than to get Ontario voters to give the NDP another chance, either federally or provincially.

In 20 years or so enough of them will have died off and it will be a new ball game but for right now, I just can't see it! It is an emotionally based sentiment. You can't try to use reason to change people's minds when their hearts were stung so badly. Overall one could argue it's not even a fair sentiment but again, that doesn't matter.

It IS a bit of an ad hominem attack, very similar to those on Rob Ford as Mayor of Toronto made every day by the Left! Still, there is a grain of truth to it. Mulcair has repeatedly made suggested financial policy statements. 11 times for his mortage??!! It is perfectly logical to question his ability to understand and handle financial problems. Keep in mind that the NDP has ALWAYS been vulnerable to attacks on how they would manage financesl! They always have great plans for how to spend money but they get very vague on how to produce it. Usually they just blow those questions off with talk of more taxes on the rich, taking it for granted that somehow the rich are genetically programmed to keep producing wealth no matter how much you tax them and they will NEVER quit or leave the country! It is useless to point out that there have been some NDP provincial governments that did quite well with finances. As always, they have to fight perceptions based on years of rhetoric from NDP opposition parties and of course, Bob Rae's Ontario term.

Again it is not entirely fair, since Mulcair would PM and not finance minister. One would expect he would choose someone else who would be good at the job.

Yet once again, that doesn't matter. In politics, perception is reality.

Bob Rea he is a Liberal. If people on Ontario are scared of him they should be voting for the NDP. I hope Conservatives keep repeating Bob Rea all the way to the election.

[mentalfloss]

Can't say I give two poops, but somehow the media will spin it to make it sound like the guy is bad with money and dutch disease and greece and wmds.

[Newfoundlander]

So Jack Layton lived in social housing and Tom Mulcair can't pay off a little mortgage, interesting.

[punked]

Can't say I give two poops, but somehow the media will spin it to make it sound like the guy is bad with money and dutch disease and greece and wmds.

Lets be fair a few years ago he lost a law suit for more then hundred thousand dollars because he dared say a Parti Quebecois Minster was influence peddling. We are learning right now though through the Quebec Prob he may very well have been right but the proof at the time was circumstantial. Sounds like a guy willing to stick his guns and mortgage his house then be bullied.

[punked]

So Jack Layton lived in social housing and Tom Mulcair can't pay off a little mortgage, interesting.

I am going to say this right here right now. You are lair who is repeating a lie that has been debunked many times about Jack Layton.

Jack Layton lived in a housing Co-op where he paid MORE THEN MARKET VALUE in downtown Toronto so those who could only afford less could live also live in downtown Toronto. You repeating a lie that is so throughly debunked makes you look like a hack.

[Newfoundlander]

Lets be fair a few years ago he lost a law suit for more then hundred thousand dollars because he dared say a Parti Quebecois Minster was influence peddling. We are learning right now though through the Quebec Prob he may very well have been right but the proof at the time was circumstantial. Sounds like a guy willing to stick his guns and mortgage his house then be bullied.

That explains why he probably did it then but what about the other 10 times?

[Newfoundlander]

I am going to say this right here right now. You are lair who is repeating a lie that has been debunked many times about Jack Layton.

Jack Layton lived in a housing Co-op where he paid MORE THEN MARKET VALUE in downtown Toronto so those who could only afford less could live also live in downtown Toronto. You repeating a lie that is so throughly debunked makes you look like a hack.

So he lived in housing that someone of low income could have lived in for a lot less then what he was paying?

[punked]

So he lived in housing that someone of low income could have lived in for a lot less then what he was paying?

No. The way a housing Co-Op works is people who believe in a mixed housing neighborhood get together. Those who can pay more (like Jack Layton) pay more so those who can't pay more will pay less because someone else paid more. So if Layton wasn't there then another family who could not afford to live in Downtown Toronto wouldn't have been able to live there because they would not have been subsidized by others like Layton.

I see why you hate the NDP so much though. You are a very misinformed and still repeating lies which have been debunked 10 years ago. I would think you would do some research on your own to make up your own opinions but you just hear talking points and repeat them.

Edited May 27, 2012 by punked

[Argus]

Lets be fair a few years ago he lost a law suit for more then hundred thousand dollars because he dared say a Parti Quebecois Minster was influence peddling. We are learning right now though through the Quebec Prob he may very well have been right but the proof at the time was circumstantial. Sounds like a guy willing to stick his guns and mortgage his house then be bullied.

No, it sounds like a fool who doesn't realize you can't accuse people of criminal actions without evidence.

Btw, Stockwell Day was a similar fool.

[bleeding heart]

No. The way a housing Co-Op works is people who believe in a mixed housing neighborhood get together. Those who can pay more (like Jack Layton) pay more so those who can't pay more will pay less because someone else paid more. So if Layton wasn't there then another family who could not afford to live in Downtown Toronto wouldn't have been able to live there because they would not have been subsidized by others like Layton.

I see why you hate the NDP so much though. You are a very misinformed and still repeating lies which have been debunked 10 years ago. I would think you would do some research on your own to make up your own opinions but you just hear talking points and repeat them.

No good deed goes unpunished.

[punked]

That explains why he probably did it then but what about the other 10 times?

What about them? I have refinanced 3 times over the last 10 years as interest rates have gone down, and so has our government (in a way) it means you pay less over the long run being locked into a new much lower interest rate (that is if it is done right). That makes someone good with money not bad with it. This article doesn't say why he has done what he has done but it isn't unusual.

[Newfoundlander]

No. The way a housing Co-Op works is people who believe in a mixed housing neighborhood get together. Those who can pay more (like Jack Layton) pay more so those who can't pay more will pay less because someone else paid more. So if Layton wasn't there then another family who could not afford to live in Downtown Toronto wouldn't have been able to live there because they would not have been subsidized by others like Layton.

I see why you hate the NDP so much though. You are a very misinformed and still repeating lies which have been debunked 10 years ago. I would think you would do some research on your own to make up your own opinions but you just hear talking points and repeat them.

Well that was nice of him, so why did he decide not to help others live there after the media found out he was living in the co-op?

[punked]

No, it sounds like a fool who doesn't realize you can't accuse people of criminal actions without evidence.

Btw, Stockwell Day was a similar fool.

What if they are criminals though? Seems here Mulcair is being accused of being bad with money with no evidence so where is that line again?

[Newfoundlander]

What about them? I have refinanced 3 times over the last 10 years as interest rates have gone down, and so has our government (in a way) it means you pay less over the long run being locked into a new much lower interest rate (that is if it is done right). That makes someone good with money not bad with it. This article doesn't say why he has done what he has done but it isn't unusual.

I guess we'll wait for his response on why he decided to have a 300,000 mortgage instead of a $58,000 one.

[Argus]

Let the personal attacks begin.

I don't think of it as a personal attack. As I said above, politicians go to great lengths to hide everything about themselves nowadays, and what they think, and what they believe. Every word and action is governed by spin-doctors and media analysts to appeal to targeted voting segments. I want to know more about the people in charge, and what they do in their private lives might, in certain cases, be an indication of what they'd do while in office.

It might be considered unfair to talk about Vic Toews cheating on his wife, but you know what, it could also be an indication of what kind of a person he is. I want to know if someone is cheating on their wife, if someone is unable to handle their personal finances, if someone is a rotten neighbour. I want to know what kind of a person this is before I vote for them. BEcause they sure as hell aren't going to tell me what kind of a person they are if they can possibly avoid it.

As for Mulcair, the big complaint about the NDP is that they don't place much importance on fiscal restraint and managing budgets. If Mulcair is incapable of managing his own personal finances, or simply doesn't care how much debt he runs up or how fast he repays it - if ever ,that's certainly something I think I, as a voter, should be including in my assessment of his likely performance as an MP, or in this case, a Prime Minister.

Edited May 27, 2012 by Argus

[punked]

Well that was nice of him, so why did he decide not to help others live there after the media found out he was living in the co-op?

Because he and his Wife Olivia could not longer live in a three bedroom house considering they had to take care of both their mothers and needed a bigger place so they bought a house.

Here is a question for you. When this story arose in 1990 and the Toronto co-op board came out an explained that Layton was paying more then a normal person would so other's of less fortune could live there why was that not good enough for you then? Seriously it is 23 years later and anyone who actually does any research would know your argument makes no sense.

[Argus]

What if they are criminals though? Seems here Mulcair is being accused of being bad with money with no evidence so where is that line again?

You have to be able to prove it before you spout off to the press. I don't think much of the honesty or integrity of Ottawa's mayor or the people around them, but I'm not about to come out and say Jim Watson is a crook - even if I think he is.

The evidence that Mulcair might be bad with money and unable to handle debt is remortgaging his house 11 times. He can now refute that by pointing out his reasons.

[Argus]

What about them? I have refinanced 3 times over the last 10 years as interest rates have gone down, and so has our government (in a way) it means you pay less over the long run being locked into a new much lower interest rate (that is if it is done right). That makes someone good with money not bad with it. This article doesn't say why he has done what he has done but it isn't unusual.

Nice try. Doesn't work, though. He didn't refinance at a lower rate. He remortgaged. That's why an original mortgage of $58,000 is now a mortgage of $300,000.

You've owned your house for ten years? Do you have no equity in it after all that time?

[punked]

I guess we'll wait for his response on why he decided to have a 300,000 mortgage instead of a $58,000 one.

Again here is a case where you don't understand what is going on. It isn't a choice of a 58,000 dollar mortgage or a 300,000 one. All we know is Mulcair started with a 58,000 Mortgage and now has a 300,000 dollar one. How he got there and why he got there we don't know. Nor do we need to know.

[punked]

Nice try. Doesn't work, though. He didn't refinance at a lower rate. He remortgaged. That's why an original mortgage of $58,000 is now a mortgage of $300,000.

You've owned your house for ten years? Do you have no equity in it after all that time?

Again you do not know how he got to where is. Although I will tell you what there are plenty of things in this world worth more to me then my house and there are plenty of things that would make me re-mortgage my house.