Half of Canada contributes nothing to its tax base.

[Dougie93]

7 minutes ago, cannuck said:

Canada as a country wil never go bankrupt - it has too much in real value in resource wealth.  The government, on the other hand, will some day reach a point where it is no longer credit worthy as we will not be able to service our debt.  You and I will be worm feed by then, but it is our responsibility to those left behind to right the wrongs.

I agree, although I would insert the caveat the Canada's as nations will never go bankrupt because a nation state in the Westphalian sense is not an economic entity.

The Government of Canada could very easily go bankrupt and could for all we know be bankrupt right now, as bond traders can turn on a dime and bankruptcy can be incited by them in a trading day.

The Americans might bail them out, but either way, austerity would be imposed from without and it would cripple their ability to conduct the activities that bother me, that would really chop them down to size, can't have a functioning Nanny Police State when you can't afford so many nanny police.

Still haven't answered the question as to how it is you think that I am coward tho. 

I'm not clinging to this failed state, as I said, I'm hedged for its default and prepared to take a leap of faith into status quo in the wake of it, that is the opposite of cowardice, no?

Edited January 11, 2019 by Dougie93

[cannuck]

2 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Still haven't answered the question as to how it is you think that I am coward tho. 

Because you, and anyone else intellectually capable of being objective are fighting the diversionary battle and surrendering the main prize to those who are simply steeling it by privilege.

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, cannuck said:

Because you, and anyone else intellectually capable of being objective are fighting the diversionary battle and surrendering the main prize to those who are simply steeling it by privilege.

I am privileged, pretty sure I'm one of the privileged, moreover a monarchist living in a monarchy is the height of privilege, monarchy being the ultimate expression of privilege.

Doesn't bother me, I mean, obviously, so what is it that you think I am afraid of?  You're not making any sense.

[turningrite]

8 minutes ago, cannuck said:

Canada as a country wil never go bankrupt - it has too much in real value in resource wealth.  The government, on the other hand, will some day reach a point where it is no longer credit worthy as we will not be able to service our debt.  You and I will be worm feed by then, but it is our responsibility to those left behind to right the wrongs that we have allowed to develop.

I wonder what you mean when you say "we" because we taxpayers have been paying the bills for decades for a system that provides offers us increasingly less in return. The so-called safety net, grounded in "social contract" philosophy, is pretty much dead in this country. Now, what's left of it mainly serves the interests of an entrenched subsidy class. And then there's health care, which has been eviscerated to the point that any description of the system as being "universal" is entirely euphemistic. I think the only way to fix the system is to wind down the subsidy programs and redesign the system to allocate benefits based on a formula structured on contributions and residency requirements. I no longer want to pay high taxes to get virtually nothing in return. And I suspect many other taxpayers hold similar views. I certainly don't feel I have any responsibility to "right the wrongs" I had nothing to do with creating.

[cannuck]

5 minutes ago, turningrite said:

I wonder what you mean when you say "we" because we taxpayers have been paying the bills for decades for a system that provides offers us increasingly less in return. The so-called safety net, grounded in "social contract" philosophy, is pretty much dead in this country. Now, what's left of it mainly serves the interests of an entrenched subsidy class. And then there's health care, which has been eviscerated to the point that any description of the system as being "universal" is entirely euphemistic. I think the only way to fix the system is to wind down the subsidy programs and redesign the system to allocate benefits based on a formula structured on contributions and residency requirements. I no longer want to pay high taxes to get virtually nothing in return. And I suspect many other taxpayers hold similar views. I certainly don't feel I have any responsibility to "right the wrongs" I had nothing to do with creating.

As I said, all that is merely the diversion from the main event.  The rise of Casino Capitalism was the result of giving government free reign to bestow the privilege of raping and pillaging the real economy.  Anyone who was alive and mentally capable of understanding is responsible for simply letting it happen when WE had the tools (of what was once at least some kind of functioning democracy) to prevent it.   If you drank from the speculative cup, IMHO that makes one an unaccused co-conspirator.

[Dougie93]

I drank from the speculative cup, mea culpa, market capitalism is fun and profitable from where I'm sitting, and also, no crime where I come from, all my activities are legit and above board.

Just hedge for eventualities, short as you like into the downside, then buy low, sell high, what's the big whoop?

[turningrite]

7 minutes ago, cannuck said:

If you drank from the speculative cup, IMHO that makes one an unaccused co-conspirator.

Speculative cup? You mean my fairly small RRSP mutual funds (which have declined in value in recent months) or my modest work pension, which no doubt is funded to some extent by investments in speculative markets? Did I have any real choice in this? Should I simply saved for retirement by putting money under my mattress or in the back of the freezer?

I largely agree with the points you make about the "casino" economy, which has focused on bidding up the value of existing assets rather than create new or productive wealth. The R/E sector is a good example of this. But, as individuals, what say have we had in the matter? What alternatives have our political parties offered? 

[cannuck]

11 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

I drank from the speculative cup, mea culpa, market capitalism is fun and profitable from where I'm sitting, and also, no crime where I come from, all my activities are legit and above board.

Just hedge for eventualities, short as you like into the downside, then buy low, sell high, what's the big whoop?

legal because WE granted through our governments the privilege to do so with a free ride on the tax system - thus driving "investment" money into speculative activity and not into productive financing.

The big whoop is all of that speculative gain increases the money supply, diluting the taxpayers' equity in the money supply.  No different from execs getting stock options that dillute the shareholders to nothing, but since we let ourselves get switched from a capitalist economy to a casino capitalist economy, nobody is buying equities for the dividends, just the profits from speculative trading.

[Dougie93]

You can enter the markets without regards to your RRSP, that's just a tax delaying mechanism.   There is risk, certainly, but there are ways of managing those risks, otherwise known as hedges, which allow you to sleep at night, and while they can be confounding at first, once you educate yourself as to how they work, then you realize it is a simple concept and not actually intimidating.

If you are want to hedge against currency devaluation, being the only reason to put money in a mattress, in that case I would recommend that currency be gold and instead of a mattress you just keep it in a safety deposit box.  Don't worry, the bank doesn't have access to that box, they are just renting the security of the box, what is inside remains yours no matter what.

[cannuck]

6 minutes ago, turningrite said:

Speculative cup? You mean my fairly small RRSP mutual funds (which have declined in value in recent months) or my modest work pension, which no doubt is funded to some extent by investments in speculative markets? Did I have any real choice in this? Should I simply saved for retirement by putting money under my mattress or in the back of the freezer?

I largely agree with the points you make about the "casino" economy, which has focused on bidding up the value of existing assets rather than create new or productive wealth. The R/E sector is a good example of this. But, as individuals, what say have we had in the matter? What alternatives have our political parties offered? 

It was (and IS) our responsibility to get involved in the political process to stop those things from happening.

Before you say one person can't make any difference, I can assure you that all differences start with one person.  In my own daliances into partisan politics, our very small band of shit disturbers have had VERY large impact.

[Dougie93]

13 minutes ago, cannuck said:

It was (and IS) our responsibility to get involved in the political process to stop those things from happening.

Before you say one person can't make any difference, I can assure you that all differences start with one person.  In my own daliances into partisan politics, our very small band of shit disturbers have had VERY large impact.

Fool's errand, Canadian Confederation is inherently flawed resulting in de facto dictatorship by collusion among the entrenched interests which control all three major political parties, so all roads lead to Rome, and no matter how you vote you will end up with the same result with only the most modest of tweaks at the margins.

The only vote which would count against this status quo would be to exercise your constitutional right to withdraw from Confederation as sovereign jurisdiction, under the Clarity Act.

Not saying that would be a panacea, that is only the first step, to free yourself from the effective dictatorship and scale it down to size, then the votes you cast in your new state, while still subject to a Liberal Party of some sort no doubt, would at least be free of their dictatorial rule.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Dougie93

[Hates politicians]

On 1/10/2019 at 1:12 PM, QuebecOverCanada said:

I know the thinking schemas of OP.

He is right in a way; we have to have a meritocracy and everyone should contribute to society, and in a way to have a meritocracy we have to let the rich have their money and not have them pay for everything. But the thing is, the rich receive a lot too first off and no, they don't pay for everything. And no, not everyone CAN contribute to society, so it does not surprise me a little bit that half the population doesn't pay a penny to the State; THEY HAVE NOTHING and also DEMAND NOTHING. 

And here I am, paying in the 40% bracket and demanding nothing. And we have people like OP who demand more contributions from the general population. It always means me in the end when someone makes a stupid call to tax all Canadians like that.

Half the population is indians and welfare bums. Cut off the money to them until they get a job and pay their fair share.

[turningrite]

10 minutes ago, cannuck said:

It was (and IS) our responsibility to get involved in the political process to stop those things from happening.

Before you say one person can't make any difference, I can assure you that all differences start with one person.  In my own daliances into partisan politics, our very small band of shit disturbers have had VERY large impact.

Canada's political system is controlled by an elitist cabal that does everything in its power to ensure that alternative (or "fringe", as Trudeau puts it) perspectives are silenced. Corporate globalism is at the root of our economic malaise, yet not a single major political movement exists in this country to challenge it. At least the U.S. has Trump, as inconsistent and imperfect a voice for change he might be. We, the minions, simply try to survive as best we can in a system over which in practical terms we have little or no control. We, ordinary taxpaying citizens of modest means, are the "yellow vests," as I said earlier, even if many don't realize it. Our lives and relatively marginal prosperity is continuously being squeezed for the sake of the powerful being able to say they are doing something. As long as you leave their family trusts alone, I guess, "they" are doing just fine.

[Dougie93]

Indeed, the cabals are the Socialist Nanny Police State of the left propped up by the unions and the Prohibitionist Nanny Police State of the corporations.

Perspectives are not silenced tho, I have a fringe perspective, fringe at this juncture at least, and nobody ever bothers me, don't be afraid to exercise your rights, the more you do, the more they are entrenched and inviolable.

[Argus]

2 hours ago, cannuck said:

Main street doesn't get funded now.  When you put money in Bay Street or Wall Street's hands, all it is used for is to inflate the value of the underlying equities.  Business needs to be an investment target, not a plaything for financiers.  THIS is why corporate governance has gone to hell - it is not the best business person running things, it is those who will best give the finance community gains without the bother of being a business.   Reality is: we need the US to do the same thing, but after seeing what it is like to run a branch plant economy at the whims of American masters, we really don't need THAT kind of investment at all - as it is seldom an actual investment.

You are exhibiting the kind of cowardice that lets us screw up the entire world of business and simply surrendering it to the world of finance without a fight because we are individually to frigging greedy and useless to actually be productive and too gutless to stand up for what is right.

I'm simply pointing out the very, very obvious result of doing what you plan. And it won't just be big business. Every small investor will do the same.

You see an issue, and decide the best thing to do about it is take out the nuclear weapons and smother everything in sight with them. Maybe you should consider solutions which are somewhat more nuanced.

[Argus]

47 minutes ago, turningrite said:

Canada's political system is controlled by an elitist cabal that does everything in its power to ensure that alternative (or "fringe", as Trudeau puts it) perspectives are silenced.

As long as you accept there is no conspiracy involved and this 'cabal' is more a collection of like-minded (if self-serving and idiotic) people I would tend to agree.

47 minutes ago, turningrite said:

Corporate globalism is at the root of our economic malaise, yet not a single major political movement exists in this country to challenge it.

What? You don't want a free trade deal with China!?

IMO our trade with China helps them a hell of a lot more than it helps us. and always has. International trade can work, if it's done properly, but we usually do what the corporations want. It's been a long, long time since what was good for GM was good for Canada (or America).

 

[cannuck]

47 minutes ago, Argus said:

I'm simply pointing out the very, very obvious result of doing what you plan. And it won't just be big business. Every small investor will do the same.

You see an issue, and decide the best thing to do about it is take out the nuclear weapons and smother everything in sight with them. Maybe you should consider solutions which are somewhat more nuanced.

The opening volley was bank deregulation.  When Klinton wrote off Glass-Steagall that was the last remaining check on the banks and a green flag to simply "do whatever you want", and they did.   The resulting orgy of incredible greed and corruption led to '08

The nukes were already dropped when instead of letting the street crash when it had to they were declared "too big to fail" and bailed out whilly nilly on the taxpayers' backs.

You want me to take a pocket knife to a nuclear war.

[Dougie93]

Glass-Steagal would not have prevented 2008, as Glass-Steagal primarily is about a firewall between the retail side of banks and the investment side of banks, but the collateral obligations which were leveraging into a credit crisis, was going to take down the big investment banks on Wall Street, and then that would have taken down the retail banks downstream, so the taxpayer would have had to bail those banks out anyways,  and Glas-Steagal would not have been involved.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Dougie93

[cannuck]

I thought I made it clear it was just the LAST of many, many acts and a signal, not a cause due to its regulatory content.   I will be more specific next time (under big time crunch as trying to get some of that good old capitalist pig stuff out of the way from year end).

[Dougie93]

Market forces caused those changes, your seeming assumption that governments are actually in control of a supranational global market, is delusional.

 

[cannuck]

Governments have 100% control over both regulatory and taxation regimes.  Those two things define exactly what business and finance can do.

 

[Dougie93]

But market forces simply flow around those regimes, or bust through the dykes and overwhelm them, the governments are subject to the market, because they owe the market literally trillions, so the governments are forced to adapt, in order to make sure those markets keep propping them up.   So regardless of what some politicians puts on paper,  it doesn't actually amount to control.

It wasn't a lack of regulation which incited this, it is a lack of solvency.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Dougie93

[cannuck]

8 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

But market forces simply flow around those regimes, or bust through the dykes and overwhelm them, the governments are subject to the market, because they owe the market literally trillions, so the governments are forced to adapt, in order to make sure those markets keep propping them up.   So regardless of what some politicians puts on paper,  it doesn't actually amount to control.

It wasn't a lack of regulation which incited this, it is a lack of solvency.

There is some truth to what you say, but the fact is only governments have the power to fix it.

Of course, when you consider that Goldman Sucks has owned the last ten or so US administrations...

Edited January 11, 2019 by cannuck

[Dougie93]

8 minutes ago, cannuck said:

There is some truth to what you say, but the fact is only governments have the power to fix it.

Of course, when you consider that Goldman Sucks has owned the last ten or so US administrations...

You need to try to relax and let it go, and here's how; consider that you and the Government of Canada are not the same thing, the Government of Canada is at this juncture just a tax confiscating militarized regulatory regime working for entrenched interests.   Those are narrow interests, their interest is not your interest.

So if the Government of Canada collapses into insolvency, that's not the end of the world for you, you move on without them, because once they are insolvent, the police won't come to arrest you if you just shrug and walk away, not only because there is no real way they can make you pay the government's debt, can't get blood from a stone, but because the police are one of the entrenched interests who are running this government into the ground, and when it goes broke, they go broke, and trust me, the police do not show up to work for free.

Edited January 11, 2019 by Dougie93

[Yzermandius19]

23 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

But market forces simply flow around those regimes, or bust through the dykes and overwhelm them, the governments are subject to the market, because they owe the market literally trillions, so the governments are forced to adapt, in order to make sure those markets keep propping them up.   So regardless of what some politicians puts on paper,  it doesn't actually amount to control.

It wasn't a lack of regulation which incited this, it is a lack of solvency.

I mean sure, Canada could cut off it's nose to spite it's face with even more heavy handed regulation and taxation, but the market will simply flow around that overly burdensome business environment to locations that are more hospitable, like America for instance. The governments lack of control over the market is rather laughable, Canada should make like Bruce Lee, be like water.

Confederation does have one use though, helping to cling to international hockey superpower status, the Soviets know.

Edited January 12, 2019 by Yzermandius19