Canada tops, Harper shines?

[JLM]

I heard a financial analyst on C.B.C. radio early this morning that Canada is among the top of the G 20 countries as far as being in good financial shape. I would suggest that Harper should get the credit for that since it is on "his watch".

 

[AnnaG]

I'd suggest it'd be the banks, companies, and population at play there, not politicians.

 

[JLM]

I'd suggest it'd be the banks, companies, and population at play there, not politicians.

I'd be inclined to agree with you, BUT it's always attributable to the president who was on watch at the time so just naturally figured the same would apply to Canada. :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

[Slim Chance]

I'd be inclined to agree with you, BUT it's always attributable to the president who was on watch at the time so just naturally figured the same would apply to Canada. :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

You'd be absolutely correct if it was the liberals that were in power. As it stands, Harper is the "resident expert's" mortal foe and therefore, any progres in the economy is attributable to Chretin and Trudeau.

That's just the way it is

 

[JLM]

You'd be absolutely correct if it was the liberals that were in power. As it stands, Harper is the "resident expert's" mortal foe and therefore, any progres in the economy is attributable to Chretin and Trudeau.

That's just the way it is

Why couldn't I have thought of that- how stupid of me!!!!!!!! :lol::lol::lol: And another thing a lot of the prosperity is a direct benefit of the Charter. :lol::lol::lol:

 

[Slim Chance]

It's non-stop goodness that flows from the Charter.

 

[Cliffy]

Now is this thread about Harper or about bashing a certain member of the forum?

 

[JLM]

Now is this thread about Harper or about bashing a certain member of the forum?

Actually about the state of our economy and whatever or whoever it was that it's attributable to.

 

[AnnaG]

I'd be inclined to agree with you, BUT we've been told by a resident expert that when things are bad or good in the U.S. it's always attributable to the president who was on watch at the time so just naturally figured the same would apply to Canada. Or would that just be stupid thinking ???????????????? :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

You'd be absolutely correct if it was the liberals that were in power. As it stands, Harper is the "resident expert's" mortal foe and therefore, any progres in the economy is attributable to Chretin and Trudeau.

That's just the way it is

Oooooooohhh, yeah. I forgot the natural law and its corollary (Hypogrits are born to reign, which makes Cons governance an aberration).

 

[Kreskin]

It's on my watch so I'm taking credit.

 

[Tonington]

I heard a financial analyst on C.B.C. radio early this morning that Canada is among the top of the G 20 countries as far as being in good financial shape. I would suggest that Harper should get the credit for that since it is on "his watch".

So does that mean he also gets credit for the meltdown? The recession, and buying a piece of the automakers? All on Harper too? So isn't it a wash, if the financial system is the best in the G20, but he also put us into a recession that cost Canadians their jobs? ;-)

The shiniest turd is still a turd.

 

[JLM]

So does that mean he also gets credit for the meltdown? The recession, and buying a piece of the automakers? All on Harper too? So isn't it a wash, if the financial system is the best in the G20, but he also put us into a recession that cost Canadians their jobs? ;-)

The shiniest turd is still a turd.

Nah, that won't fly as it's already been established that the biggest part of the recession was caused by sub prime mortgages in the U.S. and criminal bonuses by C.E.O.,s.....................you're going to have to start getting up earlier in the morning. :lol::lol::lol:

 

[lone wolf]

MY JOB (author unknown)

It's not my job to run this train;
the whistle I cant blow.
It's not my place to say how far
the trains allowed to go.
It's not my job to shoot off steam
nor even clang the bell,
but let the damn thing
Jump the track . . .
and see who catches Hell!

 

[pegger]

I heard a financial analyst on C.B.C. radio early this morning that Canada is among the top of the G 20 countries as far as being in good financial shape. I would suggest that Harper should get the credit for that since it is on "his watch".

Sure - the fiscal situation of Canada today was all because of what Harper has done for last 12 months, and nothing can be attributed to any another Canadian Federal government....ever. The previous years of sound fiscal management had NOTHING to do with our country being where it is now. :roll:

 

[earth_as_one]

Depression era Canadian Bank regulations saved our collective bacon, not Harper.

Neo-conservative bank deregulation in the US and Europe combined with unbridled greed and fraud led to the financial meltdown. Luckily Harper never got a the required majority he would have needed to deregulate Canadian banks.

Worldwide Financial Crisis Largely Bypasses Canada
Tight Regulations, Strict Lending Practices Encourage Optimism

By Keith B. Richburg
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, October 16, 2008

TORONTO, Oct. 15 -- While the United States reels from the global financial crisis, with credit markets still frozen and stock prices careening from highs to lows, Canada has remained relatively insulated.

Canadian banks have not gone shaky like their American counterparts, economists and other experts said. There is no subprime mortgage or home foreclosure mess. And while the United States fears a prolonged recession, Canadians have remained relatively sanguine, convinced that they are in a good position to weather the economic tsunami from the south.

"We will be pulled down," said Michael Gregory, chief economist at BMO Nesbitt Burns, an investment firm. "Not as deep, not as long."

The main reason for optimism here is the banking system. Experts here note that Canadian banks are more tightly regulated, more liquid and less highly leveraged. Instead of being highflying investment banks, they tend to operate in a more traditional manner, with large numbers of loyal depositors and a more solid base of capital.

"I think the regulatory framework in Canada is a little more stringent," Gregory said, "and Canadian banks are a little more conservative in terms of lending." The World Economic Forum this month rated Canada's banks as the world's soundest, ahead of banks in Sweden and Luxembourg.

According to the Canadian Banking Association, one reason for the system's solidity is that banks are national in scope. Each of the largest five institutions has branches in all 10 Canadian provinces, meaning they are less susceptible to regional downturns and they can move capital from region to region, as needed. "As far as I am aware, no American bank has branches in all 50 states," banking association spokesman Andrew Addison wrote in an e-mail.

Strict rules also govern mortgage lending. By Canadian law, any mortgage that will finance more than 80 percent of the price of a home must be insured. Two-thirds of all Canadian mortgages are insured by the quasi-governmental Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corp. As a result of the tough standards for insurance, "people tend not to get mortgages they cannot afford," Gregory said.

Defaulting on a loan is also more difficult in Canada than the United States, Gregory said. "You can't just drop off the keys and walk away."

For Canada's seven biggest banks, the percentage of mortgages at least three months in arrears was 0.27 percent in July, close to historic lows, according to the banking association. Also, few Canadian banks got caught holding large numbers of toxic American mortgages.

Another difference is that in Canada, mortgage interest is not tax-deductible, making it harder to buy a house. As a result, Canada did not have as strong a construction surge as the United States did during the boom years, and thus does not now have a big oversupply.

People do not take out mortgages just for the tax break. In Canada, "a mortgage is seen as something you want to get rid of as fast as possible," said Peter Dungan, an economist with the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto....

Worldwide Financial Crisis Largely Bypasses Canada - washingtonpost.com

 

[earth_as_one]

Nah, that won't fly as it's already been established that the biggest part of the recession was caused by sub prime mortgages in the U.S. and criminal bonuses by C.E.O.,s.....................you're going to have to start getting up earlier in the morning. :lol::lol::lol:

Greedily and fraudulently selling mortgages to people who couldn't afford them was the root cause of the financial crisis:

The proportion of subprime ARM loans made to people with credit scores high enough to qualify for conventional mortgages with better terms increased from 41% in 2000 to 61% by 2006. However, there are many factors other than credit score that affect lending. In addition, mortgage brokers in some cases received incentives from lenders to offer subprime ARM's even to those with credit ratings that merited a conforming (i.e., non-subprime) loan.[80]

Mortgage underwriting standards declined precipitously during the boom period. The use of automated loan approvals allowed loans to be made without appropriate review and documentation.[81] In 2007, 40% of all subprime loans resulted from automated underwriting.[82][83] The chairman of the Mortgage Bankers Association claimed that mortgage brokers, while profiting from the home loan boom, did not do enough to examine whether borrowers could repay.[84] Mortgage fraud by lenders and borrowers increased enormously.[85] In 2004, the Federal Bureau of Investigation warned of an "epidemic" in mortgage fraud, an important credit risk of nonprime mortgage lending, which, they said, could lead to "a problem that could have as much impact as the S&L crisis".[86][87][88][89]

So why did lending standards decline? In a Peabody Award winning program, NPR correspondents argued that a "Giant Pool of Money" (represented by $70 trillion in worldwide fixed income investments) sought higher yields than those offered by U.S. Treasury bonds early in the decade. Further, this pool of money had roughly doubled in size from 2000 to 2007, yet the supply of relatively safe, income generating investments had not grown as fast. Investment banks on Wall Street answered this demand with financial innovation such as the mortgage-backed security (MBS) and collateralized debt obligation (CDO), which were assigned safe ratings by the credit rating agencies. In effect, Wall Street connected this pool of money to the mortgage market in the U.S., with enormous fees accruing to those throughout the mortgage supply chain, from the mortgage broker selling the loans, to small banks that funded the brokers, to the giant investment banks behind them. By approximately 2003, the supply of mortgages originated at traditional lending standards had been exhausted. However, continued strong demand for MBS and CDO began to drive down lending standards, as long as mortgages could still be sold along the supply chain. Eventually, this speculative bubble proved unsustainable...

Subprime mortgage crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some people are probably guilty of criminal activity. At a minimum I question the morality of people who sell products at a premium they know are valueless.

 

[JLM]

"Depression era Canadian Bank regulations saved our collective bacon, not Harper. "

I'm inclined to agree, I don't think Harper had anymore to do with our recovery than Bush had to do with the melt down in the first place.

 

[JLM]

Now is this thread about Harper or about bashing a certain member of the forum?

One person seems to think so but I've just searched the thread and don't see his/her name anywhere.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Earth_as_one, the article in Wikipedia is spot on. Canadian banks deserve most of the credit for the relatively sound economic position of Canada. That and the good management of economy by the Liberals, who left the economy in very sound shape indeed for Harper, with more than 10 billion $ surplus. By comparison, Bush stuck Obama with 550 billion $ deficit.

Since interest payments are not tax deductible, it is indeed the aim of many home owners to pay off the mortgage as soon as possible. As a result they have a big stake in the house they own, they are lot less likely to walk away from the house than Americans.

Let me tell you about my son, who starts his residency in internal medicine on 1st July in London. He recently bought a house for 165,000 $. We gave him 35,000 $ for down payment. He put in 30,000 $ of his own money, a total of 65,000 $ down payment. He took the rest (100,000 $) mortgage. This in spite of the fact that he was preapproved for mortgage up to 210,000 $. But he figured 100,000 is about what he could comfortably afford on what he is making.

With such a big stake in the house, he is not going to walk away from it, no matter what.

As to conservatives here who are moaning and groaning that Harper does not get credit for the sound economic situation in Canada, I think he is getting the credit for it. Unfairly in my opinion, but people are giving him the credit. That is reflected in the opinion polls. Opinion polls indicate that Liberals and Conservatives are neck and neck. Had it not been for sound economic position of Canada, Liberals would be ahead comfortably. So I think Harper is benefiting from the sound economic position of Canada.

 

[Goober]

Earth_as_one, the article in Wikipedia is spot on. Canadian banks deserve most of the credit for the relatively sound economic position of Canada. That and the good management of economy by the Liberals, who left the economy in very sound shape indeed for Harper, with more than 10 billion $ surplus. By comparison, Bush stuck Obama with 550 billion $ deficit.

Since interest payments are not tax deductible, it is indeed the aim of many home owners to pay off the mortgage as soon as possible. As a result they have a big stake in the house they own, they are lot less likely to walk away from the house than Americans.

Let me tell you about my son, who starts his residency in internal medicine on 1st July in London. He recently bought a house for 165,000 $. We gave him 35,000 $ for down payment. He put in 30,000 $ of his own money, a total of 65,000 $ down payment. He took the rest (100,000 $) mortgage. This in spite of the fact that he was preapproved for mortgage up to 210,000 $. But he figured 100,000 is about what he could comfortably afford on what he is making.

With such a big stake in the house, he is not going to walk away from it, no matter what.

As to conservatives here who are moaning and groaning that Harper does not get credit for the sound economic situation in Canada, I think he is getting the credit for it. Unfairly in my opinion, but people are giving him the credit. That is reflected in the opinion polls. Opinion polls indicate that Liberals and Conservatives are neck and neck. Had it not been for sound economic position of Canada, Liberals would be ahead comfortably. So I think Harper is benefiting from the sound economic position of Canada.

Does he rent out the extra rooms to other residents from the hospitial?