Greater Fool - Garth Turner
----------------------------------------------
Where’s money safe?
A worthy question to ask on the day when General Motors goes into bankruptcy and Canada’s officially declared in recession. If nothing else, we’re one confused nation.
This past weekend media stories of bidding wars and escalating home prices mixed with dire predictions of where a $50 billion deficit will lead us. Government tax credits and cheap rates encourage people to spend, while household debt soars to a new $1.3 trillion high. A thousand people apply for an entry-level office job in just two days, while the geniuses who lost billions running the public pension plan get chunky bonuses.
Abnormal times. The country’s largest bank bleeds money, while the stock market soars. Most people expect life to return to what it was a year or two ago, but fail to understand that cannot happen. It’s now evident we could have $100 oil, rising interest rates, inflation and higher taxes at the same time as chronic unemployment and industrial collapse.
And how can things end fairly, when terrified politicians lavish $1.4 million on each and every autoworker job – with no guarantee any will exist in a year? Governments are more involved in the running of the economy than at any time since the 1930s. And that turned out well.
Meanwhile, our population’s aging fast, with incredibly predictable results. Climate change is upon us - anything but predictable. We’re adding more debt in a year than an entire generation accumulated. And families have done next to nothing to mend their ways since the world almost ended at Thanksgiving.
We’ve had a housing bubble, an equity bubble and a commodity bubble. And after Bernie Madoff, can anybody trust anyone anymore?
Where’s money safe?
Here are seven suggestions.
1. Cash. Those who warn of a currency collapse, hyperinflation or people buying houses with pieces of money are financial posers. None of these things will happen, certainly not in the next decade. Cash money will be the only form of wealth you can be sure of, so have as much of it as possible. Banks are fine, but do not exceed your insurance limit. Online banks are a leap of faith. A safe in the cold air return is not.
2. TFSA. The government, in a move it will regret, now allows you to completely avoid paying tax on investments, so long as they are in a TFSA. Just created this year, these accounts allow you to transfer in $10,000 a year per couple, and invest the money in any asset, free of tax on any amount earned. If you don’t have one, you don’t deserve to have money.
3. Bank preferreds. Moan all you want about the banks and their vulnerability, but the fact is no government on earth is going to let another major bank go down. That makes these among the safest places to invest – but not in the volatile common stock. Instead, bank preferred shares are more stable and come with an income stream, currently paying around 6%, or five times the rate of inflation.
4. Tax-deductible mortgage. If you have investments, and a mortgage you service out of after-tax dollars, you’re not paying attention. Sell the investments, pay off the mortgage, re-mortgage the house and buy back your investments. Now you have a tax-deductible mortgage, with the distinct advantage of being able to write off all interest charges from your income. Also consider an RRSP mortgage, which I have referenced here previously.
5. Oil. This is the energy economy, and the oil age. We can pave the country with windmills and crank out hybrids, but we’ll never diminish the appetite for gasoline, diesel, NG, propane, heating oil or electricity – at least not until there is a crisis. Between now and then, oil will soar, taking many other commodities with it. Demand from Chindia alone is enough to double crude in the near future. Integrated oil companies, energy mutuals or trailers in Fort Mac are considerations.
6. RRSP. Much in disfavour now, this last great tax shelter is a gift. A contribution in kind allows you to invest without money. The RRSP homebuyer’s plan allows you to leverage up a downpayment in just 60 days using government money. An RRSP loan at today’s rates is a no-brainer, using the refund to pay down the borrowing. And a leveraged meltdown strategy lets you get cash out of an RRSP or a RRIF without paying tax.
7. Universal life. Now that over 70% don’t have any pension plan, it makes sense to over-fund a UL policy. You can invest this money in a sheltered growth account, then structure payments to last the rest of your life – all tax-free, since they come from the proceeds of a life insurance policy. Or, you can wait for the wonks who run the CPP to lose it all.
8. An advisor. If you think bonds are safe or buying two condos is diversifying, you need an advisor. If you fear getting Madoffed, you need to know this: Almost all advisors in Canada just buy stuff for you, which remains in your name. This is totally different from BM’s clients, who handed over cash which disappeared into a fund the guy ran himself. Reality is, most people who fail financially are do-it-yourself investors who even think reading a blog is worthwhile.
I mean, imagine.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Monday, December 15, 2008
Harper v. Ignatieff - Garth's blog
So you prefer Iggy with his 25 years living in the UK working for the BBC and his 5 years teaching at Harvard, over Harper’s faithful service to his country Canada?
By HARRY S on 12.15.08 3:41 pm
Harry S., what years of service to Canada are you attributing to Harper? That is a joke! The only thing Harper has done is push and bully people for most of his adult life to further his own agenda and career.
What exactly has Harper done? Well, funny enough he was a member of the Young Liberals Club in high school. Quit that.
Enrolled at the University of Toronto but quit that.
Moved to Edmonton where it seems his daddy (an accountant at Imperial Oil) probably got him a job in the Imperial Oil mail room (Stevie then became an IT geek for a while).
Got paid by the Conservative Party to be the aid to Jim Hawkes, then quit the Conservatives to join the Reform Party.
Lost his first attempt running against Hawkes. Worked for Deb Grey’s office. Got paid by the Reform Party to develop right wing policy. Quit as policy chief in 1992 because people didn’t agree with him.
Got his bachelor’s and master’s degrees in economics (never paid a nickle by anyone to be a practicing economist).
Ran successfully in 1993 against Hawkes (helped by the way with a $50,000 ad campaign waged against Hawkes by the National Citizens Coalition) and was an MP until 1997 when we quit again because he couldn’t get his way.
Joined the right wing National Citizens Coalition as VP then president to champion their cause (no surprise there given their ad campaign that helped defeat Hawkes).
Re-entered politics in 2002 and beat Stockwell Day for Alliance Party leadership. He was elected in a bye-election that the Liberals and Conservatives did not even contest. Harper’s only opponent was an NDP candidate (a former United Church moderator) whom Harper refused to debate because he “despised him”.
Since 2002 Harper’s record is well known.
There’s an interesting pattern through all of this…he quits when he doesn’t get his way. The supreme example of that was proroguing parliament to avoid losing a confidence motion.
Harry, perhaps in your strange world this looks like leadership. To me is only looks like a childhood bully who never grew up. I also do not see any evidence of broad intellectual capacity.
By comparison Michael Ignatieff’s life accomplishments are simply too long to detail in this posting. Here’s just a quick overview:
- wrote 16 books that have been translated into 12 languages.
- The Russian Album won the 1987 Governor General’s Award for Non-Fiction and the British Royal Society of Literature’s Heinemann Prize.
- his biography on Isaiah Berlin was shortlisted for both the Jewish Quarterly Literary Prize for Non-Fiction and the James Tait Black Memorial Prize
- his book Virtual War: Kosovo and Beyond won the Orwell Prize for political non-fiction
- he worked on the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty which examined the role of international involvement in Kosovo and Rwanda
- his book, Blood and Belonging: Journeys into the New Nationalism won the Gordon Montador Award for Best Canadian Book on Social Issues, and the U of T Lionel Gelber Prize
This is a man of supreme intellect and someone that the British Arts Council recognized as “an extraordinarily versatile writer”.
Ignatieff has written extensively on Canadian culture and human rights, as well as international development, peacekeeping and the international responsibilities of Western Nations.
He has held teaching positions at Oxford, the University of London, the London School of Economics, and the University of California. He was the director of the Carr Centre for Human Rights Policy at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. He was the Chancellor Jackman Visiting Professor in Human Rights Policy at the University of Toronto. Ignatieff’s contributions during his career have been recognized by 9 honorary doctorates.
Harry, for you to dismiss this Canadian of great distinction by calling him “an egghead” shows your total and complete misunderstanding of the man, his intellect, and the history of leadership he has exhibited throughout his career.
Would I choose Ignatieff over Harper as PM? In a heartbeat.
He is also an acclaimed journalist and film maker. This is a man of tremendous intellectual depth.
By TS on 12.15.08 7:00 pm
By HARRY S on 12.15.08 3:41 pm
Harry S., what years of service to Canada are you attributing to Harper? That is a joke! The only thing Harper has done is push and bully people for most of his adult life to further his own agenda and career.
What exactly has Harper done? Well, funny enough he was a member of the Young Liberals Club in high school. Quit that.
Enrolled at the University of Toronto but quit that.
Moved to Edmonton where it seems his daddy (an accountant at Imperial Oil) probably got him a job in the Imperial Oil mail room (Stevie then became an IT geek for a while).
Got paid by the Conservative Party to be the aid to Jim Hawkes, then quit the Conservatives to join the Reform Party.
Lost his first attempt running against Hawkes. Worked for Deb Grey’s office. Got paid by the Reform Party to develop right wing policy. Quit as policy chief in 1992 because people didn’t agree with him.
Got his bachelor’s and master’s degrees in economics (never paid a nickle by anyone to be a practicing economist).
Ran successfully in 1993 against Hawkes (helped by the way with a $50,000 ad campaign waged against Hawkes by the National Citizens Coalition) and was an MP until 1997 when we quit again because he couldn’t get his way.
Joined the right wing National Citizens Coalition as VP then president to champion their cause (no surprise there given their ad campaign that helped defeat Hawkes).
Re-entered politics in 2002 and beat Stockwell Day for Alliance Party leadership. He was elected in a bye-election that the Liberals and Conservatives did not even contest. Harper’s only opponent was an NDP candidate (a former United Church moderator) whom Harper refused to debate because he “despised him”.
Since 2002 Harper’s record is well known.
There’s an interesting pattern through all of this…he quits when he doesn’t get his way. The supreme example of that was proroguing parliament to avoid losing a confidence motion.
Harry, perhaps in your strange world this looks like leadership. To me is only looks like a childhood bully who never grew up. I also do not see any evidence of broad intellectual capacity.
By comparison Michael Ignatieff’s life accomplishments are simply too long to detail in this posting. Here’s just a quick overview:
- wrote 16 books that have been translated into 12 languages.
- The Russian Album won the 1987 Governor General’s Award for Non-Fiction and the British Royal Society of Literature’s Heinemann Prize.
- his biography on Isaiah Berlin was shortlisted for both the Jewish Quarterly Literary Prize for Non-Fiction and the James Tait Black Memorial Prize
- his book Virtual War: Kosovo and Beyond won the Orwell Prize for political non-fiction
- he worked on the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty which examined the role of international involvement in Kosovo and Rwanda
- his book, Blood and Belonging: Journeys into the New Nationalism won the Gordon Montador Award for Best Canadian Book on Social Issues, and the U of T Lionel Gelber Prize
This is a man of supreme intellect and someone that the British Arts Council recognized as “an extraordinarily versatile writer”.
Ignatieff has written extensively on Canadian culture and human rights, as well as international development, peacekeeping and the international responsibilities of Western Nations.
He has held teaching positions at Oxford, the University of London, the London School of Economics, and the University of California. He was the director of the Carr Centre for Human Rights Policy at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. He was the Chancellor Jackman Visiting Professor in Human Rights Policy at the University of Toronto. Ignatieff’s contributions during his career have been recognized by 9 honorary doctorates.
Harry, for you to dismiss this Canadian of great distinction by calling him “an egghead” shows your total and complete misunderstanding of the man, his intellect, and the history of leadership he has exhibited throughout his career.
Would I choose Ignatieff over Harper as PM? In a heartbeat.
He is also an acclaimed journalist and film maker. This is a man of tremendous intellectual depth.
By TS on 12.15.08 7:00 pm
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Sad Day for Canada - GG gives Steve a prorogue
Tories expected to bring battle to the voters
Last Updated: Thursday, December 4, 2008 | 11:42 AM ET Comments301Recommend132CBC News
Transport Minister John Baird suggested that the Conservative party's strategy over the next few weeks will be to go beyond elected members of Parliament and the Governor General and ask Canadians to decide the current political crisis.
Around midday Thursday, Gov. Gen. Michaëlle Jean agreed to a request from Prime Minister Stephen Harper to suspend Parliament, a move that delays a confidence vote set for Monday that could have toppled his minority government.
"We are going to see something rivalling an election campaign between now and when Parliament comes back," said CBC's Don Newman.
The quasi-election campaign will unfold over the holiday season with speeches, advertising and polling in the weeks ahead of resumption of Parliament on Jan. 26, said CBC's Keith Boag.
Speaking to reporters outside the Governor General's residence, Harper said the first item on the agenda when Parliament begins will be the budget. The government could be toppled at that time in a confidence vote.
In the meantime, the Conservatives will seek to encourage Canadians to pressure members of Parliament so the NDP and Liberals lose the nerve to proceed with the coalition, said Boag.
"The more time they get to think about it … the more hesitant they may become. That's their objective," said Boag.
Earlier in the day, Baird said the party is focusing its attention on the voters.
"I think what we want to do is basically take a time out and go over the heads of the members of Parliament, go over the heads, frankly, of the Governor General, go right to the Canadian people," Baird said Thursday morning in the foyer of the House of Commons.
"They're speaking up loudly right across the country in a way I've never seen them," he said.
Pressed on whether Baird considered the House of Commons and the vice-regal envoy of lesser authority, Baird responded: "We live in a democracy. [The Canadian people] are the ones that rule. They're speaking up loudly."
The party has repeatedly dismissed the proposed NDP-Liberal coalition, which would operate with the support of the Bloc Québécois, as a betrayal of Canadians who voted in the election seven weeks ago.
Baird said he expects the proposed coalition to dissolve before the government reconvenes.
"I think enough of them will change their minds and this thing will fall apart," he said.
Baird said there are already cracks in the Liberal caucus, pointing to an article in the Guelph Mercury in which area MP Francis Valeriote was quoted as speaking out against the proposed coalition.
"I believe in working toward a solution, not working toward a coalition," the Liberal representative said according to the local newspaper.
Baird said former Conservative prime minister Brian Mulroney was criticized 20 years ago for "flirting with separatists" and former Liberal prime minister Pierre Trudeau's party would never have agreed to this type of arrangement.
"It sells out everything the country stands for to bring the separatists into a coalition on the government side of the House," said Baird.
"I think the lust for power has almost obscured what has always been fairly strong judgment when it comes to national unity and the Liberal party."
Justin Trudeau said the Conservatives have misrepresented how his father would have addressed the current political turmoil.
The newly elected Liberal MP said his father was dedicated to Canada and always willing to step up for Canadians in their time of need, and negotiated a number of times with then Parti Québécois Quebec premier Rene Levesque.
"There was an openness to respecting other people's points of view if we can work together for common causes," said Trudeau.
The coalition emerged after Conservatives released a mini-budget blasted by all opposition parties.
They accused Harper of doing nothing to address the financial turmoil and using the fiscal update to introduce what they saw as ideologically driven measures that attacked women and workers. At issue was a three-year ban on the right of civil servants to strike, elimination of public subsidies for political parties and limits on the ability of women to sue for pay equity.
While the Tories have backed down on those contentious issues, the opposition still says the government is not addressing the economic situation.
The coalition — which would have a 24-member cabinet composed of six NDP and 18 Liberal MPs — has vowed to make an economic stimulus package a priority, proposing a multibillion-dollar plan that would include help for the auto and forestry sectors.
Last Updated: Thursday, December 4, 2008 | 11:42 AM ET Comments301Recommend132CBC News
Transport Minister John Baird suggested that the Conservative party's strategy over the next few weeks will be to go beyond elected members of Parliament and the Governor General and ask Canadians to decide the current political crisis.
Around midday Thursday, Gov. Gen. Michaëlle Jean agreed to a request from Prime Minister Stephen Harper to suspend Parliament, a move that delays a confidence vote set for Monday that could have toppled his minority government.
"We are going to see something rivalling an election campaign between now and when Parliament comes back," said CBC's Don Newman.
The quasi-election campaign will unfold over the holiday season with speeches, advertising and polling in the weeks ahead of resumption of Parliament on Jan. 26, said CBC's Keith Boag.
Speaking to reporters outside the Governor General's residence, Harper said the first item on the agenda when Parliament begins will be the budget. The government could be toppled at that time in a confidence vote.
In the meantime, the Conservatives will seek to encourage Canadians to pressure members of Parliament so the NDP and Liberals lose the nerve to proceed with the coalition, said Boag.
"The more time they get to think about it … the more hesitant they may become. That's their objective," said Boag.
Earlier in the day, Baird said the party is focusing its attention on the voters.
"I think what we want to do is basically take a time out and go over the heads of the members of Parliament, go over the heads, frankly, of the Governor General, go right to the Canadian people," Baird said Thursday morning in the foyer of the House of Commons.
"They're speaking up loudly right across the country in a way I've never seen them," he said.
Pressed on whether Baird considered the House of Commons and the vice-regal envoy of lesser authority, Baird responded: "We live in a democracy. [The Canadian people] are the ones that rule. They're speaking up loudly."
The party has repeatedly dismissed the proposed NDP-Liberal coalition, which would operate with the support of the Bloc Québécois, as a betrayal of Canadians who voted in the election seven weeks ago.
Baird said he expects the proposed coalition to dissolve before the government reconvenes.
"I think enough of them will change their minds and this thing will fall apart," he said.
Baird said there are already cracks in the Liberal caucus, pointing to an article in the Guelph Mercury in which area MP Francis Valeriote was quoted as speaking out against the proposed coalition.
"I believe in working toward a solution, not working toward a coalition," the Liberal representative said according to the local newspaper.
Baird said former Conservative prime minister Brian Mulroney was criticized 20 years ago for "flirting with separatists" and former Liberal prime minister Pierre Trudeau's party would never have agreed to this type of arrangement.
"It sells out everything the country stands for to bring the separatists into a coalition on the government side of the House," said Baird.
"I think the lust for power has almost obscured what has always been fairly strong judgment when it comes to national unity and the Liberal party."
Justin Trudeau said the Conservatives have misrepresented how his father would have addressed the current political turmoil.
The newly elected Liberal MP said his father was dedicated to Canada and always willing to step up for Canadians in their time of need, and negotiated a number of times with then Parti Québécois Quebec premier Rene Levesque.
"There was an openness to respecting other people's points of view if we can work together for common causes," said Trudeau.
The coalition emerged after Conservatives released a mini-budget blasted by all opposition parties.
They accused Harper of doing nothing to address the financial turmoil and using the fiscal update to introduce what they saw as ideologically driven measures that attacked women and workers. At issue was a three-year ban on the right of civil servants to strike, elimination of public subsidies for political parties and limits on the ability of women to sue for pay equity.
While the Tories have backed down on those contentious issues, the opposition still says the government is not addressing the economic situation.
The coalition — which would have a 24-member cabinet composed of six NDP and 18 Liberal MPs — has vowed to make an economic stimulus package a priority, proposing a multibillion-dollar plan that would include help for the auto and forestry sectors.
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Steve's & Flaherty's "Sub Prime" Crisis
From my very admittedly “possibly” weak understanding of the issue he allowed the banks to turn weak mortgages over to CMHC prematurely. If the mortgages had in fact defaulted they would have gone to CMHC in any case. My understanding is that this freed up $75 billion for Cdn banks to lend to Cdn businesses and individuals to help alleviate the credit crunch. So in the end I don’t understand how this is a bank bailout as any mortgage defaults would have gone to the gov’t owned CMHC in any case.
Probably I’m just naive SK boy but it appears this is just another of your many many attempts to get your lib lemmings revved up with false information.
By Doug on 11.28.08 1:42 am
Perhaps this not so naive Sask boy can help you back, Doug.
CMHC approved loans guarantee through insurance, 90% of all CMHC approved mortgages. 75 Billion in mortgage defaults is in reality, a 7.5 Billion dollar bailout for Canada’s banking industry so it is a bailout of sorts but the real bailout is CMHC, Canada’s own crown corporation put at heavy risk by a Harper government who up and decided it was prudent to change CMHC approved mortgage regs from 25 year 10% down regs to 40 year 1.5% down and with the cash back schemes at least two of the chartered banks were offering, it is safe to say a 40 year nothing down mortgage, Canada’s version of sub prime. Flarehty introduced this in July of 2006 and in so doing, flooded the mortgage industry with a whole new set of buyers, buyers that in reality could not afford to buy homes in the first place but that didn’t matter, it was the deal that mattered to everyone, the cut, the commission on the sale.
And since July of 2006, valuations of homes went up by 40% nationwide and in some cities, doubled. This fueled a major boom on an already lucrative housing, residential and commercial real estate market and created hyped new construction starts like no other and the consequences? Overdevelopment (and we can stop right there and ponder what that means as that alone is bad on its own), grossly inflated real estate valuations that breed negative equity for those who buy in late and a market poised for dramatic devaluation which later breeds foreclosures, unemployment and recessions all on their own if bad enough.
So lets consider the consequences of Harper/Flarehty’s version of subprime, a nasty real estate led recession all on its own without the big drop in commodities and think for a moment about why, Doug, you think its wise to attack a messager because you don’t like the message and believe this Harper Con job is worth defending because we now have a major housing, condo and commercial real estate correction, a major stand still in construction and what will be huge layoffs in the construction sector as a result of Flarehty/Harper’s disasterous version of subprime that will end up costing taxpayers 75 Billion bucks before federal deficits begin coming in from what will be a devastated commodity market, gutted manufacturing, busted construction industry spawned by nutter government deregulation.
And Harpers hail mary answer is?…??
Get rid of public election financing in favor of corporate/private payoffs and bribes so that future elections can be bought outright… bring back gender pay inequality… and bust unions.
This is their hail mary.
Doug, if you didn’t at the very least try to feign humility and say “From my very admittedly “possibly” weak understanding of the issue”, I would have been much less than kind. But… if you still wish to defend Harpers policies after reading these words, I would find no reason for remorse or regret in quickly pointing out that people who believe its wise to support governments that waste 75 Billion on policies that breed recessions are quite naive, ignorant or just plain stupid. And since you should now know better, Doug…
By brain on 11.28.08 9:31 pm
Probably I’m just naive SK boy but it appears this is just another of your many many attempts to get your lib lemmings revved up with false information.
By Doug on 11.28.08 1:42 am
Perhaps this not so naive Sask boy can help you back, Doug.
CMHC approved loans guarantee through insurance, 90% of all CMHC approved mortgages. 75 Billion in mortgage defaults is in reality, a 7.5 Billion dollar bailout for Canada’s banking industry so it is a bailout of sorts but the real bailout is CMHC, Canada’s own crown corporation put at heavy risk by a Harper government who up and decided it was prudent to change CMHC approved mortgage regs from 25 year 10% down regs to 40 year 1.5% down and with the cash back schemes at least two of the chartered banks were offering, it is safe to say a 40 year nothing down mortgage, Canada’s version of sub prime. Flarehty introduced this in July of 2006 and in so doing, flooded the mortgage industry with a whole new set of buyers, buyers that in reality could not afford to buy homes in the first place but that didn’t matter, it was the deal that mattered to everyone, the cut, the commission on the sale.
And since July of 2006, valuations of homes went up by 40% nationwide and in some cities, doubled. This fueled a major boom on an already lucrative housing, residential and commercial real estate market and created hyped new construction starts like no other and the consequences? Overdevelopment (and we can stop right there and ponder what that means as that alone is bad on its own), grossly inflated real estate valuations that breed negative equity for those who buy in late and a market poised for dramatic devaluation which later breeds foreclosures, unemployment and recessions all on their own if bad enough.
So lets consider the consequences of Harper/Flarehty’s version of subprime, a nasty real estate led recession all on its own without the big drop in commodities and think for a moment about why, Doug, you think its wise to attack a messager because you don’t like the message and believe this Harper Con job is worth defending because we now have a major housing, condo and commercial real estate correction, a major stand still in construction and what will be huge layoffs in the construction sector as a result of Flarehty/Harper’s disasterous version of subprime that will end up costing taxpayers 75 Billion bucks before federal deficits begin coming in from what will be a devastated commodity market, gutted manufacturing, busted construction industry spawned by nutter government deregulation.
And Harpers hail mary answer is?…??
Get rid of public election financing in favor of corporate/private payoffs and bribes so that future elections can be bought outright… bring back gender pay inequality… and bust unions.
This is their hail mary.
Doug, if you didn’t at the very least try to feign humility and say “From my very admittedly “possibly” weak understanding of the issue”, I would have been much less than kind. But… if you still wish to defend Harpers policies after reading these words, I would find no reason for remorse or regret in quickly pointing out that people who believe its wise to support governments that waste 75 Billion on policies that breed recessions are quite naive, ignorant or just plain stupid. And since you should now know better, Doug…
By brain on 11.28.08 9:31 pm
In-and-Out Election Scheme August 2008
Internet breaking news from the G&M states Stephen Harper is running scared about the In and out Scheme and subsequence scandals…lots of reasons least of all is the failure of those wwho failed to appeart and tscoff at summons to appear, and total fear of what could happen next!
Once again what are these people afraid of and why is MSM (aka the press the media, and journalist) that they will not continue to mention them by name?
British Columbia
Burnaby-Douglas, George Drazenovic
Burnaby-New Westminster, Marc Dalton
Cariboo-Prince George, Dick Harris
Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca, Troy DeSouza
Kelowna-Lake Country, Ron Cannan
Kootenay-Columbia, Jim Abbott
Nanaimo-Cowichan, Norm Sowden
Okanagan-Coquihalla, Stockwell Day
Okanagan-Shuswap, Colin Mayes
Prince George-Peace River, Jay Hill
Vancouver East, Elizabeth M. Pagtakhan
Vancouver Kingsway, Kanman Wong
Saskatchewan
Cypress Hills-Grasslands, David Anderson
Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River, Jeremy Harrison
Manitoba
Winnipeg Centre, Helen Sterzer
Ontario
Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing, Ian West
Davenport, Theresa Rodrigues
Kitchener Centre, Steven Cage
London-Fanshawe, Dan Mailer
Parkdale-High Park, Jurij Klufas
Sarnia-Lambton, Patricia Davidson
Scarborough Centre, Roxanne James
Thunder Bay-Rainy River, David Leskowski
Timmins-James Bay, Ken Graham
Toronto Danforth, Kren Clausen
Trinity-Spadina, Sam Goldstein
Vaughan, Richard Majkot
Windsor West, Al Teshuba
York-South Weston, Steve Halicki
Quebec
Argenteuil-Papineau-Mirabel, Suzanne Courville
Beauce, Maxime Bernier
Beauport-Limoilou, Sylvie Boucher
Bas-Richelieu-Nicolet-Becancour, Marie-Eve Helie-Lambert
Charlesbourg-Haute-Saint-Charles, Daniel Petit
Compton-Stanstead, Gary Caldwell
Drummond, Jean-Marie Pineault
Gatineau, Patrick Robert
Hull-Aylmer, Gilles Poirier
Lac-Saint-Louis, Andrea Paine
Laurentides-Labelle, Jean-Sarge Beauregard
Levis-Bellechasse, Steven Blaney
Lotbiniere-Chutes-de-la-Chaudiere, Jacques Gourde
Louis-Hebert, Luc Harvey
Louis-Saint-Laurent, Josee Verner
Megantic-L’Erable, Christian Paradis
Montmorency-Charlevoix, Yves Laberge
Mount Royal, Neil Martin Drabkin
Notre-Dame-de-Grace-Lachine, Allen F. Mackenzie
Pierrefonds-Dollard, Don Rae
Pontiac, Lawrence Cannon
Portneuf-Jacques-Cartier, Howard M. Bruce
Quebec, Frederik Boisvert
Richmond-Arthabaska, Jean Landry
Saint-Laurent-Cartierville, Ishrat Alam
Shefford, Jean Lambert
Sherbrooke, Marc Nadeau
New Brunswick
Beausejour, Omer Leger
Moncton-Riverview-Dieppe, Charles Doucet
Nova Scotia
Dartmouth-Cole Harbour, Robert A. Campbell
Halifax, Andrew House
Halifax West, Rakesh Khosla
Prince Edward Island
Malpeque, George Noble
Newfoundland and Labrador
Bonavista-Gander-Grand Falls-Windsor, Aaron Hynes
Humber-St. Barbe-Baie Verte, Cyril Pelley Jr.
Labrador, Joe Goudie
Random-Burin-St. George’s, Cynthia Downey
___________________________________________________
OTTAWA _ A primer on the alleged misconduct of the federal Conservative party in the last federal election, courtesy of Canadian Press:
WHAT _ Elections Canada alleges that the Conservative party organized a program to allow it to spend more on election ads than allowed under the rules through an “in-and-out” scheme. This program shifted $1.3 million in expenses to 67 local candidates who had room under election
spending limits to pay for advertising, but didn’t have the cash.
WHO _ The elections watchdog says the party sent the money to these individual campaigns, which then sent it right back, supposedly as a payment for regional ads. But the money actually was spent by the party on national ads, Elections Canada alleges.
HOW _ The agency says the party transferred money to 67 campaign bank accounts “and within a very short span of time, these funds or funds closely approximating the amounts deposited, were transferred back out of these accounts.”
WHY _ The elections watchdog says this plan allowed the national party to overspend its legal limits by about $1.1 million. And 65 of the 67 the individual campaigns involved got to claim 60 per cent reimbursement from the government for the phantom ad money that just passed through their bank accounts. The other two campaigns didn’t get enough votes to qualify for reimbursements.
PENALTIES _ Elections Canada alleges that the program violated a number of sections of the Elections Act. Convictions could bring a maximum penalty of up to five years in jail and a $5,000 fine for the financial agents involved and a $25,000 fine for the party. Most violations of the act bring fines, usually $2,000 or less.
By David Bakody on 08.21.08 9:18 am (on Garth's blog)
Once again what are these people afraid of and why is MSM (aka the press the media, and journalist) that they will not continue to mention them by name?
British Columbia
Burnaby-Douglas, George Drazenovic
Burnaby-New Westminster, Marc Dalton
Cariboo-Prince George, Dick Harris
Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca, Troy DeSouza
Kelowna-Lake Country, Ron Cannan
Kootenay-Columbia, Jim Abbott
Nanaimo-Cowichan, Norm Sowden
Okanagan-Coquihalla, Stockwell Day
Okanagan-Shuswap, Colin Mayes
Prince George-Peace River, Jay Hill
Vancouver East, Elizabeth M. Pagtakhan
Vancouver Kingsway, Kanman Wong
Saskatchewan
Cypress Hills-Grasslands, David Anderson
Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River, Jeremy Harrison
Manitoba
Winnipeg Centre, Helen Sterzer
Ontario
Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing, Ian West
Davenport, Theresa Rodrigues
Kitchener Centre, Steven Cage
London-Fanshawe, Dan Mailer
Parkdale-High Park, Jurij Klufas
Sarnia-Lambton, Patricia Davidson
Scarborough Centre, Roxanne James
Thunder Bay-Rainy River, David Leskowski
Timmins-James Bay, Ken Graham
Toronto Danforth, Kren Clausen
Trinity-Spadina, Sam Goldstein
Vaughan, Richard Majkot
Windsor West, Al Teshuba
York-South Weston, Steve Halicki
Quebec
Argenteuil-Papineau-Mirabel, Suzanne Courville
Beauce, Maxime Bernier
Beauport-Limoilou, Sylvie Boucher
Bas-Richelieu-Nicolet-Becancour, Marie-Eve Helie-Lambert
Charlesbourg-Haute-Saint-Charles, Daniel Petit
Compton-Stanstead, Gary Caldwell
Drummond, Jean-Marie Pineault
Gatineau, Patrick Robert
Hull-Aylmer, Gilles Poirier
Lac-Saint-Louis, Andrea Paine
Laurentides-Labelle, Jean-Sarge Beauregard
Levis-Bellechasse, Steven Blaney
Lotbiniere-Chutes-de-la-Chaudiere, Jacques Gourde
Louis-Hebert, Luc Harvey
Louis-Saint-Laurent, Josee Verner
Megantic-L’Erable, Christian Paradis
Montmorency-Charlevoix, Yves Laberge
Mount Royal, Neil Martin Drabkin
Notre-Dame-de-Grace-Lachine, Allen F. Mackenzie
Pierrefonds-Dollard, Don Rae
Pontiac, Lawrence Cannon
Portneuf-Jacques-Cartier, Howard M. Bruce
Quebec, Frederik Boisvert
Richmond-Arthabaska, Jean Landry
Saint-Laurent-Cartierville, Ishrat Alam
Shefford, Jean Lambert
Sherbrooke, Marc Nadeau
New Brunswick
Beausejour, Omer Leger
Moncton-Riverview-Dieppe, Charles Doucet
Nova Scotia
Dartmouth-Cole Harbour, Robert A. Campbell
Halifax, Andrew House
Halifax West, Rakesh Khosla
Prince Edward Island
Malpeque, George Noble
Newfoundland and Labrador
Bonavista-Gander-Grand Falls-Windsor, Aaron Hynes
Humber-St. Barbe-Baie Verte, Cyril Pelley Jr.
Labrador, Joe Goudie
Random-Burin-St. George’s, Cynthia Downey
___________________________________________________
OTTAWA _ A primer on the alleged misconduct of the federal Conservative party in the last federal election, courtesy of Canadian Press:
WHAT _ Elections Canada alleges that the Conservative party organized a program to allow it to spend more on election ads than allowed under the rules through an “in-and-out” scheme. This program shifted $1.3 million in expenses to 67 local candidates who had room under election
spending limits to pay for advertising, but didn’t have the cash.
WHO _ The elections watchdog says the party sent the money to these individual campaigns, which then sent it right back, supposedly as a payment for regional ads. But the money actually was spent by the party on national ads, Elections Canada alleges.
HOW _ The agency says the party transferred money to 67 campaign bank accounts “and within a very short span of time, these funds or funds closely approximating the amounts deposited, were transferred back out of these accounts.”
WHY _ The elections watchdog says this plan allowed the national party to overspend its legal limits by about $1.1 million. And 65 of the 67 the individual campaigns involved got to claim 60 per cent reimbursement from the government for the phantom ad money that just passed through their bank accounts. The other two campaigns didn’t get enough votes to qualify for reimbursements.
PENALTIES _ Elections Canada alleges that the program violated a number of sections of the Elections Act. Convictions could bring a maximum penalty of up to five years in jail and a $5,000 fine for the financial agents involved and a $25,000 fine for the party. Most violations of the act bring fines, usually $2,000 or less.
By David Bakody on 08.21.08 9:18 am (on Garth's blog)
Monday, November 24, 2008
Outsourcing Canada - Garth 23 Nov 08
AIN’T IT THE TRUTH!!?
Joe Smith started the day early having set his alarm clock
(MADE IN JAPAN )
for 6am. While his coffeepot
(MADE IN CHINA )
was perking, he shaved with his electric razor
(MADE IN HONG KONG ).
He put on a dress shirt
(MADE IN SRI LANKA),
designer jeans
(MADE IN SINGAPORE)
and tennis shoes
(MADE IN KOREA)
After cooking his breakfast in his new electric skillet
(MADE IN INDIA)
he sat down with his calculator
(MADE IN MEXICO)
to see how much he could spend today. After setting his watch
(MADE IN TAIWAN )
to the radio
(MADE IN INDIA )
he got in his car
(MADE IN GERMANY )
filled it with GAS
(from Saudi Arabia )
and continued his search for a good paying job. At the end of yet another discouraging and fruitless day checking his Computer
(Made In MALASIA ),
Joe decided to relax for a while. He put on his sandals
(MADE IN BRAZIL )
poured himself a glass of wine
(MADE IN FRANCE )
and turned on his TV
(MADE IN INDONESIA ),
and then wondered why he can’t find a good paying job in CANADA .
By maybe Rhino? on 11.23.08 2:06 pm
------------------------------
But what can we expect when these (above) countries pay their workers $1 per day (perhaps a slight exaggeration!) and the unions have our NA companies paying up to $70 per hour on the GM assembly lines. Something has got to give, eh?
Joe Smith started the day early having set his alarm clock
(MADE IN JAPAN )
for 6am. While his coffeepot
(MADE IN CHINA )
was perking, he shaved with his electric razor
(MADE IN HONG KONG ).
He put on a dress shirt
(MADE IN SRI LANKA),
designer jeans
(MADE IN SINGAPORE)
and tennis shoes
(MADE IN KOREA)
After cooking his breakfast in his new electric skillet
(MADE IN INDIA)
he sat down with his calculator
(MADE IN MEXICO)
to see how much he could spend today. After setting his watch
(MADE IN TAIWAN )
to the radio
(MADE IN INDIA )
he got in his car
(MADE IN GERMANY )
filled it with GAS
(from Saudi Arabia )
and continued his search for a good paying job. At the end of yet another discouraging and fruitless day checking his Computer
(Made In MALASIA ),
Joe decided to relax for a while. He put on his sandals
(MADE IN BRAZIL )
poured himself a glass of wine
(MADE IN FRANCE )
and turned on his TV
(MADE IN INDONESIA ),
and then wondered why he can’t find a good paying job in CANADA .
By maybe Rhino? on 11.23.08 2:06 pm
------------------------------
But what can we expect when these (above) countries pay their workers $1 per day (perhaps a slight exaggeration!) and the unions have our NA companies paying up to $70 per hour on the GM assembly lines. Something has got to give, eh?
Friday, October 17, 2008
Aftermath 2008
Poor Mr. Dion wasn't successful! In fact, the LPC lost 19 seats across the country. Now, he has been in seclusion at Stornaway for two days, trying to decide whether to stay or go as the leader. Many think he should stay. More think he should go. He had the right ideas but just couldn't sell them to the Canadian public. Here is Jeffrey Simpson's take on what Steve is going to have to do now, as he sits, gloating, in his chair at 24 Sussex Drive.
JEFFREY SIMPSON
From Friday's Globe and Mail
October 16, 2008 at 9:59 PM EDT
Stephen Harper has not had to govern in tough times. Now he will, and the country will get an even sharper insight into the man and his priorities.
Mr. Harper arrived in office to find federal coffers overflowing, debt declining and unemployment low, courtesy of the Chrétien-Martin stewardship. He could keep program spending ahead of the inflation rate, shovel billions of dollars to the provinces, cut taxes, diminish debt, and record surpluses. As governing goes, this was easy. Unwise in some cases, but easy.
Now come the economic furies. Yesterday, the Bank of Montreal predicted a contraction of the Canadian economy in the final quarter of 2008 and the first quarter of 2009 – the definition of a recession. The Bank of Nova Scotia is also forecasting one, as have economists at the University of Toronto.
Technical recession or not, growth will slow, government spending will rise, and government revenues will decline. The highly regarded TD Economics unit believes Ottawa will be facing a $10-billion deficit in fiscal 2009-2010 and another one of about the same size in 2010-2011. That would represent a $20-billion swing since the Conservatives took office in 2006.
Related Articles
Recent
News: Top economist says change course or run deficits
Globe editorial: Don't live in fear of a deficit
Tom Flanagan: Now comes the hard part for Mr. Harper
Internet Links
Politics: Globe stories, photos, graphics, interactives, columns, opinion and more.
Central Canada will be hammered by these numbers. But even energy-rich Western Canada will slow down. Yesterday, oil prices fell below $70 a barrel, almost half what they were not that long ago.
Under those circumstances, all parties can throw their campaign promises on the bonfire of illusions. At least the Conservative promises cost less than those of the other parties, but even most of these promises are for the bonfire.
One Conservative promise was never to run a deficit. Asked about the deficit possibility on Oct. 11, Mr. Harper said that any talk about cutting spending to avoid a deficit was a “ridiculous hypothetical scenario.” Similarly, he dismissed tax increases.
So, there you have it: no deficit, no spending decreases, no tax increases.
Maybe everyone who follows economic developments is wrong. Maybe the U.S. economy will avoid a recession. Maybe U.S. consumers who are already highly indebted will go into further debt and resume spending. Maybe Canada can float off into the Indian Ocean to hide from the U.S. storms.
In the real world, something will have to give in Canada if the banks' projections are correct. An economic slump that smashes Ontario will hasten that province's receipt of equalization payments, which, in turn, will put pressure on federal finances.
Lower corporate profits and higher levels of company closures and bankruptcies will reduce Ottawa's income, as will higher unemployment and slower growth. Economic growth will cool in the economic engines of the three westernmost provinces.
The U.S. Congress has already tried one stimulus package that failed. It has tried massive borrowing to stabilize banks. Another package is being talked about on Capitol Hill. The U.S. deficit, already running at $500-billion, is set to soar, perhaps as high as $1-trillion. When the world's biggest borrower borrows even more, it further destabilizes international markets. But this is what beckons. Countries can neither run nor hide from this U.S.-created tsunami of debt and its baleful consequences.
What to do? Refusing to run a deficit will require abandoning at least some of Mr. Harper's campaign promises, because his platform contained modest spending and tax cuts that collectively totalled about $8-billion over the next four years. Running a deficit would require abandoning his vow not to countenance one.
When times are tough or when government finances are a mess, as they were when the Liberals arrived in office in 1993 and the Progressive Conservatives in 1984, prime ministers have to say No and say it often. The governments post-1984 and post-1993 were blessed with solid parliamentary majorities.
Mr. Harper has a minority government, stronger than his first, but still a minority. Minorities work best when times are good and decisions are easy. Now times are worsening, so the decisions will get harder.
Canadians have never seen Mr. Harper govern in tough times. He campaigned on being the one to steer Canada through the turbulence. The campaign is over. Now governing begins.
JEFFREY SIMPSON
From Friday's Globe and Mail
October 16, 2008 at 9:59 PM EDT
Stephen Harper has not had to govern in tough times. Now he will, and the country will get an even sharper insight into the man and his priorities.
Mr. Harper arrived in office to find federal coffers overflowing, debt declining and unemployment low, courtesy of the Chrétien-Martin stewardship. He could keep program spending ahead of the inflation rate, shovel billions of dollars to the provinces, cut taxes, diminish debt, and record surpluses. As governing goes, this was easy. Unwise in some cases, but easy.
Now come the economic furies. Yesterday, the Bank of Montreal predicted a contraction of the Canadian economy in the final quarter of 2008 and the first quarter of 2009 – the definition of a recession. The Bank of Nova Scotia is also forecasting one, as have economists at the University of Toronto.
Technical recession or not, growth will slow, government spending will rise, and government revenues will decline. The highly regarded TD Economics unit believes Ottawa will be facing a $10-billion deficit in fiscal 2009-2010 and another one of about the same size in 2010-2011. That would represent a $20-billion swing since the Conservatives took office in 2006.
Related Articles
Recent
News: Top economist says change course or run deficits
Globe editorial: Don't live in fear of a deficit
Tom Flanagan: Now comes the hard part for Mr. Harper
Internet Links
Politics: Globe stories, photos, graphics, interactives, columns, opinion and more.
Central Canada will be hammered by these numbers. But even energy-rich Western Canada will slow down. Yesterday, oil prices fell below $70 a barrel, almost half what they were not that long ago.
Under those circumstances, all parties can throw their campaign promises on the bonfire of illusions. At least the Conservative promises cost less than those of the other parties, but even most of these promises are for the bonfire.
One Conservative promise was never to run a deficit. Asked about the deficit possibility on Oct. 11, Mr. Harper said that any talk about cutting spending to avoid a deficit was a “ridiculous hypothetical scenario.” Similarly, he dismissed tax increases.
So, there you have it: no deficit, no spending decreases, no tax increases.
Maybe everyone who follows economic developments is wrong. Maybe the U.S. economy will avoid a recession. Maybe U.S. consumers who are already highly indebted will go into further debt and resume spending. Maybe Canada can float off into the Indian Ocean to hide from the U.S. storms.
In the real world, something will have to give in Canada if the banks' projections are correct. An economic slump that smashes Ontario will hasten that province's receipt of equalization payments, which, in turn, will put pressure on federal finances.
Lower corporate profits and higher levels of company closures and bankruptcies will reduce Ottawa's income, as will higher unemployment and slower growth. Economic growth will cool in the economic engines of the three westernmost provinces.
The U.S. Congress has already tried one stimulus package that failed. It has tried massive borrowing to stabilize banks. Another package is being talked about on Capitol Hill. The U.S. deficit, already running at $500-billion, is set to soar, perhaps as high as $1-trillion. When the world's biggest borrower borrows even more, it further destabilizes international markets. But this is what beckons. Countries can neither run nor hide from this U.S.-created tsunami of debt and its baleful consequences.
What to do? Refusing to run a deficit will require abandoning at least some of Mr. Harper's campaign promises, because his platform contained modest spending and tax cuts that collectively totalled about $8-billion over the next four years. Running a deficit would require abandoning his vow not to countenance one.
When times are tough or when government finances are a mess, as they were when the Liberals arrived in office in 1993 and the Progressive Conservatives in 1984, prime ministers have to say No and say it often. The governments post-1984 and post-1993 were blessed with solid parliamentary majorities.
Mr. Harper has a minority government, stronger than his first, but still a minority. Minorities work best when times are good and decisions are easy. Now times are worsening, so the decisions will get harder.
Canadians have never seen Mr. Harper govern in tough times. He campaigned on being the one to steer Canada through the turbulence. The campaign is over. Now governing begins.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
