Post: #26

Well, the general trend in political polls in Western nations is that support for conservative parties is substantially under counted. The most recent and obvious example being the British election. Probably most (50+%) of conservatives do not trust mainstream media and institutions like polling companies since they hold conspiracy theory like views that they are part of a left wing conspiracy.

Unless pollsters (most of whom will be on the left in their own life) acknowledge that fact they will continue to get things spectacularly wrong. Like they did with the British election. They need much more creative techniques to tease out true data than simply innocently asking people what their views are. This will always result in right wing views being under counted.

Back to the Canadian election: My "hope" is still for an NDP minority government, shortly followed by "the crash", for which they will be unfairly blamed. No confidence vote and new elections all within two years of taking power. But based on current polling I'd say it looks like Harper will be getting a minority government. Not quite sure why he even wants to win. Economically he's kicked so many cans down his damn road for so long they will soon come rushing back towards him and the nation.

Post: #27

The UK polls were a bit of an aberration.

Ontario stayed liberal even as the economy tanked, simply because they didn't want a socially conservative government. Same happened in Alberta with wildrose, they had it in the bag until some moron decided to talk about abortion, religion and gays. In the USA based on some of these right leaning forums you'd think that Romney had it in the bag in 2012, yet he lost.

Even in Europe, right wing parties are growing in popularity but not translating into poll victories. When election time comes, it's usually centre right or centre left that wins out.

The British conservatives are very similar to the Canadian conservatives, they are simply a slightly centre of the right party, only ever so slightly though. Most people who think there's a grand left wing conspiracy aren't voting for them they're voting ukip or bnp.

Post: #28

NDPs nationally have been talking more conservative then the Con(artists). McCluir sounds like a Joe Clarck light some days while Harper sounds like a drooling cuck who will say any bogus shit to get votes while denying he ran a dictatorship during his majority term.

All the major parties suck but the NDPs have had to reform their party to become electable. Pandering to Quebec is a reality for all the parties, so whatever to that. But from a broader policy approach he has been more tight on the grip then what the Cons say or Queer Trudeau who wants to give everybody money and blow up taxes too.

I knee McCluir was different when he was all in on the oil sands and didn't pander to feeble environmentalists. Don't kept it real in what gives Canada money. When he did that I knew the NDPs were coming at this different.

Mind you in don't vote so I have no skin in this. But just from my viewpoint a NDP minority with the Con's tossed aside to the waste heap like the PCs were for a while would be ideal.

Also there is no "right" in Canada. Your most radical places are in Alberta and pockets of BC, Sask and fringe parts of east Ontario that is the true only long standing Libertarian pocket of Canada. Every other place that considers themslebes "right" is on the pirch or just right beside it.

Classic Canadian social conservatism always had elements of aid and charity to the less off, it is a Canadian cultural thing. Not accepting that means you watch to much Fox News. National and top Provincial PCs were all hacks in the modern age who ran up the largest deficits. Snake Liberals got rid of a good Conservative in Joe Clark and then walloped and left the door open for Mulroony. Go look at examples from Sask, Manitoba, Ontario of what the Cons did to the books.

The meme here on RVF is go all right wing or nothing but in Canada it has been a disaster as all are wolfs in sheeps closing. A typical 2015 Canadian Con is just a Liberal who didn't like abortion.

Glad Harper and his goons will be gone. My father says Harper has been worse then Mulroony, I believe him. TPP is worse then NAFTA ....

Post: #29

LOL! Cannot wait for future PM Mulcair to open the floodgates for 'Refugees' if his junior caucus in Alberta is so eager to help.
Refugees are the NDP's best friend - permanent leeches on social programs, hence permanent NDP voters.

http://calgaryherald.com/news/politics/a...fugee-plan

Post: #30

(08-04-2015 02:59 PM)Vronsky Wrote:  

(08-03-2015 06:07 PM)scotian Wrote:  

I still believe that Chretien with Martin as finance minister was the best federal government that I've seen in my life, and none of the candidates inspire me too much but it'll be interesting to say the least, bring on the attack ads making fun of Trudeau's hair!

Quoted for the truth. The reason that Canadian banks not only survived the 2008 crisis, but actually set a global standard in terms of regulatory frameworks, was solely due to Chretien's delegation of the Finance portfolio to Martin who instituted tough banking rules. We also had a surplus under Martin that got changed into a deficit under Harper. He is not a good economic leader, not on the level of Martin. I especially dislike what he has done to in terms of dismantling renowned and respected federal science programs and StatsCan, all done for politically motivated reasons.

Harper has not been good for Canada and I will be happy to see the back of him soon.
[/quote]

i hate to shit on your view of martin/chretien and our banks but once the housing meltdown occurs you will see how little framework we actually have...

First off Canadian Banks are a complete oligopoly and our government doesnt allow outside competition. Hence why HSBC for example has like 5 branches in major cities... They are not allowed to stick a branch on ever corner like the big 6.

Secondly our banks require way less reserves. That is dating back to the banking act in 1993 i believe where they lowered the reserve requirement to 0% for " chequebook money" which basically means any type of credit

Thirdly our banks were bailed out to the tune of 75 billion dollars during the crisis. During the 08 election we gave them 50 billion in bailout money and then another 25 billion the following year.... If you break it down per bank vs the US our banks received almost double the money than the US banks received.

This time around will be interesting to see how our banks stay a float once the bubble totally implodes in Vancouver and Toronto.

Also dont forget Canada was in the midst of a debt crisis in the 90s. We were once called an honorary 3rd world country by other nations. We lost our AAA rating and were forced to actually cut spending.... and then with the start of the commodity super cycle in the late 90s Martin/chretien began to pilfer the west and huge transfer payments began to roll into Ottawa. Also that lovely GST came into affect under their reign... All that lead to an eventual surplus in 2002

They were not the dynamic duo that people think... We just forget actual events that transpired. DOnt forget when Martin was Prime Minister they called him Mr. Dithers because he couldnt make up his mind and get anything done.

Anyways done ranting but if you want to know how Canadian Banking actually works read Towers of Gold, feet of clay or Bank Heist.

Also there are plenty of articles about the government bailout of the banks. Read the articles from 2008 and 2009....Not the study some quebec university did years later. But if you understand how the banking system works and CMHC then you will see exactly how we funneled tax payer money to our banks, who would have collapsed had it not happened

Post: #31

As for the election Canada is so far gone it is not even funny.... We are about as left as it gets now and on the path to Sweden or Denmark... It still breaks my heart that Alberta went Orange... Hopefully that will bring back a strong super right wing government and shrink taxes/government spending, restore property rights and freedoms.

I will be abstaining from the federal election this time around as i do not agree with any of the parties what so ever. We need a collapse in government confidence so people will finally wake up to what we have become

Post: #32

The Green Party is proposing to eliminate university and college tuition in Canada

Quote:The Green Party made a number of commitments Wednesday morning, which include putting small businesses in the spotlight and slashing Canada’s student debt.

“We still start investing in Canada’s future by abolishing tuition fees for students without adequate financial means,” read the Party’s platform package. “Through consultation and collaboration with provincial governments and universities and colleges, by 2020 we will abolish tuition fees for post-secondary education and skills training for Canadians.”

Link:
https://www.kelownanow.com/news/news/Nat...rb_by_2020

On a policy level I think this is a silly idea, it will just lead to more young people wasting their early years on useless Arts & Humanities degrees.

But on a personal level, considering that I'm a student I hope this leads to one or more of the actual contending parties vowing to reduce tuition costs. Maybe the NDP if they feel like the greens are coming too hard at them from the left and want to bolster their base

Post: #33

I don't know what was more vomit-inducing, Trudeau shitting all over small businesses saying that they are a vehicle for wealthy Canadians to save on taxes (rather than the huge employer of Canadians that they are), or Mulcair pretending to be all enraged by that comment and "demanding an apology" when his socialist party would be just as bad if not worse for small businesses.

Your two poll-leading leftist party leaders everyone.

People like me who actually work in the private sector are pretty screwed.

Post: #34

It could be good to get a socially liberal party that is also business friendly. In many ways that was the Liberals under Cretien.

Post: #35

(09-10-2015 12:05 AM)BIGINJAPAN Wrote:  ...

i hate to shit on your view of martin/chretien and our banks but once the housing meltdown occurs you will see how little framework we actually have...

...

Also there are plenty of articles about the government bailout of the banks. Read the articles from 2008 and 2009....Not the study some quebec university did years later. But if you understand how the banking system works and CMHC then you will see exactly how we funneled tax payer money to our banks, who would have collapsed had it not happened

This is why I hope that the NDP get into power, at least for around two years. As far as I can see they are the only party that might actually allow the banks to...if not implode exactly, at least go to a "C$0" market cap when the genuinely unprecedented residential real estate bubble pops. When it does, and CMHC is unable to make good on their obligations (comically insufficient reserves) to the banks I think that both the Conservatives and the Liberals will simply use other federal funds to prop up CMHC and make good on the "insurance". Also, it is possible that the government may make debts to CMHC non-dischargeable in bankruptcy (like student loans), so as to maintain an illusion that unpaid, and unpayable, loans will magically be paid back "some time". Just to keep them on the books. A large part of the population will then essentially be modern day debt peons facing decades of payments for a house that has long been repossessed.

I hate being "doom and gloom", honestly, but Canadian residential real estate is in such a massive bubble which is somehow simultaneously obvious and denied by most people, not to mention the biggest in recorded history, that you can just stare at it in shock. It really is too bad, though, since when it goes it is going to be like +25% of the population has had the very floor underneath them just disappear. Canadian politicians (e.g. Harper) and bankers (e.g. Mark Carney) have not acted appropriately in the last 7 odd years to mitigate the risks and will be partly to blame.

Post: #36

Toronto and vancouver are the only markets that are overheating, and they won't pop because much of the money is coming from foreign investors. The rest of Canada's housing market is generally reflective of the income situation.

Post: #37

(09-10-2015 12:47 PM)DjembaDjemba Wrote:  Toronto and vancouver are the only markets that are overheating, and they won't pop because much of the money is coming from foreign investors. The rest of Canada's housing market is generally reflective of the income situation.

More than anything I would want what you are saying to be right DD, because of the social cost of it being wrong. But unfortunately that is not what I see in the numbers.

In the event of a price crash the best outcome, in my view, is...

1) ...for CMHC's coffers to be completely depleted and the organisation disbanded (yes, I'm serious. They make home ownership more expensive and risky for Canadians, not less so as is, or should be, their mandate)

2) Canadian banks market cap to go to C$0, or wherever it ends up once unpayable mortgages are written off.

3) Home owners who are substantially underwater to declare bankruptcy and start again.

4) Foreign "investors" in real estate who are underwater can flee and leave the banks in the lurch. I don't care. I feel nothing for the banks. They have coluded with the federal government (CMHC) to create their own mess.

Basically bank shareholders should bear the brunt. If you haven't noticed I take an unusual view of where the responsibility lies in a lender-borrower relationship. Contrary to most people I believe that most (say 70%) of the responsibility lies with the lender. If a loan genuinely goes bad and there has been no one sided fraud (only on the part of the borrower) then the lender must take his lumps and write off most of the loan. I say this because the lender is in a much, much better place to determine the risks than a borrower. They have financial knowledge and smarts not usually possessed by the borrower.

But anyway, that was a bit of a tangent. Obviously time will tell what happens to Canadian residential real estate. Interesting times ahead.

Post: #38

Domestic banks aren't tossing out loans to foreign investors. Those homes are usually purchased with cash or on foreign credit. Banks take an extra step to even make it hard to borrow as a Canadian citizen if the income is derived out of country.

Canadians also can't walk away from an underwater mortgage even if they declare bankruptcy assuming they are cmhc insured. They can and usually are sued for the difference if the property sells below the insured loan value.

Post: #39

(09-10-2015 01:14 PM)DjembaDjemba Wrote:  Domestic banks aren't tossing out loans to foreign investors. Those homes are usually purchased with cash or on foreign credit. Banks take an extra step to even make it hard to borrow as a Canadian citizen if the income is derived out of country.

Canadians also can't walk away from an underwater mortgage even if they declare bankruptcy assuming they are cmhc insured. They can and usually are sued for the difference if the property sells below the insured loan value.

Are you sure about that? I was under the impression that debts to CMHC where treated the same as any other type of debt in bankruptcy. I'm quite aware that CMHC will come after the borrower after paying the bank, but if that debt isn't dischargeable in normal bankruptcy the situation is even worse than I thought.

Not a challenge, but do you have any links to statutes or articles discussing how debts to CMHC are handled? It is subject that interests me since I have been following the Canadian housing market for some years, vaguely thinking about a short trade. The longer we go without a correction the more I feel I should be shorting Canadian banks and home builders. I've looked online for info on how debt to CMHC is dealt with, but aside from the fact that it is obvious that CMHC does have a claim against the original borrower there's not a lot of info on how it is dealt with in personal bankruptcy. The limited amount I've seen seems to indicate is like any other debt, but there's not a lot of info.

The way foreign owned residential real estate is financed is a bit murky. I understand what you are saying. A genuine foreigner with no Canadian income and residence is unlikely to get a residential mortgage in Canada, let alone one insured by CMHC. But in practice there are many foreign investors who live abroad, but have family connections in Canada to do the paperwork. It would be interesting to get good data on foreign ownership. Who owns what, where is the mortgage and though whom it is insured, if at all. I suspect (but obviously don't have the data) that Canadian banks have a lot of residential mortgages effectively made to foreign investors.

Post: #40

(09-10-2015 01:44 PM)Bad Hussar Wrote:  The way foreign owned residential real estate is financed is a bit murky. I understand what you are saying. A genuine foreigner with no Canadian income and residence is unlikely to get a residential mortgage in Canada, let alone one insured by CMHC. But in practice there are many foreign investors who live abroad, but have family connections in Canada to do the paperwork. It would be interesting to get good data on foreign ownership. Who owns what, where is the mortgage and though whom it is insured, if at all. I suspect (but obviously don't have the data) that Canadian banks have a lot of residential mortgages effectively made to foreign investors.

Most of the Chinese buying homes in Vancouver for example, are rich people who want to move their money out of China. Canadian banks are actually helping them dodge Chinese authorities. The property being brought by foreign investors poses no risks to banks but does fuck up the market for the locals which is why you see the average family/resident in Vancouver being priced out of that market.

Canadians banks are basically helping people from China launder money. There's no risk to the housing bubble here at least from that POV. If the market does crash/correct it definitely won't create a risk from in terms of foreign investors defaulting on their mortgages.

Canadian banks helping clients bend rules to move money out of China

Post: #41

BadHussar, if you declare bankruptcy in Canada and have a cmhc insured mortgage, your other debts are discharged but you can keep your home and keep banking with your mortgage institution. There are quite a few more checks and balances so the system doesn't collapse completely if shit hits the fan.

Post: #42

Are you guys actually voting?

I want Harper out so badly, but not sold on Trudeau. I think he is living of his father's legacy.

Bad Hussar - are you homesick and thinking of moving back?

Post: #43

Prediction: Conservative minority.

Post: #44

(09-10-2015 05:51 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  Are you guys actually voting?

I want Harper out so badly, but not sold on Trudeau. I think he is living of his father's legacy.

Bad Hussar - are you homesick and thinking of moving back?

It might sound 'blue pill' around these parts but I always vote, no point being an apathetic voter.

Post: #45

(09-10-2015 05:51 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  Are you guys actually voting?

I want Harper out so badly, but not sold on Trudeau. I think he is living of his father's legacy.

Yes I will be voting, for all the good it will do (which is none).

Harper is gone. But I pretty sure it's an orange wave rising in his place. Not that there is any real difference between the Liberals and the NDP. Both with spend more, tax more, grow government, cave in to public sector unions and give money to the "right" kinds of businesses.

Our economic decline begins here.

Post: #46

We've been stagnating for a decade now, the conservatives have not been the solid economic drivers they tout themselves to be. That said, tax and spend liberalism will torpedo whatever is left of our fragile economy, especially in Eastern Canada and Quebec.

The ndp is actually moving right, the Liberals moving further left.

Post: #47

^ The NDP only seems to be moving to the right. It's a cynical and highly colourable play for centre-left voters because they sense (rightly) most Canadians want Harper out. I don't believe for a second that they will balance budgets and lower taxes. Once in power, they will be psychologically incapable of that.

For instance, everyone thought the NDP here in Alberta would have to moderate a bit because i) it's Alberta; and ii) our economy, and therefore government treasury, depends heavily on oil and gas. But now that they are in, they are doing exactly what NDP governments always do. Taxes are up. Spending is through the roof. The moratorium on raises and hiring in the public sector was quietly set aside. The government has declared all out war on the oil and gas industry and is droning on and on about combating climate change, all with oil at $45 and gas at $3.

If you want to get a good look at what an NDP government would be like, you should get an archived copy of their policy resolutions passed at their last convention. They recently took it off their webpage because it clashes significantly with their recent pretend-centrist campaigning. The NDP is a completely collectivist/statist/marxist party and they won't be changing that up if they come into power (and I think they will).

Post: #48

It is true if you have a CMHC mortgage and default CMHC will sell your house and it if there is a shortfall they will come after you for the difference.... Because they are a government agency after they win in court they can garnish your wages as well if you dont make payment arrangements.

As for the viability of CMHC all it takes is a small correction in real estate and people start defaulting. Once the defaults start CMHC will be out of business... The equity they have is something like 8% of the total portfolio... Not to mention CMHC borrowers arent the greatest credit worthy either.... Hence why the banks pawn the mortgages off on the government... The banks would never loan people that kind of money without an institution like that... That is why you have to have a great job, high credit score and they do a much thorough check regarding property values when you put more than 20% down on a house... That 80% loan is the banks cash and they are on their own with conventional mortgages

I find it hard to believe the NDP would let the banks fail.... They probably think bailing out CMHC is saving a government institution/poor people.... I have a hard time seeing them letting it collapse and letting the banks go... Remember who actually runs the government in the west?

Post: #49

(09-10-2015 05:51 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  Are you guys actually voting?

I want Harper out so badly, but not sold on Trudeau. I think he is living of his father's legacy.

Bad Hussar - are you homesick and thinking of moving back?

A little. But with my work right now Canada isn't the best place for physical or tax residence. But things may be changing business wise.

Will probably be back scouting in the second quarter next year. But BC is about the only place I really like in Canada. Well, maybe Montreal as well, socially, but I don't like their tax and regulatory regime. Especially the Quebec Language Gestapo. Don't get me started...

Aside from my conviction regarding a housing bubble, which I probably do get a bit too heated over, I approve of all the development in Vancouver over the last 10 years or so. All the shiny new buildings aren't going anywhere, bubble or no bubble. I especially like the fairly recent office tower construction downtown and am 100% for bringing more jobs downtown. For a time when I lived there I was one of many who lived downtown but worked out in the burbs. There was a lot of reverse commuting going on.

Post: #50

(09-11-2015 07:15 PM)BIGINJAPAN Wrote:  It is true if you have a CMHC mortgage and default CMHC will sell your house and it if there is a shortfall they will come after you for the difference.... Because they are a government agency after they win in court they can garnish your wages as well if you dont make payment arrangements.

As for the viability of CMHC all it takes is a small correction in real estate and people start defaulting. Once the defaults start CMHC will be out of business... The equity they have is something like 8% of the total portfolio... Not to mention CMHC borrowers arent the greatest credit worthy either.... Hence why the banks pawn the mortgages off on the government... The banks would never loan people that kind of money without an institution like that... That is why you have to have a great job, high credit score and they do a much thorough check regarding property values when you put more than 20% down on a house... That 80% loan is the banks cash and they are on their own with conventional mortgages

I find it hard to believe the NDP would let the banks fail.... They probably think bailing out CMHC is saving a government institution/poor people.... I have a hard time seeing them letting it collapse and letting the banks go... Remember who actually runs the government in the west?

Ja, my impression is that the CMHC is not properly funded. If it were a typical insurance company they'd have actuaries and other analysts doing massive amounts of work to properly asses risk, set appropriate premiums and , critically, even after all this still take out their own insurance with Swiss Re, Zurich Re or other Re-Insurance company. The fact that they have standard rates that apply to all approved borrowers should already raise red flags. The actual risk profile of each borrower varies greatly. Why are they all being charged the same amount?

As you say, a bank would rather have a borrower who is a relatively poor credit risk and puts 5% down than a borrower who is a relatively good credit risk and puts 25% down. For the reason you mention - they believe that the 5% down borrower is a sure thing, since if he defaults the Government of Canada will pay them what is due. Aside from the very basic House Price to Income ratio, which is stupefyingly high, it is this strange state of affairs that convince me that things just cannot continue.