Canadian election and other political stuff

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
jimkenney12 said:
You do understand that "the Bank" is the Bank of Canada which will not lose any money regarding mortgage defaults. All that the government loses would be taxes on the banks' income lost due to mortgage defaults.

In our complicated and biased economic system, the banks will squeeze every penny they can out of home owners and write off losses on mortgage defaults by institutional investors and well connected individuals. Banks were, maybe still are, among the largest owners of farmland on the prairies.

The Trudeau government brought on new rules to make it harder for individuals to get mortgages by requiring them to be able to pay mortgages with a higher interest rate than they were getting. What is happening now is like a light shower compared to 1982.
Click to expand...

The bank will do all it can in inflated means to make an extended profiteering activity ... you can bank on it as a mess of muskrats ...
 
How many here realize that if you are in, or receiving benefits from, a pension plan, you are benefiting from the banks' profitability/greed? Aside from financial crises like 2008, banks remain a very solid, stable investment so institutional investors like pensions tend to use them heavily as a backbone investment. That includes CPP, by the way. And defined contribution plans like my employer's that include Canadian equity mutual funds or ETFs as an option. I would argue that pretty much every Canadian has invested money in the banks and benefits from their greed, if only through CPP or a corporate pension plan.
 
The banks could share more of their profits by increasing CPP. Yes, I know it's the government that does that. Still... .
 
Northwind said:
The banks could share more of their profits by increasing CPP. Yes, I know it's the government that does that. Still... .
Click to expand...
The only way the government can do that is by raising contribution rates, which is already happening. I don't think CPP still has a surplus at the moment (beyond what is needed to ensure they can meet future commitments).
 
Its just too much to deal with say those that have sold their sol to whatever ... some declare Monae a God! Close to Monet but a differing image ... darker?
 
Northwind said:
The banks could share more of their profits by increasing CPP. Yes, I know it's the government that does that. Still... .
Click to expand...
Starting now, anyone that turns 65 and starts CCP now will see an increase.....but not the ones who have already started it.
Doesn't sound fair, but that's what it is.
 
Waterfall said:
Starting now, anyone that turns 65 and starts CCP now will see an increase.....but not the ones who have already started it.
Doesn't sound fair, but that's what it is.
Click to expand...
Okay, excellent I'm ready to see that increase. I wonder if I can even get CCP, though. I wouldn't be surprised if I can't. I qualify for Canada's dental plan, but am unable to take advantage of it. There's some kind of nutty rule that one's dentist must be in Canada
 
Waterfall said:
Starting now, anyone that turns 65 and starts CCP now will see an increase.....but not the ones who have already started it.
Click to expand...
It isn't fair but makes accounting sense. The higher CPP contributions create the room for the higher payments so only those paying the higher contributions benefit. However, that kind of misses the point of CPP and just means more pressure on tax-funded programs like OAS and GIS.
 
WhyCzar said:
Click to expand...
My comments from the Jagmeet Singh thread. No need to post stuff like this twice, eh. Just put it once in an appropriate thread and link to that post from other relevant threads.

Mendalla

Post in thread 'Jagmeet Singh....NDP'

WhyCzar said:
Click to expand...
See, that's interesting. I didn't think he would actually do it. Of course, the NDP could still keep the Liberals on life support by voting against confidence motions on a case-by-case basis. There just isn't the lifeline the Liberals had with the agreement.
  • Like
 
Jagmeet Singh: We’re no longer propping up the Liberals, we’re tearing up our supply and confidence agreement.

Justin Trudeau, literally 30 mins later: How bout those interest rate cuts?
 
Mendalla said:
It isn't fair but makes accounting sense
Click to expand...

It may be good accounting. It truly sucks for those of us in the middle. We paid into CP for decades and this is what we get in return. While I do have a small work pension, a little more from CPP would help a ton.

Sometimes life impacted decisions and decisions impacted life in a way that CPP is more important for some than others.

It is shitty that a group in the middle gets the short straw because they aren't in the right demographic or whatever.

Saying it isn't fair but that it makes accounting sense doesn't cut it. There can be a shifting of priorities.
 
Northwind said:
Saying it isn't fair but that it makes accounting sense doesn't cut it. There can be a shifting of priorities.
Click to expand...
That was kind of my point but I was just saying I understand why it was done that way even if i don't agree. Ultimately, the problem is that these programs are designed by bean counters like accountants and actuaries, not ethics specialists or justice advocates. Which should change but I can't name one party in this country (no, not even the NDP) that would actually change it.
 
Mendalla said:
Which should change but I can't name one party in this country (no, not even the NDP) that would actually change it.
Click to expand...
I think it's a possibility, if he heard enough backlash about it, he might promise that during an election.....seniors are still a good portion of the population, and we also actually vote.
I would actually prefer a leader in this political climate that actually cares about Canadian societies needs and injustices and not just wars abroad.
 
Waterfall said:
I think it's a possibility, if he heard enough backlash about it, he might promise that during an election.....seniors are still a good portion of the population, and we also actually vote.
I would actually prefer a leader in this political climate that actually cares about Canadian societies needs and injustices and not just wars abroad.
Click to expand...
It requires a whole new way of setting up the plan I think. And a whole new way of funding it.

I would rather see a move not focussing on the CPP alone but on a Universal Basic Income, which would apply to all age ranges.
 
GordW said:
It requires a whole new way of setting up the plan I think. And a whole new way of funding it.

I would rather see a move not focussing on the CPP alone but on a Universal Basic Income, which would apply to all age ranges.
Click to expand...
And maybe, it's only the NDP that would take that suggestion seriously?....we learn as we go.
 
GordW said:
I would rather see a move not focussing on the CPP alone but on a Universal Basic Income, which would apply to all age ranges.
Click to expand...

I agree.

They were able to have a $2000 per month CERB payment. That was a good thing. If they can do that, they can find a way to start with a $2000 monthly CPP and go from there. Those who don't need it will "give back" through their taxes.
 
And... it has happened. Top TV Canada has reported that Trudeau's government is now at risk because Singh's NDP party have withdrawn their support. Canada will soon enough be going to the polls. Enjoy the race
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top