Trump's actual wording would've been "I spoke with President Trudeau and that Nieto guy and I really worked em over, I made them reopen NAFTA. Now, they didn't want to, but I made em do it because I'm a smart guy, the smartest."
"I've talked with Canada and Mexico, it was a great talk, great talk. You know, they call me the great communicator. I'm the best at talks. And they said, get this, they said they would be willing to reopen NAFTA. No other president has ever reopened NAFTA. All the other presidents -- they were laughing at us! They were laughing at us, folks. But they respect me. I'm going to make them renegotiate NAFTA, and it will be a great treaty, the best treaty, and we will win bigly."
Trump's actual wording would've been "I spoke with President Trudeau and that Nieto guy and I really worked em over, I made them reopen NAFTA. Now, they didn't want to, but I made em do it because I'm a smart guy, the smartest."
"I've talked with Canada and Mexico, it was a great talk, great talk. You know, they call me the great communicator. I'm the best at talks. And they said, get this, they said they would be willing to reopen NAFTA. No other president has ever reopened NAFTA. All the other presidents -- they were laughing at us! They were laughing at us, folks. But they respect me. I'm going to make them renegotiate NAFTA, and it will be a great treaty, the best treaty, and we will win bigly."
Trump's actual wording would've been "I spoke with President Trudeau and that Nieto guy and I really worked em over, I made them reopen NAFTA. Now, they didn't want to, but I made em do it because I'm a smart guy, the smartest."
"I've talked with Canada and Mexico, it was a great talk, great talk. You know, they call me the great communicator. I'm the best at talks. And they said, get this, they said they would be willing to reopen NAFTA. No other president has ever reopened NAFTA. All the other presidents -- they were laughing at us! They were laughing at us, folks. But they respect me. I'm going to make them renegotiate NAFTA, and it will be a great treaty, the best treaty, and we will win bigly."
I have this mental image of Bombardier driving across the border with trucks full of airplanes, just dumping them in the States, and it makes me giggle.
This is selfish obviously but as someone who doesnt own any property I should be happy if the housing bubble bursts, right? Looking forward to it.
Prices would drop, making it more affordable to buy a home. Am I missing something?
See: America 2007-2012
No, it affects everyone.
PSN: Canadian_llama
+5
Options
El SkidThe frozen white northRegistered Userregular
edited April 2017
It does make people going into the housing market for the first time pretty happy though, admittedly. And makes people who had JUST got into the housing market for the first time before the bubble bursting very sad
It does make people going into the housing market for the first time pretty happy though, admittedly. And makes people who had JUST got into the housing market for the first time before the bubble bursting very sad
It will also massively increase mortgage rates. 1st time home buying will be tough at 6-10% interest.
I don't think so.
You need 20%+ down payment or equity to get a 30 year mortgage and 40 is completely gone.
We don't do sub prime or teaser rates as far as I know.
Nor is our market built on a house of cards of shitty debt.
I think it's a very big stretch to compare this to the 2008 crisis.
This is bad lenders being punished for not doing their job.
I'm not suggesting that there's a crisis coming. I'm saying people look back at the Harper government tightening mortgage rules after 2008 without realising that they had already loosened them between 2006-7, and I'm unsure that the post-2012 rules are actually more stringent than the pre-2006 rules. Nobody was paying attention to mortgage rule changes pre-2008, obviously, but Harper et al. made some changes that played right into the same factors that caused the US crisis, and them immediately reversed course after 2008 (obviously). It's not clear to me that our rules now are of the quality of the 2006 ones that prevented the financial contagion of 2008 from spreading to us in the first place.
Just yesterday, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty repeated the mantra that the government acted early to get rid of risky mortgages. What he and Prime Minister Stephen Harper do not explain, however, is that the expansion of zero-down, 40-year mortgages began with measures contained in the first Conservative budget in May of 2006.
At the time, Mr. Flaherty announced that the government was opening up the market to more private insurers.
"These changes will result in greater choice and innovation in the market for mortgage insurance, benefiting consumers and promoting home ownership," Mr. Flaherty said.
The new rules encouraged the entry of such U.S. players as American International Group - the world's largest insurance company - and Triad Guarantee Inc. of Winston-Salem, N.C. Former Triad chief executive officer Mark Tonnesen, who spearheaded his company's aborted push into Canada, said the proliferation of high-risk mortgages could have been mitigated if Ottawa had been more watchful.
"There was a lack of regulation around the expansion of increased risk," he said.
Virtually unavailable in Canada two years ago, high-risk mortgages proliferated in 2007 and early 2008 and must now be shouldered by thousands of consumers at a time when the economy is sinking quickly and real-estate prices are swooning. Long-term mortgages - designed to help newcomers get into the housing market sooner - are the most expensive in terms of interest costs, and least flexible when mortgage-holders cannot meet their payments and need extensions.
The Bank of Canada this week warned that the perilous economy could lead to a doubling of so-called "vulnerable households" - those unable to meet their debts - and perhaps cost thousands of Canadians their homes. The central bank, which is always cautious with its words, said in a report that there is the potential for "a substantial increase in default rates on household debt."
The federal government waited until June of this year to slam the regulatory door on 40-year mortgages. In October, as the global financial crisis erupted, Mr. Harper lauded his government for its "early" response to the mortgage dangers.
"In the U.S., they are still responding to the fallout of the subprime mortgage mess. In Canada, we acted early over the past year," Mr. Harper said in a speech to the Empire Club in Toronto.
He didn't say that, not only did his own government open the sheltered Canadian mortgage market to U.S. insurers, but it also doubled to $200-billion the pool of federal money it would commit to guarantee their business. The foreigners unleashed what one U.S. insurance executive described as a fierce "dogfight for market share" that prompted rivals, including the giant federal agency Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, to aggressively push such risky U.S.-style lending.
People lauded Harper et al. for closing the very doors they had opened in the first place.
The article's actually very long and details a long history of Canadian mortgage rules. Worth a read, though I'm not sure I come out of it really understanding the full impacts of everything. But here's a choice quote:
On May 2, 2006, in his first budget, Mr. Flaherty announced that not only would Ottawa guarantee the business of U.S. insurers, it was doubling the guarantee to $200-billion.
Twenty-four hours before Mr. Flaherty's announcement, AIG's mortgage subsidiary first registered with Canada's lobbyist commissioner, according to a federal registry. At the time, companies who spent more than 20 per cent of their time lobbying the government for changes in policy were required, by law, to register. It is not known how much time AIG spent promoting its cause to the government.
Edit: More about the CMHC, and how quiet, subtle shifts in policy may have exposed it to significant market risks:
It’s a familiar-sounding story to American ears. “The Canadian government mortgage apparatus echoes uncannily our experiences down here with Fannie and Freddie” says Jim Grant, author of the widely read Grant’s Interest Rate Observer newsletter. “CMHC has distorted the housing market by making homes, especially ones that are on the pricier end of the spectrum, more affordable and encouraged a lot of people to get in over their heads.”
Grant and other critics argue the CMHC’s balance sheet looks strikingly similar to both Fannie and Freddie if you compare the mortgages the agency insures against its equity. Using the CMHC’s 2010 forecasts, it insures $519.1 billion in mortgages against $9.9 billion in equity, which works out to around 1.9 per cent (although the CMHC says it has another $6.7 billion in “unearned” premiums that could be used toward future claims). By comparison, in 2007, at the peak of the bubble, Fannie Mae backed up US$2.7 trillion of mortgage-backed securities with US$40 billion of capital, or 1.5 per cent equity against its overall exposure. But the CMHC says its capital levels are double what the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions requires of mortgage insurers (though the CMHC is not regulated by the OFSI). But such assurances in the absence of transparent disclosure offer limited comfort. As C.D. Howe researcher Finn Poschmann wrote in a recent report: “Parliament and the voters to whom it answers have no formal documentation of the way these exposures are calculated or managed.” ...
The CMHC dove into such high-risk products largely without supervision. While the government had previously relaxed conditions for guaranteeing mortgage insurance as part of a plan to introduce more private sector competition, it was the CMHC’s management and board that ultimately made the decision to go to 40-year amortization periods. In the same way, in 2007, the CMHC introduced a program for self-employed Canadians who have difficulty documenting their earnings to nonetheless obtain mortgage insurance by “stating” their income. While the program was restricted to borrowers with good credit ratings, one mortgage broker told Maclean’s self-employed Canadians were able to get much larger mortgages than those in the same field who had documented incomes. Then, a year ago, the CMHC backtracked and significantly tightened its rules on stated-income mortgages.
Ontario NDP have proposed a universal pharmacare system covering the most common 125 medications prescribed in Ontario.
Ontario Liberals have proposed a pharmacare system would cover all drugs currently covered by the existing Ontario Drug Plan Benefit (for seniors and poor people) for people under age 25.
Ontario PCs have proposed JACK DIDDLY SQUAT and have openly admitted that their campaign strategy will involve NO policy proposals, banking on Wynne's unpopularity and reflecting on the fact that every time Brown has tried to do something policy-related, he's pissed off (the alt-right) half of his party.
When the NDP and Liberals split the progressive vote and we end up with, at best, a do-nothing PC party that has absolutely no vision for what it actually wants to do and a empty suit for Premier ............
I don't foresee the NDP getting much of a vote honestly. Horwath isn't super popular and this pharmacare plan is the first thing I can recall hearing from them in like a year. Better than the PCs for sure, but that's not exactly a high bar to clear.
There was already a lot of speculation that they'd be announcing an election this weekend, so nobody is surprised, but it does put the premier in a position where he's decided to deny that the date is official for a few days, before probably dropping the writ and announcing that date on Sunday.
Also, if they do announce an election, it would almost definitely make the budget they just announced moot, since it would dissolve the legislature before they vote on it.
Unless the NDP really shape up I won't for them again but can't vote for these clowns no matter what. They are the main source of most of AB's fundamental problems on nearly every front.
Unless the NDP really shape up I won't for them again but can't vote for these clowns no matter what. They are the main source of most of AB's fundamental problems on nearly every front.
Honest question, what's the alternative?
Want to find me on a gaming service? I'm SwashbucklerXX everywhere.
I don't foresee the NDP getting much of a vote honestly. Horwath isn't super popular and this pharmacare plan is the first thing I can recall hearing from them in like a year. Better than the PCs for sure, but that's not exactly a high bar to clear.
Agreed. I just can't support a provincial NDP leader who triggered an election in an attempt to gain seats, in the process losing the kingmaker position in a minority government. It's like "You assholes, the NDP is not going to form the government in Ontario. You had all the power you were ever going to have, and you pissed it away. Wankers."
I don't foresee the NDP getting much of a vote honestly. Horwath isn't super popular and this pharmacare plan is the first thing I can recall hearing from them in like a year. Better than the PCs for sure, but that's not exactly a high bar to clear.
Agreed. I just can't support a provincial NDP leader who triggered an election in an attempt to gain seats, in the process losing the kingmaker position in a minority government. It's like "You assholes, the NDP is not going to form the government in Ontario. You had all the power you were ever going to have, and you pissed it away. Wankers."
It was fun talking to NDP supporters at the time. They were all 'we can't support these corrupt liberals!' Like, she supported them for three and a half fucking years. But the poll numbers went up slightly, so gotta do the thing. Then Horwath decided to shift center, Wynne shifted left, and the ONDP became irrelevant forever.
+1
Options
Caulk Bite 6One of the multitude of Dans infesting this placeRegistered Userregular
Calling back to the chip flavours topic, just opened a bag of PC Brand Thai Curry, and it's... Well, it definitely tastes like that.
What I haven't decided is if I like it in chip form.
I don't foresee the NDP getting much of a vote honestly. Horwath isn't super popular and this pharmacare plan is the first thing I can recall hearing from them in like a year. Better than the PCs for sure, but that's not exactly a high bar to clear.
Agreed. I just can't support a provincial NDP leader who triggered an election in an attempt to gain seats, in the process losing the kingmaker position in a minority government. It's like "You assholes, the NDP is not going to form the government in Ontario. You had all the power you were ever going to have, and you pissed it away. Wankers."
It was fun talking to NDP supporters at the time. They were all 'we can't support these corrupt liberals!' Like, she supported them for three and a half fucking years. But the poll numbers went up slightly, so gotta do the thing. Then Horwath decided to shift center, Wynne shifted left, and the ONDP became irrelevant forever.
Especially since they had to stand up against a budget that was basically an NDP wet dream.
+5
Options
GreasyKidsStuffMOMMM!ROAST BEEF WANTS TO KISS GIRLS ON THE TITTIES!Registered Userregular
I'm really starting to worry about how the BC election is going to shape up. Feels like the Green Party is gaining some momentum which might split the vote in the Liberal's favour. Classic.
It sucks even more because party affiliation aside, I would vote for my Green party candidate in a heartbeat. Really great guy, owns my favourite coffee shop in town, and has a good attitude about a lot of things. Buuuuut... strategic voting
I got pissed earlier today, tho not surprised at all.
Every other parties signs were in their usual areas and stuff, usual spread, then other day, Clark sent a new wave of signs.
They are all placed directly in front of other parties signs completely obscuring them, like purposefully an inch in front of every sign they could find
I got pissed earlier today, tho not surprised at all.
Every other parties signs were in their usual areas and stuff, usual spread, then other day, Clark sent a new wave of signs.
They are all placed directly in front of other parties signs completely obscuring them, like purposefully an inch in front of every sign they could find
While I think that's not strictly illegal, I'm pretty sure that's violating the spirit of a law somehow.
I got pissed earlier today, tho not surprised at all.
Every other parties signs were in their usual areas and stuff, usual spread, then other day, Clark sent a new wave of signs.
They are all placed directly in front of other parties signs completely obscuring them, like purposefully an inch in front of every sign they could find
While I think that's not strictly illegal, I'm pretty sure that's violating the spirit of a law somehow.
Kinda like how she got elected here in the first place
I got pissed earlier today, tho not surprised at all.
Every other parties signs were in their usual areas and stuff, usual spread, then other day, Clark sent a new wave of signs.
They are all placed directly in front of other parties signs completely obscuring them, like purposefully an inch in front of every sign they could find
While I think that's not strictly illegal, I'm pretty sure that's violating the spirit of a law somehow.
Kinda like how she got elected here in the first place
There's a story here, I'm sure I've heard before, but it's not coming to me
I got pissed earlier today, tho not surprised at all.
Every other parties signs were in their usual areas and stuff, usual spread, then other day, Clark sent a new wave of signs.
They are all placed directly in front of other parties signs completely obscuring them, like purposefully an inch in front of every sign they could find
While I think that's not strictly illegal, I'm pretty sure that's violating the spirit of a law somehow.
Kinda like how she got elected here in the first place
There's a story here, I'm sure I've heard before, but it's not coming to me
The candidate on the ticket suddenly dropped out after winning the election and suddenly Clark instead.
And then both moved into million dollar lakefront houses
I got pissed earlier today, tho not surprised at all.
Every other parties signs were in their usual areas and stuff, usual spread, then other day, Clark sent a new wave of signs.
They are all placed directly in front of other parties signs completely obscuring them, like purposefully an inch in front of every sign they could find
While I think that's not strictly illegal, I'm pretty sure that's violating the spirit of a law somehow.
Kinda like how she got elected here in the first place
There's a story here, I'm sure I've heard before, but it's not coming to me
The candidate on the ticket suddenly dropped out after winning the election and suddenly Clark instead.
And then both moved into million dollar lakefront houses
I got pissed earlier today, tho not surprised at all.
Every other parties signs were in their usual areas and stuff, usual spread, then other day, Clark sent a new wave of signs.
They are all placed directly in front of other parties signs completely obscuring them, like purposefully an inch in front of every sign they could find
While I think that's not strictly illegal, I'm pretty sure that's violating the spirit of a law somehow.
Kinda like how she got elected here in the first place
There's a story here, I'm sure I've heard before, but it's not coming to me
The candidate on the ticket suddenly dropped out after winning the election and suddenly Clark instead.
And then both moved into million dollar lakefront houses
I'm kinda surprised this does not get talked about more.
Canadian "universal" healthcare is untouchable in today's world.
I think the shitshow that is happening down south is actually serving as a reminder and illustration about how good we have it. If anything it's strengthening Canadian's belief in the system.
Posts
If you're serious then I'm sorry if I've offended anyone.
If you're not serious: https://img.memesuper.com/60d04f837809f0f07bf6f71e496daa2f_some-people-have-no-sense-of-humor-so-i-go-to-imgflip-imgflip-sense-of-humor-meme_490-326.jpeg
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trump-trudeau-nafta-renegotiation-1.4088545
is worth a look, just for the general hilarity that ensues both from Trudeau and everyone else there when the NAFTA stuff comes up.
I have this mental image of Bombardier driving across the border with trucks full of airplanes, just dumping them in the States, and it makes me giggle.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
This has a strong possibility of being the metaphorical canary in a coal mine.
Prices would drop, making it more affordable to buy a home. Am I missing something?
Battle.net: Fireflash#1425
Steam Friend code: 45386507
See: America 2007-2012
No, it affects everyone.
It will also massively increase mortgage rates. 1st time home buying will be tough at 6-10% interest.
Mortgage rules have been tightened several times since 2008 in Canada.
AFTER they were loosened by Harper at al. before 2008. I believe our regulations are now actually weaker than they used to be.
You need 20%+ down payment or equity to get a 30 year mortgage and 40 is completely gone.
We don't do sub prime or teaser rates as far as I know.
Nor is our market built on a house of cards of shitty debt.
I think it's a very big stretch to compare this to the 2008 crisis.
This is bad lenders being punished for not doing their job.
I'm not suggesting that there's a crisis coming. I'm saying people look back at the Harper government tightening mortgage rules after 2008 without realising that they had already loosened them between 2006-7, and I'm unsure that the post-2012 rules are actually more stringent than the pre-2006 rules. Nobody was paying attention to mortgage rule changes pre-2008, obviously, but Harper et al. made some changes that played right into the same factors that caused the US crisis, and them immediately reversed course after 2008 (obviously). It's not clear to me that our rules now are of the quality of the 2006 ones that prevented the financial contagion of 2008 from spreading to us in the first place.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/special-investigation-how-high-risk-mortgages-crept-north/article1067885/
People lauded Harper et al. for closing the very doors they had opened in the first place.
The article's actually very long and details a long history of Canadian mortgage rules. Worth a read, though I'm not sure I come out of it really understanding the full impacts of everything. But here's a choice quote:
Edit: More about the CMHC, and how quiet, subtle shifts in policy may have exposed it to significant market risks:
http://www.macleans.ca/economy/business/a-mortgage-monster/
"Kevin O'Leary said Quebec is the Florida of Canada."
"Wait... I thought Florida was the Florida of Canada."
Point!
Ontario Liberals have proposed a pharmacare system would cover all drugs currently covered by the existing Ontario Drug Plan Benefit (for seniors and poor people) for people under age 25.
Ontario PCs have proposed JACK DIDDLY SQUAT and have openly admitted that their campaign strategy will involve NO policy proposals, banking on Wynne's unpopularity and reflecting on the fact that every time Brown has tried to do something policy-related, he's pissed off (the alt-right) half of his party.
When the NDP and Liberals split the progressive vote and we end up with, at best, a do-nothing PC party that has absolutely no vision for what it actually wants to do and a empty suit for Premier ............
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/liberal-election-website-vote-may-30-1.4090178
There was already a lot of speculation that they'd be announcing an election this weekend, so nobody is surprised, but it does put the premier in a position where he's decided to deny that the date is official for a few days, before probably dropping the writ and announcing that date on Sunday.
Also, if they do announce an election, it would almost definitely make the budget they just announced moot, since it would dissolve the legislature before they vote on it.
Early but still good news!
Unless the NDP really shape up I won't for them again but can't vote for these clowns no matter what. They are the main source of most of AB's fundamental problems on nearly every front.
Honest question, what's the alternative?
It was fun talking to NDP supporters at the time. They were all 'we can't support these corrupt liberals!' Like, she supported them for three and a half fucking years. But the poll numbers went up slightly, so gotta do the thing. Then Horwath decided to shift center, Wynne shifted left, and the ONDP became irrelevant forever.
What I haven't decided is if I like it in chip form.
Especially since they had to stand up against a budget that was basically an NDP wet dream.
It sucks even more because party affiliation aside, I would vote for my Green party candidate in a heartbeat. Really great guy, owns my favourite coffee shop in town, and has a good attitude about a lot of things. Buuuuut... strategic voting
Every other parties signs were in their usual areas and stuff, usual spread, then other day, Clark sent a new wave of signs.
They are all placed directly in front of other parties signs completely obscuring them, like purposefully an inch in front of every sign they could find
I generally align with the rest of the platform as well but that small personal thing swayed me to ndp over green.
While I think that's not strictly illegal, I'm pretty sure that's violating the spirit of a law somehow.
Kinda like how she got elected here in the first place
There's a story here, I'm sure I've heard before, but it's not coming to me
The candidate on the ticket suddenly dropped out after winning the election and suddenly Clark instead.
And then both moved into million dollar lakefront houses
Oh right, that was like 10 pages ago
I'm kinda surprised this does not get talked about more.
If the party leader loses in their riding someone drops off and in they go.
yea I think that is just how it goes, not sure about million dollar lakefront houses though
Million Dollar lake front homes, whose remodel shut down a major road here for almost 4 weeks.
Definitely shady.
Truth be told though I don't expect any party to be immune from this quid pro quo Bullshit and it's not high on my care-o-meter.
I just want policies that benefit the province and the people in my community.
I watched a horrific debate for my riding and the only person who stood out as professional and prepared was Rob Fleming the NDP guy.
I think that has solidified my vote.
Their candidate replacement policy is still stupid though.
Any politician here that would try to abolish it would get mauled I truly hope.
I think the shitshow that is happening down south is actually serving as a reminder and illustration about how good we have it. If anything it's strengthening Canadian's belief in the system.