Canadian Money Forum banner

41 - 60 of 77 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,234 Posts
The attack on meat is because it has been shown to be healthier both for humans and for the environment when less meat is eaten.

I liked their vision but I think they're a bit overly optimistic, that's only 10 years away.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,291 Posts
Professional politicians are good. There are certain skills and experience needed to be an effective government. The same goes for the public service in general ... these are systems that one has to develop expertise in.

Look at the disaster you get when you put some nobody like Trump in charge. He doesn't even know the basics of government and his mind is on celebrity obsessions like status and loyalty. He has totally mismanaged the US government, causing destruction to many big institutions.

Trump's mismanagement has caused tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths. If he continues mismanaging the COVID response, there could be the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people on his hands.

Great example of how important it is to have someone qualified and competent in government roles. You can't just put some random dude in charge ... it's very dangerous. The deaths that Trump is responsible for are kind of like casualties of a mismanaged war, with a moron in charge of the military.

And here in our country, I only want skilled, professional politicians in important roles. That means someone who likely has a background in law or public administration, plus some years working in the political system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
Discussion Starter #43
The attack on meat is because it has been shown to be healthier both for humans and for the environment when less meat is eaten.
Nonsense. Humans have eaten meat for 2.6 million years or more...became farmers only 10,000-15,000 years ago. Humans evolved eating meat. Evolution doesn't move that fast. The reason there are so many people with metabolic syndrome and T2 diabetes is; grains, sugar, and starchy plants. Removing that food source will only end in disaster for many.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
625 Posts
Interesting if not stupefying video. What is with the attack on meat? Does the Seventh-day-Adventists lead the world economic forum?
James

Power has gone to their heads they think they can control the climate & eliminate CO2 which only makes up .04% of the atmosphere LOL They know their agenda would never pass if voted on so they are trying to force it on us. I do not think they will succeed though they are doing a lot of damage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,735 Posts
Professional politicians are good. There are certain skills and experience needed to be an effective government. The same goes for the public service in general ... these are systems that one has to develop expertise in.

And here in our country, I only want skilled, professional politicians in important roles. That means someone who likely has a background in law or public administration, plus some years working in the political system.
The problem with professional politicians is they see everything as a political problem.
They also think since they're an expert at politics, they're an expert at other stuff, stuff they don't understand.

Many see them as the ultimate national manager, and if they just did better everything would be good.

The thing is they try to run the country like some sort of Dilbert gag, rather then letting "their people" just do their job.

Today we have a problem where our "leaders" are trying to use politics to solve problems that they don't understand, and might not even be problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
I take it from your language that you would support the Conservatives.

The Conservatives had inherited a budget surplus of $14 billion in 2006 which they quickly turned into a deficit. During this incredibly long 10 year stretch in government, the Conservatives ran mostly deficits except for the final year. And no it wasn't just because of the 2008 crisis. Harper actually started running a deficit before the 2008 crisis hit.

You said you want a chance to elect someone new. Who do you want to elect? Surely not the Conservatives, the party of chronic deficits and poor fiscal management.
I wish Harper was at the helm right now. He would weather this storm far better then T2. You talk of Harpers poor fiscal record, yet he did in fact run budget surpluses. The deficits he ran - including the big one of 56Billion is a drop in the bucket to what Trudeau is doing. Canada was having a streak of great growth with record low unemployment yet Trudeau was running deficits. Not sure in what universe you think Harper was worse then Trudeau
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,740 Posts
As the OP of this thread, I was hoping for some rational thoughts around finances and how to prepare family, friends, for the long term rather than political bickering ...
Not sure what sort of info - beyond financial literacy, having an emergency fund, investing and buying you can afford instead of keeping up with the Jones (which is already available from multiple sources) would be relevant.

As for preparing family/friends, my experience when talking about it is that a small number engage and the rest are going to ignore what was said or will change the subject.


... Sortition to form government can't come fast or soon enough. Surely even a 10 year old knows you cannot spend more than you generate.....without consequences....
I guess you haven't noticed that many are spending $1.58 for each dollar earned and how debut has mushroomed, right?

If I understand your description of Sortition - are you really sure that people who are convinced there purchase is okay because they can afford "$X a week" with no concern about what they are paying or how it fits within their income will make better financial decisions? How about those who respond to financial basics with "it's complication, beyond me and I have to trust my loyal bank rep"?

I have seen some really easy to fix financial mistakes made by otherwise quite bright co-workers.


Cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
Discussion Starter #48
I guess you haven't noticed that many are spending $1.58 for each dollar earned and how debut has mushroomed, right?
Oh I noticed. Its a major problem and its extremely sad. The hardest part of the problem is that those who do work hard to keep solvent, spend below their needs and save are punished for those that don't.

If I understand your description of Sortition - are you really sure that people who are convinced there purchase is okay because they can afford "$X a week" with no concern about what they are paying or how it fits within their income will make better financial decisions? How about those who respond to financial basics with "it's complication, beyond me and I have to trust my loyal bank rep"?
No I am not convinced with your strawman example would end in better financial decisions. But is it worse than the current situation? I would rather have someone with no political skeletons, no base to satisfy, no agenda, to decided because they might make better ethical and financial decisions. That little 'might' is called hope. The current professional politician have made a mockery of democracy. And democracy can denigrate to tyranny quickly. Those who have read Plato will remember that the tyrannical man is the son of democracy. Where the father (democracy) is not lawless, the son (tyrant or mob) does indulge unnecessary desires. (Ridding meat in the diet, proroguing government, building a wall whether T2 or Trump--they are taking democracy from its roots away in unnecessary desires.) All that to say, it will not be today but maybe in 5 or 10 years...but the results are not going to be good.

I have seen some really easy to fix financial mistakes made by otherwise quite bright co-workers.
Your right, knowing the right thing and doing the right thing doesn't always align.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,740 Posts
... No I am not convinced with your strawman example would end in better financial decisions.
What have I misrepresented that makes it a strawman example?

All I'm saying is there's a lot of financial ignorance in the general public that would likely be in play for the lot casting, jury style gov't decision making for financial policy.
I'm not so sure that removing the bad parts of politicians automatically means better decisions.


... Your right, knowing the right thing and doing the right thing doesn't always align.
There's that for those that know the right thing but there's also a lot of the public who don't know and/or aren't interested in figuring out the right thing (financially speaking).

Cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
Discussion Starter #50
What have I misrepresented that makes it a strawman example?
You didn't misrepresent anything. I called it a straw man, because financial ignorance in the general public is not different than financial blissful ignorance displayed by professional politicians. Er.....let me take that back, professional politician are worse because their decision are not based on is this good for the country but rather base on agendas, skeletons, and vanity projects.

All I'm saying is there's a lot of financial ignorance in the general public that would likely be in play for the lot casting, jury style gov't decision making for financial policy.
I'm not so sure that removing the bad parts of politicians automatically means better decisions.
So in the final outcome you could be right. But we as a country have yet to test Sortition out. It may work well, it may not. But the population at large has shown itself to be tired of the current system.

There's that for those that know the right thing but there's also a lot of the public who don't know and/or aren't interested in figuring out the right thing (financially speaking).
Yes and those that aren't interested are culpable. On the one hand, they are immediately damaging their person/family situation and on the other hand, they are extending that damage to others (who may be doing the right things) by increased taxation that should not have needed to happen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,291 Posts
For those of you who are worried about Canadian stimulus programs and payments to citizens:

Were you equally concerned when the government and central bank(s) repeatedly paid billions, and even trillions (in US), to entities such as banks (2007-2008), then provided aggressive QE stimulus measures pretty much whole time over the last 11 years?

The US Federal Reserve balance sheet expanded by $3.6 TRILLION since the 2007 handouts started
The Bank of Canada balance sheet expanded by $350 BILLION since 2007 plus billions more at CMHC

(Another thing to remember here is that the US Federal Reserve is helping fund the whole world, so Canada benefits from that $3.6 trillion of stimulus)

The stimulus over the last few years was largely on the central bank's balance sheet, but all of that results in a hidden tax as well. It's not much different other than a sleight of hand of where the balance sheet sits. The QE and asset rescues of 2008 boosted asset values tremendously and helped the rich, with very little benefit to anyone else.

Did all that stimulus and burden on the future worry you as well? Or are you only worried about the current phase of stimulus which (for once) is actually paying cash out to regular citizens.

Here's the reality. Stimulus money has been pumped into the economy non-stop since 2007/2008, and it was widely celebrated by conservatives and the ultra rich (because it helped them the most). It was very strongly celebrated by American Republicans and Trump. And early this year, the Bank of Canada rapidly printed hundreds of billions of $, almost exactly on par with the new government's spending deficit.

I don't recall hearing any whining when the Bank of Canada bought up all those assets. So why are conservatives suddenly whining so much about an almost identical amount being paid out in stimulus & spending?

The answer ... instead of just helping the rich, this time it's being spread more broadly, including to the poor. Cry me a river.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,757 Posts
What do people think would have happened if there was no lock downs ?

Would the world just continue on with the virus running rampant and increasing numbers of people becoming sick and needing emergency care ?

What if the doctors and nurses became sick and couldn't treat the patients ? What if the police and paramedics got sick ?

What if the service workers became sick and couldn't deliver goods and services, food and utilities to Canadians ?

What if the nursing home staff all got sick and couldn't care for the residents ? What if workers simply decided not to expose themselves to the virus ?

The lockdowns were designed to enable the above essential workers to keep Canada as safe as possible for all Canadians.

The COVID was and is bad enough with the lock downs. I think without them it would have been a disaster 100 times worse than we are dealing with now.
Why float fear mongering "what if's" instead of looking at the actual numbers?

If you're 50 or under and healthy the survival rate is greater than 99.9%. I'm pretty sure most professions can survive losing 0.1% of their staff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,291 Posts
Apparently there is strong global demand for Canadian provincial bonds, described in this article.

It shows why global interest rates matter. Europeans look at German bunds yielding -0.6% (negative) and ask where they can get higher yields for not too much risk. When they look around the world, they see Canada and provincial bonds with the elevated yields.

We're a strong, stable country with a good reputation, and global capital therefore helps fund our provincial borrowing. People are right to complain that the debts are becoming huge, but there is also enormous appetite for that debt.

The actions of the ECB, BOJ, US Fed and Bank of England are all helping Canada (federal and provinces) borrow money for very, very cheap. When our government entities can borrow the money at only 1% or 2% yield (equal to inflation, aka FREE money) and use that to fund programs and infrastructure which employ people, invest in the future, and/or prevent lives from being destroyed .... that's a good deal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,679 Posts
Nonsense. Humans have eaten meat for 2.6 million years or more...became farmers only 10,000-15,000 years ago. Humans evolved eating meat. Evolution doesn't move that fast. The reason there are so many people with metabolic syndrome and T2 diabetes is; grains, sugar, and starchy plants. Removing that food source will only end in disaster for many.
I kind of agree with you. When I cut back on grains, sugar, and starch, I felt a heck of a lot better. Way more energy, needed less sleep, started losing weight too without feeling hunger. Paleo really works for me. Meat, eggs, vegetables, nuts, seeds, and fruit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
Discussion Starter #57
I kind of agree with you. When I cut back on grains, sugar, and starch, I felt a heck of a lot better. Way more energy, needed less sleep, started losing weight too without feeling hunger. Paleo really works for me. Meat, eggs, vegetables, nuts, seeds, and fruit.
I have a younger family member who always exercised, was fit, proper BMI, never overweight was always strict diet of eating which was high-carb, low fat diet and he ended up with quad bypass and having T2 diabetes a few years back. He had absolutely no symptoms and is very lucky to be alive. When that happen, I spent two years researching, reading and studying this area. Its clear to me the food guide is completely nuts and inappropriate for most since more and more people are becoming unknowingly insulin resistance & or hyperinsulinemia.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,291 Posts
The reason there are so many people with metabolic syndrome and T2 diabetes is; grains, sugar, and starchy plants.
When I cut back on grains, sugar, and starch, I felt a heck of a lot better. Way more energy, needed less sleep, started losing weight too without feeling hunger. Paleo really works for me. Meat, eggs, vegetables, nuts, seeds, and fruit.
I want to make sure I'm understanding what you guys wrote here. You're saying that it's best to avoid grains, sugar, and starchy plants. Does that mean avoiding stuff like corn & potatoes?

From what I understand, simple carbs (sugar) are the stuff you really need to avoid.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,679 Posts
I want to make sure I'm understanding what you guys wrote here. You're saying that it's best to avoid grains, sugar, and starchy plants. Does that mean avoiding stuff like corn & potatoes?

From what I understand, simple carbs (sugar) are the stuff you really need to avoid.

Yes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
171 Posts
Why float fear mongering "what if's" instead of looking at the actual numbers?

If you're 50 or under and healthy the survival rate is greater than 99.9%. I'm pretty sure most professions can survive losing 0.1% of their staff.
The key point being "if you're 50 or under AND HEALTHY'

On the other hand the link below shows if your 20 years old, significantly obese with Diabetes you have the age equivalency of a 72 year old.

So no worries if your young and healthy but if your not than take this seriously,

 
41 - 60 of 77 Posts
Top