Friday free-for-all!

It’s that time of the week again… Time for our end of the week new round up and open topic discussion thread!  Here are a few recent links to kick off the chat:

Canadians carry stupid debt levels
Canada better off than USA?
Average price to jump this month?
Chinas glut of unsold goods
-(lazy editor, More links to follow)

So what are you seeing out there? Post your news links, thoughts and anecdotes here and have an excellent weekend!

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Chip
Guest
Chip

@patriotz:

I agree birth rates are largely the result of cultural changes. But my point is if the problem is disposable income, it makes no sense to funnel people’s earnings through a bureaucratic government program when you could just cut their taxes and give it to them at source.

The Canadian govt for example spends $7 billion on tax collection alone, and I rarely see cost benefit analyses done on the programs this money goes to. What, for example, is the change in employment rate, economic output etc in Quebec from their universal daycare program?

patriotz
Member

@Chip:
“Instead, cut taxes for families so they have more disposable income and skip the bureaucracy.”

There is no correlation between tax rates in developed countries and the birth rate. Hong Kong, the darling of small government proponents, comes in at .97. Singapore, which has both low taxes and big incentives to have children, is 1.26, on a par with Eastern Europe.

Here’s an interesting one for you – French Guiana, which is legally part of France and has the same tax rates as far as I know, is 3.27, while France proper is 1.89. And French Guiana has much lower incomes.

Switzerland, which has much lower taxes than Germany, has the same birth rate. Neither country had a housing bubble if you think that matters.

And so on.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
@Anonymous 146 Sorry you got downvoted – i think that was probably a genuine question. In real terms, land could very well go up drastically in value compared to a fiat currency that suffers serious devaluation; but gold will do better. Partially because your RE will be locked in a land suffering financial stress in that case – not a real winning argument to buy somewhere. There are few hard assets that are divisible, liquid, mobile. Real estate in particular is not. Gold has been used as currency for over 3000 years. It is well established as a hedge against inflation. It is durable, inert and can’t be reduced to ashes by a single flaming arrow from an angry neighbor like your house. Most importantly, gold can’t be suddenly created and put into circulation at the whim of an irresponsible… Read more »
Chip
Guest
Chip

“Countries that give good benefits to stay home mothers and have a good daycare system, like France, do have a higher birth rate.”

France is also broke.

And what’s the point of taxing families to the hilt so the govt can then return some of that money in the form of benefits for the same families?

Instead, cut taxes for families so they have more disposable income and skip the bureaucracy.

Absinthe
Member
Absinthe

@Anonymous: However, if you pull apart the data and compare like with like – educated women allowed control over their own biology – then I’ve read data that goes both ways. As @Painted turtle says, some social programs really do seem to encourage higher birth rates; some choice is delayed due to circumstances.

Absinthe
Member
Absinthe

@Anonymous:

Women who have education and both personal and economic choices, in the aggregate, tend to have fewer babies. In the aggregate, women with possibilities do prefer not to have very large families.

Also – without suggesting that Uganda offers anything near a Canadian standard of living – I think the economies of unpaid productive work have got to make a difference in barter and subsistence economies that means there’s some apples-and-oranges comparison of how life looks daily.

Families with six babies usually need some member(s) of the family doing unpaid care, and this networks out. So everything from bartered child and senior care to food production or gathering, re-purposing and recycling manufacture, etc…

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

@Painted turtle: “Who can really feed a family of six with an average salary in Vancouver?”

Well can people in Niger, Uganda and Mali afford to? There have the highest birth rates in the world. No they can afford it less than any Canadian. But they have the kids anyway.

Norway may have the best social programs to have kids under. In Norway day care is free, if you want to be a stay at home mom you get paid to do it, dental is free for kids and University is free. You only have to feed your kids. They have a similar birth rate to Canada. What does that tell you?

http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?c=no&v=25

rp1
Guest
rp1

#151 @Painted turtle: “Who can really feed a family of six with an average salary in Vancouver?”

Anyone. The problem is putting a roof over their heads.

VMD
Member

Shanghai composite index continues its plummet, now hitting Feb 2009 level.
http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=000001.SS#symbol=000001.SS;range=5y

will the Chinese government stimulate things enough to prevent a hard landing? (some would say they’re already in one)

Crikey
Guest
Crikey
@patriotz: “What’s unfair about it is that when they were outside the country they weren’t getting Canadian services. So why should their services be reduced once they are back in Canada paying taxes like everyone else? They weren’t getting something for nothing while they were away.” We all know that a majority expenses for Canadian services (eg. medicare and post-secondary education) are not evenly spread throughout a person’s lifetime, but are generally concentrated into smaller periods or one’s life. Think: medical care emergencies (and later life care), and earlier life post-secondary education. Paying for those things depends on many years of paying into the system. So your argument that while Canadians are away they “weren’t getting something for nothing” doesn’t work. Looking it a different way, imagine a job where employees showed up only once every two weeks, only on… Read more »
Patiently Waiting
Member
Patiently Waiting

@Painted turtle: The age group that is currently close to or ending its fertile years (35-45 year olds), grew up in a Canada much different then today. They had expectations about the kinds of circumstances that were suitable for raising a family.

Very few can create those circumstances now, in the big cities anyhow. There is either not enough money or not enough time or neither partner can pull away from their career. I agree most didn’t make a conscious decision to have no children (or just one child) and there is more regret than some people realize.

Painted turtle
Guest
Painted turtle

Patrioz, I usually agree with you, but not on that one.
I know several couples who have less kids than they wish because they cannot afford them,
And others who waited so long to have a stable job situation that they are now past the red line on their biological clock.
Countries that give good benefits to stay home mothers and have a good daycare system, like France, do have a higher birth rate.
Who can really feed a family of six with an average salary in Vancouver?

SmellyFeet
Guest
SmellyFeet

Look, I said it. Deal with it. It’s as good as done.

20,000 listings and more, we’ll hit it by late October.

Tell your ma I said so.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Where’s Freako?

SmellyFeet
Guest
SmellyFeet

Freefall is scary when there is no parachute to bail you out.

This time it’s real, the elite will wipe out the lower middle class, back to poverty , back of the line.

Gold will chart a course to five thousand.

Eat shit, you dogfarts.

SmellyFeet
Guest
SmellyFeet

You idiots. Numbskulls. Brain dead maggots.

MOI is going over 15 this fall, and we will slice through 20,000 listings like a hot knife through your eyeball.

Your a bunch of dumbasses.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

If gold can soar because of dollar devaluation, why can’t other real assets (incl. RE) soar as well?

rp1
Guest
rp1

#139 @Chabar: Haters gonna hate. Add some red stripes and you have one heck of a candy cane house for Christmas.

VMD
Member

@Chabar:
what a masterpiece, the right side of the house looks either like Optimus Prime or this

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Living in Canada =

Most good career opportunities in a few major centres = moving there to have your familiy’s financial future raped.

No wonder people are leaving.

Girlbear
Guest
Girlbear

Dear central bankers of the world,

Please stop pumping up the stock markets and housing markets with your neverending monetary stimulus packages.

I am tired of the bandaid being pulled off so slowly. It is painful and aggravating.

Please just let the markets take their natural course and find their true values.

Yes, that will also be painful but at least we will get it over with and markets will become less opague and scary.

Sincerely,
Girlbear

Dan in Calgary
Guest
Dan in Calgary
@patriotz, “People in Canada who want to have large families have them, and the great majority who don’t want them don’t have them. This is a cultural preference and has very little to do with economic considerations.” Too broad a claim. Although there may be a cultural mechanism, economics play a huge role. More economics. It was at least well studid back in the 1980s, but don’t ask me to cite literature. The principal seemed to be (when I studied it) that affluence begets low birth rates. It may be nothing more than simple greed. “People who have” don’t want to give things up. Birth rates lower than replacement rates started with West Germany, then recognized for its affluence. Hmmm … I wonder if studies were done on East vs. West Germany? Similar cultural values regarding family, but different economies?
Girlbear
Guest
Girlbear

@Chabar: ABSOLUTELY HIDEOUS. Lot value only, not many Chinese arriving anymore according to real estate friends.

Chabar
Guest
Chabar

@VMD:

Good life they live. This could be a house waiting for a next grater Chinese fool.

http://www.uglychinesecanadian.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/4459565214_130d8ef01e

patriotz
Member
@Crikey: “What is unfair about this?” What’s unfair about it is that when they were outside the country they weren’t getting Canadian services. So why should their services be reduced once they are back in Canada paying taxes like everyone else? They weren’t getting something for nothing while they were away. There is simply no way schemes such as you suggest could get federal/provincial agreement, as I’ve pointed out, and they would also face judicial challenges. The solution for immigrants not making a proportional contribution to government services is one, increase the quality of immigrants so that their average income goes up, and two, crack down on immigrants who are evading taxes on foreign income (or domestic income for that matter). As far as native-born Canadians going non-resident for extended periods and coming back for medical treatment, I just don’t… Read more »