Occupy Bay street

[Duster929]

The example doesn't even need to be that extreme. The U.S is in some deep doo doo. I can understand people down there being PO'd. That and the banking system down there was responsible for the economic crisis they're looking at. This may be an oversimplification of things, but the reason their economy went tits up is because a bunch of mortgage backed securities became worthless when a crap-ton of sub-prime mortgages defaulted; mortgages which were backed by investment and banking firms.

Up here sub-prime mortgages are backed by the Canadian government. So technically, shouldn't these idiots be occupying Ottawa?

We don't really have as much sub-prime mortgages as they do, and they weren't securitized to the same extent as in the US. Also, we didn't have the same rates of default and the decline in home values that they had. We just didn't experience the same shock in the housing market, as a result. Part of it is that mortgage interest isn't tax deductible in Canada, and part of it is that major health care costs are covered by the government.

All that being said, there's enough blame to go around. Don't forget that the banking system is responsible for giving out the bad loans. The individuals are responsible for taking the loans, and not being able to pay them back. People bought homes, cars, education, and all kinds of things that they couldn't afford, and then defaulted on those loans. The 99% share some of the blame for the collapse as well.

 

[jc100]

Exactly. Drama queens want to act like they live in Ghana for christs sake.

I thought that's what this whole thread has been about? In the grand scheme of things they aren't that bad...but they have been getting worse and there's no sign of them getting better.

 

[Duster929]

I thought that's what this whole thread has been about? In the grand scheme of things they aren't that bad...but they have been getting worse and there's no sign of them getting better.

That's not true. There are plenty of signs of things getting better. Housing prices have been increasing, incomes have been increasing, unemployment has been falling, and GDP has been rising.

 

[Flashmonkey]

We don't really have as much sub-prime mortgages as they do, and they weren't securitized to the same extent as in the US. Also, we didn't have the same rates of default and the decline in home values that they had. We just didn't experience the same shock in the housing market, as a result. Part of it is that mortgage interest isn't tax deductible in Canada, and part of it is that major health care costs are covered by the government.

All that being said, there's enough blame to go around. Don't forget that the banking system is responsible for giving out the bad loans. The individuals are responsible for taking the loans, and not being able to pay them back. People bought homes, cars, education, and all kinds of things that they couldn't afford, and then defaulted on those loans. The 99% share some of the blame for the collapse as well.

Agreed 100%. My understanding of all of that investment type stuff is rudimentary at best, but I do know that things are different up here; different enough to kind of make this 99% type protest almost ludicrious up here.

It seems as though this protest is happening here because it's happening everywhere else. It's a farce, and I think it's disrespectful to the cause in the U.S.

 

[fastar1]

The example doesn't even need to be that extreme. The U.S is in some deep doo doo. I can understand people down there being PO'd. That and the banking system down there was responsible for the economic crisis they're looking at. This may be an oversimplification of things, but the reason their economy went tits up is because a bunch of mortgage backed securities became worthless when a crap-ton of sub-prime mortgages defaulted; mortgages which were backed by investment and banking firms.

Up here sub-prime mortgages are backed by the Canadian government. So technically, shouldn't these idiots be occupying Ottawa?

If Americans could go back 10 years and change the way they let their politicians run things, do you think they wouldn't? Should we wait 10 years for things to get as bad here, and only then complain?

It's widely accepted that we have been spared the worst of the meltdown so far due to our increased government oversight of big banks, and our increased focus on the welfare of citizens over the welfare of corporations. That, by the way, is a legacy of the Chretien years.

What is happening now that Harper has a majority is that Canadian political parties have had all their public funding removed, so that they have to compete with whatever support they can get from the wealthiest indiciduals and corporations that they can attract. What kind of political leadership do you think this is going to lead to, and what kind of dependancy on big business are we all going to be facing in 10 years? Will it resemble anything like we're seeing in the US, Iceland, Italy? Is Canada immune?

 

[Duster929]

If Americans could go back 10 years and change the way they let their politicians run things, do you think they wouldn't? Should we wait 10 years for things to get as bad here, and only then complain?

It's widely accepted that we have been spared the worst of the meltdown so far due to our increased government oversight of big banks, and our increased focus on the welfare of citizens over the welfare of corporations. That, by the way, is a legacy of the Chretien years.

What is happening now that Harper has a majority is that Canadian political parties have had all their public funding removed, so that they have to compete with whatever support they can get from the wealthiest indiciduals and corporations that they can attract. What kind of political leadership do you think this is going to lead to, and what kind of dependancy on big business are we all going to be facing in 10 years? Will it resemble anything like we're seeing in the US, Iceland, Italy? Is Canada immune?

America is very likely going to elect a Republican President next year, so I'm not sure you're right that they'd like to change their government. They protested in the street over greater regulation of health care, and they don't believe they should pay taxes. So, I'm not so sure you're right about them regretting the mis-steps of the last decade.

And I don't think Canadians are any more far-sighted. Sometimes you don't smell the **** even when you're sitting in a pile of it.

 

[Flashmonkey]

If Americans could go back 10 years and change the way they let their politicians run things, do you think they wouldn't? Should we wait 10 years for things to get as bad here, and only then complain?

I agree with your post...and IMO that's a perfect summation of the problem...the specific problem...that needs to be addressed here, in Canada.

Is that the message these idiots are putting out, though? Nope.

Like I said, if these protesters actually understood the issue that they were protesting about, they'd be occupying parliament hill.

 

[fastar1]

I agree with your post...and IMO that's a perfect summation of the problem...the specific problem...that needs to be addressed here, in Canada.

Is that the message these idiots are putting out, though? Nope.

Like I said, if these protesters actually understood the issue that they were protesting about, they'd be occupying parliament hill.

They haven't declared any specific purpose or goal for the movement. Maybe they're formulating it, maybe as you say they're clueless. For now the message is that there's some ****ed up **** going on in the way our world is run, and as imprecise as that message is, it is also right.

 

[Flashmonkey]

They haven't declared any specific purpose or goal for the movement. Maybe they're formulating it, maybe as you say they're clueless. For now the message is that there's some ****ed up **** going on in the way our world is run, and as imprecise as that message is, it is also right.

Ya it is right...and to be honest I want this protest to succeed. Maybe that's why I'm bashing them so much. But their vagueness is hurting their cause. They have no message; not one the general public around here can relate to, anyway. That's why there's so much apathy.

Imagine if a protest like this was staged on Wall Street 10 years ago. How much support would that have garnered?

 

[fastar1]

Yep, I've already stated what I think of the sincerity and depth of this movement.

http://www.gtamotorcycle.com/vbforu...y-Bay-street&p=1674588&viewfull=1#post1674588

 

[Flashmonkey]

Ahh page 5...I remember that. LOL I'm starting to repeat myself too.

 

[daught]

Good article in Globe and Mail today

Prof. Kershaw, an associate professor at the Human Early Learning Partnership, released a study on Tuesday with colleague Lynell Anderson showing that new families today have a lower standard of living than the baby-boomer generation, even though the Canadian economy has doubled in size since 1976.

And while the share of young women contributing to household incomes is up 53 per cent, average household incomes for young couples overall have remained static since the mid-1970s, after adjusting for inflation. Yet housing prices during the same period rose 76 per cent nationwide.

https://secure.globeadvisor.com/servlet/ArticleNews/story/gam/20111019/NWGENSQUEEZE1019ATL

sonnythebull, my standard of living target is not that of China or India. Just because they have it worse, it doesn't mean I will let mine slide quietly.

 

[Duster929]

Good article in Globe and Mail today

Prof. Kershaw, an associate professor at the Human Early Learning Partnership, released a study on Tuesday with colleague Lynell Anderson showing that new families today have a lower standard of living than the baby-boomer generation, even though the Canadian economy has doubled in size since 1976.

And while the share of young women contributing to household incomes is up 53 per cent, average household incomes for young couples overall have remained static since the mid-1970s, after adjusting for inflation. Yet housing prices during the same period rose 76 per cent nationwide.

https://secure.globeadvisor.com/servlet/ArticleNews/story/gam/20111019/NWGENSQUEEZE1019ATL

sonnythebull, my standard of living target is not that of China or India. Just because they have it worse, it doesn't mean I will let mine slide quietly.

Interesting information, but it doesn't entirely show the whole picture. There has been a huge shift in values over that same period.

We can say that housing prices have increased, but we should also take into account the average square footage occupied per person in those same markets, and how that has changed. From 1976 to 2010, the value we have placed on space has changed dramatically. Houses are bigger, condos are bigger, people live alone more than they used to (as opposed to with family or roommates), so the square footage per person has expanded.

Further, prices of housing have changed also because we have decided as a society to spend more of our income on housing, as opposed to other things. It's this collective shift that has boosted the price of housing. It's impossible to counter this momentum as an individual, but the shift has happened. Similarly, we spend a greater proportion of our income on electronics and entertainment, and a smaller proportion on food.

There's more to the numbers than you think. Yes, houses are more expensive than they were 40 years ago. But 40 years ago, it was also much less common for a single 27 year old person to live in a 1,000 square foot condo, with two televisions, two computers, a cell phone, internet connection, and cable television. Not to mention a fly-away vacation once or twice a year, dinners at restaurants once or twice a week, and a car and a motorcycle. Today, these elements are considered a fairly normal "standard of living".

I suggest that maybe it's our collective values that have gotten ahead of our wallets, instead of our wallets having fallen behind?

 

[mmmnaked]

lucky2's posts are downright hilarious. That guy is lost in space.

 

[FiReSTaRT]

Think how much better traffic would flow

Yawohl Mein Fuhrer! Kill a few hundreds of thousands for holding up traffic and it will start flowing again!

I agree protesting is good in some cases but in the case of the occupy wall street it's stupid,misguided and a bunch of freaks

They're not the same as you so they should also get shot for that (2 rounds if they're holding up traffic, only 1 if they're just freaks)?

More like the planes flying into buildings changed the world.

If it wasn't for those planes, there would have been other excuses. Major privacy intrusions have also been justified by "fighting piracy".

That's not true. There are plenty of signs of things getting better. Housing prices have been increasing, incomes have been increasing, unemployment has been falling, and GDP has been rising.

Housing prices have been increasing a hell of a lot more than incomes and most of those low unemployment figures are boosted by part-timers who can't make a living with what they're making.. Hell, quite a few fulltimers don't get enough to provide for their families.

Good article in Globe and Mail today
Prof. Kershaw, an associate professor at the Human Early Learning Partnership, released a study on Tuesday with colleague Lynell Anderson showing that new families today have a lower standard of living than the baby-boomer generation, even though the Canadian economy has doubled in size since 1976.

And while the share of young women contributing to household incomes is up 53 per cent, average household incomes for young couples overall have remained static since the mid-1970s, after adjusting for inflation. Yet housing prices during the same period rose 76 per cent nationwide.

https://secure.globeadvisor.com/servlet/ArticleNews/story/gam/20111019/NWGENSQUEEZE1019ATL

sonnythebull, my standard of living target is not that of China or India. Just because they have it worse, it doesn't mean I will let mine slide quietly.

daught: Don't try to confuse this argument with truth.. That should be made illegal and according to our fuhrer, you should get shot for that

 

[jc100]

That's not true. There are plenty of signs of things getting better. Housing prices have been increasing, incomes have been increasing, unemployment has been falling, and GDP has been rising.

Putting people with solid degrees in jobs on the front desk of Hertz renting out cars isn't really solving the underlying problem.

 

[sonnythebull]

Interesting information, but it doesn't entirely show the whole picture. There has been a huge shift in values over that same period.

We can say that housing prices have increased, but we should also take into account the average square footage occupied per person in those same markets, and how that has changed. From 1976 to 2010, the value we have placed on space has changed dramatically. Houses are bigger, condos are bigger, people live alone more than they used to (as opposed to with family or roommates), so the square footage per person has expanded.

Further, prices of housing have changed also because we have decided as a society to spend more of our income on housing, as opposed to other things. It's this collective shift that has boosted the price of housing. It's impossible to counter this momentum as an individual, but the shift has happened. Similarly, we spend a greater proportion of our income on electronics and entertainment, and a smaller proportion on food.

There's more to the numbers than you think. Yes, houses are more expensive than they were 40 years ago. But 40 years ago, it was also much less common for a single 27 year old person to live in a 1,000 square foot condo, with two televisions, two computers, a cell phone, internet connection, and cable television. Not to mention a fly-away vacation once or twice a year, dinners at restaurants once or twice a week, and a car and a motorcycle. Today, these elements are considered a fairly normal "standard of living".

I suggest that maybe it's our collective values that have gotten ahead of our wallets, instead of our wallets having fallen behind?

Exactly right. Try living like 40 years ago and you wont have such money stress. Everyone wants to look and live like a big shot now.

 

[sonnythebull]

Yawohl Mein Fuhrer! Kill a few hundreds of thousands for holding up traffic and it will start flowing again!



They're not the same as you so they should also get shot for that (2 rounds if they're holding up traffic, only 1 if they're just freaks)?



If it wasn't for those planes, there would have been other excuses. Major privacy intrusions have also been justified by "fighting piracy".



Housing prices have been increasing a hell of a lot more than incomes and most of those low unemployment figures are boosted by part-timers who can't make a living with what they're making.. Hell, quite a few fulltimers don't get enough to provide for their families.



daught: Don't try to confuse this argument with truth.. That should be made illegal and according to our fuhrer, you should get shot for that

I would love an explanation from all mein volks as to even though house prices have increased, supposed wages and standard of living have decreased. Who's buying the houses and driving the prices up then? And where do they get the money when the sky is falling?

 

[FiReSTaRT]

I would love an explanation from all mein volks as to even though house prices have increased, supposed wages and standard of living have decreased. Who's buying the houses and driving the prices up then? And where do they get the money when the sky is falling?

People still need a place to live... So, instead of being able to pay off the house in 15-20 years on a single income, they're paying them off in 30-35 years on 2 incomes with a hell of a lot less breathing room. Many single family homes are being converted into MDU's, where the working poor, unable to afford their own home have to live until they scrape some cash together for a down-payment on a 35 year mortgage. The upper-middle class is either buying up those houses as "investment properties" or the owner is occupying one of the units and managing the whole property from there. The owner may have a million dollar property, but he's still living in an apartment in a slum. That's what being house-poor is all about. The sky isn't falling but you're majorly misinformed if you truly believe that the middle class hasn't been shrinking over the last 30-35 years. Most of babyboomers might manage to retire without being destitute, but I'll be investing into cat food, cardboard box and sleeping bag manufacturers when it's time for Gen-X to start retiring.

 

[01cbr]

Putting people with solid degrees in jobs on the front desk of Hertz renting out cars isn't really solving the underlying problem.

I would really love to hear how you think the government can solve this issue.