Printable View
There is nuance. I refer to an investment forum (not short term trading) and most of what I do and associate with in terms of that forum is value investors. In terms of economic systems the value investors (long term view, buy cheap) and the short term traders would differ very little in opinion.
Also, these are people who have a full time job and invest in stocks on the side.
But yes, there opinions are relevant and yes, lopsided towards laissez faire capitalism.
Ya, we're really hurting with the worlds 10th largest economy despite a population of 30 million. (Fyi that means per capita we're actually more productive than Germany and about equivalent to the USA, although the real measure of economic prosperity would be PPP, and there we would be about equivalent with the USA and better off than Germany as well)Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander III
Actually its the exact opposite. With the flight of manufacturing jobs people are often left with low-level service industry jobs or outright unemployment. Those manufacturing jobs paid well. You could own a home, purchase two cars, put your kids through college without accumulating a gross amount of debt.Quote:
Originally Posted by tonywalt
Now instead of using actual income to finance consumption people put it on their credit cards, an unsustainable trend.
I don't see that. I mentioned the decimation of Mexico's agricultural industry and also the steep decline of America's manufacturing base. My own region has been hit hard with mill closures left and right due to Canada's inability to limit the exportation of raw logs under NAFTA. People cite China's rise as an example of the success of free trade policy. China's trade is not free. Its fixed. Free trade really just amounts to the undemocratic stripping of economic sovereignty from the people and handing it over to corporations. Adam Smith counselled the Americans back in the 18th century not to develop manufacturing but instead be a resource provider for the industrially developed nations of Europe, Britain in particular. The Americans did not listen, instead implementing protectionist trade policies which put them on the path to becoming the world's leading economic and industrial superpower.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander III
Let us not do the Canada vs. whoever thing again.
Canada is an industrious and innovative country, and recently due to the following, it has done better than most:
1. Massive, and I mean, massive natural resources in proportion to population. It has large Oil reserves, gold, nickel, diamonds, and lead. All prices in these commodities have doubled and tripled. Canada benefits enormously. This drives the country recently, but when commodity markets go down - and they will, Canada will feel the effect. But all due respect for harnessing resources.
2. Bank regulations - They are tight, but while regulations preserves the sector, it does not have proportionately the seem reach and power that the US financial institutions have and want.
But again, let's just say I have a very vested interest in Canada. And even when Oil and commodities go down Canada still prospers because of it's educated and industrious ways. Hats off to Canada.
I should say that when I visit certain oil rich countries in desert areas they are often quite proud of their "achievements" and say so with alot of volume, at which point I get nod politely, grow very silent and sip on my scotch....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darcy88
I have referred twice on these forums to the folly in abandoning the Glass-Steagall act. It's hardly surprising that the people running organisations such as Goldman Sachs give themselves huge bonuses for having influenced the powers that be into giving them a free hand to make more millions by rigging the market in their favour. I am unequivocally right-wing but detest irresponsibility from whichever quarter it comes and those responsible for bringing the free market into disrepute should be punished rather than rewarded.
The so-called UK Financial Services Authority, which now that the damage has been done is about to be wound up, stood by and did nothing while hedge funds and banks turned what was formerly a reasonably contained system in to a casino in which they gambled with peoples livelihoods whilst lining their pockets with untold wealth. I think there is a good case for putting those involved in damaging a country's financial security on trial for treason.
The 1999 repeal of the Glass-Steagall act was the tipping point, and it only took 9 years.
Warren Buffett once said, and I cannot find the quote, that trading is a bit like having an island where 5 people do all the work and the other 3 bet on the productivity of the 5.
He is right, and I am seperating trading of derivitive instruments that have no utility as opposed to actual investment in equity or sensible debt issue. Some options are necessary for financial planning, but they go onto secondary markets and become another attraction in what has become a casino.
I agree that there has to be, of necessity, risk taking in investment banking but that shouldn't apply to the retail business. The introduction of the Glass-Steagall act made it illegal for banks to use ordinary depositors money in that way. Those who encouraged its removal and then took risks with their ordinary customers money are guilty of irresponsibility at best and immoral behaviour at worst. People such as Dick Fuld and Henry Paulson in the US and Adam Applegarth and Fred Goodwin in the UK are directly responsible for millions of people losing their homes and employment. The dust has far from settled on this economic crisis but if it ends with blood on the streets it won't be because of a failure of capitalism but rather the greed of a handful of individuals.Quote:
Originally Posted by tonywalt
All good points but I think its much simpler than that. The human brain is composed 60% of fat and runs mostly on carbohydrates. All that maple syrup and Canadian bacon... that's the key.Quote:
Originally Posted by tonywalt
Though Toronto-Dominion bank is now the 6th largest in North America (in terms of branches) because of the buyout of a number of American banks after the financial meltdown. So, the protections did provide outlets for expansion in a relatively weak global market.Quote:
Originally Posted by tonywalt
Right now, I'm convinced that the banks and richest individuals are the ones running this country right now. The government works for them, not the people. An actual honest politician, Elizabeth Warren, said it best:
What's happened is that Washington now works for those who can hire an army of lobbyists and an army of lawyers. You know, if you're in the drug business, and you are selling prescriptions to seniors, and you don't want to have to negotiate over the prices, Washington works beautifully for you. If you want subsidies to drill for oil, Washington is working for you. If you run a hedge fund and want to pay the lowest possible taxes, Washington is working for you.
In fact, there was recently a study, just in the last couple of weeks, there was a study in which it comes out that thirty of the largest companies in the United States are now spending more on lobbying than they pay in federal taxes.
Think about that. I mean that is the investment, and that's what they see as the future.
Thats rationalizing cowardice - Canada's GPD is roughly 1/14th of that of America, despite having greater natural reasources. Also canada's gdp is the 14th in the world, right infront of iran and turkey.Quote:
Originally Posted by OrphanPip
Darcy, I think we are both ususing the word "free market" meaning two different things, I use it in the ecnomical scientific sense.
Man, Wikipedia's hits must have gone through the roof due to this thread alone.
True, they have done some expansion. It's a different country with a somewhat different model or formula, but clearly it was spawned by the people of each country.Quote:
Originally Posted by OrphanPip
Our resources pretty much are American resources. They consider our oil fields "domestic." Considering that Turkey and Iran have over double our population I'd say our ranking ahead of them is not bad. Iran is also resource rich.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander III
On your other point... I think I understand and I agree. I was talking in particular of the neoliberal trade reforms that have been enacted in the last two decades. Capitalism in general I am somewhat less hostile towards.
Um first of all, Canada's GDP is 10th in the world according to the IMF, World Bank and CIA factbook. We are 14th per capita, which places us higher than the 3 economic powerhouses of Europe, the UK, Germany, and France.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander III
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/D...ources/GDP.pdf
Also, I don't see how rational sound economic policy which turned out to be more effective in the long run is "rationalizing cowardice." It would be more apt to refer to your post as rationalizing recklessness or plain stupidity. No rational person thinks the deregulation of the American banking sector has had a net positive effect.
Edit: I see now you used the nominal PPP, which isn't an indication of the actual size of a nation's economy, but is meant to reflect quality of life differences. However, PPP is useless nominally as an indicator, but should only be considered in terms of per capita.