Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
The Amplifier
7745 Followers
Paul Sanchez
2659 Followers
Peter Parker
1288 Followers
Mendokusai Daiyo
17822 Followers
Zeljko Sop
735 Followers
pasarisAug 3, 2010
Sure-footed and cautious wins the race.
dangercollieAug 3, 2010
Canada has fairly strict banking rules in place, the kind Republicans claim overly burden our banking system and raise the cost of borrowing.
I think it's better to pay a little more for credit and avoid massive taxpayer bailouts of our banking institutions. And they make the banks hold their mortgages:
FTA: "See, in America, more than half the mortgages originated were intended for sale. In Canada, nearly all mortgages are held by the banks that issued them."
The good news is I've made a metric ass load of money off investing in Canada (NYSE: EWC). Which actually mitigated the damage to my investments when the US stock market collapsed. If you can't beat em, join em, eh?
richmomzAug 4, 2010
Their central bank is also publicly accountable and controlled by people appointed by elected representatives, unlike our privately owned Federal Reserve that literally hands out trillions of dollars to undisclosed recipients every year and tells Congress to f**k off if they dare to ask who's getting it and why.
leafofsilverAug 4, 2010
Actually, the success of a central bank depends in part upon its independence from elected representatives, because a strong and independent central bank keeps inflation in check. In fact, many developed states in the world enshrines central bank independence as a principle in their constitution.
richmomzAug 4, 2010
Even if legislators aren't setting monetary policy, there should be SOME form of at least retroactive oversight into what the bank is doing (otherwise what's to stop them from printing trillions of dollars and handing it out to whomever they want?) Are we really so naive to think such immense power won't be abused absent any form of public scrutiny?
davidg11Aug 4, 2010
Um...can we not forget one thing though?
Canada is 1/10 the size of the USA.
33 million people. Canada has a little more than the population of Texas at 25 million.
I always have to laugh when our system of anything is compared to countries a fraction the population size of ours.
Canada's rich commodity wealth is spread over so few people. It is a WONDER they aren't far more prosperous than they actually are!
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
leafofsilverAug 4, 2010
I apologize for misreading your post then -- from the tone of your post it seems that you want the legislature to have complete control over central bank operations, which would be detrimental to the health of the economy.
daimposterAug 4, 2010
@david: But the US has more resources. Warmer climate makes longer growing seasons. Many of the resources are not easy resources to get to. A lot of the oil is in oil sands. A lot of other resources are so far away from population. 90% of the Canadian population live within 100miles of the US border. That means 10% is spread thoughout the vast majority of the norther lands of Canada.
BTW, Canada may have a population of about 35M but does that mean their banking wont work for us? We can't use examples of other highly industrialized countries such as England (50M), Spain (46M), South Korea (48M), France (65M), Germany (81M)?
bonestampAug 4, 2010
It's funny, Canada avoiding a major financial meltdown because their bank regulations are so conservative. The US had a meltdown because the "Conservatives" want to have very liberal bank regulations.
chadsexingtimeAug 4, 2010
I'd be careful with those words - conservative regulations do not come from conservative politicians.
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
"The difference is that Canada has one regulator, the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions, that oversees it all, and the quality of its regulation and its overarching conservatism on leverage allows it to take those risks"
What's funny is that it was (mostly) the Liberals who put most of these policies in place, not Conservatives. The Conservatives are doing their best to undo these regulations.
richmomzAug 4, 2010
The group of politicians normally classified as "conservative" here in the US are in fact anything *but* conservative.
nutsackninjaAug 4, 2010
Also all of our toxic mortgages are backed by the Canadian government, the CMHC forced the Canadian government to bail them out to the tune of 75B so when s**t hits the fan (Look at our out of control housing prices, especially in Toronto). The taxpayers are going to be on the hook for it.
http://www.pacificfreepress.com/news/1/6148-ottawa-misleads-on-canadian-bank-bailouts.html
Also Ontario is running a huge deficit per capita even worse then California.
State/Province Population Deficit Per Capita Deficit
Ontario 11,410,046 $21 Billion $1,840
California 36,961,664 $20 Billion $ 541
Yeah I wouldn't say much betterComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
California Total Debt: $32,675,732,212
Ontario Total Debt: $212,200,000
Notice the 3 zeros missing? Ontario has just a little more wiggle room than California does.
nutsackninjaAug 4, 2010
@JMJimmy
Very true, but we only need about 2 - 3 years to catch up to them if our spending isn't put under control.
This year alone we will surpass them by over $1200 per person and that is unacceptable.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
pp7kAug 4, 2010
What is the conversion of metric ass load to imperial ass load?
ostracizeAug 4, 2010
Canadian banks made out better, not because of the red tape, but because they were already burned twice in the last 20 years or so.
Canadian banks paid dearly both in 1987 and in the dot-com bubble due to excessive speculation and global investments that didn't pan out.
After 9/11, most Canadian banks decided not to get too entangled in the easy money schemes other institutions across the world did. Instead, they decided to focus on doing what they do best, ie. individual branch management and prudent and safe loans to individual customers.
Throughout the 2000's, they were the laughing stock of the global financial world and many Canadian investors looked longingly at places like the U.S. and salivated at the profits. But the organizations stood firm and did not get involved in the lucrative financial instruments - fearing another significant crash.
The result? When the s**t hit the fan, Canadian banks were well insulated relying on a solid base of income from their domestic borrowers rather than financial instruments with no value behind them.
nutsackninjaAug 4, 2010
Also helps that the Canadian taxpayer is backing up 75B in toxic mortgage loans from the CMHC
addiktionAug 5, 2010
Yeah and US citizens sit back and watch the dollar get pawned from massive amounts of bail outs. To companies that either didn't need it or will fail and need to fail so smaller businesses can enter the market. Politicians shouldn't be allowed to have sex with business executives...
pimpofpixelsAug 3, 2010
Easy... We elected Bush.
curious12Aug 4, 2010
..And than Obama. We don't have a good track record on presidents over last several years. The Clinton administration encouraged a stock and housing bubble and when things came crashing down and a huge connected hedge fund, LTCM, came knocking on their door, what did they do? Bailed them out. No moral hazard in the U.S. for any corporate entity with government ties. That is a big reason the standard of living has gone done for the average person in the U.S.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
speedsteamboatAug 4, 2010
I'm pretty sure the standard of living has declined more directly because we've had flat wages and growing private debt for the past four decades.
lemadAug 4, 2010
We have no idea if Obama is good or not. He keeps getting blocked by retards.
curious12Aug 4, 2010
Hey, who am I to argue, with my facts and all. The Democrat propaganda machine controls digg. So, keep on posting and ignore the people trying to present the clear and truthful side.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
lemadAug 4, 2010
Facts? where? I'm not a Democrat, I'm not even American. But I'm an economist, and the Republicans kill your economy each time they are elected because they take their decisions based on ideologies, while the science of economy keeps evolving.
captininsanityAug 4, 2010
"The Democrat propaganda machine"
It's not a conspiracy. You're being ignored because you're an idiot.
curious12Aug 4, 2010
The facts I uttered above. I wasn't implying that you, LeMAD, were somehow one of the propaganda spreaders. I don't even know you, so I could never prove it either way. Just saying, The "Democrat", brand has had just as much a hand in this as the "Republican" brand. Your right, economics does keep evolving, but the core principals are still the same. Austrian economics is invariably the thinking that enables the individual and makes a better standard of living for them. As opposed to the Keynesian school of thought, which is a hindrance.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
curious12Aug 4, 2010
@captininsanity, I don't think I'm being ignored. You just responded to me, with a baseless insult that has no merit.
pathouston22Aug 4, 2010
"And the Clinton administration was probably the best America had since, well, a really long time."
And I suppose you'll give credit to the Republican Congress as well?
Probably not.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
curious12Aug 4, 2010
@SpeedSteamBoat. Yes, I agree, but not as much on it being the direct cause, because, why have wages remained flat. A big reason is because we subsidize corporate America. The bankers wages aren't remaining flat.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
lemadAug 4, 2010
It depends. It is proven that sometimes, the decision that is best (short term) for individuals can eventually be bad for everyone, as it was shown with the American banking system and the mortage bubble, which crashed because of a lack regulations.
Another exemple: If you are making TVs, you have no choice to make a great quality product for a reasonable price or you won't sell any. So it's great for the consumer, great for the economy. But in healthcare, that's way more complicated than that. And if the government lets the free market take control of it, money will all be lost on marketing and all kinds of useless stuff and the prices will keep getting up at an astronomical pace.
curious12Aug 4, 2010
@LeMAD "crashed because of a lack regulations". I'd say crashed because of the wrong kind of regulations. There were plenty of regulations. What we need is to regulate the Federal Reserve Bank and put laws on the books that say banks must have the money available that for individuals that hold on demand savings there. If a private company wants to spend money on marketing, so be it. If they aren't hurting anybody. What concern is that to you?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
archiesteelAug 4, 2010
"Austrian economics is invariably the thinking that enables the individual and makes a better standard of living for them. As opposed to the Keynesian school of thought, which is a hindrance."
Uh, no. The Laissez-Faire advocates are the ones being blindly led by ideology, not the Keynesians.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
curious12Aug 4, 2010
Yeah, but the answer to all the economic problems we have has been to handle it in a Keynesian manner, and it is clearly not working. So, why not try saving instead of spending and allow people to keep what they earn, instead of leaving it in the hands of some monstersous bureaucracy in Washington DC.
oxidaneAug 4, 2010
You can't continue to use him as a scapegoat all the time and act like America was a utopia before he came along. It's gotten so banal to blame everything on Bush, can you do anything else?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
ikorkyiAug 4, 2010
it was as good as it ever was right before bush.
andreoAug 5, 2010
I have to agree with IKorkyI. The best economic time that I had was under the Clinton administration.
No signs of layoffs. Regular wage increases. Plenty of jobs to be had.
Though I will admit that the steel industry (which I as loosely associated with) was taking a beating near the end of his term. And the Clinton administration tried putting in tariffs to counter the problem. But it was to little to late to save some mills.
Its been a steady slope downhill since Bush was elected. Lots of saber rattling. Finger pointing. And overall grade school like behavior on both sides. And the only ones that are suffering is the average American citizen. While some Americans are worried about having a place to live. Our elected officials, both past and present, are wondering which house they are going to hold Thanksgiving dinner at.
Just saying...
g8kprAug 4, 2010
Well Elected is a "hazy" word. I don't really think that Bush won the first presidency, Gore did, Bush just manipulated his way in. The second time was pure facepalmage. The rest of the world said WTF?
kylereAug 4, 2010
Actually, we elected Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Obama. All of whom have failed to handle international trade properly, or to even avoid making miserably ignorant decisions such as Clinton signing NAFTA. Blaming it on Bush alone shows an elementary school level knowledge of the world. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
lemadAug 4, 2010
Nafta was great for America actually, as it was for Canada and Mexico.
liquidramAug 4, 2010
Canada is your largest trading partner, BY FAR.... and powered by NAFTA. You obviously have no idea what that agreement actually does.
It allows all 3 countries to trade our goods at fair rates. It's mutually beneficial.
kylereAug 4, 2010
Sorry, but the math of this does not hold up. It was great for Mexico and Canada. It did nothing but further undermine the production of goods within the US. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
lemadAug 4, 2010
Fair trade agreement are always good for every partners, unless you try to fight the changes it creates to your economy.
If it kills a few jobs, let them die, others will vbe created elsewhere.
kylereAug 4, 2010
Economics amongst capitalist states is never that simple. You need to stop watching Fox news.
elephantstompAug 4, 2010
Ford wasn't elected President, nor was he elected Vice President.
excerpt from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Ford
Gerald Rudolph Ford, Jr. (born Leslie Lynch King, Jr.; July 14, 1913 – December 26, 2006) was the 38th President of the United States, serving from 1974 to 1977, and the 40th Vice President of the United States serving from 1973 to 1974. As the first person appointed to the vice-presidency under the terms of the 25th Amendment, when he became President upon Richard Nixon's resignation on August 9, 1974, he also became the only President of the United States who was elected neither President nor Vice-President.
techoboAug 4, 2010
As general as your statement is, it's kind of true. I work in Canada for an American company. Much of our product is exported and sold in the US. The topic of the USD/CAD is always a hot topic. One thing to note though, it's not that the Canadian dollar is strong, it's that the American dollar at the moment is weak. And while it may seem to Canadians that a dollar that is almost par is a good thing, they are very wrong. With America being our largest trading partner, we are loosing millions as a country because of the current exchange rate.
So common America, step up your game!
Sincerely,
Canada.
robert99aAug 4, 2010
TWICE !!
ogremidgetAug 5, 2010
How about, Obama spent more money than all previous presidents, COMBINED.
ninjagamesAug 3, 2010
America!
bdog2g2Aug 4, 2010
f**k Yea!
jerrycanAug 4, 2010
Coming again to save the mother f**king day, yeah!
pp7kAug 4, 2010
According to this article, it was Canada that saved the motherf**king day.
"De-regulators, your game is through; Canadian prudence is coming for you!"
Ok, it doesn't exactly roll of the tongue.
frostyb007Aug 4, 2010
Spending money and can't pay it back!
nerkidnerAug 3, 2010
I'd trade it all if the Stanley Cup could find its f**king way back to Toronto.
vbullingerAug 3, 2010
Priorities people.
lemadAug 4, 2010
Leafs suck.
pasarisAug 4, 2010
Patience. It's only been 43 years.
g8kprAug 4, 2010
The leafs won`t win it as long as their are loyal leaf fans. Why do hockey team owner`s care if their team wins or looses, they`re still getting revenue from the "fans"
lemadAug 4, 2010
One thing's for sure, no playoffs again this year. But you'll get a great 1st round draft pick next year.
predatorpastaAug 4, 2010
if you're talking about the boston bruins then you're absolutely correct
the leafs traded their first round pick for this year and next year to boston for kessel
modsuperstarAug 4, 2010
It's in Toronto all the time, just costs $20 to go to the HHoF
betteroffedAug 4, 2010
ZING!
amishmackAug 4, 2010
$15 actually
modsuperstarAug 4, 2010
I was just guessing, haven't been in a few years so I was adjusting for inflation:)
pxtlAug 4, 2010
Reaffirming my belief that to be a Leafs fan you must be a masochist.
They should change their cheer to "Thank you sir, may I have another!"
chadsexingtimeAug 4, 2010
Maybe if you're nice we'll drive it down from ottawa some day.
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
I was born a leafs fan and I stayed a leafs fan year after year. A few years ago they were starting to really improve. Just they'd ALWAYS loose in overtime. And I was like, "Common guys you can do this!" and then they bombed SO HARD. And THEN the make it seven thing happened with bettman and all that bulls**t and the leafs were like "Hamilton can't have a team because they belong to us" and I was like "f**k YOU I DON'T BELONG TO ANYONE YOU SHOULD BE f**kING GLAD THAT I AM SITTING HERE CHEERING FOR YOU WHEN YOU HAVE DONE s**t ALL FOR THE DURATION OF MY LIFE. YOU SHOULD BE f**kING GREATFUL" and now I'm searching for a new team.
/hammertown
insight21Aug 4, 2010
Try being a Cubs fan.....
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
go blackhawks bitch!!! lol
stuffradioAug 4, 2010
It's coming to the Canucks baby WHooooo!
lartonesAug 4, 2010
Or we got another Canadian team or 2 back....
andreegalAug 4, 2010
This city would go bat s**t insane... GO LEAFS!
craftyshrewAug 4, 2010
Give it up and enjoy Phaneuf.
tiakAug 4, 2010
It may just be my imagination, but the comparative prices seem to me to be right where they were two years ago... Where's the huge change?
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=USDCAD=X&t=2y&l=on
curious12Aug 4, 2010
Not sure what you are trying to take away from that chart. The Canadian Dollar has strengthened. That is what the article is saying. The reason being is that Canadian Banks were more conservative than the U.S. banks. I would argue that there are more reasons the U.S. banks were more free wheeling with their loans, mainly government intervention and encouragement by the Federal Reserve, but, any "comparative" advantages lost because of the depreciating currency, will be made up by the average Canadian being able to live better because they have a stronger currency. Plus their stronger banks, definitely give them a competitive advantage.
manstein01Aug 4, 2010
It's been this way for years now. When I visited in 07 i was basically 1:1
Oh, and it has nothing to do with Bush or Republicans. it has to do with our massive national debt and the Federal Reserve, which always thinks printing money in the answer.
palehorse68Aug 4, 2010
You realize that Canada has a central bank as well, right? The Bank of Canada? (Same deal as the Fed). DangerCollie is right, the reason Canada does better is because Canada regulates it's banks to keep them from doing bats**t stupid things like sub prime mortgages.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_Canada
g8kprAug 4, 2010
Also Canada has a small amount of Strong Banks, where (from what I understand) the U.S. has several banks, some are strong, other's not so good. When my brother moved down there, he was told by people "set up an account with this bank, don't go near that bank" that sort of thing.
here you have
TD Bank
Bank of Nova Scotia
CIBC
RBC
BMO (Bank of Montreal)
You can't really go wrong if you stil with the top three. I personally don't like RBC and BMO has high rates. But you won't really get screwed over by going to any of those.
propethicAug 4, 2010
Don't forget that they have about <10% the population of the U.S and probably more resources available per person/organization
anillopAug 4, 2010
Oh and bush and the republicans didn't have anything to do with that.
ostracizeAug 4, 2010
They did, but not any more so than the democrats and the democrat presidents.
manstein's point is this isn't a party issue or a "who the president is" issue. It's a problem with the system that's been around for decades and nobody on either side wants to address it. It's the third rail of politics.
Palehorse is right in that Canada also has a central bank but because it is more openly and closely tied to politics, it exists (more tightly) for the benefit of the government/taxpayers rather than for the benefit of the private organizations that use it (ie. the banks). So it typically takes a more conservative stance than banks would like.
But I'm of the opinion that a monopoly on finance as in the Federal Reserve or the Bank of Canada is necessarily less ideal than spreading those risks out across multiple organizations. I mean, if a central bank is a good idea, then it MUST be a good idea to have exactly one global central bank (and some people think it is). This article is case in point where spreading the risks across multiple organizations is a good thing.
Imagine America without a Federal Reserve and instead one central bank per state, or even better, no central bank of any sort. Wouldn't risks be more spread out? Wouldn't growth be necessarily more conservative and safer?
bonestampAug 4, 2010
It happened exactly like the article said. Canada has a ton of regulation, when the US economy hit the s**t bucket, Canada's was relatively unharmed. The US dollar lost value and fell below the value of the Canadian dollar. The US has been dwindling bank regulations since the early 80s, it's time to bring some back.
denizen42Aug 4, 2010
So true
curious12Aug 4, 2010
And the more their central bank controls, the worse their banking system will get. If they have laws that protect individuals than they will prosper. More regulations that make it difficult for people to get things done is not a positive. I don't think putting a standard "cap" on what you can do is necessarily, a positive too. Yes, obviously, it's better than printing money to no end, but it should just be the banks have a responsibility to have funds to make the customer good. If they aren't fulfilling that responsibility, than they should be dealt with.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
fairdinkummateAug 4, 2010
"...the more their central bank controls, the worse their banking system will get."
So let me get this straight - Canada has a banking system with strict regulation & a strong central bank that has significantly outperformed the US banking system with a weaker central bank & regulation that is ineffective at best & you think that Canada should move towards the American system? Seriously, with logic like that it's no wonder the US economy is in trouble.
yangj08Aug 4, 2010
This does not explain China. Regulated up the wazoo and still people want to set up shop there.
curious12Aug 4, 2010
@FairDinkumMate. You are clearly missing the point. The U.S. central bank is incredibly "strong". Look at their balance sheet. It is A LOT bigger than the Canadian Central bank's. In no way am I implying Canada should move towards an American system. Our system is in disarray. The U.S. government should definitely not encourage the banks to make irresponsible loans, through things like the CRA act and the central bank flooding the market with dollars. I am just saying putting a standardized "cap" isn't the BEST solution in my opinion. The banks should be accountable to the people they do business with.
epiccollisionAug 4, 2010
you missed the point... in Canada we don't have small banks the smallest of our banking institutions are credit unions and they are limited in scope...We have 5 consumer banks(TD, Royal, CIBC, Scotia, BoM) that cover well over 90% of the entire market/assets... we don't have local savings and loans we have 1 or 2 regional specialty banks but their exposure to risk is very limited by the products they offer....while the largest banks in the US are large they don't have the seeming monoply on the lending market that the Big 5 in Canada do...also almost all of the lending activities are backed by the bank itself and not sold as an investment on the open market so its in the best interest of the bank to make sure the person they are lending to is credit worthy...another angle the 5 banks took is buying up smaller banks affected by the mortgage crisis and extend their profit model in to the troubled us market
curious12Aug 4, 2010
How is what you are saying, me missing the point. Your changing the discussion. My point is that the Federal Reserve and the U.S. government should not be encouraging moral hazard. That is all. BTW, you seem to be describing an Oligopoly. And, if it has worked out that way for Canada and nobody gets hurt all the more power to you. Here, the U.S. citizens have been hurt by the Corporate/Government partnership running the show, and they keep on passing more regulations that make it worse. And that includes the Dems and Repubs.
bastionkaneAug 4, 2010
Your looking at that chart backwards. When the chart goes up that's good for the American dollar. That spike was due to the bailout 'fixing' the banking system then it crashed back down a year later once people realized that wasn't true. look at the five year graph for more context.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=USDCAD=X&t=5y&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=
lemadAug 4, 2010
The bailout saved the world from another 1929.
lemadAug 4, 2010
How much money do Americans lose each year because their government refuses to nationalize healthcare? Enough to kill their economy.
But American politicians are blinded by ideologies and by what they think made them succesful in the past, while other countries are evolving.
solkreAug 4, 2010
Just moving the cost to the government isn't going to fix the underlying problem of unreasonably high health-care costs.
Why should it cost $90 to see a family doctor for 15 minutes, to get an anti-biotic prescribed?
lemadAug 4, 2010
Well, yeah it's going to fix it. The private sector is notoriously bad at handling healthcare.
There are no reasons why Americans pay 2 to 3 times more for healthcare than Canadian, other than the fact that all this money is not invested into getting the patients a better and cheaper service.
binaryclockAug 4, 2010
It's free here in Canada, always has been. I just can't fathom having to worry about money when it comes to a loved one's health.
lemadAug 4, 2010
It's not free of course. We pay for it, the the money goes to the patients, not marketing, or corruption.
jerrycanAug 4, 2010
Bingo. Public healthcare in Canada doesn't have the same "Profit motive" in the USA.
fallout22Aug 4, 2010
s**t started hitting the fan when "profit" and "healthcare" went in the same sentence.
andreoAug 5, 2010
Why does it cost $90 to see the doctor? Because of the amount of staff involved with a doctor visit.
You see the doctor and you have to check in with the front desk staff.
Then you see his / her nurse.
Then you medical record gets filed away by someone at some central location (if your dealing with a hospital).
And all this is normal until you get to the billing part.
Your visit has to go to a billing department that was setup just so they can deal with the different insurance companies.
The insurance company runs your bill through their payment department.
The doctors billing department figures out what is left for you to pay (that is assuming that the insurance company's payment department is happy with the billing codes and so on and actually pays what it says it will).
And that's the condensed version and assumes that no billing codes were put in the wrong place and so on.
Your paying not only for your doctor. But his staff, the staff of the insurance company, a few managers on both sides to oversee everything (which doesn't come cheap), their bosses (which doesn't come cheap either) who reports to the top brass (CEO, Presidents, CFO, Etc.) (which really doesn't come cheap).
ShovelbabyAug 4, 2010
The high costs are not because medical care is private. There are many other reasons, some of which are:
Illegal immigration http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjPBtfpn8wI
The bureaucracy that is involved, which has been implemented because of government regulations. There are countless stories of people who took control of their own healthcare and shopped several doctors and paid outright for a treatment and they saved thousands of dollars. If we paid outright for office visits (like we do for oil changes on our car), the doctors could lower the cost of all their paperwork and office visits would be relatively inexpensive. Insurers could lower their costs because that would be relieved of a huge number of claims. There are doctors doing this now and it works great. Doctors and patients are very happy.
The federal government passed the HMO Act which allows only employers to get tax benefits leading to the employer based system that we have now. (This makes the individual uninvolved in the costs or choices made on behalf of them.)
State governments have laws that give insurance companies a pseudo monopoly within states, which reduces competition. They also have mandates as to what things have to be covered, which adds to the cost of everyone’s policies to cover for expensive procedures for others.
The letigious nature of our country. Doctors have to pay for very expensive liability insurance to protect themselves in the event of a lawsuit.
Doctors have requirements to do certain tests and when not required often do them to cover themselves from potential lawsuits.
These are a few of the reasons. There are many more. The answers are simple and if left to the individual who is shopping for their own needs, they would make a much better decision for themselves. Giving the authority to make all of your health decisions to a bloated, corrupt government who will make this as big of a beauracratic mess as the IRS is not the answer. Even Britain is realizing this and moving away from socialized healthcare http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/25/world/europe/25britain.html
brain1Aug 4, 2010
About Illegal Immigration, My take on that, and I'm just guessing is...When Arizona ,or any State in the Union succeeds at making it an established Law allowing Police to pull you over and ask for your Papers. And when it is expanded all over the USA.......It is then ,that our Government after succeeding at turning the USA into a Police State......Will finally secure our Borders.
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
Its corporate greed and nutty rightwingers. America is now second rate...wait I mean 13th rate...see the UN human development survey.
ShovelbabyAug 4, 2010
The US sucks so bad and yet millions risk their lives to move here. Huh.
fordsvt1Aug 4, 2010
Yup, no one immigrates to Canada. At all.
People emigrate the world over, wherever they can go that is "better" than where they are. The US, Britain, Canada, Australia.... the fact that people seek to move to the USA doesn't mean it's perfect.
greatwhitmonkeyAug 4, 2010
I for one welcome our new Canadian overlords.
mydiggloginAug 4, 2010
Are you forgetting Bryan Adams and Celine Dion?
liquidramAug 4, 2010
Actually a large portion of your actors and performers are Canadian. They just don't advertise it. Look it up... it's a long list.
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
I love how those few select names keep coming up. Get over it, we're going to export some crap along with the good.
bancanAug 4, 2010
Bryan Adams is awesome. Seriously what is with Digg hating on everything nowadays.
rikushixAug 4, 2010
Seconding what LiquidRAM said. There are a TON of Canadians actors and musicians living in LA or other parts of the US. Kinda interesting, actually.
thatryanguyAug 4, 2010
Really, if you're going to complain, at least complain about Nickleback.
taiyoryuAug 4, 2010
Health care for all!
chadsexingtimeAug 4, 2010
Abortions for some, tiny american flags for others!
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
Right after this last Poutine and Canadian Maple doughnut.
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
Those are both delicious dishes..
blacklilyninjaAug 4, 2010
mow make me a sammich
tekdemonAug 5, 2010
The entire basis of this article is plain silly-that the value of the Canadian dollar somehow equates to a great economy. Lots of robust economies have cheap currencies (South Korea, China, etc.) because it helps you export to other countries cheaply. So there's more Canadians buying American stuff now that they can afford it more easily. This mostly just makes Canada a bigger consumer nation-just look at how much people complained about their car prices, so all the foreign auto makers ended up dropping their Canadian prices significantly-which really only raises the amount of money flowing out of Canada.
I'm not saying that the Canadian regulatory system isn't good, just that basing the entire premise of this article on the valuation of the Canadian dollar is idiotic. And let's be honest, it's not so much that Canada did a lot in recent years that their dollar is now valuable, it's just that we did a lot of dumb stuff that racked up a crapton of debt and then proceeded to print tons of extra money to fund things. Which of course makes our exports more competitive actually lol.
zephikAug 5, 2010
Honestly, looking at how Cananda does things... I'm wouldn't be entirely against that and if they ever tried to invade and take over us, I'd probably just let them. :/
fassAug 4, 2010
What a condescendingly insulting article! "Reliably second-rate", Canada doing well = something having gone wrong, "Tim Hortons, Doug Henning, Justin Bieber, and Jason Bay being their primary contributions to higher culture"... I'm not even Canadian, but I got such an urge to punch the douchebag writer right in his (probably) fat, stupid face.
It's people like him that make the USA have a high-school girlish "reputation" in the world, while Canada has a renown.
speedsteamboatAug 4, 2010
It's called, I dare say, a sense of human, my friend.
g8kprAug 4, 2010
Yea, he forgot to mention William Shatner, Celine Dione, Jim Carrey, Keanu Reeves, Mike Myers, Laura Secord, Hudson Bay Company, Lake Ontario, Corner Gas, Rick Mercer, Saying "eh", French Canadians, Poutine, Chesterfields, Serviettes, Hockey, Cold, Igloo's, Lumberjack's, People named Francois, Three party Politics, and Rocket Robin Hood.
lemadAug 4, 2010
Hockey and Québec save Canada from being the lamest place on earth.
frasermooAug 4, 2010
Corner Gas sucks hard, but you saved it with Rocket Robin Hood.
g8kprAug 4, 2010
Quebec? Well there are a lot of nice things about Quebec, it's not the gleaming halo of Canadian Greatness that Quebecois seem to think it is.
I mean, really, a Province who has a political party in the federal election's whose sole purpose is to seperate from Canada?
Language Police?
Legal Drinking ages that are merely suggestions?
Smoking in Public buildings (ie: shopping malls.)
The Feds bending over backwards for Quebec at every turn. (i.e.Bombardier being bailed out)
Hell's Angels secure in Quebec.
Quebecois instant hatred of anyone speaking "Anglish"
No Right turns on Red Lights?
Worst drivers in the country (and I used to live in Markham, Ontario!)
g8kprAug 4, 2010
Corner Gas didn't suck hard.. If it did, then at what level of suckiness do you put "Little Mosque on the Prairie". I mean... WHO WATCHES THIS?
jerrycanAug 4, 2010
Think you're missing a party....
g8kprAug 4, 2010
Bloc Quebecois doesn't count, and the Green Party isn't strong enough yet.
dislexicllamaAug 4, 2010
G8kpr:
I mean, really, a Province who has a political party in the federal election's whose sole purpose is to seperate from Canada? Actually their sole purpose is to stir s**t in Parliament, they hardly have a public goal of separation anymore.
Language Police? Yeah this is still true, companies get sued for bilingual advertisement..
Legal Drinking ages that are merely suggestions? That's what happens with unregulated sale of alcohol (corner stores and gas stations?), in Ontario the LCBO/Beer Store combo is much stricter than the average Petro-Canada part time clerk.
Smoking in Public buildings (ie: shopping malls.) Smoking in enclosed places has been banned province-wide.
The Feds bending over backwards for Quebec at every turn. (i.e.Bombardier being bailed out) Bombardier = one of Canada's most profitable, important and culturally rooted companies. I would consider bailing them out to be a national matter, not just based on their home base of Quebec City.
Hell's Angels secure in Quebec. And anywhere else in the country, they're our MS-13 just with more swearing and less mexican.
Quebecois instant hatred of anyone speaking "Anglish". Can't refute this, I still get people gasp at the fact I can speak French and live in Ottawa...
No Right turns on Red Lights? This is no longer in effect province-wide, only in some part of Montreal.
lemadAug 4, 2010
@G8kpr: You're wrong on pretty much everything...
Yes there's a separatist party in Ottawa, but all the other partys (parties?) are ridiculously bad..
The language laws suck, even us french think it sucks. But we have no choice. If we don't do anything, our culture will disapear in 50 years. Besides it doesn't change anything for anglos. It's mostly to force immigrants to send their kids to french public schools. They still have the choice to go to english private schools. Still most immigrants are fine with this and enjoy living here. Btw racial crimes are really rare in the province. (probably amongst the lower in the world).
Legal drinking age is 18. it as enforced as in the rest of Canada.
Smoking is illigal in all buildings, including bars.
The bending over backwards used to be true, sometimes, but now Quebec has no political power in Canada, espically Montréal.
Most people in the Hells Angels who created problems in the 90's are behind bars these days. Of course new people took over, and theres still the mafia and street gangs who are selling drugs and stuff, but they stopped to cause trouble in the population. Quebec is probably safer than the rest of Canada, and Montreal might be the safest big city in America.
Anglo/Franco "fighting" was over a long time ago. Quebercers have nothing against anglos.
You can do right turn on red lights....except in Montréal.
And yes we can't drive.
Btw I was joking about Quebec saving Canada from being the lamest country, I like Canada, I'm just not Canadian...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
sephickAug 4, 2010
YES WE CAN DRIVE!
You just have to addapt to the Montreal Style of driving (I can't speak for the rest of Quebec, especially those back country hicks)
And LeMAD is right on the money about everything else
arekkusuAug 4, 2010
G8kpr your informations are mostly out dated.
I mean, really, a Province who has a political party in the federal election's whose sole purpose is to seperate from Canada? Agreed, it's lame.
Language Police? Agreed, it's lame.
Legal Drinking ages that are merely suggestions? Not anymore, people check IDs all the time, some clubs even check the ID of everyone that comes in.
Smoking in Public buildings (ie: shopping malls.) That was banned YEARS ago + bars/clubs some years ago. Thank god for that.
The Feds bending over backwards for Quebec at every turn. (i.e.Bombardier being bailed out) Your opinion.
Hell's Angels secure in Quebec. Not in the last 10 years.
Quebecois instant hatred of anyone speaking "Anglish" Not everyone is like that and the people who are like that are uneducated retards that even we hate.
No Right turns on Red Lights? It's allowed everywhere except in Montreal and where there's a sign.
Worst drivers in the country That's your opinion. I've seen plenty of s**tty drivers in Ontario.
homer729Aug 5, 2010
Let's not forget that two out of the six or so regular correspondents on the Daily Show are Canadian (Jason Jones and Samantha Bee). yeah!
chrysaliiAug 4, 2010
Rush
all this and you forgot Rush.
g8kprAug 4, 2010
Sorry.... "And Rush!"
jesst3rAug 4, 2010
Hell, if you're going to list Celine, you may as well list Nickleback as well. They both suck, but have both earned more money than we'll ever see.
g8kprAug 4, 2010
Lol, I made that list off the top of my head in about 2 minutes. If I wanted too, I could have wikipedia and searched the internet for all things Canadian and come up with a list a million times longer. I forgot Maple Syrup, Lacrosse, Stanley Park, Skating on the Rideau Canal, Bonhomme, Just For Laughs festival, Sir John A. MacDonald, Halifax Explosion, Cabot Trail, Rita McNeil,
etc. etc. etc.
jakesnAug 4, 2010
and April Wine and BTO and the Tragically Hip and The Guess Who and the Barenaked Ladies and Neil young and Steppenwolf, the list goes on...
koobzzAug 4, 2010
Yeah, I am Canadian and I didn't take offense at all. C'mon, let's hug it out. C'monnnnn.
gcrenegadeAug 4, 2010
This article could have australia inserted where canada is and reads exactly the same. We have no banks in any trouble at all, we also have a thriving commodity trade thanks to the chinese and we are well positioned to take advatage of the strongest region for the next 20 years. Australia is not quite at parity but I feel by the end of the year we will be there.
g8kprAug 4, 2010
Australia truely Rocks, if I couldn't live in Canada, or had to move elsewhere for work, that is the first place I would look too.
sephickAug 4, 2010
agreed
hubrisAug 4, 2010
I was under the impression Australia mostly rode out the recession based on the massive savings that were stored away by your previous governments, who expected that a worldwide economical melt-down was coming.
I was over in Cairns a few weeks ago....certainly no recession-based discounts on consumer goods! :)
tangytengAug 4, 2010
Australia:
How are those Cane toads working out for you?
eviljazeAug 4, 2010
Geez. Thanks for the backhanded complement, eh?
anxdietyAug 4, 2010
Yet a trip to the local book store shows two different prices. One for the US and one for in Canada, and ours is always higher. We pay more for stuff just because we're Canadian.
quillAug 4, 2010
I find that many recently published books now have a single price -- and my local gaming/comic store charges the listed US price for everything.
Note that there may be other reasons beyond dollars that keep the price on some goods different, including various shipping, regulatory, duty, and trade tariffs (free trade notwithstanding).
balthisarAug 4, 2010
You pay more in your local currency. It just happens to be that in US dollars, you're paying more than Americans paying in US dollars. But you don't pay in US dollars.
Look at is this way: just because your currency is worth more, should you now take a 15% pay cut? Reducing the price of books (and everything else) would only make it fair to cut your pay as well.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
bigshark101Aug 4, 2010
Wait, what? We import goods (i.e. cars & books) from the US and even though our dollar is on par or stronger, we are still paying more for that same item. Cutting our pay is the dumbest comparison ever, salary has no ties to current exchange rates whatsoever. If our dollar is stronger, our buying power should also increase.
chilidogsAug 4, 2010
You don't pay more. The two currencies have different values. Imagine two people purchasing the same item, one pays with a ten dollar and the other pays with two fives. Did the person who paid with two fives pay more because he gave two bills? No because the different denominations have different values just like different currencies do.
tii9Aug 4, 2010
@ Chilidogs, but the Canadian dollar is par with the US dollar now. yet on the back of most books in Canada the US price is a few dollar cheaper. So yes, we are paying more.
johnnyspadeAug 4, 2010
You're assuming though that the cost of goods and services only has to do with the value of the local currency, which isn't the case. There are other factors, like the cost of bringing the product into the country, or the the cost of manufacturing it in that country, the population base of the nation consuming it, etc.
fallout22Aug 4, 2010
Photography equipment too. Ridiculous price gap.
lartonesAug 4, 2010
If that is your concern, just go to the bank and exchange your money in to US currency and pay that way. They cannot deny it.
thatryanguyAug 4, 2010
Actually, a lot of Canadian book stores are having to refuse american currency, because they pay more to bring the book up, and are thus selling at a loss because of the exchange rate.
lartonesAug 4, 2010
Weird, I've never had an issue. Just go to Chapters/Indigo.
pstrollAug 4, 2010
North Pole is now Canada
Canada is now America
America is now Mexico
Mexico is now ???
dukeAug 4, 2010
Colombia. Run by the drug cartels.
jonathandyerAug 4, 2010
What?
bdog2g2Aug 4, 2010
Argentina.
cristinamkAug 4, 2010
.. a s**t hole at the threshold of civil war
warpfieldAug 4, 2010
Somalia?
blacklilyninjaAug 4, 2010
the north pole always was canada
ooglerAug 4, 2010
Justin Bieber wasn't off the tit a couple of years ago - and completely unknown.
ooglerAug 4, 2010
Oh, and I hope you got the Bank of Canada's permission to use that graphic of the 20 or you're in some deep s**t.
risadAug 4, 2010
Huzzah! Maple syrup and Molsons for everyone!
newpollutionAug 4, 2010
Bagged milk for all
pxtlAug 4, 2010
Molson is part of Coors now. Not really Canadian anymore.
jerrycanAug 4, 2010
Dear lord, not that pond water! Molson Canadian and Labatt Blue are the Budweiser and Miller of Canada. And probably the two s**tiest beers ever.
vip3r007Aug 4, 2010
Forget Molson it's crap.
stemninAug 4, 2010
Keith's and Moosehead..
campcampingstonAug 4, 2010
Moosehead is amazing.
rikushixAug 4, 2010
Moosehead sponsored the launch party at my store last month and left behind a good 120 cans of lager...I gotta say, it's not bad.
Still has nothing on Sleemans.
binaryclockAug 4, 2010
This just in... Canadians are more powerfully economically than originally thought.. news at 11.
mikeymooseAug 4, 2010
Canada! f**k Yeah! (eh!)
sangjmoonAug 4, 2010
Canada doesn't have the exceptions to the normal home loan rules that the US congress passed, so they never had a subprime mortgage mess. The only reason they got affected was because of indirect financial relations with the investment vehicles packaging US subprime loans. If the Democrats, who created the exceptions to the home loan rates and as a result also created Fannie Mae, followed Canada's example of keeping strict rules for qualifying for home loans and rates, the impact of the current economic crisis would have been much less.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
fairdinkummateAug 4, 2010
This has been debunked so many times now as to be ridiculous. Get this through your thick skull - The vast majority of sub-prime mortgages were NOT made as part of the CRA. The rate of default on CRA loans is the same as standard, non sub-prime loans across the country.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
sangjmoonAug 4, 2010
The default rate is independent of their root of the abnormal money supply increase. Subprime mortgages, by definitely have higher risk, and that risk was masked by repackaging them in higher rated investment vehicles. The government happily used this derivative to sell subprime loans to raise more money to hard out even more subprime loans. This snowballed until it all came crashing down. I'm all for compassion, but compassion without considering the long term economic consequences is just plain stupid because it ends up hurting us even worse in the long run.
barrettandersonAug 4, 2010
"This has been debunked so many times now "
No it hasn't.
fairdinkummateAug 4, 2010
"The government happily used this derivative to sell subprime loans to raise more money to hard out even more subprime loans."
What planet are you living on? Please provide a link showing where the government sold even ONE sub-prime loan. I think you have the government confused with the banks. The BANKS made the sub-prime mortgages & then bundled & sold them as AAA+ rated securities. Did the government have anything to do with this? Yes. By having lax regulations made worse by implementing the Basel II accord without first implementing the Basel I accord(the one that should have added all of the safeguards to allow Basel II to be implemented).
But none of this has to do with the CRA. You must discriminate between CRA sub-prime mortgages & bank/mortgage lending implemented sub-prime mortgages. Blaming the former for the economic collapse caused by of the latter is simply partisan politics looking to lay the blame on a program that the right was ideologically opposed to from the start. The reason is obvious when considering that the right's ideology of the unadulterated free market is the root cause of the economic crisis.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
richmomzAug 4, 2010
Two words: the "Federal f**king Reserve". Ok that was three but I felt the extra word was necessary and appropriate.
pradaaddictAug 4, 2010
The Bank of Canada, our central bank is owned by the Queen and is kept distinctly separate from government for the same reason the Fed is kept separate from your government.
richmomzAug 4, 2010
It was my understanding that the government was the bank's shareholder, not the Queen - is that not true?
vbullingerAug 4, 2010
"The Bank of Canada, our central bank is owned by the Queen and is kept distinctly separate from government for the same reason the Fed is kept separate from your government."
Why? To fleece the public and keep them in perpetual debt?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
pradaaddictAug 4, 2010
yes the MoF holds shares as well.
richmomzAug 4, 2010
That's unfortunate - I had thought they were a little less corrupt than our central bank (though comparitively that may yet be the case).
falserAug 4, 2010
Hey! Paypal ripped me off, just yesterday they only gave me 95 cents.
apeirophobiaAug 6, 2010
Yeah, paypal has their own imaginary version of the exchange rate it seems...
brijazzAug 4, 2010
Who's Justin Bieber?
lartonesAug 4, 2010
a nobody in a few years... (example:Avril Lavigne)
techoboAug 4, 2010
I work in Canada for an American company. Much of our product is exported and sold in the US. The topic of the USD/CAD is always a hot topic. One thing to note though, it's not that the Canadian dollar is strong, it's that the American dollar at the moment is weak. And while it may seem to Canadians that a dollar that is almost par is a good thing, they are very wrong. With America being our largest trading partner, we are loosing millions as a country because of the current exchange rate.
So common America, step up your game!
Sincerely,
Canada.
piieerrrreeAug 4, 2010
Why are you being buried? It's all true. A stronger Canadian dollar means less exportation to the relatively weaker US dollar (econ 101)
cosworth99Aug 4, 2010
Because a Canada that relies on an artificially undervalued dollar exchange is only weakening itself.
I'll take innovation over a Bank Of Canada rate subsidy any day as a means of true competitiveness.
In 100 years, when the planet is boiling and water is scarce down south, Canada will be a superpower. We will be the ones with massive immigration issues.
bccartmanAug 4, 2010
"In 100 years, when the planet is boiling and water is scarce down south, Canada will be a superpower."
The forward thinkers have already planned for that, do a little research (Google) into how many of its water rights/ treaties Canada has "given" away and it will freak you out.
epiccollisionAug 4, 2010
the Canadian dollar was never artificially undervalued over the long term...while certain markets corrections were taken by the bank of canada(when inflation goes amok) it was not artificial as the Canadian dollar is openly traded on the world market...the Chinese RB, thats artificial
timthetaxmanAug 4, 2010
It's because we have inflated to dollar though massive deficit spending and by printing money to cover a lot of the difference.
Don’t just look at the Canadian dollar, look at the Yen or just about any other currency. All have made huge gains against the dollar over the last 25 years.
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
korvan504521Aug 4, 2010
Huh, they're about even now aren't they?
Kinda might as well unite the currency.
Wonder what we'll call it?
All part of the plan people.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
morrissey79Aug 4, 2010
It'd be called a Loonback and would feature Washington nailing the Queen doggy style, and a beaver fighting an eagle on the reverse.
chadsexingtimeAug 4, 2010
Go Beaver Go!
ghurksAug 4, 2010
Dugg for eagle-fighting beavers!
cme884Aug 4, 2010
I like it.
hatoummoAug 4, 2010
You conspiracy nuts are f**king ridiculous sometimes.
There is no "amero", nor for that matter any stupid chips in your body that could kill you.
Go outside and enjoy nature sometime.
fairdinkummateAug 4, 2010
Canada would be crazy to unite the currencies! Why would they want to tie their stable economy & currency to the unregulated, troubled US currency?
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
A "strong" currency does not imply a "strong" economy. Appreciation or depreciation of the USD against a foreign currency is not necessarily "good" or "bad", it's largely a reflection of interest rate differences (nominal exchange rate) and inflation (real exchange rate). If the CAN appreciates further against the USD, then that means our exports are more attractive to Canada, which decreases our trade deficit in a positive way (a trade deficit is also not always "good" or "bad", it depends on why it exists). The Canadian overnight rate is at .5% against the .25% in the US. This makes borrowing US dollars to invest in Canada attractive, not only because they have more conservative banking regulations.
gorftronAug 4, 2010
Well, Canada does have Zap Rowsdower.
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
Yep, just got back from Toronto yesterday. Beautiful City full w/ beautiful women but its expensive as s**t, but I guess someone has to pay for that free health care.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
leif777Aug 4, 2010
Come to Montreal. It's a prettier city with even prettier women and the cost of living is about 1/3 cheaper than Toronto.
cdnchaozAug 4, 2010
But then, just like living in New Jersey, you're technically in Quebec.
*ducks*
leif777Aug 4, 2010
Every rose has it's thorn... in this case it's a touque wearing, poutine eating, tabernaque swearing thorn.
bccartmanAug 4, 2010
"... the cost of living is about 1/3 cheaper than Toronto"
How the hell do you figure that?
The Income Tax rate (combined Fed and Prov) is almost 50% higher than the rest of Canada.
willthewayAug 4, 2010
Too bad this isn't true anymore.
Beep111Aug 4, 2010
Yeah, but see Canadians banks and finance have to answer to the government. Ever since Bush we've pretty much given wall st. free rein. Do what you want, essentially. And this is what happened of course. It shook a lot of people that were formerly in favor of deregulation, including Greenspan. Still, I think it's bulls**t how the fed. reserve can just do whatever they want. Why exactly do we have to answer to a private bank/mint?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mingkAug 4, 2010
The Canadian government did actually give money to the banks, just not for a "bailout". And technically they didn't give it to them, they exchanged it for some good looking assets. The only reason the Canadian government did it was to get a leg up on the rest of the world while other countries just gave money to the their banks.
http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2008/10/10/flaherty-banks.html
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
bush should be prosecuted.
heybobAug 4, 2010
Dugg for Shadowy Men...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadowy_Men_on_a_Shadowy_Planet
029aAug 4, 2010
Ah, to go back to the good ol' days when you could get a $20 lap dance for 15 USD.
odinthorAug 4, 2010
... or less.
barackalypseAug 4, 2010
Yet oddly, no prices in Canada actually went down as their currency gained, everything still costs stupidly more there. The McDonald's value menu is still $1.39 CDN. Gas is still over $3.15 a gallon. Compare Newegg.com to Newegg.ca prices and you'll see how badly our northern neighbors overpay.
lartonesAug 4, 2010
actually we pay a $1 or more on average a litre which works out to $4 or more a gallon in Canada.
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
Higher prices are a reflection of either taxes or minimum wage. McDonalds is pricing (varies regionally - I can only speak for Ontario) a result of a $10.25 minimum wage. Gas, primarily taxes. Personally, I'd rather have a decent minimum wage and pay a few extra cents for crappy food rather than have a low minimum wage and only be able to afford crappy food. Last time I ate at a McDonalds was 3 years ago - Egg McMuffins, I had to get them to hold the ham & butter for it to actually taste like real food.
awflAug 4, 2010
I see what you are saying, but I'm am not sure they are overpaying. Maybe they are simply paying a more direct, truer cost for their transactions. Dunno, but if you factored in what our costs are to protect our (oil) interests in the middle east, I am sure it is easily adds more than a dollar in gas prices. As well, I understand buying technical goods in Canada were always more expensive, but not because of the exchange rates but protecting their internal (electronics) industries.
frostyb007Aug 4, 2010
We pay on average (dollar at parity), over 12.5% for items than the states do (with some exceptions that we get the same or cheaper) But since most of the s**t we buy is U.S. based.. we will always pay more.
kiwicommonsAug 4, 2010
Awesomeness...done :)
soberkebapAug 4, 2010
Makes me proud to be from Canadia :D
We have less nigra and practically zero mexicans here too. I'm not trying to be racist but having less illegal immigrants and much less widespread poverty helps contribute to a stable economy and higher quality of life.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
drazyrAug 4, 2010
Holy f**k dude, can you try to troll a little harder next time?
soberkebapAug 4, 2010
What do you mean?
meorAug 4, 2010
This is the biggest abortion of economic understanding I've ever heard. If the Canadian dollar unit is 2% higher than the US dollar unit and is therefore 2% better, does that make the US dollar unit 85 times better than the yen?
barthrhAug 4, 2010
The explicit relative values of the currencies wasn't the point of the article. The article was about the change in value of the Canadian dollar relative to the US dollar. It used to be at best 85% of the USD (it's been much lower, in the 60's) and now it virtually at parity. The discussion and arguments are sound.
If the yen had gone from 85 times the USD to 100 times, then the same discussion could apply -- why the sudden and sustained uptick?
meorAug 4, 2010
Who says it's an uptick? Maybe both the US and Canadian dollar are losing value but the US dollar is losing value faster. Maybe neither dollar is changing value but the cost of living in Canada has gone down relative to the US.
r3ap3rAug 4, 2010
Proud to be Canadian!
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
Spell Check Your Text
Language: English (change)
I don't understand why Canada gets made fun of so much by the yanks? We're the second largest land mass in the world, and our entire country is beautiful - see our rocky mountains, our prairies or our maritime. Sure we pay in taxes for our health care, but it pays for it self when an emergency springs, and finances are never on your mind. Also, it's not like we can't compete for innovations, we invented both Superman and Basketball; not to mention the only sport where fist fighting is considered 'part of the game'.
Our Tim Horton's coffee is orgasmic, and have any of you even tried a poutine? That s**t is fries, gravy and cheese! It's GOD LIKE. .
Other Canadian inventions:
The Tragically Hip
Our Lady Peace
No Doubt
Billy Talent
electron microscope
pacemaker
gingerale
insulin
IMAX
Java
washing machine
the freaking light bulb
pacemaker
telephone
Come on ppl, Canada Rocks
cdnchaozAug 4, 2010
No Doubt is not Canadian. They're from Anaheim, CA, if I recall correctly.
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
Damit how did I forget RUSH?
-_- looks like it's suicide again for me
andreoAug 5, 2010
Yeah!? Well Shasta was invented in the U.S.
Saturday nights and an all Rush mix tape just wouldn't be the same without a 2 liter of Shasta to go with it...
fordsvt1Aug 4, 2010
No Doubt? What?
frostyb007Aug 4, 2010
Although I agree with you about Canada being great. Some of your "reasons" there are pretty lame. There's so much more to it.
avrusAug 4, 2010
What they don't make mention of is the number of goods that are disproportionaly more expensive in Canada than in the US. Difference in exchange rates aside, some products (magazines for example) are 50-80% more expensive in Canada with no logical or economical explanation.
I can't remember the product I was looking at the other day, it was produced in Canada, sold on Amazon.com and yet the price in Canada was 25% higher than on Amazon.com (after exchange rate factors).
spiralspiritAug 4, 2010
all books, all magazines, anything published in the US and then shipped here has massive increase in price. Years ago when I bought books for $6.99 in the states they were $9.99 or $11.99 canadian - far more than the 15% difference in the currency.
obeythefistAug 4, 2010
Everything in Canada has a higher price tag. Years ago, when there was a 15% discount on stuff when you visited Canada, prices were 10% - 15% higher than for the equivalent in the US. But as their dollar made gains on ours, their prices didn't go down.
banderwockyAug 4, 2010
Wow, the author of the article sure seems to be angry that Canada is doing well. Jealous much?
andreoAug 4, 2010
But but but, Canada and their taxes! And socialized health care! And they can't walk around with guns on their hips, or on their gun rack in their trucks, or hidden under their jackets!
How could this happen?!
/s
leif777Aug 4, 2010
Every rose has it's thorn... in this case it's a touque wearing, poutine eating, tabernaque swearing thorn.
asimpledadAug 4, 2010
Never mind the Canadian oil boom and how much money is getting pumped into their economy over that. Never mind Canadian timber sales and the GDP $$$ that adds. No, it's purely their banking regulation that has caused this. Have you seen their national (or royal or whatever they call them) forests after they are logged? So depressing. Much smaller population + huge natural resources to exploit = Oranges, compared to our Apples. Hardly surprising they are doing good with the great deck they have been dealt. It's funny though, how many Canadians come over here to do their shopping. Walmart is full of them (and please, stop just dumping your litter in the parking lot, it may be OK in Canada, but in the USA, we put it in trash cans).Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
pona64Aug 4, 2010
Yeah we litter all the time, its great and were all ok with it.Who needs a trash can?
(and please, stop dumping your oil in the water, over here we put it in barrels).
fordsvt1Aug 4, 2010
ASimpleMind
leif777Aug 4, 2010
I don't know about the rest of Canada because I've only lived in Montreal and Toronto but bars, clubs, food, transit, housing, daycare and education (and more) are all WAY cheaper in Montreal. I'm enjoying a much more comfortable life in here and I'm making the same as when I lived in Toronto....and can afford to live downtown and skip the hour and a half commute... and I don't worry about getting shot.
Anyway, to get on topic, regardless of the QST it's a much cheaper city if you're just visiting.
pona64Aug 4, 2010
Yeah we litter all the time, its great and were all ok with it.Who needs a trash can.
(and please, stop dumping your oil in the water, over here we put it in barrels).
heliumflashAug 4, 2010
Canadians have been shopping in the US for a while as our sales taxes are a lot lower (and taxes in general are lower).