What Makes the Canadian Financial System So Different?

[Mogura]

According to World Economic Forum, Canada has the world's "soundest" banking system. It is the only country in the G7 that did not have to come to the aid of its financial sector with a state sponsored bailout. So what makes the Canadian financial system different?

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

It's an interesting article, discussing how the Canadian cultural mindset may have attributed to Canada's avoiding this whole mess. Enjoy!

[Nemesis]

It also helps that our Prime Minister is an economist (even though he's still a jackass).

[Causa Mortis]

According to World Economic Forum, Canada has the world's "soundest" banking system. It is the only country in the G7 that did not have to come to the aid of its financial sector with a state sponsored bailout. So what makes the Canadian financial system different?

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

It's an interesting article, discussing how the Canadian cultural mindset may have attributed to Canada's avoiding this whole mess. Enjoy!

If I recall correctly, Canada also does not require banks to hold a small set of government-approved assets in their reserve portfolios. This allows for greater diversification, which lessens inherent risk, and also means that one insolvent bank says nothing about banks generally.

This was true up through the 1950s, I don't know if its still true today.

[LaoTzu]

We Regulate.

US banks were allowed to invest in derivatives and the stock market. That was relatively new I think (don't quote me, finance isn't my deal).
So when the economy and stock market plunge, it pushes small banks into insolvency.

Not so, here in Soviet Canuckistan.

[Synamon]

The difference is regulation. Mortgages are a good example:
The heart of the franchise – and probably the true key to the stability of the Canadian financial sector – is mortgages. Unlike many of the economies that were hardest hit by the crisis, particularly the US and the UK, Canada has a highly restrictive mortgage market. All mortgages with less than a 20 per cent down payment must be insured. Adjustable-rate and interest-only mortgages are practically unheard of. One obvious result is a more robust mortgage market: Palter at McKinsey says that less than 1 per cent of Canadian mortgages are currently in default, compared with 10 per cent in the US, with almost no difference in the home ownership rate, around 67 per cent in both countries.

[mormeguil]

There is also the fact that we don't have any small banks. The banking services are almost all provided by 6 large banks. This way, if anything goes wrong they are better able to survive the hit and can recoup on longuer term.

[RedIrish]

There seems to be a certain feeling amoungst Canadians that society should be governed for the common good. Not for individual rights and freedoms. Therefore Canadians see no inherent conflict with the concept of limiting activities of corporations or individuals.

[Mader]

They have been careful and conservative in their banking industry.

They refused to get involved in the GM mess.

Also, most of the provinces require a balanced budget every year and the national government is moving in this direction.

Admirable.

[LaoTzu]

They refused to get involved in the GM mess.


Sort of. Our Government gave Billions to the auto companies at the same time the US did. A smaller amount of course; but equal in relation to our share in them. The auto sector is a pretty major part of the economy, which is why the dollar can't be at par too long. (But it's nice for a while :P )

[JonD]

There seems to be a certain feeling amoungst Canadians that society should be governed for the common good. Not for individual rights and freedoms. Therefore Canadians see no inherent conflict with the concept of limiting activities of corporations or individuals.

When it comes to banking, yes. Look what the US did to the world economy with all their fancy freedoms.

Here are some reasons why Canada's financial system is doing alright:

- Very conservative lending criteria.

- More stringent Tier 1 capital requirements set out by the Canadian government compared to other countries.

- Canadian banks are heavily diversified.

- Subprime homeowner loans account for just 5% of overall Canadian mortgages. This number is four times higher in the United States.

[herbicidal]

I'm not as sure that Canadians have done things "right".

We are highly dependent on the US buying our resources. Housing prices are still too high, in other words they are still in a bubble. This has been propped up the same as the states with very low interest rates on loans, very low requirements for down payments. As the economy continues to slide at some point, interest rates will rise dramatically. In the early 1980's interest rates reached over twenty percent, what will happen when the average Canadian's mortgage payment doubles?

We have a strong oil & gas sector, moderately strong mining, if that falters I'm not sure what we would have left. Pulp and paper is gone, forestry gone, tourism faltering, agriculture borderline, automobile industry on life support, we are getting a short term boost from the olympics at a cost to taxpayers of seven billion dollars. Of course it will somehow not cost us a dime in the end. So they say....

Like the U.S. the Canadian government has seen fit to stimulate the economy, it's like a cadaver receiving cardiac "stimulation"... charging.... clear.... look an arm moved. It's alive, the economy is getting better, see. Anytime now it's going to get up and start walking.

I believe that the US is only in the beginning of this economic downturn, we are probably four years away from the bottom.

The banks are getting money for barely above 0% interest and they still can't make a profit? They are still highly leveraged. If they are only staying a float marginally now, how will they do when interest rates shoot up?

Over the next couple of years the U.S. Dollar is going to drop dramatically. I would say by about half of it's current value, compared to the world in general. Will Canada maintain it's dollar strength, I really doubt it. My expectation is that the Canadian dollar will devalue along side the United States. The government will be under enormous political and economic pressures to lower the Canadian dollar. The U.S. will simply be unable to afford to purchase anything Canadian otherwise. If you don't believe that the U.S. Dollar will drop, look at the "US dollar index" back to 1997, you will see that it has already dropped by nearly half. It was at around 121 and is now in the mid 70's

Since we are the U.S. biggest trading partner, I expect that we are screwed. On the plus side agriculture might do alright as American's may need to eat.

Even the government's statistics are manipulated. Does anyone really believe that inflation is only 1.3%. Try 5% and climbing. Unemployment numbers are on the rise, and grossly miscalculated and they don't take into account the following.
- Anyone who has given up looking for work
- Anyone who is not on Unemployment Insurance
- Anyone who has downgraded their job to a part-time position.

If calculated as it was in the 1980's unemployment in the United States is now 22%. Great depression era levels are estimated (since no one hardly tracked stats then) at 30%.

Let's also not forget that both the Harper and Bush administrations have been seemingly joined at the hip for several years now.

All of Canada's mortgages are backed by the government, and have been for some time. The Canadian government guarantees these loans further propping up the housing market.

Canadians have been borrowing against their ever increasing home prices for several years now, driving down homeowner equity. Canadian consumer debt is at all time highs, credit cards and mortgages.

Perhaps, in conjunction with the stimulus's the government has handed out, we have continued to believe that our economy is better. And it is merely that belief that has kept thing running for the last 18 months. Time will tell.

[lurk]

We Regulate.

US banks were allowed to invest in derivatives and the stock market. That was relatively new I think (don't quote me, finance isn't my deal).
So when the economy and stock market plunge, it pushes small banks into insolvency.

Not so, here in Soviet Canuckistan.
The repeal of the Glass-Steagle Act in 1999 broke down the barrier between banks and investment companies. This removed many limits on the kinds of vehicles that banks could invest in.

[LaoTzu]

Thanks, that's exactly what I was thinking of.

[Causa Mortis]

When it comes to banking, yes. Look what the US did to the world economy with all their fancy freedoms.


:rollseyes:

So the financial crisis is all the US' fault, cause like the US sets interest rates by determining the real global supply of savings and real global demand for investment, and individuals and institutions in China, the EU, OPEC, and Japan didn't participate in activities that caused or facilitated the current downturn.

---------- Post added 02-02-2010 at 10:25 PM ----------


I believe that the US is only in the beginning of this economic downturn, we are probably four years away from the bottom.

On the basis of what? Your hunch? Your interpretation of pundits on the nightly news? People always expect current trends to continue forever and ever, and the very best macro forecasters - guys with PhDs who spend all day reviewing data and the latest research - have a terrible track record of predicting short and mid-range macro trends (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.).

If calculated as it was in the 1980's unemployment in the United States is now 22%. Great depression era levels are estimated (since no one hardly tracked stats then) at 30%.

Your source for 22% unemployment? Your source for a substantive chance in the way unemployment statistics are collected since the 1980s? The worst stats I've seen which include "discouraged workers" who aren't looking for jobs, is about 14%.

And unemployment during the worst years of the depression peaked out around 25% (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.).

[Geminii]

There seems to be a certain feeling amoungst Canadians that society should be governed for the common good. Not for individual rights and freedoms. Therefore Canadians see no inherent conflict with the concept of limiting activities of corporations or individuals.

I've wondered for a while about maybe having economic laws which become tighter with a legal entity or group's influence on a given economy.

If you're a mom-and-pop shop making $100K a year, you get near-total economic freedom.

If you're a multibilliondollar player in a trilliondollar industry, you get government restrictions up the wazoo. Being "too big to fail" leads directly to "and so you're not allowed to go play in Alligator Creek". Have lots of close economic ties with other entities and you get straightjacketed, be independent with lots of redundant financial backup and you get more freedom.

[ArtistTyrant]

they don't give money to anyone who wants to borrow

[LaoTzu]

source? :)

My bank insisted I take 4x what I was asking for. I obliged them.

[Ytterbium]

I like Canada, seems like a nice place. Compared to your neighbours that is.
I think Canada should rise up and try stand more on their own rather than a satellite state of your southern neighbour. So I think it should reach out a hand for the rest of the world, perhaps Europe in particular. Somewhat like Mexico. Canada have all the right things to be very successful. Natural resources, energy and labour.

[Aronnax]

I like Canada, seems like a nice place. Compared to your neighbours that is.
I think Canada should rise up and try stand more on their own rather than a satellite state of your southern neighbour. So I think it should reach out a hand for the rest of the world, perhaps Europe in particular. Somewhat like Mexico. Canada have all the right things to be very successful. Natural resources, energy and labour.

To imply Canada is a "satellite state" of the US is an insult to Canada's sovereignty. Canada is no more a US satellite than Sweden is a satellite of Germany. Canada has strong economic ties with the US because the distance involved makes the nations natural trading partners. Trading heavily with your neighbors is not a form of economic subjugation, it's a beneficial arrangement for both Canada and the US.

[Ytterbium]

To imply Canada is a "satellite state" of the US is an insult to Canada's sovereignty. Canada is no more a US satellite than Sweden is a satellite of Germany. Canada has strong economic ties with the US because the distance involved makes the nations natural trading partners. Trading heavily with your neighbors is not a form of economic subjugation, it's a beneficial arrangement for both Canada and the US.
Indeed. Infact Sweden is a satellite state of Germany. So you're absolutely correct there. Both Canada and Sweden have these same limitations of regulations from a higher instance. I think it would be very beneficial for Canada if they also sought other trading partners. Swedens largest partner is Norway, but Sweden doesn't trade with Norway alone. Neither does Canada but it would be good if they could widen the trade with other partners aswell. Just as their banks spreads the risks around. The US is likely to take a huge downturn in the future and it would be very bad for Canada if it's there in the same boat.
This doesn't isn't an advice for Canada only but for most countries trading alot with the US. Sweden and Japan does so aswell. So the economies are going up and down depending on the USD. So as I mentioned before Canada should start to take up more space, be seen. Elbow the US in the stomace and take place. Otherwise it's just going to be there in the background, a satellite.

[Aronnax]

Free economies trade with whomever it's profitable to trade with. In the instance where it makes fiscal sense to ship goods 5000 Km from Canada to the Netherlands it's done. When it makes fiscal sense to ship goods 7500 Km from Canada to Japan it's done. No amount of wishful thinking will eliminate the costs associated with long distance trade. Countries trade with the US because it's profitable to do so. If the US economy takes an substantial hit they'll find other markets.

[SirJac]

Free economies trade with whomever it's profitable to trade with. In the instance where it makes fiscal sense to ship goods 5000 Km from Canada to the Netherlands it's done. When it makes fiscal sense to ship goods 7500 Km from Canada to Japan it's done. No amount of wishful thinking will eliminate the costs associated with long distance trade. Countries trade with the US because it's profitable to do so. If the US economy takes an substantial hit they'll find other markets.

The world economy isn't exactly a free market, politics plays it's hand and negotiating free trade treaties take a fair amount of time and energy. I think it's fair to say that we spend a significant amount of our time and energy focusing on our trade realations with the US and have been not spending enough of our time abroad. "Putting all of our eggs in one basket", I believe it is.

[Aronnax]

The world economy isn't exactly a free market, politics plays it's hand and negotiating free trade treaties take a fair amount of time and energy. I think it's fair to say that we spend a significant amount of our time and energy focusing on our trade relations with the US and have been not spending enough of our time abroad. "Putting all of our eggs in one basket", I believe it is.

In general free trade agreements are a good idea and Canada shouldn't hesitate to form them when it's practical. That said, Canada's exports to the US consist of oil, lumber, metals, US automobiles and car parts. Unless Canada makes drastic changes to its economy free trade agreements with other nations won't significantly affect the Canadian export market.

The largest consumer (by far) of big 3 automobiles is the United States, free trade agreements won't open up European and Asian markets for American style automobiles. Regarding raw materials: the farther you have to ship them the smaller the profit margin becomes. As long as the US can afford to buy the materials it makes economic sense for Canada to sell them to the US instead of other nations. The geographical isolation of Canada is a major factor here, there aren't a lot of options in terms of trading partners.

[Ytterbium]

In general free trade agreements are a good idea and Canada shouldn't hesitate to form them when it's practical. That said, Canada's exports to the US consist of oil, lumber, metals, US automobiles and car parts. Unless Canada makes drastic changes to its economy free trade agreements with other nations won't significantly affect the Canadian export market.

The largest consumer (by far) of big 3 automobiles is the United States, free trade agreements won't open up European and Asian markets for American style automobiles. Regarding raw materials: the farther you have to ship them the smaller the profit margin becomes. As long as the US can afford to buy the materials it makes economic sense for Canada to sell them to the US instead of other nations. The geographical isolation of Canada is a major factor here, there aren't a lot of options in terms of trading partners.

Just like SirJac said there's no free trade. There's NAFTA and EU but these works just as much as trade obstacles aswell.
Who said other markets open up for US spec vehicles? Why can't Canada open up for 'other spec' cars? Why must Canada have US spec cars, why not their own regulations? Canada can build other cars than US ones. I know they assembled Volvo cars in Canada before. Canada can manufacture vehicles and other machinery aswell which doesn't have to be US spec. Just look at Mexico. They've a few global brands which the US lacks. Canada could do the same. That egg in the basket thing.

[Aronnax]

Just like SirJac said there's no free trade. There's NAFTA and EU but these works just as much as trade obstacles aswell.
Who said other markets open up for US spec vehicles? Why can't Canada open up for 'other spec' cars? Why must Canada have US spec cars, why not their own regulations? Canada can build other cars than US ones. I know they assembled Volvo cars in Canada before. Canada can manufacture vehicles and other machinery aswell which doesn't have to be US spec. Just look at Mexico. They've a few global brands which the US lacks. Canada could do the same. That egg in the basket thing.

The burden to build factories for other auto manufactures lies at the feet of the corporations. Total costs are more strongly related to the distance and labor costs than tariffs. Canadian factories build primarily for Domestic and US consumption, even European and Japanese brands built in Canada are primarily consumed by Canada and the US.

Manufacture for export only makes sense if the labor + shipping costs make it worthwhile. Canada has significantly higher labor and shipping costs than Mexico does, making a lot of trade cost prohibitive. You can pay a Mexican factory worker about half of what a Canadian laborer earns, that's why Mexico is popular destination for outsourced manufacturing capacity.

You don't seem to understand that Canada doesn't rely on trade the same way many other nations do. Their resource wealth coupled with a developed infrastructure and a high level of education means Canadian prosperity isn't reliant on trade the same way many other nations are. Heavy trade between the US and Canada is a matter of convenience and mutual benefit, not the inequitable subjugation you've characterized it as.

[Nemesis]

Just like SirJac said there's no free trade. There's NAFTA and EU but these works just as much as trade obstacles aswell.
Who said other markets open up for US spec vehicles? Why can't Canada open up for 'other spec' cars? Why must Canada have US spec cars, why not their own regulations? Canada can build other cars than US ones. I know they assembled Volvo cars in Canada before. Canada can manufacture vehicles and other machinery aswell which doesn't have to be US spec. Just look at Mexico. They've a few global brands which the US lacks. Canada could do the same. That egg in the basket thing.

This is a good point, and that question will be bouncing around in my head.

The only thing I can think of in response is that we probably don't want to put the auto-industry in the top priority for our trading. After seeing how badly the auto industry was hit in the states during the economic down-turn, It's probably wise to keep our exports focused on other things. Keep in mind that Alberta is sitting on a massive amount of oil, and there are still "vast untapped resources" of oil in the NWT, Nunavut, and the Yukon. If we really wanted to rev up our trading with strong resources, that would be the way to do it.

That being said, we seem to be doing just fine as we are (in spite of a troubled global economy). Hell, I haven't even seen any signs of economic strife in southern Alberta at all. I imagine that we are sitting on these resources as a means to keep us afloat in case things go completely ape-shit, and the U.S completely tanks.

[Thinker]

Canada is the only G7 country to survive the financial crisis without a state bail-out for its financial sector.

This is true.
Australia (G20) also, did not need to bail out its financial sector.

Two of the world’s 15 most highly valued financial institutions are Canadian

I understand that Australia's largest 4 banks were amongst the top ten world wide in 2009 (although I couldn't find the reference).

Australia's financial system is also highly regulated. Our level of sub-prime loans, and exposure to CDO's was insignificant.

The only significant response in Australia to the GFC in the context of the financial system was to provide a government guarantee for deposits. This effectively allowed the banks to continue to provide credit through the GFC.

I would suggest that both Canada and Australia, were also in very good economic positions given their resource industries.

[SirJac]

Yes, Australia did better then Canada in recovering, returning to positive GNP growth a couple months earlier then us. I'm quite bullish on Australia's future since they are also resource rich and have a better trade relationship with China.

[Ytterbium]

The burden to build factories for other auto manufactures lies at the feet of the corporations. Total costs are more strongly related to the distance and labor costs than tariffs. Canadian factories build primarily for Domestic and US consumption, even European and Japanese brands built in Canada are primarily consumed by Canada and the US.

Manufacture for export only makes sense if the labor + shipping costs make it worthwhile. Canada has significantly higher labor and shipping costs than Mexico does, making a lot of trade cost prohibitive. You can pay a Mexican factory worker about half of what a Canadian laborer earns, that's why Mexico is popular destination for outsourced manufacturing capacity.

You don't seem to understand that Canada doesn't rely on trade the same way many other nations do. Their resource wealth coupled with a developed infrastructure and a high level of education means Canadian prosperity isn't reliant on trade the same way many other nations are. Heavy trade between the US and Canada is a matter of convenience and mutual benefit, not the inequitable subjugation you've characterized it as.
Ofcourse it's so. Most such things as vehicles, trucks etc. are usually made locally. To avoid tariffs and logistics. However transporting such machinery around the world is done nevertheless.
Sweden is a typical example of such. Swedish labour is cheap compared to other EU states, so are the energy costs. It's thus very cost effective to produce in Sweden. However logistics is expensive. So in the end it's cheaper to produce in central Europe than in so remotely like Sweden or Finland. From central European states you can reach millions of people in a few miles and that's not the case further north. The Swedish 'home market' has always been too small so all companies have sought to export. Even though we don't build so many cars and other consumer goods. Alot of heavy machinery is built and shipped out all over the world. I don't see why Canada could do the same. They've pretty much the same conditions regarding resources and energy. All I think is needed is to step out of that America mindset that you told only because it was an easy way out just to deal with the US.

This is a good point, and that question will be bouncing around in my head.

The only thing I can think of in response is that we probably don't want to put the auto-industry in the top priority for our trading. After seeing how badly the auto industry was hit in the states during the economic down-turn, It's probably wise to keep our exports focused on other things. Keep in mind that Alberta is sitting on a massive amount of oil, and there are still "vast untapped resources" of oil in the NWT, Nunavut, and the Yukon. If we really wanted to rev up our trading with strong resources, that would be the way to do it.

That being said, we seem to be doing just fine as we are (in spite of a troubled global economy). Hell, I haven't even seen any signs of economic strife in southern Alberta at all. I imagine that we are sitting on these resources as a means to keep us afloat in case things go completely ape-shit, and the U.S completely tanks.

I don't think you should put the auto industry in that top priority. It's not that in Sweden either. Even though two brands have spawned from Sweden, they produce quite few vehicles compared to other EU states. These countries have quite large automotive industries and most of them only sell to Europe. That's really putting all the eggs in one basket. The Swedish automotive industry is smaller but it exports to the whole world. It seems mostly that American car industries have been hit worst by the crisis. Volvo cars for instance which ford bought from Volvo in 1999 or so have been bringing profits for Ford the first years. Until Ford started to manage Volvo cars themselves everything went in the other direction with losses. I think there's a lot of incompetence in the management in the American multinational giants.

[mormeguil]

The best thing for Canadian economy would probably be to highly specialised in an high level technology. Wich one? I don't know, but another problem is that it would mean reforming the school system to produce people working in that sector almost exclusivly.

[freeeekyyy]

Ofcourse it's so. Most such things as vehicles, trucks etc. are usually made locally. To avoid tariffs and logistics. However transporting such machinery around the world is done nevertheless.
Sweden is a typical example of such. Swedish labour is cheap compared to other EU states, so are the energy costs. It's thus very cost effective to produce in Sweden. However logistics is expensive. So in the end it's cheaper to produce in central Europe than in so remotely like Sweden or Finland. From central European states you can reach millions of people in a few miles and that's not the case further north. The Swedish 'home market' has always been too small so all companies have sought to export. Even though we don't build so many cars and other consumer goods. Alot of heavy machinery is built and shipped out all over the world. I don't see why Canada could do the same. They've pretty much the same conditions regarding resources and energy. All I think is needed is to step out of that America mindset that you told only because it was an easy way out just to deal with the US.



I don't think you should put the auto industry in that top priority. It's not that in Sweden either. Even though two brands have spawned from Sweden, they produce quite few vehicles compared to other EU states. These countries have quite large automotive industries and most of them only sell to Europe. That's really putting all the eggs in one basket. The Swedish automotive industry is smaller but it exports to the whole world. It seems mostly that American car industries have been hit worst by the crisis. Volvo cars for instance which ford bought from Volvo in 1999 or so have been bringing profits for Ford the first years. Until Ford started to manage Volvo cars themselves everything went in the other direction with losses. I think there's a lot of incompetence in the management in the American multinational giants.
It's not so much a problem with american automakers themselves as it is with the labor unions. The UAW has had an iron grip on the big 3 american automakers for 50 years. They make it incredibly difficult for ford, gm and chrysler to compete in the world market. In a sense it is incompetence because the automakers should have never signed the agreements with the union in the first place, but now that that's happened, there's not much they can do. The main reason ford has moved much of their production from the US to mexico, for instance, is to avoid the union. I would absolutely love to see the UAW cease to exist, unfortunately, that's very unlikely in the foreseeable future.

[Ytterbium]

It's not so much a problem with american automakers themselves as it is with the labor unions. The UAW has had an iron grip on the big 3 american automakers for 50 years. They make it incredibly difficult for ford, gm and chrysler to compete in the world market. In a sense it is incompetence because the automakers should have never signed the agreements with the union in the first place, but now that that's happened, there's not much they can do. The main reason ford has moved much of their production from the US to mexico, for instance, is to avoid the union. I would absolutely love to see the UAW cease to exist, unfortunately, that's very unlikely in the foreseeable future.
:laugh: Ofcourse yeah blame it on the union. It's just a very big problem the most carmakers across the globe and their workers have even stronger unions. With a month of paid vacation and other great benefits. These countries manages to manufacture and export cars around the globe. But the US doesn't. Do you seriously think that the Japanese and German autoworkers have a weaker unions and a lower wage?

[Aronnax]

:laugh: Ofcourse yeah blame it on the union. It's just a very big problem the most carmakers across the globe and their workers have even stronger unions. With a month of paid vacation and other great benefits. These countries manages to manufacture and export cars around the globe. But the US doesn't. Do you seriously think that the Japanese and German autoworkers have a weaker unions and a lower wage?

Japanese and German autoworkers have a significantly lower combined compensation package (wages + benefits) than US UAW autoworkers. The primary cost difference is found in health care and retirement benefits.

[Ytterbium]

Japanese and German autoworkers have a significantly lower combined compensation package (wages + benefits) than US UAW autoworkers. The primary cost difference is found in health care and retirement benefits.
So if the US had tax funded healthcare they could compete with Germany? Is this why also Canada produce so much US cars? Then I think the US should get their 'socialistic' healthcare reform and become a glorious nation again. :thumbsup:

[freeeekyyy]

So if the US had tax funded healthcare they could compete with Germany? Is this why also Canada produce so much US cars? Then I think the US should get their 'socialistic' healthcare reform and become a glorious nation again. :thumbsup:

Or the union could just quit being so unrelenting and take a cut in retirement and healthcare benefits. Some of their workers have been collecting a pension longer than the amount of time they actually worked for the company.

[Mogura]

Singing more praises of the Canadian financial system:

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Ytterbium]

Or the union could just quit being so unrelenting and take a cut in retirement and healthcare benefits. Some of their workers have been collecting a pension longer than the amount of time they actually worked for the company.
It's not like they're some kind of super humans never ever needing any medical attention in their life. Like Mogura wrote it seems you could learn a bit from Canada.

[freeeekyyy]

It's not like they're some kind of super humans never ever needing any medical attention in their life. Like Mogura wrote it seems you could learn a bit from Canada.
Who said they should get no medical attention? It's not a binary system. Less doesn't mean nothing. The same medical and retirement benefits everybody else gets would be fine for them, and plenty.

[Ytterbium]

Who said they should get no medical attention? It's not a binary system. Less doesn't mean nothing. The same medical and retirement benefits everybody else gets would be fine for them, and plenty.This is slightly off-topic. I don't know what benefits they've but nevertheless that's not the problem. American cars doesn't sell well in the rest of the world. Just like French cars never sold well in the US and thus now not sold there anymore. It's hardly the fault of the union.

[LaoTzu]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

There are niche car manufacturers trying to break out into the market.
Though, this isn't a 'car' in the traditional sense. It's more a 'light urban vehicle' than something you can take cross-country.

Originally, it was unavailable for sale in Canada... though it was designed and manufactured here.

Policy isn't always all that sensible. :)



As for Unions... Toyota has been operating near here for a while now, and just opened another plant a couple years ago. There has been no real interest in unions at those plants. The company deals with its employees fairly; and the employees don't expect the sun and moon as a bonus.
Even unionized, it's still cheaper to set up here than in the States...because of healthcare benefits.

[Ytterbium]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

There are niche car manufacturers trying to break out into the market.
Though, this isn't a 'car' in the traditional sense. It's more a 'light urban vehicle' than something you can take cross-country.

Originally, it was unavailable for sale in Canada... though it was designed and manufactured here.

Policy isn't always all that sensible. :)Looks like one of those French moped cars. Didn't you have something called Dynasty IT aswell?
I the EU those small electric cars are classed as quadricycles. Four-wheeled motorcycles thus to avoid car safety criterias.

As for Unions... Toyota has been operating near here for a while now, and just opened another plant a couple years ago. There has been no real interest in unions at those plants. The company deals with its employees fairly; and the employees don't expect the sun and moon as a bonus.
Even unionized, it's still cheaper to set up here than in the States...because of healthcare benefits.That's the fault I think most right-wingers, conservative, liberals whatever you called them. They have the mantra of that competition is making everything better. Well it's not really so. It makes some things better but not every thing. Many things are the most effective as regulated monopolies. Quite an irony but that's the way it is. :laugh: