Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

I find it amazing that people here still fall for the "trickle down" nonsense that even its inventor admitted doesn't work a few years back.

The Canucks, with their commie health care, 0 medical bankruptices, and very progressive income tax have more bling spread more equally than America.



http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/201 ... -americans

While Americans might enjoy throwing politically-charged barbs at their neighbors to the north, Canadians now have at least one reason to be smug.

For the first time in recent history, the average Canadian is richer than the average American, according to a report cited in Toronto's Globe and Mail.

And not just by a little. Currently, the average Canadian household is more than $40,000 richer than the average American household. The net worth of the average Canadian household in 2011 was $363,202, compared to around $320,000 for Americans.

If you're thinking the Canadian advantage must be due to exchange rates, think again. The Canadian dollar has actually caught up to the U.S. dollar in recent years.

"These are not 60-cent dollars, but Canadian dollars more or less at par with the U.S. greenback," Globe and Mail's Michael Adams writes.

To add insult to injury, not only are Canadians comparatively better-off than Americans, they're also more likely to be employed. The unemployment rate is 7.2 percent—and dropping—in Canada, while the U.S. is stuck with a stubbornly high rate of 8.2 percent.

More at link.

poop rolls down hill........

So in a shity global economy Canada does better then America. I wonder if this has to do with their import to export ratios or the level of debt national and private. Because I don't see how you can blame this on health care being that the wide majority of Americans don't have any

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

This is about net worth; not income.

No matter how much income you give somebody, what they accumulate from it is largely dependent upon them - NOT the economic system.

And, if you look at :
http://www.averagesalarysurvey.com/arti ... 92229.aspx
You will find the following:
.......................................
"Salaries in Canada are a little bit lower than in USA or Europe. But this is compensated with lower prices of flats and houses in Canada.
Those Canadian at the bottom of 20 per cent fell by 20 per cent comparing last 30 years. The median income for this group dropped from $19,300 in 1980 to $15,300 in 2010. All in 2010 Canadian dollars.
Those people in the middle of 20 per cent group found their salaries stagnate. Statistics Canada shows that this group's median salary was $41,300 in 1980. And pretty much the same 30 years later.
The richest top 20 per cent found their salaries rise by 16 per cent to $86,200. This is also shown in big increase of those who earn above the $100.000 a year. In 1980, 3.4 per cent people reached that value. By 2010 this value jump to 6.5 per cent."
.............................
Which sounds pretty much exactly like criticisms of what you are pleased to call "trickle-down economics" in our own US economy. So your denouncement of our much-modified and overregulated market economy (the word "free" no longer belongs in that phrase) is just more liberal smoke and mirrors; but I WILL give you the benefit of the doubt and credit you with being mistaken and misguided by your misspent youth 'mongst all them liberal damnyankees rather than dishonest.

I'd hazard a guess that the marginally smaller average net worth in the USA is closely related to the ever-increasing dependency on entitlements, which REQUIRE that recipients basically own next to nothing. That would pull down the average net worth.

Net worth is truer barometer of real wealth than income; you know that.

The reason I posted this article is because, if you subscribe to Republican economic orthodoxy (as 99% of here do) then Canadians should be massively unemployed government dependents in bread lines. Instead, their economy has been quietly and slowly growing nicely, so much so you see this happening:

http://www.twylah.com/CTVNews/tweets/182799160104337408

TORONTO - A group of doctors is calling on federal and provincial governments to raise income taxes levied on high-income Canadians. They are launching a campaign to get support for the idea, using the slogan "Tax us. Canada's worth it." Doctors for Fair Taxation are proposing new surtaxes that would tax any income over $100,000.

For all the talk of late of the awesomeness of the American business model...I'm just not seeing it. I know its "blame Obama", who is apparently somehow responsible for every ill and evil, but the system here that favors the few over the many here kind of doesn't work.

The Canucks manage to run a pretty tight ship while making sure no one has to worry about a sudden injury or illness bankrupting them, and their economy obviously hasn't suffered for it.

I'm sure also some of this may have to do with Canada's oil explotation as oil prices have come up and the strengthening of their currency do to our government's intentional devaluation of our own. Also Canada is still primarily an exporter of natural resources and any nation which is on the positive side of that sort of trade equation is going to do well.

Perhaps rather than assume it is how they spend their money, maybe the difference is in how they make it. maybe if we opened up areas to more mineral resource exploitation here in the US we would see a positive impact on wealth as well?

Kreutz, Kreutz, Kreutz............ You are still the undisputed King of Out of Context and Jumped Conclusions. What is it your people say?.............. OY VEY!

You have seized upon a couple of isolated facts/assumptions, exaggerated their significance, ignored most of the other related facts and information, and drawn unwarranted conclusions from the the ones you seized upon. Bless your heart. I know you can't help it .... it's in the liberal DNA.
.............................................
Basic information

Canada has one of the highest levels of economic freedom in the world.

**************************Today Canada closely resembles the U.S. in its market-oriented economic system, and pattern of production.***********************************************

[9] As of September 2011, Canada's national unemployment rate stood at 7.1%,[10] as the economy continues its recovery from the effects of the 2007-2010 global financial crisis. In May 2010, provincial unemployment rates varied from a low of 5.0% in Saskatchewan to a high of 13.8% in Newfoundland and Labrador.[11] According to the Forbes Global 2000 list of the world's largest companies in 2008, Canada had 69 companies in the list, ranking 5th next to France.[12]

**********************************************As of 2008, Canada’s total government debt burden is the lowest in the G8.*************************************************************************
..............................................................
Yes, Kreutz, net worth is the better measure. THAT WAS MY POINT, IN FACT.

But net worth is inexorbly linked with income, now, isn't it? Net worth is the accumulation over a period of years of what is left of what you earned after you'd spent all you were going to spend. Average annual earnings in the USA are slightly larger. Taxes in Canada are higher. So how is it that Canadians have a larger net worth? IT CAN ONLY BE ONE OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH OF TWO THINGS: (1) they consume less, which means they actually enjoy a lower standard of living now in order to accumulate for the future (now THERE'S a novel idea, huh?) and (2) they have less inflation and therefore lower prices.

As you can see above, Canada's debt was the lowrest in the G8 as of 2008. So very clearly what is going on in Canada, it seems to me, is that the people in Canada are living less well so the government can take more and the fact that they are digging their governmental debt hole more slowly has postponed (NOT avoided - their debt is now growing pretty fast as even their higher taxes can't fund their government redistribution schemes) the same problems we have now in the USA. Of course, the factors Riposte cites are also significant.

So what you're really saying is that the Canadian ship is better than ours in the USA because it isn't sinking as fast as ours is. It's still going to sink, just as the European Socialist flotilla did before it. We conservatives want to plug the holes in the bottom of our ship. But first we have to stop BHO and his crew from drilling all those NEW holes.

Yes, their oil/gas industry is growing, but thats just one sector of their economy. Its worth noting that the Keystone XL pipeline would have created more jobs in Canada than the US, but of course we should step up our game on that front anyway, since we have literally centures worth of coal and gas, which can be tapped while educing the environemental consquenes.

So what you're really saying is that the Canadian ship is better than ours in the USA because it isn't sinking as fast as ours is. It's still going to sink, just as the European Socialist flotilla did before it.

Pretty much. But if you listen to the free marketeers who prophesize dire warnings over robust (or even mild) governmental intervention (which Canada certainly does) their ship should already be at bottom, but, like you said its somehow a little further above the waterline than ours.

This exposes major flaws in conservative economic theory. Similar to the claim high taxes kill jobs, when the inverse appears true. Unemployment rates are lower when taxes are higher. Go figure.

As for the European socialist flotilla having sunk, I was not aware it has sunk. If so, global
investors are dumber than I thought:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000087 ... lenews_wsj

FRANKFURT—The topsy-turvy world of Europe's debt crisis notched up another first Tuesday, as Germany got paid by investors for borrowing their money for two years.

Germany sold €4.173 billion ($5.13 billion) of a two-year note, or Schatz, at an average yield of minus 0.06%, meaning it will pay back less money in two years than it received Tuesday from investors.The two-year bonds won't have any scheduled interest payments to investors.

The negative interest rate reflects the intense degree of risk aversion that has seized European debt markets in recent months. Investors are now so afraid of much larger losses on other countries' bonds that they are willing to embrace the certainty of a much smaller loss on German ones instead.

[/quote][/quote]

Let that one sink in for a minute, making money on issuing bonds, those crafty Germans, we should be so lucky!

Sounds like Deutschland (and Germany is Europes economy) is doing quite well. Dont forget the PIGS economies that dragged down the Euro should have never been let in anyway.

Dormin, you need to remember one thing, a national economy is more than its government and banks. Many European factories are still operating and exporting just fine.

In the most basic terms, wealth is an accumulation of unspent money or property. In the case of real estate it is valued at property value - loan amount. Since we had the government encouraging easy loans and that caused property values to skyrocket with property owners playing a game of real estate "hot potato", is it hard to see where people have lost their "wealth". What people fail to see is, if they haven't sold their property it has not gained or lost it's value. Your 1000 square foot house remains a 1000 sqare foot house, whether you paid $80,000 for it 15 years ago, $160.000 for it 5 years ago or $120,000 a year ago.

If you bought real estate as the bubble was getting ready to burst, your property may be worth less than it was when you purchased it and you may be stuck living there for a while or sell it for a loss. The reality is, when you bought the property, you thought it was worth it. Real estate values will come back, it will just take a while and that is where most American "wealth" is stored.

We should have no fear. As soon as we in the US get enough government lawyers, tax enforcers and coders working on "solutions" to our economic woes, the all will be well.

And I also have a bridge to sell you!

Ignore It: Study Says Canada Net Worth Higher Than U.S.

By Elizabeth MacDonald

Emac's Bottom Line

Published July 18, 2012

FOXBusiness

There’s a study out there that says the net worth of Canadians is now higher than that of Americans.

The study is impenetrably absurd, and so are the pundits touting it.

The study from Environics Analytics of Toronto says the average Canadian household had a net worth of $363,202 at the end of last year, versus $319,970 for the average American household. The average Canadian household now looks to be more than $44,000 richer than the average American household, the study says.

Set aside the oversights, including that it appears the study uses U.S. government statistics that leave out Americans’ massive 401(k) accounts as Americans are not required to report these retirement accounts on tax returns. The study attempted to use estimates here, but the disclosures are poor.

Similar, too, is the fact that the study ignores Canada’s microscopic defense spending, which amounts to a fraction of the U.S. military budget. For decades, Canada has relied on the U.S. for its own defense and protection, and instead blows its money on a flawed single-payer health system that is growing more expensive and whose long wait times for exams and doctor or hospital visits has Canadians flying down to the U.S. for health care.

Pundits on the study also ignore the fact that academic data shows health spending is growing at a faster clip in Canada than in America, that heart disease and cancer mortality are worse in Canada, and that lack of MRIs and scanners are worse in Canada, as are the long wait times for care.

And yet a Time magazine blog also has ignored all that, and has instead crooked the trumpets for Canada’s socialist model: “Watch out, Americans: Your thrifty, socialist neighbors to the north have steadily become richer than you.”

But the big problem with such analysis is that even the study’s authors oddly admit they ignored government debt spending, which is turning America weirdly less "capitalist-competitive" and more "me-too socialist." Moreover, America is sliding into the very kind of government central planning that Canada is running away from, and that’s the problem.

“Such debt is higher in the U.S. as a percentage of GDP than it is in Canada,” the study’s authors say.

After Canada lost its triple-A credit rating first in 1992 and then in 1994 from both S&P and Moody’s Investors Services, Canada cut its civil service, froze government wages, balanced its budget and got back its triple-A in 2002.

America lost its S&P triple-A last year, because its socialized housing policies caused the financial crisis and wrecked the U.S. economy.

Fixing income inequality by giving everyone a house was a social science experiment with disastrous consequences.

And the deficit has grown by about $5 trillion since President Barack Obama took office -- equal to the GDP of Germany and South Korea combined -- the attitude being it takes a government village, not entrepreneurs and small business, to fix the U.S. economy.

Never mind what Great Britain’s Winston Churchill said, that “redistributing wealth is like standing in a bucket trying to lift oneself up by the handle.”

Canada escaped the housing bust with big mortgage down payments, unlike the U.S. mortgage policy of “no job, no income, no problem” mortgages. The study’s authors also note Canada rejected mortgage interest deductibility and only “briefly embraced” subprime mortgages.

Meanwhile, Canada has moved to privatize parts of its systems for post office, air traffic control and railways.

Still, one thing has Canada looking more like slow, stodgy big spender Europe. Canada has a value added tax; America doesn’t.

Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2012 ... z21EStHJGf

Ah Fox, they never disappoint.

Similar, too, is the fact that the study ignores Canada’s microscopic defense spending, which amounts to a fraction of the U.S. military budget. For decades, Canada has relied on the U.S. for its own defense and protection, and instead blows its money on a flawed single-payer health system that is growing more expensive and whose long wait times for exams and doctor or hospital visits has Canadians flying down to the U.S. for health care.

Yes, they should be like us and instead have a massively bloated useless military to protect themselves from what I can only assume to be an army of eskimos riding polar bears. Or perhaps they can be like us and use it for pointless foreign entanglements than enrich defense contractors?

Last I checked people in either the US or Canada got sick far more frequently than invaded, so how does that use of funds qualify as "blow"?

Its a much wiser use of finite resources.

Interestingly in 6 years for working in metro NYC hospitals (some rather prestigious) I've never seen one Canadian coming here for elective medical treatment.

Not saying it doesn't happen, but I've never seen it. What I have seen is Canadian tourists coming to our ER's if sick or injured while here for stabilizing treatment and then refusing further definitive treatment until they get home.


Also, most 401ks are utterly in the toilet still, especially since quite a few fund managers moved into bonds after the crash and missed the first big recovery in stocks. ANd guess what? Most Americans dont even have them. That would require an upper middle class job, which are dying as fast as the Republican party base. So its still not really going to change things to include them.

The "value added tax bit" was ironic because thats been touted by conservatives as an alternative to the income tax, is a VAT like the individual mandate to simply be abandoned if ever enacted by a filthy Democrat?

Fox "news" isn't.

So what if the US has a military that's bigger than the next 26 militaries combined, 25 of which are our allies? Instead of working with allies, we should take up the job of defense ourselves. The bar has already been set with having two wars at a time. If we start cutting the military now we won't be able to shoot for the goal of being in three wars at a time.

All I can say is that Canada has a Beaver on their nickel. You cannot take any country seriously that has a Beaver on their money.

I wonder if this means Okreutz will move to Canada and leave us alone if his golden goose Obumercarless is ditched after the next election?