Sens Lounge: "Pleeease won't you be.....my neighbour"

[Stylizer1]

Yes to going all-in on resources, LMAO at the carbon tax being a reason for low GDP per capita, you clearly don't understand how the carbon tax was administered. By the way, it is gone now.

Our GDP per capita is low because the boomers decide to prevent new housing from built everywhere and then got filthy rich off of their homes they bought for a pittance. We are a nation of lazy bastards who sit on assets and make sure the future pays for our failings.

It's not gone now, it's just at zero%. The move was for theatrics and not based with any legal authority.

 

[FunkySeeFunkyDoo]

Yes to going all-in on resources, LMAO at the carbon tax being a reason for low GDP per capita, you clearly don't understand how the carbon tax was administered. By the way, it is gone now.

Our GDP per capita is low because the boomers decide to prevent new housing from built everywhere and then got filthy rich off of their homes they bought for a pittance. We are a nation of lazy bastards who sit on assets and make sure the future pays for our failings.

IMO the falling GDP per capita is a bit of a mystery, I've yet to read a serious analysis that I believed. It's probably a number of factors, and most people would have some anecdotes that point to one or more of those factors.

Personally, having worked in the Ottawa high tech scene for 30-ish years, I'd say that a big factor is that almost every serious young, ambitious, entrepreneur that I've met has moved to the US. Was that because they didn't like Canadian taxes, weather, anti-business culture, etc? Not sure, maybe all of the above.

 

[Micklebot]

Can you expand on the bolded? How does the Gini coefficient (I assume a lower value here is better than higher?) make us "still pretty competitively positioned"?

sorry, I wasn't clear. By Competitively positioned I was just referring to the per capita GDP, we're in line with the UK, France, Germany, ect.

Gini coefficient is a measure of income inequality, the higher the more income inequality. This is a bit of a personal values proposition, but for me, it's important that we keep income inequality low. High levels of income inequality tend to be bad for more than just the surface "fairness". High levels of income inequality have been correlated to the erosion of democracy, as well as poorer education and health outcomes. It's also been shown to have negative impacts on the economy too by slowing household spending in the lower and middle class, while shifting wealth to households with a higher propensity towards saving, and slows consumption spending in the economy overall.

GDP is a fine measure of success for developing countries, but for richer countries, it does a pretty poor job of measuring what we actually care about, quality of life. It doesn't say anything about the level of job and income security, the quality of infrastructure and public services, and the balance of paid work and leisure time.

 

[Cosmix]

I stuck it into a TFSA and then bought stocks with it... So I would buy like 2-4k in like Walmart or Amazon or Google or visa or MasterCard or apple and stuff like that. Also banks. Also Berkshire Hathaway is a good buy, generally. But do research. Everytime I would save a couple thousand I would look at companies that are reputable and tell you what stocks to buy and sell and why. In essence, do research, but also can be safe with the big companies that make a good return year after year over decades.

Read John Bogle's books.

 

[Relapsing]

Personally, having worked in the Ottawa high tech scene for 30-ish years, I'd say that a big factor is that almost every serious young, ambitious, entrepreneur that I've met has moved to the US. Was that because they didn't like Canadian taxes, weather, anti-business culture, etc? Not sure, maybe all of the above.

From my time in EcDev, I'd point the finger at Venture Capital. The volume of VC Dollars in the US is gargantuan compared to what's available in Canada. Beyond that, the success rate of US tech companies far surpasses those in Canada.

And it's not like we lack in trying to support tech start-ups either - In Ontario at least, it is far and away the biggest elephant in the room, to the point where economic development support for traditional businesses is a joke. The programming we had available for disruptive technology companies felt like an embarrassment of riches.

Yes to going all-in on resources, LMAO at the carbon tax being a reason for low GDP per capita, you clearly don't understand how the carbon tax was administered. By the way, it is gone now.

Our GDP per capita is low because the boomers decide to prevent new housing from built everywhere and then got filthy rich off of their homes they bought for a pittance. We are a nation of lazy bastards who sit on assets and make sure the future pays for our failings.

I'm no economist, but if around 1/5th of your Countries GDP is accounted for by the Real Estate, Rental and Leasing Market, that's probably not a great idea. We have also grown comfortable with resource extraction, whereas I'd argue we need to find renewed focus on value added manufacturing. So yes, all in on resources, but we need to be smarter about it.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

And we have all these people who just buy homes to rent them out and act like they are job creators, driving the economy.

Canada is trash. Don't invest in it.

 

[jbeck5]

I was speaking in general as to who the losers with checking accounts were over the "covid years".

Should have bought low instead of keeping it in an account doing nothing.

 

[Micklebot]

And we have all these people who just buy homes to rent them out and act like they are job creators, driving the economy.

Canada is trash. Don't invest in it.

Idk how many people buy to rent these days, my understanding is there's been a shift towards corporations, real estate investment trusts, private equity firms, pension plans ect being the "landlords".

We'd likely be much better off if it was just individuals buying up properties to rent out. My best landlord when I was renting was a real estate agent that bought a walk up apartment to rent out, his father lived in the unit next to mine. I'd much rather that than a corporation that is obligated to get the best return for its stockholders....

 

[mysens]

Yes to going all-in on resources, LMAO at the carbon tax being a reason for low GDP per capita, you clearly don't understand how the carbon tax was administered. By the way, it is gone now.

Our GDP per capita is low because the boomers decide to prevent new housing from built everywhere and then got filthy rich off of their homes they bought for a pittance. We are a nation of lazy bastards who sit on assets and make sure the future pays for our failings.

Well laugh all you want. The Carbon Tax is a huge denominator in the gdp. My business every month is paying out 36-38k a month solely in carbon tax. There is no rebate, no recapture, no write off. The money goes and never comes back. This is to provide heat and hot water for tenants in apartment buildings. To say this has no effect is just plain uneducated and ignorant. We will delay infrastructure projects, repairs, upgrades to apartment dwellings, second guess if buying new appliances or just repair them. Replacing a new floor for a tenant or just patch it up. This money paid out for carbon tax could have been used for capital expenditures. But it won’t, so then the hardware store doesn’t sell, the manufacturer doesn’t sell, the raw materials to make said product doesn’t sell, the miner or who extrapolates the material doesn’t sell. It’s a chain reaction that continues all the way down. So yes, carbon tax affects me personally and all the tenants, and of course every worker who works to make and deliver this product. You may laugh, but I am certainly not.

 

[Stylizer1]

Idk how many people buy to rent these days, my understanding is there's been a shift towards corporations, real estate investment trusts, private equity firms, pension plans ect being the "landlords".

We'd likely be much better off if it was just individuals buying up properties to rent out. My best landlord when I was renting was a real estate agent that bought a walk up apartment to rent out, his father lived in the unit next to mine. I'd much rather that than a corporation that is obligated to get the best return for its stockholders....

Ever get those "hand written" letters in your mailbox about making an offer on your house sight unseen? They claim to be locals but it's pretty obvious there are deeper pockets behind these. They have been happening in the states too trying to find people looking to downsize/retirement homes.

Im sure the people sending those letters are part of bigger companies like the one Mark Carney is/was apart of, Brookfield Asset Management Ltd., a real estate investment company, Jeff Bezos "Arrived", Blackrock, etc.

10 years ago a colleague and I where talking about how contractors and developers were hurting the housing market because they would buy up cheap homes, put 50-100k into them and sell them for over 200k that was the original price. Her son was looking to buy a starter home and they seemed to always get out bid. Never thought companies would be doing it to this level. During covid when houses shot up I kept a really close eye on the markets across the city. On my street alone probably 10 houses were put up for sale until interest rates shot up.

20 years ago in Vancouver there were so many investment properties that were foreign own that just sat there vacant.

There have been so many variations to the same problem I'm surprised no one has made it illegal to do this.

 

[Stylizer1]

Look whats happening to The Bay right now. In 2008 the Hudson Bay Company was bought by NRDC Equity Partners, LLC.

"NRDC's current portfolio includes two of the leading companies in their sectors, Hudson's Bay Company (HBC) and Retail Opportunity Investments Corporation (ROIC).

HBC is a holding company that owns and manages over 57,000,000 square feet (5,300,000 m2) of retail properties located in Canada and the U.S. through its two main divisions:

Hudson's Bay – operates over 80 department stores across Canada
Saks Global – operates various department stores and outlet stores in the U.S., including:
Bergdorf Goodman
Neiman Marcus
Neiman Marcus Last Call
Saks Fifth Avenue
Saks Off 5th

NRDC formed its real estate investment trust portfolio company, ROIC, through a public equity raise of $414 million completed in October 2009. ROIC focuses on acquiring and growing high quality shopping centers. It has invested over $200 million and has completed/announced 14 transactions as of September 2010.

NRDC owned Lord & Taylor from 2006 to 2019, operating 50 department stores and four outlet centers located in the U.S. The sale of the chain to Le Tote Inc. was announced in August 2019. Home Outfitters, another subsidiary, operated 69 kitchen, bath, and bed superstores across Canada until closing in 2019."

They were never interested in the brand just the real estate.

The media landscape(news, music, movie etc.), Automotive,(Stelantis), Honda and Nissan Merger(were in talks to become the 3rd largest car maker).

Only 10 companies control almost every large food and beverage brand in the world. These companies — Nestlé, Pepsico, Coca-Cola, Unilever, Danone, General Mills, Kellogg's, Mars, Associated British Foods, and Mondelez.

Who is the major owner of Coca-Cola? Largest shareholders include Berkshire Hathaway Inc, Vanguard Group Inc, BlackRock, Inc., State Street Corp..... all investment conglomerates.

But we have to foot the bill for carbon? This is the reality, this is globalism and these are the people selling us climate change.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

IMO the falling GDP per capita is a bit of a mystery, I've yet to read a serious analysis that I believed. It's probably a number of factors, and most people would have some anecdotes that point to one or more of those factors.

Personally, having worked in the Ottawa high tech scene for 30-ish years, I'd say that a big factor is that almost every serious young, ambitious, entrepreneur that I've met has moved to the US. Was that because they didn't like Canadian taxes, weather, anti-business culture, etc? Not sure, maybe all of the above.

If you are a multimillionaire, especially one that is an English speaker, the USA is the best place in the world to live. Very easily. The USA caters to the rich and super rich. The American Dream is sold all over the world as the gold standard of life.

No country in the world can compete with that, and it's especially easy for young enterprising Canadians who dream of great wealth to move south. Nothing we do (short of the USA completely imploding) will stop that from happening. Hell, it's the same as being small market Ottawa in the NHL trying to woo UFAs here instead of playing their big money years in Florida or California or Texas.

But the thing is....we can't base our policies, tax structure, rebates, and whatever else on desperately trying to woo people here. It's like the Sens, if you have to overpay every UFA and young star $2-3 million per year on every contract...you're screwed. You won't be able to compete for a Cup, you'll just spend a ton of money for false hope.

We shouldn't be dreaming here about usurping Nike or Microsoft or Amazon. We should be working on making good mid-sized companies and solid businesses that can compete globally and make profit without having to be corporate monsters. Companies that are Canadian and kept Canadian.

 

[Bjornar Moxnes]

And we have all these people who just buy homes to rent them out and act like they are job creators, driving the economy.

Canada is trash. Don't invest in it.

Where's Mao Zedong when you need him?

 

[Bjornar Moxnes]

If you are a multimillionaire, especially one that is an English speaker, the USA is the best place in the world to live. Very easily. The USA caters to the rich and super rich. The American Dream is sold all over the world as the gold standard of life.

No country in the world can compete with that, and it's especially easy for young enterprising Canadians who dream of great wealth to move south. Nothing we do (short of the USA completely imploding) will stop that from happening. Hell, it's the same as being small market Ottawa in the NHL trying to woo UFAs here instead of playing their big money years in Florida or California or Texas.

But the thing is....we can't base our policies, tax structure, rebates, and whatever else on desperately trying to woo people here. It's like the Sens, if you have to overpay every UFA and young star $2-3 million per year on every contract...you're screwed. You won't be able to compete for a Cup, you'll just spend a ton of money for false hope.

We shouldn't be dreaming here about usurping Nike or Microsoft or Amazon. We should be working on making good mid-sized companies and solid businesses that can compete globally and make profit without having to be corporate monsters. Companies that are Canadian and kept Canadian.

It's kinda sad that Europeans are the most likely to want to play in Canada and not put Canadian teams on their NTC/NMC.

 

[FunkySeeFunkyDoo]

If you are a multimillionaire, especially one that is an English speaker, the USA is the best place in the world to live. Very easily. The USA caters to the rich and super rich. The American Dream is sold all over the world as the gold standard of life.

No country in the world can compete with that, and it's especially easy for young enterprising Canadians who dream of great wealth to move south. Nothing we do (short of the USA completely imploding) will stop that from happening. Hell, it's the same as being small market Ottawa in the NHL trying to woo UFAs here instead of playing their big money years in Florida or California or Texas.

But the thing is....we can't base our policies, tax structure, rebates, and whatever else on desperately trying to woo people here. It's like the Sens, if you have to overpay every UFA and young star $2-3 million per year on every contract...you're screwed. You won't be able to compete for a Cup, you'll just spend a ton of money for false hope.

We shouldn't be dreaming here about usurping Nike or Microsoft or Amazon. We should be working on making good mid-sized companies and solid businesses that can compete globally and make profit without having to be corporate monsters. Companies that are Canadian and kept Canadian.

I agree with most of this. But when you state “We should be working on making good mid-sized companies and solid businesses… “ , I’ll point out that those companies still need entrepreneurial people to start and grow them.

I’ll also ask — what policies should we be doing to achieve that, and why aren’t we already doing it?

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

I agree with most of this. But when you state “We should be working on making good mid-sized companies and solid businesses… “ , I’ll point out that those companies still need entrepreneurial people to start and grow them.

I’ll also ask — what policies should we be doing to achieve that, and why aren’t we already doing it?

That's a good question, and I don't have any good answers for it. I do know the country does have small business loans and grants and there are some programs out there to help entrepreneurs out....but it's still tough out there to get an idea off the ground.

 

[jbeck5]

No, the losers where the actual people economies are based off of and the consolidation of wealth from those who benefited from the lock downs.

The losers you refer too are basically 90% of the middle class who's wealth took a large hit.

This has nothing to do with investing. You're just complaining to complain.

When it comes to the stock market, there are proven winning strategies....people just don't like the idea of potentially taking a step back even if it means taking 2 steps forward later on.

I remember the first time I invested. I had saved up like 20k and it went down to like 16k in 2 weeks. People are scared of that. that was the equivalent of 2 months worth of salary for me. Gone. Without doing anything.

My dad said "relax. Sit tight. That's all part of it"

And it went up...and then down...like 8-10 months later I break even back to 20 grand. Thinking "well it's just gone up for a whole so it will probably go back down...what a waste. I should have had it in a 2% savings account or 6% GIC or whatever".

But sure enough, like always, the market goes up and up long term.

So after a year, what happens? Well, the trends of most is going up...and I've saved another 10k...so let's invest. Well, everything just generally kept going up and up and up....so after a couple years, that 30k turns into 45-50k.

Perfect timing, I'm looking for a house. Sell all. Made 15-20k on my 30k invested over 3 year period. The first year was just climbing out of a whole I made in the first month. I guess my initial timing was poor. If I invested a month later, I would have been up many thousands. Oh well lol.

The rule there is, invest as early as you can. Time in the market is more important than timing the market...because that's too risky. Can go anyway...whereas time in the market is a proven climb decade over decade.

 

[jbeck5]

No, the losers where the actual people economies are based off of and the consolidation of wealth from those who benefited from the lock downs.

The losers you refer too are basically 90% of the middle class who's wealth took a large hit.

This has nothing to do with investing. You're just complaining to complain.

When it comes to the stock market, there are proven winning strategies....people just don't like the idea of potentially taking a step back even if it means taking a step forward.

I remember the first time I invested. I had saved up like 20k and it went down to like 16k in 2 weeks. People are scared of that. that was the equivalent of 2 months worth of salary for me. Gone. Without doing anything.

My dad said "relax. Sit tight. That's all part of it"

And it went up...and then down...like 8-10 months later I break even back to 20 grand. Thinking "well it's just gone up for a while so it will probably go back down...what a waste. I should have had it in a 2% savings account or 6% GIC or whatever".

But sure enough, like always, the market goes up and up long term.

So after a year, what happens? Well, the trends of most is going up...and I've saved another 10k...so let's invest. Well, everything just generally kept going up and up and up....so after a couple years, that 30k turns into 45-50k.

Perfect timing, I'm looking for a house. Sell all. Made 15-20k on my 30k invested over 3 year period. The first year was just climbing out of a whole I made in the first month. I guess my initial timing was poor. If I invested a month later, I would have been up many thousands. Oh well lol.

The rule there is, invest as early as you can. Time in the market is more important than timing the market...because that's too risky. Can go either way...whereas time in the market is a proven climb.