World looks to Canada for model economy

[Jimaz]

Just in case there were any doubts that the financial meltdown was not inevitable:

World looks to Canada for model economy

[Finance Minister Jim Flaherty] recalled visiting China in 2007 and hearing suggestions that the "Canadian banks were perhaps boring and too risk adverse. And when I was there two weeks ago, some of my same counterparts were saying to me, 'You have a very solid, stable banking system in Canada,' and emphasizing that. There wasn't anything about being sufficiently risk-oriented."

The banks are stable because, in part, they're more regulated. As the U.S. and Europe loosened regulations on their financial industries over the past 15 years, Canada refused to do so. The banks also aren't as leveraged as their U.S. or European peers.

There was no mortgage meltdown or subprime crisis in Canada. Banks don't package mortgages and sell them to the private market, so they need to be sure their borrowers can pay back the loans....

Smart move, Canada!

[Sstashmoo]

Yep all you need is an ultra rich neighbor where the entire Government wears a "kick me" sign.

[Detroitej72]

This statement speaks volumes...

The banks are stable because, in part, they're more regulated. As the U.S. and Europe loosened regulations on their financial industries over the past 15 years, Canada refused to do so. The banks also aren't as leveraged as their U.S. or European peers.

There was no mortgage meltdown or subprime crisis in Canada. Banks don't package mortgages and sell them to the private market, so they need to be sure their borrowers can pay back the loans....

I'm interested in hearing how the cons try to debunk these facts about regulation.

[rb336]

I'm interested in hearing how the cons try to debunk these facts about regulation.

Easy. they ignore them and scream a bunch of lies at the top of their voices, heavy with words like "socialism" and "fascism," etc., until the gullible believe it

[maxx]

Yep all you need is an ultra rich neighbor where the entire Government wears a "kick me" sign.

Please explain what this has to do with Canada's banks being regulated. Ours used to be too until some conservative got this great idea about the "free market".

[ghettopalmetto]

Please explain what this has to do with Canada's banks being regulated. Ours used to be too until some conservative got this great idea about the "free market".

See, it ties in real nicely. Using the Sstashmoo Banking Regulation Axiom [[axioms don't need to be proven, by the way!), one can also say that the reason Poland has avoided recession is because it sits next door to wealthier Germany. How convenient!

[oladub]

This statement speaks volumes...

The banks are stable because, in part, they're more regulated. As the U.S. and Europe loosened regulations on their financial industries over the past 15 years, Canada refused to do so. The banks also aren't as leveraged as their U.S. or European peers.

There was no mortgage meltdown or subprime crisis in Canada. Banks don't package mortgages and sell them to the private market, so they need to be sure their borrowers can pay back the loans....

I'm interested in hearing how the cons try to debunk these facts about regulation.

States have every right to regulate banks. Most of the S&L's that went bankrupt were in Texas and California which had weak banking regulations. S&L's in states with stricter regulations did not go bankrupt. The reason Texas and California had weak reugulations was that it made a lot more money for their S&L's when times were good and gave a boost to commerce and construction. The federal government jumped in and came to the aid of Texas and California when their S&L's came crashing down. This was bad policy in that Texas and California benefited from weak policies and then suffered no consequences. Federal taxes had to be transferred from taxpayers of states with sound banking policies to Calofornia and Texas.

The more recent federal Wall Street bailout also generally aided the culprits. This time it was national banks including some banks that own the federal reserve that collapsed because of their risky policies. Imagining that there should even be a federal reserve or such a large federal presence encouraging the development of national megabanks making the collapse possible, solutions include discouraging too big to fail national megabanks, eliminating the federal reserve system, and reducing FDIC insurance coverage for national banks.

North Dakota has it's own state owned bank that by most accounts works well. State banks might work out for other states as well or at least the states that aren't as corrupt as California and Texas. Considering that FDIC is virtually broke and billing savers to stay afloat, this might be an alternative to the fed, Goldman Sachs and related political allies.

The Majority of Bank Deposits come from Tax Collections and State Fees
The deposit base of Bank of North Dakota is unique. The original act of 1919 provided that all public funds were to be deposited with the Bank of North Dakota. An initiated measure in 1921 changed this by providing that all political subdivisions, with the exception of the state itself, make deposits either with private institutions or with the Bank of North Dakota. Because the law requires that all monies of the state and state institutions must be deposited with Bank of North Dakota, the state does not have the problem of allocating funds to various financial
institutions.

As described in Section 9 of the original act: "The Bank of North Dakota may receive deposits from any source, including the United States Government and any foreign or domestic individual, corporation, association, municipality, bank or government". The Bank of North Dakota pays comparable interest on all deposits whether state or private. BND Returns Profits to the State
Beginning in 1945 BND began transferring profits to the general fund. Since then BND has returned over $555 million to the general fund.

BND is Not FDIC Insured
In contrast to most commercial banks, Bank of North Dakota is not a member of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation [[FDIC). North Dakota Century Code 6-09-10 provides that all BND deposits are guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the State of North Dakota.
http://www.banknd.nd.gov/about_BND/pdfs/faqs.pdf

[ghettopalmetto]

Oladub,

Are you contending that states have the power to regulate international banking conglomerates like Bank of America, Wachovia, and Citibank?

An S&L wholly within a state is one thing. A financial firm with global reach is quite another.

[Detroitej72]

Most of the S&L's that went bankrupt were in Texas and California which had weak banking regulations. S&L's in states with stricter regulations did not go bankrupt. The reason Texas and California had weak reugulations was that it made a lot more money for their S&L's when times were good and gave a boost to commerce and construction. The federal government jumped in and came to the aid of Texas and California when their S&L's came crashing down. This was bad policy in that Texas and California benefited from weak policies and then suffered no consequences. Federal taxes had to be transferred from taxpayers of states with sound banking policies to Calofornia and Texas.

The more recent federal Wall Street bailout also generally aided the culprits. This time it was national banks including some banks that own the federal reserve that collapsed because of their risky policies.

I see a pattern here. The S & L crash happened during the Messiah, Regan's term. Neal Bush, son of the vice president was a major player here. Then, George Bush, brother of Neal, bails out Wall Street during another period of deregulation. This should tell the ditto heads and tea baggers that deregulation costs them their tax dollars, but I seriously doubt they will face the facts.

The moral of the story here is, never let cons deregulate any financial institution because history has shown it is a complete failure to the American tax payers.

[ghettopalmetto]

This should tell the ditto heads and tea baggers that deregulation costs them their tax dollars, but I seriously doubt they will face the facts.

Yes, but if it personally profits you and your buddies, isn't that called "capitalism"?

Remember: privatize profits, socialize losses.

[GOAT]

Maxx, a quick fyi, Clinton started the de-regulation process and the Chimp expanded it and put it in the hot seat.

As for Canada's role model economy. It would be better if there were more Canadian companies in Canada instead of so much foreign investment and a higher level of productivity is needed.
That being said, our banking system is one of the best in the world. I never understood the U.S banking system especially after the 1929 crash.

[oladub]

Oladub,

Are you contending that states have the power to regulate international banking conglomerates like Bank of America, Wachovia, and Citibank?

An S&L wholly within a state is one thing. A financial firm with global reach is quite another.

gp, To the extent that international banking is involved you have a valid point. However, the spoils were shared among buddies under communism also. Corruption, rather than capitalism, is the common factor. Either system can be corrupted.

Detroitej72, The federal governmment has no obligation or delegated power to bail out corporate executives. Tea partiers are ahead of you on that one. Note: 'tea baggers' is a derogatory term meant to describe the practicioners of an act seemingly better understood by liberals.

[GOAT]

I am so glad they call themselves teabaggers. because that is what they are; scrotum-heads to the extreme. But I believe they don't even know whatthe term "teabagger" is which makes it even more funny.

[Sstashmoo]

The rest of you are teabagees.

[oladub]

I am so glad they call themselves teabaggers. because that is what they are; scrotum-heads to the extreme. But I believe they don't even know whatthe term "teabagger" is which makes it even more funny.

I think they stopped calling themselves that when libs explained what it meant in their culture, oops, but thanks for making my point.

[rb336]

States have every right to regulate banks.

Yes, and they do. The federal government, under the interstate commerce clause, also clearly has the right to regulate MOST banks

[rb336]

Maxx, a quick fyi, Clinton started the de-regulation process and the Chimp expanded it and put it in the hot seat.

As for Canada's role model economy. It would be better if there were more Canadian companies in Canada instead of so much foreign investment and a higher level of productivity is needed.
That being said, our banking system is one of the best in the world. I never understood the U.S banking system especially after the 1929 crash.

no, reagan started the ball rolling, followed by dubyadaddy and bubba

[Detroitej72]

Note: 'tea baggers' is a derogatory term meant to describe the practicioners of an act seemingly better understood by liberals.

Kind of like cons thinking their cute by referring to the president by the nickname he had during his school years. Too bad the reason he used it back then was because he thought[[rightly so) that some folks were so racist they couldn't accept him with an ethnic name.

And I find it hard to believe cons don't partake in tea bagging, just ask Tom Foley.

[oladub]

Yes, and they do. The federal government, under the interstate commerce clause, also clearly has the right to regulate MOST banks

But so much more can be done by the states and better. Canada has done a much better job than our federal government has as has North Dakota which doesn't even participate in the FDIC from what I could make of that link. Given our federal government's horrid record of regulating interstate commerce, it would be a good idea for states to adopt North Dakota's healthy model and thus reduce necessary federal meddling. I would think that libs would relish the possibilities of a state bank, such as North Dakota's, returning profits to the state's general treasury instead of our present system of private megabanks, under the fed's wing, distributing profits to executives and stockholders.

[Jimaz]

I think they stopped calling themselves that when libs explained what it meant in their culture, oops, but thanks for making my point.

Teabaggers are feigning innocence. They knew.

Attachment 6487

[Jimaz]

Not many defenders of extreme deregulation here. Why would that be?

[Detroitej72]

Not many defenders of extreme deregulation here. Why would that be?

Hum, maybe because they have no argument?

[oladub]

Related topic about Canada.

" A majority of people from around the world would move to Canada if presented with the opportunity, according to a survey out Tuesday.

The online survey...showed that 53 percent of people -- including 77 percent of respondents from China and 68 percent from India -- would like to live in Canada, if they could. Almost one-third [[30 percent) of Americans would choose Canada too, according to the poll results."
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/10062...ration_society

[Jimaz]

In a severely, overly deregulated economy, the distinction between lobbying and outright bribery becomes increasingly blurred. We don't hear as much uproar about bribery as we once did. Why is that?

A sports metaphor: The games that have no umpires [[regulators) are undoubtedly far more lively for the patrons [[speculators) that drive revenue so we should get rid of umpires or at least co-opt them by allowing each team to direct and compensate half of the umpires [[regulators)? That should be fair, right? The problem there is that all of the umpires [[regulators) would be no longer disinterested. They would then each have a vested interest in the outcome of the game. They would no longer be objective.

Too many of these recent economic disasters have sprung directly from the seeds of deregulation.

The all-too-many real-life consequences of overderegulation have silenced even the wisest adherents of this Wrecking Crew.

The final bubble to pop will be theirs, then ours.

The financial meltdown was not inevitable. It was an avoidable scheme deliberately not avoided -- for the profit of the parasitic saboteurs in power at the expense of its victims.

[maxx]

But so much more can be done by the states and better. Canada has done a much better job than our federal government has as has North Dakota which doesn't even participate in the FDIC from what I could make of that link. Given our federal government's horrid record of regulating interstate commerce, it would be a good idea for states to adopt North Dakota's healthy model and thus reduce necessary federal meddling. I would think that libs would relish the possibilities of a state bank, such as North Dakota's, returning profits to the state's general treasury instead of our present system of private megabanks, under the fed's wing, distributing profits to executives and stockholders.

A state bank? Those North Dakotans must be commies. And what's wrong with the FDIC except it doesn't have enough money to cover all accounts as we discovered during the Reagan S & L scandal. You get something reimbursed rather than nothing if your account is not insured.