For the First Time, Canadians Now Richer Than Americans

[cssnms]

For the First Time, Canadians Now Richer Than Americans

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.

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.



"CHANGE"


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/comme...rticle4380634/

[MisterSkiMask]

Well, we can all Hope it gets better.

[xbook]

Maybe we should consider some of their policies here.

[MisterSkiMask]

Originally Posted by xbook

Maybe we should consider some of their policies here.

Like incentives to get American companies to manufacture in their country? I am all for that.

[cssnms]

Or perhaps if the American $ wasn't devalued and the US govt stopped spending more money then it takes it then perhaps the US could re-take its' spot on that list.

[MiddleAgedAl]

Originally Posted by xbook

Maybe we should consider some of their policies here.

Such as the fact that the Canadian Federal Government is currently represented by the most right wing of all Canadian political parties, the Conservative Party of Canada?

Stephen Harper was first elected Prime Minister in 2006. When he was up for re-election in 2011, Canadian voters took a look at how their southern neighbors got hammered during the global downturn, and how they fared in comparison, (0 Canadian Banks have failed, for example, with lower unemployment rates), and re-elected the Conservatives with an even bigger margin than they won the first time.

During this period, the conservative government LOWERED corporate income tax rates 5 separate times from 2008-2012, giving them them the lowest statutory tax rate in the G7 group of countries. http://www.canadabusinesstax.com/cor...ome-tax-rates/

This predictably had a positive effect on business health and the lowering of the unemployment rate.

[cssnms]

Originally Posted by MiddleAgedAl

Such as the fact that the Canadian Federal Government is currently represented by the most right wing of all Canadian political parties, the Conservative Party of Canada?

Stephen Harper was first elected Prime Minister in 2006. When he was up for re-election in 2011, Canadian voters took a look at how their southern neighbors got hammered during the global downturn, and how they fared in comparison, (0 Canadian Banks have failed, for example, with lower unemployment rates), and re-elected the Conservatives with an even bigger margin than they won the first time.

During this period, the conservative government LOWERED corporate income tax rates 5 separate times from 2008-2012, giving them them the lowest statutory tax rate in the G7 group of countries. http://www.canadabusinesstax.com/cor...ome-tax-rates/

This predictably had a positive effect on business health and the lowering of the unemployment rate.

The Canadians have been drifting back to the right for quite a while now, the Quebec leftists do have nearly as much power. They even shut down their federal gun registration program because it cost billions.

[jaiman]

Originally Posted by MiddleAgedAl

Such as the fact that the Canadian Federal Government is currently represented by the most right wing of all Canadian political parties, the Conservative Party of Canada?

Stephen Harper was first elected Prime Minister in 2006. When he was up for re-election in 2011, Canadian voters took a look at how their southern neighbors got hammered during the global downturn, and how they fared in comparison, (0 Canadian Banks have failed, for example, with lower unemployment rates), and re-elected the Conservatives with an even bigger margin than they won the first time.

During this period, the conservative government LOWERED corporate income tax rates 5 separate times from 2008-2012, giving them them the lowest statutory tax rate in the G7 group of countries. http://www.canadabusinesstax.com/cor...ome-tax-rates/

This predictably had a positive effect on business health and the lowering of the unemployment rate.

Ummm, the CPC is a right wing party, but they'd only be a touch to the right of the Democrats and far to the left of the Republicans. Add to that, several of the policies that kept Canadian banks sound were enacted by the previous Liberal government, and it was a Liberal government that balanced Canada's budget with rather sever spending cuts and your subtle implication that America needs a shift to the right in order to prosper starts to wobble.

[jaiman]

Originally Posted by cssnms

The Canadians have been drifting back to the right for quite a while now, the Quebec leftists do have nearly as much power. They even shut down their federal gun registration program because it cost billions.

I think it would be hard to say that a country with socialized medicine (that even the right wing party won't touch), legal gay marriage, few restrictions on abortions and fairly restrictive gun laws (especially compared to the US) is drifting to the right.

[MiddleAgedAl]

Originally Posted by jaiman

Ummm, the CPC is a right wing party, but they'd only be a touch to the right of the Democrats and far to the left of the Republicans. Add to that, several of the policies that kept Canadian banks sound were enacted by the previous Liberal government, and it was a Liberal government that balanced Canada's budget with rather sever spending cuts and your subtle implication that America needs a shift to the right in order to prosper starts to wobble.

Your remarks then suggest that Canadian interpretations of labels such as "conservative" and "liberal" dont convert directly to American equivalents.

Balancing a budget with severe spending cuts sounds like a sound economic idea to me, doesn't sound like something a person with liberal or left ideologies would be very happy about.

Actions > Labels IMHO. Frankly, the semantics of the name doesnt matter to me, you can call your party the crazy bastards, but if you make smart economic choices such as cutting spending, and lowering corporate tax rates, you got my support over someone who wants to raise taxes and jack up the spending.

[cssnms]

Originally Posted by jaiman

I think it would be hard to say that a country with socialized medicine (that even the right wing party won't touch), legal gay marriage, few restrictions on abortions and fairly restrictive gun laws (especially compared to the US) is drifting to the right.

Not splitting hairs,,, point being there is a growing conservative leaning moving in Canada.

[jaiman]

Originally Posted by MiddleAgedAl

Your remarks then suggest that Canadian interpretations of labels such as "conservative" and "liberal" dont convert directly to American equivalents.

Balancing a budget with severe spending cuts sounds like a sound economic idea to me, doesn't sound like something a person with liberal or left ideologies would be very happy about.

Actions > Labels IMHO. Frankly, the semantics of the name doesnt matter to me, you can call your party the crazy bastards, but if you make smart economic choices such as cutting spending, and lowering corporate tax rates, you got my support over someone who wants to raise taxes and jack up the spending.

Its more that the political center in Canada is more to the left than in America and the spread between the left and right is much narrower. The Liberals are the party of the left, but in the late 90s and early 2000s Canada was drowning in debt and a new path was needed. I suspect that if America continues to divide itself viciously along party lines, the wealth gap will continue to grow.

[cssnms]

Originally Posted by jaiman

Its more that the political center in Canada is more to the left than in America and the spread between the left and right is much narrower. The Liberals are the party of the left, but in the late 90s and early 2000s Canada was drowning in debt and a new path was needed. I suspect that if America continues to divide itself viciously along party lines, the wealth gap will continue to grow.

Generally speaking I agree with that statement.

[MiddleAgedAl]

Originally Posted by jaiman

The Liberals are the party of the left, but in the late 90s and early 2000s Canada was drowning in debt and a new path was needed.

This is good stuff, once we overcome translation issues, we can learn here !

OK, so since the "political party terminology exchange rate" between the US and Canada is not 1.0, lets focus more on actions and outcomes, rather than inconsistent labels that might muddy the waters.

So when drowning in debt, and a new path was needed (sound familiar in 2012?) a Canadian political party set things on the road to financial stability by doing stuff such as slashing spending then ? And history has proven that to be a wise choice?

Slashing spending would of course result in a smaller government, unless everyone is happy to take huge pay cuts. In the United States, I would humbly suggest that most people who tend to support the idea of less government would be more likely to call themselves "conservative" than "liberal". Those labels may not mean quite the same in Canada, which is useful to keep in mind, but that successful model can still be copied regardless.

[jaiman]

Originally Posted by MiddleAgedAl

This is good stuff, once we overcome translation issues, we can learn here !

OK, so since the "political party terminology exchange rate" between the US and Canada is not 1.0, lets focus more on actions and outcomes, rather than inconsistent labels that might muddy the waters.

So when drowning in debt, and a new path was needed (sound familiar in 2012?) a Canadian political party set things on the road to financial stability by doing stuff such as slashing spending then ? And history has proven that to be a wise choice?

Slashing spending would of course result in a smaller government, unless everyone is happy to take huge pay cuts. In the United States, I would humbly suggest that most people who tend to support the idea of less government would be more likely to call themselves "conservative" than "liberal". Those labels may not mean quite the same in Canada, which is useful to keep in mind, but that successful model can still be copied regardless.

You are missing the point, the cuts were palatable BECAUSE it was the left making them. The fact that the Liberals were willing to do it made people realize how needed they were. If the conservatives had tried the same thing, everyone on the the Left would have been up in arms. Ever heard the expression "Only Nixon could go to China?" same thing.

[txz4]

Originally Posted by jaiman

You are missing the point, the cuts were palatable BECAUSE it was the left making them. The fact that the Liberals were willing to do it made people realize how needed they were. If the conservatives had tried the same thing, everyone on the the Left would have been up in arms. Ever heard the expression "Only Nixon could go to China?" same thing.

Interesting post. There is a HUGE rift between the left and right in this country and just as you've said, each party can only do typical moves it seems, and nothing that's not 100% in step with the party. Unfortunately im not sure i see it changing. Elements of the right seem to be more libertarian and some seem more socially conservative, though its drifting in the direction of social conservatism (not a fan). The same thing seems to be happening on the left side of things too. Id assume the poo flinging will continue.

[MiddleAgedAl]

Originally Posted by jaiman

You are missing the point, the cuts were palatable BECAUSE it was the left making them. The fact that the Liberals were willing to do it made people realize how needed they were. If the conservatives had tried the same thing, everyone on the the Left would have been up in arms. Ever heard the expression "Only Nixon could go to China?" same thing.

I am familiar with the Nixon expression. That does provide clarity, thanks.

So, there was a party which normally upholds left-wing ideologies, and in this particular instance, reluctantly executed policy which most would characterize as representing a right-wing approach.

It's probably true, then, if the right-wingers had proposed this, the liberals would have been up in arms (probably on principle alone), and likely resisted this. As history has shown, they would have been wrong to do so.

After all, this would be a policy which you yourself assert is a key factor in the fiscal health Canada enjoys today, right ?

A 'left-wing' party did a 'right-wing' thing, in spite of their ideologies, not because of them. With 20/20 hindsight we see that it was the correct thing to do.

I wonder how things would be today in Canada, if people had rejected a fundamentally good idea because the "wrong type of idealogue" presented it.

I certainly respect the fact that you feel that my "implication that America needs a shift to the right in order to prosper", has a wobble in it. I am unclear how this snippet of history supports that...

[Cdnrockies]

Originally Posted by jaiman

I think it would be hard to say that a country with socialized medicine (that even the right wing party won't touch), legal gay marriage, few restrictions on abortions and fairly restrictive gun laws (especially compared to the US) is drifting to the right.

And this is also precisely why our government is not the disaster that our US friends are dealing with. See my comments below.

Originally Posted by MiddleAgedAl

Your remarks then suggest that Canadian interpretations of labels such as "conservative" and "liberal" dont convert directly to American equivalents.

Balancing a budget with severe spending cuts sounds like a sound economic idea to me, doesn't sound like something a person with liberal or left ideologies would be very happy about.

Actions > Labels IMHO. Frankly, the semantics of the name doesnt matter to me, you can call your party the crazy bastards, but if you make smart economic choices such as cutting spending, and lowering corporate tax rates, you got my support over someone who wants to raise taxes and jack up the spending.

We were actually having this discussioin in the "Off-topic" forum in respect to the gun massacre in Aurora. It diverted from the discussion on gun control into how the US can get out of the tailspin it appears to be in.

There are two main problems imho. One, the US bipartisan system has sunk to the point where it is simply a "one way or the other" decision making process that has little regard for what is best for the country and it's citizens as a whole.

That is where our country's government differs the most. While we have some heated political debates up here as well, the fact of the matter is that the parties are not actually that different. Throw in the "subsidiary" parties that help keep the Libs and PC's on task and our system seems to work.

The second problem is more to do with the psychology of American society. The sense of entitlement and arrogance needs to change. (And this is not to suggest every American is this way, but the reality is this is the perception the majority of the world has). This was the main discussion in the gun control thread. Banning guns without a cultural mindset shift will not change things for the better.

Combine a government that actually makes decisions based on what's best for society and it's citizens, not simply what is in opposition to the other party, with a societal attitude adjustment that works together for a more successful, healthier, and safer USA and there may be light at the end of the tunnel.

[ABQ325i]

Originally Posted by Cdnrockies;12368682

There are two main problems imho. One, the US bipartisan system has sunk to the point where it is simply a "one way or the other" decision making process that has little regard for what is best for the country and it's citizens as a whole.

[B

That[/b] is where our country's government differs the most. While we have some heated political debates up here as well, the fact of the matter is that the parties are not actually that different. Throw in the "subsidiary" parties that help keep the Libs and PC's on task and our system seems to work.

The second problem is more to do with the psychology of American society. The sense of entitlement and arrogance needs to change. (And this is not to suggest every American is this way, but the reality is this is the perception the majority of the world has). This was the main discussion in the gun control thread. Banning guns without a cultural mindset shift will not change things for the better.

Combine a government that actually makes decisions based on what's best for society and it's citizens, not simply what is in opposition to the other party, with a societal attitude adjustment that works together for a more successful, healthier, and safer USA and there may be light at the end of the tunnel.

I could not agree more.

[G-Bus]

I think that the main points have been spoken about here and I strongly agree with my Canadian brothers opinions.

On the other part, over here in Quebec it's quite the contrary. On the last elections, in QC the majority voted for the NDP where the rest of Canada was in majority for the Conservative Party. It's a good lesson to be taught to Quebecers that sometimes you need to go with the flow for the common good of the country and not only for ourselves.

We're a month away from early elections right now in Quebec and it's ridiculous how there are NO interesting parties to vote for, in my opinion.

We've currently got the Liberal Party running which is extremely corrupt and then we've got running for office the PQ which want to separate from the rest of the Canada which is extremely dumb and a waste of tax payers money. On top of wanting to separate they are also very tied to Syndicates therefore a bigger government (Quebec Government employs more people that the Canadian Federal Government, go figure that out) and again, more tax payers money wasted on useless jobs that are not needed (instead of taking example on the Federal gouv and cutting jobs, they want to do exactly the contrary, so again go figure that one out as well). Quebec also happens to be the most in debt province in Canada. We have more debt, per habitant that the US! Quebec debt per cizitzen is 46k$ and the US debt per citizen is 50k$. The remaining competing party (CAQ) is fairly young and the guy is ALL OVER the place, left and right... Very hard to follow and typical for a new comer that tries to be liked by everyone. The rest of the parties are too small and not worth mentioning.

I think that the Liberal party will be re-elected again (because people here are THAT dumb) and that the PQ and CAQ will be the minorities and try to block anything the Liberals will try to do. Overall it could be a not so bad situation.

To give you ideas of what the Liberal Party has done so far in Quebec;
-Raised taxes about 4% (14.5% right now, will go up to 16.5%, 1% per year until 2014)
-Pushed the retirement age
-Extremely corrupt (health, education, construction)
-Plan North (basically will sell all of our natural ressources for cheap to private companies from outside. Mostly Chinese companies. They say it will create jobs but in reality it'll be mostly Chinese workers who will be shipped here)
-Retarded Laws that prevent people from gathering in the streets for manifestations about government decisions (you need to call the cops and let them know of your intentions and whereabouts before you go out if not you can get a ticket). It has been brought to court because obviously no one agrees and it goes against constitutional rights but it's costing us millions AGAIN to fight it.

And that's only half of the shit they have done so far...

The Quebec residents are really biased and have poor judgment regarding the rest of Canada. Most people in Quebec hate Harper because there were talks about making abortion illegal and that's their main argument AGAISN'T Harper, without knowing all of the other things he has done for Canada and Quebec. Most of Canada, from what I've read is mainly FOR abortion, if it is controlled and properly managed. I think that people here like to disagree with the rest of Canada just to try to prove that they are different when in reality it's not in their advantage.

Sorry for the little off topic but I think it's nice to see this side of the story as well.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by ABQ325i

I could not agree more.

Same here. This is *the* biggest problem in the US. The two party system is no longer checks-and-balances. It's a tug of war with both sides more or less equal. Ergo, nothing gets done.

[enfield]

I think the main issue is one of balance. Any extreme ideology will usually result in extreme results.... eventually. The Buddha suggested the middle path. In some ways Canada does follow the middle path.

For example - our Medical care is not 100% free. Sure we pay taxes to pay for health care but we also do not cover cosmetic surgery, elective dental work, elective eye care, glasses, outpatient prescriptions etc.

We also do not have a complete ban on firearms like in the UK. I think our firearm laws frequently target the wrong people & some of are laws are just plain dumb but I do like the idea of a safety course, a license, and a background check before one buys a firearm.

We also tend to stay away from foreign wars where we have no interest. Libya was an exception and I did not support that effort because our national interests were not involved. I believe George Washington talked about staying away from permanent alliances & foreign wars. The US wastes a lot of money bombing places when it is not in the national interest of the United States. Why does the US bomb to spread democracy when it is not a democracy itself and is actually a republic? - I believe Benjamin Franklin had something to say on the subject of a Republic. Does the US really need to spend as much money on the war machine? I believe Dwight Eisenhower warned against the Military Industrial Complex.

There are many other examples that I could go over but I think moderation is best when giving example.

In closing - The United States is my favourite foreign country. I love the people, I love the land, and I love your constitution. The US constitution is one of the finest documents I have ever read. I hate to see the people of the US suffering because of the excesses of capitalism & war. I suggest capitalism in moderation combined with socialism in moderation.

Flame suit on!